Saturday, April 14, 2012

Impeachment & The Supreme Court

Impeachment
&
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]
Saturday, April 14, 2012, 9:36:25 AM

     We the People have fallen under the despotic[4] spell of the concentrated power[5] in the Supreme Court that has created ABSOLUTE POWER from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the "malicious or corrupt" judges,[6] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [7] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[8] and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[9]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [10] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.
     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 on "Judicial Authority":
     "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."
Impeachment was to be used as an integral part of the checks and balances of We the People's constitutional government!!!    
     How can the Supreme Court, a delegated authority, acting under a sworn to constitutional commission award themselves and others "absolute immunity"[11] from said constitutional commission to "do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid"[12] i.e., the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America?"[13] by DENYING the constitutional assurance of governmental accountability with 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, law and equity?[14]
     We the People have fallen under the despotic[15] spell of the concentrated power[16] in the Supreme Court that has created ABSOLUTE POWER from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the "malicious or corrupt" judges,[17] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [18] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[19] and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[20]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [21] acting under color of law to wit, 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,[22] 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[23] grant of "Absolute Immunity,"[24] by and for ministers, is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial, unconstitutional and "unlawful Conspiracy"[25] "before out of Court"[26] to obfuscate "false and malicious Persecutions."[27]
     "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. [28]  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[29]

Impeach the current Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[30]
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice[31] 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,[32]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to a redress of grievances,[33] with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[34] 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"[35]" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[36] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,"[37] "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!!!!!!  I have been kicking and screaming for nearly 8 years.  I have suffered through 411 days of illegal 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 Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115."
        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),[38] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [39] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98)[40] and myself (USCA8 No. 11-2425).[41]   The fact that "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners"[42] PROVES "We the People" have NO ENFORCEABLE RIGHTS IN America today!!!!!!!!!!!!


DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Saturday, April 14, 2012, 9:36:25 AM, 2012 04-14-12 Impeachment & The Supreme Court REV 00

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge, 1610 Olive Street, Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
(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] 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!!!!!!!!!!
[5] "All 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 certainty of corruption by full authority.  There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949), Essays on Freedom and Power, Boston: Beacon Press, p. 364
[6] 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.
[7] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[8] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) Police ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[9] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[10] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[11] "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)
[12] 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"
[13] 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
[14] 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.
[15] 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!!!!!!!!!!
[16] "All 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 certainty of corruption by full authority.  There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949), Essays on Freedom and Power, Boston: Beacon Press, p. 364
[17] 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.
[18] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[20] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[21] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[22] 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.
[23] 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.
[24] "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
[25] 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."
[29] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[31] The redress of a justifiable grievance REQUIRES a remedy in BOTH law and equity
[32] 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
[33] 1st Amendment, "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
[34] 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.
[35] "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
[37] 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.
[41] See also USCA8 07-2614,08-1823,10-1947,11-2425 and Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115&11-8211
[42] "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners" and 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

--
Thanks in advance

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316

Thursday, April 12, 2012

“Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms,” The Declaration of Independence

"Petitioned for Redress
in the most humble terms,"
The Declaration of Independence
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 is ever truly safe."[1]
Thursday, April 12, 2012, 11:01:04 AM

         King George III's governments unjustified[3] assertion of immunity by his rejection of We the People's "repeated Petitions"[4] for a redress of grievances "in the most humble terms" with the Declaration of Independence,[5] is the raisons d'etre, and thus the timely[6], certain and indisputable judicially binding precedent, for We the People's CONSTITUTIONAL intent to establish Justice[7] and Due Process of Law[8] with the First Amendment's LAWFULLY UN-ABRIDGE-ABLE "right of the people":

         "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." [9]

         Additionally 15 years after the ratification of the constitution Chief Justice John Marshal in 1803 reconfirmed and established precedent for "the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), Page 5 U. S. 163 when he asserted the King, the sovereign / the government, could be "sued in the respectful form of a petition":
"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."[10]

For the Supreme Court FIVE[11] to arbitrarily limit and or deny the lawfully established UN-ABRIDGE-ABLE Due Process First Amendment right of redress for the attempted MURDER[12] of Mr. Thompson, via the denial of his conceded constitutional rights, is criminal and thus impeachable BAD BEHAVIOR.[13]  For the Supreme Court FIVE[14] to assert prior precedent only establishes the ongoing CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY[15] AGAINST RIGHTS!!!!  John Thompson's First Amendment right was UNJUSTIFIABLY denied by the Supreme Court FIVE[16] in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571.[17]  The Supreme Court FIVE[18] and Connick both[19] acknowledged the prior deprivation of Thompson's rights in the facts of the case.  The on going CRIMINAL[20] 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 (Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 and now 11-8211).  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."[21]  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 UN-ABRIDGE-ABLE, 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."[22]

Do "We the People" have to fight another REVOLUTIONARY WAR for our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
I went to JAIL for asking this before,
Tell Me Again Why I Shouldn't Blow Up a

Now there are members of the congress that want to assert they are attempting to address this issue.  Senator Jim Webb (D VA) sponsored the bill, "The National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2009" (it is three years later, the "National Criminal Justice Commission Act of 2011,"[23] still has not passed and NOTHING HAS HAPPENED), 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 potential that over whelming majority of the rest of the world, 6,000,000,000 people, are right and we, 300,000,000 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-ABRIDGE-ABLE by congress:

         "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." [25]

         How can the Supreme Court, a delegated authority, acting under a constitutional commission award themselves and others "absolute immunity"[26] from said constitutional commission to "do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid"[27] i.e., the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America?"[28] by DENYING the constitutional assurance of governmental accountability with 1st and 7th Amendment Justice, law and equity?[29]
         We the People have fallen under the despotic[30] spell of the concentrated power[31] in the Supreme Court that created ABSOLUTE POWER from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the "malicious or corrupt" judges,[32] the "malicious or dishonest" prosecutor, [33] the "knowingly false testimony by police officers"[34] and "all (malicious, corrupt, dishonest and incompetent[35]) persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process" [36] acting under color of law to wit, 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,[37] 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[38] grant of "Absolute Immunity,"[39] by and for ministers, is a massive, at the highest levels, ministerial, unconstitutional and "unlawful Conspiracy"[40] "before out of Court"[41] to obfuscate "false and malicious Persecutions."[42]
         "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. [43]  Mr. Lowe of Kansas and Mr. Rainey of South Carolina respectively said it originally in 1871[44]

Impeach the current Black Robed Royalist Supreme Court FIVE[45]
for condoning the denial of a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to justice[46] 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,[47]" denying the establishment of justice and abridging a Constitutionally secured and congressionally un-abridge-able right to a redress of grievances,[48] with their deprivation of substantive 7th Amendment[49] 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"[50]" for the "deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America"[51] e.g., "To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process,"[52] "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!!!!!!  I have been kicking and screaming for nearly 8 years.  I have suffered through 411 days of illegal 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 Petition for a Wirt of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115."
        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),[53] Mr. Smith (No. 10-8145), [54] Mr. al-Kidd (No. 10–98)[55] and myself (USCA8 No. 11-2425).[56]   The fact that "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners"[57] PROVES "We the People" have NO ENFORCEABLE RIGHTS IN America today!!!!!!!!!!!!


DGJeep "The Earth and everything that's in it" (www.dgjeep.blogspot.com)
Thursday, April 12, 2012, 11:01:04 AM, 2012 04-11-12 Petitioned for Redress with Marbury V Madison

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge, 1610 Olive Street, Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316
(314) 514-5228


[1] "Damages" By Dahlia Lithwick, Slate, posted Monday, Aug. 8, 2011, at 7:22 PM ET underlining added
[2] 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
[3] I would assert the Magna Carta (§ 61) 1215, Magna Carta 1297, The Petition of right 1628, BOTH denied Sovereign Immunity and assured the unregulated justifiable "lawful judgement of his peers" as regards the petition at a minimum!!!!!
[4] The Petition of Right 1628 has been considered a declaratory act which permitted an individual harmed by the government to take action against the crown since 1628 and as reconfirmed by the Long Parliament in 1641.
[5] "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] A Revolutionary War and 13 years later, 1789 Ratification of the Constitution and 1776 Declaration of Independence
[7] "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."
[8] V and XIV Amendments to the Constitution.
[9] The First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America
[10] Underlining and emphasis added
[12] It should be noted that ATTEMPTED MURDER involved 18 years in prison, 14 years on DEATH ROW.
[13] 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] 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.
[17] 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.
[20] 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.
[22] The First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America
[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
[25] The First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America
[26] "In short, the common law provided 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)
[27] 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"
[28] 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
[29] 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.
[30] 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!!!!!!!!!!
[31] "All 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 certainty of corruption by full authority.  There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." Lord Acton, John Emerich Edward (1949), Essays on Freedom and Power, Boston: Beacon Press, p. 364
[32] 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.
[33] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[35] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grant of malice, corruption and dishonesty!!!!
[36] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for "all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process"
[37] 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.
[38] 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.
[39] "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
[40] 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."
[44] Cong.Globe, 42d Cong., 1st Sess., 374 & 394
[46] The redress of a justifiable grievance REQUIRES a remedy in BOTH law and equity
[47] 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
[48] 1st Amendment, "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
[49] 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.
[50] "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
[52] 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.
[56] See also USCA8 07-2614,08-1823,10-1947,11-2425 and Writs of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115&11-8211
[57] "With 5% of the world's population, our country now houses nearly 25% of the world's reported prisoners" and 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




--
Thanks in advance

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
http://dgjeep.blogspot.com/
E-mail is preferred Dave@DGJeep.com, DGJeep@DGJeep.com
(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316