Did The Federal Courts Lie  Abusing  Juris My Diction Crap!

Did The Federal Courts Lie Abusing Juris My Diction Crap!

Have you seen the Matrix? In the movie humans are asleep truly living their lives in a dream world created and controlled by the MATRIX, a fantasy world created by super computers running at Quantum speed. The people sustained, in a constant state of sleep, while the computer uses them as a source of thermal energy.

The irony of this is just how much it mirrors the current state of existence for all Americans. Americans live in a country where they believe their protected by the rule of law, and the Government is protecting them, and their free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

The reality though is the media controls all that we know. They control what is reported on the nightly news, what stories we read and hear. They feed US all with grand illusions of truth and justice or of imminent threat and fear. However, the reality for most is like the movie, really something quite different. This is an example of a true story of criminal corruption in the highest levels of government and the Federal Courts, A story the media will not report. Why ?

The US Government has for decades now kept the bulk of society in a downward spiral of prosperity. Declining standards of living and opportunity, increasing debt loads and ever higher and higher taxation. We are the thermal fuel of the US Government Matrix suffering extortion at ever accelerating rates of taxation on lower incomes and continually declining buying power.

The Federal, State, and Local Governments are extorting from all of us through taxation. Those in power and the 1% get ever more decadent, ever more rich, while 99% of us grow ever poorer and dependent on crumbs.

An early line in the Matrix is “If your gonna give me that Juris my diction crap you can cram it” where the sun don’t shine! This piece is all about the US Federal Courts use of that Juris my diction crap and how in the Matrix the law is not really applicable. Just like Trinity right after that line, she defies the rules of gravity, time, and space. In our Matrix, its the rule of law, the Constitution, and Justice which are inexplicably inapplicable and inaccessible in the U.S. Federal Courts against Government corruption.

This whole story is a long and complex, and it’s yet to have played out. However, as I blog about the issues I’m building a record for the book. This piece covers why I say the Federal Courts have perpetrated a lie about their lack of jurisdiction to aid an abet the USDA’s criminal racketeering operations.That’s correct folks I believe the Federal District Court and the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ignored federal law in violation of federal law to protect a criminal unconstitutional racketeering enterprise run by the USDA.

In September 2013 I filed a civil lawsuit case # 4:13-cv-00054 WDVA against the USDA and seven federal employees of USDA and one employee of the University of Virginia mediation program for racketeering under Chapter 18 1961,1962.1964.1968. I alleged the USDA is operating a criminal conspiracy designed to usurp individual constitutional rights and to protect employees from accountability and responsibility for crimes against civilians avoiding financial damages resulting from their criminal activities and torts.

In March 2014 The Federal District Court Judge Jackson L. Kiser ruled he lacked jurisdiction to hear these allegations because, I failed to invoke the Federal Tort Claims Act “FTCA” and had not requested permission from the racketeer influenced corrupt organization “USDA”, permission to sue the USDA et al  for being corrupt. Although, I had in writing from the agency all administrative requirements had been exhausted.. see Mr. President all that’s necessary for the triumph of government evil is for those in power to do nothing. 

I allege, this was a criminal act by the Federal district court and the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, intentionally ignoring federal law, federal precedent, and the federal rules of civil procedure, as well as, a breach by these Judges of their judicial oaths of office.

It amounts to an intentional act to aid and abet a criminal enterprise operating in the highest levels of the Executive branche of Government. This operation is owned, operated, and maintained by the Secretary of Agriculture! Currently Tom Vilsack!

First Chapter 18 U.S.C. 1965(a) states “Any civil action or proceeding under this chapter against any person may be instituted in the district court of the United States for any district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.”

Second to quote the Department of Justice”DOJ” guide to civil RICO: Page 79

” Section 1331 of Title 28, United States Code, provides that “[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States,” and hence confers subject matter jurisdiction upon federal district courts to hear a claim arising from an alleged violation of a federal law or statute(i.e., a federal question). Therefore,federal district courts are empowered to hear civil claims arising from and alleged violation of the RICO statute, 18 U.S.C. section 1961 . See e.g., Rolls-Royce Motors, Inc. v. Charles Schmitt & Co., 657. Supp. 1040, 1055(S.D.N.Y. 1987).”

Third. The 10% of the case that proceeded unlawfully did so under 5 U.S.C. Section 701 to the plaintiffs objection as the case was not filed nor contained argument for this intent. The Court however, ignored what the law actually said and granted the USDA deference to change the word “or’ to “and”. In other words they choose to ignore the letter of the law.

Supreme Court justices have documented their believe this is unconstitutional and is the prevue of the Jury or Judge in Civil and Criminal proceedings. The very challenge our case made to the Supreme Court..

The original case filing requested that a jury decide whether the USDA followed its own regulations. A constitutional right to a jury trial. A constitutional right for the people to judge not only if the law was broken but if the law is fair and just. A prime intent of the founding fathers to maintain checks and balance on Government tyranny.

Furthermore, 5 .U.S.C 702 states the right of review under Section 701 states: “A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.” 18 U.S.C. 1961 is a relevant statute when the crimes have been committed!

The Supreme court stated in Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp 397 U.S. 150(1970) ID. at 153-54. that it interpreted the Administrative Procedure Act provision that “any person aggrieved” can seek judicial review as creating a right to appeal as a private attorney general. A civil suit brought by a private individual under Chapter 18 1961 is provided with private attorney general status.

“The Congressional Statement of Findings and Purpose underlying RICO explains that, among other things, RICO was designed to combat activities that weaken the stability of the Nation’s economic system, harm innocent investors and competing organizations, interfere with free competition, seriously burden interstate and foreign commerce, threaten the domestic security, and undermine the general welfare of the Nation and its citizens . . . . Pub. L. No. 91-452, 84 Stat., at 922, 923. Indeed, Congress created RICO to provide new and expanded criminal and civil remedies to vindicate the public’s interest in combating racketeering activity and “to free the channels of commerce” from such unlawful conduct.”

Fourth 18 U.S.C. 1964(c) “Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee,”

The law clearly states that a suit under this chapter is for injury to an individuals business or property. It is not a suit for the Negligence, Fraud, and Obstruction of justice, and theft of constitutional rights that are the TORTS in this case. It is therefor a suit for the conspiracy to operate and engage  in a criminal racketeering enterprise. How then does an individual lack jurisdiction for failing to invoke the Federal TORT claims ACT?

I told the court the premise itself is unconstitutional. When a plaintiff alleges the Agency is operating a racketeer influenced corrupt organization. It’s unconstitutional to require that the plaintiff ask permission, as required by the FTCA, of the racketeer to sue the racketeer for operating a racketeer influenced corrupt organization. This is simply unfair and beyond common right or reason and therefore a violation of due process!

It’s also unconstitutional because, it results in a taking of the personal property rights to treble damages and attorneys fees granted by congress to private citizens under rico. A right provided as an incentive for private citizens to undertake pursuing this type of crime in government where prosecutorial gaps exists.The  DOJ is prohibited from undertaking action aganist a government agency. It is a conflict of interest since their required to defend them. Private attorney general is a right granted only to civilian non attorneys.

The courts have consistently held in all prior precedent that a RICO enterprise is not protected by sovereign immunity as the FTCA would imply see:  The Words of Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in United States of America v. Lawrence E. Warner and George H. Ryan, Sr. (2007) p 72-75 

See United States v. Angelilli, 660 F.2d 23, 31-33 (2d Cir. 1981) “ We view the language of 1961(4) as unambiguously encompassing governmental units, … and the substance of RICO’S provisions demonstrate a clear congressional intent that RICO be interpreted to apply to the activities that corrupt public or governmental entities.”), cert . denied, 455 U.S. 910 (1982); See also G. Robert Blakely, The civil RICO Fraud Action in Context: Reflections on Bennett v. Berg, 58 Notre Dame L. Rev. 237, 298-299 (1982) (Collecting decisions). In Cianci, 378 F.3d at 78-88, where the First Circuit affirmed the RICO convictions of the mayor of Providence, Rhode Island and associates who operated affairs of an associated-in-fact enterprise consisting of themselves, the city and its agencies and entities to enrich themselves, the court stated that “[a] RICO enterprise animated by an illicit common purpose can be comprised of an association-in-fact of municipal entities and human members when the latter exploits the former to carry out that purpose. See also United States v Warner, 498 F.3d 666,694-97(7th Cir, 2007), The Seventh Circuit held that the State of Illinois was properly charged as the RICO enterprise that was the victim of corrupt office holders’ pattern of racketeering activity.

Similarly, the Supreme Court has explained, in the context of a private right granted by federal statute, “Where a private right is granted in the public interest to effectuate a legislative policy, waiver of a right so charged or colored with the public interest will not be allowed where it would thwart the legislative policy which it was designed to effectuate.” Brooklyn Savs. Bank v. O’Neil, 324 U.S. 697, 704 (1945). See also Tompkins v. United Healthcare of New England, Inc., 203 F.3d 90, 97 (1st Cir. 2000) (“[a] statutory right may not be disclaimed if the waiver could ‘do violence to the public policy underlying the legislative enactment.’”)

As a General Rule RICO is Not Preempted by Other Statutes.(i.e. FTCA) The issue whether other statutes pre-empt RICO charges has arisen in both civil and criminal RICO cases. This issue is addressed in OCRS’ Civil RICO Manual (Oct. 2007) at 272-82. Briefly, RICO was designed to augment existing civil and criminal remedies, and therefore, RICO, as a general rule is not pre-empted by other, even more specific statutes. See at 273-74, 276 and notes 289 and 291.

I allege that Federal District Judge Jackson L. Kiser of the Federal District Court of VA Danville knowingly violated Federal Law 42 U.S.C. 1983 “ with his ruling and opinion in this case on March 24th 2014. 

“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.”

I further Allege Judge Clyde H. Hamilton, Robert B. King, and Barbra M. Keenan of the fourth circuit court of appeals in their supporting opinion of Judge Kisers ruling have intentionally also violated Federal Law 42 U.S.C. 1983 ” and have done so intentionally adding and abetting  a criminal racketeering operation owned and operated by the U.S. Government for the tyranny and oppression of the people for the sole purpose of preserving the enterprises criminal activities.

The operation of a criminal enterprise specifically designed for the Obstruction of Constitutional rights which violates multiple federal statutes is an act of treason on the Constitution and in this instant case Americas farmers. These judges have supported a war on the constitution and are also guilty of treason not just misprision of treason U.S.C 2382.

I Find nothing more hypocritical, despotic, or insideous than a Judge protecting criminals in Government interfering with free competition, seriously burdening interstate and foreign commerce, threatening the domestic security, and undermining the general welfare of the Nation and its citizens! But, Most of all is the blatant undermining of the the Constitution of the United States and the Judiciary’s obligation to protect the people from tyranny by enforcing the Governments laws on the Government that enacts them.

In Supreme Court petition 14-1051 question one was

  1. Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act Chapter 18 §1964(c) for violations of  1961 and §1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or provisions of the Federal Tort Claims FTCA?

The Supreme court denied petition 14-1051 which presented a federal question to the court it has never addressed. Furthermore, I believe the court knew the plaintiffs constitutional rights had been violated, but, denied the petition to protect the Governments continued criminal enterprise. An enterprise that has operated with federal courts support of deference for decades now. You can see more on the courts recent opinions on deference in this blogs post  How do you justify calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors of “We The People” So much for JUSTICE! 

Justice Louis Brandeis offered this view ‘”Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to come a law unto himself. It invites anarchy. (United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).”

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

-Declaration of Independence, 1776

The U.S. Government is breaking it’s own laws aided and abetted by corruption in the Federal Courts! They have in effect supported a U.S. Government operation for the despotic  tyranny and oppression of the American Farmer.

I stand by calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors to “We The People” !

Chris Julian – Pro-Se

How do you justify calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors of “We The People”?

How do you justify calling the Supreme Court Justices Traitors of “We The People”?

Like This!

On April 27th 2015 the Supreme Court denied Certiorari to petition 14-1051. This Petition ask three questions but the number #1 question was “Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) Enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act 18 U.S.C. 1964(C) for violations of 1961 and 1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or by provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)?

The Federal Court and the appellate court upheld that failure to evoke the FTCA was a fatal flaw in my case. However, Civil Rico is not a suit for any TORT. It requires the commission of multiple felonies or torts to be invoked but, the federal statue states the law applies to the operation of an enterprise defined in 1962 causing damages to an individuals business and property stated in U.S.C.18 1964″ (c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee” Additionally, all precedent history indicates an Enterprise to be a  separate entity that does not enjoy sovereign immunity protection.

On March 24, 2014 The Federal district court Of VAWD ruled  it lacked jurisdiction in the matter because I had not asked the USDA for permission  (i.e filed form SF-95 requesting permission of USDA to sue them for being corrupt). The 4th Circuit court of appeals upheld this ruling!. Neither court offered any explanation of any kind as to how this was the case when all the precedent and stare decisis and prior statements of the supreme court were contrary to this ruling.   I found no record of any precedent being set for a Federal Agency being charged with violation of this Federal crime nor any suggestion in any case precedent or Supreme Court decision this statute would not apply to the USDA or any other government agency for that  Matter

. ” In United States v Angelilli 660 F. 2d 23  the second circuit stated in paragraph 27 available here http://openjurist.org/660/f2d/23/united-states-v-angelilli the following.” 27 ” In sum, we view the language of § 1961(4), defining enterprise, as unambiguously encompassing governmental units, and we consider that the purpose and history of the Act and the substance of RICO’s provisions demonstrate a clear congressional intent that RICO be interpreted to apply to activities that corrupt public or governmental entities. We note that this view is shared by virtually every other court that has considered the question.

”  In United States of America v. Lawrence E. Warner and George H. Ryan, Sr. (2007) p 74-75 . The Second circuit addressed Sovereign immunity and provides a significant list of precedent to support that a Racketeering enterprise does not benefit from immunity. ”

“In arguing that states may not be considered “legal entities” under the racketeering statute, appellants miscast a straightforward issue of statutory interpretation into an issue of federalism. Br58. Their reliance on cases dealing with federalism or state sovereignty, such as Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 748 (1999), is misplaced. Nothing in RICO precludes the states from addressing corruption or infringes in any way on the legitimate functioning of state government or on its sovereignty.” “Appellants overlook the fundamental principle that the racketeering enterprise, whether it be a legitimate business, governmental entity or association in fact, is merely the vehicle through which defendants conduct alleged racketeering activities.”
     See also U. S. Supreme Court on United States v. Turkett: 452 U.S. 576,580 (1981) (“[t]here is no restriction upon the associations embraced by the definition” of “enterprise”).” The precedent, issues, and laws around Jurisdiction and Sovereign immunity are to lengthy to discuss in detail for the purpose of this post But! I suspect this entire line of defense was used by the Federal Courts to aid and abet this criminal government racketeering enterprise in avoiding litigation.  A look at why i believe this was just BS on Jurisdiction in the next blog post!
How long this racketeering operation has been going on in the USDA I’m not quite sure. I know at the lest it was in operation in the early 1990’s when, the then Secretary of Agriculture established the National Appeals Division his own judicial tribunal reporting directly to him like all other agencies under the USDA who NAD holds hearings for. Judge &  Jury, of themselves! with no rules of evidence, no stare deices, no rights to present evidence of criminal wrong doing, no judicial history available like the Federal Courts but, only the rulings of officers directly reporting for the preservation of their mob bosses and the preservation of the enterprise and their own jobs. All the precedent, laws, and legal challenges in the cases preceding to the Supreme court were completely ignored.

This RICO enterprise is operated by the USDA’s budget for risk management. There is nothing wrong per se with having a risk management operation or even a legal risk management operation. There is however, a serious problem with running a risk management operation illegally, and in violation of individual constitutional rights, and in violation of Federal Law with the unlimited financial support of the U.S. Government and the largest Legal firm in the world at your disposal. For the express purpose of denying constitutional rights to due process. It is this very conflict of interest- The DOJ can not prosecute a U.S. Agency for crimes and thats a prosecutorial gap civil rico was designed to remedy.

The USDA uses illegal tactics, illegal processes under the RICO act to operate this enterprise. They further abuse government power in its operation and every legal trick they can pull using federal protections as shields for their corruption. Furthermore, as in my case they have used deference to avoid attaching legal damages to 14 federal violations by a lawyers count. I personally find  the count much larger but, I have information he did not.

This illegal unconstitutional racketeering operation is run by the USDA to avoid accountability and responsibility for the criminal acts of its’ employees and the incompetent mis management of the peoples resources. Which their doing with our tax dollars and this whole operation is designed for tranny, oppression and utter despotism of farmers, often poor farmers. The RICO statute 1964(a) grants the Federal Court the right to order “dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, making due provision for the rights of innocent persons.Therefore,  had the courts heard this case the opportunity existed for the Judicial Branch of Government to preform their duty to the American people and put an end to the executive branches operation of this tyrannous enterprise.  An absolute heinous act of terrorism operated by a Federal Agency for its own self preservation to the detriment of farmers and others. 

It is precisely the duty of the Federal Courts to apply the law as written and to uphold the constitution of the United States. They are “We The Peoples” only protection from a Government bent on tyranny and oppression. This case lives on and if the Government continues to get its way likely on, and on, and on!  It was not dismissed in the Federal Court with prejudice. I would also contend that based on crimes committed by Judge jackson L. Kiser the entire case history is void and unenforceable.

In mid April I delivered my request for permission from this corrupt organization to sue them for being corrupt. See my letter to the President posted on this blog. However, and this is why I’m so bothered by the courts denial of this petition. In making that request Government Form SF-95  I had to sign my name agreeing to accept as settlement a sum certain as stated on Form SF-95. If the USDA now wishes to put an end to this legal battle they can simply pay that sum certain.

The real disappointment here is – then this racket can continue to operate and frankly they will get off much cheaper to just pay me the large sum than to open themselves to the potential litigation that could follow me from all their prior criminal acts the last 3 decades. Consider for a moment they have already settled multiple class action filings for several billion dollars.

Thats why The Supreme Court are Traitors to the American People. They were given the opportunity to potentially do their Job to protect “We The People”: from tyranny and put an end to this heinous, criminal, illegal, and  unconstitutional racketeering operation. A Chance to permanently end a reign of terrorism that has punished  farmers for seeking help for more than 3 decades, They traitorously passed on it. How many more poor individuals will get raped, robbed and financially destroyed by this oppressive government agency? Because the Federal Courts protected this racket and the Supreme Court decided to let this petition and the USDA’s racketeering operation have a pass to continue on and on until?

If you never heard about the USDA’s despotic history I suggest these articles for a little history lesson.

1. http://old.seattletimes.com/text/2017876971.html From Old Seattle times.

2.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113730694 From National Public Radio/NPR

3. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_015583.pdf NRCS USDA. Gov

4.http://deltafarmpress.com/white-farmers-suing-usdafsa Delta Farm Press “A particular favorite of mine” 

5.http://www.ebony.com/black-listed/news-views/alabama-black-farmers-sue-usda-981#axzz2dehBlOEK “Ebony Magazine “follow the links on this one to more if you like”

   I’m interested in any intelligent conversation on this subject. Please feel free to leave your comments!

I believe the Media will not cover this story because they fear retribution in the courts and government. Telling the people their really is no justice system could anger a mob.

Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist essays describing the proposed new constitution.” I am not well versed in history, but I will submit to your recollection, whether liberty has been destroyed most often by the licentiousness of the people, or by the tyranny of rulers. I imagine, sir, you will find the balance on the side of tyranny.”

In June of 1776, delegates of the Virginia Convention adopted a declaration of rights that included the following statement:…In controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred.” Less than one month later, representatives of all 13 colonies signed the Declaration of Independence, which cited “depriving us in many cases of the right to trial by jury” – a right granted to every British subject by Magna Carta in 1215 – as one of the chief reasons for breaking with the King and Mother England.”

The Court took this path the BS of jurisdiction to deny a trial by jury as demanded in the original complaint. While I find it interesting the Media will not report on this story. More interesting is the lack of remarks from a single legal pundit!

A blessed warm christmas cheer to the Supreme Court, 4th circuit court of appeals and especially the dishonorable judge Jackson L. Kiser who’s demise I await with great anticipation that I may raise my glass to the glory of God upon his death and drink to his eternal life in Hell!


Christopher B. Julian Pro-Se.

Supreme Court of the U.S. Government!  No longer a court of Law but of Men.

Supreme Court of the U.S. Government! No longer a court of Law but of Men.

September 2013 a Civil Lawsuit was filed alleging Racketeering by the USDA and seven affiliated defendants. The court granted the Government a lengthy extension of time to respond. No evidentiary hearing was ever held. No discovery ever allowed. No Amendment to the complaint, was ever allowed.

A hearing of approximately 30 minutes was held in late February 2014 and a ruling claiming the court-lacked jurisdiction on 90% of the cause of action was published late March 2013. For all intense purpose this ruling reflects the courts opinion that Federal Agencies are protected by sovereign immunity for racketeering.

It requires a plaintiff first to request permission from a corrupt government agency permission to sue them for being corrupt. It grant them the opportunity to simply pay you to avoid court. I contended this itself was a violation of Due process beyond common right and reason. A constitutional challenge to the FTCA in the matter was presented and completely ignored.

All prior precedent rulings on Governors, judges, legislators and even the State of Illinois the courts found racketeering enterprises are not protected by Sovereign immunity. See United States of America v. Lawrence E. Warner and George H. Ryan, Sr. (2007) p 74-75 . Perhaps this is a Supreme Court Question but, they denied answering it and neither the Federal court nor the appellate court properly addressed it.

An Interlocutory appeal was filed in June requesting appellate review of the courts ruling. The district court continued to delay and ruled in favor of the defendants granting them deference to actually change the wording of their own regulations as well as extraordinary deference in changing their interpretative rules and applying those changes long after the rules as written had been relied on.

The District Courts rulings by the dishonorable Judge Jackson L. Kiser are fascinating not for the countless acts of deceit, deception, obfuscation, intentional acts of misdirection or even the outright lies. But for the absolute disregard for the rules of civil procedure, blatant disregard for all judicial precedence, and the absolute intense and malicious degree with which they are written to exonerate the Government and their criminal employees.

Continue reading

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !

Supreme Court or Supreme Government Puppet

Recently the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari to petition 14-1051. In denying this petition the court dismissed its constitutional duty to all of America. They sold their judicial powers under the constitution of the United States to an executive branch of the U.S. Government.

They dismissed the judicial “check” on the political branches. Unlike the Legislative and Executive Branches, each of which possesses several political checks on the other, the Judiciary has one primary check on the excesses of political branches. That check is the enforcement of the rule of law through the exercise of judicial power.

In denying petition 14-1051 they allowed the USDA to continue racketeering operations they have operated now unconstitutionally for decades. Subjecting tens of thousands of poor American farmers to tyranny and despotism while destroying their lives, livelihood, families and futures.

This decision the Supreme Court (Government Puppet) shirked the greatest obligation to the American people the Supreme Court has. A constitutional obligation to exercise their judicial checks on the other branches of Government subjecting the American people to precisely the abuses the Framers of the Constitution sought to prevent!

I respectful request “We the People” of the United States of American stand up and demand at the top of our lungs to rectify the despicable, shameful discharge of the Courts primary responsibility to We The People and the Constitution.It is precisely the usurpation of judicial powers by an executive branch of Government that leads to the very tyranny the founding fathers intended the separation of powers and the provision of trial by jury to prevent.

The Court failed to grant this petition even though numerous justices had just recently provided lengthy dissertations on these very issues and the courts obligations to them in Whitman v. United States, 574 U.S. (November 10, 2014), Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association (March 9, 2015) and United States V. Kwai Fun Wong (April 22, 2015) Even though this case had all the elements of these recent decisions and was a perfect vehicle for addressing the one unresolved major constitutional issue. The Court denied this petition presenting the very question they stated a desire to address.

There are numerous articles on these cases and their subjects to be found in National Law Review  and on the SCOTUSblog.com Denial of Petition 14-1051 demonstrates just how hypocritical the Supreme Court Justices can be! It Demonstrates the Courts willingness to protect criminal operations by the other branches of Government. It demonstrates the Courts unwillingness to preform its duties to the constitution and the American People.

I’m sure there are countless other cases in the library’s of the Federal Courts that demonstrate the Federal Courts willingness to ignore Federal Law, to ignore all Legal precedent, to willingly protect the Sugar Daddy and his marry band of thugs. But I seriously doubt there are many denied petitions,  if any that demonstrate  such a  serious lack of moral and ethical integrality by the Supreme Court than this!

There’s no evidence anyone has ever brought a case to the Federal Court or the Supreme Court with the power this case had to grant the court the constitutional right to dismantle this heinous racketeering operation run by the USDA. You can read a little about USDA’s history of Oppression here.http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs141p2_015583.pdf There are many more relevant articles to be found here. http://www.blueridgesprings.com/yourusda.html

While the petition may have been mine I took it this far for the tens of thousands of  farmers who came before me. Now I need the peoples help to let your legislators and the President know you do not wish to be subjects of a criminal unconstitutional tyrannous Government aided and abetted by a Corrupt Federal Judicial system!

This court sold out the American People, the Constitution, and justice for my family and friends to Government corruption!! I’m sure I’ll have critics but I can assure you those critics will not have done there home work!

Having presented form SF_95 to the President of the United States the courts lie about a lack of jurisdiction has been cured this case will come back to court in 6 months unless corruption intervenes again. I want America watching on the next round please.

see letter to the Mr. President all thats necessary for the triumph of Government evil is for those in power to do nothing!

                                QUESTIONS PRESENTED By Petition 14- 1051 Denied April 27, 2015

  1. Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act Chapter 18 §1964(c) for violations of  1961 and §1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or provisions of the Federal Tort Claims FTCA?
  2. Should a court grant deference to an administrative agency’s statutory interpretation where it can affect the outcome of civil or criminal litigation?
  3. When a Federal Agency denies an appellant opportunity to present evidence of negligence, fraud, and discrimination, relevant to an agency decision, and judicial review is limited to review of the administrative record and the provisions of 5 U.S.C. §706, Have the administrative procedures in conjunction with the limits on judicial review not effectively violated the appellants constitutional right to due process and a jury trial?