Time: Fri Nov 15 21:25:54 1996 To: joyce@mlode.com From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: Tucker to Hillary - 1992 letter Cc: Bcc: Joyce, I am now implementing a general removal procedure from either state or federal courts, into the long-forgotten Article III District Court of the United States (see "Karma and the Federal Courts"). Since the DCUS have no competent or qualified judges at present, the removal effectively stays the whole matter, until this collateral assault on the judiciary can be sorted out -- by the Chief Justice. The way we remove state cases is to allege a "federal question." It does not need to be "letter perfekt," because the case will most probably languish, due to the issue of taxed compensation, in violation of Article III. The one I want to develop, however, is this story that the corporate States subordinated themselves to the District of Columbia when FDR forced the federal government into a permanent bankruptcy in 1933. I don't want to proceed with just "theory." I need proof in statutes and regulations, preferably. A good example is to compare 31 CFR 51.2 and 52.2: one is clearly de facto; the other is clearly de jure. This is the kind of evidence I am looking for. Armed with this data, I can justify removing any state criminal action into the DCUS, where it will stall, pending final resolution of the federal question(s) raised. In addition to the removal, the former defendant becomes the new plaintiff in a petition for order to the United States (new defendant) to show cause why its alleged agents should not be charged with a laundry list of crimes (e.g. extortion, barratry, fraud, perjury, and conspiracy to commit all of the above, to name just a few). This case is civil, but we can invoke Jury Trial of Right under FRCP Rule 38. Now we have them, because the jury cannot be convened as long as we have placed on the table our powerful challenge to the constitutionality of the Jury Selection and Service Act (two classes of citizens; two classes of federal district courts). I can make all these briefs available to you, but you will need to consent to a non-disclosure agreement. I am in such an agreement now with a habeas corpus expert, who will provide one of the last remaining pieces to this overall strategy, which is not for the weak-hearted, by the way. I was on the radio last night in West Virginia, and I will be able to sell you a copy of that tape for $10, as soon as the dupes are run. This is a good intro for the lay person, even if they must re-play it 10 times. Over for now. /s/ Paul Mitchell
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail