Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 35

[JosephSHaas]

See #4 below dealing with this jurisdictional issue that the Feds have NOT complied with THE law!

A copy and paste:

"Today's Agenda.
From:    Joseph S. Haas (josephshaas at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Tue 1/19/10 8:01 AM
To:    Dick Marple (armlaw at hotmail.com)
Bcc:  ___________________________

Dick,

Check out: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2010/houcal2010_07.html

for today, tomorrow (Wed.) and Thursday 1/19, 20 + 21 (Senate later)...

I've only looked over today's House right now, and find of interest:

1.) Municipal & Local 301 LOB
a. HB 1382 relative to Workforce Housing 10:00 a.m.
b. HB 1395   "         "   "              "         10:30 a.m.

2.) Election Law, 308 LOB
10:15 a.m. - :30 HB 1245 require birth certs. for nominations of Pres. & V.P.

3.) Finance, 210 LOB
1:00 p.m. HB 1664 make reductions in budget for FY2011
[ includes those Art. 36 judge widow pensions for NO "actual" services?
http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html  ]

4.) State-Fed. 305 LOB
2:00 p.m.* HCR 29 requiring Congress to reaffirm to adhere to the Constitution and all internal agreements and treaties [note: to Dottie about the Declaration of Human Rights, #___? for something like: our Art. 14 N.H. "complete" evidence of jurisdictional matters in ALL (state and federal) criminal cases to be allowed to be presented to the triers of the facts being THE trial jury members, not just the judge!]

3:30 p.m.: HJR 20 something about the victims fund and federal contributions.

* also at 2:00 p.m.

5.) Criminal Justice 208 LOB 2:00 o'clock p.m.
HB1630-FN relative to filing criminal complaints (as allowed by PRIVATE parties per the Premo case of 2000).

See you there, -- Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Thanks Kurt:   re: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=244728133061

In addition to this 37 seconds of silence set for March 6th for wherever you are between 3 + 3:30 p.m. that day, I suggest that you reflect on WHO in the local, county, and state government here in N.H. has done you a dis-service too as by maybe RSA Ch. 643:1 of "Official Oppression" in that AFTER they were told to Wise Up, and don't, then to sue them criminally in your local district court.  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/643/643-1.htm

My plan is to attend today's event @ 2:00 p.m. at the State House re: HB1630 that expands the current case-law per the Rita Premo case * of 2002 of fine-only complaints to jail time, and maybe to limit such to 10 days as per our equal rights in Articles 22+23, Pt. 2, N.H. Constitution ** about contempt of either the Executive or Legislative, and since then by Art. 72-a, *** the Judiciary has branched out from UNDER the Legislative to be their own supposed co-equal branch, but whose judges dish out in-justice to contempts OVER 10 days, and so the victims thereof to get $compensation as like to attach the judge's salary by a House Bill of Address, and send that offender away for up to 10 days in jail too!  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2010/HB1630.html and http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_status.aspx?lsr=2609&sy=2010&sortoption=billnumber&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=HB1630 plus: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=2609&sy=2010&sortoption=billnumber&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=HB1630

* http://www.courts.state.nh.us/supreme/opinions/2002/0209/marti098.htm

** http://www.nh.gov/constitution/house.html

*** http://www.nh.gov/constitution/judicial.html

Yours truly, - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059, e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com

cc: by forward of this to The House Judiciary Committee: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/committees/committeedetails.aspx?code=H26  e-mail: ~HouseCriminalJusticeandPublicSafety at leg dot state dot nh dot us

Note: Committee Members: of NOT to get the Court Clerks involved in making decisions, but to process these complaints to the judge.

footnote #2: the current Judge Edwin W. Kelly of Plymouth, is the Chief Judge of ALL the District Courts but who is corrupt!  [ my former tenant's attorney] He used the dissenting opinion in the Premo case, by Joseph P. Nadea of Durham on the N.H. Supreme Court to use as HIS case-law against my complaint of simple assault by one of the U.S. Deputy Marshals who I had summoned over there to the Concord District Court to a certain day and time, as served by Merrimack County Deputy Sheriff, but with Kelly REFUSing to process! This IS Official Corruption and he WILL pay!

See also the Clerk decisions already being made to HALT these type complaints to Claremont District Court too, (involving more Feds) and The Franklin District Court where I took The Town of Boscawen to court there for Littering in a "way" = my driveway, and REFUSED to process by the Clerk! --

The Feds thinking that state crimes by them ON and OFF there of which they have NO jurisdiction makes them immune! when the facts are that they have FAILed to file their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State per the "shall" word in N.H. RSA Chapter 123:1 from 1-8-17 of the U.S. Constitution, as we gave them a conditional consent or offer that they have NOT accepted, and so NO jurisdiction per the 1943 Adams case at the U.S. Supreme Court. See their very own U.S. Attorney Manual #664 that even spells this out, but that these outlaws continue to break the law as "controllable" OVER our N.H. Article 12 "inhabitants" - read that very last sentence, PLEASE!

[grolled]

6.      EDWARD BROWN     03923-049      67-White-M      05-24-2012      BROOKLYN MDC

Yeah, thanks Keith.  So in other words, from my notes of when Bob was there, the address is:

Edward-Lewis: Brown, #03923-049
MDC Brooklyn
Metropolitan Detention Center
P. O. Box 329002
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11232

BTW Whatever happened to Bob?  Is he interested in Appeal Point #12 of 12 of Reno's Appeal by Joshua Gordon of Concord, N.H. to Boston for the First Circuit if and when they (including Danny and Jason) are either released or at least given a NEW trial for WHEN the Feds are finally IN compliance with evidence of non-compliance to N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 allowed in as Exhibit #__ in their case that they had a perfect right to contest "controll"ability against them as Article 12 N.H. "inhabitants" since they never gave the Feds 1-8-17 "Consent" because as they say: "It Takes Two to Tango", and an offer (as in our conditional consent, per the Adams case of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1943), un-accepted is NOT consent, and so there was no jurisdiction! since there was NO 40USC255 to 40USC3112 federal filing, to ricochet back to help Ed & Elaine too!!

Joe,

I mean no disrespect but I've read this thread for the last 3 years and over 2500 posts by you but I have yet to see that you've been successful in helping anyone get free from the fed's stronghold.


What's up?

[JosephSHaas]

6.      EDWARD BROWN     03923-049      67-White-M      05-24-2012      BROOKLYN MDC

....

Joe,

I mean no disrespect but I've read this thread for the last 3 years and over 2500 posts by you but I have yet to see that you've been successful in helping anyone get free from the fed's stronghold.

What's up?

They didn't call "The French & Indian War" the "Seven Years War" for nothing.

Battle #____ for re-enforcements at the L.O.B. today at 2:00 p.m. -- Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Ed asked that I put out this Illumanati stuff to the internet:

Here's my info of such "stuff" as I've incorporated into my Reply letter of Elaine going to her today:

"He's in Brooklyn, N.Y. (address in my other e-mail to you).  I have a large 9x12 envelope of papers to send to him today. Ed sent me a letter saying that the U.S. Attorney's office is in cahoots with the Illuminati/ Freemasons, etc.* that I passed the info onto Marie by phone last night in my return call to her first calling me, and told her that SOMETHING sure is fishy* in that they do NOT even abide by their own U.S. Attorney Manual #664 of for their building to be registered with the state as per 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution, and for N.H. by RSA 123:1 THE place to file said papers being with Bill Gardner's N.H. Office of Secretary of State.  What is it with these federalies!?  When the State asks us for our driving license, we fork it over.  When we ask the Feds for their operating papers, they ignore us!  They ARE an Article III, Section 1 "inferior court of Congress" by the U.S./ Constitution as a tenant for the G.S.A./ General Administrative Administration landlord, and so to what? keep visiting Gregg's office in Concord ________ and call on my cell phone to that GSA agent again to have his boss, the 40USC255 to 40USC3112 "head" of "agency" comply with the law?  THEN when they acknowledge they were supposed to do so and FINALly do it, then PROOF of that they never had done it before and a NEW element in to re-open your case with this nugget of corruption that when they tried you they had no jurisdictional authority.  A point on the paperwork per the Appeal (by Reno, Danny and Jason) to the Judicial, and so me using this pressure tactic of Legislative force from Gregg to this Executive. A check and balance.  The balance being to right the scales of justice so as to get rid of this injustice as you are a kernel in the system who ought not to be there. A particle of truth in a House of Lies, the House of Lies being paid for by my employer taking out x% from my pay each week to go toward this corruption?!  I think I'll also find out WHERE she sends these $payments? To Andover, Mass. for New England or some Federal agent in N.H., like to the Portsmouth or Manchester office of the Feds? _______ Maybe even to have the State Revenue agent get involved per what are supposed to be Article 95 N.H. state agents collecting federal revenue FOR the Feds.  Me having done that Art. 95 research at Archives in that we are NOT supposed to have excise taxes here in N.H., and my complaint of such to the N.H. Dept. of Safety for BOTH the federal AND state gasoline taxes falling on deaf ears: Marta M., the counsel for them telling me by phone call to me per my visit to see Nancy Cassidy at the Commissioner Barthelmes office that she would get back to me after Thanksgiving '09, so a call just before Christmas by me to her return call resulting in my State Amendment papers to the ones before for my Claim for $25.00+, re: the Federal tax to Nancy after New Year's, and so to call again today _______ for an answer in writing BEFORE the end of the month (10 days away), or else to sue Barthelmes in the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 N.H. State Board of Claims on Feb. _____ for a March ___, 2010 hearing. This federal AND state tax to be returned to me, as a hit them in the $ pocketbook, to force them/ the State to tell that GSA Federal Agent to file those papers so that it can ricochet back to help you in your case.  Best wishes, -- Joe P.S. I also did yesterday (Jan. 19th) start the process of my complaint against the Concord Police Chief for NOT Art. 12 protecting Ed last week.  Paul Cavanaugh SAYing that he was working on to "correct" the oaths so as to comply with RSA 42:1 taking too slow as I wanted an Art. 14 "prompt" fix on the Friday BEFORE Ed went to court last Mon., Jan. 11th, and so now to have the Council on 2nd Tue. of Feb. tell him as City Solicitor to get with it by their next meeting in March, and if still not corrected, then to an April Meeting where I will give them my "two cents" worth! A correction needing "correction" at the Federal level too, by you using this info in your Rule 63 collateral attack of Singal's denial of your Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in Texas +/or for the MAss. appeal, hearing when? in May __ 2010? "

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.info/comment/reply/115414/103560

and: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100120/FRONTPAGE/1200365#comment-103649

entitled: "5th Horseman? You are Number Six!  "The Prisoner". "

of: "Thank you Bruce.  Re: "Printing more fiat (monopoly) money", but as my neighbor says: Why not?  At least then everybody will be taxed equally.

Actually for U.S. Notes "spent" into circulation, rather than these FRNs (Federal Reserve Notes) "loaned" into circulation.

The "Fed" a private outfit formed in 1913 to: (1) loan the gov't $money when their project expenditures could not be met by taxing the people, and (2) act as circulation agent for the distribution of the actual (a) lawful money and (b) commercial paper or "notes" as a NOTE is defined as a promise to pay.  Pay what? WHERE is the gold bullion per pallet of FRNs monetized?

The country is operating under a constitutional and commercial framework. The former includes gold and silver dollars of precious metal by The Coinage Act of 1792, and the latter has the debased coins of commerce by the Coinage Act of 1965 of that LBJ told Congress back then are the two types of coins to be there "together".

So HOW much bullion, if any, does the Fed turn over to the U.S. Treasury for deposit at Fort Knox? They buy these notes of from $1.00 to $100.00 in denominations at only 6-cents each.  They are PRIVATE papers UNTIL the notes are monetized.

I have a check from the U.S. Marshal for N.H. that I tried to cash by the "law". Act of 1792, Section 20.  Was the lawful money there? No! And "they" have the audacity to tell my good friends Ed & Elaine Brown that even though they are N.H. Article 12 inhabitants, they are "controllable" by other laws of the U.S. Codes and federal Statutes at Large!?  and when they/ the Feds have FAILED to comply with the law! re: NO 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers on file with our N.H. Office of Secretary of State as required by the "shall" word in N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution.

Hey!  BEFORE any more papers, including these $9 million in FRNs are offered to us, don't you think that our "offer" of conditional consent to them ought to be dealt with first?  It's the law! The Ninth Amendment and me putting my foot down, or monkey wrench into this of that Roberts Rules of Order be complied with!  Acceptance of Offer #1 before Offer #2, and no more funds of ours TO the Feds when they then dish it back to us at x% thereof, until THEY comply with the law!

Then I'll drink a toast at that sidewalk cafe to men of honor at City Hall currently filled with corruptors whose oaths are NOT in keeping with R.S.A. Chapter 42:1. May they gag on their own upchuck if they don't "Wise Up"!"

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100120/NEWS01/1200354

and: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100120/NEWS01/1200354#comment-103670

entitled: "Drivers "to make sure" police don't break their oaths!

of: "So in other words the COP is going to get out of his patrol car on random stops and measure the distance between the front or back of the bus, and if YOUR car is within 25 feet of it, then you'll get a ticket? for: $_____.

Are they going to film how much warning time by the yellow lights is given by the bus driver before he stops with red lights and that driver's side flip out STOP sign?

Everyone knows that you ought to leave a distance of one car length per every 10 mph, and so in a 30 miles per hour zone, that 's three car lengths. So as about what? 15-feet per length of vehicle x 3 = 45 feet, you have 45-25 = 20 feet or just over one car length to stop once you see the lights plus what? the yellow lights on #__ car lengths before they turn red?

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

Plus: federal funds for this non-event?!  I agree with both: Waltham Watch and  quilteresq, what a waste of time and money!!

Maybe deputize the school bus driver and give him or her law enforcement powers.  Then instead of just writing down the license number of the offender to pass over to the police for prosecution of his/her word against theirs saying he or she was not within the 25 feet, but 25 feet, one inch in court, or just against those like clearly in violation?

I say: put this money to better use of a camera mounted to the front and back to show clearly the license # and # of feet within the stop. "Big Brother" cameras for when you're not withIN the 25 feet too!

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

No wonder the COPs oaths by RSA Ch. 42:1 in Concord are also to "enforce all Federal and State Laws".  They could not care less about our Article 12 N.H. "inhabitants" they have sworn a duty to protect because they are "on the take" of federal funds!  They are supposed to bear "allegiance" to the United States of America, defined by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States as: "a federal constitutional republic" and that a constitutional republic by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic is: "a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens...

The fact that a constitution exists that limits the government's power makes the state constitutional. That the head(s) of state and other officials are chosen by election, rather than inheriting their positions, and that their decisions are subject to judicial review makes a state republican."

So WHERE be the "judicial review" by the jury of their decision of NOT to file their 40USC255 to 40USC3112 papers with our N.H. Office of Secretary of State as required by the shall word in RSA Ch. 123:1 from 1-8-17 of the U.S. Constitution? This issue as item #12 on the appeal to Boston of the co-conspirators in the Ed Brown anti IRS case.

And these local COPs want my respect!? for EVERYthing they do!? There is no allegiance or firm loyalty (from the Latin word meaning legal) to both Constitutions!! Only that of our N.H. Constitution, and in particular this Art. 12. The legal of the statutes of the U.S.A. to be in compliance with both laws: 1-8-17 U.S. and Art. 12 N.H. They are not! UNTIL the filing. 

So IF anybody is ever fined in this case, you ought to plead not guilty even if you're guilty in fact, as the end does not justify the means, in that for the fine to be lawful, the officer must be lawful too! We are supposed to have BOTH procedural and substantive due process of law! BOTH!! Get it!?"

[jzacker]

Joe,

I mean no disrespect but I've read this thread for the last 3 years and over 2500 posts by you but I have yet to see that you've been successful in helping anyone get free from the fed's stronghold.


What's up?

I like his passion. Keep it up Joe!

[JosephSHaas]

Joe,

I mean no disrespect but I've read this thread for the last 3 years and over 2500 posts by you but I have yet to see that you've been successful in helping anyone get free from the fed's stronghold.

What's up?

I like his passion. Keep it up Joe!

The Feds like the sound of my squealing tires like in a ditch. Their problem being that when that one obstacle* gets out of the way, the vehicle goes at super speed, and if they're not prepared they get like egg on their face!

...a rotten egg.

* The non-filing of the federal papers.

How do you like my latest view of this of that there be a judicial review of that executive decision by GSA "head" of Agency Leeds as to WHY he is not complying with the law? re: my latest post over to The "Concord Monitor".  My suggestion is that when the court hearing in Boston occurs for oral argument on the appeal of the co-conspirator case, that Joshua Gordon for Reno admit that his client should have been able to explain his answer of: No, not any direct contact with the U.S. Marshals to try to resolve this peaceably, but in-directly through the Art. 49 Petition, AND have Sven for Danny center in on this Judicial Review of Executive Decisions of a decision NOT to file, in the negative too is what is supposed to be allowed for jury review since the judge REFUSed to Review! and HOW the fact of NO filing equals = NO jurisdictional authority, and so these Art. 12 inhabitants had a perfect right to not rebel, but Article 10 revolt against corruption, and especially when the property tax money was paid in advance, and Bernie did approach the Town of Plainfield on June 20, 2007 BEFORE the October 4th - Ten-Four (10/4) over-and-out to tell them point blank or to either provide the protection, or return the $money, like so as to buy more bullets! The three year RSA Ch. 508:2 statute of limitations fast approaching for to sue Lebanon too, per my warning to them on June 6 '07 of the night before their B&E to Elaine's office building.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Not to forget "Reply #9465 on: Yesterday at 12:29 PM" of: "They didn't call "The French & Indian War" the "Seven Years War" for nothing.

Battle #____ for re-enforcements at the L.O.B. today at 2:00 p.m. -- Joe"

Update: HB1630 yesterday was from about 2:10 - :40 p.m. and deals with beefing up the common law right of private prosecution per the Premo case, of who I did talk with Rita Premo in Berlin, N.H. yesterday too, and that she agrees with my amendment, as speaker #4 of 4 yesterday after the Sponsor & Co-Sponsor Reps spoke, plus Howie Zibel, Counsel for the Judicial Branch of state government, that in order to pass this with the votes needed, of to get rid of that Class A misdemeanor addition of us to try to get up to a year in jail for these RSA Ch. 643:1 perpetrators of "Official Oppression" where if indigent, as 100% of their pay into non- affordable housing rents, lights, fuel etc. asking for $mucho dollars out of the indigent defense fund, that maybe to keep the fine AND sentence part in there, but limit to 10 days like "they" do to us if we are ever in "contempt" of "them", reference: Articles 22+ 23, Part 2, N.H. Constitution. Ray Burton once telling me a few years ago that of his 25 years = 1/4 century as an Executive Councilor, that there has NEVER been anybody found in "contempt" of the G&C.  I asked him: Isn't it about time? 

Thanks, - Joe

P.S. My former legal counselor once said in regards to this, that of like the government is an egg: you hit it so many times, and eventually it cracks open. 

PPS My other legal counselor said just the opposite: of something like when the individual is dealing with government that "sovereign" has only one mouthpiece, whereas when you get to some dept. of government they say you've got to go over there, and when over there they SAY you've got to go back to square one, as in The Royal Run-Around.  They NEVER have that plaque on their desk of: The Buck Stops Here.  The attorney saying: Joe - You're like Jason & The Argonauts: you cut off the head of the hydra and four more appear it its place.  Solution: stop talking to the hydra's head, and take away its platform on which they rest their supposed jurisdiction.  Or in other words, to be like Blackbeard the Pirate: Tell them to go take a hike, a long walk off a short plank. Walk the Plank. Or in this case, pull the plank from under them. Or push it.  Yeah! Them thieves who pulled Danny's case to there from the N.H. Supremes when even the U.S. Code reads of that only the Defendant can push it there. Yet another violation to add in as an Amendment for when Rep. Dan Itse's House Bill of Address goes against Judge Edwin W. Kelly, technically a District Court "Justice" who I called an "In-Justice" once and was threatened with contempt of court, and told him he was not THE court!

footnote:  I saw Chuck Douglas there too, and he signed the blue form in support as "Pro" for this HB to pass.

footnote #2: the language of the Bill was changed by the Sponsors too, to get rid of the Clerk as the Judge, to leave it of a Conference or not with the judge finding if there is probable cause to continue onto the hearing on the merits of the case.  This would eliminate the need and $ cost of like when I paid the Deputy Sheriff to summon Deputy U.S. Marshal Jamie Barry on that assault case of my "Point of Order" in court DURING the trial NOT afterward as that R.I. judge did lie in his Order of AFTERward.  So if and when the defendant FAILs to appear at said conference, then the judge can issue a bench warrant for his arrest. No cost to the complainant.

[JosephSHaas]

An interesting HB 1285 by State Rep. Dan Itse, keep up the good work!

Re: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2010/houcal2010_07.html [House Record, Vol. 32, No. 7, Fri. 1/15/10]

"WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20

COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, Room 302, LOB

9:30 a.m.          HB 1285, relative to the exemption of certain firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in New Hampshire from federal law and regulation." (to 10:15 a.m.)

See: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2010/HB1285.html

and: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_status.aspx?lsr=2014&sy=2010&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=HB1285&q=1

plus: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=2014&sy=2010&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=HB1285&q=1

Dan: How did it go today?

See you next Tuesday, Jan. 26th @ 10 a.m. Commerce Room 302 LOB for when this goes to Executive Session.

Best wishes, - Joe

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

Mod: "I like the language of 159-E:2 of:
"a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the state of New Hampshire is not subject to federal law or taxation,"

and the penalties of Class A misdemeanor for violation by any N.H. public servant, and a Class B felony by any U.S. "public servant" of:

"159-E:4 Penalty.

I. Any public servant of the State of New Hampshire as defined in RSA 640:2 that enforces or attempts to enforce a act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the State of New Hampshire shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.

II. Any official, agent, or employee of the government of the United States, or employee of a corporation providing services to the government of the United States that enforces or attempts to enforce a act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States upon a personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in New Hampshire and that remains within the State of New Hampshire shall be guilty of a class B felony."

[thinkliberty]

the penalties of Class A misdemeanor for violation by any N.H. public servant, and a Class B felony by any U.S. "public servant"

Because it's some how less of a crime when some public servant in NH violates that law? It sounds like they are planning to violate that law.

[JosephSHaas]

What Rule # if any did Jean K. Burling use in Ed's case to allow the Feds to cite a U.S. Code over-ride of our rights in Article 12?

See:

"Vote No on CACR 20 in committee and change to a HA #___ against the Sec. of State
From:    Joseph S. Haas Jr. (josephshaasjr at hotmail.com)
Sent:    Wed 1/20/10 7:37 PM
To:    ~housejudiciarycommittee at leg.state.nh.us; david.cote at leg.state.nh.us; phil.preston at leg.state.nh.us; franpotter at rcn.com; lwmcv at comcast.net; robert.thompson at leg.state.nh.us; nancy_elliott at elliott-controls.com; silvawards589 at aol.com; phackel at comcast.net; brownenh at gmail.com; rick.watrous at leg.state.nh.us; adifruscia at aol.com; usnrnurse at msn.com; will.smith at leg.state.nh.us; grichardson at upton-hatfield.com; nixonraichelaw at yahoo.com; rh.rowe at comcast.net; meadrd at comcast.net; lawrence.perkins at leg.state.nh.us
Cc:    Dan Itse (itsenh at comcast.net); jordan.ulery@ at eg.state.nh.us; lcvita2 at earthlink.net; tim_comerford at yahoo.com; semerson435 at aol.com
Bcc:    Dick Marple (armlaw at hotmail.com); ... ingbretson_studio at yahoo.com

RE: House Record Vol. 32, No. 7 Fri. 1-15-10

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/caljourns/calendars/2010/houcal2010_07.html

for: THURSDAY, JANUARY 21

"JUDICIARY, Room 208, LOB ...

1:30 p.m.          CACR 20, relating to the administration of the supreme court.  Providing that the rules promulgated by the chief justice governing the administration of the courts shall not have the force and effect of law.
2:00 p.m.   ...."

See: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2010/CACR0020.html

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_status.aspx?lsr=2630&sy=2010&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=CACR20

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/bill_docket.aspx?lsr=2630&sy=2010&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2010&txtbillnumber=CACR20


Please register me as: OPPOSED to this CACR, in that I agree that the wording of [The rules so promulgated shall have the force and effect of law.] be stricken from Art. 73-a in that it has to go, but of HOW to do it:

The extra wording was ADDed on by then House Clerk Carl Peterson* to then House Speaker John Tucker who sent it to the Secretary of State who allowed it to be in-cluded into the Constitution.  I have a copy of his* signature of this from Archives. Such is an ERROR that needs to be corrected NOT by the voters BUT by Bill Gardner doing his job: of a House Address to him as your appointee that this correction take place, to include any and all compensations to victims thereof,

including those who have been treated by "the force and effect" of having N.H. Superior Court Rule 95-B for indirect criminal contempt of court elevated up to the level of a federal offense, by their case-law or rule or statutory description, etc.of that a "petty offense" is any crime, including contempt that does result in jail or prison time of NOT over six (6) months, of therefor the accused NOT entitled to a trial by jury.

The compensation to the victims being to have the pay from the judge who wrongfully sentenced them [in violation of Articles 22+ 23 of the N.H. Constitution, Part Second, as it applies to the judiciary by Art. 72-a in that the judiciary was (past tense) under the Legislative, but that on November 16th, 1966 became a supposed co-equal branch of state government, for a maximum sentence of up to ten (10) days] liened to the moiety amount as by a Petition for a Writ of Elegit for up to half the judge's salary docketed every fortnight on payday until the #x amount of days spent in jail OVER the 10-day limit is paid to the tune of $2,500 per day in damages per the formula as prescribed in the Veronica Silva case in the RSA Ch. 541-B:1-23 State Board of Claims in the mid 1980s.

Signed: ________________________

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, New Hampshire 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone), e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com "

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.info/comment/reply/115440/103833

and: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100120/NEWS01/1200354#comment-103952

posting: "By Al on Thu, 01/21/2010 - 01:58

I started a reply to this and then looked to see who the originator is. I propose to never again argue with a fool so that I don't confuse those who might not be able to discern between me and the fool.
Al"


and my reply entitled: "Al: Are you fully retired, or just too "tired"? (lazy)"

of: "So Al: reference your: "I was a Police Office(r) for 25 years"; WHERE was that? in Concord? where your oath was in violation* of the law?  How many cases did you take to court where the defendant did question your credentials? #____

* Now who is the "fool"?: "One who can be easily deceived"**, and in this case, by the Feds, ** of having deluded you by FALSE play, of mis-leading you, leading you in the WRONG direction, to lead into ERROR (Defined as either: (1) An un-intentional deviation from what is correct, right or true, a mistake; or (2) The condition of having incorrect or false knowledge, and doing what with it when you are corrected? Nothing!? Then it is error definition #3 of a transgression*** or WRONGdoing by you!)

*** transgress: 1. To go BEYOND or OVER (a limit or boundary). 2. To act in violation of (a law, commandment, etc.) from the Latin word: transgresi of "to step across", and the word across meaning: on, at, or from the other side of: across the road.  So yes, it's good that the cars both in front and in back of the school bus stop for if the child departing not only gets off on THAT side of the road, but has to go "across" the road too, that people STOP, but your cross as a COP is to enforce the law "across-the-board" for to in-clude ALL members! not just some, as in the forced exile of Ed Brown et als to across state lines to Portland, Maine in violation of the law, meaning both: Art. III, Sec. 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, that "The trial of ALL such Crimes...SHALL be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed" AND 18USC3232, for ALL proceedings including pre-trial hearings as a PART of the trial! for the benefit of the defendant AND witnesses: me an un-called witness on that list.   

So when I reported this theft of federal funds being paid to these attorneys on the case from First Circuit Judge Jeffrey R. Howard on the 4th floor there at 55 Pleasant Street in Concord, our former A.G., you or your buddies then on "the force", decided NOT to enforce the law of this Article 12 protection!? How disgusting! And you say you deserve your retirement pay for a job never done!? "

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100121/FRONTPAGE/1210302

and: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100121/FRONTPAGE/1210302#comment-103967

entitled: "Why? Because he "has" to? WHERE is the lawful authority?"

of: "So Michael: Attorney Michael J. Connolly, "Super Layer" of 2007, '08, + '09 of:
Hinckley, Allen & Snyder LLP, Capital Commons, Suite 400, 11 South Main St
Concord, NH 03301  http://www.superlawyers.com/new-hampshire/lawyer/Michael-J-Connolly/eb440ff7-8879-4676-aca7-86c5e74fef32.html

Did you explain to your client that a tax, in its essential characteristics is NOT a debt? (Henry Campbell "Black's Law Dictionary", (c)1979, 5th Edition, page 1307 citing that New Jersey case). And that for the land tax to only pay for what Wm. R. Johnson wrote as THE N.H. Supreme Court Judge in that Epsom tax case of ONLY to pay for The "General" Tax, (the details of which are in my current case at The N.H. State Board of Tax and Land Appeals on Pleasant Street, The Johnson Building there).

Reference: paragraph #7 here: WHO are "the unnamed co-conspirators"? And do they live withIN the state of New Hampshire?  If so, they +/or their attorney might like to look at N.H. Article 12, the very last sentence. http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html of: "Nor are the inhabitants of this state controllable by any other laws than those to which they, or their representative body, have given their consent."

The question being of whether by voluntary or in-voluntary travel to up here from Florida for Mr. Ronald Boyarsky, (and the others from WHERE?), does that THEN upon arrival place them under the protection of N.H. law? and statutes? Because according to Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft's http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm website from Huntsville, Alabama AND my investigations, neither the Feds in the State of Florida NOR the State of New Hampshire have complied with the law, BELIEVE IT OR NOT! in that for Florida, the 40USC255 to 40USC3112 federal filing is supposed to be to the governor's office (from 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution), and by N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1 http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm likewise for to our N.H. Secretary of State, that as of my last check with Bill Gardner's Office, the Deputy David Scanlon did indicate to me on his letterhead of Dec. 23rd '09 that the GSA/ General Services Administration "head" of agency, Mr. Leeds, has yet to file these papers as required by the "shall" word in the statute, and so this Article III, Section 1 "inferior court of Congress" U.S. Constitution, as a tenant of the landlord G.S.A. has NO jurisdictional authority over there to prosecute criminal cases. Per the Adams case in the U.S. Supreme Court back in 1943 that spells it out that a conditional offer of consent un-accepted is NOT "Consent", and even the U.S. Attorney's Office over there knows about it, as indicated in their Manual #664.*

* See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/40/usc_sec_40_00003112----000-.html see also: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm and http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/Misc/PressStatementSchulz9-16-03.htm [both htm, not html]  ** plus the original http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=393575 for 40USC255.

** """In view of 40 USC 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 USC 255, Interpretive Note #14, citing the US Supreme Court).""

[grolled]

6.      EDWARD BROWN     03923-049      67-White-M      05-24-2012      BROOKLYN MDC

....

Joe,

I mean no disrespect but I've read this thread for the last 3 years and over 2500 posts by you but I have yet to see that you've been successful in helping anyone get free from the fed's stronghold.

What's up?

They didn't call "The French & Indian War" the "Seven Years War" for nothing.

Battle #____ for re-enforcements at the L.O.B. today at 2:00 p.m. -- Joe

What does that mean? Even France won some battles in that war!