Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 32

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4337&sid=1c499fae4c13a79d4a0b7c826b59fcde
new thread on Elaine's competence over on quats

Reply #2:  Reference:

"Re: Elaine Brown's competence* and Ed's control of her

Postby CaptainKickback on Sat May 30, 2009 2:23 am

Ed is going to have apoplexy."**

** http://www.answers.com/topic/apoplexy = "a cerebral hemorrhage"; what?!

like caused by one of those discs? in what space? of air or a vacuum? a void, thus to avoid that place of what type of vapors within the oxygen?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpn-Tagskeg&feature=related "The ENEMY" 4 of 5 @ 6:15 of 10:54 of to experiment with the chemicals in that box so as to "eliminate the oxygen", seen 1,989 times; thus what? For a State investigation of what really goes on in there to brainwash the people!? I'm serious! "They" are either in ignorance, or corrupt, and will do most ANYthing to keep their status quo! The "gig is up". http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=the+gig+is+up    the jig is up Refers to a ruse or trick that has been discovered. The game is over, the time of reckoning*** is here.

***= "The settlement of an account." settlement = "An understanding reached"; and account= of "A business relationship involving the exchange", and in this case the exchange of the "To give and receive reciprocally" of the consent for the papers by RSA 123:1 of to do it! The word reciprocally from reciprocal= "1. Concerning each of two or more persons or things. 2. Mutual. for the adjective, and "2. Math. Either of a pair of quantities whose product is unity" for the noun.  And "they" call themselves the UNITED States of America in the plural!? How many other states have they NOT filed with!? In New Hampshire at current, without the unity as in the agreement or concorde having been accomplished, "they" are indeed "The Invaders"! A Quinn Martin Production?  No! An Obama-nation! as near enough to be an abomination of "great dislike; loathing", the word loathe, of to abhor, from the Latin word abhorrere of "to shrink" from, so no Shrink* here with the capital letter S needed for Elaine, but your/ you Feds, to stop your shrinking from your duty to file by 40USC255 and do it!

Who's the real "nut case?    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNtsgXRuU5M&feature=related "The Invaders 1967 Promo 1" of 1:01 minute with 2,204 views so far.
_____________________________________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqs_0SBbPD0&feature=related 1:30; 20,805x

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste from: http://www.xomreviews.com/faithdome.org

[as found by the words: faithdome interactive online, over at GOOGLE.] Entitled:

My Review and Testimonial for Pastors Price and Schuller (A Sunday "Double Feature" well worth watching and ACTing upon).

"Thank you Dr. Frederick K.C. Price for your sermon today (Sun., May 31st '09) on how to get to charity by reading and doing what it says to do in 2 Peter 1:1-21, and that I do highlight this "beside" word in verse 5 of us in MANKIND the Antonym of the word DEITY, because we in the natural are next to, adjacent and adjoining, the super-nature, or supernatural, from the word adjoin of to unite*, but where and when? As an antonym or opposite, we have three choices for the definition of the word from which to choose, and that I call the 3-2-1 countdown: (3) "Diametrically opposed: altogether different", (2) "Facing the other way", and (1) "Placed or located across from: lying** in a corresponding position to: opposite sides of a building."

** that lying word of NOT to mean to lie, as from the noun of: "A deliberate falsehood", and lying: "To tell a lie or convey a false image or impression; prevaricate" defined as: "To stray from or evade the truth; equivocate. From the Latin word praevaricari of: "to walk crookedly; deviate" BUT to "3. To occupy a place".

I do thank you for this 2 Peter 1:13 "stir" up to remind me of what to do when encountering such an equivocator who does speak in ambiguities from the word ambiguous defined as "Susceptible of multiple interpretation" as already illustrated in the 1-2-3 countdown above.

* Thus if we cannot unite in agreement with our neighbors*** here on this plain of reality, how can we do so from the horizontal of lying down to the vertical of standing up?

*** Add to this our creatures too, as in the creator states having brought into existence the "United States of America" of Federal Agents, our public servants, as the creatures they are who are supposed to be obedient to us by way of their oath of office to abide by the Constitution, and in particular Art. I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 of the U.S. to get our "Consent" BEFORE they have operating authority withIN that state. 

For the details of YOUR state, see Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft's website from Hunstville, Alabama of the state-by-state list of statutes and the requirements by the Feds of WHERE to file their papers.

Like never done to the Secretary of State in neither MAss.achusetts nor New Hampshire, not either to the governor's office in Florida as I've check with all three locations, BELIEVE IT OR NOT! http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm A crisis brewing up here in New Hampshire http://freethebrowns.com/?page_id=27 in that there is no RSA Ch. 123:1 filing http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm of their 40USC255 papers see: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 and http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm plus: http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03.htm with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State in Concord, N.H.

Thus in addition to the what to do when encountering such a situation, I do also thank you for by quoting verse 10 of to: "give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:" to which I add, where? And with the answer given in the next hour on Robert Schuller's "Hour of Power" in The "Crystal Cathedtal" at Garden Grive, CAlif.ornia.  Today's guest speaker: Bill Butterworth talking about his 8th grade metal-working shop class teacher telling him to make a screw-driver, and him pounding the metal so flat that he thought it a failure, later to learn on graduation day that he did receive the honor of a certificate for making the best-ever chisel in his class! (;-)

The moral of the story being here of to never fall or fail, but to adapt.  As in the Federal Failure to file, yes, but WHERE to talk about this and by WHO, but the Psalm 127:4 children and :5 "in" the gate, so that there being a meeting of the minds. Thus what we want on our side is that for us to "pull" the papers to the Capitol Building and State House just a few short blocks from "Pleasant" Street, and it would be done maybe faster by some "push" as from somebody on the "inside" of the building, as maybe from either withIN the Clerk's Office or courtroom, as by ANY defendant there to alert the jury of such, that is IF the judge would allow this evidence to be marked as an exhibit for them to weigh, lest another "Point of Order" be re-marked by me during what is supposed to be a "public" trial, my right of free speech down to a "nadir" amount, being escorted out by the Deputy U.S. Marshals to the City-owned sidewalk again, or even worse: of being found in contempt of court and thrown into federal prison for up to six (6) months they term a "petty" offense, when in N.H. by our Law in Articles 22+23, Part 2, N.H. Constitution, contempt be limited to a maximum of ten (10) days, [compared to only: 24 hours in Indiana BTW] that you'd think they'd honor in harmony with us, and so might adopt same in the future. See http://www.nh.gov/constitution/house.html as it applies to the Judiciary as a supposed co-equal branch by Article 72-a http://www.nh.gov/constitution/judicial.html

So in summary here: yes, I do both: I.) re-view this like in definition #5 of "To subject to a military inspection", emphasizing what A Few Minutes with Andy Rooney said last Sunday on his CBS-60 Minutes TV program at about 7:55 p.m. for "Memorial Day" as what I think was a repeat of what he likewise said for last Fall's Veteran's Day of that our soldiers did not "give" their lives for our country, but that they were "taken" from them, and that we ought to "find a new religion" to which I say: no, but good idea in making the current religions better, as in to talk about our difference "in the gate", and not shoot at each other on the battlefields-turned-cemeteries; and II.) give my testimonial of a "formal statement testifying to a particular fact" of this federal non-filing and of HOW it might be resolved.  This being definition #1 of 3, #2 being about "A written affirmation of another's character or worth" that I hope to obtain someday from #3 being after I give the testimonial to both these two pastors: "Something given as a tribute for a person's achievement."  The achievement here being of their words and of others as invited guests, to have and hopefully will made a difference.  Your prayers are requested for such, and if and when a situation does happenstance upon you, then please to let me know to give to you in return. Amen." 

Yours truly, Joseph S. Haas [submitted @ 3:27 p.m. withOUT any Confirmation page.]

[Coconut]

http://www.keenesentinel.com/articles/2009/05/30/news/state/free/id_358108.txt

Elaine Brown's lawyer claims her husband is controlling her
By MARGOT SANGER-KATZ
Concord Monitor
Published:
Sunday, May 31, 2009 8:30 AM EDT
Elaine Brown's standby attorney has asked the federal judge in her conspiracy and weapons case to order an evaluation of her competency to stand trial, arguing that she shows signs of delusions and is controlled by her husband and co-defendant, Ed Brown.

Bjorn Lange, who was appointed by the court but has been repeatedly rejected by Brown, also asked the judge to interview her in private about whether she really wishes to represent herself in her trial, scheduled to begin in late June.

The Browns were convicted of tax-related felonies in January 2007 but evaded capture for nearly nine months by holing up in their well-provisioned concrete home in Plainfield, entertaining radical guests, stockpiling weapons and threatening violence if federal agents tried to arrest them. They are charged with a combined 11 felonies and face possible life sentences if they are convicted of the most serious charges, for making and possessing improvised explosive devices.

The couple was ultimately arrested by a team of undercover U.S. marshals posing as supporters.

From the time of their arraignment in February, the Browns have both denied the authority of the federal court and rejected the assistance of appointed standby lawyers. They have filed more than 20 motions on their own behalf, nearly all of which have been denied as "frivolous" by Judge George Singal.

Lange said that the content of those filings, which are at odds with common legal principles and the orders issued by the court, suggest that Elaine Brown is out of touch with reality and may be unable to assist in her own defense.

"Rather than reviewing discovery and considering possible defenses, which may have some legal support, the defendants continue to repeat arguments which they are repeatedly told lack merit," says the motion, filed Friday. "Albert Einstein supposedly defined insanity as, 'Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.' The defendants' conduct of their joint defense has been a folie a deux which raises doubts about their competence and judgment."

Lange cites many of the Browns' recent legal maneuvers, including efforts to bar the court from using their names, attempts to impose commercial law on the criminal proceedings, and the submission of "promissory notes" to secure their release. The Browns' filings have also asserted that the United States is a "Paine Webber Group" and "legally-nonexistant" and that the court's rulings are in violation of God's law.

"Mr. Singal does not appear to be operating under any defined understandable set of lawful rules comprehensible to ordinary man, as all laws are supposed to be such," the couple wrote in a recent motion, indicating they would not attend their trial.

Lange's motion also argues that Elaine Brown's competency may be even more suspect than Ed Brown's, because family members believe he controls her actions. Before her arrest for tax evasion, Brown was a successful West Lebanon dentist. Ed Brown, who had retired from work as a hairdresser and cockroach exterminator, spent much of his time working on anti-government causes.

Elaine's son and daughter, children from a previous marriage, "described her as being an intelligent, successful professional who is dominated by Edward Brown," the motion says.

During the couple's 2007 tax trial, the pair represented themselves, then abandoned the court when they became dissatisfied with the judge's proposed jury instructions. Elaine Brown returned to court several days later and mounted a defense with Lange's help. She testified, presented evidence and offered a closing argument. After the trial, Judge Steven McAuliffe allowed her to be freed on bail until her sentencing hearing.

Wearing an electronic monitoring ankle bracelet, she moved in with her son David Hatch-Bernier, until fleeing to join her husband in Plainfield several weeks later.

During those weeks of the couple's separation, Elaine Brown spoke several times to internet radio stations about her loneliness and anxiety. According to the motion, she also frequently spoke with Ed Brown.

"After those telephone conversations, Elaine would 'be a mess,' crying and shaking. She told her son that Edward called her a coward and accused her of betraying him."

Elaine Brown left without warning, and said that she'd been picked up by a friend. According to Lange's motion, she left behind a Post-It note saying, "I had to leave."

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.keenesentinel.com/articles/2009/05/30/news/state/free/id_358108.txt

Elaine Brown's lawyer claims her husband is controlling her
By MARGOT SANGER-KATZ
Concord Monitor
Published:
Sunday, May 31, 2009 8:30 AM EDT
...She ... presented evidence....

Thank you Coconut. But THE evidence that MUST be presented is by THE court to NOT the jurors but US: you AND me, PLUS the victims here called Defendants!

It's spelled out in 40USC255 http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 and I quote: (by copy and paste): "Unless and until the United States has accepted jurisdiction over lands hereafter to be acquired as aforesaid*, it shall be conclusively presumed that no such jurisdiction has been accepted."

*In N.H. that aforesaid is RSA Ch. 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm down from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution. See also: http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm  for the many other states.

It's the law and they must obey it. Our governor is charged to be the one who is to meet them at their gate and escort them over to file their papers with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State, 2nd floor State House.

Until it is done, there is NO authority there and EVERY day is a Kidnapping! All parties involved to spend up to a year in jail for their PART in the crime. http://freethebrowns.com/?page_id=27  18 USC 242. By our own N.H. Constitution, Article 14, Part the First & Bill of Rights for the word "prompt" every half a day of BEFORE and AFTER the noon lunch time hour is to be counted as one offense by the #__ people buzzing around Ed & Elaine and the charges start flying by me tonight and/or tomorrow on their move from Dover to Concord.  That means all state, county, town and city officers alerted of this too for their do-nothing attitudes of to "serve and protect" they have as their motto's, but are a real bunch of hypocrites! liars and thieves!!

prompt = without delay
delay - = postpone
post = after
pone = meal

The U.S. Supreme Court is clear: http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03.htm in that:

"Listen to the words of the Supreme Court; "In view of 40 USCS 255, no jurisdiction exists in United States to enforce federal criminal laws, unless and until consent to accept jurisdiction over lands acquired by United States has been filed in behalf of United States as provided in said section, and fact that state has authorized government to take jurisdiction is immaterial." Adams v. United States (1943) 319 US 312, 87 L Ed. 1421, 63 S. Ct. 1122. (Quoted from U.S. statute 40 USCS 255, Interpretive Note #14, citing the US Supreme Court). "

WHEN are they going to get it through their thick skulls!? The U.S. Attorney KNOWS that this "embraces courthouses"  http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm but is a weasel, a prevericator who strays from his oath of to the law and does the crooked walk of deviation. They are The Evaders, and Invaders! Trespassers on private and state soil. Wise up! and now!

[JosephSHaas]

The original story appeared in The "Concord Monitor" http://www.concordmonitor.com/

and in detail at: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090531/FRONTPAGE/905310344

to where I've posted Reply #1 of 1 so far for the entire day!?

As Earl Holliman, said in that "Twilight Zone" episode: "Where is Everybody?!" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0734692/ and with video over at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMn9ms37ImA

[JosephSHaas]

Top Story #1 of 6 at http://www.wmur.com/index.html

for Ed & Elaine on Channel 9 in a few minutes...

no, it just happened, and was file footage for only about 45 seconds,

telling of: (1) they want to represent themselves, and (2) will not be there for some of the trial.

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090602/NEWS01/906020324/1043
Judge to Browns:
Attend your trial Skipping it would be 'suicide pact'

[LordBaltimore]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090602/NEWS01/906020324/1043
Judge to Browns:
Attend your trial Skipping it would be 'suicide pact'

The judge is right.  With a 30 year minimum sentence on the table, the Browns are literally comiitting death-by-prison by not attending their own trial.

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090602/NEWS01/906020324/1043
Judge to Browns:
Attend your trial Skipping it would be 'suicide pact'

Thanks Donna, as in to read this later.

So withOUT reading it, I might presume Ed might have meant that at the SAME time the Feds are doing a prosecution, Ed might be in a defensive maneuver on a check-and-balance by the state AGAINST the Feds, as in like maybe a continuation of my case against the governor in the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims, set for a hearing on Friday, June 12th, of which by Rule #__ I'm to present my list of what I intend to include as evidence within five (5) "business"(?) days, and so by this Thursday or Friday, June 4th or 5th. [ Or maybe for a hearing on a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.]

The Assistant Attorney General has written that I've not encountered any bodily injury, by the Limitations section IV therein RSA Ch. 541-B:14 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LV/541-B/541-B-14.htm to which I've already replied that I might have had by seeing more spots now (eye floaters) by my contributing factor of not tinting my eye-glasses, the glare from the computer screen fracturing some side particles, but then again I guess that's what aging is about as they eventually disintegrate into a smooth mass back there UNDER the eye, and that is WHY, as I did read years ago, is HOW when one ages what they see is not as bright as they once saw the world to be, but grayer not only in the hair, but eyes too.

Anyway back to the statutes again, and RSA Ch. 541-B:19 Exemptions at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LV/541-B/541-B-19.htm me just beginning my search and re-search into what the governor and/or his legal counsel (applied to for help there within #__ days by the statute too? RSA Ch. _____ already IN the case, that if not, and he does NOT appear, I intend to ask for an immediate summary action by the Board for a default judgment of the $5000) is that she might cite RSA 541-B:19,I(b) of for "Any claim BASED upon an act or omission of a state officer, ...or official when such officer...or official is exercising due care in the execution of any statute".  (emphasis ADDed) In this case there being no executing of a statute, as by the shall word in RSA 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm AND that it is not "any claim that IS an omission", but for actions that are BASED upon that omission. My claim is strictly his having FAILed to do his Art. 41 duty that is in the constitution, and so no over-ride by a statute to do so! http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html He " shall be responsible" NOT that he "may" be so IF the Board determines otherwise.  So it's a simple matter of yes or no: did he fail to do his job or not? And what are the damages to me?

Damages or "injury" not limited to the body, but for "personal injury" too, me just getting started in searching and re-searching this today and in the Law Library this afternoon, plus tomorrow too maybe, having just found at GOOGLE for:

(1) injury of http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=injury the definition #5 of 5 there of interest being: "wrongdoing that violates another's rights AND is unjustly inflicted" (emphasis ADDed because although the word inflicted means to cause as in to carry out by aggressive ACTion (as opposed to an in-action or omission) it also means 2.) to impose, and 3.) to afflict.  I like that third definition because it's from the Latin word affigere [p. 12 of The "American Heritage Dictionary of The English Language", (c)1973] meaning to dash against, and the word dash meaning to break, as in the governor did break his RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm  to Article 84 of the N.H. Constitution http://www.nh.gov/constitution/oaths.html To break meaning to disrupt the continuity of, as in 1.) the state or quality of being continuous and 2.)  an uninterrupted succession. And so back to the Consent word in 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, to N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 Where is the continuation of this for the federal filing?  by 40 USC255 http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 There is none! And see that U.S. Supreme Court case over at: http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03.htm and;

2.) for the words: personal rights constitution at http://www.google.com/ the Fathers Rights constitution over at http://www.fatherssupportingfathers.org/constitution.html for what is written in the third paragraph up from the bottom of the page in that: "specific rights contained in the first eight amendments of the Constitution which declares fundamental personal rights" and that: "The United States Supreme Court in a long line of decisions has recognized that matters involving...the parent-child relationship are among those fundamental 'liberty' interests protected by the Constitution."  And so the children rights too, as I am one of the three children to my mother who was still living in 2007 who heard about this Ed Brown case on the FOX News down in Florida who I went to see that Summer and found out that Florida too is in non-compliance with their statute as found over at Lowell "Larry" Becraft's website of http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm and so my continued search and re-searching into the wrongs done to my fellow man, Ed Brown and his wife Elaine up here I could not just abandon to right this wrong, having cost me dearly in not seeing my mother that much as like on an extended vacation, but back to fighting this in-justice here for which omission by the governor is a First Amendment violation of my right of freedom of association: the freedom to have seen my mother more down there, and my friends the Browns up here more as on private property that was NOT protected by the local, county and state officials who did violate their oaths too to Article 12, last paragraph http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html of our state Constitution, for which they shall surely pay, and this governor "is responsible" for!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - - -  Joe / Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059

pc: The Board and AAG; this my preamble with list of exhibits.

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090602/NEWS01/906020324/1043
Judge to Browns:
Attend your trial Skipping it would be 'suicide pact'

The judge is right.  With a 30 year minimum sentence on the table, the Browns are literally comiitting death-by-prison by not attending their own trial.

Oh and the likelihood in that being reduced or just flatly dismissed by them making a special appearnce before an illegally ceded court without proper filings to operate according to the RSA 123:1, and before a Judge whom isn't from NH, but being bussed in from Maine, hell not being a natural born American, his family fleeing from Italy in the 1940's because they didnt like the oppression or the laws of their native lands, come here and stand here in judgment of my fellow Americans whom did not flee but stood their ground, questioning their unjust overbearing govt. without trembbling in fear of the what may become their fate. I doubt very little there would be much of a difference if they attend or not, either way they are gonna be railroaded.

[LordBaltimore]

Oh and the likelihood in that being reduced or just flatly dismissed by them making a special appearnce before an illegally ceded court without proper filings to operate according to the RSA 123:1, and before a Judge whom isn't from NH, but being bussed in from Maine, hell not being a natural born American, his family fleeing from Italy in the 1940's because they didnt like the oppression or the laws of their native lands, come here and stand here in judgment of my fellow Americans whom did not flee but stood their ground, questioning their unjust overbearing govt. without trembbling in fear of the what may become their fate. I doubt very little there would be much of a difference if they attend or not, either way they are gonna be railroaded.

Paytriot babble aside, of course it makes a difference whether they defend themselves.  Just look at Reno who is serving 8 years instead of 38. 

This isn't about the judge reducing the sentence (there's not a damn thing he can do to reduce the 30 year minimum prison term, that's how Congress wrote the law).  And it isn't about the DOJ dropping the charges.  It's about Ed and Elaine presenting their case to the jury. 

Realistically, Ed is toast, but it's characteristically selfish of him to drag Elaine under the bus with him.

[John Edward Mercier]

RSA 123:1 doesn't apply.
The applicable NH coverage would be under NH Constitution Part First Article Seven...

[lastlady]

Paytriot babble aside, of course it makes a difference whether they defend themselves.  Just look at Reno who is serving 8 years instead of 38.  

This isn't about the judge reducing the sentence (there's not a damn thing he can do to reduce the 30 year minimum prison term, that's how Congress wrote the law).  And it isn't about the DOJ dropping the charges.  It's about Ed and Elaine presenting their case to the jury.  

Realistically, Ed is toast, but it's characteristically selfish of him to drag Elaine under the bus with him.

Agreed!

[JosephSHaas]

RSA 123:1 doesn't apply.
The applicable NH coverage would be under NH Constitution Part First Article Seven...

Compare:

1. RSA Ch. 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm

of: "Jurisdiction* is ceded to the United States of America ...provided, that an accurate description and plan of the lands so owned and occupied, verified by the oath of some officer of the United States having knowledge of the facts, shall be filed with the secretary of this state;.... with:

2. Article 7, N.H. Bill of Rights: " http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html

of: "The people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent state; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction*, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated** to the United States of America in congress assembled."

WHERE is the EXPRESS DELEGATION?  It does NOT exist!

An offer was made on June 14, 1883 when Congress was "assembled" right?

But was the offer 40USC255 http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575  accepted? No!

How do we get this through their thick skulls!? http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03.htm

[JosephSHaas]

The Clean-up crew to the rescue?

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090602/FRONTPAGE/906020301

Here's a copy and paste:

"She wants out of Superior mess without cleaning it up first!?
New By JosephSHaas on Wed, 06/03/2009 - 00:51

Has she ever been an Administrative Judge anywhere?

The reason I ask is that when you get a jerk-judge like Admin. Judge Kathleen McGuire to ditto a jerk-Clerk like Bill McGraw at the Merrimack County Superior Court, the resulting knee-jerk reactions withOUT a hearing is just plain against the law and their RSA Ch. 92: 2 oaths of office http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm for "complete" justice by Art. 14 .includes not only READing the case, but HEARing from the complainant just what they have as evidence of an offset. http://www.nh.gov/constitution/oaths.html

Case in point of our Article 7 of the N.H. Constitution, Part First & Bill of Rights to Art. 12 (last sentence) jurisdiction with us, UNLESS the Feds can prove that they have complied with RSA 123:1. See: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html and http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm respectfully, as backed up by: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 and http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03... respectfully, plus: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.h...

How many other cases have these knee-jerk judges allowed to be not only pushed over to the federal court as by U.S. Code for defendants, but even worse, of like what the current 4 + 1 retired jerk- judges at the Supreme Court allowed to happen of an intervenor Assistant U.S. Attorney granted of to pull a case over to there!

Disgusting! I say that BEFORE she be allowed to elevate up to the higher level, that she clean up her own court crap there even if made by other judges. THEN she can start to become the next Supreme Court "Chief" Judge because if I have my way of getting my Article 32 Petition to the House for an Impeachment against these Supreme thieves it will be House Rule 36 endorsed with the sponsor and #__ co-sponsors with their signatures and District Numbers over to the appropriate committee by House Rule 4 to see to it that the Impeachment by Art. 17 starts immediately and over to that Article 38 trial in the Senate THIS Summer! See: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/house.html and http://www.nh.gov/constitution/senate.html for both the House and the Senate.

Me IN SEARCH OF...just one State Rep. to sign to get this hand-delivered by them to Legislative Services to give to the Clerk to enter it into the record BEFORE they adjourn on June 25th so that a Public Hearing can take place sometime this Summer leading onto a Fall Impeachment Trial! I'm serious! These thieves have got to go! Then there will be four more vacancies, and we'll be saving the cost of their Article 36 retirements, as un-deserving!"