Thursday, July 1, 2010

Dunning my President, Immunity is not a requirement for independence, The Most Corrupt Organization in the World.


Wednesday, June 30, 2010

President Barack Hussein Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500-0001

Re:  Dunning my President.
        Immunity is not a requirement for independence
        The Most Corrupt Organization in the World.

Dear Barack,
I hope you do not mind my calling you Barack, but I have an issue with titles of Nobility[1], smile.  I hope you can understand.  Not that I am going to start calling you Comrade Obama or Citizen Barack, I just have no issue with given names.  Again, I hope you can understand?
I have not received a response.  I realize you and your staff are busy but I have been waiting nearly TWO years for a response.  Judicial Immunity is a populist issue that I think could help you in your struggle against the darkness.  I first wrote you on November 08, 2008 asking you “Do you want to peacefully settle the Civil Rights issue?[2]I got no answer.  I wrote to your Attorney General Eric Holder three months later on Monday, February 02, 2009 “Civil Rights and Judicial Terrorism.”  I got no answer.  I was arrested on charges[3] that denied me my First Amendment Right to free speech[4] on March 11, 2009.  I was held for 411 days until the charges were dismissed and I was released Monday, April 26, 2010.  I recently wrote to you again Monday, May 17, 2010 “United States Constitution Article 2. Section 3 “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”   I got no answer.  I wrote to both you and Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Monday, June 07, 2010 “When did we authorize our Judges to become tyrants? A Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.”  I got no answer. 
The Supreme Court is now in summer recess.  It is all on my blog "The Earth and everything that's in it."
I have been seeking the essence of my civil liberty… “The protection of the laws.” The Protection of the Laws, my civil rights were criminally[5] deprived by three superior court judges, one inferior court judge, two police officers, three prosecutors and my ex spouse via fraud upon the court with a conspiracy of common interest to convict me and deprive me of my son, my home, my liberty and all my worldly property.  Starting in May of 2003 and continuing on up until today I have been denied the protection of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments, Title 18 § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law and Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights i.e., Due Process of Law.   
Due Process of Law has a comprehensive procedure and substantive provisions for the protection of rights.  When the judges stepped outside those provisions, over timely and repeated objections it was willful, criminal  and  a complete denial of the procedural and substantive protection of Due Process of Law, step outside of procedural and substantive Due Process[6] and “coram non judice”[7]
On Monday November 3, 2003 with the accord of a sitting Judge my ex-spouse illegally merged two disparate issues fraudulently to take away my son, my home, my liberty and all my worldly property.  The Judiciary in United States of America is The Most Corrupt Organization in the World.
The Protection of the Laws as the essence of Civil Liberty was first asserted and confirmed in the United States Supreme Court with Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803).  In 1803 the Courts and Chief Justice John Marshall still had integrity when the Supreme Court confronted Thomas Jefferson’s (3rd President) executive branch as represented by his Secretary of State James Madison (4th President) regarding the presidential appointment by John Adams (2nd President) of Mr. Marbury in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803)  Page 5 U. S. 163.  I quote:
The very essence of civil liberty certainly consists in the right of every individual to claim the protection of the laws whenever he receives an injury. One of the first duties of government is to afford that protection. In Great Britain, the King himself is sued in the respectful form of a petition, and he never fails to comply with the judgment of his court.
In the third volume of his Commentaries, page 23, Blackstone states two cases in which a remedy is afforded by mere operation of law.
"In all other cases," he says, "it is a general and indisputable rule that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded.[8]"
And afterwards, page 109 of the same volume, he says,
"I am next to consider such injuries as are cognizable by the Courts of common law. And herein I shall for the present only remark that all possible injuries whatsoever that did not fall within the exclusive cognizance of either the ecclesiastical, military, or maritime tribunals are, for that very reason, within the cognizance of the common law courts of justice, for it is a settled and invariable principle in the laws of England that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress." Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 (1803)  Page 5 U. S. 163
I have been unable to get the Protection of the Laws and a remedy for proper redress of the injury because of the Judge Made Law of Absolute Immunity for the Judges in the United States of America.
The Judiciary has been playing word games for the last 140 years.  The Judiciary in 1871 established what is idiomatically referred to as the Judge Made Law of Absolute Immunity for themselves with the ruling in Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 335 (1871).  The judiciary has since the Bradley ruling been exercising sovereign impunity[9].  I say sovereign because they have regularly disregard the verbiage of the constitution and statutory law and rewritten the constitution and statutory law to their benefit.  For example in Constitutional law, the 14th Amendment’s references “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” the Supreme Court of the United States only selectively enforces that e.g., in regard to domestic law, the Supreme Court refuses to apply the 14th Amendment thus “Jane Crow[10]” discrimination rules the Civil Courts of the states.  In federal statute law Title 42 § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights the statute reads “Every person who, under color of any statute” but the Judiciary as affirmed by the Supreme Court enforces it as “Every person (excluding the Judiciary) who, under color of any statute.”  I will discuss later in more detail the Judiciary’s repeal of the writ of habeas corpus, the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and of TITLES OF NOBILITY with the establishment of the Judge Made Law of Absolute Judicial Immunity.  Believe me they are sovereign and they write the laws at their discretion. 
The Judiciary acts with impunity,[11] because as defined by Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 335 (1871)This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly ” it thus provides for the protection and/or benefit of a malicious or corrupt judge, thus it is impunity[12] WITHOUT conditions, not immunity with conditions.
Beyond the word play that has empowered the Judiciary to ignore the Constitution and the Statute law for the last 140 years, the Judiciary has confused immunity with a need for independence i.e., the departmental separation of powers in the Constitution for the United States of America.  I concur with Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist Paper #78, when he asserted, “The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited Constitution,” that is true.   The Courts need to be independent of the TWO other branches of the Government.  But the Judicial Power, the Executive Power and the Legislative Power all need to be obedient to tenor of their commission under the Constitution for the United States of America as the GOVERNING Fundamental Rule of Law.
The Judiciary using their delegated authority derived from the Constitution for the United States of America has established the Judge Made Law of Absolute Judicial Immunity for itself from the fundamental rule of law, the Constitution for the United States of America.   That is by definition an act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised. 
Immunity from the Constitution was never granted nor even considered as a possibility by the founding fathers.  It was assumed that the Constitution would be the Fundamental Law governing all.  Again I quote from Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist Paper #78:
There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative (judicial or executive) act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
The Judiciary has usurped power outside the tenor of their commission with their assertion of absolute immunity / sovereign impunity[13] e.g., “This immunity applies even when the judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly, and it “is not for the protection or benefit of a malicious or corrupt judge, but for the benefit of (the people being robbed and disenfranchised) the public, whose interest it is that the judges should be at liberty (to act without regard to the law or the rights of “We the People”) to exercise their functions with independence and without fear of consequences.” ((Scott v. Stansfield, L.R. 3 Ex. 220, 223 (1868), quoted in Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350.), (Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)) and (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991)). 
Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Paper #84 defined “the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny” as “The creation of crimes after the commission of the fact, or, in other words, the subjecting of men to punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice of arbitrary imprisonments
He was at the time defending “The establishment of the writ of habeas corpus, the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and of TITLES OF NOBILITY…” as he proposed in the newly drafted though not ratified Constitution for the United States of America. 
Our Judiciary became malicious, corrupt and incompetent tyrants with when they repealed the writ of habeas corpus, the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and of TITLES OF NOBILITY with the Judge Made Law of Absolute Judicial Immunity a.k.a., sovereign impunity.  The Supreme Court with Bradley v. Fisher has acted with sovereign absolute power and repealed constitutional guarantee of the writ of habeas corpus, the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and of TITLES OF NOBILITY with the establishment of the Judge Made Law of Absolute Judicial Immunity.  I again quote, a judge of a criminal court, invested with general criminal jurisdiction over offenses committed within a certain district, should hold a particular act to be a public offense, which is not by the law made an offense[14], and proceed to the arrest and trial of a party charged with such act, or should sentence a party convicted to a greater punishment than that authorized by the law[15] upon its proper construction, no personal liability[16] to civil action for such acts would attach to the judgeBradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 13 Wall. 335 335 (1871) Page 80 U. S. 352
Judges admit, with their hubris unrestrained, some of them are going to be “malicious or corrupt,” we have to endure their impunity[17] for the greater good.  The greater good is the denial of the Protection of the Laws, The Essence of Civil Liberty[18].  Judges, by their own self aggrandizing assertion, need to be able to act without regard to the very laws “We the People” have established to limit their actions.  Judges assert they need to be able to act “with independence and without fear of consequences,” to be able to break the law, deny our RIGHTS at will and that “We the People” can or should do nothing to oppose them.  That is INSANITY!!!
The Rule of Law stands above the Judicial Power.  I quote from the Constitution for the United States of America Article III Section 2 “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties.”  To remove that limitation with absolute immunity and put the Judicial Power above the Rule of the Constitution is unconscionable.  To put anyone above the constitution is unconscionable. 
I remind you President Barrack Hussein Obama it is your duty as President of the United States per United States Constitution Article 2. Section 3, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”  The Constitution as the Fundamental Law of the United States of America is not being faithfully executed because the Judiciary has proclaimed the Judge Made Law of Absolute Judicial Immunity for themselves and trickle down immunity for others without condition or authority to do so.  This immunity is not expediting an efficient judicial process; this immunity is empowering the malicious, the corrupt and the incompetent to the detriment of “We the People.”  It is your presidential responsibility to see that the Laws be faithfully executed.  For “We the People” have established a constitutional government “of the people, by the people, for the people[19].“  You are OUR only hope to check the rogue element in our Judiciary that has authorized and institutionalized the malicious, the corrupt and the incompetent tyrants in the United States of America’s Justice Department!!
I include by reference my latest appeal to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals 10-1947, my Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 and the Original Appeal the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals 08-1823.  I have again, only this morning been denied (Case 10-1947) in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals.  I need HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
The Judiciary in United States of America is The Most Corrupt Organization in the World.
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.


Dave@DGJee.com


David G. Jeep

enclosure
      The Most Corrupt Organization in the World
     
cc: Justice Sonia Sotomayor
      e-mailed to a select group of favorites
            file


[1] More about this later, but Article 1, Section 9, 7th paragraph “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States”, Article 1, Section 10, 1st paragraph “No State shall… grant any Title of Nobility”.
[2] Most of the underlined “links” are as listed in my blog http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/ e.g., “Do you want to peacefully settle the Civil Rights issue?”.  They are available there if this is a hard copy and not an electronic copy. I can and will provide the full PDF Court records via e-mail request to Dave@DGJeep.com
[3] I was Arrested in violation of my First Amendment Right to Free Speech... for asking for my rightsI had requested “the Protection of the Law” per my Civil Rights via a quote from the FBI Mission Statement. I was charged as Case #4:09-cr-00659-CDP and held for 411 days until the charges were dismissed.
[6] Amendment XIV US Constitution
[7] Coram non judice, Latin for "not in the presence of a judge," is a legal term typically used to indicate a legal proceeding without a judge, with improper venue, or without jurisdiction.
[9] In this argument it is asserted that immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions, where as impunity and or absolute immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment WITHOUT conditions
[10] “Jane Crow” discrimination is the preference for the Woman’s maternal rights in Family Law OVER the Man’s paternal rights in property and custody matters in civil court.
[11] In this argument it is asserted that immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions, where as impunity and or absolute immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment WITHOUT conditions
[12] In this argument it is asserted that immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions, where as impunity and or absolute immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment WITHOUT conditions
[13] In this argument it is asserted that immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions, where as impunity and or absolute immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment WITHOUT conditions
[14] “The creation of crimes after the commission of the fact” A Judge made law the repeal of the Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws, US Constitution Section 9 - No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
[15] “the practice of arbitrary imprisonments” A Judge made law the repeal of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, US Constitution Section 9 - The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
[16] “no personal liability” A Judge made law the repeal of the Constitutional prohibition for a Title of Nobility.  Immunity is in fact a Title of Nobility in the terminology of Colonial Times and the Constitution of the United States of America
[17] In this argument it is asserted that immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment on certain conditions, where as impunity and or absolute immunity expresses an exemption from criminal prosecution or legal liability or punishment WITHOUT conditions
[19] President Abraham Lincoln The Gettysburg Address, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania November 19, 1863