Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 34

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.info/comment/reply/113797/101038 and

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100108/OPINION/1080315

entitled: "How to boil a frog. "

of: "Thank you AV_72 for your use of the word "attack"...

...but that I'd go ONE STEP BEYOND the mere classification of the word to be restricted to only "An assault" or pre-liminary attack, as some people do, and reference that other definition of a "Seizure by a disease" and not restrict such to the micro, but also to the macro as in the federal parasite feeding off us: the host who invited them here by 1-8-17 U.S. Constitutional "Consent" with the requirement by the "shall" word in N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 that they are obligated to file their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers with our N.H. Office of Secretary of State, under what is called a Conditional Consent or offer, as yet accepted. And so when I see a FAILure of our governor to enforce all legislative mandates as is his Art. 51 duty in the N.H. Constitution, Part Second for which he shall be Art. 41 "responsible for", I find NO FAULT or criminal intent for when a citizen does stand his ground on private soil paying his Art. 12 protection money to the town by way of his property taxes, telling the town, county, state AND feds that as an Article 12 "inhabitant" he is NOT supposed to be "controllable" by ANY of the OTHER laws, as in the federal U.S. Code or Statutes at Large, until and AFTER their fulfillment of the contract, as it takes two to tango, and the rules of the dance pre-scribed in what is called The Rule of Law, and these people to the RSA Ch. 42:1 and 92:2 oaths of office to honor the law.

You know of what case I'm referring to, and so this is why I've purposely left out the who, and reported the what first here, so as to think outside the box.  The box being of the mentality of always thinking that of the intruder from the outside in, rather than what the U.S. Supreme Court judges warned us about in Vol. 116 U.S. Reports page #____ to be on the guard for "stealthy encroachments", or in other words to become aware of our situation BEFORE the lukewarm water gradually boils us all! as in the example of how to boil a frog. "

Mod: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100108/OPINION/1080315#comment-101094

[Dave Ridley]

note that t here are 2 hugely controversial anti-gun hearings at the state house on jan 11 starting 1pm....

since ed is sentenced jan 11 one could conceivably attend three major events with one trip to concord

[keith in RI]

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=5269

the latest on eds sentencing from the folks over at quatloos.... i think the competency hearing starts at 8am tomorrow

[JosephSHaas]

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?t=5269

the latest on eds sentencing from the folks over at quatloos.... i think the competency hearing starts at 8am tomorrow

Thanks Keith.

I like that part of:

"Re: Ed's sentencing

Postby LPC on Sat Jan 09, 2010 10:59 pm
My favorite argument:

    B. The Defendant Should Not Receive a Three Point Increase Pursuant to USSG §3C1.3 Because At the Time That the Crimes Set Forth In Counts I, II, V, and VII Were Committed His Release Had Been Revoked

    U.S.S.G. § 3C1.3 implements the provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 3147. The statute requires a consecutive sentence of up to ten years for any person who is convicted of an offense "committed while released under this chapter." The chapter reference is to 18 U.S.C. Ch. 207, the chapter that contains the bail statute. In this case the application of this adjustment is mistaken because the Defendant at the time of the crimes set forth in Counts I, II, V, and VII of the indictment was no longer released under the bail statute. In fact, his release under the bail statute had been terminated by the issuance of a bench warrant when he failed to appear for trial.


Let me get this straight: The statute only applies to crimes committed *before* bail is revoked for violating the terms of the release, but does not apply to crimes committed *after* bail is revoked?

The punishment for doing ONE bad thing (committing a crime after being released on bail) is worse than the punishment for doing TWO bad things (violating the terms of release and then committing a crime)?

The "logic" of Brown's lawyers makes no sense to me whatsoever.

    If §3147 is interpreted as suggested in the PSIR then any person who had ever been released under the bail statute would forever be subject to the enhanced penalty provision - even if the case in which the release order was issued had terminated. The three level adjustment suggested in the PSIR should not be sustained.


No, it would just mean that the person released on bail would have to fulfill the conditions of the release, returning to custody when required and being released free from bail, in order for the additional penalty not to apply.

Sheesh."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[JosephSHaas]

Update:

Bernie saw Ed today in jail and so his move was either this afternoon or later tonight or early tomorrow morning.

U.S. Deputy Sheriff Gary DiMartino: thank you for your call to me of earlier and to call you and the new U.S. Marshal David Cargill (retired from the N.H. State Police) again tomorrow morning at your office # ________ to find out later.  I'll again ask to see your operating papers.

In the meantime stop bothering my brother in Florida by having that N.H. F.B.I. agent Phil Christina call him asking about WHERE I am or might be located.  A servant is NOT supposed to KNOW of what his master is up to, and that includes public servants too.  You will see me in Concord tomorrow, and as I told you I will NOT be setting foot on your federal property over there at 53-55 Pleasant Street.  It's a "Disaster Area". And the word dis-aster not of what you might think but of it being in dis-honor of the law.  You all are outlaws who think that you can operate ABOVE the law. 

What I had planned to do of to horizontally shut off your in-take driveway with my car and call to the Concord P.D. for police back-up has I "think" been scrubbed, as I've yet to read the reply to my Notice, instead of a Permit, from the Code Enforcement Officer Gene Blake probably citing that NO PARKING Ordinance due to snow removal even when no snow is expected until 6:00 a.m. I think it is, and so IF I have been GRANTED such, like AFTER this time, would you please schedule our "encounter" for say 6:01 a.m. anyway for this standoff, when there will be no such Ordinance violation, just a nuisance to your operations there until you abate your nuisance to us by having your GSA landlord head file those 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers FINALly with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State as per the "shall" word in N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution.

My presumption is that the local RSA Ch. 42:1 and 92:2 oaths have NOT been changed yet to comply with the law, and NOT these U.S. Codes or Statutes at Large of them being do-nothings to enforce the N.H. Law and Article 12 in particular to prevent one of our inhabitants from being further un-lawfully "controllable" by you. I talked with Paul Cavanaugh before last Thursday when he said he working on something else to the N.H. Supreme Court by then, and so my request of for him to get his legal opinion to City Manager Tom Aspell, Jr. by Friday for to amend the oaths by this correction BEFORE Monday, January 11th and he said that he doubt that it can be done that fast. 

So one of my first stops in Concord will be to the Police Station to see IF their oaths have been changed or to tell them to speed it up, and maybe they're wondering if I'm serious, then so be it to your in-take driveway tomorrow to ask the gate-keeper if he has the proof of filing, and if not, then to have one of the group go in to see if Ed is inside, and if he is, then proof of kidnapping by you for me to call in this crime, to report of State Kidnapping by federal agents of one of our Article 12 "inhabitants" who has NOT consented to such "control". To go over the head of the local COPS who might remain corrupted by that "federal" word in their oaths, and so to call the County Sheriff Scott Hilliard at ________ plus State Police headquarters at 271-___________ and that Troop __ over there at the corner of Clinton Street at #__ Iron Works Road by I-89 Exit 2.

Hoping that such an appointment can resolve this in a peaceful manner. Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

[JosephSHaas]

Update:

...
U.S. Deputy [Marshal] Gary DiMartino:" WHY didn't " you please schedule* our "encounter" for say 6:01 a.m."? I've received nothing by either telephone or e-mail.

* "To plan for a certain** time"

**  for "Sure".

Telephone numbers:

1. Concord P.D. http://www.ci.concord.nh.us/Police/concordv2.asp 225-8600

2. County Sheriff http://maps.google.com/maps/place?hl=en&source=hp&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=merrimack+county+nh+sheriff%27s+office&fb=1&gl=us&hq=sheriff%27s+office&hnear=merrimack+county+nh&cid=13091983148265348364 225-5451

3. N.H. Dept. of Safety
a. Commissioner: http://www.nh.gov/safety/commissioner/contactus.html 603-271-2791

b. State Police http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/nhsp/contactus.html
Director's Office: (603) 271-2450
Field Operations Bureau: (603) 271-3793
Headquarters Communications: In State and Local 271-3636

Troop D
139 Iron Works Road
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: (603) 271-3333

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100111/FRONTPAGE/1110303

entitled: "No question about judge's brain: ... it is warped!

• "
  
  of: "Re: "Brown's lawyer, Michael Iacopino... argu(ed) that Brown went to trial for 'political *purposes."'"
  
  Say what? The word political* is defined as either "Of or pertaining to government or politics".  So which one is it? for the former or latter?  If the latter, then with the new Democrat U.S. Marshal David Cargill (retired from the N.H. State Police), will he agree with his Troop D buddies when they show up at the place at 8:01 a.m. + to retrieve the hostage?
  
  Because the word political is from the Greek word politikos meaning "a citizen".  When was Ed a citizen or free man?  Before he was arrested.  Arrested by WHO? Federalies in cahoots with the Lebanon P.D. who knew that Ed and his wife had paid their property taxes for Article 12 protection, but decided to let the Feds gain "control" over them anyway, either before the stand-off by ignorance of the law is NO excuse, but certainly afterward when the knew by me provided them a copy of the Secretary of State certificate of federal non-filing of their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers that are supposed to be on file with Bill Gardner's N.H. Office of Secretary of State by R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 with the "shall" word from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution that is a mandatory must requirement.
  
  So two wrongs make a right!? That he MUST be sentenced to 30 years!!!!!!!!!!+!!!!!!!!!!+!!!!!!!!!! when the first must has YET to be fulfilled! No!  It's a "May I"? case here, as in the judge thinking that he has this power, but doesn't.  The Marshal is to execute ONLY "lawful" precepts.  Will his buddies on "law enforcement" of the County +/or State correct him?  They usually say they do NOT get involved until as back-up for the locals, but that I call upon the Investigative Unit of the N.H. State Police *** to "inquire into in detail" of WHY the local Concord COPs have that RSA Ch. 42:1 + 92:2 oath with the words in there that they will support all federal statutes when it is supposed to be this Article 12 - N.H. protection - read the very last sentence of NO other laws controllable over us than that of which we give our individual or collective consent. 
  
  So yes, we gave the Feds consent alright, but of what kind?  A "conditional" consent! that has yet to be accepted by their own statutes! So Investigative Unit of the N.H. State Police: Please "examine systematically"** or in other words inspect: "to examine carefully and critically" as in not only that part of the definition of the word critical but also of in "the nature of a crisis" of "A critical situation; turning point."  The "critic" or "One who finds fault" is Officer _________ to be given the credit for today to #1 of to inspect or "examine officially" these Concord P.D. oaths as being in de-fault of RSA Ch. 92:2 over to Art. 84 of the N.H. Constitution, and "correct" same so as to counter the Feds of what they're doing to one of our Art. 12 "inhabitants" that they have kidnapped! The "System" to be "systematic" ** And then to #2 retrieve this captive from federal back to state and private soil.
  
  ** To go beyond the word "system" of being only of "A social, ECONOMIC, or political organizational form" (emphasis ADDed for the $) to that of "A set of interrelated ideas, principles, RULES***, procedures, LAWS, etc." (emphasis ADDed for "The Rule of Law" having also been broken by this judge in allowing Ed over to Portland, Maine for a hearing when the law reads that ALL proceedings shall be had in the jurisdictional territory of WHERE the crime occurred! 18USC3232)
  
  JSH, founding member of VOCALS,Inc. [Victims of a Corrupt
• American Legal System.] This corruption on appeal to Boston for The First Circuit.
  
  *** http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/nhsp/contactus.html "Investigative Services Bureau
  Major Crime Unit: (603) 271-2663"."
  
  Mod: typo of Art. 84.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's another copy and paste:

"Time to "Investigate" these Concord P.D. Oaths as "corrupt".
From:    Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Mon 1/11/10 7:13 AM
To:    Concord Police Dept. (police at onconcord.com); Secretary of State - N.H. (elections at sos.state.nh.us); pcavanaugh at onconcord.com; Dick Marple (armlaw at hotmail.com); shilliard at merrimacksheriff.net; isb at dos.nh.gov; Foster's Daily Democrat (letters at fosters.com)
Bcc:    ____________________

To: The N.H. State Police, Investigative Services Bureau, Major Crime Unit at 603-271-2663.

Would you please meet with me over at the Concord P.D. later this morning AND then help to retrieve our Article 12 "inhabitant" from the Feds right afterward.

Thank you, - - Joe Haas

Here's a copy and paste of WHY this needs to be done by you NOW:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100111/FRONTPAGE/1110303#comment-101301 "

[roadworthy]

It seems Ed got 37 years after a lengthy rant about the illuminati, the jesuits and the moose club.  Informing the judge that he was a US Constitution Ranger conducting an investigation apparently held no sway.

[jzacker]

It seems Ed got 37 years after a lengthy rant about the illuminati, the jesuits and the moose club.  Informing the judge that he was a US Constitution Ranger conducting an investigation apparently held no sway.

Any details about what was said?  What about Ed's psych eval?

[KBCraig]

Here's the big UL article about it.

http://unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Ed+Brown+erupts%2c+gets+37+years&articleId=0f414ff5-a0d1-4a30-b917-f5d4c70da227

[Kat Kanning]

"I have no doubt in my mind that Mr. Brown would have killed multiple marshals if they hadn't dealt with him so quickly," Singal said during the competency and sentencing hearing in U.S. District Court.

You know, they act like Ed was out hunting feds, instead of being scared to death in his own home because the feds were hunting him.

[Russell Kanning]

he made the front page of yahoo
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/NH-tax-evader-gets-37-years-apf-2030058724.html?x=0&.v=1&.pf=taxes&mod=pf-taxes

maybe it is a monitor article

they act like they peacefully dealt with ed and elaine
yea tasering on older woman is very peaceful

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste of my e-mail to Elaine today for a Progress Report, of me today going to the Mayor to have this as an agenda item #___ for the next Concord City Council meeting on: ___________ ___, 2010 @ ____:_____ o'clock p.m. to have them "correct" their RSA Ch. 42:1 and 92:2 oaths over there, .......plus to type up these three RSA Ch. 643:1 "Official Oppression" charges against Barthlremes, Hillard and Barry of the State Dept. of Un-Safety that includes the N.H. State Police of policing only us and NOT these federal trespassers!, The do-nothing Merrimack County Sheriff who took orders from Monier of to "Stand Down!" (of when Dick Marple and I were in his office when he made the call, and likewise from new Marshal David Cargill, of the N.H. State Police - yeah! corruption! my papers on this way before in time were given to him by Nancy Cassidy she said, but either she lied, or he lied to me as having never received them, somebody is a liar!, and local C.O.P./ Chief of Police, .......giving a copy thereof to the Merrimack County Attorney for these misdemeanors and NOT the A.G.'s Office since they handle ONLY felony prosecutions....... And a re-visit to Gregg's Office for a Legislative check against the executive G.S.A. agent. ....... Not to forget those 18 USC 3232 illegal trips to Portland, Maine, to get Gregg AND Hodes in Concord, plus Shea-Porter and Shaheen, in Dover to get this money back! .........And with another call, write (and what? visit?) to the federal fraud unit.)

- - Joe

"He got 37 to your 35 years, so 2 more than you.  It started at about 8:30 a.m. and the ONLY supporter inside was Marie.  There were no supporters outside on the sidewalk. I got to Reme's Restaurant at about 9:30 a.m. to see if anybody was around.  After the sentence Marie got on Channel 9 at the steps (over to the 6 p.m. but not the 11 p.m. news) and we went to have lunch there (meatball sub special).  Afterward we went to STAPLES to copy what I had done earlier that day, and we both made a visit to see Nancy Cassidy, the receptionist for the N.H. Dept. of Safety Commissioner who was not in, and so I left my papers with her: my papers being: - - - - -(1) a copy of the denial by the City of Concord Code enforcement officer Gene Blake to parallel park my car against the entrance driveway between 1 + 11 South Street Sunday night 11 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. yesterday morning.  It was based upon the Chief of Police saying to me on the phone at 8:00 a.m. some day last week that he'd "just as soon" have me do his law enforcement for him since his 1986 oath reads of beyond the RSA Ch. 42:1 + 92:2 words of to support the federal statutes (at large meaning the U.S. Codes) that is AGAINST the very Article 12 he is supposed to support! in that no inhabitants here (free or otherwise, like Ed incarcerated)is "controllable" under any other laws than what we as a group or individual "Consent" to!  Our N.H. Legislature or General Court on June 14, 1883 by R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 gave conditional consent to the feds but only IF they comply with the law: both 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution and our statute, that requires by the "shall" word that means that they must file their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State since by the Adams case of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1943 as quoted by Bob Schulz on his website (who I met that day up at your place) an offer not accepted is NOT "Consent." Danny sending me the transcript of the Side Bar on this when Sven Weiberg his attorney from Portsmouth asked Reno on the witness stand in reply to what Assistant U.S. Attorney Bob Kinsella did ask him if he did anything to try to resolve this peacefully with the Marshals, and he said: no (as in not directly), but should have said yes: as indirectly through me who took our Art. 41 petition he signed too up there in Plainfield to our governor John Lynch for him to Art. 51 enforce ALL legislative mandates (as by the SHALL word), that he shall be Art. 41 "responsible for".  Unfortunately that responsibility NOT to me as an individual un-harmed in the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims as they granted the Motion to Dismiss my Case #2009-0013 filed Oct. 15, 2008, for my voluntary contribution of time fighting this that I labeled stolen time, and by case-law applicable to loss of wages from work, as I did not work that night of the Plainfield to Lebanon P.D. arrest of me going to Town Hall that June 20, 2007, and so put into my objection to their latest Chairman decision, for a hoped-for en banc hearing onto a hearing on the merits, or else I can re-file, since the A.G.'s office has this Claim for $100 that they had previously denied, of a letter from my employer of how much I make there and my Affidavit of not being there that night, losing: $xx.xx plus gas and taxi money to Bernie to pick me up at the Lebanon P.D. and drive up and back from Concord. - - - - (2) a copy of my Comment yesterday morning @ 7:01 and amended at 7:32 a.m. to "The Concord Monitor" (a copy and paste in the e-mail to follow) that was likewise on a copy and paste in my: - - - - - (3)e-mail of 7:13 a.m. to The Concord P.D., Sec. of State, Paul Cavanaugh, City Solicitor, Dick Marple, Scott Hilliard, Merrimack County Sheriff, isb = the anonymous e-mail at the N.H. State Police but with my name indicated, and "Foster's Daily Democrat" in Dover (Marie to try to visit Ed if there today, and me still looking for an answer from that Strafford County Superior Court judge for my Motion to Attach the Body of Ed in my civil case against the Board of Commissioners heading for a jury trial in July for damages being of them to pay me for stolen time OR to get my "counsel" to Ed LATE, and so to re-open his latest case as his "counsel" from me was stolen! by not allowing me in there based upon some federal policy over-ride of our Art. 12 rights!). - - - - (4) being a copy of the N.H. Underground printout of my "Update" to Gary DiMartino who called me Sunday night asking WHERE I was on my cell phone (as if they don't have GPS satellite locating technology) AND N.H. 603 F.B.I. agent Phil Christina who even called my brother in Florida.  I met with Phil only for a few seconds by my car yesterday morning outside the City Library in the free 20-minute parking spot after I had gone in to see: the Code Assistant, the receptionist in the Police Station and Paul Cavanaugh who says that he's working on a memo to all dept. but WHEN!?  I wanted this "corrected" by last Friday! And so today to write up a request to appear before the Concord City Counsel on this wrong that if righted could have resulted in police law enforcement against the Feds as an executive  check-and balance for our Art. 12 inhabitant Ed, since my latest verification of non-federal filing is in a letterhead from Dave Scanlon, Deputy Sec. of State on Dec. 23, 2009 and so my visit yesterday too to U.S. Senator Judd Gregg's office at 4:55 p.m. to file my COMPLAINT that he straighten out his Art. III, Sec. 1 U.S. "inferior court of Congress" by having their landlord of the G.S.A. head Mr. Leeds finally file these papers proving that they had NO jurisdictional authority before that! Me to visit Gregg's office today for a follow-up call to GSA from the receptionist's desk as I did once before "calling from Judd Gregg's office" (on my cell phone). - - - - - And (5) My Update at the N.H.U. of 5:49 a.m. 1-10, Mon. (yesterday morning) with the telephone numbers to these outfits, including a visit after Reme's first visit to the State Police Troop D over at Exit 2 off of I-89 with P.T. Kenneen (Terrance/ Terry Patrick) who said he'd look into it, but too late now to prevent! So me to write up criminal charges as per the Respondeat Superior against his ultimate boss of Barthelmes, Dept. of Safety Commissioner, and Sheriff Hillard plus local C.O.P. Rbt. Barry of RSA Ch. 643:1 "Official Oppression" a misdemeanor to get them each a year in jail IF prosecuted by the County Attorney getting a copy of this, or else me to privately prosecute for only the $2,000 maximum fine, since by the Rita Premo case of Year 2000 at the N.H. Supreme Court I can do this, as I did against Deputy U.S. Marshall Jamie Barry for assault, but only AFTER Ed Kelly, the Concord District Court judge (my former tenant's attorney in Plymouth when I was in Ashland) has that House Bill of Address by Rep. Dan Itse of Freemont against him later this month or next this Legislative Session because the Premo vote was 4 to 1, and Kelly using Joe Nadeau's dissenting opinion as his case law BELIEVE IT OR NOT!  Happy New Year! -- Joe"

"Joe,

Ed's hearing was this morning.  Do you know what happened?  Did he get returned to Strafford, or immediately transferred as I was?

Please let me know as soon as possible.

Thanks

Elaine"

[JosephSHaas]

"Elaine: Here's the copy and paste of my words over at The "Concord Monitor" that I did refer to in my last e-mail to you.

I did just call Janice at The Concord City Clerk's Office.  She told me to put my request in writing, re: the 2-page printout of my Reply #9430 on page 629 just today with underline or brackets with notes of referring to them: The Members of the City Council, of which she makes about 25 copies for distribution to the library and elsewhere.

The time table being of it goes to City Council Tue., Feb. 8th to refer to the legal dept. for Paul to get back to them for their March meeting that if not "corrected" by them right then and there then for to please include me in as an Agenda item to talk about this at their April meeting.

What I'd also like is this correction with a verbal +/or written apology for their Code Agent and C.O.P. not protecting Ed as an Art. 12 inhabitant, THEN that could be used by Danny, Reno and Jason in their Appeal to Boston on WHY the jurisdictional issue was not checked locally by the executives withIN the state against the Feds.

So I think I'll wait to see what they do about an apology that is worth more than what I could get from them financial as a qui tam claimant to the criminal fines of $2000 x 3 = $6,000 for RSA Ch. 643:1 Official Oppression, since they love wealth over liberty to some degree but changing for the better for all of us as the truth goes marching on!  - - Joe"