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

[J’raxis 270145]

Oh good, you can access the site today, joehaas

Reference: "Database Error: MySQL server has gone away
File: /home/nhunderg/public_html/forum/Sources/Security.php
Line: 279"

Temporary error; things look fine now. Means the database was down for a moment.

[JosephSHaas]

...yet to printout, copy and deliver from here to both Federal Rep. Paul Hodes* and U.S. Senator Judd Gregg** (both with offices in Concord) is:

Would you please see to it for WHO this Federal Agent is supposed to be to have filed and to file these N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 documents ....

Update: The staff receptionist Mr. ______ and Ms. ______ for Hodes and Gregg were served by me in person this afternoon at exactly: 4:36 p.m. and 4:50 o'clock p.m. respectfully, with the copy of this printout, as signed plus the "Bicameral Superiors" Comment of 6/6 too of 09:28 AM in reply to Raymond Karczewski's two posts of 6/5, Fri. @ 05:13 and before that of 6/4 last Thursday @ 19:11 p.m. also copied and delivered on two pages (both sides now) where the heading is: "JUDGE SINGAL, Answer the Question of Jurisdiction and Set Ed and Elaine Brown Free."

Yours truly, - - Joe

[Kat Kanning]

Oh good, you can access the site today, joehaas

Reference: "Database Error: MySQL server has gone away
File: /home/nhunderg/public_html/forum/Sources/Security.php
Line: 279"

Temporary error; things look fine now. Means the database was down for a moment.

Shoot, I told him that the feds were trying to keep him from reading the forum.

[JosephSHaas]

So as not to have a shrunk version of this with the side notes from over at: http://www.theatla.com/mark-howard.html for THE AMERICAN TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, The Top 100 Trial Lawyers, here's a copy and paste for Mark Howard:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Mark joined Kacavas Ramsdell & Howard in 2006 after 8 years as a federal prosecutor in the United States Attorney's Office, and 19 years of trial experience in federal and state courts in New Hampshire and throughout the country. His practice includes federal and state criminal defense, federal and state appeals, commercial litigation, personal injury and professional liability matters.

As an Assistant United States Attorney from 1998 to 2006, Mark prosecuted hundreds of federal felony offenses. As a former supervisor of violent crimes in the U.S. Attorney's Office, Mark focused on federal firearms laws, robberies and narcotics offenses. As supervisor of criminal appeals, Mark not only oversaw the appellate work of other attorneys, but also personally handled over 30 criminal appeals in the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, Massachusetts.

Prior to joining the U.S. Attorney's Office, Mark was a homicide prosecutor in the New Hampshire Attorney General's Office from 1988 to 1991. Mark prosecuted many murder cases and represented the State before the New Hampshire Supreme Court in over 25 criminal appeals. From 1991 and 1998, Mark practiced as a civil trial attorney with the Manchester law firm of Merrill & Broderick (and its successor firms), where he tried such diverse matters as multi-million dollar asbestos property damage cases, legal and other professional liability matters, commercial disputes, and personal injury claims.

Mark has been a member of the New Hampshire Bar Association since 1987, and served as Chair of the Ethics Committee from 1993 to 1997. In 1997, Mark was awarded the New Hampshire Bar Foundation's Robert E. Kirby Award, which is presented to a New Hampshire lawyer under the age of 35 who exhibits outstanding professionalism, diligence, competence and perspective.

In addition to his trial practice, Mark served from 1994 to 2002 as an adjunct professor law at the Pierce Law Center in Concord, New Hampshire, where he taught criminal law and courses in professional ethics and federal court jurisdiction. Mark lectures frequently on criminal competency and insanity issues, as well as federal sentencing, at the Pierce Law Center and at the Vermont Law School. In 2002, Mark was invited to lecture at the University of Wales at Aberystwyth in the United Kingdom.
Memberships:

    * New Hampshire Bar Association
    * New Hampshire Trial Lawyers Association
    * American Trial Lawyers Association
    * New Hampshire Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

As the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 Chairman appointed by the Chief Judge of the N.H. Supreme Court to the N.H. State Board of Claims http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-LV-541-B.htm and in particular, section 3 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LV/541-B/541-B-3.htm that I just found out about last night with a copy of his name as Chair on the letterhead to me from the Board's secretary Melissa Dudley in an attachment to her e-mail of 2:38 p.m. (exactly 2 hrs. before I was in Hodes' office delivering to him my request for his to contact the Congressional Research Service to find out WHO is supposed to be filing these RSA 123:1 papers) I'll have to file a Motion to Disqualify him too an an outlaw for having been a federal prosecutor for over eight ( 8 ) years!!!!!!!!

My written objection to his 2-page ORDER of Tuesday, June 9, 2009 to follow...

[JosephSHaas]

Sold out at the news stand; to check the library:

http://www.unionleader.com/default.aspx?storyDate=2009-06-10

"Still just 50 cents!  - - Browns' lawyers say they were trying to defend home".

Page #_____. Article by: ________________________________

Mod: http://nhunionleader.newsstand.com/index.cfm?NSEMC=TULTULPRN20050215EE

Free Sample, to copy and paste to here?

[JosephSHaas]

My latest comment over at the http://www.concordmonitor.com/  :

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090611/FRONTPAGE/906110353/1013


"The Moderator is a Nazi! Mark Potok is a jerk! (CTN to help).
New By JosephSHaas on Thu, 06/11/2009 - 08:39

What a lazy Moderator we have here! Why don't you just erase that "part" of the posting so that we who arrive here late can have at least something to go on. You're worse than a Nazi guard of a POW camp in Germany during WWII; at least then they only used scissors to cut out a portion of the letter. But don't feel bad, the F.C.I.'s in America do what you do too, in returning the entire envelope when it's only one sheet of several they don't like.

BTW I heard on the ABC-TV News last night that James Von Brunn's ex-wife, Patricia Taylor Von Brunn, from when they lived on Blueberry Lane in Lebanon, N.H. during the 1970s into the early 1980s, as would-be land developers, was going to be on "Good Morning America" today, but haven't heard an announcement of it to the 9:00 a.m. ending? or does it go to 10 a.m.? Sorry I haven't seen these programs since the 1990s with Joan London.

Plus they had on that Mark Potok jerk* from the Southern Poverty Law Center at about 7:10 a.m. today talking about those who say that the Federal Reserve System is some "secret" this or that must be a loonie or something, that I find revolting, as the owners are "secret"; see this website just sent to me from a friend who I've known from the 1970s who was in N.H. too back then, and who met James Von Brunn just two weeks ago in person and was surprised by what happened yesterday. http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/ ** [See also: http://www.nickelrant.com/rants/090610rant.htm he did write to me later.]

* This Potok jerk who called Ed a militant. I called Potok to try to talk to him about this lie, and he refused to return my call. The word of to "militate" being to use force as evidence, and so like in the Ed Brown case, WHO is the REAL militant but those of the U.S. Marshal's Office! Ed has the evidence by way of the gold-sealed certificate of federal non-filing to N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, because there is no 40USC255 paperwork, and so the U.S. Government, our paid agents, to do their job in a lawful manner be the REAL outlaws! So as seen on Hannity FOX-TV last night, to do what actor Craig T. Nelson said of to withhold that portion of your taxes in protest is THE thing to do. Why should somebody not doing their job be paid!? If the employer doesn't fire them, then to fire the fire-er by not paying them either! Thanks Craig, more power to you."

Mod: ** http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1240.htm click on the "ownership" link goes to: http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_10/woolsey-fed.html for this 6-cents per FRN but leaves off that Sec. 16 of the 1913 contract!

[John Edward Mercier]

The owners of the Federal Reserve System?
The owners of the various member banks are public... just need to know where to write the request.

[JosephSHaas]

The owners of the Federal Reserve System?
The owners of the various member banks are public... just need to know where to write the request.

Check out "The Lewis decision" http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_10/sidebars.html just before footnote #5 of the "ownership" link.  Reminds me of that Rev. Ed Wayland case of him from Biddeford, Maine run over by that Fed truck in Boston in the 1980s and his lawsuit down there too.  Him having gotten cancer then moved to Mexico for to try to find a cure, and where he died. He was a friend of my friend Roger M. Rush of then on Forrest Ave. in Portland, Maine who ran for Cumberland County Sheriff and then moved out west to his gold mine, leaving his wife Joyce to the house there.

Mod: By GOOGLE for a search for: "Roger M. Rush", I did find only one entry on one page =

http://books.google.com/books?id=3jjNW-_TnusC&pg=PA96&lpg=PA96&dq=%22Roger+M.+Rush%22&source=bl&ots=ShM_gRohcz&sig=pZk0dNS2Sqj2QBKQC5d9C-ehcPs&hl=en&ei=ukcxSvO3FM2EtwfIuv3XBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

[JosephSHaas]

...
My written objection to his 2-page ORDER of Tuesday, June 9, 2009 to follow...

Here's a copy and paste:

"To: Melissa Dudley, Secretary
State Board of Claims
FPLC, Concord, N.H. 0301
603: 513:5126

Dear Melissa:

--This is to follow-up my telephone call to you of about 10:00 o'clock a.m. this morning before the server to me for my internet crashed and a part had to be NOT replaced, BUT repaired they said in a call back at about 3:00 p.m. (5 hours later) now having to re-write what I had originally wrote since it was not saved!

--I had originally asked you and so repeat now of for WHEN did you scan and then send by e-mail forward the 25-pages from my "FOLLOW UP" of having been filed with the Secretary of State by me last Wednesday, June 3rd to the Chairman, as to the time yesterday, June 9th = from ___:___ to ___:___ o'clock am/pm for all twenty-five pages from start to finish and presumably ALL delivered to him at his e-mail account BEFORE the ORDER that was received by you WHEN? @ ___:____ o'clock am/pm that you re-forwarded to me at exactly 2:38 p.m. Plus also did you likewise send copies by forward to the other members of this Board too? And if so when? At the same time, by cc? and did you save a copy in your Sent folder, and if so, may I please have a copy of it?

--The reason I ask is that the ORDER only deals with the loss of "time" as indicated in the first paragraph of my list of EXHIBITS on page 9 of this "FOLLOW-UP", suggesting to me that the ORDER was written BEFORE receipt, if at all of what you had sent, as proof of sending is NOT proof of delivery, and that of WHEN, if any time at all, did the Chairman after its receipt, open it up and READ* this material!? To ask him this question and more on Friday morning. ___

--* Not merely to READ, but by Rule 206.01(f) on page 11 of the 10/28/05 copies given to me by Paula last week, of that "The chair shall rule upon a motion after FULL consideration of ALL objections and applicable law." (emphasis ADDed) So my further questions to him for Friday's meeting are also: (1) WHEN, if at all, was there a deliberation with other(s) for definition #1 of 3 for the word "consideration"? = _____________________ (this fill-in the blank for WHO) and (2) what weight was the "factor" being of both: (a) that there was no RSA 99-D:2 7-day request in writing  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/99-D/99-D-2.htm from the governor to the A.G.'s office for them to be "required", but not prohibited, and so them appearing anyway, so no great weight here I presume, but that of (b) the fact that of both of them (the governor and Attorney General's Office) being both in violation of Rule 302.04(b)(1) on page 32 in that there was no response within 30 days of the receipt on October 15th, 2008, that should have resulted in a technical default, since the end does not justify the means, since we are supposed to have both procedural AND substantive due process of law by the 5th & 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution!  To say otherwise is to put oneself in extreme denial as a sociopath needing medical attention!  This fact overlooked as not dealt with in this ORDER.  The Motion to Dismiss having been their so-called response, but OUTside the time frame, and now this hasty re-action by the Chairman using only a fifth of the exhibits!!!!! Such is in violation of both Art. 14, Pt. 1 N.H. Const. http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html for "complete"ness to the full definition of the word consideration as spelled out in RSA Ch. 21:2 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/I/21/21-2.htm

--The ORDER highlighting this "time" in both paragraphs #1+4 of 6, and going from just that bodily injury in paragraph #2 to this personal injury in paragraph #3 is somewhat of an improvement that the gist of my "Follow-Up" was supposedly read to some degree, but to call it only my "time" in dealing with the "political" process and limiting it to "lost wages" only for a convenient way of "a measure of monetary damages" leaves out the fact in EXHIBIT #6 that a $50.00 bill inside the stolen envelope was taken for which could have been used to hire legal counsel BEFORE the arrest of Ed Brown and his wife Elaine on Thursday, October 4th, 2007 over-and-out of their property.

- -The "political" dealing with "The policies or affairs of government", and the word policies, in the plural, from the word: policy, meaning: 2. "A written contract" as in the 1. "method of action adopted by a government" especially "designed to influence and determine decisions" or "A guiding principle or procedure".  Thus THE contract in this case being THE Constitution and Art. 51, Part 2 http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html to be exact, in that the governor SHALL, as in a must/ mandatory requirement "execute the laws of the state AND of the United States" (emphasis ADDed for both RSA 123:1 and 40USC255) for which by Article 41 he "shall be RESPONSIBLE for the faithful execution of the laws." [emphasis ADDed for this word meaning to not only "Being the source or CAUSE of something (with for)" but also: "Involving PERSONAL ability to act".

--In this case the CAUSE and effect being: that be-CAUSE of the governor's FAILure to act as my "agent" to enforce the laws, the effect or result was my having to try to get the locals and county "agents" to Art. 12 "protect" at the lower levels of government, and by so trying did irritate one Council woman in Lebanon for to protect Elaine's Dentist Building from a break and enter that she filed a charge against me with the local police for Criminal Threatening that resulted in me being arrested on my way to the Plainfield Town Hall to meet with The Board of Selectmen that June 20, 2007 night, and subsequent loss of wages as having not worked the 2nd shift at work that night, my claim for $100.00 filed with the A.G.'s Victim's Fund, and me still withOUT my Art. III, Sec. 2, Clause 3 Day in Court!

--Thus here are these conveniently measured amounts for monetary damages of stolen time in part 5 or (e) of my Exhibits, and so to see to it that this ORDER directed to me be sent back to The FULL Board to NOT accept it and proceed onto the full hearing on the claim, including those stolen rights of association with my friends the Browns by way of telephone, internet, mail, and meeting on PRIVATE property that they have been away from for over 1.5 year now!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P. O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone)

P.S. According to documentation at the N.H. Supreme Court Clerk's Office, this Chairman Mark Howard of Manchester was appointed March 9th to become effective April 1st '09, but that upon a call over to The Secretary of State's Office, they have no recording yet of his RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office.  Would you please verify that he took it on: ___________ with a copy to me to show that this ORDER is legitimate."

[JosephSHaas]

Here's what I did receive and read last night at 9:41 p.m. in the attachment to the e-mail of 3:27 PM from Melissa Dudley, the Secretary to the N.H. State Board of Claims per my Oct. 15, 2008 claim not docketed in until Year 2009 as #13, and for a hearing not scheduled now until September ___ almost a full year later!!!!

"Notice is hereby given that the Order on the motion to dismiss is withdrawn pending further consideration of Mr. Haas' submission to the Secretary of State on or about June 3, 2009.  The matter is removed from the June 12, 2009, docket* and will be placed on the next regularly scheduled hearing docket. - - Mark E. Howard, Chair, New Hampshire Board of Claims  DATED: June 11, 2009  DISTRIBUTION: Joseph S. Haas ... Danielle L. Pacik, Assistant Attorney General ...."

* 10:30 o'clock a.m.

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

Sold out at the news stand; to check the library:

http://www.unionleader.com/default.aspx?storyDate=2009-06-10

"Still just 50 cents!  - - Browns' lawyers say they were trying to defend home".

Page #_____. Article by: ________________________________

Mod: http://nhunionleader.newsstand.com/index.cfm?NSEMC=TULTULPRN20050215EE

Free Sample, to copy and paste to here?

Here's what was written By Kathryn Marchocki, New Hampshire Union Leader, Vol. 147, No. 62, for: Wednesday, 10 June 2009 @ pages A1 + 8:

"Attorneys: Couple has a 'well-founded fear'.  Armed standoff: Browns' lawyers say they were trying to defend home.

--Attorneys for convicted tax evaders Edward and Elaine Brown likely will argue the former Plainfield couple's armed standoff with federal agents was a justifiable attempt to defend themselves and their homes.

-'A jury could find by a preponderance of the evidence that any possession of firearms by / (page A8:) Elaine Brown after June 7, 2007 was justified by a well-founded fear that the government was prepared to use excessive, unlawful force against her,' her attorney Bjorn Lange, wrote in a motion filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Concord.

--The Browns court-appointed lawyers claim the large-scale show of force by at least 174 federal, state and local law enforcers involved in the unsuccessful June 2007 attempt to arrest the couple changed the nature of the 10-month stand-off.  As a result, the Browns went from non-violent offenders peaceably resisting arrest at their Plainfield compound to a couple who believed they had to defend themselves from death at the hands of law enforcers, defense attorneys argued.

--The lawyers filed motions requesting the court order the federal government to provide them with all evidence to support this defense. Attorney Michael J. Iacopino said Edward Brown, 66, is entitled to the same information, claiming the same facts and assertions apply to him.  Federal prosecutors refused to release the evidence, the attorneys said.

--It was the defense attorneys' first court filing since the Browns agreed last week to let the attorneys represent them when they go to trial for conspiracy against the United States, weapons possession and obstruction of justice charges. Trial begins June 30.

--Judge George Z. Singal gave federal prosecutors until noon today* to respond to their requests.

--Law enforcers lying in wait for Edward Brown to get his mail at the end of his druiveway on June 7, 2007 instead 'tazered' and shot at a Brown supporter, who was interrogated and released, the defense wrote.  After that, the presence of law enforcers around the Brown residence became apparent, they claimed.

--The behavior of Elaine Brown, 68, changed from 'passively refusing to surrender' to taking up arms to defend herself, Lange wrote.

--'That police conduct signaled to Elaine Brown that the government was prepared to use unlawful, excessive force against her, even though the crimes then at issue involved tax evasion and money laundering.' Lange wrote.

--Defense attorneys are seeking access to a list of all armored vehicles, cruisers, SUVs, ambulances, and other vehicles available to government agents on June 7, 2007, descriptions of uniforms, firearms and equipment law enforcers wore or carried, the names of all involved in the apprehension and questioning of Daniel Riley, the Brown supporter taken into custody.

-The Browns were convicted in January 2007 of income tax evasion and money laundering.  The couple claimed there is no law that requires them to pay federal income taxes.

--The couple not only refused to appear at their April 2007 sentencing where they were ordered to serve 63 months in federal prison, but they remained holed up in their fortress-like home for 10 months until undercover federal agents arrested them Oct. 4, 2007.

--An 11-count indictment handed up Jan. 21 accused the couple of obstruction of justice, possessing a firearm in connection with a violent crime, conspiring to precent federal agents from arresting them, conspiring against the United States and failure to appear for sentencing on tax charges."

JSH

[JosephSHaas]

To be or not to be there next Thursday, June 18th:

Here's another copy and paste: [ regarding this right to 6th Amendment "Counsel" ]

"
Response to inquiry?
From:    Jean L. Miccolo (jmiccolo at co.strafford.nh.us)
Sent:    Fri 6/12/09 2:29 PM
To:    'Joseph S. Haas' (josephshaas at hotmail.com)

Good Afternoon Mr. Haas:

I spoke to Administrator Bower regarding your inquiry to meet with the Commissioners regarding a vote on your 5th Amendment Rights. He informed me that County Attorney Velardi will be sending you a letter via USPS responding to several of your inquiries and addressing your request to meet with the Commissioners.

Jean L. Miccolo, Administrative Assistant

Strafford County Commissioners Office

603.516.7100, jmiccolo at co.strafford.nh.us

The first day of your new beginning: Knowledge fueled by emotion equals action. Action is the ingredient that ensures results. Only action can cause reaction; only positive action can cause positive reaction. "

[DonnaVanMeter]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090615/FRONTPAGE/906150303

[John Edward Mercier]

The owners of the Federal Reserve System?
The owners of the various member banks are public... just need to know where to write the request.

Check out "The Lewis decision" http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_10/sidebars.html just before footnote #5 of the "ownership" link.  Reminds me of that Rev. Ed Wayland case of him from Biddeford, Maine run over by that Fed truck in Boston in the 1980s and his lawsuit down there too.  Him having gotten cancer then moved to Mexico for to try to find a cure, and where he died. He was a friend of my friend Roger M. Rush of then on Forrest Ave. in Portland, Maine who ran for Cumberland County Sheriff and then moved out west to his gold mine, leaving his wife Joyce to the house there.

Mod: By GOOGLE for a search for: "Roger M. Rush", I did find only one entry on one page =

http://books.google.com/books?id=3jjNW-_TnusC&pg=PA96&lpg=PA96&dq=%22Roger+M.+Rush%22&source=bl&ots=ShM_gRohcz&sig=pZk0dNS2Sqj2QBKQC5d9C-ehcPs&hl=en&ei=ukcxSvO3FM2EtwfIuv3XBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

That would be the actual bank though... not the system. Congress enacted the system... and the US Treasury is accreditted any profit from the system.

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090615/FRONTPAGE/906150303

Thanks Donna.  I did just post my reply over there at exactly 10:38 a.m. this morning, and citing that 18 USC 242, of these Federal militants who are depriving Ed & Elaine plus the Freedom Four the protections of the law from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution to NH RSA 123:1 for the process, since until that filing, Art. 12, N.H. is supposed to be in force, and us N.H. taxpayers are being ripped off too: by the N.H. State Police, and also the people in the counties of both Merrimack and Strafford, by their Sheriffs refusing to honor their RSA Ch. 92:2 oaths of office! The ones in Grafton and Sullivan Counties worthless too!!

So WHEN Obama's team members read this, and report back to him of WHO to appoint as the next U.S. Attorney and Marshal, it will be one who will go after these bad apple Republicans who do violate 18 USC 242, and so the McAuliffe/Singal team of judges and Coluntono/Monier team of enforcers to each spend up to ten (10) years in a Federal Correctional Facility, until they are corrected, like to finally write for their release in the SAME time that they have put Ed & Elaine plus Danny, Reno, Jason and Bob, all combined time of almost 2 years each x 6 = 12 years divided by these 4 outlaws = 3 years each!!! or will their Clerks and/or Deputies do what's right to avoid being charged too? Like some Deputy on a pick-up of Ed in Dover to drive to Concord alright, but to the N.H. State Police Headquarters instead upon some governor's order to finally assert his Art. 41 + 51 powers:

Sample Order: I, John H. Lynch, of Hopkinton, in my authority as governor of this state do hereby assert my executive check and balance against a federal government invasion into our state withOUT lawful authority, as no RSA 123:1 filing be there per Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 17 U.S. Constitution, and so do hereby order that the State Police take into custody, any and all U.S. Marshal and/or his Deputies, or County Sheriff(s) and/or his/their Deputy/ies too on any Transport Order from any U.S. District Court judge of Concord, or Capitol, in that we are in authority over them until such filing take place, and so take into custody any and all such persons acting outside this law, to put to P.R. bail for the charges of kidnapping, for knowingly being in violation of the law, or not, as by a Respondeat Superior relay of the charges to their Superiors to have to answer all the way up to the White House V.P. if necessary! as this is one of his Art. III "inferior" courts by section 1 thereof our U.S. Constitution whose judges and staff are all acting outside the law, and for which he will have to answer too, as to when he was also notified of this error and did nothing to correct it.

-- On 2nd thought: to charge Gregg and Hodes too, thus 4 + 2 = 6 outlaws into 12 years = only 2 years each, as I doubt that when Pelosi and Biden hear about this that they will let this injustice continue and will be filing those blueprints down at the GSA in Boston with our S of S right away! thus to move "forward" this case with THAT evidence of non-jurisdiction up to that point-in-time. A motion for Habeas Corpus by Ed granted immediately as to effect how a Motion for Early Release by them be dealt with too. Like for some "good-time" credits" to be given to the first Fed reading this and acting on it, in cooperation with our state authorities.

Sample letter from a Deputy U.S. Marshal: I've read what Mr. Haas has written on the internet, and he is correct. I do hereby deliver the victims Ed & Elaine Brown to the N.H. State Police as Ordered by Gov. Lynch. Or: Deputy Sheriff: I do hereby deliver Ed & Elaine Brown to the N.H. State Police in order that the words in the last sentence of Art. 12 be honored for which I have taken an RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office.