Friday, September 16, 2022

This is an ongoing RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) conspiracy to UNCONSTITUTIONALLY defeat the United States Article III Supreme Court’s criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 liability.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.

Supreme Court of the United States

One First Street N.E.

Washington, DC 20543-0001

Re: DGJeep[1] v. United States (Petitions for Writ of Certiorari 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856)

Dear People,

I am in receipt of the letter dated September 6, 2022. Now let us not lie to each other. You state "the Court is unable to assist you in the matter you (I) present." That is a 20 year fraud[2] on the court by a judicial officer of the court! I admit you may not want to admit your culpability. But it is my right to repeatedly petition to expose your 20 years of crimes against my rights!

This is an ongoing RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) conspiracy to UNCONSTITUTIONALLY defeat the United States Article III Supreme Court's criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 liability.

The Court could take any of the above referenced petitions on appeal or you could PROPERLY assume original jurisdiction of the past CRIMINAL RICO conspiracy you created by asserting difficult, if not IMPOSSIBLE restrictions, self-servingly, on your OWN civil and criminal liability. This has NEVER been "vexatious or a continual calumniations[3]."

I repeat - the FACTS of MY case, they are without question - my liberty rights, my paternity rights, my property rights, were unconstitutionally deprived on November 3. 2003, 7:59pm CT. I have been fighting to regain them relentlessly since.^{^[4]} The undisputed issue is and has always been – a flagrantly, infamous, fraudulent, NON-EXIGENT, extra-judicial (coram non judice) court order:

a fraud (fraus omnia corrumpit ^{^[5]}) on the court by an officer of the court (FRCP 60(d)(3))^{^[6]} - a NOT "facially valid court order"^{^[7]} that was reckonably^{^[8]} issued "in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction,"^{^[9]} "beyond debate"^{^[10]} "sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right"^{^[11]}

It is clear to any non-partisan reading of your prior precedent that your goal is to make any judicial 1^st and 7^th Amendment constitutional liability difficult - not to mention the more statutorily self-evident criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 liability. And I realize that your goal here may be to NOW make it "very, very" difficult to assert any judicial 1st and 7th Amendment constitutional liability. After 20 years, I am now, if anything, MORE committed to restraining your self-serving unconstitutional assertion of immunity from the VERY document you are sworn to enforce/defend against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Just a little history lesson, first and foremost the United States constitution clearly limits criminal and civil judicial power to a joint verdict of a judge and jury. Unrestrained jurisdiction and / or freestanding judge made law was never conceived of or authorized by the United States constitution.

The 4th Chief Justice to the Supreme Court - John Marshall wrote a beautiful piece of constitutional fiction with Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803). And for the 34 years of John Marshall's Supreme Court Tenure, it remained as a judicial aspirational on the shelf.

The United States fought a civil war 1861-1865. The impetus for and the result of the civil war was the elimination of slavery e.g., the 13^th, 14^th, and 15^th Amendments with "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article" - criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 statutes.

The Supreme Court of the United States, with the clear exception of the Warren court, has since the Civil War been reading vagaries to increase their power. Now "under such regulations as the Congress shall make" We the People need to eliminate any use of Judge made law. And again constrict the judicial power CONSTITUTIONALLY with a need for jury verdicts.

NOTE: Despite revisionist's corrupt assertions there was nothing about "state's rights" in any of the United States' post war amendments, criminal or civil statutes. States' rights were GREATLY reduced if not eliminated by the WINNERS, nationalizing the United States' constitutional civil, voting, and criminal RIGHTS!

If there is anything further, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.

David G. Jeep

enclosure, US Postal Money Order $300 Supreme Court Filing Fee

[1] It should be noted that my middle class family roots had the Jeep name centuries in advance of the Willys Motor Co creation of their General Purpose (GP) for the U.S. Army. My Father fought in WWII and drove / rode a GP.

[2] Fraus omnia corrumpit - "fraud corrupts all." – a long standing principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision or arbitral award.

[3] Floyd and Barker (1607) "And those who are the most sincere, would not be free from continual Calumniations," in all cases it is the judiciary's responsibility to avoid "vexatious" or calumnious actions to the best of their ability not concede to their inevitability. "Vexatious" or calumnious actions are hazards in any human endeavor,

[4] Petitions 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856

[5] fraus omnia corrumpit - "Fraud corrupts all." - A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision or arbitral award.

[6] Rule 60(d)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - "set aside a judgment for fraud on the court"

[7] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide REASONABLE probable cause for an ex parte order of protection. Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03, there was a complete absence of jurisdiction for the stated charge. (Stump v. Sparkman,435 U.S. 356-57 (1978) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)) -

[8] If reason (reckonabilty) does not limit jurisdiction with probable cause, nothing can."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] Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)

[10] (Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011), Mullenix v. Luna 577 U. S. _(2015))

[11] "To this day, I am haunted by the vivid memory of the confirming shrug from the Police Officer when I questioned it as served on November 3, 2003. I am further haunted by the memory of the same confirming shrug when Commissioner Jones first saw the absurdity of the court order on the bench November 20, 2003 as my attorney then highlighted as he repeated his prior objections." (Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U. S. 635, 640 (1987), Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011)

Thanks in advance...

"Agere sequitur esse" ('action follows being')

David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044 (formerly)

www.DGJeep.com - Dave@DGJeep.com

Mobile (314) 514-5228 leave message

David G. Jeep

1531 Pine St Apt #403

St. Louis, MO 63103-2547

Wednesday, September 14, 2022

The GREEN New Deal

Stabilize the economy

· OPEC's oil INFLATION has been at the root of EVERY surge in inflation since 1973

Defeat Putin

· Putin and Russia are no longer a world power. Putin and Russia are merely petroleum producers throwing their weight around

Defeat OPEC i.e., Saudi Arabi, Al Qaeda, Radical Islam, Venezuela

· Radical Islam, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia have been USING OPEC and their Petro Dollars to dictate to the free world for toooo long

Stimulate the economy

· FDR’s original “New Deal” deficit financed WWII, the Baby Boom and the greatest economic recovery in history. Do not believe the assertion of the conservative "eggheads" nebulous assertion of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand.” Government deficit spending has created the United States economy not stifled it!!

Save the PLANET

· Saving the planet from global waring is an existential threat and this should stand alone as a reason to create, defend and deficit finance the Green New Deal if need be to DEFEAT global warming. Yes you can pay off a former Cincinnati weatherman and one or two PhD Meteorologist to say Global Warming is farce. But any reasonable person concurs with the overwhelming majority of scientific authorities that are screaming the DEATH knell of global warming if left unabated by the Green New Deal.

The GREEN New Deal

Congresswoman Cori Bush - Re: Civil Rights 1776-2022 and a Constitutional Judiciary

Congresswoman Cori Bush

563 Cannon House Office Building

Washington, DC 20515

Re: Civil Rights 1776-2022 and a Constitutional Judiciary

Dear Ms. Bush,

I live in your district. I am a 66-year-old white guy. I was born a white, I will always be a white guy -- I am going to die a white guy. I stress that because “Civil Rights” are not just a racial issue. Additionally, as a lifelong St. Louisan, I had the solidly middle-class advantage of going to THE proverbial old boy’s school. I graduated CBC in 1974. I WAS living in the best neighborhood in far west St. Louis County. I stress that because “Civil Rights” are not an economic issue, this side of Donald Trump. Nonetheless my CIVIL RIGHTS are ignored!

I have been engaged in a CIVIL RIGHTS issue for the last nearly 20 years.[1] The FACTS of MY case are without question. My issues are EXACTLY the same as every revolutionary colonist, every slave, and/or every MAN in the 21^st century. My civilized rights issue is exemplified by the rights Ida B. Wells sought in 1884-1887. Ida B. wells was no shrinking-violet like Rosa Parks. It took TWO men and boy to drag Ida off the train. And then Ida B. Wells, on her own dollar, won a CIVILIZED award of $500 in 1884 US dollars. Ida B. Wells did all this amidst “Southern Horrors: Lynch Law in All Its Phases,” she literally wrote the book.

Ida B. Wells’s 7^th Amendment constitutional rights were DENIED by the Tennessee Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court's ruling in 1887. It concluded: "We think it is evident that the purpose of the defendant in error was to harass with a view to this suit, and that her persistence was not in good faith to obtain a comfortable seat for the short ride." The American absolutely immune “star chamber” has for too long been able to deny the rule the United States without regard to Constitution they proport to “defend against all enemies foreign or domestic”.

The 7^th Amendment is CLEAR: “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.”

You want to fix the “star chamber” i.e., the judiciary, you want to fix the 2^nd Amendment, you want to GUARANTEE civilized human rights enforce the founding father’s 7^th Amendment.

The unrecognized civil rights Civil Rights 1776-2022 issue that has plagued the United States is the denial of 7th Amendment rights! I personally have the EVIDENCE of 2003-2022 of unconstitutional immunity from the 7th Amendment:

· a fraud (fraus omnia corrumpit ^{^[2]}) on the court by an officer of the court (FRCP 60(d)(3))^{^[3]}

· a NOT “facially valid court order”^{^[4]}

· that was reckonably^{^[5]} issued “in the "clear absence of all jurisdictions,” [6]

· “beyond debate” [7]

· “sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right”^{^[8]}

The Article III Federal Courts have been unregulated and allowed to self-servingly hold themselves immune from the very Constitution the are held to defend. Article III section 2 states “the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.”

Judges will NOT be making anymore judge made law if they are held like the rest of the citizenry, to answer to a 7^th Amendment CIVILIZED jury.

If there is anything further, please let me know.

Thank you in advance.

David G. Jeep

enclosure “The Green New Deal”

cc: www.DGJeep.com

file

[1] www.DGJeep.com - https://drive.google.com/file/d/17Z_nJTJ7tatl57njkzWxyFopN-b5JI5M/view Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts

[2] fraus omnia corrumpit - “Fraud corrupts all.” - A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision or arbitral award.

[3] Rule 60(d)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - “set aside a judgment for fraud on the court”

[4] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide REASONABLE probable cause for an ex parte order of protection. Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03, there was a complete absence of jurisdiction for the stated charge.

[5] If reason (reckonabilty) does not limit jurisdiction with probable cause, nothing can."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)

[6] (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)

[7] (Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011), Mullenix v. Luna 577 U. S. _(2015))

[8] "To this day, I am haunted by the vivid memory of the confirming shrug from the Police Officer when I questioned it as served on November 3, 2003. I am further haunted by the memory of the same confirming shrug when Commissioner Jones first saw the absurdity of the court order on the bench November 20, 2003 as my attorney then highlighted as he repeated his prior objections."

The GREEN New Deal

Stabilize the economy

· Oil INFLATION has been at the root of EVERY surge in inflation since 1973

Defeat Putin

· Putin and Russia are no longer a world power. Putin and Russia are merely petroleum producers throwing their weight around

Defeat OPEC i.e., Saudi Arabi, Al Qaeda, Radical Islam, Venezuela

· Radical Islam, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia have been USING OPEC and their Petro Dollars to dictate to the free world for toooo long

Stimulate the economy

· FDR’s original “New Deal” deficit financed WWII, the Baby Boom and the greatest economic recovery in history. Do not believe the assertion of the nebulous assertion of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand.” Government deficit spending has created the United States economy not stifled it!!

Save the PLANET

· Saving the plane is an existential threat and this should stand alone as a reason to create, defend and deficit finance if need be to DEFEAT global warming. Yes you can pay off a former Cincinnati weatherman and one or two PhD Meteorologist to say Global Warming is farce. But any reasonable person concurs with the overwhelming majority of scientific authorities that are screaming the DEATH knell of global warming left unabated by the Green New Deal.

The GREEN New Deal

Trump’s ISSUES

Trump’s ISSUES

Tuesday, September 13, 2022 7:35:00 AM

Wednesday, September 14, 2022

I. Trump’s TAXES (Criminal and Civil)

1. Trump appeals ruling backing IRS release of tax returns to House to full DC Circuit

2. Trump Organization CFO pleads guilty to tax fraud as legal cases surround former president Aug 18, 2022 6:50 PM EDT

3. Trump’s tax returns: The legal issues and possible outcomes - Richard Lempert Thursday, May 28, 2020

II. Trump’s FALSE ELECTORS

1. The Fake Electors Scheme, Explained Published July 27, 2022 Updated Aug. 3, 2022

III. Trump’s Georgia Call

1. Trump–Raffensperger phone call

IV. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Top-Secret Documents

1. Material on foreign nation’s nuclear capabilities seized at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago…. Updated September 6, 2022 at 10:36 p.m. EDT |Published September 6, 2022 at 7:53 p.m. EDT

2. Trump Had More Than 300 Classified Documents at Mar-a-Lago - Published Aug. 22, 2022 -Updated Aug. 23, 2022

V. Trump Berman Barr-AG Accusation at the DOJ -

1. Senate to Investigate Charge That Trump Meddled in Prosecutor’s Office- Sept. 12, 2022

VI. Trump’s Super Pac FRAUD

1. “Trump’s Post-Election Fund-Raising Comes Under Scrutiny by Justice Dept.” - A federal grand jury has issued subpoenas seeking information about Save America PAC, which was formed as Donald J. Trump promoted baseless assertions about election fraud.

The FACTS of MY case are without question

The FACTS of MY case are without question

The FACTS of MY case are without question - my liberty rights, my paternity rights, my property rights, were unconstitutionally deprived on November 3. 2003, 7:55pm CT. I have been fighting to regain them relentlessly since.[1] The UNDISPUTED issue is and has always been – a flagrantly, infamous, fraudulent, non-exigent, extra-judicial (coram non judice) court order:

1. a fraud (fraus omnia corrumpit ^{^[2]}) on the court by an officer of the court (FRCP 60(d)(3))^{^[3]}

2. a NOT "facially valid court order"^{^[4]} (Stump v. Sparkman,435 U.S. 356-57 (1978) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)) -

3. that was reckonably^{^[5]} issued "in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction," (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)

4. "beyond debate" (Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011), Mullenix v. Luna 577 U. S. _(2015))

5. "sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates that right" (Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U. S. 635, 640 (1987), Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011)^{^[6]}

"The congressional purpose[7] seems to me to be clear- NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. A condition of lawlessness existed in certain of the States under which people were being denied their civil rights. Congress intended to provide a remedy for the wrongs being perpetrated. And its (US Congress 1871) members were not unaware that certain members of the judiciary were implicated in the state of affairs which the statute(s) (now codified as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985) was intended to rectify…. Mr. Rainey of South Carolina noted that "[T]he courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity. Congressman Beatty of Ohio claimed that it was the duty of Congress to listen to the appeals of those who, by reason of popular sentiment or secret organizations or prejudiced juries or bribed judges, [cannot] obtain the rights and privileges due an American citizen. . . ." MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 559 (1967)

THE GRAVITAS OF THE PERSONAL^{^[8]} ISSUE IS BEYOND QUESTION, IT TOOK AWAY PETITIONER'S SON, HOME, CAR AND EVERYTHING HE ONCE HELD DEAR IN THE WORLD. Thus, the issue could never be construed as vexatious^{^[9]} nor is the ongoing fight against flagrant injustice "continual Calumniations"^{^[10]} nor could a near 20 year struggle against injustice be construed as an inconsequential "short ride."^{^[11]}

At issue – a flagrantly, infamous, fraudulent, non-exigent, extra-judicial (coram non judice) COURT ORDER - a fraud (fraus omnia corrumpit ^{^[12]}) on the court by an officer of the court (FRCP 60(d)(3))^{^[13]} - a NOT "facially valid court order"^{^[14]} - that was reckonably^{^[15]} issued "in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction,"[16] "beyond debate"[17] - "sufficiently clear that every reasonable official would have understood that what he is doing violates"^{^[18]} a right that right.^{^[19]}^{^[20] ^[21] ^[22] [23]}

Jane Crow Discrimination = Fathers are disfavored by domestic relations law in the United States of America!

^{^[1]} Petitions 07-11115, 11-8211, 13-7030, 13-5193, 14-5551, 14-10088, 15-8884 and 18-5856

[2] fraus omnia corrumpit - "Fraud corrupts all." - A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision or arbitral award.

[3] Rule 60(d)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - "set aside a judgment for fraud on the court"

[6] "To this day, I am haunted by the vivid memory of the confirming shrug from the Police Officer when I questioned it as served on November 3, 2003. I am further haunted by the memory of the same confirming shrug when Commissioner Jones first saw the absurdity of the court order on the bench November 20, 2003 as my attorney then highlighted as he repeated his prior objections."

[7] Jim Crow and/or Jane Crow

[8] While the petitioner asserts this is not necessarily an isolated Jane Crow issue, it is a uniquely flagrant "first impression" and PERSONAL for the petitioner. Per McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 235 U.S. 151 (1914) " The essence of the constitutional right to equal protection of the law is that it is a personal one, and does not depend upon the number of persons affected"

[9] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871), Page 80 U. S. 348 and 349

[10] Floyd and Barker. (1607) Easter Term, 5 James I - In the Court of Star Chamber. - First Published in the Reports, volume 12, page 23.

[11] Ida B. Well v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad - Tennessee Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court's ruling in 1887. It concluded, "We think it is evident that the purpose of the defendant in error was to harass with a view to this suit, and that her persistence was not in good faith to obtain a comfortable seat for the short ride."[Southwestern Reporter, Volume 4, May 16–August 1, 1887.

[12] fraus omnia corrumpit - "Fraud corrupts all." - A principle according to which the discovery of fraud invalidates all aspects of a judicial decision or arbitral award.

[13] Rule 60(d)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - "set aside a judgment for fraud on the court"

[14] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does not provide REASONABLE probable cause for an ex parte order of protection. Clearly based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03, there was a complete absence of jurisdiction for the stated charge. (Stump v. Sparkman,435 U.S. 356-57 (1978) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003))

[15] If reason (reckonabilty) does not limit jurisdiction with probable cause, nothing can."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)

[16] (Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (per curiam) PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003)

[17] (Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011), Mullenix v. Luna 577 U. S. _(2015))

[18] Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U. S. 635, 640 (1987), Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U. S. 731, 741 (2011) - "To this day, I am haunted by the vivid memory of the confirming shrug from the Police Officer when I questioned it as served on November 3, 2003. I am further haunted by the memory of the same confirming shrug when Commissioner Jones first saw the absurdity of the court order on the bench November 20, 2003 as my attorney then highlighted as he repeated his prior objections."

[19] While the petitioner asserts this is not necessarily an isolated Jane Crow issue, it is a uniquely flagrant "first impression" and PERSONAL for the petitioner. Per McCabe v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 235 U.S. 151 (1914) " The essence of the constitutional right to equal protection of the law is that it is a personal one, and does not depend upon the number of persons affected"

[20] Ida B. Well v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad - Tennessee Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court's ruling in 1887. It concluded, "We think it is evident that the purpose of the defendant in error was to harass with a view to this suit, and that her persistence was not in good faith to obtain a comfortable seat for the short ride."[Southwestern Reporter, Volume 4, May 16–August 1, 1887.

[21] Bradley v. Fisher, 80 U.S. 335 (1871), Page 80 U. S. 348 and 349

[22] Floyd and Barker. (1607) Easter Term, 5 James I - In the Court of Star Chamber. - First Published in the Reports, volume 12, page 23.

[23] "The congressional purpose (now codified as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985) seems to me to be clear- NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW. A condition of lawlessness existed in certain of the States under which people were being denied their civil rights. Congress intended to provide a remedy for the wrongs being perpetrated. And its (US Congress 1871) members were not unaware that certain members of the judiciary were implicated in the state of affairs which the statute(s) (now codified as Criminal 18 U.S.C. § 241 &; 242 and Civil 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985) was intended to rectify…. Mr. Rainey of South Carolina noted that "[T]he courts are in many instances under the control of those who are wholly inimical to the impartial administration of law and equity. Congressman Beatty of Ohio claimed that it was the duty of Congress to listen to the appeals of those who, by reason of popular sentiment or secret organizations or prejudiced juries or bribed judges, [cannot] obtain the rights and privileges due an American citizen. . . ." MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting. Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 559 (1967) THE GRAVITAS OF THE PERSONAL ISSUE IS BEYOND QUESTION, IT TOOK AWAY PETITIONER'S SON, HOME, CAR AND EVERYTHING HE ONCE HELD DEAR IN THE WORLD. Thus the issue could never be construed as vexatious nor is the ongoing fight against flagrant injustice "continual Calumniations" nor could a near 20 year struggle against injustice be construed as an inconsequential "short ride."

Thanks in advance...

"Agere sequitur esse" ('action follows being')

David G. Jeep, Federal Inmate #36072-044 (formerly)

www.DGJeep.com - Dave@DGJeep.com

Mobile (314) 514-5228 leave message

David G. Jeep

1531 Pine St Apt #403

St. Louis, MO 63103-2547