America’s Fail from Democracy to Oligarchy!

If you consider yourself an American patriot concerned at all about the future of this Country. Concerned at all about your children’s future; I implore you not to give in to boredom, tribalism, dissociation, or apathy and read, comprehend, verify and take action on the facts in this story. It’s extremely important that you do.

Fact in the 161 year history prior to 1950 the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was a republican federalist 151 years. Ninety-three percent is a main trend.

Between 1938 – 1946 Major attacks were made on the pillars of the Constitution of the United States while federalist republican Harlan F. Stone presided as Chief Justice. His Federalist lead Supreme Court failed to block the Executive and Legislative branches from violating the constitutional doctrine of Separation of Powers. Allowing the creation of headless Agencies with legislative and judicial powers. This was a completely avoidable violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine. It’s not hard to speculate that in this time period of American History racism and bigotry were major contributing factors.

The Doctrine Separation of Powers and its precepts were based on careful analysis of how to keep a government from failing as had happened for thousands of years. Throughout history violation of the precepts lead to the demise of nations.

During the reign of Harlan Stone the Supreme Court codified the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in biased favor of Federal Government representation.
Created and established with precedent the Government’s protection under Sovereign immunity seen by legal experts as unsupported by the Constitution or relevant history of its creation while defining it as an anachronistic relic and doctrine that should be eliminated from American law.
Codified the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in biased favor of Federal Government representation.
Closed the door of the Court house on private citizens convening a grand jury to prosecute corruption of government officials. A move seen by legal experts as a willful subversion of well-settled law.
Established the State Attorney Generals who serve at the discretion of the President, as gatekeepers of the courtroom and judge controlling prosecution and defense of Government.
Gifted the newly formed Agencies with deference allowing them to create and uncreate laws at will or simply unconstitutional power to protect themselves from its violation. It’s well documented the Supreme Court views the doctrine unconstitutional though it remains today with unchecked power.

Fred M. Vinson appointed by Harry S. Truman was the last Democratic Chief Justice appointed serving seven years 1946-1953, every Chief Justice since to today’s chief Justice John Roberts has been a republican federalist. This means the swing vote on the Supreme Court has been a federalist republican 218 of 231 years giving federalist republicans 94 percent advantage over all swing votes.

Between 1953 and 1961 Richard M. Nixon was Vice President of the United States. Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W.Bush loaded the Supreme Court and Federal Courts with Federalist Judges as did John Adams in 1803.

“In a word, the main trend draws with it all particular accidents.” – Montesquieu“

In 1965 Taylor Caldwell wrote the Novel A Pillar of Iron. Ironically the events and individuals above with help from Vice President AL Gore, Senator Patrick Leahy, and others lead to the Goss Conspiracy.

The implementation of this premeditated conspiracy of treason on the Constitution by all branches of the Federal Government, was telegraphed by Federal district Judge Bruce Van Sickle. Judge Van Sickle laid out the plan as the Goss Principle in his memorandum and order in the Case of Coleman v. Block February 17,1984.

The Coleman case was a class action lawsuit by over three hundred thousand farmers who claimed a violation of their due process rights by the USDA. Ironically The linchpin Brutus of treason in the implementation of this treason on the Constitution was former Vice President Joe Biden as he held the position of Chair on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Joe Biden middle of the night Saturday October 27, 1990 just prior to recess ahead of midterm elections passed amendment S.3204 by voice only vote in the Senate and Congressman Jack Brooks suspending House rules at 11:57 Pm, Congress agreed to the amendment to H.R.5316 by voice vote at 12:09 Am When they then all left Washington and returned home for midterm elections.

The Biden Amendment altered the judicial oath of office 28 U.S. Code § 453.Oaths of justices and judges in 1990 see Notes Amendments 1990. The Amendment gifted Federal Judges power to substitute what Judge Van Sickle calls fair informal procedure for the Constitutional right to due process. The power to deny due process was augmented by existing precedent of the Federal Courts which empowered Federal Judges to discriminate without recourse against any litigant in a federal court proceeding. The legal justification for this is also presented in the Goss Principle laid out by Judge Van Sickle where its underlying legal support was founded on the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Judge Van Sickle waited on the implementation of this change to issue his final ruling in Coleman v. Block on July 5th 1991. He had previously waited on Congress, the Senate, and the President throughout the cases history to dictate the outcome of the Coleman v. Block Class action lawsuit.

Bipartisan Passage of this Treason on the Constitution was dependant on support of the Congressional Black Caucus ‘CBC’ led by Congressman John Conyers. America’s strongest congressional supporter of Civil Rights legislation and reparations. In exchange for the CBC support of this treason on the Constitution was expected passage of the Civil Rights Legislation of 1990. However, President George H.W. Bush vetoed the legislation on October 22, 1990. A committed bipartisan effort of Congress attempted to override the President’s veto two days later and failed by a single deciding vote cast by former Vice President Dan Quayle.

As many as 100,000 minority and women farmers had claimed the USDA discriminated against them in the administration of the USDA’s farm loan programs. This discrimination went beyond the denial of the due process violations acknowledged in Coleman v. Block, Matzke V. Block, Allison v. Block, Curry V. Block , and other state sponsored actions.

These individuals and their legal representations showed up at Clarence Thomas office of Civil Rights prior to President Reagan’s scuttling of Civil Rights offices throughout his administration. Clarence Thomas’s opposition to Affirmative action was not well received by the CBC, minorities, or the women movements of the time. See for example New York Times “The Black Caucus Votes To Oppose Thomas For High Court.” July 13, 1991. and “The Inquirer “Critics Assail Thomas’ role At The EEOC He Wins Support of Black Group, Nunn” July 17, 1991. These two are linked to my personal archived copies. Since putting out the first draft copy of my book, numerous supporting documents by major publications have disappeared and or been altered on the internet.

Passage of the 1990 Civil Rights act was needed to provide these minority farmers with restitution for the USDA’s discrimination because the 1964 act had no provision for damages caused by discrimination. The 1990 act would rectify this legislative issue by providing limited damage awards to these minority farmers. There are a number of these cases that followed completion of the Treasons implementation in 1994. The most widely known is Pigford v. Glickman which included settlement with Charles and Shirley Sherrod and their 6000 acre black farmer co-op in the middle of a White farmer community in Plains GA home of Former President Jimmy Carter.

Preventing White plantation farmers from due process and restitution for their grievances against the Government, while providing damage awards to minority farmers for discrimination was viewed by the Congressional Black Caucus, Congressman Conyers, and federalist republicans as a form of reparations.

In order to force President George H.W. Bush into signing the Civil Rights Legislation of 1990. Now Minority Senate Chair of the Judiciary and his partner in Crime Senator John Danforth of Missouri used Anita Hill to hold Clarence Thomas Supreme Court Nomination hostage as ransom for his signature on the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

Read for yourself the words of then Senator Joe Biden during the confirmation hearings on Clarence Thomas confirmation. Nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas to Be Associate Justice of The Supreme Court Of The United States. U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Washington DC. U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 1993.

“He [Congressman John Conyers] is the toughest ally and toughest opponent on the Judiciary Committee. I know it [Clarence Thomas Confirmation] is not going anywhere unless I get his agreement before it goes.” Pg 667

“[Y]ou are the black leadership of the Nation. They say, No. 1, that this really only reflects a difference on affirmative action; that’s what this is all about. The only thing you all are concerned about is affirmative action….” Pg 700.

Affirmative action being the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Remember most all of Congress supported passage of the legislation. They new it was all part and parcel of the Goss Conspiracy on the Constitution.

Timeline.

September 23, 1991 Senator Joe Biden said, Anita Hill agreed to allow the Federal Bureau of Investigation to investigate the allegations.
September 23, 1991 FBI agents interview Anita Hill in Oklahoma. She then sends a copy of the affidavit to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
September 24, 1991 Senator John Danforth introduces the Civil Rights Act of 1991 legislation on the Senate floor. Why Danforth it was Ted Kennedy’s legislation?
September 25, 1991 Clarence Thomas learns of the allegations by Anita Hill and is interviewed by the FBI.
On September, 27, 1991 the judiciary committee deadlocks 7 to 7 on the nomination of Clarence Thomas.
October 6, 1991 NPR airs Nina Toten Bergs story, based on a copy of Anita Hills affidavit which had been leaked by the Senate Judiciary committee.
October 9, 1991 USA Today reports Anita Hill was told by Senate staffers her signed affidavit alleging sexual harassment by Clarence Thomas would be the instrument that “quietly and behind the scenes” would force him to withdraw his name. Nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas to Be Associate Justice of The Supreme Court Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate 102 First Session Oct 11- 13 1991 Part 4 of 4. Printed by US Government Printing Office Washington 1993 Senator Arlen Spector Pgs 64-65.
October 11, 1991 Senator Joe Biden opens the hearings. “Professor Hill made two requests to this committee,” he says. First, that the committee investigate the charges and, second, that the charges remain confidential.” I believe we have honored both her requests,”
Please watch this video and let Joe Biden tell you exactly what actually happened!

Joe Biden sent the FBI on September 23, 1991 to Anita Hill’s home in Oklahoma with a subpoena to compel her to complete an affidavit of her allegations. I would consider that quite coercive wouldn’t you?
This is not something that you initiated, am I correct?
Anita Hill: No
What made her go public. Well NPR reporter Nina Totenberg called her with the affidavit in hand that Senator Joe Biden should have ensured and ensured her would not be made public.
She’s testifying because of unexpected events Senator Joe Biden and the Judiciary committee are responsible for. Unexpected events because Senator Joe Biden had committed to her, her allegations would be kept confidential.
She is a hostile witness who had no intention of ever being there to make allegations against Clarence Thomas.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is using Anita Hill to hold Clarence Thomas Confirmation hearing hostage, as ransom for President George H. W. Bush’s signature on passage on the Civil Rights Act John Danforth placed on the floor of the senate on September 24, 1991. The day the Senate Judiciary Committee had the allegations Senator Joe Biden subpoenaed from Anita Hill in hand.

October 15, 1991 Clarence Thomas was confirmed 52,48, the narrowest margin in more than a century.
October 26, 1991 The New York Times runs their story The Compromise on Civil Rights. Bottom line ” Scorecard: Bush gave in completely to the Danforth position.” In other words no changes from Kennedy’s 1990 Civil Rights Act Bush had previously vetoed and overrode.

There are lot more truths to the story strung among all the lies on both sides of the aisle in this bipartisan treason against the Constitution, Americas Farmers, Rural communities and the rule of law in America.

The Consequences of this treason cannot be overstated. The most comprehensive study since of the Federal Judiciary was done by Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial Discipline Reform.org
New York City

To Quote Dr. Cordero’s assessment of the U.S. Federal Judiciary

“In the last 225 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, only 8 of its judges have been removed from the bench. They hold all their adjudicative, policy-making, administrative, and disciplinary meetings behind closed doors and never appear before a press conference. They act with impunity. The evidence reveals their motive, means, and opportunity to engage in financial and non-financial wrongdoing by abusing power to deny due process, disregard the law, and decide by reasonless summary orders. They have hatched a system of wrongdoing so routine, widespread, and pervasive among themselves and between them and insiders as to have turned wrongdoing into their Judiciary’s institutionalized modus operandi.”

To Quote the Third Degree.net on the Federal Judiciary.

“In 2010, after years, sometimes decades in the metaphorical trenches, trying to vindicate the federal rights of average Americans through domestic legal processes, a coalition of U.S.-based good government advocates reported to the United Nations that “the ability of average Americans to effectively petition their government is so diluted or compromised that what would otherwise be our constitutional and universal human rights are no more than privileges, doled out at government discretion.” It took nearly five (5) more years for some advocates from that coalition to confirm underlying patterns of abuse.”

The effects of the Federalist Republican Goss Conspiracy on the Constitution was well described by Ted Kennedy’s speech on the Senate Floor when he attacked the nomination Robert Bork‘s Supreme Court nomination. Bork had been Richard Nixon’s Solicitor General and instrumental in the Saturday Night Massacre. It should be noted that Bork abandoned his lifetime Judicial Appointment in 1988.

“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, and schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens.” Senator Ted Kennedy

The New York Times Kennedy and Bork July 5, 1987

It’s my educated guess that while Democrats aided the Republicans in this bipartisan act of treason, This was Ted Kennedy fingering Robert Bork for the framework of the Goss Conspiracy based on the 1975,76 rulings in Goss v. Lopez and Mathews v. Eldridge respectfully.

Their actions and efforts are in fact perfectly described by Taylor Caldwell’s depiction of Cicero in defending his actions in the Catiline Conspiracy.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared”

Montesquieu father of the Separation of Powers Doctrine expounded the the following view of Roman History.

“It is not chance that rules the world. Ask the Romans, who had a continuous sequence of successes when they were guided by a certain plan, and an uninterrupted sequence of reverses when they followed another. There are general causes, moral and physical, which act in every monarchy, elevating it, maintaining it, or hurling it to the ground. All accidents are controlled by these causes. And if the chance of one battle—that is, a particular cause—has brought a state to ruin, some general cause made it necessary for that state to perish from a single battle. In a word, the main trend draws with it all particular accidents.”

Ironically the “one battle—that is, the particular cause bringing the US Government to ruin, was a battle over segregation of a White Farm Community in Plains Georgia. A battle fought by former President Jimmy Carter for Charles and Shirley Sherrod regarding a 6,000 acre black farmer Co Op called New Communities in Plains Georgia. The Segregationist Senator Herman Talmadge and the Lieutenant Governor of Georgia Lester Maddox both blocked first Governor Carter and Former President Carter’s attempts to help the Sherrods save their farming Community from financial collapse. You can read more on that story here: https://brsinv.com/2020/04/19/civil-rights-battle-against-whitey-that-ultimately-imprisoned-americans/

Ironically in 1862, Isaac Newton, the first commissioner of US agriculture, reported to his president, Abraham Lincoln, that haciendas brought down Rome. The message to the country was pretty clear: small family farmers were the foundations of the American Republic. How history rhymes America.

Former President Jimmy Carter on the State of American Government.

JIMMY CARTER: THE U.S. IS AN “OLIGARCHY WITH UNLIMITED POLITICAL BRIBERY”/

This treason on the Constitution effectively makes every federal judge sitting on the bench today a strong arm protector of a criminal enterprise, and under the rule of law invalidates every decision in every court case the Courts have handled since 1990. Furthermore in makes every member of Congress and every President since an American Traitor. Make no mistake they’ve turned the government into a criminal enterprise and empowered it as a king that can do no wrong. They’ve converted the Federal Judiciary into a protection racket for the criminal operation of We The Peoples Government.

Justiceship Nominee, now justice Neil Gorsuch reportedly said that:

“An attack on one of our brothers and sisters of the robe is an attack on all of us”

The Judiciary has protected itself by granting Judges absolute immunity. The Government with sovereign immunity, employees with qualified immunity and the ability to change the laws when needed to protect themselves. Congress does not expose the treason that’s undermined the Constitution for the same reason.

Shared deception creates bonds of necessity. Those involved in the deception need each other to support the lies. If one caves to the truth or is exposed, all involved are seen in the harsh light of day.
This may actually be the source of the judicial sickness known as Black Robe disease .

Having learned of all this and experiencing it first hand myself when I attempted to bring this conspiracy to light as it had been implemented into the procedural design of the USDA Administrative hearings. I wrote the following into a motion before the Federal Court. It prompted the Federal Judge to not only send a US Marshall after my wife and I but to also have Homeland Security contacting us.

A corrupt Federal Agency aided and abetted by a corrupt Federal Court is a travesty of justice for American democracy an insult to the U.S. Judicial system, to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to Life , Liberty, and Justice for all. It results in tyranny, oppression, and absolute despotism of the people justifying completely and succinctly the second amendment to the constitution of the United States. There is no greater criminal than the criminal that sits on the bench robbing America of its foundations.

The Declaration of Independence was supported almost entirely by the failures of Great Britain to recognize the colonist rights under the Magna Carta to Due Process. Fifty thousand relatives of the American people died in the American revolution to free America from such oppression. These traitors have destroyed those rights and dishonored every American Veteran thats fought for democracy since in a single decade of greed and incompetence. Make no mistake they’re evil deeds oppress the poor and middle class and enrich the wealthy. WE THE PEOPLE should prepare for the dissolution of Government as we know it. History never repeats but always rhymes and the greatest minds of history would tell America their Government is doomed.

Recently the Senate Dems put out a report called captured courts which exposes some of what the federalist have been up to.

I personally believe there’s only two ways to rid our Government of the Criminal enterprise now in control.

One is revolution the other is the fourth branch and true sovereign of the nation under the Constitution, We The People hold all branches accountable for the conspiracy of treason that ended the American republic before a public hearing and jury trial.

“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people. ” John Adams.

“Trial by jury is the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its Constitution” Thomas Jefferson 1789

You need to step up and get involved if you want a better future for your children and the world. If you would rather see an attempt by the people to bring back a Constitutional government sign the petition. Tell your family, friends, neighbors spread the word to sign. Call your Senator, Congressman and demand they support this petition for your Government stand trial. The Goss Conspiracy is written not to just tell the story but detail the evidence.

Sign the petition. on Change.Org “Demand U.S. Government Accountability to the Law”

January 18, 2019 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Spirit of the Laws [No Apathy]

Most Americans seem clueless about their civic responsibilities. Principal enlightenment historian, author, and engineer of the U.S. Constitutions foundation Montesquieu; warned citizens in the treatise Spirit of the Laws:

“The tyranny of a prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy of a citizen in a democracy.” Montesquieu, Spirit of the laws, 1748.

Montesquieu warned citizens not to become apathetic to how their Government is performing or lose sight of the Government’s actions. The Fables of Cicero tell us why.

“The traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.”

Unfortunately, after the Bill(s) of rights, American, British, French, and more, humanity lost touch with the roots of war, thousands of years of human history, the rise and fall of Kings, Monarchies, Dynasties, Feudal warlords, Religions. How and why these governments rose to power and what caused them to come hurtling down.

My question for humanity is?

Is it perhaps time to consider a very different kind of Government constructs? How did Einstein define Apathy?

“Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking.” Albert Einstein

Could we all step Outside the Box, work together, use our minds, redefine Governing of humanity and the planet on truth, science, and knowledge, and like nature focus on the pursuit of humanity’s perfection?

Ask Giordano Bruno This time if we join together they want to hang us ALL. Considered the Father of Modern Science.

Twenty-five hundred years ago Confucius had done just that. Imagine 2,500 years ago just trying to survive in the world without electricity, running water, cars, and bicycles. Think about it all, it’s a pretty extensive list yet, Confucius is known to have spent time studying Chinese history when developing his philosophy, in fact, it was his quest to find those things in Chinese history that made a dynasty great and what made them fall. He sought the best ways to Govern and rule a society. Can you imagine how hard it was in that time period to actually keep the history available for consumption? Or just to share your thoughts OutSide the Box.

Is it time to consider flipping Confucius’s quest?

Can we think OutSide the Box?

Rather than being imprisoned by government or religion how might humanity imprison them?

Confucius died believing his philosophies a failure, but his seeds grew roots and his philosophical teachings became among the world’s most prolific.

The rise and fall of the Roman empire would follow, great philosophers Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Epicureanism, came and went contemplating, debating, teaching, refining the arts of reason, exploring the depths of their ability to understand the nature of the world around them. What was their purpose? What was the best way to live, where do ethics and morality originate, and what is this place I call reality? A thousand years, no tv, no motorized transportation, no phone, no internet, just philosophical ideas shared on handwritten documents often duplicated with room for error. More than a thousand years of philosophical effort thought, and contemplation by the greatest of thinkers. Today’s humanity is mostly ignorant of their work, too lazy to exercise their minds with such hefty thoughts. Too lazy even to learn what they thought or what the importance or validity of their thought were. I still will likely spend the rest of my life trying to catch up with them. For anyone reading this. I tell my own daughter Philosophize This with I; am Stephen West is an extraordinary free learning opportunity.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Unless nature decides humanity’s too stupid to keep.

Is there a glitch in the humanities program code causing it to dump critical data? Is Humanity like AI taught to think and reason and yet with the input of garbage is garbage?

For thousands of years, governments rise and fallen each demanding its citizens follow their doctrines of the faith. Greek Gods, roman rule, and the streets of Athens would give rise to sophist men who taught various artful forms of winning one’s case without any moral ethic resolve but purely to win.

Socrates himself gave his own life by presenting what’s considered the worst legal defense in history. He basically refused to abandon his principal belief in living a virtuous life. He refused to lie to the court to avoid punishment for an offense he’d not committed. Forced to drink poison for being accused a sophist, liar, and lawyer after the Oligarchs of death lost power over Rome in the age of the Thirty Tyrants of Athens. The people had not stood for the despotism of oligarchs, must we? After the tyrants, the people had little trust. Why would they?

Hundreds, thousands of Gods who never seemed to answer the people’s prayers came and went regardless of the sacrifices. From the ashes of Europe, China, Asia, India, and the Middle East rose Buddhism, Taoism, Catholicism, Hebraism, Islam, and Christianity. Diversity of faiths. For hundreds of years to follow religious wars raged as the dark ages ensued. In Europe, the reformation led to war after the war between Protestants and Catholics. From these beginnings came the ages of enlightenment and the Philosopher, and antarchist, John Locke, and Montesquieu, philosopher, lawyer, politician, and author of the most authoritative contemplated treatise on the operation of Government known to America’s founding fathers. John Locke English philosopher and physician is widely regarded as one of the most influential Enlightenment thinkers and is commonly known as the “Father of Liberalism“. These men lived in times when the only form of education was the passing of history through the written word and the modes of transportation were challenging, to say the least.

Protestants and Catholics warred in France and a relative calm settled over France despite the strife between the Catholics and the Huguenots (French Protestants), the court of Henry III was then dominated by a tolerant faction of the Politiques (moderate Catholics, sympathizers of the Protestant King of Navarre, Henry of Bourbon, who became heir apparent to the throne of France in 1584. Here in Paris, France lived Giordano Bruno an Italian Dominican friar, philosopher, mathematician, poet, and cosmological theorist who proposed theories of an infinite universe with a multiplicity of worlds.

The Roman Catholic and Reformed Churches of the time were struggling to the evangelization of Europe. Giordano believed Lucretius the universe was infinite, his god was infinite, and creation could be nothing less. He was excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church for his beliefs.

Bruno abandoned the Dominican order, and, after wandering in northern Italy, he went in 1578 to Geneva, where he earned his living by proofreading. He formally embraced Calvinism. After publishing a broadsheet against a Calvinist professor, however, he discovered that the Reformed church was no less intolerant than the Catholic. He was arrested, excommunicated, rehabilitated after retraction, and finally allowed to leave the city. He moved to France, first to Toulouse—where he unsuccessfully sought to be absolved by the Catholic church but was nevertheless appointed to a lectureship in philosophy—and then in 1581 to Paris.

In Paris Bruno at last found a congenial place to work and teach. Despite the strife between the Catholics and the Huguenots (French Protestants), the court of Henry III was then dominated by the tolerant faction of the Politiques. Bruno’s religious attitude was compatible with this group, and he received the protection of the French king, who appointed him one of his temporary lecteursroyaux. In 1582 Bruno published three mnemotechnical works, in which he explored new means to attain an intimate knowledge of reality. He also published a vernacular comedy, Il Candelario (1582; “The Candlemaker”), which, through a vivid representation of contemporary Neapolitan society, constituted a protest against the moral and social corruption of the time The Spaccio de la Bestia trionfante (1584; The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast), the first dialogue of his moral trilogy, is a satire on contemporary superstitions and vices, embodying a strong criticism of Christian ethics—particularly the Calvinistic principle of salvation by faith alone, to which Bruno opposes an exalted view of the dignity of all human activities. The Cabala del cavallo Pegaseo (1585; “Cabal of the Horse Pegasus”), similar to but more pessimistic than the previous work, includes a discussion of the relationship between the human soul and the universal soul, concluding with the negation of the absolute individuality of the former. In the De gli eroici furori (1585; The Heroic Frenzies), Bruno, making use of Neoplatonic imagery, treats the attainment of union with the infinite One by the human soul and exhorts man to the conquest of virtue and truth.

Can we think OutSide the Box to redefine the constructs of humanity for the conquest of virtue and truth?

January 27, 1593, Bruno entered the jail of the Roman palace of the Sant’Uffizio (Holy Office).

During the seven-year Roman period of the trial, Bruno at first developed his previous defensive line, disclaiming any particular interest in theological matters and reaffirming the philosophical character of his speculation. This distinction did not satisfy the inquisitors, who demanded an unconditional retraction of his theories. Bruno then made a desperate attempt to demonstrate that his views were not incompatible with the Christian conception of God and creation. The inquisitors rejected his arguments and pressed him for a formal retraction. Bruno finally declared that he had nothing to retract and that he did not even know what he was expected to retract. At that point, Pope Clement VIII ordered that he be sentenced as an impenitent and pertinacious heretic. On February 8, 1600, when the death sentence was formally read to him, he addressed his judges, saying:

“Perhaps your fear in passing judgment on me is greater than mine in receiving it.

Time is the father of truth, its mother is our mind.

Time takes all and gives all.”

Bruno was hung naked upside down and burned at the stake by the Church of the Day. For Thinking OutSide the Box.

In 1609 Considered the beginning of the age of enlightenment Galileo invented the telescope and proposed a Heliocentric universe causing a conflict with the Catholic Church and he was put under house arrest by the inquisition for spreading ideas in contrast with religious doctrine. Galileo’s ideas were a key role in the scientific revolution inspired by Enlightenment, where people were turning to rationalization through science and questioning the great authority the Church had in the time period.

The Thirty Years’ War ended in 1648. It led to the division of Western Christianity into different confessions (Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Anabaptist, Unitarian, etc.). By the time of its arrival, Western Christianity was only compromised in the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, where Utraquist Hussitism was officially acknowledged by both the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor; in addition, various movements (including Lollards in England and Waldensians In Italy and France) were still being actively suppressed.

As William the Silent wrote in his marriage proposal to the uncle of his second wife, the Elector August of Saxony, he held Orange as “my own free property”, not as a fief of any suzerain; neither the Pope nor the Kings of Spain or France.^[8]^[9] That historical position of honor and reputation would later drive William the Silent forward, as much as it also fueled the opposition of his great-grandson William III to Louis XIV, when that king invaded and occupied Orange.

The last descendant of the original princes, René of Châlon, left the principality to his cousin William the Silent, who was not a descendant of the original Orange family but the heir to the principality of Orange by testament, however in violation of the inheritance pattern enacted by the last will of Marie des Baux, the Princess of Orange through kinship to whom Prince René derived his own right thereto.

Louis XIV of France began his personal rule of France in 1661, after the death of his chief minister, the Italian Cardinal Mazarin.^[3]An adherent of the concept of the divine right of kings, which advocates the divine origin of monarchical rule, Louis continued his predecessors’ work of creating a centralized state governed by the capital. He sought to eliminate the remnants of feudalism persisting in parts of France and, by compelling many members of the nobility to inhabit his lavish Palace of Versailles, succeeded in pacifying the aristocracy, many members of which had participated in the Fronde rebellion during Louis’ minority. By these means, he became one of the most powerful French monarchs and consolidated a system of absolute monarchical rule in France that endured until the French Revolution. History never repeats but always rhymes.

Louis encouraged and benefited from the work of prominent political, military, and cultural figures such as Mazarin, Colbert, Louvois, the Grand Condé, Turenne, Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban, André Charles Boulle, Molière, Racine, Boileau, La Fontaine, Lully, Marais, Le Brun, Rigaud, Bossuet, Le Vau, Mansart, Charles, Claude Perrault, and Le Nôtre.

During Louis’ reign, France was the leading European power, and it fought three major wars: the Franco-Dutch War, the War of the League of Augsburg, and the War of the Spanish Succession. There were also two lesser conflicts: the War of Devolution and the War of the Reunions. Warfare defined the foreign policy of Louis XIV, and his personality shaped his approach. Impelled “by a mix of commerce, revenge, and pique”, Louis sensed that warfare was the ideal way to enhance his glory. In peacetime, he concentrated on preparing for the next war. He taught his diplomats that their job was to create tactical and strategic advantages for the French military.^[4] Were the views of the Catholic Church of France the same?

In 1673, Louis XIV of France annexed all territory of the principality to France and to the royal domain, as part of the war actions against the stadtholder William III of Orange — who later became King William III of Great Britain. Orange ceased to exist as a sovereign realm, de facto. And my ancestors were banished from the land they’d held for over a thousand years on the Rhone the AOC of St Julien. The loss of these lands by Pérrié De St Julien I De Malacare is documented in parliamentary records of England in his petitions for funds for protestant french Huguenots to travel to America. See St Julien De Malacare in the History of Huguenot Pedigree.

This is the history in which my ancestral roots run deep David DeCros St Julian was born in 1605 in Béziers, Herault, Languedoc-Roussillon, France. David had a son Pierre de St Julien De Malacare I formerly St Julian aka Julien born 1641 in Vitré, Ille-et-Vilaine, Bretagne, France Pierre’s wife Jeanne (LeFebre) de St. Julien gave birth to twin sons in 1669. Pierre lived in fear under the rule of Louis the XIV for his progeny named his sons Pierre Renee De St. Julien I 1 & 2 The birth record reflects a single son But twins who would carry the same name, known only to close friends and family they were René and Piérré. Rene and Pierre had an older sister Aimee de St. Julian; born 3, 7, 1667 Charlotte Ravenel; born 5,15,1668 a younger brother Louis de St. Julian; Born 08,5,1670 sister Marguerite de St. Julian; Born 12,19,1671 younger brother Paul de St. Julian; Born 10,14.1673 and sisters Emilie de St. Julian; Born 1, 10,1675 Jeanne Renee de St. Julian Born 5,6, 1678 and Marie Ester de St. Julien Born 12,14,1679.

In April of 1680, the ship Richmond arrived in Charleston SC with 45 French Protestants (Huguenots) aboard. This needs further verification because for centuries now the truth has been hidden by numerous facts,

Piérré De St Julien De Malacare I. Did not travel on the Richmond, today’s historical records show unequivocally he traveled to the UK with William of Orange, his wife, and several children to live in Ireland.
Piérre [Rene] actually Piérre De St Julien De Malacare II was on the Richmond with his wife, his brother Louis and Sister Marguerite, Four St Juliens. Piérré’s burial and his will are recorded in Charleston SC in French.
Rene De St Julien De Malacare Piérré’s twin brother René Petit was also not on the Richmond and traveled to the UK with William II to lead dragoons in the Glorious Revolution and the Battle of Boyne.
For centuries now people have wondered what happened to Rene Petit and Piérré Fore and have never concluded who they really were.
On the Ships Manifest, In the Petitions to England’s Parliament, see Royale Gem Of Malacare. The identities of these Individuals were obscured. See the Manifest. Piérré, His Wife, and a Friend are listed as his friend, his friend, and also his friend. Their names are not listed. More research is needed but I believe Piérré’s twin brother Réné filed the petitions with parliament, booked himself on the Richmond, his Brother Piérré, and his wife. But, he did not make the voyage that is verifiable in the annals of history. This was all done to keep their whereabouts from being known by Louis XIV, Catholic Churches, and the Reformed Churches of the time. Piérré De St Julien was a descendant of Piérré De St Julien friend of the apostle Peter where together they were fishermen in youth on the Rhone.

In 1685 under the rule of Louis XIV of France the Edict of Nantes, which granted rights to Huguenots, was abolished. The revocation effectively forced Huguenots to emigrate or convert in a wave of dragonnades, which managed to virtually destroy the French Protestant minority divesting French Protestants of all religious and political prerogatives. The English were happy to encourage these refugees to settle in the colonies, most of whom were representative of France’s prosperous merchant and professional classes. More refugees followed, and in 1687, a church was built on what is now the corner of Church St. and Queen St. in downtown Charleston. About four hundred and fifty Huguenots had settled in the Low Country of South Carolina by 1700.

In 1679 Pierre a presbyterian minister and his wife Jeanne and their children all fled France through the Netherlands. From France Charlotte, Pierre II, Louis, and Marguerite set sail for America landing in Charleston South Carolina, Pierre de St Julien De Malacare I and their siblings are contained in the list known as the “St: Julien” or “Ravenel” list. This is a list of French and Swiss refugees in Carolina who desired to be naturalized. Its date by comparison of names with births has been fixed at about 1696. It was found among the papers of Henry de St: Julien of St Johns Berkley who died in 1768 or 1769 and was the youngest son of Pierre de St: Julien mentioned in the list. His papers came into the possession of M’. Daniel Ravenel of Wantoot and the list was first published in 1822 in the Southern Intelligencer a paper published in Charleston. It was re-published in 1867 and again in pamphlet form by T. Gaillard Thomas M. D. in 1888; and in 1897 in the Transactions of the Huguenot Society of S. C. These same documents list Marie, Charles Fromagett as Pierre’s wife at the time he purchased transportation for what is believed to be 27 individuals aboard the Richmond which arrived in Charleston SC in the fall of 1680. These documents have inconsistencies that are explainable with the truth.

I have discovered the Analysis of the names of these individuals is inaccurate and has been misunderstood by historians all these years. While others may have figured this out I’ve found no indication that’s the case. So for posterity, I wish to explain why I believe their analysis was seriously flawed. I don’t have time now to work on analyzing the correct numbers. But I will explain to those who might pursue it why I claim the current analysis is flawed. First historians have not accepted that individuals on the Richmond were French it is stated in the record that while they believed that to be true they did not have solid information on which to establish that fact. The internet and ancestral records verify that in fact my ancestor Piérré and his family were all in fact French Huguenots fleeing the persecution of Louis XIV of France.

Richmond’s travel to America is known to have been Commissioned and is documented to have been chartered by Rene Petit and Jacob Guerard. The number of Individuals on the Richmond is extrapolated as stated by the South Carolina Historical Society as follows:

“Considering the connection between the names of Guerard and Petit with the immigrants on the Richmond, and the apparent coincidence of the dates of arrival of the other names mentioned with the probable date of arrival of the Richmond, the names mentioned are as close as the writer has been able to get to the probable names of the French Protestant passengers on that vessel.”

So while there are many mistakes in the analysis. This is the first and perhaps the largest. Guérard and Petit are not family names they’re French words. Guérard is actually spelled Guérard and is a French commune in Northcentral France. The word means “not in accordance with philosophic knowledge or methods an unphilosophic judgment” Parliamentary England details confirm the funds for the Richmond and the land grants were secured by William II.

” The letter of the Proprietors to lay out 4000 acres to Jacob Guerard which went by the Richmond was dated 17 Deer 1679″

Petit actually Pétit is actually French for Small and I believe was a reference for the petitioners of land grants. I also believe for various reasons that 17 Deer is not a date at all but a reference to 17 individuals from the Comtat Venaissin an enclave in the Kingdom of France which included the town of Orange and Avignon and was known as the Principality of Orange. The Enclave had been bequeathed to the Holy See in 1271. The enclave inhabitants did not pay taxes and were not subject to military service, making life in the Comtat considerably more attractive than under the French Crown.1. When Louis XIV, invaded and occupied the Principality of Orange. Perrie, Renee St Julien a Protestant minister in the province of Orange and owner of St Juliens in the province of Orange between Orange and Avignon on the Rhone river at a junction known as Guérard. Protestants including William of Orange fled the rule of Louis XIV and sought refuge in the Guérard commune in the northeast of France just outside Paris. They fought their last battle in August 1678 at the battle of St Denis.

The Richmond set sail from? England or Netherlands October 29, 1679.

Arrived in South Carolina and the First of Issue of land as instructed by William II was made in South Carolina on August 5, 1680.

According to the South Carolina Historical And Genealogical Magazine published by the South Carolina Historical Society Charleston S.C January 1917. In December of 1686, Pierre purchased the Punkin Hill Plantation

“which included the French Settlement which gave for a time to the adjoining vicinity the name of Orange or French Quarter.”

The Plantation adjoins the land on which the Episcopal Chapel “Of St. Thomas’ parish now stands known as the “Ponkinhill “Chapel. Pierre de St Julien I and his wife Jeanne (LeFebre) de St. Julien along with Aimee and the younger children Paul, Emilie, Jeanne, and Marie.

René De St Julien sailed with William III of Orange to the United Kingdom where there William took the English Crown in the Bloodless War.

January 7, 2019 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Royale Gem of Malacare.

Pope Francis,

I believe I’m descendant of Peter St Julien, “Pope Clement I“ neither St Julien nor Clementine, are pious fiction. I’m a Protestant, Huguenot, Apostle PIerre cousin of William keeper of the Parish of St Denis in the Holy See in the Commune St Julien keeper Guérard.

The Kingdom of Comtat Vennisan , Juliens ancestrial home, should be returned to the rightful Heirs.

Linage of Réné Petit. St Julien De Malacare.

Piérré St Julien De Malacare was born into the Thirty Years War, a Protestant Minister of the Reformations in the Comtat Vinnisan. He ministered through the French Wars of Religion in the Heart of the Holy See. He had two first sons and separated his family to ensure Gérard of Malacare. His land St Julen adjoined the Medoc’s on the Rhine was commandeered by Louis XIV. They escaped with their lives from France after the Battle of St Denis August 78 with the reciprocation and help of cousin William of Orange in 1679. In Fact he bought them all safe passage and provided them with 8,000 acres in Charleston South Carolina. Where Piérré AND his brother Réné established the Plantation of Pompion Hill, The Pompion Hill Chapel The Parish of St Denis, the Quarter of Orange, The Principality of Orange in America. The First American French Quarter. The First French in America all delivered to Charleston SC to Gérard the jewel of malacare.

Christopher B. St Julien De Mala Care Gérard Royal Jewels House of Orange.

CB St.Julian

BRS

Summary of History continuously updated with new facts.

https://brsinv.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/main-trend-8.pdf

History Segment One.https://bluefrenchqtr.substack.com/p/a-characteristic-vindacation-behind?r=r6fv

History Segment Two. https://bluefrenchqtr.substack.com/p/a-characteristic-vindication-behind?r=r6fv

History Segment Three. https://bluefrenchqtr.substack.com/p/a-characteristic-vindication-behind-988?r=r6fv

August 21, 2018 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

History always rhymes!

“Fahy says farmers are facing more stress now than they have since the farming crisis of the 1980s, when hundreds of farms were auctioned on the courthouse steps across the country each month and thousands of farmers faced financial ruin. “ Their dad killed himself on the farm where he was born. They hope his story will save others. Story by Jessica Ravitz CNN August 21, 2018

The farm crisis of the 1980s’ occurred because of the gross negligent management of government policies and regulations by Congress as detailed in the USDA publication “A Time to Choose” 1980 by Robert Bergland.

Ronald Regan upon assuming the presidency chose corporate mega farming over rural small and mid size farms. He promoted global trade effectively outsourcing much of farming to Africa, Mexico, and Chile and placing local production into the hands of large corporate players like Cargill, Tyson, Dole, etc. Farm credit agencies got swamped in bad loans as USDA/FSA personnel had flooded the market with sub prime farm loans under the false assumptions more production the better, the bigger the better, Farms need more equipment to increase production and yield. Farms need to get bigger to improve economies of scale. Or where they intentionally using government funds to create an intentional bubble profiting on the rise, sucking up the assets on the fall, and profiting on resale of ill gotten real estate.

When public and private funding vaporized farmers turned to the lender of last resort the USDA.

USDA personnel were holding that loaded gun aimed at farmers seeking credit and had zero training on the use of that gun. Were completely uneducated in its use and then Regan reduces credit availability by 23% in every state killing hundreds of thousands of small & midsize farmers. This wasn’t just killing available credit Reagan wanted a 23% reduction in outstanding loan dollars. And FmHa responded with robo foreclosures the Courts found in violation of the Constitution.

Congress, Bush, and Clinton set out to clean up Congresses mess by eliminating accountability for their complete incompetence in the management of farm policy trade, regulations, and the USDA. Congress and Clinton institutionalized a criminal and unconstitutional racket pinned to deference and aided by the US Judiciary to avoid any future accountability for negligence, fraud, discrimination, or just outright criminal behaviors by USDA personnel. An un accountable government agency armed with a a loaded gun their not trained to use while their victims are bated into the traps government continues to create.

The Federal Judiciary told Congress to pass the Separation of Powers restoration act to fix Governments gross criminal and unconstitutional denial of Due Process. Justice Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts in case briefs and Scalia in public statements made it known the Supreme Court would look at reversing the doctrine of deference because its unconstitutional and extremely abused by Government and the Federal Judiciary. See Whitman v. United States, 574 U.S. ___ (November 10, 2014). Scalia “ I doubt the Government’s pretensions to deference. They collide with the norm that legislatures, not executive officers, define crimes. When King James I tried to create new crimes by royal command, the judges responded that “the King cannot create any offense by his prohibition or proclamation, which was not an offense before.” James I, however, did not have the benefit of Chevron deference. With deference to agency interpretations of statutory provisions to which criminal prohibitions are attached, federal administrators can in effect create (and uncreate) new crimes at will, so long as they do not roam beyond ambiguities that the laws contain [internal citations omitted]”

See

Justices Scalia and Thomas Amenable to Reexamining Deference to SEC Statutory Interpretations

Perez v. Mortgage Bankers association No . 13-1041 December 1, 2014 – Decided March 9, 2015.

“judicial deference to agency interpretive rules cannot be squared with the constitutional structures of separation of powers, and checks and balances.”[Emphasis added]

Update 9-17-18 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STUDENT AID FUNDS, INC. v. BRYANA BIBLE May 16, 2016 Scoutus deny’s challenge to Auer deference on Constitutionality. Read this and you will find members of the Supreme Court admitting there Co-Conspirators with Government Agencies in war on the Constitutional rights of Due Process and Equal Justice.Do I need a jury trial to convict them of Treason when they have admitted guilt? Here is another more recent statement of the same thing. How many years will the public allow tyranny? Thomas and Gorsuch

Justice Scalia suffered a mysterious circumstantial death February 13, 2016 just as an excellent case to address deference was in the Federal Circuit. ”MINE” Justice Kavanugh gave a deference dog whistle speech outlining his concurrence with Scalia’s views on the subject June 2, 2016. In march of 2017 at the Confirmation hearings of Neil Gorsuch Senator Al Franken expresses the democrats objections to the reversal of deference.

Congress knows and has known they are criminally and unconstitutionally abusing deference. See history on Separation of Powers restoration Act. The Federal Judiciary has known and knows Government agencies are criminally and unconstitutionally abusing deference. See the cases referenced above. The Federal Judiciary has an absolutely abysmal record of providing Due Process. Congress is never removing judges in what looks like a quid pro quo. It all stinks of a Government warring against providing Due Process as the Constitution requires as they kill off more and more farmers like me with Treason. Who is master, who is slave?

August 14, 2018 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Who is master, who is slave?

President of the United States July 11 2018
Donald J. Trump
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Re: Racketeering by the US Government!

Dear Mr. President,

First it’s often stated fact this country is founded on the rule of law. However, it’s rarely, if ever stated the rule law governs this nation, as it has become increasingly corrupt.

The rule of law states no man may sit in judgment of his own case. As an individual harmed by criminal conspiracies of the US Government, it is my allegation and assertion all branches of the US Government have conspired in an act of treason on the Constitution, the American people, and especially Americas farmers.

Thomas Jefferson said: “ I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” His sentiment was echoed often by founding fathers.

My allegation asserts all branches of the US Government have conspired including the U.S. Federal Judiciary, the Legislature, and the Executive branches most notably of the USDA.

You have publically stated numerous times as Attorney General Jeff Sessions has the intent to uphold the laws of this country and you both took the oath of office to uphold supreme law the Constitution.

Consequently, I demand for the benefit of the public good, the US Government founded on the rule of law, abide by the rule of law, and stand trial before a jury of US citizens for treason. Furthermore, I request trial be presided over by an impartial judge from an international court.

I do not want to see some blatant obfuscating form letter response but a direct, specific, and reasoned reply to my petition to which I have a right under the first and fourteenth amendments to the Constitution.

Thank you Mr. President for your time and your service. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Christopher. B. Julian On behalf of We The People.

The Julian Family
8908 Sharonbrook dr.
Charlotte, NC 28210
Christopher.b.julian@gmail.com

CC: Chief Justice John Roberts
Supreme Court of the United States
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Attorney General
Jeff Sessions
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair
Senator Chuck Grassley
135 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Congressional Judiciary Committee Chair
Congressman Bob Goodlatte
2309 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 203515

United States Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530

American Civil Liberties Union
Washington Legislative Office
915 15^th St NW, Washington DC 20005

Update 10-10-2018 The UN has indicated willingness to hear such a case against the US. Government. See the Opt-In Press release here.

December 7, 2017 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Justice; Chief Justice John Roberts!

via Justice; Chief Justice John Roberts!

August 16, 2017 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Justice; Chief Justice John Roberts!

Chief Justice John Roberts,

Justice Louis Brandeis known as the people’s judge said “Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the rules of conduct that command to the citizen” No man is above the law so the confirmation hearings say.

Today Executive branches of the U.S. government are running criminal enterprises in violation of Federal laws, federal antitrust laws, and the Constitution. Three times I previously brought this matter to the attention of then-President Barack Obama. Please refer to the correspondence which can be found on this blog. None of the communications was ever addressed.

Congress approved the implementation of these enterprises in violation of the Constitution and their oaths of office. Consequently, they do not want their despicable deeds exposed. I have multiple times by mail and phone requested Congressman Morgan Griffth the opportunity to address Congress regarding this matter. No request was ever acknowledged. You may also refer to the written correspondence evidenced in this blog.

These enterprises are specifically designed for the obstruction of justice, denying due process, denying equal protection, and denying fair hearings. These procedures are an absolute abysmal affront to Due Process, American values, and the Constitution.

Three times I’ve brought these allegations into Federal Courts with the filing of Civil Lawsuits. For Five years Government has refused to allow a fair hearing on these matters. Each is dismissed by corrupt federal officials who’ve used lies, deceit, deception, and downright criminal acts to subvert these allegations. Enough is Enough as Clarence Thomas Said When Anita Hill lied, I purpose to aid the treason afoot.

If anyone has any doubts Federal Judges lied about material evidence against the USDA’s racketeering enterprise to aid, abet, and protect the Governments treason, I respectfully request you look at the evidence presented in another post on this blog, Here is a list of post to start with: Please leave your opinion in the comments.

Corrupt Federal District Court Of Federal District Judge Jackson L. Kiser – Traitor

Dumb and Dumber, Judges Don’t Know English!

Federal Court Opinion Balances Scales of Justice With Lies!

If you want to know about the implementation of this criminal enterprise and the treason that created it. You can read about that here.

https://brsinv.com/the-goss-conspiracy-undue-process-to-treason/

And don’t forget to check out other links to evidence.

The Federal Judiciary is aiding, abetting, and protecting these criminal enterprises and even gifting them with the ability to write new laws at will avoiding accountability for criminal and civil violations of Federal law against the people they’re supposed to serve. See the Statements of the Supreme Court on deference made over the last five years in the Court’s rulings. See the Separation of powers Restoration Act which implements the recommendations Justice Antonin Scalia made to congress to eliminate the treason afoot by Government Agencies many years ago.

These acts Sir are in violation of the government’s contractual obligation to operate legally and within the law. These acts are a complete and utterly criminal violation of the Constitution’s intent for the separation of powers. These acts Sir have the Government warring against the Constitution and against the American people. These acts Sir, are acts of treason as defined by the Constitution of the United States.

As you should now beware, Sir, these criminals, unAmerican, and unconstitutional allegations, allege a criminal conspiracy of wrongdoing by every branch of the US Government. It’s a tenant of the rule of law that no man may preside over his own case. I, therefore, submit that this case must be heard against the US Government by a Jury of the American people and its criminal operations must be stopped.

The rule of law states: The Law should govern a nation as opposed to being governed by the arbitrary decisions of individual government officials. The Judiciary has repeatedly corruptly, and maliciously, relied solely on arbitrary decisions of corrupt Government officials in the judiciary aiding, abetting, and protecting the Government’s criminal and unconstitutional RICO enterprises. They’re guilty of Treason by conspiring, aiding, and abetting domestic enemies of the Constitution and the American people.

This country is founded on the rule of law. If it’s to be governed by the rule of law then All branches of Government must stand trial as defendants and defend themselves before a jury of unbiased civilian jurists.

To Quote Thomas Jefferson:

“Trial by jury is the only anchor yet ever imagined by man, which can hold a government accountable to the principles of its constitution.”

John Adams called trial by Jury:

“the heart of liberty.”

James Madison said:

“Trial by jury in civil cases is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature”

As Justice Brandeis said:

“A government of laws will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. If a government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites every man to come a law unto himself. It invites anarchy.”

The prophecy of Elbridge Gerry declining to sign the Constitution and the warnings of Thomas Jefferson in 1820 are proven accurate.

How Sir can I, can any of us, have anything but contempt for a judiciary that’s aiding, abetting, and protecting illegal and unconstitutional operations of the people’s government? How should I, or any of us, not have contempt for a Government operating above the law and against justice for its people? The American people cannot address Government Corruption in Corrupted Courts under their control. The people should awaken to the fact corruption permeates the Judiciary and it should no longer be allowed to Judge itself by dismissing facts.

This petition is made pursuant to the First Amendment to the Constitution the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. The Government is not entitled to immunity in this matter because its sovereignty cannot supersede the Government’s agency requirements as defined, by the Constitution, by the Contract, which gave rise to the existence of the Government, a contract that requires Government to operate legally and within the law.

I cite and incorporate for reference and submit as evidence the Judiciary is criminally corrupting all procedural records of filings, and appeals, including the appeal to the supreme court, writs, the dockets, and all supporting documentation, including the actual dockets for the following cases.: 4:13-cv-0054, 1-15-1544C, and 3-16-cv-173. That is, an honest factual assessment of all filings in these cases will suffice to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the Government is guilty of treason.

The courts are thus aware of the evidence against them and the allegations of the criminal enterprises as complained of in the aforementioned cases. They may not preside over nor dismiss a case against them without a proper and fair hearing. Since the complaint alleges criminal wrongdoing and conspiracy by the judiciary, including the willful intent to obstruct justice. The judiciary has neither the right nor the Authority to dismiss this case. Plaintiff demands the US Government including the Judiciary stand trial for TREASON! Before a Jury of American Citizens.

Failure of the Judiciary to defend itself before a Jury is an admission this country is no longer founded or governed by the rule of law but is in fact under the rule of a Criminal enterprise of despots and traitors.

Please readers watch this Facebook post it’s all related to the Treason I’ve been fighting.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fjlecenarro%2Fvideos%2F1538558802878659%2F&show_text=0&width=560

The Traitor Federal District Court Judge Jackson L. Kiser is now railroading another case. This one is a young man who’s fighting to prove his innocence and having his every effort to gain access to the evidence to exonerate him criminally obstructed. See:

The Case of Brian Hill

No one in a Republic is above the law, above the supreme law; not even the judiciary!

Sincerely,
Christopher B. Julian Pro Se.
980-254-1295

July 25, 2017 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Let Me Show You Dodd-Frank Sucks!

For years now I’ve been fighting for my life because of Dodd Frank legislation. Dodd Frank made it illegal for me to obtain a mortgage on a farm and business under development, I already owned outright and debt free! The USDA then denied me a farm loan to keep my farming operation in business, expand it, and continue development because my house was too big. My 100% equity was effectively ineligible for leverage. Contrast that with the Financial institutions that brought the house down while they were leveraged as much as 70 to 1.

Today I had a discussion about my issues with it on twitter, that along with many other impetus of the moment, bring me to wana share the lost opportunities Dodd Frank is currently causing my family and friends. The featured Image on this page is a graph of the Sub Prime bubble Wall Street created igniting Dodd Frank Legislation. Note: they grew sub-prime lending 600% and Securitization of them 900% leading up to the Financial Collapse.

First you need to know a little about who I am and what I’ve done in my life. At ten thousand feet look at my about cbjulian page, but, for this blog post, I want you to know these things.

First My mother was a construction bookkeeper I grew up working on construction sites. My brother is a builder, realtor, real estate broker. My brother in law is a builder. I grew up surrounded by construction. From 1972 to 1987 as I worked my way through college and an accounting degree. I worked all kinds of jobs mainly in construction, but also as a commercial fisherman in Alaska. I’ve worked on and run framing crews. Electrician crews, trim crews, done plumbing, hung sheet rock, painted, laid brick , hardwood floors, and tile, installed cabinets and appliances and farmed an Apple Orchard.

Second I’m no dummy – I’d never, have survived more than 15 years in finance and finance technology services at Bank Of America from 1987 – 2004, if hadn’t some basic skills. In support of this below you’ll find a link to my resume and two links to some of the recognition I received while working at Bank Of America. Please note my career progression at Bank of America.

Third From 1995 to 1996 I built the house pictured in this slide show with funding from BB&T after I had purchased the lot. I worked my butt off that year every night, weekend and holiday on this house trying to do as much of the work as I possibly could myself. It liked to kill me. As you look at the slides realize when I moved in in 1996 the house was just over 1900 square feet with a 900 square foot unfinished basement. It had two bedrooms 1 and half baths. While building it the city inspectors knew by the way it was being constructed I intended to add on.

Fourth From 1996 until 2006 when I sold the house I worked on improvements and additions until I finished the vision I had for this house. When finished it was a little over 3800 square feet with a 900 square foot finished basement. It had 4 bedrooms 3 and half baths with a built in steam shower and a huge bonus room with giant walk in closet.

Fifth I won’t get into the numbers and I don’t consider my time cost working on this house but I made a very nice profit on it. While you look at the slide show I want you to know: I laid all of the hardwood floors in this house, My wife and I did all the wood work and built all the porches on this house. I personally finished 2 baths including the steam shower work all myself. I framed, wired, insulated, hung sheet rock, finished sheet rock, did all custom trim work, painted, and hung all the fixtures in every other addition in this house. I did all the work except where I had someone install carpet.

Sixth in 2007 I bought with proceeds from the sale of the house above an old 23 Acre Apple Orchard on the side of a mountain with some very nice Piedmont views. The Land was ideal for a vineyard, ideal for starting a hard apple cider business and has many profit opportunities, I like to keep close to my vest although, your welcome some other time to look at the Business plan for this property.

Seven from 2007 until 2012 I spent my days on the development of this farm, putting life back into the Apples for future hard apple cider making, prepping the land and resources for a future vineyard and eventually wine production. Construction of a main residence designed to support numerous business potentials. Like a basement that would support being a small winery for start up and could and would later become a quest rental and even eventually our main living quarters. Below is a slide show on that property again keep in mind I ran the farming operation and I taught two farm hands everything they needed to know to help me with all the home construction you see done in these photos.

Eight in june of 2006 at the young age of 46 my wife and I became first time parents. While I’m usually behind the camera taking pictures here a few of me at work.

Nine in 1996 in addition to the house at 454 Hunter Lane, I also took an equity stake in a duplex, 8910 Sharonbrook drive. I took out a small private 10 year loan on this property for a 1/3 stake. I did this to help my mother have control over the property, as she bought the other side 8908 Sharonbrook drive for her personal residence.

Ten the five years I worked putting the Apple Orchard back in business and prepping the land for planting of a vineyard and construction on the house all got stopped when my personal funding ran out. Dodd Frank made it illegal for me to have a mortgage on that property without also having a full time job. I thought I had a full time job to farm the orchard, plant the vineyard, finish the house construction, and get the business operational. However, Dodd Frank prevents an individual such as myself from using mortgage proceeds to pay myself to work while I make capital improvements to the assets I’m borrowing against. For numerous financial reasons and advantages this is pure financial ignorance on the part of Government. Or is it actually a Deep State effort to control land use? Think about it ; its like saying if you put money in this bank you can’t draw it out unless you have a job to make payments. Actually its worse cause the value of money in the bank is pure perception it could become worthless overnight as opposed to land, diamonds, gold or oil.

Think about it for a minute why do we have front yard mechanics? If you could frame your own house, plumb it, wire it, sheet rock it, trim it, paint it, why would you want to pay anyone other than yourself to do that work, especially if you needed the work? If you could plant a vineyard yourself why would you take a job so you could pay someone else twice what you’d pay yourself? If in the end the asset is worth the same no matter who actually makes the capital improvements then you’re building sweat equity to do the job yourself. Dodd Frank wars against sweat equity! Thanks Dodd Frank!

Now lets look at that duplex and how Dodd Frank is killing opportunity for my family and friends and waring against my creation of sweat equity.

My mother passed away and now my brother and I are forced to sell the Duplex because I’m unable to find a good job. You can be sure my court battles against Wall Street, and the U.S Government are playing a major role in keeping me from gainful employment.

The Duplex is currently under contract for $237,000.00 and while I live in one side the other is rented to tenants who’ve lived there since 1996. When the contract closes we may all have to move disrupting all our lives which none of us want.

Since I have a significant equity stake in this property I could literally buy the duplex from my brother and mothers estate for $175,000.00. I could, using equity pay myself $50,000.00 over the next year to rehab the duplex and with rent afford the loan payments. New siding, new heat and air, interior and exterior painting etc. Now at the end of another year you think I could get another contract on the duplex? One at least as much as the one it’s currently under, or maybe with these improvements even more? Wouldn’t that be a better outcome for the people who’s lives are about to be disrupted and uprooted? Remember the renters have lived here over 20 years, don’t want to move, or were they’ll go. Thanks Dodd Frank!

In another year My wife or I might find good jobs, We might be able to sell the farm, we might win the lawsuit against Wall Street, although given Federal Court corruption thats not likely. We might move out and rent both sides to cover the mortgage payments. Can you be certain tomorrow you’ll have a job and be able to afford your mortgage payments. How long would your equity support you?

I’ve tried every way I know to secure financing to do just that, but Dodd Frank regulations prevent it. Hard Money lenders can’t help either because, Dodd Frank rules prevent investor properties from being owner occupied. Thats dumb too. If you’re a contractor its much easier to work on a place you’re living in. And an owner, tenet with equity at stake has a vested interest in improving the assets value as much as possible.

Below is a slide show of the Duplex. I leave you with the statement and the facts I’m happy to debate at anytime! Dodd Franks rules are stupid, inappropriate, a hinderance to capital appreciation, small business development, and personal wealth creation,

Dodd Frank Sucks!

Please any constructive comments are welcome leave some.

CBJulian

@brsinv.com

@blueridgespring

July 4, 2017 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Character

On the day of independence, it seems appropriate to reflect on the battles we’ve dared to fight. To recap the impetus of our pursuit of justice. To highlight for the American people what we do for our country and what our countries have done for us.

We had years of sorted battles with government officials in Patrick County VA, as we began the development of a business in a small rural community. There were many battles, most of them Government driven obstruction to progress, all leading to lengthy and costly delays. In 2012 we learned Government’s implementation of Dodd-Frank would again place a major obstacle in front of our efforts and force us to pursue funding from a USDA farm loan program.

The way we view what happened next goes like this.

The USDA raped my family.

Stole all be it a nominal amount of money from my family.

I committed fraud and mail fraud against my family.

Lied to my family.

Put my family through a process intentionally designed to deny fair procedures.

Lied about my family.

Illegally accessed our credit files committing fraud and mail fraud again in an attempt to cover up the fact they’d not pulled a credit report as procedurally required before denying the farm loan application. An intentional premeditated act of malice and forethought to deny access to a Government funded loan program with the intent to wipe out our business.

Denied fair procedures in a hearing on these matters including the direct denial of presenting evidence the credit report was never obtained as procedurally required.

Imposed post facto law against my family in violation of the procedural rules of retroactivity and in violation of the Constitution.

Operated a racket intentionally designed for the obstruction of justice.

Orchestrated a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

They abused deference by design as part of their racket to write a law to justify the crimes they committed against us.

14 Felonies committed by Government personnel so stated the only lawyer ever to review the case assessed. A lawyer I might add declined to take the case and was later appointed by Obama to U.S. district Attorney for the jurisdiction in which the case was filed.

Federal District Court Judge Jackson L. Kiser violated his oath, the law, the constitution, and the Federal rules of civil procedure to aid and abet this government agency in avoiding accountability for their crimes.

To avoid accountability for the Gross negligent mismanagement of a Government Agency by its management and Congress.

Fourth Circuit Court Judges Clyde H. Hamilton, Robert B. King, and Barbara Milano Keenan, ignored the criminal acts of the USDA and Judge Jackson L. Kiser to protect the Government’s criminal enterprise.

The Court of Federal Claims Judge Edward J. Damich who appears had a role in the creation of this criminal enterprise refused to acknowledge he had taken an oath of office or that he would abide by that oath during proceedings. He declined to hold judge Jackson L. Kiser accountable for violating the trust obligations of his official duties.

The Court of Appeals Federal Circuit Chief Justice Sharon Prost who was Judge Edward J. Damich’s likely boss at the time the enterprise was created and also would’ve played a role in the implementation of the laws which enabled the USDA’s criminal enterprise chose to circumvent a writ of mandamus seeking to ensure our case be heard by an unbiased judge. On appeal, she and Judges Raymond T. Chen, and Kara F. Stoll justified their opinion with precedent on the criminal RICO statute and not on the Civil Statute which provided the monetary damages the filing sought to obtain. We view this as an intentional act to obstruct justice by forcing a plea to the Supreme Court that rarely ever answered and we believe rarely answered often with the specific intent to deny justice and protect the Governments’ criminal enterprises from the laws of the land.

The American people should realize this is the Government operating a criminal enterprise in violation of federal laws, in violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has telegraphed often its belief it operates unconstitutionally publicly and to Congress. Congress knows of the Supreme Courts’ views and while its made efforts to pass laws to stop the lawless abuses it has not gotten one signed into law.

The Supreme Court knowing this is unconstitutional and is being abused is guilty of treason on the Constitution and the American people by allowing it to continue even when challenged in appropriate courts and cases.

The American people need to understand the US Government is acting criminally and the Federal Judiciary is aiding and abetting them in crimes against the American People. These are acts of treason by traitors within our society. So-Called Judges!

These crimes have gone on now for decades and destroyed the life, livelihood, liberty, and happiness of hundreds of thousands of American people. Pointlessly, because, Government-Congress is grossly, negligently, and incompetently, mismanaging the American people’s resources and is unwilling to atone for its crimes and incompetence.

As simply and straightforward as I can say it:

The US Government committed numerous criminal and abusive acts against my family while the Federal Courts have gifted them unconstitutionally with the ability to create a new law to avoid being held accountable for the significant and atrocious damages they caused. Tyranny! which Thomas Jefferson defined as ” that which is legal for the government, but illegal for the citizenry”

The combination of the Governments actions with Dodd-Frank and the specific intent to deny my family access to a Government funded Farm loan have caused untold financial and emotional damages to my family and posterity.

What’s the great American Lie?

No one is above the law! Because Government is above the law when judges with absolute immunity protect them. Judges with absolute immunity are above the law when they refuse to hold one another accountable to it.

Such is the impetus for a War on Government and the Federal Judiciary protecting it from the people they’re supposed to serve. Ask yourself if these judges are aiding, abetting, and protecting a Government Agency and its personnel engaged in a criminal enterprise should they not be removed from the bench for violating their oaths of office? For Treason?

I suggest the American people demand the Government face a Jury Trial!

I suggest the American people demand to know why Mainstream Media has not reported these facts?

I suggest the American people demand to know why these Judges were not held accountable by their Appellate courts?

I suggest if any American doubts the validity of these allegations they put up a jury trial to hear the unabridged evidence and let’s have a public trial mock or otherwise to shine a light on the criminal nature of our Government. On the oppressive, despotic, ruling tyrant it’s become.

A criminal enterprise owned and operated by the Federal Government aided and abetted by the federal judiciary is treason to the people and the constitution and the reason America must demand an end to immunity protections the Government and the Judiciary have gifted themselves.

If my allegations are true these judges are protecting treason, protecting a criminal government enterprise, protecting criminals, and protecting the hundreds of legislators who signed off on establishing a criminal enterprise to hide their incompetence.

These so-called judges have sided with the enemies of every fallen US soldier and thus have blood on their hands; indelible stains on their integrity, their independence, and their character.

These facts and those surrounding the precursor of Dodd-Frank the subprime financial collapse of 2009 are now before Federal District Court Judge Robert J. Conrad in the Federal District Court of North Carolina Western District case 3:16-cv-173. Judge Conrad has been almost totally silent since this case was filed on April 15,2016, now fourteen months on the docket.

The Government continued denial of fair hearings, of justice; The continuous arbitrary rulings by Government officials “Traitors” is persistent and unrelenting psychological rape. It must be stopped and eliminating immunity protection is key. As Montesquieu said, “there’s no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”

They claim it’s unfair to attack a judge because they can’t defend themselves. In this case, it doesn’t matter, there simply is no defense for treason, no defense of the Judiciary becoming a coconspirator with congress against We The People. We The People should not blindly trust and accept the actions of any branch of Government because as Thomas Jefferson said “all history hath shown to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots”

Fourth of July 2017 and we have no independence from the despotism of our corrupted Government kings who’ve gifted themselves and each other to be above the law.

Chief Justice John Roberts on Character; on all the things the Federal Judiciary has given my family.

I look forward to the days of enjoying my BBQ.

CB Julian

@Blueridgespring

@blueridgesprings.brsinv.com

September 11, 2016 by CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Petition for Rehearing Denied

The Petition below to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals was Denied by Chief Justice Sharon Prost, and two new kids Judge Chen and Judge Stoll. See the Court order 13-petition-denied Note: denial of this petition affects the precise outcome predicted long before the complaint was ever filed see the blog post Any doesn’t Mean Any Anymore

Below is the petition as submitted and denied. Note: The Court has dismissed this case for failure to state a claim. No request, in this case, was ever made to Amend the Complaint. Plaintiffs do not believe the complaint is deficient but, rather the court simply wishes to impose the Government’s will with false statements and reliance on assumption rather than fact.

The Federal Courts participate in these proceedings as if they were Counsel for the Defense of the U.S. Government. There is literally no appearance of impartiality by the Federal Judiciary.

***********************************************************************************************************

1 The Panels decision conflicts with decisions of the United States Supreme Court in:

United States v. Navajo Nation, 556 U.S. 287, 290 (2009);

United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538, 100 S.Ct. 1349,63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980);

United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 400, 96 S.Ct. 948, 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976);

Eastport S.S. Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607,372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967));

Compagnie General Transatlantique v. United States, D.C., 21 F.2d 465, 466.(1927);

The Court of Appeals for the Federal District Opinion relies on:

Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009);

Plaintiffs find no indication, other than the Court’s reliance and citation; these cases are binding precedent in the Federal Court of Claims or in the Federal Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. To the extent, they are Plaintiffs seek to have them overruled.

18 U.S.C. §1964(c) is a money-mandating statute conferring jurisdiction on the Court of Federal Claims under 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1) based on identifiable decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Court of Appeals states at 5 ¶2 of their Opinion:

“to the extent that Plaintiffs now argue that the RICO Act is, itself, a money-mandating statute conferring jurisdiction on the Court of Federal Claims,4 we hold that it is not.[1] See Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009).“ [2]

This statement of the Court presents numerous issues.

First, the Court implies by this statement Plaintiffs had not previously argued RICO Act was a money-mandating statute, which is false, and evidenced by the Courts footnote 4 and the fact it is specifically stated in the Complaint at Dkt item 1. p.14 ¶42(3) (Consideration)

“This statute providing a civil cause of action identifies a source of substantive law separate from the Tucker Act creating a right to monetary damages”

It was further discussed in Plaintiff’s responsive reply brief Dkt. Item 7 (C) p. 20-23. Second, by implication, the Court appears to concede RICO is a money-mandating statute but contends its one that does not confer jurisdiction on the Court of Federal Claims.[3] The Court has then cited precedent that Plaintiffs were not afforded the opportunity to address. If it’s the Courts contention, the Federal Court of Claims does not have jurisdiction to hear a criminal RICO case plaintiffs would agree that’s true, however, if it’s the court’s contention the Federal Court of Claims does not have jurisdiction with regards to RICO’s civil cause of action as another separate source of law mandating compensation by the Federal Government when paired with the Tucker act; Plaintiffs would argue that’s not in accordance with the Court of Federal Claims mandated jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1), or with the Supreme Courts interpretations which Plaintiffs relied on in filing the complaint. The plaintiff’s Complaint alleges Jurisdiction under the Tucker Act of 1887, codified at 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1), which allows the Court of Claims to entertain claims against the United States “founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress. 18 U.S.C §1964(c) is an act of Congress and a Federal statute. The Supreme Court stated: Justice Anton Scalia United States v. Navajo Nation, 556 U.S. 287, 290 (2009);

““Neither the Tucker Act nor the Indian Tucker Act creates substantive rights; they are simply jurisdictional provisions that operate to waive sovereign immunity for claims premised on other sources of law (e.g., statutes or contracts).” Quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 400, 96 S.Ct. 948, 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976); United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538, 100 S.Ct. 1349, 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980) “The other source of law need not explicitly provide that the right or duty it creates is enforceable through a suit for damages, but it triggers liability only if it “`can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government.” (quoting Eastport S.S. Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607, 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967)) [4]

The court must recognize that in District court case 4:13-cv-00054 JLK; while liability usually lies with a third party defendant in a prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §1964(c), The liability in case 4:13-cv-00054 JLK and consequently this instant case lies with the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government was rightfully the defendant in the RICO civil suit filed in a Federal Court of appropriate jurisdiction. The court as agent/trustee for the U.S. Government and We The People converted the terms of the agreement to become judge, jury, and defendant, dismissing its own case without due process of law in violation of the Plaintiffs’ procedural rights. The Government in this case is liable for damages as both Defendant and as agent/trustee, which breached its fiduciary duty of care with regards to the Plaintiff’s procedural rights.[5]

Justice Blackmun United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 400, 96 S.Ct. 948, 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976);

“The Tucker Act is merely jurisdictional, and grant of a right of action must be made with specificity. The respondents do not rest their claims upon a contract; neither do they seek the return of money paid by them to the Government. It follows that the asserted entitlement to money damages depends upon whether any federal statute “can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damage sustained.“[6]

In this instant case, Plaintiffs have rested their claims upon a contract created with the grant of a private cause of action and although they do not seek the return of money paid by them to the Government, they have asserted entitlement to monetary damages based upon substantive rights conveyed to the plaintiffs by congressional grant with the evocation of federal statute 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) in case 4:15-cv-00054-JLK. When the Federal Government is the defendant in a RICO case the money mandate of the statute is the liability of the Federal Government and the Federal Government is additionally liable as agent/trustee when breaching its duty of care.

Judge Davis Eastport S.S. Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct.Cl. 599, 607, 372 F.2d 1002, 1009 (1967));

“But it is not every claim involving or invoking the Constitution, a federal statute, or a regulation which is cognizable here. The claim must, of course, be for money.^”

“In the second group, where no such payment has been made, the allegation must be that the particular provision of law relied upon grants the claimant, expressly or by implication, a right to be paid a certain sum” [7]

Plaintiffs have from the beginning maintained the particular provision of law relied upon 18 U.S.C. 1964(c) expressly granted them the right to treble damages, attorney’s fees, and court cost i.e. to be paid, a certain sum of money-mandated compensatory damages, that the promise (Offer) of these substantive rights to property was conveyed by Congresses explicit grant of a civil cause of action with 18 U.S.C §1964, a grant, which conveyed the promises (offer)[8] of those damages by the filing of a complaint under 18 U.S.C. §1964(c). That this particular provision of law relied upon conveyed the promise an express written offer to Plaintiffs who met the stated terms of qualification, adhered to terms of performance, and anticipated assuming the position of a Private Attorney General for the prosecution of a US Government operated RICO enterprise. Justice Aufustus Hand Compagnie General Transatlantique v. United States, D.C., 21 F.2d 465, 466,(1927).

“* * *. To limit the recovery in cases `founded’ upon a law of Congress to cases where the law provides in terms for a recovery would make that provision of the Tucker Act almost entirely unavailable because it would allow recovery only in cases where laws other than the Tucker Act already created a right of recovery. `Founded’ must therefore mean reasonably involving the application of a law of Congress. * * *” [9]

The court’s findings the RICO Act does not confer jurisdiction is correct however, the court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1) which says founded upon any Act of Congress and under the Supreme Courts interpretations of that Statute, a RICO’s Civil Cause of Action filed against the U.S. Government creates a reasonable right of recovery from the Federal Government.

As Justice Scalia conveys other sources of law (e.g., statutes or contracts) triggering liability if it can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government. Justice Blackmun’s entitlement to money damages confers where “any” federal statute can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damage sustained. Judge Davis, the allegation must be the particular provision of law relied upon grants the claimant, expressly or by implication, a right to be paid a certain sum. Justice Aufustus founded means reasonably involving the application of a law of Congress.

18 U.S.C. §1964(c) is a Federal statute (a law of Congress) granting to a private citizen, meeting stated requirements, the mandated promise of treble damages, attorney fees, and court cost, for accepting the Governments offer of compensation in exchange for prosecuting a criminal case in the public interest. When the Federal Government is the defendant in a criminal RICO case it’s fair to interpret the statute as expressly mandating compensation of a certain sum from the Federal Government. Furthermore, as an agent/trustee of the U.S. Government, which breached its duty of care in the prosecution of a Government Agency, the Federal Government becomes libel for the full potential benefit of a successful prosecution.

The Court’s reliance on Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014); and Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009).“ is Misapprehended; neither of these cases involved a breach of contract or takings claim, for a specific performance failure, where the RICO statute had been evoked in an appropriate jurisdiction. Neither of these cases looked at RICO as another source of law mandating compensation by the Federal Government on which a breach of contract or taking claim under the Tucker act was founded. Neither of these cases looked at a civil action under the RICO statute.

However, if the court’s contention 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) does not fall within the Courts jurisdiction Plaintiffs challenge such an interpretation as not in accordance with the jurisdictional mandate for 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1) nor in accordance with Supreme Court precedential interpretation of the jurisdiction conferred on the Court as discussed supra.

To the extent Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009) is a precedential opinion in the Federal Circuit which was relied on in Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Plaintiffs would ask to have this precedent overruled by the Federal Circuit. The Court stated its justification in Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009) at p.5 B. “The Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Plaintiff’s Criminal Claims”

“This court has no jurisdiction over RICO claims because RICO is a criminal statute.” And excluded 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) by specifically referencing “18 U.S.C. §§1961- 62”

In Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014) The Court stated:

“These claims do not fall within the court’s jurisdiction as defined by the Tucker Act because none of those statutes or constitutional provisions mandate the payment of money. See Hufford v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 696, 702 (2009) (holding that the Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction over RICO claims).”

In Hufford v. United States, the Court found it-lacked jurisdiction because RICO was a criminal statute and specified §§1961- 62, however, 18 U.S.C §1964(c) grants a “Civil” cause of action, not “Criminal” a civil case where the United States was the defendant. The contention the Court lacks jurisdiction is inconsistent with Supreme Court interpretations of the court of Federal Claims jurisdictional mandate under 28 U.S.C. §1491(a)(1) as discussed supra. If the Federal Court of Appeals has found as the Plaintiffs consistently argued 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) is a Federal Statute mandating compensatory damages for economic injuries i.e. a money-mandating statute see Dkt. Item 7 (C ) p. 20-23, and Plaintiffs maintain it is. Then it would fall within the Court’s jurisdiction and the misapprehended conclusion of Trevino v. United States, 557 F. App’x 995, 998 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The Statute that does not “mandate the payment of money” is false.

18 U.S.C. §1964(c) Grants a Private cause of action a clear indication the legislature intended to create private Contractual or vested rights.

The Court of Appeals states at 6 ¶2 of their Opinion.

“Plaintiffs’ allegations do not establish that any contract existed between Plaintiffs and the government. Plaintiffs’ Characterization of §1964(c) as a contract “offer” is false.” “[A]bsent some clear indication that the legislature intends to bind itself contractually, the presumption is that a law is not intended to create private contractual or vested rights” “Nothing in RICO Act suggests it was intended to function as a contract offer to private citizens.” [10]

The Court of Appeals states at 4 ¶5

“ Dismissal for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) is proper only when a plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.”

And at 5 ¶1.

“we must assume that all well-pled factual allegations in the complaint are true.”

However, the court has based its argument on the reliance on an assumption, the presumption the legislature did not intend to bind itself contractually. The Court has assumed Plaintiffs could prove no set of facts to support the claim 18 U.S.C. §1964(c) constitutes a valid offer and that in fact the statute is intended to convey contractual private rights. Contrary to the Court’s precedent in Hufford v. United States “RICO is a criminal statute.” 18 U.S.C. §1964 is the congressional “GRANT” for a “CIVIL” cause of action of criminal offenses, a clear indication Congress intended to convey to the private citizen the vested right to prosecute a criminal offense for compensation. [11]

Plaintiffs would ask the Court? How this statute conveys the right to prosecute and the compensatory damages to a private citizen if not by offering to do so? How does a Pro Se become a “Private Attorney General” for which public prosecutorial resources are deemed inadequate, a woefully painful, unusual, challenging, and demanding position, without an offer from Government to do so? The term applies only to the exercise of one’s ability to pursue certain specific kinds of legal actions statutorily authorized (offered). It does not create the ability to call one’s self a “private attorney general”. Consequently, the term is only applicable to a private non-attorney citizen who has accepted the statutory offer to do so.[12]

The Senate reports on the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees award Act of 1976 S. Rep. 94-1011 p.6 (1976) The Committee acknowledged that,

“[i]f private citizens are to be able to assert their civil rights, and if those who violate the Nation’s fundamental laws are not to proceed with impunity, then citizens must have the opportunity to recover what it costs them to vindicate these rights in court.”

The Senate obviously intended to offer citizens, the opportunity to recover what it cost them to vindicate their rights in Court. [13]

Whether it’s a Grant, cognizable as a taking or an offer as a contract [14]neither is applicable without the Plaintiff’s acceptance of the rights and promises conveyed and a Plaintiff cannot assume private attorney general status without a valid acceptance of the authorization to do so. Furthermore, the statute provides, a promise of substantial and significant benefit to the American people, the potential demise of USDA’s RICO enterprise. This Court has balanced the scales of justice with assumptions rather than facts inconsistent with the Court’s procedural rule FRCP 1. They should be construed and administered to secure the “just” determination of every action.

The Court’s reliance on Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 470 U.S. 451, 465–66 (1985) (quoting Dodge v. Bd. of Ed., 302 U.S. 74, 79 (1937)). ).“ Is a Misapprehended assumption for injustice and to the extent the Court relies on the case as precedential Plaintiffs seek to have it overruled in this instance.

Plaintiff’s claims are at the bottom a request the Court of Federal Claims review whether the Government violated the Plaintiffs procedural due process rights and failed faithfully to perform its agency/trustee duties effecting a breach of contract or taking of personal property.

The Court of Appeals states at 5 ¶2 of their Opinion:

“Plaintiffs’ claims are, at the bottom, requests that the Court of Federal Claims review the Western District of Virginia’s decision to dismiss Plaintiffs’ earlier action.”

This is false! Plaintiff’s claims are at the bottom a request the Court of Federal Claims review whether the Government violated the Plaintiffs procedural due process rights and failed faithfully to perform its agency/trustee duties affecting a breach of contract or taking of personal property conveyed to the Plaintiffs by an act of Congress. Rights granted with the specific intent to grant Plaintiffs status as a prosecutor of Government corruption, in a Government violating the fundamental laws of this Nation, in a prosecutorial void, where the Government’s action aided the Government in avoiding prosecution and affected the Government will to unconstitutionally write new law preserving the Governments corrupt objectives. [15] To the extent the court relies on Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d 378, 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994) Regarding this matter Plaintiffs would seek to have the precedent overruled in this instance.

Submitted by,

Christopher B Julian Pro-Se

[1] Emphasis added.

[2] The court states “Plaintiffs now argue” yet it’s noted in footnote 4 that plaintiffs consistently argued this point throughout the proceedings. It was in fact the DOJ who argued the RICO’s damages were not money-mandating.

[3] In all prior arguments, the defense argued the statute was not money mandating and the Court did never clarify it.

[4] Emphasis Altered.

[5] That Judge Jackson L. Kiser chose to deny the Plaintiffs procedural rights to aid the Government’s RICO enterprise is a matter between him and the Government.

[6] Emphasis altered.

[7] Emphasis Altered.

[8] To an aggrieved farmer whose business has been wiped out by government actions the prospect of being paid a reasonable attorney’s fee to prosecute the offender is a very attractive offer.

[9] Emphasis added.

[10] Emphasis added.

[11] A Pro Se would be entitled to the same Attorneys fees as a Plaintiff represented by counsel

[12] The relationship might be different if an attorney prosecuted the case for a non-attorney client in anticipation of collecting an attorney’s fees.

[13] The burden of proof in a civil case is a preponderance of the evidence.

[14] How is it appropriate for the Court to presume the legislature did not intend to bind itself contractually without allowing for the presentation of evidence to the contrary?

[15] As an Article I court, the duty of Congresses separation of powers responsibility, to hold the Federal Judiciary accountable has been conveyed to the Court of Federal Claims. The Courts Duty is to render justice against the Government in favor of citizens just as it would administer between private individuals. It just takes one bad apple corp. to spoil the whole bushel.

Up-Date 10 -8- 2016 For benefit of readers you should know that every one of the court’s prior arguments was shown to be based on the incongruent premise. The court did not and could not provide any argument for accepting as true their faulty unsupportable premises. So where this argument suggests a precedent be overruled it was not without significant prior support for doing so. The very fact that this court supported their opinion with precedent on statutes that were different from the bases of the filing and arguments shows their specific intent was to deny justice. I.e. Criminal RICO and Civil RICO are different statutes!!

	CB St. Julian of Mal… on US Federal Judicial zionist wh…
	Ari Asulin on US Federal Judicial zionist wh…
	CB St. Julian of Mal… on Judging the Judges of a J…
	New York Litigation… on Judging the Judges of a J…
	Criminal Immigration… on First Appellate Court of Appea…

Blue_French_Qtr

The root of all evil is not money it's a lie.

Author: CB St. Julian of MalaCare

America’s Fail from Democracy to Oligarchy!

Spirit of the Laws [No Apathy]

Royale Gem of Malacare.

History always rhymes!

Who is master, who is slave?

Justice; Chief Justice John Roberts!

Justice; Chief Justice John Roberts!

Let Me Show You Dodd-Frank Sucks!

Character

Petition for Rehearing Denied