PAM Puts The Smackdown On IRS re Browns

[ElfNinosMom]

That's right, our favorite Private Attorney General (and my blog's namesake) has decided to get involved in the Brown case (even though he admits he hasn't seen any of the case documents).

Watch out, Marshal Monier - if you don't do exactly as PAM instructs, he's going to file a "Verified Criminal Complaint Upon Information" about you under the RICO act!

RE: Ed and Mrs. Elaine Brown - NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST

NOTICE AND DEMAND

TO CEASE AND DESIST


TO: Mr. Stephen R. Monier

c/o Office of the U.S. Marshal

Warren B. Rudman U.S. Courthouse

55 Pleasant Street, Suite 207

Concord 03301

NEW HAMPSHIRE, USA

FROM: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a), Rotella v. Wood


DATE: June 15, 2007 A.D.

SUBJECT: Mr. Ed and Mrs. Elaine Brown

Greetings Mr. Monier:

This is to inform you formally and officially that my office legally represents the United States ex rel. in Tenth Circuit appeal #07-2017.

In that case, extensive verified evidence has already been admitted into that Court’s record, proving conclusively that there is no Statute at Large creating a specific liability for income taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”).

The alleged “liability” was fabricated by the Internal Revenue Service, but there is no corresponding Act of Congress creating that specific liability for any income taxes imposed by IRC subtitle A.

Accordingly, even if the IRS were a de jure service, bureau, office or other subdivision of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (which they are NOT), they would still not have any authority to create a tax liability by means of regulations published in the Federal Register. See 31 U.S.C. 333; Commissioner v. Acker, 361 U.S. 87 (1959).

Moreover, you are hereby served with formal NOTICE that the constitutionality of IRC subtitle A, the federal Jury Selection and Service Act and the Act of June 25, 1948, has now been properly and formally challenged in that Tenth Circuit Appeal.

In the first instance, it is now the position of the United States ex rel. that the Jury Selection and Service Act is unconstitutional because it expressly discriminates against State Citizens by requiring that all jury candidates be federal citizens. The U.S. Supreme Court has already held that such “class discrimination” in jury selection is unconstitutional. There are two (2) classes of citizens in America.

Therefore, the Browns were never “indicted” by a lawfully convened federal grand jury, and they were never “convicted” by a lawfully convened federal trial jury. Both panels of federal citizens were not lawfully convened federal juries, in the first instance.

My office has not yet had an opportunity to review any of the court pleadings filed in the Browns’ case. Nevertheless, our 17 years of experience in State and federal litigation inform us that the U.S. Department of Justice routinely institutes criminal proceedings on behalf of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. However, the latter entity incorporated twice in Delaware, and both of those foreign corporations have now been revoked by the Delaware Secretary of State.

To make matters much worse, the long-standing rule in all federal litigation is that statutes conferring original jurisdiction on Federal District Courts must be strictly construed. The Article IV United States District Court has no criminal jurisdiction whatsoever. The general grant of criminal jurisdiction at 18 U.S.C. 3231 confers original jurisdiction upon the Article III District Courts of the United States, not on the Article IV United States District Courts.

We have enclosed a few key documents to substantiate every statement above, and full details are readily available from supporting links and related resources in the Supreme Law Library on the Internet here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/

DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST

Accordingly, formal demand is hereby made of you and all of your associates, accomplices and accessories of whatever description, to cease and desist immediately from any further attempts to apprehend the Browns or to trespass upon their fundamental Rights or private property in any manner whatsoever.

NOTICE OF INTENT

If you willfully violate this lawful NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST, this is our formal NOTICE to you of our intent to lodge a VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, ON INFORMATION specifically naming you as a principal in a conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activities in connection with the Browns and in connection with any other attempts by your office to enforce a non-existent liability for IRC subtitle A “income taxes”, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962.

Notice to agents is notice to principals.

Notice to principals is notice to agents.

Thank you for your immediate cooperation.

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and

Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/...

List of Hard Copy Attachments:

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/irs.estopped.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson ... /nad06.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/su ... eill.1.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/de ... ctions.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/su ... eill.2.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/su ... eill.3.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/green.card.gif

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/eddings/reminder.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/...

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/cr ... tle.28.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/...

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/...

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/williamson2/appeal/...

[Nikki]

How about an additional ballot option:

PAM (assuming the Marshall's Office can find the homeless shelter where he lives) will be receiving a visit from a representative of the US Marshall's Office and will be asked to explain why he is making terroristic threats.

[grixit]

If he actually sent this, i hope he is arrested for fraud, misrepresentation and interfering with law enforcement.

[Demosthenes]

If he actually sent this, i hope he is arrested for fraud, misrepresentation and interfering with law enforcement.

They have to find what bridge he lives under first.

[Nikki]

They have to find him first. For the past few years, his only address has been one of several private post boxes.

Even if he is arrested, he has a guaranteed get-out-of-jail-free card: he is crazier than someone who's name I won't mention because he will pop in and hijack the thread.

[notorial dissent]

Why should PAM let a little thing like knowing what was going on get in the way of a perfectly good psychotic incident, when it has never stopped him before? After all, facts only confuse the issue and makes pompous rhetoric all the harder to maintain.

I mean, to start with, we have the unlicenced practice of law. Interfering with a law enforcement action, I don’t know exactly what they call it when you are dealing with a Federal Marshall, my sister usually called it a broken wrist when someone got in her way. I’m sure it must also be a Federal Offense to pretend to represent the gov’t as well.

I’m not sure what the reality, legality, or even existence of the IRS has to do with the Marshal, since he is only executing a court order, he doesn’t care why it was issued.

Could this be construed as a “threat” against the Marshal? Another Federal offense??

I don’t know if PAM realizes that he is playing in the big leagues now, and Federal LEO’s take a very dim view of this kind of interference, and since some of his rantings have now moved into true federal offense realm, he may get more than just dismissed like all his civil suits have been.

[notorial dissent]

Just how lucky can the Browns afford to get, first they get Bulten on their side vowing to help, and now they've got PAM. With this kind of help they'll be lucky if they get the chair when this is all said and done.

[Nikki]

If I recall correctly, which at my age is always an open question, isn't PAM under an order by a federal District Court judge to get all "legal papers" approved before he files them?

Thus, either I'm hallucinating or his threat is moot because the judge will apply the VAN PELT SCOOTER local rule.

[Demosthenes]

They have to find him first. For the past few years, his only address has been one of several private post boxes.

Even if he is arrested, he has a guaranteed get-out-of-jail-free card: he is crazier than someone who's name I won't mention because he will pop in and hijack the thread.

My magic ball places PAM in ... Hanford, CA.

[Nikki]

They have to find him first. For the past few years, his only address has been one of several private post boxes.

Even if he is arrested, he has a guaranteed get-out-of-jail-free card: he is crazier than someone who's name I won't mention because he will pop in and hijack the thread.

My magic ball places PAM in ... Hanford, CA.

Is that the physical PAM (as in attached to a computer at a public library) or one of his several different personalities?

[Demosthenes]

Is that the physical PAM (as in attached to a computer at a public library) or one of his several different personalities?

Most recent IP.

[.]

first they get Bulten on their side vowing to help, and now they've got PAM

Plus Randy Weaver. Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

If Van Pelt was paying attention, he'd jump on this train before it goes off the rails, which no doubt will happen soon.

Maybe it's all a plot by Monier to suck in every nut-ball in the entire country.

[ElfNinosMom]

If I recall correctly, which at my age is always an open question, isn't PAM under an order by a federal District Court judge to get all "legal papers" approved before he files them?

In July 2004, PAM was indeed declared a vexatious litigant by the 9th Circuit of the Eastern District of California. Far be it from PAM to let a little thing like a federal court order stop him, though. According to one of the victims .... er, I mean, defendants ..... in the PAM v AOL case, he has continued to file documents despite the dismissal of that case years ago.

[Nikki]

ENM:

Didn't PAM spin the fact that he had to submit all of his filings to the court for review and permission to file them to mean something like

I now have a Federal District Judge dedicated to reviewing and processing all of my material?

[notorial dissent]

first they get Bulten on their side vowing to help, and now they've got PAM

Plus Randy Weaver. Winner, winner, chicken dinner.
I forgot about Randy, let’s get the rest of my family killed, Weaver, a standard of cool and sane deliberation if ever there was one.

If Van Pelt was paying attention, he'd jump on this train before it goes off the rails, which no doubt will happen soon.
Not a chance, that would require actual work and effort to which he is violently allergic, and since he isn’t working, he couldn’t afford a bus ticket, maybe we should get up a collection to buy him a one way ticket. His sterling reparté and legal acumen would probably be a welcome addition after all the help they got at trial, after all, they haven’t had anything really funny to laugh at in quite a while.

Maybe it's all a plot by Monier to suck in every nut-ball in the entire country.

I’d say the lake is still missing several loons, but some of them are currently locked up and can’t add their three cents worth to the stew.

[ElfNinosMom]

ENM:

Didn't PAM spin the fact that he had to submit all of his filings to the court for review and permission to file them to mean something like

I now have a Federal District Judge dedicated to reviewing and processing all of my material?

Yes, he did. He long claimed that Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supervises his unauthorized practice of law. He decided that Judge Kozinski was supervising his work simply because he had been sending it to Judge Kozinski, and Judge Kozinski (who undoubtedly never even saw the stuff PAM was sending) never asked him to stop.

"Nevertheless, it was served upon Judge Kozinski, whom I had selected to supervise all my litigation work. He has consented by his silent acquiescence. In other words, he has never requested that I stop sending him our pleadings, and I have recently adopted the convention of showing the phrase "(supervising)" after his name on the CC: line in transmittal letters and PROOFS OF SERVICE."

Of course, copying everything to a powerful judge served not only to feed PAM's ego, but also to frighten people into thinking that the fake documents (including fake judgments) PAM was sending to them were not only real, but that they were actually coming from the judge himself.

PAM got quite upset with Judge Kozinski when the judge's office (quite correctly) told PAM to stop calling and trying to get the judge to discuss his case against AOL, when his appeal was at the Ninth Circuit. He got even more upset with Judge Kozinski when his appeal was denied. It appears PAM thought the Ninth Circuit would rule in his favor as a result of his nonexistent relationship with that judge. At that point, he stopped claiming that the judge was supervising his work and, last time I checked, he was looking for another judge who would agree "by silent acquiescence" to supervise his work.

After his appeal was denied, PAM completely turned on Judge Kozinski and demanded to see his oath of office (and Judge Kozinski was, if I recall correctly, the only judge who ever actually complied with that request, which has been sent to an endless list of judges throughout the US) but PAM still claims Judge Kozinski's oath is defective and therefore he is not a real federal appellate judge.

Since we haven't discussed PAM in quite some time, I'm sure there are some here who need to catch up. So here's everything you ever wanted to know, but were afraid to ask, about PAM and the poor appellate judge who has unwittingly been pulled into PAM's alternate universe:

Meet Judge Alex Kozinski:
http://elfninosmom.blogspot.com/2004/02 ... inski.html

A clever speech by Judge Kozinski: "How You Too Can Lose Your Appeal":
http://elfninosmom.blogspot.com/2004/03 ... ppeal.html

Meet PAM:
http://elfninosmom.blogspot.com/2005/09/who-is-pam.html

[John J. Bulten]

Yeah, Paul was very busy last month working for Pete on an I-thought-you-hired-him basis. He took immediate stock of the situation and launched an incisive multiprong strategy which ran something like the following (recited from memory, because I deleted all the emails for space):
- Challenge Judge Nancy's credentials
- Appeal from USDC to DCUS
- Locate USA Corp. and USA, Inc.
Honestly, he was as dogged about that last one as Snoopy going into a courtroom looking for John Doe and Richard Roe, who were supposed to be there.

I suggested he study the USSC case, Four Hundred and Forty-Three Cans of Frozen Egg Product v. United States of America, where the frozen egg products mooted the standing of "USA" and instead won their case by successfully challenging admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. I wrote it up for the LH newsletter.

I wished him well of course. He's obviously had ample time by now to obtain negative answers from all 50 Secretaries of State (not to mention the federal zone). But I still don't know if his redirection to New Hampshire was my best choice. Time will tell.

[Joey Smith]

If only PAM would stay in one place long enough for the nice men in white and carrying butterfly nets to find him . . .

[ElfNinosMom]

Yeah, Paul was very busy last month working for Pete on an I-thought-you-hired-him basis. He took immediate stock of the situation and launched an incisive multiprong strategy which ran something like the following (recited from memory, because I deleted all the emails for space):
- Challenge Judge Nancy's credentials
- Appeal from USDC to DCUS
- Locate USA Corp. and USA, Inc.
Honestly, he was as dogged about that last one as Snoopy going into a courtroom looking for John Doe and Richard Roe, who were supposed to be there.

I suggested he study the USSC case, Four Hundred and Forty-Three Cans of Frozen Egg Product v. United States of America, where the frozen egg products mooted the standing of "USA" and instead won their case by successfully challenging admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. I wrote it up for the LH newsletter.

I wished him well of course. He's obviously had ample time by now to obtain negative answers from all 50 Secretaries of State (not to mention the federal zone). But I still don't know if his redirection to New Hampshire was my best choice. Time will tell.

Expect to receive a very large invoice for PAM's services, whether there was an agreement to pay him or not. If PAM operates as he has in the past, you will eventually receive an invoice for treble damages due to alleged civil RICO violations, and maybe even a fake judgment. If you're really lucky he will accuse someone involved of being a "deep cover operative".

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/garfield/beckmans.htm

[webhick]

I’d say the lake is still missing several loons, but some of them are currently locked up and can’t add their three cents worth to the stew.

Loon Mountain - NH