Friday, November 1, 2013

The Attorney General should be relentlessly prosecuting “absolute immunity” in defense of We the People’s reckonable Supreme Law of the Land - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 13-7030 Jeep v. United States!


Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Re: Judicial "absolute immunity" makes inalienable
       rights unsecured!
      The Attorney General should be relentlessly
       prosecuting "absolute immunity" in defense of
       We the People's reckonable Supreme Law of the
       Land - Petition for Writ of Certiorari 13-7030 Jeep
       v. United States!

 Dear "Uncle Tom,"



WILL YOU EVER PROSECUTE[1]
the CRIMINALS?
I hate to resort to name calling, but in this case nothing else seems to work.  I have contacted you, and your immediate supervisor, SEVERAL times on this issue!!!!  If either of you were anything more than, an “Uncle Tom,” a front for the Black Robed Royalist Judiciary you would be RELENTLESSLY prosecuting the “sense and reason”[2] of the law to QUASH “absolute immunity” at any and all opportunity.  Absolute immunity” is diametrically opposed to the Constitutional rule of Law!!!!   I mean that is your job isn’t it, to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic” via PROSECUTION[3] of the law? 

Absolute immunity” has for the last 148 years empowered the unrestrained “deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” [4]  The Black Robed Royalist Judiciary sophistry[5] asserts “strict scrutiny” for “constitutional rights” but as we both know that is just judicial sophistry without the commensurate obligatory “strict liability” to support it.  And per the “difficult problems of proof” asserted in Connick, District Attorney, et al. v. Thompson No. 09–571 Decided March 29, 2011 We the People do not even have “respondeat superior” liability to rely on for the security of our inalienable rights from our supposed “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”[6]

Let us just think about that for a second.  We the People, wrote a constitution to “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” among other things.  This constitution was almost immediately amended by a “Bill of Rights” to give further definition to the Declaration of Independence’s assertion of “certain unalienable Rights” and “the blessings of liberty.”  But somehow We the People “intended sub silentio[7] not to hold our government liable for the security of We the People’s rights?  THAT IS INSANITY - an “incredible,”[8] fantastic or delusional[9] scenario.  I know the Black Robed Royalist Judiciary’s job is a lot more fun for THEM if they can avoid any and all liability for anything they do, but that is not what We the People had planned.  We the People clearly intended to hold the “government of the people, by the people, for the people”[10] liable for said rights!  Why would We the People invest the time and effort in a constitution.

The Black Robed Royalist Judiciary is quite LITERALLY “do(ing) not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid,”[11] the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.” [12]  They have BEEN HISTORICALLY and repeatedly doing this and yet there has NEVER been an Attorney General willing to PROSECUTE the Black Robed Royalist Judiciary.  I should not need to point this out to you, a supposed African American victim of the deprivation” of RIGHTS!

We the People fought a Revolutionary War and then a Civil War investing some 646,392 lives to maintain the union devoid of slavery and establish the “Constitutional provisions, adopted in the interest of liberty and for the purpose of securing, through national legislation, if need be, rights inhering in a state of freedom and belonging to American citizenship”[13] i.e., the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to We the People’s constitution.  We the People went further and passed into law the constitutionally authorized “ex industria [14] statute law the 1866 Civil Rights Act, 14 Stat. 27-30, April 9, 1866 (now codified as Title Criminal 18, U.S.C, § 241 & 242) into the United States Code of Law to hold UNQUALIFIEDWhoevercriminally liable for the deprivation of rights under color of law, The Civil Rights Act of 1871, 17 Stat. 13, enacted April 20, 1871 (now codified as Title Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 & 1985) into the United States Code of Law to hold UNQUALIFIEDEvery personcivilly liable for the deprivation of rights under color of law and "An Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, (now codified as Civil Rights Act of 1964 Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) “The purpose of the first section of the act of Congress of March 1, 1875, was to prevent race discrimination in respect of the accommodations and facilities of inns, public conveyances, and places of public amusement. It does not assume to define the general conditions and limitations under which inns, public conveyances, and places of public amusement may be conducted, but only declares that such conditions and limitations, whatever they may be, shall not be applied so as to work a discrimination solely because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The second section provides a penalty against anyone denying, or aiding or inciting the denial, of any citizen, of that equality of right given by the first section except for reasons by law applicable to citizens of every race or color and regardless of any previous condition of servitude.”[15]

Post-Civil War We the People did everything RIGHT!  But that has all been defeated by the corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[16] actions[17] of our Black Robed Royalist Judiciary.  I mean just look at the cases, Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 7 (1868) origin Judicial criminal “Absolute Immunity” circumventing the recently enacted 1866 Civil Rights Act, Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 (1872) origin Judicial civil “Absolute Immunity circumventing the recently enacted Civil Rights Act of 1871, Blyew v. United States, 80 U.S. 581 (1871) overturned a mass murder conviction, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) overturned a conviction for a massacre/pogrom, Civil Rights Cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883) creating the ongoing Jim Crow discrimination over the necessary and properly enacted "An Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) separate and UNEQUAL clarifying segregation over the necessary and proper enacted "An Act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights." 18 Stat. 335, enacted March 1, 1875, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967) reaffirmed Judicial “Absolute Immunity”, Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 409 (1976) prosecutorial “Absolute Immunity”, Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) “Absolute Immunity” for forced sterilization, and Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (1983) “Absolute Immunity” for knowingly false testimony by police officers," and “all persons that were integral in the Judicial Process.” 

Not to mention the current malicious corruption of what We the People deemed necessary and proper with District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that abolished gun control and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), the abolished credibility in election campaign financing. 

Do we have to have another CIVIL WAR to establish the inalienable rights our Revolution and our Constitution as amended post-Civil War are supposedly built on? 

TODAY in October of 2013 everybody has “absolute immunity” but the innocent individual person, the victims!  The innocent individual person has “absolute liability for themalicious or corrupt” judges,[18] the “malicious or dishonestprosecutor, [19] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers,"[20] corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[21] actions[22] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators[23] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[24] actions of “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process. [25]  The innocent individual person can be irreparably injured, if not DESTROYED; the innocent individual person has no remedy, no redress.

I think it is undisputable that the founding fathers sought to “establish Justice,”[26] as expressed 15 years after the ratification (1788) of the constitution in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 163 (1803) by Chief Justice John Marshall[27] the MOST influential constitutional authority of his day and TODAY, with the unqualified assertions, I quote, “it is a general and indisputable rule that where there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law whenever that right is invaded” and “that every right, when withheld, must have a remedy, and every injury its proper redress.”

We the People have fallen under the despotic[28] spell of the “excess of power[29] in the Supreme Court that has constructed[30] ABSOLUTE POWER[31] from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for all to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[32] of We the People’s desire to “establish Justice” under color of law i.e., ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for the “malicious or corrupt” judges,[33] the “malicious or dishonestprosecutor, [34] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers,"[35] corrupt, malicious, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[36] actions[37] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators “are entitled to absolute immunity”[38] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[39] actions of “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [40] acting under color of law to render ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION[41] of inalienable rights under color of law.

We the People in essence traded the “absolute immunity” of the nobility[42] for the “absolute immunity” of themalicious or corrupt” judges,[43] the “malicious or dishonestprosecutor, [44] the “knowingly false testimony by police officers,"[45] the malicious, corrupt, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[46] actions[47] of federal, state, local, and regional legislators[48] and the malicious, corrupt, dishonest, sincerely ignorant and conscientiously stupid[49] actions of “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process [50] acting under color of law to wit, ABSOLUTE CORRUPTION.[51] 

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:  My Blog - Saturday, November 02, 2013, 2:44:02 PM


[1] Under the Constitutionally authorized ex industria federal statute law 18 USC §241-§242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law against the respondents in Petition for Writ of Certiorari 13-7030 Jeep v. United States
[3] The President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” per Article II, Section3 of the Constitution for the United States of America. 
[4] The Constitutionally authorized ex industria federal statute law 18 USC §241-§242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law and 42 USC §1983-§1985 Civil action for deprivation of rights
[5] “We have long enough suffered under the base prostitution of law to party passions in one judge, and the imbecility of another. In the hands of one the law is nothing more than an ambiguous text, to be explained by his sophistry into any meaning which may subserve his personal malice” (Thomas Jefferson, To John Tyler Monticello, May 26, 1810)
[6] A. Lincoln Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, November 19, 1863
[7] BRISCOE V. LAHUE, 460 U. S. 362 (1983)
[8] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 363 (1983)
[10] A. Lincoln Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, November 19, 1863
[11] FEDERALIST No. 78, “The Judiciary Department” From McLEAN'S Edition, New York. Wednesday, May 28, 1788 Alexander Hamilton
[12] The Constitutionally authorized ex industria federal statute law 18 USC §241-§242 Criminal Deprivation of rights under color of law and 42 USC §1983-§1985 Civil action for deprivation of rights
[16] “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King “Strength to Love” 1963
[17] The recent Government Shut Down comes to mind, but the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court had already handed our legislators absolute immunity for their legislative actions, Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997). 
[18] 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.
[19] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[21] “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King “Strength to Love” 1963
[22] The recent Government Shut Down comes to mind, but the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court had already handed our legislators absolute immunity for their legislative actions, “are entitled to absolute immunity” Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997). 
[23]  “are entitled to absolute immunity” Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138
[24] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grants of dishonesty, malice and corruption.  Martin Luther King said it better, “Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity” (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). 
As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series").  The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post published: April 16, 2012, The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[25] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[26] Preamble to the Constitution for the United States of America
[27] In 1788, Marshall was selected as a delegate to the Virginia convention responsible for ratifying or rejecting the United States Constitution, which had been proposed by the Philadelphia Convention a year earlier. Together with James Madison and Edmund Randolph, Marshall led the fight for ratification. He was especially active in defense of Article III, which provides for the Federal judiciary.
[28] 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!!!!!!!!!!
[29] James Madison (1751–1836), the 4th President of the United States (1809 – 1817), often referred to as the “Father of the Constitution,” in his essay “Property” for the National Gazette March 27, 1792
[30] Alexander Hamilton’s assertions of danger of “constructive power” to rights with in Federalist number 84
[31]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.” Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[32]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.” Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[33] 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.
[34] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[36] “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” Martin Luther King “Strength to Love” 1963
[37] The recent Government Shut Down comes to mind, but the Black Robed Royalist Article III Supreme Court had already handed our legislators absolute immunity for their legislative actions, “are entitled to absolute immunity” Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997). 
[38] “are entitled to absolute immunity” Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138
[39] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grants of dishonesty, malice and corruption.  Martin Luther King said it better, “Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity” (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). 
As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series").  The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post published: April 16, 2012, The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[40] Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 345 (1983) ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY for “all persons -- governmental or otherwise -- who were integral parts of the judicial process
[41]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.” Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.
[42] There are TWO constitutional prohibitions for the grant of Nobility i.e., "Absolute Immunity," Article 1, Section 9, 7th paragraph  "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States" and Article 1, Section 10, 1st paragraph "No State shall… grant any Title of Nobility." 
You some how want to argue that “the grant of Nobility” was about something other than the ROYAL Status of IMMUNITY. You want to argue that hereditary property rights were linked to a Colonial interpretation of Nobility?  That would undermine Free-Enterprise.
There is not now and there was not then any titular value other than Royal status as immunity - being above the law?  Did Nat “King” Cole violate the constitution?  No one is that petty.  Nobility conferred ONE-THING of interest now and then, IMMUNITY from the RULE OF LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[43] 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.
[44] Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U. S. 428 (1976) Prosecutorial ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY
[46] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grants of dishonesty, malice and corruption.  Martin Luther King said it better, “Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity” (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). 
As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series").  The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post published: April 16, 2012, The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[47] The denial of the “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, “the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) or Obamacare,” shall not be questioned.”
[48] “are entitled to absolute immunity” Bogan v. Scott-Harris - 523 U.S. 44 (1997) Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U. S. 367, 372, 372-376; Amy v. Supervisors, 11 Wall. 136, 138
[49] Incompetence is the most insidious and it is covered up by the gratuitous grants of dishonesty, malice and corruption.  Martin Luther King said it better, “Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity” (MLK Jr., Strength to Love, 1963). 
As regards state Prosecutors, "States can discipline federal prosecutors, rarely do" 12/08/2010 USAToday by Brad Heath & Kevin McCoy ("Federal prosecutors series").  The "OPR is a black hole. Stuff goes in, nothing comes out," said Jim Lavine, the president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "The public, the defense attorneys and the judiciary have lost respect for the government's ability to police themselves."
As regards law enforcement "Convicted defendants left uninformed of forensic flaws found by Justice Dept." By Spencer S. Hsu, The Washington Post published: April 16, 2012, The Washington Post reported on cases that demonstrate problems of COMPETENCY in forensic analysis that have been known for nearly 40 years by the Justice Department.
[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]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.” Lord Acton in a letter he wrote to scholar and ecclesiastic Mandell Creighton, dated April 1887.


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
GENERAL DELIVERY
Saint Louis, MO 63155-9999