Congressman Wm. Lacy Clay by HAND
President Barack Hussein Obama by US Mail
Neal K. Katyal, Acting Solicitor Gen. by US MailSenator Claire McCaskill by US Mail
Eric H. Holder, Jr. Attorney General by US Mail
Re: "Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms"
The TIMELY, certain and indisputable Judicially BINDING PRECEDENT
Impeach the Supreme Court FIVE[1]
Dear People,
I am sure this seems like nothing to you. It is about A Constitutionally guaranteed Civil Right!!! "We the People" in writing the First Amendment's guaranteed ourselves:
"Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"
sought to establish Justice[2] via Due Process of Law[3] for those of US that would, unavoidably, acknowledging human imperfection, eventually be aggrieved. The idea that anyone would ever assert "Sovereign Immunity" or abridge a constitutional amendment per Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571's version of "limited liability" for a constitutionally DECLARED and ESTABLISHED right in a government of the people, by the people, for the people was and is insanity!!!!!!!!!!!!
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance."Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
cc: a select group of e-mail favorites, file - Thursday, April 28, 2011, 4:35:51 PM
enclosure:"Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms"
"Petitioned for Redress
Thursday, April 28, 2011, 4:35:51 PM
King George III's government's unjustified[5] assertion of immunity by his rejection of We the People's "repeated Petitions" for a redress of grievances "in the most humble terms," the Declaration of Independence,[6] is the raisons d'etre, and thus the TIMELY[7], certain and indisputable judicially BINDING PRECEDENT, for We the People's CONSTITUTIONAL authority to establish Justice[8] and Due Process of Law[9] with the First Amendment's LEGALLY UN-ABRIDGABLE redress of grievances. The DENIAL of the repeated petitions for redress of grievances by the colonist in 1776 formed the precedent for the First Amendment guarantee. :
"Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
For the Supreme Court FIVE[10] to arbitrarily limit and or deny the lawfully established UN-ABRIDGABLE Due Process First Amendment right of redress for the attempted MURDER[11] of Mr. Thompson, via the agreed denial of his constitutional rights, is criminal and thus impeachable BAD BEHAVIOR.[12] For the Supreme Court FIVE[13] to assert prior precedent only establishes the ongoing CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY[14] AGAINST RIGHTS!!!! John Thompson's First Amendment right was UNJUSTIFIABLY denied by the Supreme Court FIVE[15] in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571.[16] The Supreme Court FIVE[17] and Connick both[18] acknowledged the prior deprivation of Thompson's rights in the facts of the case. The on going CRIMINAL[19] conspiracy against rights then denied him the already established JUSTIFIED, Due Process, First Amendment Jury Award "for a redress of grievances."
My rights have been denied SIMILARLY for 7 ½ years (Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115). They KIDNAPPED my son, took my home, sullied my father's good name. They took EVERYTHING I ever cared about!!!!!!!!!!!! They did it ILLEGALLY and UNCONSTITUTIONALLY by denying me "rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws."[20]. The facts of my case have never been disputed nor can they be. The evidence is unimpeachable. Additionally I have been denied my JUSTIFIABLE, Due Process, legally UNABRIDGABLE, First Amendment right "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
How do victims re-establish themselves after the criminal denial of a conspiracy against right under color of law without the First Amendment's assurance:
"Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The Court has often acknowledged[21] that the alternative to judicial process is force. Therefore, in so abridging the right of the people to obtain just redress through the compulsory process of law, the judiciary is setting the people up for violence against government by refusing to hear their cries for justice. That is our government wagging a war of oppression against its own people.
Do "We the People" have to fight another
REVOLUTIONARY WAR?
I went to JAIL for asking this before,
"Tell Me Again Why I Shouldn't Blow Up a
There are members of the congress that want to assert they are attempting to address this issue, NOT!! Senator Jim Webb (D VA) sponsored the bill, "The National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2009" (three years later, the "National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2011,"[23] still has not), to take a HARD look at our Justice system in regard to this and other issues. "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners. We currently incarcerate 756 inmates per 100,000 residents, a rate nearly five times the average worldwide of 158 for every 100,000.[24]" I refuse to believe we are 5 times as criminal as any other country. I REFUSE to believe that our criminal Justice system is 5 times better!!!! You could REASONABLY make a case based on the fact that the over whelming majority (22 world to 1 USA) of the rest of the world, 6,894,027,231 people, are right and we, 312,706,226 people, are wrong; that 4 out of 5 of the people we currently have in jail have a claim that their rights have been denied!!!
BUT, this issue is UN-ABRIDGABLE by congress:
"Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
"The Right of Petition is the right to substantive justice between government and governed." We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"" for the deprivation of "any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[25] e.g., To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process, The Exclusionary Rule, Grounds for Impeachment, Jeep v Obama, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947, Jeep v Jones Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115
DGJeep"The Earth and everything that's in it" (http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/)
Thursday, April 28, 2011, 4:35:51 PM 2011 04-29-11 The TIMELY , certain and indisputable Judicially BINDING PRECEDENT REV 03.doc
[1] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[2] "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
[3] V and XIV Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America.
[4] "We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury" IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
[6] "We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury" IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
[7] A Revolutionary War and 13 years later, 1789 Ratification of the Constitution and 1776 Declaration of Independence
[8] "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
[9] V and XIV Amendments to the Constitution.
[10] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[11] It should be noted that ATTEMPTED MURDER involved 18 years in prison, 14 years on DEATH ROW.
[12] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights is a crime -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap (they aided and abetted in the kidnapping of my son), aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they aided and abetted in the attempted murder of Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be
sentenced to death.
[13] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[14] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights is a crime -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap (they aided and abetted in the kidnapping of my son), aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they aided and abetted in the attempted murder of Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be
sentenced to death.
[15] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[16] Let's not get pedantic here and assert that he used the WRONG shibboleth by asking only for his Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985 right. Justice, to fulfill its purpose has to be self-executing i.e., "We the People" enforce the law without a required shibboleth. "We the People" arrest bank robbers without a shibboleth from the victim.
[17] Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts
[19] TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PART I—CRIMES, CHAPTER 13—CIVIL RIGHTS § 241. A Conspiracy against rights is a crime -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap (they aided and abetted in the kidnapping of my son), aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill (they aided and abetted in the attempted murder of Mr. Thompson), they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be
sentenced to death.
[21] United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196 (1882) Page 106 U. S. 219 "In such cases, there is no safety for the citizen except in the protection of the judicial tribunals for rights which have been invaded by the officers of the government professing to act in its name. There remains to him but the alternative of resistance, which may amount to crime."
[23] Additionally sponsored by Mr. BROWN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. FRANKEN, Mr. GRAHAM, Mrs. HAGAN, Mr. KERRY, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEVIN, Mrs. McCASKILL, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. SHAHEEN, Mr. UDALL, Mr. WARNER, Mr. WHITEHOUSE, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. MENENDEZ, and Mrs. MURRAY
[24] "Why We Must Fix Our Prisons", By Senator Jim Webb, Parade Magazine published: 03/29/2009, U.S. Imprisons One in 100 Adults, Report Finds New York Times, By ADAM LIPTAK, Published: February 29, 2008, Our Real Prison Problem. Why are we so worried about Gitmo? Newsweek by Dahlia Lithwick Published June 5, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment