Monday, April 16, 2012

The Blessings of Liberty and The Supreme Court



The Blessings of Liberty
and
The Supreme Court
I sometimes feel like the waif in “The Emperor’s New Cloths”
AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN SEE IT??
 “A country in which nobody is ever really responsible is
a country in which nobody[1] is ever truly safe.”[2]
Wednesday, April 18, 2012, 6:16:31 AM

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”[4] 
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.”[5]
Liberty as a right can only be sustained for an individual, as an absolute, in isolation.  Once the individual enters civilization Liberty, as an absolute right, has to be limited, by justice, for the individual as it relates to civilization i.e., I am not at Liberty to infringe on your LibertyJustice is the limitation of our civil liberty rights.  Civil rights are not awarded for good behavior; civil rights are the inalienable minimum that can not be taken away.  The most important, although seldom expressed right of the individuals is the right to Justice.[6]  “Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.[7]  To secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, Liberty as an individual’s right has to be limited by Justice and the rule of law reckonable[8] by a person of “ordinary intelligence.”[9]  Governments are incorporated among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, persons of “ordinary intelligence,”[10] to maximize individual Liberty and establish Justice to limit it.
The concentration of power in a single person or in an oligarchy e.g., the United States Supreme Court has over time proved itself to be antithetical to the Blessings of Liberty.  Concentrated Power becomes self indulgent and thus corrupted by concentrated self-centered interests.  Lord Acton expressed it most eloquently:
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.”[11]
For this reason “We the People” attempted to disperse power with the Constitution of the United States of America by establishing three separate branches of Government, with an inherent system of checks and balances among them, the legislature (Article. I., Section. 1., All legislative Powers. e.g., impeachment), the executive (Article. II., Section. 1., The executive Power), and the judicial[12] (Article III., Section. 1., The judicial Power).
The checks and balances, within the constitutional government of the United States of America, as in civilization at large, was suppose to limit Liberty as an absolute right for any of the branches of government.  The legislature makes law, has impeachment[13] authority for the other two branches and has limited tenure based on electability, the executive then administers the law and has limited tenure based on electability and, supposedly, the judiciary administers justice, via the ancient, established, procedural and substantive Due Process of Law, to settle disputes that arise under the law in support of the free-standing rule of law given “a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice,” [14] liberty and justice for all DOES NOT have limited tenure. 
The exact wording of the constitution is “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority.[15]  The judiciary[16] is to settle all issues presented based on the Blessings of Liberty and Justice under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made.  The assertions “establish Justice and the Blessings of Liberty” are preeminent in the preamble to the constitution and thus are redundant to “under this Constitution.
The establishment of “Justice” was to be based on Due Process of Law.  Due Process of Law is an established, ancient, procedural and substantive justice system for the dispassionate protection of rights. 
All constitutionally commissioned federal employees take the oath of office 5 U.S.C. §3331
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
The Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 (28 U. S. C. § 453) established additionally the oath of office for constitutionally commissioned judges as:
" I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States.  So help me God."
In spite of all the checks and balances, in spite of having sworn to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States, the Supreme Court has, with unashamed hubris and sophistry,[17] circumvented the checks and balances created to constrain them, and created ABSOLUTE POWER[18] from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the “malicious or corrupt” judges,[19] the “malicious or dishonest” prosecutor,[20] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers"[21] and “all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[22]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [23] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
Because of the dysfunction in our Legislature that has been sustained through earmarks, secret holds and the filibuster, our Legislature cannot even do its primary job, passing effective legislation; much less effectively assert their power of impeachment.[24]  The delays caused by earmarks, secret holds and the filibuster has put us decades behind the rest of the world as relates to Judicial Administration, Civil Rights and Health Care.  With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners[25]  and the current state of our too expensive healthcare system PROVES IT!  Are we 5 times as criminal? Is our justice system 5 times as good?  Are our streets therefore 5 times as safe?  Is our opened overpriced end of life care worth the cost or would the money be better spent on well care?  

I read an article in the Washington Post “Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept.” By Spencer S. Hsu, Published: April 16, 2012.  The Washington Post exposes the Justice Department’s corruption, malice and incompetence[26] as regards 40 years of corrupt, malicious and incompetent[27] forensic analysis, and I have to laugh to keep from crying.  Why would they, the justice system as a whole, not lie?  It is in their interest to get convictions and they can not be held accountable for the “malicious or corrupt” judges,[28] the “malicious or dishonest” prosecutor, [29] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers"[30] and “all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[31]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [32] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.

I have been fighting for EIGHT years to get the Justice System, from local state court to the United States Supreme Court to acknowledge and take responsibility for their CORRUPTION, DISHONESTY, MALICE and INCOMPETENCE.[33]  I have pushed the issue, with uncontested undisputable evidence in hand, 4 times through the 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals 07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1947 and 11-2425.  I have been to the United States Supreme Court twice with Writs of Certiorari 07-11115 and 11-8211, with uncontested undisputable evidence in hand and they REFUSE to acknowledge it much less take responsibility for it. 

Justice and Civil rights are non-existent in the United States of America today.
We the People now live at the discretion of the ABSOLUTE POWER of the judiciary that has been criminally created from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the “malicious or corrupt” judges,[34] the “malicious or dishonest” prosecutor, [35] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers"[36] and “all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[37]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [38] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.  The ABSOLUTE POWER enable by the deliberate usurpation[39] of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY by the Supreme Court for itself and others has enable ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
The Supreme Court, a delegated authority, under and criminally contrary to a sworn to constitutional commission, has awarded themselves and others “absolute immunity[40] from said constitutional commission to “do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid[41] i.e., the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[42] by DENYING the constitutional checks and balances of We the People with the assurance of governmental accountability 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, law and equity?[43]
We the People have fallen under the despotic[44] spell of the concentrated power in the Supreme Court that has created ABSOLUTE POWER[45] from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the “malicious or corrupt” judges,[46] the “malicious or dishonest” prosecutor, [47] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers"[48] and “all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[49]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [50] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.  The ABSOLUTE POWER enable by the deliberate usurpation[51] of ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY by the Supreme Court for itself and others has enable ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.

See Petition for a Writ of Certiorari 11-8211 Jeep v. Obama

I sometimes feel like the waif in “The Emperor’s New Cloths.”  AM I THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN SEE IT??
ANY assertion of personal ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, without proof of divinity, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity,[52] in a government of free and equal persons on THIS PLANET!!!!! 
ANY assertion of governmental ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, acknowledging un-avoidable human fallibility, is a fraud, by any standard of Justice, law and equity, in a government of the people, by the people and for the people on THIS PLANET!!!!!
The ministerial[53] grant of Absolute Immunity,”[54] by and for ministers, is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial, unconstitutional and “unlawful Conspiracy[55]before out of Court[56] to obfuscate “false and malicious Persecutions.”[57]
Immunity is given to crime, and the records of the public tribunals are searched in vain for any evidence of effective redress.” “The courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity.”   I say it NOW, 2011!!! Justice William O. Douglas said it in 1961 and 1967. [58]  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[59]
Impeach the current Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[60]
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice[61] and
"fraud upon the court."
Before they have a chance to screw-up Healthcare for
100 years!!!!!!
Impeach the current Supreme Court FIVE for verifiable NOT "good Behaviour,[62]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to a redress of grievances,[63] with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[64] justice between the government and the people, Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011 and "fraud upon the court" with Ashcroft v. al-Kidd No. 10–98  Decided May 31, 2011!!!
        The Right of Petition is the right to substantive justice between the government and the people.  We do not have any individually enforceable rights in this country, "Everybody, BUT the innocent victim, has "ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY"[65]" for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America[66] e.g., “To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,”[67] “The Exclusionary Rule,” “Grounds for Impeachment.”
        Most of the 99% of Americans have not had the pleasure and are silently intimidated by the prospect of being dragged through our corrupt COURTS kicking and screaming!!!!!!  This should not be about the shibboleth of whether this is a writ of coram nobis, writ of audita querela or writ of habeas corpusI have been kicking and screaming for nearly 8 years with undisputed evidence of the illegal and unconstitutional Judicial,[68] Prosecutorial,[69] Police,[70] Federal Constitutionally Commissioned Officers[71] and private[72] misconduct.  I have suffered through 411 days of illegal FEDERAL incarceration, 4 years of homelessness and two psychological examinations.  I ask you to review Jeep v Obama 8th Circuit Court of Appeals case #11-2425, Jeep v United States of America 10-1947,” Jeep v Bennett 08-1823, “Jeep v Jones 07-2614, and the most humble Petitions for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 and 11-8211.”
        I have referenced “To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,” in several of my papers, I do so only because the facts of the case in “To Kill a Mocking Bird” are generally known.  The abuses are happening EVERYDAY in REAL LIFE Mr. Thompson (No. 09–571),[73] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [74] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98)[75] and me (USCA8 No. 11-2425).[76]   The fact that “With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners[77] PROVES the existence of ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION; “We the People” have NO ENFORCEABLE RIGHTS IN America today!!!!!!!!!!!!

DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, April 18, 2012, 6:16:31 AM, 2012 04-18-12 The Blessings of Liberty And  The Supreme Court  REV 99RX

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge, 1610 Olive Street, Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
E-Mail Dave@DGJeep.com (preferred)
(314) 514-5228


[1]And if you think that is a national problem, consider that the United States is by far the World's greatest power; it is not accountable to its own people for its abuses of power, and that abuse of power flows freely into international circles. Given that reality, there is not a nation in the world that should not fear us in the same way that a reasonable person fears a child with a gun.” 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. ( Summer 2000 ) JOHN E. WOLFGRAM e.g., George Bush’s false representations of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder” by Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi -  Underlining and parenthetical text added for emphasis.
[2] “Damages” By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate, posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining and foot note added
[3] Mr. Thompson in the New York Times in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011
[4] The Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
[5] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States of America ratified, on June 21, 1788.
[6] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered.  I have been forced into poverty, homelessness for FOUR YEARS!  The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able justifiable redress of grievance from the government: Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  The 7th Amendment secures the right to settle all suits: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law” assures justice as regards equity.
[7] FEDERALIST No. 51, “The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments” by James Madison, For the Independent Journal.  Wednesday, February 6, 1788. 
[8]Predictability, or as Llewellyn put it, "reckonability," is a needful characteristic of any law worthy of the name.” Antonin Scalia: The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules, 56 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1175, 1175-81 (1989)
[9] SYKES v. UNITED STATES Cite as: 564 U. S. ____ (2011) 7, SCALIA, J., dissenting, United States v. Batchelder, 442 U. S. 123 “It is a fundamental tenet of due process that "[n]o one may be required at peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes." Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U. S. 451, 306 U. S. 453  (1939). A criminal statute is therefore invalid if it "fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice that his contemplated conduct (probable cause) is forbidden." United States v. Harriss, 347 U. S. 612, 347 U. S. 617  (1954). See Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U. S. 385, 269 U. S. 391-393 (1926); Papachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U. S. 156, 405 U. S. 162  (1972); Dunn v. United States, ante at 442 U. S. 112-113.  (Underlining and parenthetical text added for emphasis)
[10] SYKES v. UNITED STATES Cite as: 564 U. S. ____ (2011) 7, SCALIA, J., dissenting, ibid.

[11] John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton, KCVO, DL (10 January 1834 – 19 June 1902), known as Lord Acton, wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, April 1887 (emphasis and underlining added)

[12] the administration of justice: judicial proceedings; the judicial system.
[13] ESPECIALLY as impeachment relates to the JUDICIARY with otherwise unlimited tenure I quote from Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, “And the inference is greatly fortified by the consideration of the important constitutional check which the power of instituting impeachments in one part of the legislative body, and of determining upon them in the other, would give to that body upon the members of the judicial department. This is alone a complete security. There never can be danger that the judges, by a series of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment of the body intrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their presumption, by degrading them from their stations. While this ought to remove all apprehensions on the subject, it affords, at the same time, a cogent argument for constituting the Senate a court for the trial of impeachments.” Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, “The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority” From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 stated that impeachment was to be used as an integral check for “Judicial Authority”
[14] SYKES v. UNITED STATES Cite as: 564 U. S. ____ (2011) 7, SCALIA, J., dissenting, ibid.
[15] The Constitution for the United States of America, Article III., Section. 1.
[16] the system of courts of justice in a country
[17] As regards Judges Thomas Jefferson said “the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice” (letter To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[18] "All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949) wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, April 1887
[19] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[20] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[22] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[23] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[24]And the inference is greatly fortified by the consideration of the important constitutional check which the power of instituting impeachments in one part of the legislative body, and of determining upon them in the other, would give to that body upon the members of the judicial department. This is alone a complete security. There never can be danger that the judges, by a series of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment of the body intrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their presumption, by degrading them from their stations. While this ought to remove all apprehensions on the subject, it affords, at the same time, a cogent argument for constituting the Senate a court for the trial of impeachments.” Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, “The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority” From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 stated that impeachment was to be used as an integral check for “Judicial Authority”
[25]With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisonersand you have the moronic audacity to ask why???? “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
[26] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[27] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[28] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[29] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[31] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[32] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[33] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[34] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[35] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[37] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[38] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[39]And the inference is greatly fortified by the consideration of the important constitutional check which the power of instituting impeachments in one part of the legislative body, and of determining upon them in the other, would give to that body upon the members of the judicial department. This is alone a complete security. There never can be danger that the judges, by a series of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment of the body intrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their presumption, by degrading them from their stations. While this ought to remove all apprehensions on the subject, it affords, at the same time, a cogent argument for constituting the Senate a court for the trial of impeachments.” Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, “The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority” From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 stated that impeachment was to be used as an integral check for “Judicial Authority”
[40]absolute immunity from subsequent damages liability for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process.”   Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335 (parenthetical non italic text added for clarity)
[41] Alexander Hamilton June of 1788 at the ratification of the Constitution for the United States of America, The Federalist Papers No. 78, “The Judiciary Department”
[42] Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242, and Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985  The absence of exigent circumstances should be noted.  
[43] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered.  I have been forced into poverty, homelessness for FOUR YEARS!  The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able justifiable redress of grievance from the government: Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  The 7th Amendment secures the right to settle all suits: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law” assures justice as regards equity.
[44] Montesquieu in his “De l'Espirit des Lois” (1748) (The Spirit of the Law) defines three main kinds of political systems: republican, monarchical, and despotic.  Driving each classification of political system, according to Montesquieu, must be what he calls a "principle". This principle acts as a spring or motor to motivate behavior on the part of the citizens in ways that will tend to support that regime and make it function smoothly. For democratic republics (and to a somewhat lesser extent for aristocratic republics), this spring is the love of virtue -- the willingness to put the interests of the community ahead of private interests. For monarchies, the spring is the love of honor -- the desire to attain greater rank and privilege. Finally, for despotisms, the spring is the fear of the ruler.    We the People have currently despotic system in that we have NO enforceable rights in America TODAY!!!!!!!!!!
[45] "All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949) wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, April 1887
[46] Bradley v. Fisher, supra, 80 U. S. 335, 80 U. S. 349, note, at 80 U. S. 350, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 57 (1967) Judicial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY is based on a skewed reading, overlooking the noted exception that absolute ANYTHING creates, of Lord Coke, Floyd and Barker (1607) ruling from an acknowledged CORRUPT court, the Star Chamber.
[47] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[49] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[50] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[51]And the inference is greatly fortified by the consideration of the important constitutional check which the power of instituting impeachments in one part of the legislative body, and of determining upon them in the other, would give to that body upon the members of the judicial department. This is alone a complete security. There never can be danger that the judges, by a series of deliberate usurpations on the authority of the legislature, would hazard the united resentment of the body intrusted with it, while this body was possessed of the means of punishing their presumption, by degrading them from their stations. While this ought to remove all apprehensions on the subject, it affords, at the same time, a cogent argument for constituting the Senate a court for the trial of impeachments.” Alexander Hamilton in FEDERALIST No. 81, “The Judiciary Continued, and the Distribution of the Judicial Authority” From McLEAN's Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 stated that impeachment was to be used as an integral check for “Judicial Authority”
[52] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered.  I have been forced into homelessness for FOUR YEARS!  The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able redress of grievance from the government: Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  The 7th Amendment’s secures the right to settle all disputes/suits: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law” assures justice as regards equity.
[53] Ministerially created rules are SECONDARY, in a Democratic Constitutional form of government, to the will of the people as specifically expressed in the Constitution and the Statute law.  For anyone to ministerially grant immunity from the Constitution and Statute law is to act in direct conflict with the tenor of the commission under which the MINISTERIAL authority was granted.
[54] “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process” for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335
[55] Lord Coke Floyd and Barker (1607) “Judge or Justice of Peace: and the Law will not admit any proof against this vehement and violent presumption of Law, that a Justice sworn to do Justice will do injustice; but if he hath conspired before out of Court, this is extrajudicial; but due examination of Causes out of Court, and inquiring by Testimonies, Et similia, is not any Conspiracy, for this he ought to do; but subornation of Witnesses, and false and malicious Persecutions, out of Court, to such whom he knowes will be Indictors, to find any guilty, &c. amounts to an unlawful Conspiracy.”
[59] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[61] Justice without regard to equity impoverishes the victim at the expense of the evil they have suffered.  I have been forced into homelessness for FOUR YEARS!  The 1st Amendment secures the constitutional right to a lawfully un-abridge-able redress of grievance from the government: Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  The 7th Amendment’s secures the right to settle all disputes/suits: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law” assures justice as regards equity.
[62] Article III Section 1 the Constitution for the United States of America "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour" Yes it is spelled wrong in the Constitution
[63] 1st Amendment, “Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
[64] Amendment VII In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
[65] “absolute immunity… for all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process” for the “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.” Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) @ Page 460 U. S. 335
[67] Mr. Hoar of Massachusetts stated: "Now, it is an effectual denial by a State of the equal protection of the laws when any class of officers charged under the laws with their administration permanently, and as a rule, refuse to extend that protection. If every sheriff in South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) refuses to serve a writ for a colored man, and those sheriffs are kept in office year after year by the people of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri), and no verdict against them for their failure of duty can be obtained before a South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) jury, the State of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri), through the class of officers who are its representatives to afford the equal protection of the laws to that class of citizens, has denied that protection. If the jurors of South Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) constantly and as a rule refuse to do justice between man and man where the rights of a particular class of its citizens are concerned, and that State affords by its legislation no remedy, that is as much a denial to that class of citizens of the equal protection of the laws as if the State itself put on its statute book a statute enacting that no verdict should be rendered in the courts of that State in favor of this class of citizens. " Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 334.( Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 177) Senator Pratt of Indiana spoke of the discrimination against Union sympathizers and Negroes in the actual enforcement of the laws: "Plausibly and sophistically, it is said the laws of North Carolina (or now the State of Missouri) do not discriminate against them; that the provisions in favor of rights and liberties are general; that the courts are open to all; that juries, grand and petit, are commanded to hear and redress without distinction as to color, race, or political sentiment." "But it is a fact, asserted in the report, that of the hundreds of outrages committed upon loyal people through the agency of this Ku Klux organization, not one has been punished. This defect in the administration of the laws does not extend to other cases. Vigorously enough are the laws enforced against Union people. They only fail in efficiency when a man of known Union sentiments, white or black, invokes their aid. Then Justice closes the door of her temples."  Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess. p. 505. (Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961), Page 365 U. S. 178) non italic parenthetical text added fro clarity.
[68] Judge Goeke and Commissioner Jones 07-2614, Judges Bennett and Colyer, 08-1823 (combined as 10-1947 and 11-2425)
[69] Prosecutors Devin M. Ledom, W. Steven Rives, W. James Icenogle, 08-1823 (combined as 10-1947 and 11-2425)
[70] Police Alex Little, Officer Badge #920 and Tim Taylor Officer Badge #913, 08-1823 (combined as 10-1947 and 11-2425)
[71] Topped off by the criminal cover-up and denial by the Federal Justice system including the Supreme Court, the President of United states, the Attorneys General Federal and state, the FBI and USMS. 07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1946, and 11-2425
[72] Sharon G. Jeep and Kristen M. Capps 07-2614 (combined as 10-1947 and 11-2425)
[76] See also USCA8 07-2614,08-1823,10-1947,11-2425 and Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115&11-8211
[77]With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisonersand you have the moronic audacity to ask why???? “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
[78] No. 11-8211 Title: David G. Jeep, Petitioner v. Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
Docketed:           January 10, 2012
~~~Date~~~         ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oct 5 2011           Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.
Jan 24 2012        Waiver of right of respondents Barack H. Obama, President of the U. S., et al. to respond filed.
Jan 26 2012        DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 17, 2012.
Feb 21 2012        Petition DENIED.
Feb 22 2012        Petition for Rehearing filed.
Mar 21 2012        DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 13, 2012.