Author: CB St. Julian of MalaCare

Did The Federal Courts Lie Abusing Juris My Diction Crap!
by

Did The Federal Courts Lie Abusing Juris My Diction Crap!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In Supreme Court petition 14-1051 question one was

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

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

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

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

-Declaration of Independence, 1776

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

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

Chris Julian – Pro-Se

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

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

Like This!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Amen!

Christopher B. Julian Pro-Se.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue reading →

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !
by

Supreme Court Sells out Constitutional Obligation to The American People !

Supreme Court or Supreme Government Puppet

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  1. Is a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization (RICO) enterprise operating in and by a Federal Agency protected from civil suit for violation of the RICO act Chapter 18 §1964(c) for violations of  1961 and §1962 (a-d) by sovereign immunity or provisions of the Federal Tort Claims FTCA?
  2. Should a court grant deference to an administrative agency’s statutory interpretation where it can affect the outcome of civil or criminal litigation?
  3. When a Federal Agency denies an appellant opportunity to present evidence of negligence, fraud, and discrimination, relevant to an agency decision, and judicial review is limited to review of the administrative record and the provisions of 5 U.S.C. §706, Have the administrative procedures in conjunction with the limits on judicial review not effectively violated the appellants constitutional right to due process and a jury trial?
Mr. President all thats necessary for the triumph of Government evil is for those in power to do nothing!
by

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

Blue Ridge Springs Orchard

blueridgesprings.com

 BRS_Image

April 14, 2015

President of the United States
Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Re: Racketeering by the USDA and Form SF-95

Dear Mr. President:

Mr. President, I’ve always been your ally and supporter. I mean absolutely no disrespect to you or your administration in sending this letter. I’m fully aware your administration inherited many issues of corruption in government at the IRS, VA, CIA, NSA, and the Secret Service, I’m writing to you regarding corruption at the USDA and in the Federal Judiciary for three primary reasons.

First Federal Judge Jackson L. Kiser informed me you were the top law enforcement official in the country and it would take executive action on your part to rectify the tyrannical despotic operations of the United States Department of Agriculture, which destroyed my life’s work and relegated my family to homelessness. Given the Federal Courts have ignored numerous federal laws, their judicial oaths of office, and all prior legal precedent, and justified their opinions with deceit, deception, intentional misrepresentation, and outright lies. All of which I’m happy to provide evidence of before the jury I demanded as a constitutional right. It follows, the Judiciary is not performing its appointed duties and your intervention under the take care clause 5 of Article 2 of the United States Constitution is required to protect the laws and the Constitution of the United States.  As President, it is your sworn duty to uphold federal law for racketeering against the USDA and the Federal Judiciary for aiding and abetting this enterprise, violating their oaths of office, and violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983 for justice, the law, and the U.S. Constitution to prevail.

Secondly, Judge Jackson L. Kiser and his cohorts – Judge Clyde H. Hamilton, Robert B. King, and Barbra M. Keenan of the fourth circuit court of appeals have intentionally ignored numerous federal laws, all legal precedent, and their judicial oaths to railroad this case and assist the USDA in the commission of a racketeering operation objective to steal constitutional rights to trial by jury, They have prevented this case from any evidentiary hearings or ever being heard in a courtroom and have granted the USDA extraordinary deference to write there own laws to avoid attaching financial damages for numerous acts of negligence, fraud, mail fraud, discrimination, conspiracy, and countless other crimes including perjury. Deference I might add several Supreme Court justices have recently argued as Un–Constitutional. [1] I am now dependent on the 1 percent chance the Supreme Court of the United States will grant my petition for certiorari. With the court’s track record in this case I cannot help but be highly skeptical of a positive outcome. I believe with your background in constitutional law and the fact, the leader of this organized crime ring works for you, you may find it of interest therefore; I have included a copy of my Supreme Court Petition with this letter for your reference.

Third, Judge Kiser dismissed part of this lawsuit without prejudice on grounds that I must first file form SF-95 with the USDA requesting permission from a racketeer-influenced corrupt organization (RICO) permission to sue them for being corrupt. I find such to be beyond common right and reason, a violation of due process, and unconstitutional, no agency should be judged in its own case; therefore, since Mr. Vilsack, a member of your cabinet, runs and operates this criminal operation, I’m deferring my form SF-95 submission to you, his manager.

The form is enclosed with this communication. Mr. President, having spent more than 2 years and never having had a trial, an opportunity for discovery, an evidentiary hearing, or the opportunity even for my grievance and evidence to be heard the statute of limitations clock on filing form SF-95 is about to expire. I requested a leave of the Supreme Court to motion for equitable tolling; however, I did not receive a timely response, and given the treatment, I have already encountered in the Federal Courts, I have every reason to believe it would not be granted even though the court has recently questioned the constitutionality of deference. The extraordinary deference granted in this case is highly relevant to an assessment of the legal damages. Furthermore, the district and appellate courts’ actions leave me with no respect for the institution, and highly skeptical that we’ll ever see justice in this matter from the Federal Court system.

The Federal Courts seem determined to aid, abet, and protect the criminal operations and protect the criminals in this agency. I personally believe for an executive branch of government to have established its own court system where the federal rules of evidence do not apply, the rights of due process are totally ignored, and there is no stare decisis is unconstitutional given the specific separation of powers specified by Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the constitution. For an executive branch of the government to have usurped judicial powers where they serve corruption in the executive branch rather than the interest of the people seems highly unconstitutional–downright criminal. A heinous operation you would expect the judiciary would likely demand to dismantle rather than protect. This leads me to serious questions about the judiciary’s true resolve to protect us the people, and the constitution from a tyrannous despotic government.

Mr. President, I wrote to you regarding the issues my family encountered as a result of Dodd-Frank legislation and criminal activities by the USDA in 2012. Additionally, I copied you on a letter, which I wrote to each member of the Senate Banking Committee in January 2013. I appreciate the fact each of these letters received a response from your office. However, it was quite ironic you or your office forwarded my letter of January 2013 to Christopher P. Beyerhelm USDA Deputy Administrator of Farm Loan Programs, who eventually responded, he would not be able to have any involvement with our issues as they were pending with the (USDA) National Appeals Division (NAD) but, he would forward some of our issues on to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) although they seem to have no record of it.

This was ironic for 2 reasons; first I had already made a complaint to the CFPB. But much more importantly Mr. Beyerhelm’s negligence was a factor in wiping out everything my wife and I worked so hard to accomplish. You see Mr. Beyerhelm is one of the many USDA employees named as defendants in the lawsuit against the USDA for racketeering.

The federal courts have railroaded this case, ignoring federal laws and all prior precedent ultimately leaving my family now in our 3rd year attempting to get justice from an absolutely corrupt despotic federal agency aided and abetted by a corrupt Federal Judiciary. I find it very disturbing to know the RICO act has been used against numerous states, and local government agencies in cases where the courts have always found a RICO enterprise not to be protected by sovereign immunity. In fact, Mr. President, the courts found in United States v. Warner, 498 F.3d 666, 694-97 (7th Cir. 2007), the Seventh Circuit held that your home “State of Illinois was properly charged as the RICO enterprise that was the victim of corrupt office holders’ pattern of racketeering activity”. How is it, that a state RICO has no sovereign immunity while a Federal Agency RICO operated by an executive branch of government is protected?

Overall, our story is long and complex, it would as Mrs. Janice Pigford says regarding their case with the USDA, ” Take Jesus Christ himself to come back here and straighten out this whole mess.” This seems to be the specific intent of the USDA and the Federal Courts, although I’m confident in an honest jury’s ability to find the appropriate answer but, it seems highly unlikely the Government will ever allow that to happen. This brings me to an explanation as to the demands of the lawsuit, which I believe the country deserves.

By the time the lawsuit was filed, we had experienced negligence, on a massive scale, countless acts of fraud, mail fraud, obvious discrimination, violations of the FCRA, FOIA, obstruction of justice in the form of perjury, denied an opportunity to present relevant evidence of these in our defense and being disallowed to present a defense for violating a regulation that was not a regulation when it was broken. Our stellar personal credit had been irreparably damaged as well as being unemployed and relegated to homelessness. At this point, we had become quite aware of the racketeering operations being orchestrated by the USDA to avoid responsibility and accountability for the criminal acts of its employees. Everything we had worked our whole lives to accomplish was being destroyed by a criminal RICO enterprise operated by the USDA.   How do you place a value on this small sample of the damages caused by criminal incompetent USDA-run government agencies?

  • 20 plus years of saving until it hurt to amass the financial ability to make this effort – lost
  • The devastation of a business plan for which you had already provided 6 years of development, planning, financial resources, and hard manual labor to implement – lost.
  • A business plan that was on the verge of getting established when the market demand was growing rapidly – was lost.
  • A viable business development opportunity providing jobs in a rural Hud-Zone in serious need of economic stimulus – lost.
  • Multi-million-dollar life insurance policies which you will never be able to replace – lost.
  • A lifetime of planning to be able to provide care and comfort to your literally poor mom – irreplaceably lost.
  • Time to spend with her and her to spend with you and the only granddaughter you gave her – forever irreplaceably lost.
  • Being forced into homelessness in your fifties with a young daughter now only 8. How can you replace the childhood she’s had with the one she should’ve had? Forever irreplaceably lost.
  • The absolutely despicable fact the USDA is running a RICO operation with taxpayer dollars to hide its incompetent mismanagement, protect its employees from criminal prosecution, and avoid accountability and responsibility. All with malice and specific intent to destroy the lives of struggling farmers whom they’re legislatively directed to assist. Unconscionable!

That’s just the beginning of a very very long list of devastating consequences from the incompetent criminal and corrupt mismanagement of federal resources at the USDA and the unwillingness of the Agency to simply admit a mistake.

  • I was aware the USDA’s largest single legal settlement payout was 14 million dollars.
  • I was aware that the agency had a 3-decade history of discrimination against, Blacks, White, Hispanics, and Women farmers, a history of sexual harassment, and had defended its discrimination successfully against white farmers because white farmers are not a protected civil class.
  • I was aware although, I felt I’d been the victim of discrimination that as a married white, protestant, and heterosexual man I would have no success with a suit for discrimination.
  • I was aware this criminal enterprise would continue to devastate and destroy small farms and farmers as it had for 3 decades if not stopped.
  • I was well aware the stories of farmers from the last 3-decades were all very similar to mine.
  • I am aware this institution needs to shut down or disinfected. Although the culture of this organization appears so culturally corrupt there’s no hope.
  • I was evidently mistaken to believe with such a history, the Federal Courts would follow the law and use the powers of chapter 18 of 1964 to dismantle this criminal unconstitutional enterprise.

Form SF-95

  • Requires the statement of a SUM certain for settlement. It, therefore, denies me the liberty, and the property conveyed to me by congress in chapter 18 §1964(c) to pursue this proceeding for the farmers and people of this country.
    • It denies me the opportunity to leverage the grant of treble damages.
    • It denies me the opportunity to leverage the grant of attorney’s fees.
    • It affords the USDA the opportunity to settle this without granting the court the opportunity to exercise statutory remedies like dissolution or reorganization, which RICO authorizes.
    • It offers no opportunity to make any demands for relief from the agency outside of a monetary one. No opportunity to demand changes to put this racket out of business.

The Original Suit filed in Federal District Court:

  • The original suit requested 1 million dollars a month in damages for all of the reasons stated above and more, but mostly because the Agency was operating a conspiracy of devastation against my family and friends simply because it wished to cover up its crimes, incompetence, and had unlimited time and resources to do so.
  • The original suit requested 1 million dollars a month until settlement. Because of the agency’s specific intent to do harm to my family and friends in order to avoid accountability and responsibility for their criminal behavior and it needed to end post haste or have consequences.
  • The suit requested 1 million each for 4 other individuals whose lives were devastated and irreparably damaged by these same actions.
  • It was intended for this case to never be settled but carried it into trial expecting to win so the court would have the opportunity afforded under RICO to dismantle this criminal unconstitutional enterprise.
  • While RICO suits are for damages to an individual’s property and business, legal precedent suggested the torts may be actionable too however, these could be subjected to provisions of the FTCA. Which came first the chicken or the egg? Deference dictated.
  • The suit also sought repayment of fees paid to FSA for services, that the agency never provided.
  • And for the Agency to repay the plaintiffs for the cost of Mediation which was nothing more than an agency scam, a tool of the racketeering operation.
  • The suit also requested all payments net of taxes. Because previous successful litigants against the USDA claim the IRS partnered with the USDA in retaliation for the suits. Are all the tens of thousands of claims against the USDA valid? I don’t know, but I have experienced and seen their corruption firsthand.

The original suit totaled $14,000,370.25.

Add to that 1 million a month for 19 months only through April 2015.

$19,000,000.00

Add to that the congressional mandate in a RICO case of treble damages:

19+14= 33,000,370.25 * 3 = $99,001,110.75

Plus attorney fees granted by RICO for 28 months based on my last corporate salary at Bank of America 100,000.00 a year is 233,333.36 = $99,234,444.11

Add to that all required federal and state tax payments: will just use an overall estimated tax rate of 42% so the bottom line is $140,912,910.64.

That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the 18 billion dollar settlement the DOJ just made with Bank of America plus all the other financial institution settlements made by the DOJ for their roles in the mortgage and financial market collapse. The mortgage collapse and the implementation of Dodd-Frank is the only reason a request ever had to be made of the FSA/USDA for a farm loan in the first place.

If Brian Moynihan, my former employer, is worth 18 million a year my family, friends and I are worth 12.

Oh, I’ll just let the 29.5 percent interest asked for in the original suit, because American Express hit me with it when I was one day late with a payment for the first time in my life because of this mess slide.

Based on the court’s finding for a lack of jurisdiction, this letter and the attached documents, I find satisfy the court’s ruling effectively, that form SF- 95 be submitted. The Agency may now take their six months on top of the already 2 years they’ve known about these complaints to think about their future in court. I will be better prepared when refilling this suit and more. Upon a ruling from SCOTUS, every public avenue to disclose the truth will be pursued.

Mr. President, I had no desire to travel any part of this road. I simply was working very hard on the American Dream when a financial collapse caused by highly overpaid idiots prompted Congress to implement some bad legislative provisions with Dodd-Frank. This left me no alternative but to pursue the only financing option available – a rural farm loan with the USDA/FSA farm loan program. The criminal negligence, “My opinion” which resulted in the criminal acts committed by this agency led directly to the criminal unconstitutional racketeering enterprise operated by the Secretary of Agriculture. A fraudulent criminal racketeering enterprise that:

  • Denies individual constitutional rights while usurping the judicial system.
  • Allows the commission of crimes hiding behind sovereign immunity.
  • Intentionally grants extraordinary deference to incompetence.
  • Designed to eliminate damages with deference segregated by misuse of the FTCA from the crimes that were perpetrated on their victims.
  • Designed to avoid accountability or responsibility for the corrupt incompetent administration of the people’s resources and to manage legal risk expenses.
  • Designed to prevent an appellant’s presentation of relevant evidence.
  • Designed to hide the truth in any case by only making available the perverted corrupt self-opinionated hearing officer “and/or” Ha! Ha! Director’s ruling protects the system and the powers in Government.
  • Designed for no transparency on any hearing or challenge or brief, just corrupted judges’ opinions and orders available for public review.
  • Designed not just by shielding case history but also with intentional acts to avoid stare decisis from any other appellate hearing.

Mr. President, petition copies for the Supreme Court are expensive, especially when you’ve been forced into homelessness by a government agency and had to spend more than 2 years in legal maneuvers against a defendant with unlimited time and resources. So when you’re finished reading my petition, could you please sign this copy and return it.

I have done and will continue with my last breath to perform my civic duty to the best of my ability to put an end to tyranny and despotism by the U.S. Government.

I consider my obligation to file form SF-95 complete and respect that you will ensure that its appropriately handled and filed.

A judge that justifies his opinions with lies and balances the scales of justice with deceit, deception, misdirection, obfuscation, and misrepresentation is a criminal as are those who look the other way. They have no Honor.

Mr. President, I respectfully request you perform your sworn duty with regard to the take care clause under the 2nd amendment to the Constitution.

All that’s necessary for the triumph of evil is for those in power to do nothing.

Thank you Mr. President for your time and your service.

Sincerely,

Christopher. B. Julian

The Julian Family

474 Orchard View Drive

Ararat, Virginia 24053

Christopher.b.julian@gmail.com

CC: Secretary of Agriculture

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Mail Stop 0101 Room 200-A

Washington, DC 20250

Assistant Secretary Agriculture Admin.

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Mail Stop 0103 Room 240-W

Washington, DC 20250

Dept of Agriculture White House Liaison

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Mail Stop 0112 Room 507-A

Washington, DC 20250

Chris P. Beyerhelm

Deputy Administrator for Farm Loans Programs

U, S. Department of Agriculture

Farm Service Agency Stop 0520

1400 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, D. C. 20250-0520

As an update to this posting, it should be noted the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari on April 27, 2015, just as expected. The reason this letter was submitted to the President and the Secretary of Agriculture prior to the 2-year deadline under the FTCA. Interesting questions arise as RICO has no statute of limitations and the Supreme court just ruled in favor of equitable tolling under the FTCA. See United States v. Wong decided on April 22, 2015. 

The White House has not responded in any way to this communication. Are President Obama and Presidents Clinton’s involvement in Piggford and Piggford II perhaps related to ignoring these charges from a white man and protecting the Government which Obama is now in charge of.

Some info on Obama, Clinton, & Vilsack

[1] See Justice Scalia and Thomas’s comments in National Law Review on December 4, 2014. See also Scalia and Thomas’s individual opinions in the recent decisions on Perez & Nickols v. Mortgage Bankers Association Decided March 9, 2015

Corrected error not 2nd amendment but Article 2 clause 5.

Do you know the one thing, The one thing you always know?
by

Do you know the one thing, The one thing you always know?

I’ve been working lately assimilating factual information about presumptions, assumptions, and lies. There’s been no shortage of these inspirations for blogging provided by the Federal District Court experience; in my lawsuit against RICO USDA for racketeering. Continuing efforts to sue the USDA for racketeering in Federal District Court has provided far more inspiration from presumptions, assumptions, deceit, deception, and outright lies and obstruction than I would’ve ever imagined in a court of law. Reading through the Court’s latest Opinions inspired me to preempt my many blog additions under draft with this editorial.

Once many years ago my brother asks me a silly question. While I’m not clear on its relevance here it comes to mind. He said: Is it presumable to assume that assume assimilates presume or does presume to assimilate the assumption or is it all just presumptive?

Presumption

How naively I’ve walked through life, brainwashed by television, believing court was about facts, truth, honor, and justice. Then believing court offered an opportunity to address grievances with facts, present your evidence, expose the truth with honor, and have justice prevail with those who broke the law being held accountable. It never dawned on me that a Federal District Court would allow for the scales of justice to be shifted by the injustice of presumption without evidence, assumptions, deceit, deception, and misrepresentation along with outright lies rather than the presentation of factual evidence and the truth. After all, Judges sit on the bench and ask witnesses to swear to tell the truth the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Right? Judges I believe and expect to have, hold and honor the highest in moral and ethical standards, Judges are expected to base their decisions on facts, not fiction, on truth and not lies, and on the presentation of evidence to support reasonable grounds for a presumption rather than purely on assumption.  On sound solid logic, not assumptive and fallacious interpretations.  Judges are expected to demonstrate the utmost diligence in finding of facts to conclude the truth and adherence to the law in enforcing justice. Judges are expected to remain neutral.

Assumption

Perhaps Courts might be far more bastions of truth and justice if we opened the door and exposed them to the public light, exposing judges’ actions to public scrutiny, requiring all court hearings to be recorded and taped. After all, are Judges not civil servants who should be held responsible, and accountable to the people, and the society they serve? Would not the presence of cameras and recorders simply incent them to greater accountability for truth, justice, and equal justice for all? Would it also not protect them from the human condition to succumb to their own egos, biases, and corruption?

Assimilate Truth

Like all of those individuals named in my lawsuit against the USDA for racketeering, the U.S. Attorney, the Virginia State Attorney, the Judge, his court, and the Virginia State University employees involved, are civil servants. All are accountable to the people, all subject to public scrutiny while they rely on public funding to provide them jobs in civil service. I find it a civic duty to expose them one and all, to hold them one and all publicly accountable and responsible for their every misrepresentation, every lie, and every deceitful and deceptive action they take in their public service. I have no tolerance for liars, no tolerance for injustice served on the people by servants who take sustenance from the public trust and use it against the public they are paid to serve. I will relinquish no restraint in publicly naming these individuals now or in the future or in exposing anything I find unethical or any transgression of service. I intend to combine the contents of my blog and the entire story with full disclosure of all relevant facts from every source I have in a future publication. Any individual holding a job through Local, State, or Federal employees should expect to have their name disclosed along with a factual representation of their deeds and my personal opinions and observations of how a preponderance of the factual evidence might be interpreted.

I’ve worked with executives of major financial institutions, and migrant workers who’ve spent their whole lives in the field, I’ve worked with Fishermen, Carpenters, Electricians, Accountants, Programmers, Doctors, Nurses, and migrant workers. I’ve personally known and worked with very wealthy people and very poor individuals and I’ve encountered good and bad people from all walks of life.

The best mentor, I ever had was a veteran serviceman who taught me to take pride in my work, to be the best I could be, to do the best job I could do, and to be honest no matter what others did and I would always be able to have respect and honor for myself. He also taught me a saying I truly believe to be an esoteric truth, all men should learn to heed. He said: “There’s one thing you always know and that is you never know”. People who grew up wealthy can’t know the challenges of truly being poor, poor people can’t know the challenges of being rich. No one can ever know what it’s like to stand in your shoes or ever have more than a glimpse of the history that makes you, who you are. So before making assumptions, before you get to presumptive before you pass judgment you should always ask yourself the question, what is it that I may not know, what is it I might need to know because everyone should remember they can’t ever really know unless they’re blind in which case they never see the light to know what they only thought they knew. I call them Egidiots, egos so large it gets in the way of their intellect making them do idiotic (stupid) things.

The Truth can be told. Lies once written never erased. Facts can allude to the truth or lead to assumptions not grounded in truth, only, by disclosure of all the facts does one learn the truth. We all know the old saying when you assume you make an ASS out of You and ME. But, neither facts nor the truth go away, simply, because they are ignored.

So before you make judgments about people or situations best to have as many facts as you can and ask yourself the question; what is it, I may not know, because you never know too much, you never know everything, and you should know you never know. Don’t be an ASS. Don’t be an Egidiot. You just might not know everything.

You know

Judge Jackson L. Kiser sends U.S. Marshall with comments on my Blog.
by

Judge Jackson L. Kiser sends U.S. Marshall with comments on my Blog.

Untitled 1

Untitled 2

Untitled 3

Untitled 4

Untitled 5

Read the filing Judge Kiser refers to on page 1 Here Reply to Response DeCoster Sanctions.. Pay careful attention to what the filing actually says.

Update 3-3-2016 I invite you to read the blog post to which Judge Jackson L. Kiser has referred in his show cause order. I believe you will find that contrary to his statement of being wholly unsubstantiated in each article the allegations are backed up by supporting documentation and evidence. Secondly, if you carefully read the statement made in the court filing you will see that Judge Jackson L. Kiser’s allegation I called him and his court criminal and corrupt is not accurate but, was as he runs his court based entirely on his personal assumption and bias. Nowhere in that statement was his name or any reference to his courtroom made. It’s a statement no different than one repeated countless ways throughout the ages on issues with court neutrality and objective application of the law by countless judges.

Update 5-3-2017 It should have been noted long ago. Held in front of the Marshall is a document showing that plaintiffs were already scheduled to appear in court on the date of the Show cause order the Marshall is serving. I.E. Judge Kiser sent the U.S. Marshall purely and solely for the purpose of intimidation. 

Really nice public / Government employee rare find in Virginia.

Really Nice U.S. Marshall

Really Nice U.S. Marshall

by

Everyone is free to believe what

Everyone is free to believe what he or she tells himself or herself to believe. But facts don’t lie. So be sure before you lie to yourself that you know the facts.

Federal Court is not what you would expect. Let’s take a look at a few prime examples provided by the U.S. Attorney General’s Office of Western Virginia represented by Kartic Padmanabhan in the Federal District Court of Virginia Danville Division. Mr. Padmanabhan recently represented the USDA defendants in a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization RICO lawsuit. Mr. Padmanabhan made a number of statements, which were very interesting to a Pro-Se victim for the first time ever in a courtroom.

Is a lie, a lie if you don’t know it’s a lie? Is it a lie if you claim you did not know you were lying? Ask a Federal Court Judge but find one that’s not a liar. Don’t ask an attorney they have to be liars they never know which side of a case they’ll be representing.

Mr. Padmanabhan has a job with an interesting parody to it. On the one hand, the DOJ prosecutes civilian criminals and occasionally government employees when they come under the scrutiny of Congress or the Senate. However, on the other side of the coin, the DOJ defends civil servants and Government Agencies who commit crimes against the people.

Interesting parody prosecutes criminal civilians and defends civil servants for the same crimes.

So here are a few questions to consider? Is it a crime for an attorney from the DOJ to lie to a federal court judge in a hearing? Is it a lie if you really don’t know you lying? How about, is it a lie if you sure as hell; should have known the truth about a material fact in a case?

Interesting because I’m not sure whether Mr. Padmanabhan was just outright lying to a Federal Court judge, or he simply had done a criminal job of reviewing the case! Maybe he had a bad memory or perhaps that’s just the way the DOJ operates in protecting bad government actors. Here are a few examples of Mr. Padmanabhan’s performance.

Example 1.

Mr. Padmanabhan made the following statements to the judge you may review the court transcripts here. See the first one is on page 7 top of the last paragraph. The second is on Page 10 center paragraph.

Judicial Review

More Judicial Review

But let’s take a look at what the complaint actually said about judicial review. This is taken directly from the complaint you can view it here see pleading with cover sheer this excerpt is on page 15.  Just how could it be stated any more clearly? But the Government did me a favor by assuming that was the intention.

Complaint Judicial Review

Example 2.

Mr. Padmanabhan tells the Judge plaintiff argues the house is not on the farm property. And the Judge explains that’s a problem with the plaintiff’s argument. Excerpt from the court transcript page 8 last paragraph.  see it here in the Court Trans script Motion Hearing.

House is not on the Farm

House not on farm the court

Court 2 not on the farm

Apparently, more than 7 months after filing the complaint, Mr. Padmanabhan did not read the complaint documents and exhibits or listen to the hearing tapes. The Judge apparently did not read or listen to them either. Why else would they be wrong about a material fact of the case? Yes, this is a material argument falsely represented by the NAD Director Roger Klurfield.

Take a look at this issue in the complaint filing on page 15 item 21. See it Here in Pleading as filed with Coversheet. House is on the FArm

That the house is actually on the farm is documented no less than ten times in the complete filing with exhibits.

Perhaps they got it wrong because the USDA NAD director attempted to justify a major portion of his position with this lie or perhaps this is the lie the NAD director etc. wanted the public to see. After all, only his summary of events goes on the public record.

Example 3. I love this one most of all. “ They acted clearly within the scope of their employment” See it here in the court transcript page 6 center paragraph.

Acted within the scope of their jobs

They’re accused of multiple acts of negligence, fraud, perjury, illegally accessing a credit report, providing inaccurate FOIA responses, discrimination, and violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights, orchestrating a conspiracy effort to cover it all up. and running a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization.  But “they acted clearly within the scope of their employment.”

The complaint details the date time and major events in order of occurrence. FRCP 9(f) States: “TIME AND PLACE An allegation of time or place is material when testing the sufficiency of a pleading” The pleading provided solid evidence of Fraud, Mail Fraud, and Perjury- Obstruction of justice with exhibits supporting the allegations. It detailed a multitude of other despicable acts involved in protecting the enterprise and the chronology is a pattern all in itself. It provided detail on the Predicate acts for a RICO filing and alleges a conspiracy to do so. It meets every requirement of a RICO filing although, it is not described as such because the court’s instructions were not to make legal arguments and cite cases or statutes. As a Pro-Se I don’t know how you meet the filing requirements of a RICO without making legal arguments and citing appropriate statutes? Can you?

Example 4.

The complaint has a one-line throwaway alleging a Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization and no other allegations. See that here in the court transcripts. Page 10 near the bottom.

No mention of RICO

No allegation is other than Negligence, Fraud, Mail Fraud, Perjury, Obstruction of Justice, discrimination, denial of service, FCRA violation, and FOIA violations. A conspiracy and a scheme to still constitutional rights. Look again at the paragraph that states USDA is operating a RICO and keep in mind a RICO is defined by the prerequisite of certain crimes. Mail Fraud and obstruction of justice. That a sequence of events and recurring criminal acts make a pattern and a conspiracy is conducted. And as a matter of FACT, this suit was filed on the docket as a RICO charge on day one.

Pr 24 RICO no other Allegations

This is what the supreme court said was required to state a claim.

State A claim

Everyone is free to believe what he or she tells himself or herself to believe. But facts don’t lie. So be sure before you fool yourself you know the facts. Because this court and this Attorney do not show any evidence of grasping them.

Response to Reply for Sanctions

JULIAN

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

James Rigney, Et Al,

Defendant(s).

 ))

)

)

)

)

)

)

 Case Number:             4:13CV00054

 

 

 

CHRISTOPHER B. AND RENEE G. JULIAN’S REPLY TO RESPONSE FOR SANCTIONS OF KATHERINE DECOSTER.                         

REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS.

Comes now Plaintiff’s s Christopher B. and Renee G. Julian in opposition to Katherine DeCosters response to motions for sanctions. Rule 5(b)(2)(E) is very specific “If the person consented in writing” Plaintiffs never consented in writing to any electronic form of service. Plaintiffs simply did Ms DeCoster a favor letting her know of her errors. Plaintiffs had no reason to object to her email and a response was merely a common curtsey. It is plainly direct, obvious, and observable that plaintiffs were made aware of these motions only by the courts service of the Roseboro notice. Plaintiffs would not have had such a notice had they not been Pro-Se. Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to make any motion or any reply with regards to Ms DeCosters motion for an extension of time to respond as the Court granted the motion without Plaintiffs having any knowledge of its existence. There is no way now nor was there ever anyway for this error to be justly corrected. The Jonesboro notice was the one and only reason Plaintiffs responded to the Motion to dismiss and plea of immunity. This was for Plaintiffs a very serious issue. It put Plaintiffs case in a very precarious situation as the Defendants motion was for failure to state a claim and given the lenience gifted in the filing of the complaint Plaintiffs could not jeopardize the case with a motion for default judgment.

Facts

  1. Motion for extension of time to file a response. Dkt 14 & 15

The Court new Plaintiffs were Pro-Se. This is evidenced by the issuance of the roseboro notice. The Court Clerk had informed Plaintiffs on inquiry Judge Jackson L. Kiser never grants Pro-Se Plaintiffs access to electronic filing. The Court knew when the Defendant filed the motion for extension of time to respond that it had not been served for this reason. This is further evidenced by the time the Court allowed for Plaintiffs to file an opposition ref dkt 14 & 17 and dkt 21 & 23 as opposed to the length granted when the USAG made the same motion; and note the Holiday weekend in the filing of dkt 21. The Court approved this motion knowing it was not effective. Dkt 17 Since Plaintiffs had no knowledge this motion had been filed until after receiving the roseboro notice from the court dkt 18 Plaintiffs never had any opportunity at all to oppose this motion.

  1. Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim and plea for Sovereign and qualified immunity.

This Motion placed Plaintiff’s in a very precarious position jeopardizing elements of our case. Plaintiffs had to respond to countless issues Sovereign Immunity, Qualified Immunity, failure to state a claim, etc raised in defense of Ms Johnson that were by rule subject to summary judgment as they were issues raised outside of the complaint, hence the rosesboro notice. Furthermore, Plaintiffs were subjected to numerous allegations in the motion of faults in the filing directly attributable to the courts instructions not to make legal arguments or citations. Had plaintiffs motioned for default judgment, a viable motion in response to failure to effect service, however, the court could have, and, we now know, would have dismissed Ms Johnson on failure to state a claim. Was that the courts prime objective? Defeating the primary reason Ms Johnson was named in this suit, Ms Johnson’s participation in aiding and abetting RICO USDA in the Commission of the enterprises objectives, an argument that had been completely pulled from the original complaint to comply with the Courts instructions not to cite statues, cases or make legal arguments. A compliance with the courts instructions, which caused Plaintiffs serious undue and unnecessary complications, and has significantly, delayed the entire process while causing significant physical and mental stress to plaintiffs as well as stealing precious time from our lives.

The Courts actions with regard to these two motions together with the Courts action approving the USAG’s motion for extension without granting Plaintiffs a single day of the Clerks Office being open to file an opposition, when the court clerk had been informed plaintiffs were attempting to file a responsive motion Exhibit AT. Plaintiffs viewed these actions as biased and prejudicial treatment by this court which resulted in Plaintiffs contacting the 4CCA on 11/14/ 2013 Exhibit AU attempting to file a grievance for prejudicial treatment by this court. Additionally, two articles on the experience were published on the internet “Legal Conundrum by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5(b)2(e) on January 1, 2014 and “Op Ed for the Federal District Courts” on January 15th 2014 after being denied publication by the Wall Street Journal. One additional article “ The Weak” discussing the experience was published on January 7, 2014. It is further worth noting that after all the motions had been filed the Court did not act to make a ruling and the moving party never motioned for a hearing or advised the court as prescribed by local rule 11(b). Did the Court and the Defendants council wait intentionally? There is absolutely no way to prove these acts were not coordinated between the court and the Defense Councils. And there is evidence in the docket of ex parte communication. Everyone is welcome to read any of our articles at Blueridgesprings on wordpress.com There will be many more to come.

Up-Date 4-26-2017 these are all facts that demonstrate bias on the part of this court.

                                                            CONCLUSION

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.

            Respectfully Submitted,

                                                                                    Christopher B. and Renee G. Julian Pro-Se

by

USDA Plays Dumb

Christopher B. Julian

474 Orchard View Drive

Ararat, Virginia, 24053

 

May 24, 2014

 

 

 

 

Mr. Kartic Padmanabhan,

 

Mr. Padmanabhan,

Please advise your clients at the USDA and NAD, Plaintiffs do not view the administrative record provided to the court as complete and accurate. While they have obviously stated such on a technicality, Plaintiffs view it as another example of the enterprises deceptive culture. Plaintiffs respectfully request pursuant to FRCP 37(a) NAD provide to the court the complete record of the Plaintiffs case. Plaintiffs assume the defendants have not provided the complete record on the technicality the documentation was retained under a separate case number NAD created during correspondence. Plaintiffs request that NAD provide the court with a complete administrative record for NAD Case No. 2013E000308 as it is inextricably tied to this case.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Christopher B. & Renee G. Julian

Pro-Se.