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 thought 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 were 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.
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
The Supreme court denied petition 14-1051which 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).”
-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