"One Hoax to Cover Another Hoax, and So On!"




                 Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

            Private Attorney General:  18 U.S.C. 1964


                 All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308)



In many ways, it's now approaching comedy in the extreme

to witness how very consistently Federal government personnel

avoid certain legal questions like a global plague of toxic chemtrails.


Arguably Numero Uno in this parade of deliberate distractions

is the real identity of "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA".


This is no idle or irresponsible question, chiefly because

that entity has shown as the "Plaintiff" on every single Federal

Grand Jury "indictment" we have examined during the

past 30 years of litigation and supporting legal research.


We traced it to two Delaware corporations, but both corporate

charters were revoked by the Delaware Secretary of State

soon after we attempted to serve their Agent for Service of process.


In order to demonstrate due diligence, we also inquired at the

Secretary of State for several other States of the Union, and

without exception those offices also confirmed that

"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" never registered to do

business as a foreign corporation in any of those other States.


It doesn't appear to be registered with the D.C. office

responsible for enforcing corporation laws inside

that Federal enclave, either.


There is an entity registered in Scotland by the name of


anyone only slightly familiar with the subject of Federal jurisdiction

already knows that a "private limited company" with "UK Origin"

can NOT be the entity that shows on Grand Jury "indictments"

in the USA.


This ongoing controversy would not really warrant all of the

keystrokes it has inspired during the past 30 YEARS,

were it not for the far-reaching legal implications that arise

from Article III in the U.S. Constitution:


The Judicial Power of the United States extends to all cases

in which the United States (Federal government) is a Party!


That Clause is supreme Law throughout the USA,

not some nebulous ethical goal to be ignored with impunity.


Our BEST THEORY to date, therefore, is that the truly fictitious entity

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA shows on all those "indictments"

as a means to circumvent that supreme Law at Article III

and to convene a Federal legislative tribunal instead of

a constitutional court.


This is not a "conspiracy theory" as certain intelligence agencies

like to brand certain ideas.  Strictly speaking, it is a valid hypothesis

that continues to survive, because no contrary evidence has been

forthcoming from anyone responsible for disproving that hypothesis.


One would expect U.S. Attorneys would have disproven that

hypothesis long ago:  without any powers of attorney legally

to represent "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" as such, those attorneys

are thereby rendered liable for numerous felony Federal offenses,

like jury tampering, perjury, false arrest, unlawful incarceration,

witness retaliation and obstruction of justice.


The primary problem here is that Federal legislative tribunals

do not enjoy any criminal jurisdiction whatsoever!


They can't, as long as 18 U.S.C. 3231 confers criminal jurisdiction

on the District Courts of the United States -- which have originated

criminal prosecutions during the "brief" period spanning

from the Act of 1789 to the Acts of 1948 -- only 159 YEARS!


The general rule here is that statutes like Section 3231

must be STRICTLY CONSTRUED, and that means

the United States District Courts are NOT mentioned!


In Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, cf. "inclusio unius

est exclusio alterius":  an irrefutable inference must be made

that whatever was omitted or excluded from a Federal statute

was intended to be omitted or excluded by Act of Congress!


What we have termed the "Sea Change" that occurred

on June 25, 1948, attempted to convert the Federal Judiciary

from Article III constitutional courts to Article I legislative tribunals.


The mechanism that attempted to authorize such a "Sea Change"

was a series of "amendments" to Rules of Court.  This, however,

was a FATAL ERROR chiefly because the U.S. Supreme Court

has held -- correctly -- that Rules of Court may not expand

or restrict original jurisdiction which has already been conferred

on Federal District Courts by prior Acts of Congress.


See Willy v. Coastal Corp. for dispositive authority on this

fundamental point.  All legislative power is vested in the Congress,

not in any Federal courts.  See Article I.


Here's an experiment which anyone can try, time permitting:

if you live and/or work in one of the 50 States of the Union,

we strongly recommend that you make polite contact

with your State's Secretary of State, play dumb, and



Is "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" a corporation registered

to do business in your State?


Please share their answer(s) with us!



Further reading:









Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Civil RICO: 18 U.S.C. 1964;

Agent of the United States as Qui Tam Relator (4X),

Federal Civil False Claims Act: 31 U.S.C. 3729 et seq.

http://supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved (cf. UCC 1-308 https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/1-308)