Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS

[JosephSHaas]

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/289176/public-servant

and: http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/289176/public-servant#comment-209966

of: "
Letter
Public servant
Clark J. Nichols, Henniker
For the Monitor
October 31, 2011
I had the privilege of meeting Perkins Bass in 1962 when I, a Democrat and a union member, plumped for Jim Cleveland in his first run for Congress.
In a period when public service meant an American political ideal and not a means to an ideological end, Bass represented New Hampshire's citizens with full understanding of the distinction.
CLARK J. NICHOLS
Henniker "

& "

I met Jim Cleveland at The Waterville Valley I-93 Tourist Exit.

By JosephSHaas - 10/31/2011 - 9:10 am New

Yeah, I guess back then there were no corrupt judges to impeach, eh Clark? (;-) As in I saw no Bills of Impeachments ever submitted by him or any of his following including his son Charlie who I think is worthless!

Yeah Charlie would meet with people in the basement of The Concord City Library to HEAR complaints, BUT what, if anything did he do about them? Nothing!

The current crap out of Stephen McAuliffe, the Federal judge, is his telling the jury in the Ed Brown case that all the Tax Code has been declared lawful in every court in the nation, when nothing could be further from the truth: case in point of my TRYing to tell otherwise through an Affidavit* to the court, but that it returned to me by Deputy Clerk Dan Lynch since I was not a party to the case: only an un-called witness. That's like saying that if you saw a building on fire as you were driving by and called The Fire Dept. of them asking if you owned the building and if not, then no to the call for something to be done. Of them back to their card game while awaiting a "real" fire.

* My affidavit stated that of what Martin J. "Red" Beckman wrote in one of his books that I bought here when he was running for President: that Section (5) of the Code for Rents was unconstitutional, and with a U.S. Supreme Court case. My Case #M.83-50-D in this SAME Court of the IRS that I won thanks to Chief Judge Shane Devine. "

[WithoutAPaddle]

... My affidavit stated that of what Martin J. "Red" Beckman wrote in one of his books that I bought here when he was running for President: that Section (5) of the Code for Rents was unconstitutional, and with a U.S. Supreme Court case. My Case #M.83-50-D in this SAME Court of the IRS that I won thanks to Chief Judge Shane Devine. "

Beckman's co-author, William J. Benson, was unsuccessful when he tried to use their legal theories to keep himself out of jail.

From Wikipedia:

In United States v. Benson, a criminal case, Benson himself raised the Sixteenth Amendment argument, which was rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. In this phase of the case, his conviction for tax evasion and willful failure to file tax returns was overturned on other grounds and the case was remanded to the trial court.

Upon retrial, Benson was again convicted of tax evasion and willful failure to file tax returns, and his conviction was upheld on appeal. The conduct for which he was convicted involved over $100,000 of income he did not report on Federal income tax returns. He was sentenced to four years in prison and five years of probation.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a copy and paste of an e-mail that I did just send to Ed:

"Ed, That's what somebody told us on the NH Underground I think it was maybe even more than a year ago of that xy% of the donations that people send into you are deducted out to go toward your $fines, that of such until they are paid.  All paid now? Thanks for letting me know that ZERO is taken out toward "Uncle Sam" that you get to spend 100% of all donations, up to the $25.00 per month limit, not including free speech in the form of stamps and copy cards (re: your getting to read e-mails at 5-cents a minute and 15-cents a copy still the going rate?) You'd think that the proceeds that "they" got from the two auctions in N.H. and Mass. would get it down to zero even IF they had such a policy against you that they do NOT have.  I can relay this info to the NHU website so that people are not put off of sending you money as you never signed such a contract.  Especially when they hear that you're making progress against these bastards in the real estate cases.  They might like to camp out WHEN you might turn the place into a campground and the donators to get rentals at the preferred rate! (;-) - I just made this up, not Ed's idea but mine. And then the other night I saw that History Channel report entitled: "Billions Behind Bars" (BBB; like The Better Business Bureau) of the BOP of you can make 60-cents a day behind bars plus some $5.00 bonus every now and then, but that I have no idea of the details. - - Joe cc: over to NHU for this update, and the address at: http://www.bop.gov/inmate_programs/money.jsp  for where "Santa" can reach you too: Federal Bureau of Prisons, Insert Valid Committed Inmate Name (Edward-Lewis: Brown), Insert Inmate Eight-Digit Register Number (03923049), Post Office Box 474701, Des Moines, Iowa 50947-0001, or by "Western Union", or by calling: "using a credit/debit card: The inmate's family or friends may simply call 1-800-634-3422 and press option 2." Of a copy of this of what I write and yours too to NHU of: "If people are under the impression that i am flush,
please let them know that I am not, and soon, at this rate I will be truly indigent.
Thank you. See you soon. Ed...end". "

"Message successfully sent." to ED @ 10:41 a.m. - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

Below are the: *  list of 5 N.H. Supreme Court judges, plus its Clerk *** who did violate their RSA Ch. 92:2 oaths of office when they let a Federal policy over-ride or control over one of our Article 12 inhabitants +/or Article 30 citizens (Parts 1 + 2 of the N.H. Constitution; the extra * for Conboy of now on the Supremes, and Chief Broderick, off, Dalianis now the Chief) . Inhabitant Danny Riley for his 2007-0745 civil case to there on the Habeas Corpus appeal from the Petition to Houran ** (former A.A.G.) in Dover at The Strafford County Superior Court who did NOT hold a hearing for Article 14 "complete"ness.  The over-ride of 28USC636(c)(1) that requires a "consent" from the party BEFORE his case can be "Removed" to Federal Court, per his right as is supposed to be a guarantee by Article 12 of the N.H. Bill of Rights, but that was stolen. Plus after notifying the Governor**** (1) and his Dept. head in the N.H. Dept. of Safety ****(1) and Division of State Police ****(2) to Article 12 "protect" Ed Brown and others with proof of the Federal non-filing to RSA Ch. 123:1 from the Secretary of State***** that they REFUSED to do!

Cost of these officials on an annual basis divided by #____ cases = $______ for this denial?
*
JOHN BRODERICK JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $143,506.84
ROBERT LYNN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $141,076.12
LINDA DALIANIS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $140,095.84
GARY HICKS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $138,895.84
JAMES DUGGAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $138,895.84
CAROL CONBOY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

**
STEVEN HOURAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $132,582.40

***
EILEEN FOX CLERK OF COURT JUDICIAL BRANCH $104,169.20

****
JOHN LYNCH GOVERNOR EXECUTIVE BRANCH $113,537.88
FREDERICK BOOTH DIRECTOR OF STATE POLICE SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,165.92
DAVID CARGILL STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,708.63 (now: U.S.Marshal)

*****
WILLIAM GARDNER SECRETARY OF STATE SECRETARY OF STATE $100,165.92

Let's Article 17 + 38 impeach these thieves!

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

___________________________________________________________


STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

2008 ANNUAL SALARIES

$1,000 SCOPE

EMPLOYEE TITLE AGENCY ANNUAL SALARY



Annual salaries for terminated employees, along with certain employees who may have transferred from one job

classification to another, include payment of unused leave balances authorized by statute.



MICHAEL BUCKLEY LEGIS LBA EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $229,608.90

RICHARD GUSTAFSON CHANCELLOR (NHCTC) REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $173,788.09

JAMES FREDYMA CONTROLLER (DHHS) HHS:COMMISSIONER $158,087.80

FRANCIS FRASIER REFEREE JUDICIAL BRANCH $157,780.00

* JOHN BRODERICK JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $143,506.84

* ROBERT LYNN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $141,076.12

DAVID KING JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $140,806.25

* LINDA DALIANIS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $140,095.84

EDWIN KELLY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $139,855.84

RICHARD GALWAY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $139,195.84

* GARY HICKS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $138,895.84

* JAMES DUGGAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $138,895.84

DIANE NICOLOSI JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $137,998.50

THOMAS ANDREW CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER JUSTICE, DEPT OF $136,711.26

PHILIP MANGONES JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $136,054.59

JAMES O'NEILL JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $134,805.96

THOMAS RAPPA JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $134,564.10

GERARD BOYLE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $133,980.28

DIANA DORSEY STATE SENIOR PHYSICIAN HHS:COMMISSIONER $133,721.81

BRIAN TUCKER JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $133,529.28

** STEVEN HOURAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $132,582.40

PAUL MASSARO STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $131,939.32

KENNETH BROWN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,838.56

LARRY SMUKLER JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,656.55

NORMAN CHAMPAGNE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,650.42

PAMELA ALBEE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,519.52

KENNETH MCHUGH JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,349.96

JAMES BARRY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,180.08

WILLIAM LYONS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,180.08

KATHLEEN MCGUIRE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,180.08

WILLIAM GROFF JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,180.08

CLIFFORD KINGHORN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $131,007.19

GILLIAN ABRAMSON JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

TINA NADEAU JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

JOHN ARNOLD JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

PAUL LAWRENCE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

RICHARD HAMPE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

* CAROL CONBOY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,880.08

JOHN KORBEY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,749.98

DANIEL CAPPIELLO JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,730.08

GARY CASSAVECHIA JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,616.08

CHRISTINA O'NEILL JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,580.08

EDWARD BURKE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,538.73

PETER HURD JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,449.96

TIMOTHY VAUGHAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,289.08

EDWARD GORDON JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

STEPHEN MORRISON JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

LUCINDA SADLER JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

R LAURENCE CULLEN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

JAMES LEARY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

JOHN LEWIS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

JOHN YAZINSKI JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

JAMES PATTEN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $130,280.08

RAVINDRA LUCKOOR SENIOR PHYSICIAN/PSYCH II (NHH HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $129,981.72

SUSAN CARBON SPECIAL JUSTICE JUDICIAL BRANCH $129,980.56

MARGARET SNOW ST EPIDEM & ADMIN HLTH DATA UN HHS:COMMISSIONER $129,681.72

DAVID HUOT RETIRED JUDGE JUDICIAL BRANCH $129,626.04

JOSE MONTERO PHYSICIAN IN CHARGE (HEALTH MG HHS:HEALTH MGMT, OFFICE OF $129,494.22

SUSAN HARBOUR STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $128,952.17

CHESTER BATCHELDER SUPERINTENDENT (NH HOSPITAL) HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $127,835.19

MICHAEL SULLIVAN RETIRED JUDGE JUDICIAL BRANCH $127,147.33

BRUCE TWYON STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $126,502.54

DARRIN DUSTIN STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $126,264.07

JOHN EMERY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $126,080.80

PETER GRASSO PHARM BD COMPLIANCE INV/INSP HHS:ADMIN ATTACHED BOARDS $125,141.31

IPHIGENIA DAUKOPULOS CHIEF PHARMACIST HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $123,452.16

MICHAEL RYAN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $121,945.46

LINDA HODGDON COMMISSIONER (ADMIN SERVICES) ADMINISTRATIVE SERV, DEPT OF $120,843.91

THOMAS BAMBERGER JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $120,155.88

ANTHONY KINGSBURY CORRECTIONS LIEUTENANT CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $119,634.00

GEORGE BLATSOS COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) REVENUE ADMINISTRATION,DEPT OF $118,935.65

JOHN COUGHLIN JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $118,673.95

JENNIE DUVAL ASSOC CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER JUSTICE, DEPT OF $118,158.56

JUDITH LAFOREST CHIEF PHARMACIST CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $115,792.55

ROBERTA VITALE-NOLEN DIR OF NURSING HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $115,771.32

ROBERT LUX SENIOR PHYSICIAN/PSYCH I (NHH) HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $114,493.06

JOHN CYR JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $114,380.81

NICHOLAS TOUMPAS COMMISSIONER (HHS) HHS:COMMISSIONER $113,537.88

****(1) JOHN LYNCH GOVERNOR EXECUTIVE BRANCH $113,537.88

LAWRENCE MACLEOD SPECIAL JUSTICE JUDICIAL BRANCH $113,476.00

DONALD GOODNOW DIRECTOR JUDICIAL BRANCH $112,733.08

TIMOTHY PIFER ADMINISTRATOR IV SAFETY, DEPT OF $112,684.89

HOWARD ROUNDY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MGR IV LIQUOR COMMISSION $112,425.87

MARSHALL BUTTRICK COURT CLERK VIII JUDICIAL BRANCH $112,054.23

JOHN BARTHELMES COMMISSIONER (SAFETY) SAFETY, DEPT OF $110,727.22

EDWARD GIROUX STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $110,541.38

WILLIAM WRENN COMMISSIONER (DEPT OF CORRECTI CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $110,472.22

BRACKETT SCHEFFY JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $110,340.56

KELLY AYOTTE ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE, DEPT OF $110,127.22

ROBERT FOLEY FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $109,991.23

GARY WOOD STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $109,643.35

HOWARD ZIBEL GENERAL COUNSEL JUDICIAL BRANCH $109,596.04

MARY THORPE PHARMACIST HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $109,461.80

ROBERT QUINN STATE POLICE CAPTAIN SAFETY, DEPT OF $109,128.93

CHARLES ANNAL VICE CHANCELLOR (NHCTC) REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $108,988.12

DAVID LEFRANCOIS JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $108,506.76

LUCILLE JORDAN PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $108,478.12

DAVID BRILLHART ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (DOT) TRANSPORTATION, DEPT OF $108,198.98

BARBARA KILCHENSTEIN PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $108,088.12

SUSAN ASHLEY SPECIAL JUSTICE JUDICIAL BRANCH $108,061.00

JOHN WHITMORE CONSERVATION OFFICER LT FISH AND GAME COMMISSION $107,880.39

MARK EDELSTEIN PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $107,863.12

KATHARINE ENEGUESS PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $107,842.12

ANNE BARBER FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $107,822.08

HENRIETTA LUNEAU FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $107,572.76

JEFFREY GRAY DEPUTY CONSERVATION OFFICER FISH AND GAME COMMISSION $107,545.35

JOANNE FORTIER WARDEN NH STATE PRISON-WOMEN CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $107,487.53

THOMAS BURACK COMMISSIONER (ENVIR SERVICES) DES:ENVIRONMENTAL SERV,DEPT OF $107,388.98

DANE PRESCOTT BUSINESS SYSTEMS ANALYST I DEPT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $107,235.89

STEVEN BUDD PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $107,188.12

WILDOLFO ARVELO PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $107,188.12

DARLENE MILLER PRESIDENT, REG COMM TECH COLL REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $107,188.12

GEORGE BALD COMMISSIONER (DRED) RESOURCES & ECON DEVEL,DEPT OF $106,874.48

LYONEL TRACY COMMISSIONER (DEPT OF EDUC) EDUCATION, DEPT OF $106,698.98

STEPHANIE NUTE FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,620.56

DEBORAH REIN FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,620.56

GARY FOWLER RESEARCH DATA ANALYST JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,454.01

MICHAEL HAMBROOK STATE POLICE MAJOR SAFETY, DEPT OF $106,352.34

BRUCE DALPRA FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,320.56

ALICE LOVE FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,320.56

NANCY GEIGER FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,320.56

LEONARD GREEN FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $106,020.56

BRUCE CARDELLO JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,883.28

DAVID FORREST FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,720.56

PHILIP CROSS FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,720.56

MICHAEL GARNER FULLTIME MARITAL MASTER JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,720.56

SARA WILLINGHAM ADMINISTRATOR IV ADMINISTRATIVE SERV, DEPT OF $105,651.42

EARL SWEENEY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (SAFETY SAFETY, DEPT OF $105,528.72

RICHARD BAILEY NON-CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEE DEPT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $105,469.76

ELIZABETH KEYES STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $105,379.31

JOHN SAFFORD COURT CLERK VIII JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,252.48

RAYMOND TAYLOR COURT CLERK VIII JUDICIAL BRANCH $105,142.98

SUSAN FOREY STATE POLICE EXECUTIVE MAJOR SAFETY, DEPT OF $104,940.58

KENNETH COLETTA TI/COLLEGE PROFESSOR REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $104,912.71

MARY CASTELLI SENIOR DIVISION DIRECTOR HHS:COMMISSIONER $104,628.72

DAVID PECK REPORTER OF DECISIONS JUDICIAL BRANCH $104,615.80

DAVID GAGNE STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $104,545.67

KAREN ANDERSON SENIOR DENTIST (DEPT OF CORREC CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $104,532.72

PETER FAUVER RETIRED JUDGE JUDICIAL BRANCH $104,458.31

THOMAS GETZ CHAIRMAN (PUC) PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM. $104,328.72

HERBERT WEST STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $104,323.16

*** EILEEN FOX CLERK OF COURT JUDICIAL BRANCH $104,169.20

CLIFTON BELOW COMMISSIONER (PUC) PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM. $103,760.20

MARY ANN COONEY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (HHS) HHS:COMMISSIONER $103,622.24

DANIEL BERRIDGE STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $103,621.56

SCOTT SWEET STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $103,370.15

ORVILLE FITCH DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE, DEPT OF $103,089.10

MICHAEL FUDALA CIVIL ENGINEER VI TRANSPORTATION, DEPT OF $103,016.77

WILLIAM KELLY LEGISLATIVE EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $102,968.32

JEFFRY PATTISON LEGIS LBA EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $102,912.06

DOYLE DAVIS TI/COLLEGE PROFESSOR REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $102,859.91

DENNIS D'OVIDIO ADMINISTRATOR III HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $102,359.62

JAMES MICHALIK SPECIAL JUSTICE JUDICIAL BRANCH $102,034.00

JANICE THEODORE NURSING COORDINATOR CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $102,000.31

BARRY CONWAY COMMANDANT NH VETERANS HOME $101,638.32

DAVID CHASE ENVIRONMENTALIST IV DES:ENVIRONMENTAL SERV,DEPT OF $101,618.11

ROBERT LAPOINTE JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $101,325.28

CHRISTOPHER AUCOIN STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $101,307.63

CAROL HOLAHAN LEGISLATIVE EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $101,168.13

JOHN DIANIS LEGIS LBA EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $101,104.48

VIRGINIA BEECHER DIRECTOR OF MOTOR VEHICLES SAFETY, DEPT OF $101,065.92

TERRENCE KINNEEN STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,904.42

CHARLES WEST STATE POLICE TROOPER I SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,800.92

****(3) DAVID CARGILL STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,708.63

THOMAS TIMMONS SENIOR DENTIST (NH HOSPITAL) HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $100,465.92

JEFFREY SMITH MANAGER OF OPERATIONS JUDICIAL BRANCH $100,369.96

IAN BERKELEY STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,319.52

CHRISTOPHER COLITTI STATE POLICE CAPTAIN SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,173.75

***** WILLIAM GARDNER SECRETARY OF STATE SECRETARY OF STATE $100,165.92

****(2) FREDERICK BOOTH DIRECTOR OF STATE POLICE SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,165.92

BRYAN TRASK STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $100,108.46

BRUCE CHENEY DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES SAFETY, DEPT OF $99,985.92

PETER HILDRETH COMMISSIONER (BANKING) BANK COMMISSION $99,928.92

CHRISTOPHER WAGNER STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $99,880.17

CATHERINE PROVENCHER TREASURER STATE TREASURY $99,768.68

NANCY ROLLINS DIR COMM SUPP & LONG TERM CARE HHS:COMMISSIONER $99,748.32

MARK LIEBL STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $99,731.71

GEORGE COPADIS COMMISSIONER (DEPT OF LABOR) LABOR, DEPT OF $99,679.92

MICHAEL WALLS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ENVIR DES:ENVIRONMENTAL SERV,DEPT OF $99,565.92

CHRISTOPHER POPE DIR OF HOMELAND SEC & EMERG MG SAFETY, DEPT OF $99,420.42

JOSEPH BOUCHARD ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ADMIN ADMINISTRATIVE SERV, DEPT OF $99,269.16

LYLE KNOWLTON DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS (DOT) TRANSPORTATION, DEPT OF $99,265.92

SALLY GALLERANI TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPEC VI DEPT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $99,176.24

SANDRA LAVALLEE ADJUNCT FACULTY REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $99,019.78

TIMOTHY HACKETT STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $99,015.71

DAVID PARENTEAU STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,952.55

ROGER SEVIGNY INSURANCE COMMISSIONER INSURANCE, DEPT OF $98,710.92

KENNETH CLARK ADJUTANT GENERAL ADJUTANT GENERAL $98,665.92

MARY HEATH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (EDUCATION EDUCATION, DEPT OF $98,665.92

RICHARD BROTHERS COMMISSIONER (EMP SECURITY) EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DEPT OF $98,665.92

EDWARD FITZGERALD JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $98,652.55

ELLEN ARCIERI STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,632.19

DAVID APPLEBY STATE POLICE TROOPER I SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,603.85

RICHARD FARRELL STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,487.66

ANNE HOWE DIR OF NURSING NH VETERANS HOME $98,406.72

RICHARD BERRY ADMINISTRATOR III DES:ENVIRONMENTAL SERV,DEPT OF $98,393.40

DONALD MANNING LEGISLATIVE EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $98,234.10

ANN RICE ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE, DEPT OF $98,149.22

CHARLES JOHNSTON STATE POLICE TROOPER II SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,024.93

RUSSELL CONTE STATE POLICE MAJOR SAFETY, DEPT OF $98,004.24

THOMAS LOMBARDI STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $97,986.66

DONNA SOUCY LEGISLATIVE EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $97,934.10

AUSTIN BROWNLEE REGISTERED NURSE III HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $97,781.90

RAYMOND CLOUTIER JUDGES AND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL BRANCH $97,647.10

JOHN LELACHEUR STATE POLICE CAPTAIN SAFETY, DEPT OF $97,627.22

GREGORY FERRY STATE POLICE SERGEANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $97,617.68

ARTHUR DELEAULT TI/COLLEGE PROFESSOR REGIONAL COMM TECH COLLEGE $97,540.25

RICHARD GERRY WARDEN NH STATE PRISON - MEN CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $97,444.43

JAMES WHITE STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $97,323.60

M KRISTIN SPATH ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY GENERAL JUSTICE, DEPT OF $96,874.10

KELLY BROWN PHARMACIST CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $96,660.20

PETER CROTEAU CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER JUDICIAL BRANCH $96,448.50

BARBARA HOOVER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MGR V DEPT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY $96,331.82

RODERICK MACLEAN ADMINISTRATOR II HHS:JUVENILE JUSTICE SERV $96,273.57

JOSE AVILES ADMINISTRATOR IV CORRECTIONS, DEPT OF $96,253.60

DIANE HILL NURSING COORDINATOR HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $96,096.18

DAVID BONACCI PHYSICIAN IN CHARGE (NH HOSP) HHS:NEW HAMPSHIRE HOSPITAL $95,801.94

JEROME MASLAN STATE POLICE LIEUTENANT SAFETY, DEPT OF $95,615.88

WILLIAM MCGRAW COURT CLERK VII JUDICIAL BRANCH $95,604.12

DONALD VITTUM DIRECTOR (POLICE STDS AND TNG POLICE STDS & TRAINING COUNCIL $95,581.78

DANA ZUCKER COURT CLERK VII JUDICIAL BRANCH $95,492.38

SHARON DEVRIES SPECIAL JUSTICE JUDICIAL BRANCH $95,444.00

DAVID FRYDMAN LEGISLATIVE EMPLOYEE NON-CLASS LEGISLATIVE BRANCH $95,438.62

STEPHEN BARRETT STATE POLICE CAPTAIN SAFETY, DEPT OF $95,403.29

[JosephSHaas]

Part 1 of 2:

"Subject: Re: Public Comment #____
> To: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
> From: Daniel_Lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:50:54 -0400
>
> Dear Mr. Haas:
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> I did receive your prior public comment but, unfortunately, I did not
> understand that it called for a response as it addressed various other
> items and commentary on matters other than the proposed local rule
> amendments. I apologize for not responding to your question for
> clarification on the proposed amendment to LR 73.1.
>
> To answer your original question, there was no asterisk in the draft local
> rules as indicated in the version of LR 73.1 that you inserted into your
> email. I have attached a copy of the proposed local rules put out for
> comment last month and, if you look at proposed amended LR 73.1 (page 6),
> you will see no such asterisk in the draft rule. Hopefully the attached
> draft proposed rule I published last month clearly outlines the text that
> is proposed to be added and omitted from this rule.
>
> I also note your recommendation today and thank you for your input.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Daniel J. Lynch
> U.S. Magistrate Judge/Chief Deputy Clerk
> USDC - New Hampshire
> Concord, NH 03301
> (603) 225-1477
> daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
>
> (See attached file: 11 Public Comment Draft.pdf)
>
> From: "Joseph S. Haas" <josephshaas at hotmail dot com>
> To: <daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov>
> Cc: <jay.ruais at mail.house.gov>
> Date: 11/03/2011 02:26 PM
> Subject: Public Comment #____
>
> Dan, I'm very dis-appointed in you NOT getting back to me of the missing
> word in the star "*" below, of that I did write to you about over a month
> ago on Wednesday, September 28th, with a copy to Federal Rep. Frank Guinta
> in Washington.
>
> Now here is my official comment during the Public Comment Period of time
> ending today (Thu., Nov. 3rd) being that of:
>
> "A designated party shall file either a consent or declination of
> consent on a form provided by the clerk" to please add in, something like,
> or as per the form "by" the clerk, of the word "by" meaning not only
> supplied by him in person, but available over the internet or in some Day
> Book, etc. because here's an analogy:
>
> Yeah, in the old days when I lived in Ashland I used to get these Criminal
> Complaint forms from the local Plymouth District Court Clerk who got them
> from the A.O.C. / Administrative Office of the Courts in Concord, see my
> case of State (by Haas) v. Rollins at:
> http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12680431751423737&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
> but that as the years went by, the other courts and A.O.C. plus local
> police and State Police clamped down on these complaint forms in triplicate
> with the carbon papers, and so I had to make up my own forms in accordance
> with RSA Ch. 594:14
> http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lix/594/594-14.htm So be it for
> the Feds too, in being able to get these forms without having to breath in
> the fire from the dragon breath of the Clerk or Deputy Clerk! (;-)
>
> Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joe / Joseph S. Haas, P. O. Box 3842,
> Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059, e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot
> com
>
> cc: Former State Trooper Dick Marple, of Hooksett, N.H. & State Rep.,
> Retired.
>
> P.S. The Case # for Ed was and still is: 05-C-033 per the other e-mail(s)
> already sent to you about this. This the final official one to put into
> the record, of that you may print-out the others as back-up history, or
> should I say: for future reference in getting some of these State and
> Federal judges impeached, and others of to fire them for not serving to use
> the sword AND the shield as Gov. Lynch for his non-performance of duty to
> his job description in Article 51 of the N.H. Constitution to execute BOTH
> the laws of the state AND of the United States, including Article 12 of
> Part First and our Bill of Rights NOT to be controlled over by any other
> laws, as the U.S. Codes never "Consent"ed to!, of him/Lynch from Hopkinton
> not just to buckle-under to get down on his knees bowing to "Uncle Sam" of
> the creature that we, the creators created! This really disgusts me to no
> end! See: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html and
> http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html respectfully from:
> http://www.nh.gov/constitution/constitution.html end.
> ___________________________________________________
>
> From: josephshaas at hotmail.com
> To: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
> CC: jay.ruais at mail.house.gov
> Subject: (Question) FW: Judicial Watch - Action Item re proposed amendments
> to Local Rules at the USDC-NH
> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:44:43 -0400
>
> To:
> The United States District Court
> 55 Pleasant Street, Room 110
> Concord, N.H. 03301-3941
> 603: 225-1423
> http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/
>
> Attn: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
> Deputy Clerk
>
> Question toward: First Draft (to send Oct. 3 - Nov. 3 = Public Comment
> Period)
>
> Dan,
>
> Reference: page 6 of 41
>
> 73.1 Assignment of Cases to Magistrate Judge
> * * * * *
> (2) Initial Assignment by the Clerk. The chief judge may authorize the
> clerk to initially
> randomly assign cases to the magistrate judge on a random basis for all
> purposes, including
> trial, entry of final judgment, and all post-judgment proceedings.
> (A) Notification of Initial Assignment. The clerk shall inform the parties
> of the initial
> assignment by issuing a notice of assignment and consent form.
> (B) Consent. A case initially assigned to the magistrate judge pursuant to
> this
> subsection shall be reassigned to a district judge unless all parties
> either affirmatively
> consent to the assignment or waive their right to object to the assignment.
> A party may
> object to the assignment by filing an objection within twenty-one (21) days
> after
> receiving notice of the.* A designated party shall file either a consent
> or declination of
> consent on a form provided by the clerk in the manner and within the time
> frame
> specified in the clerk's notice. Any party is free to withhold consent
> without adverse
> substantive consequences. The failure of a party to file an objection as
> required by this
> rule constitutes a waiver of the party's right to object to the
> assignment."
>
> Question: * the what? (see the asterisk place above with the missing word
> (s) of: ________ ? )
>
> You bastards, and I do mean this in the slang definition of the word as
> obnoxious or highly offensive of from the Latin word obnoxiosus of:
> injurious, KNOW that before you can get jurisdiction in a REMOVAL action
> that the Plaintiff party, like in a state court case against any of you
> "Uncle Sam" agents, there has to be a 28 U.S. Code 636(c)(1) "consent" of
> it to be removed to there in the first place.
>
> Case in point of Ed Brown v. Tom Colantuno in Grafton County Superior Court
> case #______ of when Jean K. (Mrs. Peter Hoe) Burling did allow such a
> request by U.S. Attorney Assistant _______ withOUT Ed's permission or
> "consent"!
>
> cc: to Federal Congressman Frank Guinta to look into an impeachment of the
> judge who wrongfully took this case to dismiss it! I think it was McAuliffe
> and them him in as the same judge for Ed's first criminal case. This
> bullshit has got to stop! I mean it. You creeps have got to be dealt with:
> as by the Rules Committee of The House has final say on these Local Rules
> too? Or just the main Rules? Anyway of until the regular rules are
> complied with, as in an apology to such in the past, then I call your
> looking for local rules to supplement them as out of order! So to get with
> it for said apology within the next two weeks and so by Wed., Oct. 12th
> (the real Columbus Day) of discovery by them, or you to discover something
> alright: like an Impeachment paper before the end of this Public Comment
> period!
>
> 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: also to Ed & Elaine Brown, by Corrlinks to Marion, Illinois and Fort
> Worth, Texas respectfully.
>
> And a bcc: to a State Rep. to see to it that this Jean K. Burling be Art.
> 17 + 38 impeached, to get no more Article 36 Retirement checks!
>
> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:48:52 -0400
> Subject: Re: Judicial Watch - Action Item re proposed amendments to Local
> Rules at the USDC-NH
> From: _____________
> To: ____________
>
> http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/pdf/11%20Public%20Comment%20Draft.pdf
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:30 AM, ______ wrote:
> ________________________________________
>
> From: ___________ "

[JosephSHaas]

Part 1 of 2: ....

Part 2 of 2:

"From: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
To: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
CC: jay.ruais at mail.house.gov; elections at sos.state.nh.us; wgardner at sos.state.nh.us; gcweb at nh.gov; rburton at nh.gov; dst.hilaire at nh.gov; csununu at nh.gov; rwieczorek at nh.gov; dwheeler at nh.gov; ingbretson_studio at yahoo.com; becraft at hiwaay.net; michael.a.delaney at doj.nh.gov; itsenh at comcast.net; ebailey at sheehan.com
Subject: [ "the" ____ ] RE: Public Comment #____
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:00:30 -0400

Dan,

Come on now.  Of course there was no star in the original. I put it there to indicate that whoever** wrote and typed this up had left out a word.  The sentence ends in the word "the". That is not proper English.  As Bob (and Joanne) Wherland, the Editor & Publisher of the old "Record Citizen" used to say to me back in the early 1980s in Plymouth, N.H.: (when it was competing with The "Bristol Enterprise" now combined) that's not the proper use of "The King's English".  Here's what the definition of "the" is from my dictionary:

"The definite article, functioning as an adjective BEFORE singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular specified persons or things and before certain nouns and adjectives with generic force." (emphasis ADDed).

So like the judge is wearing a black robe.  The "the" word is before the noun of THE judge.  So WHAT is the "the" word referring to in this sentence? It's not there.  Of course it's presumed to be the "Initial Assignment", or is it? by that notification sentence just prior to that. So that the COMPLETE sentence reads: " A party may object to the assignment by filing an objection within twenty-one (21) days
after receiving notice of the" what? also that of with the AND word of the consent form? To add in that word NOTICE of an Initial Assignment too?  Get it?

Joe

** WHO wrote this? ______ Did they flunk English class in Elementary School or what!? (;-)

P.S. Speaking of the word "the" and THE U.S. Attorney Manual 664 over at:   http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm

I have this "Federal question" for you to please answer too: since: "Whether or not the United States has jurisdiction is a Federal question. See Mason Co. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. at 197."

Has the Title 40 U.S. Code Section 255 (to 3112) of February 1, 1940 "head or authorized officer of the agency acquiring or holding property"  as in this case: Martha Johnson, the landlord or landlady there of the G.S.A./ General Services Administration for you as one of #___ tenants withIN the Warren B. Rudman Block at 53 Pleasant Street, Concord, N.H. filed "with the state a formal acceptance of such 'jurisdiction...."? Yes or No?  ___ Please answer with this simple one syllable word. [ To look over your shoulder for an answer from Jim Starr THE Clerk is O.K. (;-) ]

To that I mean having accepted our CONDITIONAL offer of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 U.S. Constitutional and CONDITIONAL "Consent" that we gave to "Uncle Sam" on June 14, 1883 by N.H. R.S.A. Chapter 123:1  http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm *** that by providing "an accurate description and plan of the lands so owned and occupied, verified by the oath of some officer of the United States having knowledge of the facts, shall be filed with the secretary of this state" WILL be that "formal acceptance". And that: "in the absence of such filing "it SHALL be conclusively presumed that no such jurisdiction has been acquired." See Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 " (emphasis ADDed.)

These state and federal statutes "embrace_ courthouses" under the ""other needful building" phase in 1-8-17 according to "James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. 134, 141 (1937)"

*** "State consent to the exercise of Federal jurisdiction may be evidenced by a specific enactment **** or by general constitutional or statutory provision.

• Cession of jurisdiction by the state also requires acceptance by the United States. See Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943); Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. at 651-52. " See also: http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm for a list of states, thanks to Attorney Lowell "Larry" Becraft from Huntsville, Alabama who used to be quoted a lot in F. Tupper Saussy's: "The Main Street Journal" back in the 1980s of which I was a subscriber in Ashland after having also bought his best-selling book: "The Miracle on Main Street" from Swanee, Tennessee. Tupper Saussy, R.I.P. is gone http://www.tuppersaussy.com but that his words live on.
  
  **** Thus for us here in New Hampshire there's this "specific enactment" by 123:1 involving the N.H. Secretary of State who gives an "Annual Report" to the Governor & Council (G&C) http://www.nh.gov/council/ every year, but lately Bill Gardner has been lazy!  In fact acting unlawfully, and in-completely! as against his RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office    http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/VI/92/92-2.htm   and Article 14 of our N.H. Bill of rights and that ought to get him Article 67 fired! by the State Reps and Senators who did vote for him. http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html and http://www.nh.gov/constitution/secretary.html from: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/constitution.html He calls his incomplete job description a Report! but that a Report is an accounting of to count these three items of the (1) plan and (2) description, and (3) oath, but has not indicated ANY such number! that he has FAILED to do! And that our governor has FAILed to do his duty too! And that is, not only for to use the SWORD but also the SHIELD of the law! by Article 51   http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html    of "to execute the laws of the state AND of the United States" (emphasis ADDed for BOTH, not the word "or" and so where was the Article 12 protection of some of our "inhabitants"!?  being controlled over by these "other laws" of the U.S. Codes NEVER "Consented" nor "consent"ed too, by BOTH the capital letter C in the Constitution and lower case "c" in the statute as in 28USC636(c)(1) of that there can be NO "Removal" of a state case to Federal Court withOUT the "consent" of the party!  A violation done by the N.H. Supreme Court in the Dan Riley case of 2007-0745 that ought to be corrected by a hearing there NOW! lest they all be Article 17 impeached   http://www.nh.gov/constitution/house.html   for an Article 38  http://www.nh.gov/constitution/senate.html    trial in the Sente.  So a cc: courtesy copy by e-mail of this to our N.H. Secretary of State, the five Executive Councilors, and advance information toward an Article 32 Petition to the New Republican House Grievance Committee chairman for Redress, to please post a print-out of this on your Bulletin Board there and/or in the State-Federal Relations Committee (to send them their copies later*****) for the Plainfield, Dover and Concord Reps to look into this and DO such please. Plus all the Reps. along either Route 4 and/or 101 of which he traveled from Strafford County. And those other Reps in Somersworth at just before the Somersworth-Berwick Bridge, because of the unlawful and illegal pre-trial hearings with Judge George Z. Singal in Portland, Maine: a violation of the Sixth (6th) Amendment in that ALL trials SHALL be in the state AND district of where the offense occured, and that contrary to A.G. Investigator Paul Broder who I complained to to run it up through channels to the A.G. himself (ever done?) , we do NOT live in the First Judicial District, BUT the District of N.H. withIN the First Circuit out of their Boston headquarters, and that pre-trials are a PART of the trial, AND Assistant U.S. Attorney Arnold Huftalen even tried to get Cirino Gonzalez of then at the Boscawen jail to waive his 18USC3232 rights, and REFUSED, but was trucked to Maine ANyway! Proof being in his signature on this attempted waiver that he KNEW otherwise!
  
  
• Some other states of the "specific" also being: Pennsylvania and Texas, plus Florida that requires a filing with the governor that has NOT been done either.  As compared to the "general" and of all states, get this: Missouri of: "The 'Show Me' state" giving "Uncle Sam" the "Carte Blanche" of requiring no filing at all.
  
  As stated in this Manual 664 it's time that you and the others over there also in the James C. Cleveland Building to "Wise Up" from this BELIEF as in the to be " believed to be under exclusive Federal legislative jurisdiction. See H.R. Rep. No. 1623, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. 1 (1940); S. Rep. No. 1788, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. 1 (1940)" and "See Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. at 652-56." to go from what you thought and still think(?) has been updated with this Dravo case. Please "get with it"! We do not need any more of your "Thought Police" / U.S. Marshals to take these orders from the court at face value.  I know that when Stephen Robert Monier of Goffstown was Marshal there, I did get a copy of his oath of office to execute ONLY "lawful precepts", of him to determine which ones be lawful or not by some screening process, like IF the paperwork FROM the Feds has or has NOT been filed with our Secretary of State.  I presume that former N.H. State Trooper David Cargill, now the U.S. Marshal is under the same language in his oath too.  To see to it that the wrongs committed under the previous powers NOT be repeated in the current and future tense here.
  
  Please print-out a copy of this ENTIRE reply and place within the Public Comment folder so that FINALLY we can get those #_____ individuals who will be reading this to have like that light bulb go on in their head and DO something about this. To do nothing ought to lead onto their Impeachments!
  
  Yours truly, Joe Haas
  
  cc: also to victims: Ed & Elaine Brown too, plus Cirino Gonzalez from Texas, whose Attorney was David Hugh Bownes from Laconia who I presume flew down the Texas for those court hearings there but was too "lazy" too like Bill Gardner, and so ought to be brought up on charges of "ineffective assistance of counsel."  In fact, while the first Ed Brown case was on-going I gave a copy of the certificate of Federal non-filing to William Morse, the prosecutor in-directly through his office receptionist with State Rep. Henry McElroy from Nashua, and Margo Sanger Katz of The "Concord Monitor" as a Reporter therefrom as witnesses that day, so KNOW that they KNOW this BUT do otherwise, that be CRIMINAL conspiracy since it has resulted in the unlawful incarceration of my friends.  A point of law [ or: "Point of Order"] AND fact that the N.H. Supremes were supposed to deal with, as by another Federal statute that ONLY the Defendant can PUSH the case to Federal court, WITH the 28USC636(c)(1) consent of BOTH parties, but that of them who did allow the U.S. Attorney to intervene and PULL it to there. Thus a cc: of this to them by way of Eileen Fox, their Clerk, later this afternoon, as I have a current civil case on Appeal to there (cc: to Liz Bailey too in #2011-0491) and do not want these thieves to hear my case! Thieves as in having stolen the liberty of my friend Dan Riley whose father just died yesterday, while him still fighting this corruption! Thus the reason for this timing here of a re-reading and re-quoting of this Manual 664. Shame on all of you! SHAME! A posting of this to The N.H. Underground at page 662:   http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.9915 as Reply #9929.
     
      [cited in USAM 9-20.100] "

[JosephSHaas]

Part 1 of 2: ....

Part 2 of 2: ....

Supplement:

"From: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
To: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
Subject: (thanks) RE: [ "the" ____ ] RE: Public Comment #____
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:50:43 -0400

Thank you Dan for the attachment that I "thought" was just a re-type of what I had already quoted as I did NOT open it up on my computer.  I guess thinking that "you people" send viruses in such! (;-) Paranoia? (;-)

Anyway, please to add this and that of for a complete Public Comment and with the Supplement for anybody reading this folder or file.

Best wishes, Joe

P.S. As they say: "I could not care less" for this Rule as I deal not with your court there ever again as made up of a bunch of crooks! needing to correct their stance or if not, then to be impeached, of maybe THEN for me to step foot on the property to maybe listen in on somebody else's case.  In the meantime awaiting your answer to my second question regarding Manual 664 of your yes or no answer please. And so: no, to your last sentence of: " Hopefully this answers your questions." in the plural, of yes for the singular of (B) seeing that you filled in the word "assignment" after the word "the", that ended the first draft before the amendment you call " the underline/strikeout version." BUT that I still do not have your Clerk Jim Starr assisted answer to that yes or no question.  Please to get this to me as soon as possible.

All the cc's in the prior e-mail of like what Dick Bosa used to do back in the 1990s of before the internet. (;-) R.I.P. The former Mayor of Berlin, N.H. and Vice President of our V.O.C.A.L.S., Inc.group [ Victims of a Corrupt American Legal System ] of which there were twenty (20) of us incorporator / founders, including three State Reps: Roland E. Hemon, R.I.P. of Dover, Bill McCann and Paul Taylor.

> Subject: Re: [ "the" ____ ] RE: Public Comment #____
> To: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
> From: Daniel_Lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:05:31 -0400
>
> Dear Mr. Haas:
>
> Unfortunately you are not correctly interpreting the underline/strikeout
> version. Below is the version as amended effective 12/1/11:
>
> 73.1 Assignment of Cases to Magistrate Judge
>
> (a) Designated Jurisdiction. The judges of this district designate
> the magistrate judge to conduct all proceedings in any civil matter upon
> the consent of the parties.
>
> (b) Methods of Assignment.
>
> (1) Reassignment Following Request of Parties. Parties may consent
> to the reassignment of a case to a magistrate judge by filing a Notice,
> Consent, and Order of Reference form stating that the parties consent
> to the reassignment. This form should not be returned to the clerk of
> court unless all parties consent to the reassignment. The clerk shall
> notify the parties in all cases that they may consent to have the
> magistrate judge conduct all proceedings in any civil matter.
>
> (2) Initial Assignment by the Clerk. The chief judge may authorize
> the clerk to randomly assign cases to the magistrate judge for all
> purposes, including trial, entry of final judgment, and all
> post-judgment proceedings.
>
> (A) Notification of Initial Assignment. The clerk shall inform the
> parties of the initial assignment by issuing a notice of assignment
> and consent form.
>
> (B) Consent. A case initially assigned to the magistrate judge
> pursuant to this subsection shall be reassigned to a district judge
> unless all parties consent to the assignment. A designated party
> shall file either a consent or declination of consent on a form
> provided by the clerk in the manner and within the time frame
> specified in the clerk's notice. Any party is free to withhold
> consent without adverse substantive consequences.
>
> (c) Construction With Other Laws. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c),
> the right to have certain civil proceedings conducted by a judge,
> appointed pursuant to Article III of the United States Constitution,
> shall be preserved to the parties inviolate.
>
> (§§ (b)(2)(A) and (B) amended 1/1/99; § (b)(1) amended 1/1/00; §§ (b)(1)
> and (2) amended 1/1/05; § (b)(2)(B) amended 12/1/09; §§ (b)(2)(A)-(B)
> amended 12/1/11)
>
> Hopefully this answers your questions.
> ----------------------------------------------------- "

[JosephSHaas]

Part 1 of 2: ....

Part 2 of 2: ....

Supplement:  ....

The three last Replies by me here will be sent to Ed & Elaine plus Danny, Reno and Jack by Corrlinks. -- Joe

Here's the opening paragraph that was sent: "
Re: Manual 664 (Part 1 of 2) + Supp.
To: Ed & Elaine, plus Danny and Reno, also Jack as it regards the Federal non-filing in Florida too.  Here's Part 1 of 2 plus the Supplement.  This opportunity here of a Public Comment hopefully to get that Manual 664 answer. As in to have Dan Lynch PUSH it to me, or my State public servants to, like a dentist, extract or PULL it FOR us! -- Joe P.S. This IS published over at page 662 of The NHU; Part 2 and the Supp. is at the top of page 663.  These are copy and paste's from there with the @ symbol in the e-mail addresses replaced by the "at" words so as not to get the electronic spiders to send them junk mail. To forward MY earlier reply to Dan Lynch, to Jose, Donna, Bill, Keith and David with the active hyperlinks in MY e-mail that somehow in the replies from Dan Lynch for "Uncle Sam" get de-activated!"

[JosephSHaas]

KARMA

http://wn.com/Edward_and_Elaine_Brown

@ 1:40 of this 3-minute video.

#1 of 14.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's the crap* that I did get from Chief Deputy Clerk Dan Lynch at the U.S. District Court in Concord, N.H.:

See attachment of his 1-page e-mail of Mon., Nov. 14th that I did receive in yesterday's mail. [ 242.1 KB of 25.0 MB ]

Joe

* the crap being his reply of to address any attack upon the court's jurisdiction withIN an existing case.  This is crap, as I did that with a "Point of Order" and got thrown out of the courtroom AND the Warren B. Rudman block.  I sued the U.S. Marshal Stephen Robert Monier of Goffstown in Merrimack County Superior Court in Concord for assault, and Judge Kathleen McGuire of Hopkintion did allow the Feds to Remove it to there withOUT my 28USC363(c)(1) "consent"! to R.I. where the judge did LIE that my Point of Order was not DURING the trial, that is WAS, of before the judge and BEFORE the jury did render their verdict in the Ed Brown co-conspirator cases, and so next time to make-a-scene BEFORE the jury to get it on the record.  Judge George G. Singal did tell the Marshals: "get that guy out of here!" but that neither this incident NOR his words were on the record, as the transcriber was standing up too, awaiting the word from the judge to the Bailiff to have him send in the jury.
_______________________________________________________

here's the 664 info:

"From: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
To: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
CC: N.H. Congressman Frank Guinta, Bill Gardner, N.H. Secretary of State, The Executive Councilors, two N.H. State Reps., Larry Becraft, A.G. Mike Delaney, and a woman attorney in Manchester whose co-horts do business with Uncle Sam.
Subject: [ "the" ____ ] RE: Public Comment #____
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:00:30 -0400

Dan,

Come on now. . . . "

[JosephSHaas]

This was sent to the three State Reps in Lebanon (for where Elaine had her Dental Office on Glen Road there) who REFUSE to sign an Article 32 petition to get this wrong righted!

"I presume that you all have access to the internet, but if not, like some e-mail reader only, here's a copy and paste of the 664:

from: http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00664.htm

"
US Attorneys > USAM > Title 9 > Criminal Resource Manual 664
prev | next | Criminal Resource Manual

Territorial Jurisdiction
664
    Of the several categories listed in 18 U.S.C. § 7, Section 7(3) is the most significant, and provides:

    The term "special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States," as used in this title, includes: . . .
    (3) Any lands reserved or acquired for the use of the United States, and under the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction thereof, or any place purchased or otherwise acquired by the United States by consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of a fort, magazine, arsenal, dockyard, or other needful building.
    As is readily apparent, this subsection, and particularly its second clause, bears a striking resemblance to the 17th Clause of Article I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution. This clause provides:

        The Congress shall have power. . . To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, be Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.

    (Emphasis added.) The constitutional phrase "exclusive legislation" is the equivalent of the statutory expression "exclusive jurisdiction." See James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. 134, 141 (1937), citing, Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. 647, 652 (1930).

    Until the decision in Dravo, it had been generally accepted that when the United States acquired property with the consent of the state for any of the enumerated purposes, it acquired exclusive jurisdiction by operation of law, and any reservation of authority by the state, other than the right to serve civil and criminal process, was inoperable. See Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. at 652-56. When Dravo held that a state might reserve legislative authority, e.g., the right to levy certain taxes, so long as that did not interfere with the United States' governmental functions, it became necessary for Congress to amend 18 U.S.C. § 7(3), by adding the words "so as," to restore criminal jurisdiction over those places previously believed to be under exclusive Federal legislative jurisdiction. See H.R. Rep. No. 1623, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. 1 (1940); S. Rep. No. 1788, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. 1 (1940).
    Dravo also settled that the phrase "other needful building" was not to be strictly construed to include only military and naval structures, but was to be construed as "embracing whatever structures are found to be necessary in the performance of the function of the Federal Government." See James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. at 142-43. It therefore properly embraces courthouses, customs houses, post offices and locks and dams for navigation purposes.
    The "structures" limitation does not, however, prevent the United States from holding or acquiring and having jurisdiction over land acquired for other valid purposes, such as parks and irrigation projects since Clause 17 is not the exclusive method of obtaining jurisdiction. The United States may also obtain jurisdiction by reserving it when sovereign title is transferred to the state upon its entry into the Union or by cession of jurisdiction after the United States has otherwise acquired the property. See Collins v. Yosemite Park Co., 304 U.S. 518, 529-30 (1938); James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. at 142; Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. at 650-52; Fort Leavenworth R.R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U.S. 525, 526-27, 538, 539 (1885).
    The United States may hold or acquire property within the borders of a state without acquiring jurisdiction. It may acquire title to land necessary for the performance of its functions by purchase or eminent domain without the state's consent. See Kohl v. United States, 91 U.S. 367, 371, 372 (1976). But it does not thereby acquire legislative jurisdiction by virtue of its proprietorship. The acquisition of jurisdiction is dependent on the consent of or cession of jurisdiction by the state. See Mason Co. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. 97 (1937); James v. Dravo Contracting Co., 302 U.S. at 141-42. State consent to the exercise of Federal jurisdiction may be evidenced by a specific enactment or by general constitutional or statutory provision. Cession of jurisdiction by the state also requires acceptance by the United States. See Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943); Surplus Trading Co. v. Cook, 281 U.S. at 651-52. Whether or not the United States has jurisdiction is a Federal question. See Mason Co. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. at 197.

    Prior to February 1,1940, it was presumed that the United States accepted jurisdiction whenever the state offered it because the donation was deemed a benefit. See Fort Leavenworth R.R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U.S. at 528. This presumption was reversed by enactment of the Act of February 1, 1940, codified at 40 U.S.C. § 255. This statute requires the head or authorized officer of the agency acquiring or holding property to file with the state a formal acceptance of such "jurisdiction, exclusive or partial as he may deem desirable," and further provides that in the absence of such filing "it shall be conclusively presumed that no such jurisdiction has been acquired." See Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (district court is without jurisdiction to prosecute soldiers for rape committed on an army base prior to filing of acceptance prescribed by statute). The requirement of 40 U.S.C. §  255 can also be fulfilled by any filing satisfying state law. United States v. Johnson, 994 F.2d 980, 984-86 (2d Cir. 1993). The enactment of 40 U.S.C. § 255 did not retroactively affect jurisdiction previously acquired. See Markham v. United States, 215 F.2d 56 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 939 (1954); United States v. Heard, 270 F. Supp. 198, 200 (W.D. Mo. 1967).
    COMMENT: In summary, the United States may exercise plenary criminal jurisdiction over lands within state borders:

            Where it reserved such jurisdiction upon entry of the state into the union;
            Where, prior to February 1, 1940, it acquired property for a purpose enumerated in the Constitution with the consent of the state;
            Where it acquired property whether by purchase, gift or eminent domain, and thereafter, but prior to February 1, 1940, received a cession of jurisdiction from the state; and
            Where it acquired the property, and/or received the state's consent or cession of jurisdiction after February 1, 1940, and has filed the requisite acceptance.

    [cited in USAM 9-20.100] "

[JosephSHaas]

Here's what got this started:

From: josephshaas at hotmail dot com
To: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
CC: jay.ruais at mail.house.gov [ for Frank Guinta ]
Subject: (Question) FW: Judicial Watch - Action Item re proposed amendments to Local Rules at the USDC-NH
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:44:43 -0400

To:
The United States District Court
55 Pleasant Street, Room 110
Concord, N.H. 03301-3941
603: 225-1423
http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/

Attn: daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
Deputy Clerk

Question toward: First Draft (to send Oct. 3 - Nov. 3 = Public Comment Period)

Dan,

Reference: page 6 of 41

73.1 Assignment of Cases to Magistrate Judge
* * * * *
(2) Initial Assignment by the Clerk. The chief judge may authorize the clerk to initially
randomly assign cases to the magistrate judge on a random basis for all purposes, including
trial, entry of final judgment, and all post-judgment proceedings.
(A) Notification of Initial Assignment. The clerk shall inform the parties of the initial
assignment by issuing a notice of assignment and consent form.
(B) Consent. A case initially assigned to the magistrate judge pursuant to this
subsection shall be reassigned to a district judge unless all parties either affirmatively
consent to the assignment or waive their right to object to the assignment. A party may
object to the assignment by filing an objection within twenty-one (21) days after
receiving notice of the.*  A designated party shall file either a consent or declination of
consent on a form provided by the clerk in the manner and within the time frame
specified in the clerk's notice. Any party is free to withhold consent without adverse
substantive consequences. The failure of a party to file an objection as required by this
rule constitutes a waiver of the party's right to object to the assignment."

Question: * the what? (see the asterisk place above with the missing word(s) of: ________ ? )

You bastards, and I do mean this in the slang definition of the word as obnoxious or highly offensive of from the Latin word obnoxiosus of: injurious, KNOW that before you can get jurisdiction in a REMOVAL action that the Plaintiff party, like in a state court case against any of you "Uncle Sam" agents, there has to be a 28 U.S. Code 636(c)(1) "consent" of it to be removed to there in the first place.

Case in point of Ed Brown v. Tom Colantuno in Grafton County Superior Court case #______ of when Jean K. (Mrs. Peter Hoe) Burling did allow such a request by U.S. Attorney Assistant _______ withOUT Ed's permission or "consent"!

cc: to Federal Congressman Frank Guinta to look into an impeachment of the judge who wrongfully took this case to dismiss it! I think it was McAuliffe and them him in as the same judge for Ed's first criminal case.  This bullshit has got to stop! I mean it. You creeps have got to be dealt with: as by the Rules Committee of The House has final say on these Local Rules too? Or just the main Rules?  Anyway of until the regular rules are complied with, as in an apology to such in the past, then I call your looking for local rules to supplement them as out of order!  So to get with it for said apology within the next two weeks and so by Wed., Oct. 12th (the real Columbus Day) of discovery by them, or you to discover something alright: like an Impeachment paper before the end of this Public Comment period!

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: also to Ed & Elaine Brown, by Corrlinks to Marion, Illinois and Fort Worth, Texas respectfully.

And a bcc: to a State Rep. to see to it that this Jean K. Burling be Art. 17 + 38 impeached, to get no more Article 36 Retirement checks!

Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:48:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Judicial Watch - Action Item re proposed amendments to Local Rules at the USDC-NH
From: _____________
To: ____________

http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/pdf/11%20Public%20Comment%20Draft.pdf

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:30 AM, ______ wrote:
________________________________________ "

     

[JosephSHaas]

See above, as a repeat. Sorry.

Modification: / Addition.

In addition to the Lebanon Reps. I'm also in communication with the Plainfield Reps. who have transferred whatever Article 32 Petition to have House Rule 36 endorsed over to a subject matter Rep. looking into this and/or for a House Bill of Address +/or also an Impeachment! by the Manchester Reps too, per a request as I've written a First Draft for Federal Rep. Frank Guinta to sign, and likewise impeach Federal judge George Z. Singal. Of NOW the time for this BEFORE the publication of the LSRs to House Bills that'll keep them busy for all of the Winter-Spring 2012 Legislative Session.  The list is up on the State website Mon., Dec. 5th, so if you'd like phone #s to call these Reps. I'll put them in the postings to follow.

[JosephSHaas]

Here's the "this":

Subject: Re: Public Comment #____
> To: josephshaas at hotmail.com
> From: Daniel_Lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 15:50:54 -0400
>
> Dear Mr. Haas:
>
> Thank you for your comments.
>
> I did receive your prior public comment but, unfortunately, I did not
> understand that it called for a response as it addressed various other
> items and commentary on matters other than the proposed local rule
> amendments. I apologize for not responding to your question for
> clarification on the proposed amendment to LR 73.1.
>
> To answer your original question, there was no asterisk in the draft local
> rules as indicated in the version of LR 73.1 that you inserted into your
> email. I have attached a copy of the proposed local rules put out for
> comment last month and, if you look at proposed amended LR 73.1 (page 6),
> you will see no such asterisk in the draft rule. Hopefully the attached
> draft proposed rule I published last month clearly outlines the text that
> is proposed to be added and omitted from this rule.
>
> I also note your recommendation today and thank you for your input.
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Daniel J. Lynch
> U.S. Magistrate Judge/Chief Deputy Clerk
> USDC - New Hampshire
> Concord, NH 03301
> (603) 225-1477
> daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov
>
> (See attached file: 11 Public Comment Draft.pdf)
>
> From: "Joseph S. Haas" <josephshaas at hotmail.com>
> To: <daniel_lynch at nhd.uscourts.gov>
> Cc: <jay.ruais at mail.house.gov>
> Date: 11/03/2011 02:26 PM
> Subject: Public Comment #____
>
> Dan, I'm very dis-appointed in you NOT getting back to me of the missing
> word in the star "*" below, of that I did write to you about over a month
> ago on Wednesday, September 28th, with a copy to Federal Rep. Frank Guinta
> in Washington.
>
> Now here is my official comment during the Public Comment Period of time
> ending today (Thu., Nov. 3rd) being that of:
>
> "A designated party shall file either a consent or declination of
> consent on a form provided by the clerk" to please add in, something like,
> or as per the form "by" the clerk, of the word "by" meaning not only
> supplied by him in person, but available over the internet or in some Day
> Book, etc. because here's an analogy:
>
> Yeah, in the old days when I lived in Ashland I used to get these Criminal
> Complaint forms from the local Plymouth District Court Clerk who got them
> from the A.O.C. / Administrative Office of the Courts in Concord, see my
> case of State (by Haas) v. Rollins at:
> http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12680431751423737&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr
> but that as the years went by, the other courts and A.O.C. plus local
> police and State Police clamped down on these complaint forms in triplicate
> with the carbon papers, and so I had to make up my own forms in accordance
> with RSA Ch. 594:14
> http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lix/594/594-14.htm So be it for
> the Feds too, in being able to get these forms without having to breath in
> the fire from the dragon breath of the Clerk or Deputy Clerk! (;-)
>
> Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joe / Joseph S. Haas, P. O. Box 3842,
> Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059, e-mail: JosephSHaas at hotmail dot
> com
>
> cc: Former State Trooper Dick Marple, of Hooksett, N.H. & State Rep.,
> Retired.
>
> P.S. The Case # for Ed was and still is: 05-C-033 per the other e-mail(s)
> already sent to you about this. This the final official one to put into
> the record, of that you may print-out the others as back-up history, or
> should I say: for future reference in getting some of these State and
> Federal judges impeached, and others of to fire them for not serving to use
> the sword AND the shield as Gov. Lynch for his non-performance of duty to
> his job description in Article 51 of the N.H. Constitution to execute BOTH
> the laws of the state AND of the United States, including Article 12 of
> Part First and our Bill of Rights NOT to be controlled over by any other
> laws, as the U.S. Codes never "Consent"ed to!, of him/Lynch from Hopkinton
> not just to buckle-under to get down on his knees bowing to "Uncle Sam" of
> the creature that we, the creators created! This really disgusts me to no
> end! See: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/governor.html and
> http://www.nh.gov/constitution/billofrights.html respectfully from:
> http://www.nh.gov/constitution/constitution.html end.
> "

[JosephSHaas]

How many Public Comments were there? #_____

http://www.nhd.uscourts.gov/

I just called the court at 225-1423 and asked and she doesn't know at the front desk for Dan to get back to me,

re: this "consent" Local Rule, of my expansion of such to the "Consent" with a capital letter C in the Constitution.

Are the #___ Comments going to be posted? in full? When, Where? Is there a verbal public hearing day and time of AFTER us of who put these in writing to TALK about it? Or are they going to clam up?

The deadline for the written comments ended almost a fortnight ago, on Thu., Nov. 3rd, of me still looking for an answer to that yes or no question that he ducks and writes of to see the judge who I already did of that Singal creep who said to shut up too! 

Nice bunch of public servants we have other there eh?  A "Den of Thieves" is what Andy Melechinsky (of Enfield, Conn.) said of at every law school in the country he did visit with his picketing sign back in the 1980s, R.I.P.

Plus WHO are the attorneys in this State who sign up to do this dirty business by shaking hands with these Uncle Sam agents? To carry the sword in one hand, as an officer of the court, and the shield in the other for their client? An Article 12 inhabitant. No, they toss the shield to the side and stab their clients in the back!  I want this list! Now! I called the Bar Association and they said that it's PRIVATE.  I called the Court and they say it's PUBLIC, but that it's not on-line through their website unless you're an attorney who can log in, otherwise you can access PACER for free in their lobby, OR get a PACER card account, or somebody did access thru that Freedom of Information site of accessed documents posted to the public domain?  If so, WHERE?

I will NOT step foot into their place.  Like Andy said: It's a "Den of Thieves"! We need some state check on this Federal crap, and literally too, as their water-sewer agreement in lieu of the building property tax expired, since only the land is except from the property tax, per RSA Ch. 123:2   http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-2.htm Time to send them a bill of over $2 million a year for their $100 million monstrosity!