Crazy Like a Fox — Unanswered Letters 1 — A Reply to John Smith, by Anna von Reitz

Below you will find the text of a letter that was sent to me, which among many others, I haven’t had the time or ability to answer, but which I will attempt to respond to this morning—

Hello Anna Von Reitz
I do read most of the information you put out, and you have sure put out some
mind blowing information, mind blowing for me anyhow.
Maybe it’s because I’m not very well educated, these days I am not sure if that’s
a good thing or a bad thing, I am now seventy years of age and I have learned
more about the way this world of ours is run in the last seven years then all the previous
years put together.
I knew there was corruption going on within many Government departments
but I had no idea that it was so wide spread and organised world wide.
Over the last seven years I have seen so many hard working people put up so many
petitions and protests yet nothing changes how can a drop of water thrown into
the ocean make any difference.
Not been well educated I’ve always had to look for simple solutions to any problem
I have faced.
And today I am facing the biggest problem the world has ever known how do we
as a human race save ourselves and our planet.
And there is a VERY VERY simple solution we all know about superman and
we all know about the one thing that brings him down KRYPTONITE it’s colour
is green.
Green is the same colour vibration of money, MONEY IS OUR KRYPTONITE
money is what is been used to enslave us and give our overlords power over us.
So the solution is simple we stop using any form of money world wide
and make everything free worldwide be it goods, services,health education
everything that money buys.
With one condition that every adult 18 years to 55 has to do 1 to 3 days work
each week.
Under 18 and over 55 need not work unless they want too.
By removing money from our world we take away the power of our present
over lords no one can stop us doing this except ourselves we out number
them by over a million to one.
Even if they try to set the law enforcement or military or even mercenaries
on us it will not work because money will be of no use to them plus they
get everything free anyway.
By removing any form of money from our lives:
The banks will be finished, The IRS will be finished, All national debts worldwide will be finished .
all wars will be finished nothing to fight over everything worldwide will be free.
No more mortgage payments no BLM NSA OR FBI OR KINGS AND QUEENS
No rent the list is endless but I’m sure you get the picture no one can stop us
With money out of the picture no one will need to compete with anyone for money
or power we will work to help each other.
It will put millions out of work and they will make up the work force needed so we all
work only 1 to 3 days a week.
With money out of the way all suppressed technology will come out
the military can be reassigned to clean up the planet
It really is that simple it’s up to us to make this happen and make this VIRAL we can do it.
John Smith
PS: I will be sending copies of this letter to others there is really no other way
money has to go otherwise we will always be slaves.

_________________________________________________

.

Dear John,

.

What can I say?  You are absolutely right.  The Bible calls money the “root” of the evils in this world, and the Bible is right.  What the Bible doesn’t overtly and explicitly tell you is that money and the misuse of it, is at the core of the conflict between cultures and indeed, the conflict between good and evil that is the focus of the entire New Testament.

.

Money is an idol and the worship of money is idolatry.  More people need to step back and think about this.  Those little gold coins stamped with images?  Those “graven” pieces of paper?  They are no different from hand-carved idols produced by Jabal the Idol Maker. Objects intended to represent or invoke something else are idols. It matters not that what money invokes is the labor and resources of a nation, instead of Aphrodite.

.

The entire underlying practice of using money is intimately connected with idols and idol worship and false reasoning which gives rise to delusional thinking— indeed, a kind of literal insanity that festers and torments Mankind.

.

While “money” could be a simple, utilitarian tool used to accomplish needful work, something akin to a shovel or pick ax, it is instead transformed into a “false god”.

.

Just imagine all of us going out to the tool shed and falling down before the nearest shovel and you will have a clear picture of just how crazy this is.

.

But, if we get rid of the shovel, what do we use to dig wells, spade up the garden, build roads and do all the other things we need to do in this world, eh?  How do we facilitate the trade of tulip bulbs for light bulbs, if not through some “medium of exchange”?

.

Please note the use of the word “medium” as in Madame Barackanova, Medium holding Seances every Friday night.   Money provides the illusion of transforming one thing into another and translating their relative values, too—- but it is just that: an illusion.

.

When I was a child my best friend’s mother worked at a grocery store.  One year a candy company did a big promotion. If you bought their candy bars, you got a free sticker with the team emblem of a major baseball team on it.  Mail service being what it was, the stickers didn’t arrive on time but did show up a couple years later.  My friend and I inherited the stickers and we cornered the market.

.

Trade was very brisk.  At one point, I could trade one of these baseball stickers for three big “Steelie” marbles, a candy bar, and half a cheese sandwich.  Life was good.  My friend and I were rolling in the dough of childhood, rich as Midas in all the things that mattered to children.  We reinvested part of our loot in Saltwater Taffy purchased at wholesale, keystoned it minus five cents per package, undercut the local Five and Dime Store, and made another killing.

.

We were well on our way to becoming successful entrepeneurs, and we were greedy little buggers, too.  Every afternoon after school we “took stock” and counted our inventory and our gains.  It was fun, like playing a game with actual rewards—- think of mice who have discovered the “Food Button” in some psychologist’s training maze?

.

That was us.

.

Then, one day, one of the poorest kids in town made me an odd seemingly near-suicidal proposal.  He would trade his wretched bicycle and walk to school every day in exchange for six of those baseball patches. I thought about this.  Those baseball patches cost me nothing. After all, what were they?  Pretty stickers left over from a candy company promotion.

.

I couldn’t make the trade.  I gave him the stickers for free.  I walked away.

.

No doubt that is why I never became an entrepeneur, donated my interest in “The Company” to my friend, and have made zero effort to accrue money or much of anything else ever since.

.

It became crystal clear to me how arbitrary the game of valuation is, how worthless the symbols we trade in really are, and therefore how capricious, even stupid, the whole business of money is. It is literally unreal.  It is fueled by nothing but human need and weakness — and greed.  Don’t forget the greed, the insatiable, mindless lure of the chase.

.

Think of greyhounds running around and around the track trying to catch a fake rabbit that is forever just out of reach?  That’s what money is.  The fake rabbit.

.

And banking is the knowing, willful creation and purveying of fake rabbits. It’s “legalized fraud” on the face of it.

.

But how do you make something that is intrinsically wrong into something right?  It’s like waving your hand and “legalizing” theft.

.

The plain fact is that the entire money system is criminal by definition as it currently exists and it needs to come to an end, just as you propose, John Smith.  The problem is that none of the people in power have been sufficiently motivated to do anything but chase fake rabbits themselves.

.

I have raised a flag and said—  if we are going to use these little poker chit-like things to stand as symbols for the value of our labor and our natural resources, let’s at least do away with the whole business of “translating” commodities into “standard commodities” like gold and silver.

.

Let’s just admit that we are all trading the same things— our labor and natural resources we harvest from the Earth—and everybody use the same chits to symbolize the value of that.

.

What happens when we do that?  An element of truth is introduced into the equation and all the “profits” made by speculation and “over valuation” and “under valuation” of both labor and commodities disappear.  There’s nowhere for the fake rabbit to hide.

.

We are forced to see what it is we are trading— our time on Earth, our energy, our talent and knowledge — and the resources of our native land, in exchange for the same things being offered by others.

.

And then we have to face other questions, like, is my labor intrinsically worth more than the labor of a bellhop working in a hotel in Northern Ireland?  Or a miner in South Africa?

.

And why is it that it costs so much to live in the United States and comparatively little to live in Mexico?

.

You see, once you start chasing fake rabbits and pretending that some fake rabbits are “more equal” than other fake rabbits, it’s difficult to go back to any kind of sanity and fairness.

.

It’s hard for those who are caught up in the chase to step back, look at the baseball stickers and the bicycle, and admit that it is all bushwah. It’s even harder for some people to let go, hand over the stickers, and walk away.

.

You are right, John, that is what needs to happen.  We need to set each other free from this mass delusion that has ruined the Earth for thousands of years.  We need to find an honest way to trade our goods and services.  Any suggestions?

.

Best regards,

.

Anna

 

https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2016/04/29/crazy-like-a-fox-unanswered-letters-1-a-reply-to-john-smith-by-anna-von-reitz/

All Debts are Prepaid, Read and Learn, by David Robinson

The United States CONSCRIPTED — that is, borrowed — an interest in everything that we would ever do and create — a “usufruct” relationship where our interest and the ownership of every thing within our estate transferred over to them; and they never gave their control of our property back to us. They have no lawful right to any of it, and no valid claim to us, our land, our businesses, our children, or any other asset of ours.
These thieves are pretending that we consented to this circumstance and “volunteered” to subject ourselves to the United States jurisdiction “for the War Effort” in a war that has been over almost a hundred years.
The expenses that they are responsible for are the expenses of all the shill legal fiction entities that they have created and run “in your name” by abusing the right of usufruct. Those expenses include the expenses and debts of the federal “State” foreign situs trust doing business as “David Everett Robinson” and the Puerto Rican ESTATE trust doing business as “DAVID EVERETT ROBINSON” and the United Nations transmitting utility doing business as “DAVID E. ROBINSON”, and so on ad infinitum.
What they create, they control — and they are obligated to pay for what they create and control. The ones with the gold pay the bills!
USUFRUCT: A right to use another’s property for a time without damage or diminishing it, although the property might naturally deteriorate over time. A legal usufruct is one created by law. A 100 year encumbrance — Black’s Law 7th, page 1542.
Because of this “usufruct” relationship the United States has the hidden obligation and lawful responsibility to maintain everything we think we own. We were promised that on demand, but were never taught how to access it. The system made a promise that they could not and did not keep. We need to stop claiming ownership of everything we think we own and revert our interest back to the United States so they can put it in a trust for us (which they may have already done) so they can settle our claims.
Our signature turns a piece of paper into a negotiable instrument because we are financial institutions considered to be estates patented under land patent because we come from the earth. They patented a “usufruct” interest in us. We are all agricultural beings, commodities. When you buy a house you’re not buying a house, you are creating a loan against yourself, you become the collateral for the loan. The land patent cannot go to ground because its immovable.
You are considered in law — the international law of the Hague Treaty — as Liebercode Entities “outside of” and “foreign” to the United States.
We’re our own estate on our debtor side, and considered to be a financial institution, so when you put your signature on any piece of paper you are considered to be a bank. They just take a piece of paper and overlay it on your signature, and write on that piece of paper, on top of your signature, your signature that authorizes a transaction that you never see.
Then they place a lien against that signed piece of paper and sell it as a security on the stock exchange. This is what they’re doing with child support. They have you sign something so they can slap a lien on it and then sell it as notes no longer with them, a counterfeit security anyway, as there is nothing backing it and they’ve obtained it through fraud, so they are anxious to put the obligation onto someone else so it relieves them of the obligation, because they don’t have the Note as it’s been already been sold off.
You become the naked owner. They’re supposed to be the naked owner, and we should have the usufruct.
We’re being treated as terrorists in our own country. We are living basically in a fictional reality. We’re coming out of war. We are non-adverse. We’re not here to own anything.
Once the application is completed, that’s it. The funds are supposed to be disbursed to the individual who needs it. They’re not doing that. Instead they’re creating a “usufruct” relationship. Meaning that when the person applies for something, they sign their rights over to the state, so now the state has the right to move as power of attorney which makes the person signing the application incompetent like an infant who can’t handle his own affairs and they stick someone else with the obligation to complete his financial accounts. It doesn’t matter who they appoint. This is why you find that some people are hit with the obligation.
So with the bills they have you sign, you could do a reversionary interest. You could take it and sign it over to the United States Treasury which now has the obligation under “usufruct” to settle the claim. That’s it. You sign everything over to the U.S. Treasury, excluding the middle man, who is the administrator who is acting wrongly.
When you keep this up, guess who will go down to check out their books? The U.S. Treasury. We are protected by international law and the statutes no longer apply to us as we are no longer at war once we move into non-adversarial status.
REGARDING HJR-192 AND THE “A4V”
The United States government went bankrupt in 1933. It’s an established fact that the United States Federal Government was dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act of March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719 declared by President Roosevelt, being insolvent and bankrupt.
House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR-192), 73 Congress in session, June 5, 1933 — A joint Resolution to suspend the gold clause standard and abrogate the gold clause — dissolved the United States and the official capacities of all U.S. Government Offices, Officers, and Departments, as further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.
The Receivers of the U.S. Bankruptcy are the International Bankers via the United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. All U.S. Offices, Officials, and Departments are operating within a de facto status, in name only, under the Emergency War Powers. (And this has been going on much longer than 1933).
CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC TAKEN OVER BY THE NORTH
With the constitutional Republic form of Government now dissolved, the Receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government FOR the United States. This new form of government is known as the Democracy, being an established Socialist Communist order under a NEW WORLD ORDER governorship for America.
We’re operating under a fictional basis now, because we are under Martial Rule thanks to what happened with Abraham Lincoln, which was intended to protect us.
The Founding Fathers declared that only gold and silver coins can be the “only money to be made in America.”
This Act was instituted and established by transferring the Office of the Secretary of State to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Sec. H.R. 1355 reads in part: “The United States Secretary of the Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States.”
When the colonies broke apart, when the North and South broke apart, when they went bankrupt way back then, the U.S. Constitution was no longer valid. The Constitution is now void, because there’s no sovereign government — and we’re under Martial Law Rule. So it’s time for us to wake up.
UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS
Since gold and silver coinage was heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check or promissory note was issued as a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money.
Federal Reserve Notes aka “dollars” make no such promise and are not “money” because they have no monetary value. They are worth nothing.
THE DIFFERENCE DUE TO THE BANKRUPTCY
A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States Government, not “money”. The federal United States and the Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the United States of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money — gold and silver coins.
It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitutes. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any real “money”.
When this happened, and the Federal Reserve came in, and booted the United States Treasury out, and brought in the IMF, the United States Treasury ended up in Puerto Rico. The real United States Treasury is not in the District of Columbia now, at all.
Now you know why most Americans have not been paid any “money” for a very long time, perhaps not even in their entire lifetime. Do you comprehend now why you feel broke? Why you are “bankrupt” along with the rest of the country?
Did the Central Banks commit fraud? The answer is “Yes”. Being a sentient being, our signature is a commodity to the banker’s scam, due to the fact that they had an agreement (contract) after the gold was taken. The agreement was to collateralize all United States Citizens as debt slaves. The HJR-192 Resolution (agreement contract) that ALL DEBTS ARE PREPAID!!! (On demand).
In exchange for their gold the people were promised that ALL DEBTS ARE PREPAID!!!
This means that the International Banking Cartel came up with an Economic Security Offer aka SSN — the “Socialistic Security Act. This New Deal is not a bad deal — IF it were “honored”. Sustainable benefits at old age; a secure place to reside; Healthcare; all the essentials of living; a method of transportation. Everything is actually all prepaid because we are basically Shareholders in the United States Corporation because of our Birth Certificates bonds.
If you are part of a corporation, you’re part Stockholder, so you should be getting dividends from that stock, yearly or monthly. But you’re not getting anything at all.
So this was definitely done behind our backs, with the Birth Certificate bond, without full disclosure of the contract or anything explained. All this to “protect” you — protect you from what?
BROKEN PROMISES — EXAMPLES
Banks are acting in your behalf when making a so-called loan, but instead of you receiving the actual money to pay for a house, you are actually being scammed of you own money every time you put your signature on their so-called “Promissory Note”.
The most likely Question is: “Why do they need our signature so badly?” The simply answer is: Because You are the Creditor and the Debtor. You create the money every time you sign a fraudulent contract with the international bankers.
AND HOW DO WE KNOW THIS?
Because you are land; you come from the land; therefore, you are a financial institution. When you sign your signature you create “credit” (credibility) that they can actually take from you and pocket, because you are Walking Real Estate. You are the walking Estate that they have patented. They have patented everything through your Birth Certificate. Can you imagine, we are very rich! But they are using us as agriculture in a very devastating way.
ONCE AGAIN – UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS . . .
Creditor
Under the UCC you create the Money.
That’s right!
You are the Banker.
Your signature is Required — so you can Discharge the Charge.
vs.
Debtor
Under the UCC you create the Debt.
That’s right!
You are the Banker. Your signature is Required — so you Have and Hold the Debt.
A Run on the Bank is created when borrowers demand real gold or silver instead of paper representations; so instead of being outlawed, the federal Government legalized it, and regulates the fictional money scam.
This is why Roosevelt had an issue with the Bankers. They basically came in and took the Money out of the Notes — they took Everything.
What have we learned? That around 1933, President Roosevelt declared the bankruptcy of the United States Corporation. The International Bankers demanded our gold and made it legal. They also removed Money notes that were backed by the real gold standard set by the Founding Fathers of the Republic.
The Bankers demanded even more Monies, so they created House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR-192), based in effect on the the private central bank, the non-federal FEDERAL RESERVE, INC. And, again, one of their resolutions was to Collateralize all citizens via their Birth Certificate Bonds. In exchange for HJR-192, all citizens were to have Free Transportation; Socialistic Security; Prepaid Utilities; Socialistic Healthcare; Food Rations, etc. We were to be protected and maintained by the Government of the United States of America. Everything was supposedly prepaid.
The owners of the gold pay the bills.
But something happened then, and we are now under Martial Law Rule. We we’re supposed to have all this, but the Bankers came in and took Everything to make it look like we have to pay for everything ourselves with our sweat and toil, when this is not true all.
Everything should be prepaid right now.
BIRTH CERTIFICATE BONDS – HOW DO THEY WORK?
To simplify — John Doe is born, and is incorporated. The Bond Certificate is then collateralized (converted into “money”) — for example a million dollars — and the bond is then sold in the privately held International Central Bank System. The bond is sold over and over and over again which in turn can be worth a lot of money!!! One million over a 20 year period may grow to 40 million dollars or more! But understand, in this process you are nothing but a human resource to the bankers.
After a bond is collateralized for a million dollars, a million dollars gets created out of thin air and the Federal Reserve orders the Treasury to print up 1-million Federal Reserve Notes. If you’ll notice, the dollar bills have a serial number. That is actually a “person” you are holding in your hand. So really; we are all collateralized.
Who is doing this to us? We are being treated as agriculture. So we have to find out who we are and what we are and what we are here to do. What’s being done to us, is very inhumane.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
Go to a bank and ask for a loan. The bank acts as a 3rd party between you and the Federal Reserve to tap into your million dollar Birth Certificate bond. They are loaning you your own money!!! Your own energy.
We start out on an adversarial level, but we have to act on a non-adversarial level.
With HJR-192 our best friend was created (the IRS!) our personal accountant for our bond. This is where you, the debt slave, can discharge alleged debt and where the UCC process comes on board. Now, the IRS can be your best friend.
When you accept a charge, for the honor of the name, and deposit it as credit into the United States Treasury, you are released from the obligation of the debt, by reverting all the interest to the State.
The US Treasury via the IRS is going to contact all these agents and make them get their act together. Where are they pocketing the money? Where are their books?
WHAT IS THE UCC?
The Uniform Commercial Code is 1.) a code of statutes, of contracts, a product of private “Bankers” that have hijacked the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is 2.) based on Merchant Marine law. This is important because of the prevalence of commercial transactions extending from one state to another.
For example, goods may be manufactured in State A, warehoused in State B, sold from State C, and delivered in State D.
The UCC deals with the following consecutively numbered Subjects:
1. General Provisions; 2. Sales of goods; 2A. Leases, leases of good; 3. Negotiable Instruments; 4. Bank Deposits; Banks, and Banking, Check collection process; 4A. Fund Transfers, Transfers of money between banks; 5. Letters of Credit, transactions involving letters of credit; 6. Bulk transfers and bulk Sales Actions, and liquidations of assets; 7. Warehouse Receipts, Bills of Lading and other Documents of Title; 8. Investment Securities, Securities and financial assets; 9. Secured Transaction, Transactions secured by security interests — and most importantly, Liens.
Under the UCC you are considered to be a “vessel” over which Maritime Laws apply.
Under the UCC you can be liened — in total conflict with Declaration of Independence “unalienable rights”.
Under the UCC by contracting — such as applying for a license — your inherent (original) rights are turned into privileges that can be liened. We’re under the contract of Martial Law Rule. We’ve already been liened.
• Your right to travel is now a privilege to drive.
• Your right to free speech is now a privilege to protest.
• Your right to hold property is now an asset that can be seized.
• Your right to hunt and fish is now a privilege to hunt and fish, which can be fined.
These are just a few examples of the usurping statutes of the UCC. Because they own it all, they own your title; they own you cars; they own everything you registered to the state; and more. They see you as a war-time criminal. Under the UCC all of us are considered to be an asset of the State — a debt slave used as collateral for their debts. All of us are equity for debts to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
FREE YOURSELF FROM THE SYSTEM – BY FILING A UCC FINANCE STATEMENT
By filing a UCC Finance Statement, Liening your Legal Status Name, you become the Secured Party Creditor of your ens legis Strawman. In effect, you have . . .
1.) . . . taken over the Birth Certificate bond originally created by them, and you are a “UCC Creditor” now handling your own affairs. The means being non-adversarial; you are not at war with the United States and are willing to settle your bond account via the “IRS” by accepting it for discharge;
2.) . . . you have taken over the private banker sovereign status which creates money that cannot be liened — and discharges it;
3.) . . . you have a lien on the CAFRs, and all officials who work for us whom we can shut down if they break their own corporate laws — aka, the “UCC”.
You’re moving yourself off of war-time status.
SECURED PARTY CREDITOR & CAFRS EXPLAINED
CAFRS: Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports. It has been reported that trillions of collective dollars, not shown on government Budget Reports, are shown through government CAFR reports that are virtually never openly-discussed by the syndicated News Media, Democrat and Republican Party members, the House, the Senate, nor organized public education.
With it being that the CAFR is “the accounting document for every local government, and with it being “BLACKED OUT” for open mention over the last 60 or more years, the Fact of unintentional Omission of coverage is one of the biggest Conspiracies that has ever taken effect in the United States of America.
WHAT IS A CAFR?
A Comprehensive Annual Financial Report is the government’s complete accounting of “NET WORTH”.
The CAFR was established as local government’s complete accounting record started in 1946 through the efforts of a private group located out of Chicago, Illinois by the name of Government Financial Officers Association (GFOA) http://gfoa.org which became mandatory by FED requirements on all local governments in 1978, to complete if they had not already done so.
From more than 84,000 CAFR reports produced by local governments each year in combination with Federal Government owned investment holdings, shows a conservative value of some Sixty Trillion Dollars held by local and federal governments, as of 1999. An example of the holdings shown from just one Government CAFR (NY State 2005 Retirement Fund CAFR) shows 133 Billion Dollars of investments held (Microsoft; 44 million shares thereof).
SELF SERVING GOVERNMENT FAT CATS
Instead of us receiving these tremendous amounts via dividends every month to the populace, we are being cheated out of all rightful benefits ourselves, and benefitting them instead.
As a Secured Party Creditor, putting a lien on the CAFRS makes a lot of sense!!! We are Share-holders of the United States Corporation and should be sharing in its profitable dividends. But we’re not getting anything at all.
SECURED PARTY CREDITOR BENEFITS
Discharge of Fines; Liens; Summons; Court Case Charges; Orders; Legal Notices; Protect all your Vehicles; Child Support Payments; School Loans; Alleged Credit Card debts; Utility Bills; Secured Loans; Tax Liens; Traffic Tickets, and so much more.
By using this private process, you have the power to put them under Notice of Default and use the process to lien them as well and receive monies from their bond — when they break “UCC CREDITOR LAWS”.
THE BEAST SYSTEM IMPLEMENTED FOR FINANCIAL SLAVERY AND RUIN
“But they that be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” — I Timothy 6:9-10.
LOOKING AND BANKS DIFFERENTLY
“The thief cometh not, but for to steal and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. — John 10:10.
The bank system is a well organized corrupt criminal Cartel that came to a head around 1933 when President Roosevelt declared the bankruptcy of the United States. The banks took over our gold and silver money that was backed by a gold standard.
The result is a new type of “fiat” money and a de facto government system. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, now established as a Socialist, Communist NEW WORLD ORDER Government of America.
“Fiat” money is any money declared by the government to be legal tender. Before 1933, paper money was backed by gold. Ever since, Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs), aka “dollars”, are not money but money substitutes backed only, by false belief.
http://www.amazon.com/David-E.-Robinson/e/B002OR956W/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_4?qid=1455573357&sr=1-4

https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2016/04/29/all-debts-are-prepaid-read-and-learn-by-david-robinson/

FBI Evidence Proves Innocence of Accused Boston Marathon Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

  Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

By Paul Craig Roberts
I have been contacted by attorney John Remington Graham, a member in good standing of the bar of the Minnesota Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. He informs me that acting in behalf of Maret Tsanaeva, the aunt of the accused Tsamaev brothers and a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic where she is qualified to practice law, he has assisted her in filing with the US District Court in Boston a pro se motion, including an argument of amicus curiae, and an affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva. The presiding judge has ordered that these documents be included in the formal record of the case so they will be publicly accessible. The documents are reproduced below.
The documents argue that on the basis of the evidence provided by the FBI, there is no basis for the indictment of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. The FBI’s evidence clearly concludes that the bomb was in a black knapsack, but the photographs used to establish Dzhokhar’s presence at the marathon show him with a white knapsack. Moreover, the knapsack lacks the heavy bulging appearance that a knapsack containing a bomb would have.
As readers know, I have been suspicious of the Boston Marathon Bombing from the beginning. It seems obvious that both Tsamaev brothers were intended to be killed in the alleged firefight with police, like the alleged perpetrators of the Charlie Hebdo affair in Paris. Convenient deaths in firefights are accepted as indications of guilt and solve the problem of trying innocent patsies.
In Dzhokhar’s case, his guilt was established not by evidence but by accusations, by the betrayal of his government-appointed public defender Judy Clarke who declared Dzhokhar’s guilt in her opening statement of her “defense,” by an alleged confession, evidence of which was never provided, written by Dzhokhar on a boat under which the badly wounded youth lay dying until discovered by the boat owner and hospitalized in critical condition. Following his conviction by his defense attorney, Dzhokhar allegedly confessed again in jihadist terms. As legal scholars have known for centuries, confessions are worthless as indicators of guilt.
Dzhokhar was not convicted on the basis of evidence.
In my questioning of John Remington Graham, I concluded that despite 48 years of active experience with criminal justice, both as a prosecuting attorney and defense attorney, he was shocked to his core by the legal malfeasance of the Tsarnaev case. As Graham is nearing the end of his career, he is willing to speak out, but he could not find a single attorney in the state of Massachusetts who would sponsor his appearance before the Federal District Court in Boston.
This tells me that fear of retribution has now extended its reach into the justice (sic) system and that the America that we knew where law was a shield of the people no longer exists.
Here is the Affidavit of Maret Tsarnaeva:

AFFIDAVIT OF MARET TSARNAEVA CONCERNING THE PROSECUTION OF DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV
Mindful that this affidavit may be filed or displayed as an offer of proof with her authorization in public proceedings contemplated by the laws of the United States of America, and in reliance upon Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 1746, Maret Tsarnaeva deposes and says:
I am the paternal aunt of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev who has been prosecuted before the United States District Court for Massachusetts upon indictment of a federal grand jury returned on June 27, 2013, for causing one of two explosions on Boylston Street in Boston on April 15, 2013. In the count for conspiracy, certain other overt acts of wrongdoing are mentioned. As I understand the indictment, if Dzhokhar did not carry and detonate an improvised explosive device or pressure-cooker bomb as alleged, all thirty counts fail, although perhaps some lingering questions, about which I offer no comment here, might remain for resolution, subject to guarantees of due process of law, within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
I am currently living in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya which is a republic within the Russian Federation. My academic training included full-time studies in a five-year program of the Law Faculty at the Kyrgyz State University, and I also hold the degree of master of laws (LL. M.), with focus on securities laws, granted by the University of Manitoba while I lived in Canada. I am qualified to practice law in Kyrgyzstan. I am fluent in Russian, Chechen, and English, and am familiar with other languages. I am prepared to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States, if my expenses are paid, and if my personal safety and right of return to my home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance.
Aside from other anomalies and other aspects of the case on which I make no comment here, I am aware of several photo exhibits, upon which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) relied, or of evidence which their crime laboratory has produced, and certain other reports or material. Together, these plainly show that Dzhokhar was not carrying a large, nylon, black backpack, including a white-rectangle marking at the top, and containing a heavy pressure- cooker bomb, shortly before explosions in Boston on April 15, 2013, as claimed by the FBI and as alleged in the indictment for both explosions. On the contrary, these photo exhibits show unmistakably that Dzhokhar was carrying over his right shoulder a primarily white backpack which was light in weight, and was not bulging or sagging as would have been evident if it contained a heavy pressure-cooker bomb. The only reasonable conclusion is that Dzhokhar was not responsible for either of the explosions in question.
On or about June 20-21, 2013, during their first trip to Russia, which lasted about ten days more or less, Judy Clarke and William Fick, lawyers from the federal public defender’s office in Boston, visited my brother Anzor Tsarnaev, and his wife Zubeidat, respectively the father and mother of Dzhokhar. The meeting was at the home of Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachka which is in the republic of Dagestan adjacent to the republic of Chechnya, and about three hours’ drive from Grozny. My mother, my sister Malkan, and I were present at this meeting. Zubeidat speaks acceptable English. Mr. Fick is fluent in Russian.
Laying aside other details of the conversation on June 20-21, 2013, I wish to note the following:
— The lawyers from Boston strongly advised that Anzor and Zubeidat refrain from saying in public that Dzhokhar and his brother Tamerlan were not guilty. They warned that, if their advice were not followed, Dzhokhar’s life in custody near Boston would be more difficult;
— Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick also requested of Anzor and Zubeidat that they assist in influencing Dzhokhar to accept the legal representation of the federal public defender’s office in Boston. Mr. Fick revealed that Dzhokhar was refusing the services of the federal public defender’s office in Boston, and sending lawyers and staff away when they visited him in custody. In reaction to the suggestion of Mr. Fick, lively discussion followed;
— As Dzhokhar’s family, we expressed our concern that the federal public defender’s office in Boston was untrustworthy, and might not defend Dzhokhar properly, since they were paid by the government of the United States which was prosecuting him, as many believe for political reasons. Dzhokhar’s parents expressed willingness to engage independent counsel, since Dzhokhar did not trust his government-appointed lawyers. Mr. Fick reacted by saying that the government agents and lawyers would obstruct independent counsel;
— I proposed that Dzhokhar’s family hire independent counsel to work with the federal public defender’s office in order to assure proper and effective representation of Dzhokhar. Mr. Fick replied that, if independent counsel were hired by the family, the federal public defender’s office in Boston would withdraw;
— Mr. Fick then assured Anzor and Zubeidat that the United States Department of Justice had allotted $5 million to Dzhokhar’s defense, and that the federal public defender’s office in Boston intended to defend Dzhokhar properly. Zubeidat then and there said little concerning assurances of Mr. Fick. But for my part, I never believed that the federal public defender’s office in Boston ever intended to defend Dzhokhar as promised. And my impressions from what happened during the trial lead me to believe that the federal public defender’s office in Boston did not defend Dzhokhar competently and ethically.
In any event, I am aware that, following the meeting on June 20-21, 2013, Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick continued to spend time with Anzor and Zubeidat, and eventually persuaded Zubeidat to sign a typed letter in Russian to Dzhokhar, urging him to cooperate wholeheartedly with the federal public defender’s office in Boston. I am informed by my sister Malkan, that Zubeidat gave the letter to the public defenders, shortly before their departure from Russia on or about June 29, 2013, for delivery to Dzhokhar.
During subsequent trips Mme Clarke and Mr. Fick to see Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala, the strategy for defending Dzhokhar was explained, as I learned from my sister Malkan. The public defender’s office in Boston intended to contend at trial, as actually has happened since, that Tamerlan, now deceased, was the mastermind of the crime, and that Dzhokhar was merely following his big brother. I was firmly opposed to this strategy as morally and legally wrong, because Dzhokhar is not guilty, as FBI-generated evidence shows. Some ill- feeling has since developed between myself and Dzhokhar’s parents over their acquiescence.
On or about June 19, 2014, during their visit to Grozny over nearly two weeks, three staff members from the public defender’s office in Boston visited my mother and sisters in Grozny. I am told that they also visited Dzhokhar’s parents in Makhachkala.
The personnel visiting my mother and sisters in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, included one Charlene, who introduced herself as an independent investigator, working in and with the federal public defender’s office in Boston; another by the name of Jane, a social worker who claimed to have spoken with Dzhokhar; and a third, by the name of Olga, who was a Russian- English interpreter from New Jersey. They did not leave business cards, but stayed at the main hotel in Grozny, hence I presume that their surnames can be ascertained.
I was not present at the meeting in Grozny on or about June 19, 2014, but my sister Malkan, who was present, called me by telephone immediately after the meeting concluded. She revealed to me then the details of the conversation at the meeting. Malkan and I have since spoken about the visit on several occasions.
Malkan speaks Russian and Chechen and is willing to testify under oath in public proceedings in the United States through an interpreter in Russian, if her expenses are paid, and if her personal safety and right of return to her home in Chechnya are adequately assured in advance. She relates, and has authorized me to state for her that, during the conversation on June 19, 2014, in Grozny, Charlene the independent investigator stated flatly that the federal public defender’s office in Boston knew that Dzhokhar was not guilty as charged, and that their office was under enormous pressure from law enforcement agencies and high levels of the government of the United States not to resist conviction. [Remember what happened to Lynne Stewart, the federally appointed public defender who actually served her client. She was sentenced to prison.]
This affidavit is executed outside of the United States, but the foregoing account is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, and subject to the pains and penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States of America.
Given on this 17th day of April 2015.
/s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

Here is the Argument of Amicus Curiae:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
ARGUMENT OF AMICUS CURIAE No. 13-CR-10200-GAO
MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT:
1. Federal jurisdiction: The constitutional authority of the United States cannot be extended to the prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in light of the opinion of the court in United States v. Lopez, 514 U. S. 549 (1995), and views of Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist, Ns. 17, 22, and 34 [Clinton Rossiter (ed.), Mentor edition by New American Library, New York, 1961, pp. 118, 143-144, and 209]. Congress has broad power to regulate commerce, including trade and the incidents of trade, but domestic crimes and use of weapons are generally reserved to the States. If there is sufficient evidence to prosecute Dzhokhar for murder and mayhem, he should and can be prosecuted exclusively by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Accordingly, amicus urges that the indictment now pending should be dismissed, and the conviction of her nephew Dzhokhar Tsarnaev of charges under several acts of Congress should be vacated.
2. The actual innocence of the accused: Laying aside misgivings of amicus and many others about of the “official” scenario concerning this case, as broadcast to the world by the government and mainstream news media of the United States, evidence generated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), confirmed on the judicial record of this cause, and clarified by the indictment, or suitable for judicial notice under Rule 201(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, conclusively proves that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev cannot be guilty of the crimes charged in this prosecution.
The formal indictment against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was returned on June 27, 2013. The document is 74 pages long, and accuses Mr. Tsarnaev (hereinafter called Dzhokhar) of heinous crimes, including many counts punishable by death. The central event for which Dzhokhar is alleged to have been responsible, according to the indictment, took place, on Boylston Street, in front of the Forum Restaurant, near the finish line of the Boston marathon on April 15, 2013. The most important paragraphs of the indictment are numbered 6, 7, and 24 (including several other paragraphs repeating expressly or by implication the substance thereof). Paragraphs 6-7, read in themselves and in context, state that, acting in concert withhis (now deceased) brother, Dzhokhar set down on the sidewalk and detonated one of two “black backpacks” which contained “improvised explosive devices,” these “constructed from pressure cookers, low explosive power, shrapnel, adhesive, and other materials.” Paragraph 24 clarifies that the black backpack carried, and containing the pressure-cooker bomb allegedly detonated by Dzhokhar, was placed in front of the Forum Restaurant and was associated with the second explosion. The indictment says in paragraph 6 that both bombs exploded at about 2:49 in the afternoon (Eastern time), and that the bombs Dzhokhar and his brother placed and detonated each killed at least one person, and wounded scores of others.
On the morning after the explosions, i. e., on April 16, 2013, Richard DesLauriers, special agent in charge of the FBI in Boston, made a public statement at a press conference, which is published in printed form on the FBI website and in the news media concerning the facts later set forth in the indictment. Mr. DesLauriers said, as paragraphs 6-7 of the indictment substantially confirm,
“. . . this morning, it was determined that both of the explosives were placed in a dark-colored nylon bag or backpack. The bag would have been heavy, because of the components believed to be in it.
“. . . we are asking that the public remain alert, and to alert us to the following activity . . . someone who appeared to be carrying an unusually heavy bag yesterday around the time of the blasts and in the vicinity of the blasts.”
The FBI also published on April 16, 2013, a crime lab photo of a bomb fragment found after the explosions This photo is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 1 in the appendix hereof, and is believed proper for judicial notice.
From this bomb fragment, the FBI crime lab was able to reconstruct the size, shape, and type of pressure cookers, as was reported on information published by the FBI to the nation on ABC News Nightline on April 16, 2013. A still-frame, taken from (about 01:39-01:54) of this ABC television report, is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 2 in the appendix hereof, and is offered for judicial notice. A larger segment of this ABC Nightline News report (at about 01:31-02:14) elaborates facts set forth in paragraphs 6-7 of the indictment, including reference to three of the four exhibits reproduced in the appendix hereof. Each of the pressure cookers in question was a Fagor, 6-quart model, marketed in or near Boston and elsewhere in the United States by Macey’s. Its external dimensions are probably about 81⁄2 inches in height, including cover, and about 9 inches in diameter. Stripped of hard plastic handles and filled with nails, bee bees, and other such metal, then prepared as a bomb, it would cause a bag carrying it to be, as observed by the FBI chief in Boston during his press conference on April 16, 2013, “unusually heavy.”
Again on April 16, 2013, the FBI published a crime lab photo, here reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 3 in the appendix hereof, and showing a blown- out backpack which is said to have contained one of the bombs, — a black nylon bag with a characteristic white rectangle marking about 3 by 11⁄2 inches more or less as it appeared following the explosions the day before. This photo pictures the “dark colored nylon bag or backpack” which Mr. DesLauriers described in his press conference on the day after the explosions when he described what was carried by the guilty parties. It was one of the “black backpacks” referenced in paragraph 7 of the indictment. It is pictured in prosecution exhibit 26 which was introduced on the second day of the trial in this cause (day 28 on the transcript, March 5, 2015), showing that the bag or backpack in question was found on the street near the post box in front of the Forum Restaurant on Boylston Street, and, as previously noted, was associated with the second explosion on April 15, 2013, which, in paragraph 24 of the indictment, Dzhokhar is alleged to have detonated. This general impression is confirmed by defense exhibit 3090, showing a backpack with black exterior or covering, and introduced on the sixteenth day of the trial (day 42 on the transcript, March 31, 2015). Tsarnaeva exhibit 3 is also suitable for judicial notice.
On April 18, 2013, the FBI published a 29-second street video claimed to have been taken from Whiskey’s Steak House on Boylston Street at about 02:37- 38 o’clock in the afternoon (Eastern time), only minutes before the explosions on April 15, 2013. It definitively settles the principal question raised by the indictment and the plea of not guilty interposed against it. Part of this video is tucked into prosecution exhibit 22 introduced on the third day of the trial in this cause (day 29 on the transcript, March 9, 2015). From this street video, three still-frame photos have been extracted. Two of these still-frame photos were published by the FBI on April 18, 2013, on posters which were used to identify suspects. All three photos were published by CNN and the Associated Press on April 19, 2013. The third still-frame photo from this video is most telling, and is reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4 in the appendix hereof. As already noted, the FBI and the indictment have together affirmed that the culprits who detonated these explosions were carrying large, unusually heavy, black backpacks concealing pressure-cooker bombs; but, the third still-frame photo from the Whiskey’s Steak House video reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, and drawn from a street video already used by the FBI to identify the suspects and acknowledged by the government in this prosecution, shows unmistakably that, shortly before the explosions, Dzhokhar was carrying a small-size, white* backpack over his right shoulder the same light in weight, not heavy laden, and displaying no sagging or bulging as would normally be evident if the bag identified contained a pressure-cooker bomb of the size and weight which the FBI has described.
(*For all practical purposes and to the naked eye, the color is white, although technical computer analysis suggests a very whitish shade of gray.)
Dzhokhar is not guilty of carrying and detonating a pressure-cooker bomb, as charged in the indictment, as is literally as obvious as the difference between black and white. There were and remain other suspects whose identities have been credibly suggested. See, e. g., Toni Cartalucci, Land Destroyer Report, April 19, 2013 (illustrated commentary entitled “‘Contractors’ Stood Near Bomb, Left Before Detonation.”). But here it is enough to reflect on the comment of Lord Acton that “historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility.” — J. Rufus Fears, Selected Writings of Lord Acton, Liberty Fund, Indianapolis, 1985, Vol. 2, p. 383 (Letter to Mandell Creighton, April 5, 1887). Whatever is done in judicial proceedings, history will judge this case, as surely as history has judged other significant cases.
3. The grievance of amicus: It is impossible that federal prosecutors and counsel for the accused did not know of the exculpatory evidence which has just been identified and illustrated. Yet federal prosecutors went head without probable cause, as if decisive evidence of actual innocence, impossible to ignore in a diligent study of this case, did not exist, as is wholly unacceptable in light of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 at 86-87 (1963).
Moreover, in her opening statement at trial on March 4, 2015, as reflected in the fourth paragraph of the transcript of her comments, court-appointed counsel for the accused forcefully insisted that Dzhokhar was guilty of capital felonies, as is positively disproved by evidence generated by the FBI, reinforced by the indictment itself. She said,
“The government and the defense will agree about many things that happened during the week of April 15th, 2013. On Marathon Monday, Tamerlan Tsarnaev walked down Boylston Street with a backpack on his back, carrying a pressure cooker bomb, and put it down in front of Marathon Sports near the finish line of the Marathon. Jahar [i. e., Dzhokhar] Tsarnaev walked down Boylston Street with a backpack on his back carrying a pressure cooker bomb and placed it next to a tree in front of the Forum Restaurant. The explosions extinguished three lives.”
And in her summation to the jury on April 6, 2015, as the transcript shows, court-appointed counsel for the accused said nothing of the exculpatory evidence in this case. She did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty. She could hardly have done more to promote a conviction and the severest sentence possible, even though the third still-frame photo from the video at Whiskey’s Steak House, reproduced as Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, showed Dzhokhar carrying a white backpack, as alone was enough to defeat the indictment insofar as paragraph 7 thereof averred that the accused and his brother committed the principal acts of wrongdoing by carrying and setting down black backpacks. Such misconduct is altogether unacceptable in light of Strickland v. Washington, 446 U. S. 668 at 687- 688 (1984).
The misconduct of which amicus complains served to conceal decisive exculpatory evidence by legerdemain. Amicus urges not only that the death penalty may not be imposed in this case, for all three opinions in Herrera v. Collins, 506 U. S. 390 (1993), allow that the death penalty may not be constitutionally imposed where the accused is demonstrably innocent, but that sua sponte this court order a new trial with directions that new counsel for the accused be appointed, motivated to provide an authentic defense for Dzhokhar.
4. The corpus delicti: Paragraph 10 of the indictment recites a statement in the nature of a confession by Dzhokhar written on the inner walls of a boat in Watertown. But with respect to any and all evidence offered or treated as suggesting an extrajudicial admission of guilt in this case, amicus cites the penetrating observation by Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, Edward Christian, London, 1765, Book IV, p. 357: “[E]ven in cases of felony at common law, [confessions] are the weakest and most suspicious of all testimony, ever liable to be obtained by artifice, false hopes, promises of favour, or menaces, seldom remembered accurately, or reported with due precision, and incapable in their nature of being disproved by other negative evidence.” Amicus and countless others suspect that the alleged confession in the boat was staged as artifice to suit the government’s case, and not authentic. But she stands on ancient wisdom which casts doubt on all extrajudicial confessions without adequate safeguards, including the rule that an extrajudicial confession is insufficient to convict, unless the corpus delicti be sufficiently proved up. The rule is defined with various degrees of rigor from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In federal courts, in any event, the corroboration required to sustain a confession or statement in the nature of a confession need only be independent, substantial, and reveal the words in question to be reasonably trustworthy, as appears, e. g., in Opper v. United States, 348 U. S. 84 (1954).
If such be the law here applicable, the required corroboration in this case must include evidence showing that Dzhokhar actually carried a large, heavy, black backpack on Boylston Street before the explosions on the afternoon on April 15, 2013, as claimed by the FBI and alleged in the indictment. Tsarnaeva exhibit 4, a product of investigation by the FBI, shows plainly that Dzhokhar did no such thing, hence no required corroboration has been established
5. Closing remarks: The views here expressed are not unique, but shared by good Americans, and others the world over. The undersigned and her sister Malkan are prepared to testify as expressed in the affidavit filed in support of the motion for leave to file a submission as amicus curiae. This argument is
Respectfully submitted,
May 15, 2015 /s/ Maret Tsarnaeva
Zhigulevskaya Str. 7, Apt. 4
364000 Grozny, Chechen Republic, RF Telephone: 011-7-938-899-1671
E-mail: marettsar@gmail.com 10
Of counsel:
John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X) 180 Haut de la Paroisse
St-Agapit, Quebec G0S 1Z0 Canada
Telephone: 418-888-5049
E-mail: jrgraham@novicomfusion.com
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
The undersigned certifies that this submission is consistent with the rules of this Court, that it is prepared in 14-point Times New Roman font, and that the bare text thereof consists of 2,331 words.
May 15, 2015 /s/ Maret Tsarnaeva

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 1

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 2

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 3

APPENDIX TSARNAEVA EXHIBIT 4

This is the communication I received from attorney John Remington Graham:

TO DR. PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS, GREETING :
Dear Sir, — By way of introduction. I have practiced criminal law for nearly forty-eight years, both prosecuting and defending, and served as a founding professor in an accredited law school in my native Minnesota. I have appeared as counsel before courts of record in sixteen jurisdictions, and have a background in forensic science and medicine. I can provide a résumé on request.
On March 25, 2015, while the trial was underway, I wrote and distributed a short opinion on the prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, accused of capital felonies in Boston on April 15, 2013 in United States v. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, No. 13-CR-10200-GAO on the docket of the United States District Court for Massachusetts, commonly known as the “Boston marathon case”, or “the Boston bomber case”. I used eight photo exhibits to explain my conclusions that, as a matter of law, there was no probable cause to support the indictment, and that Mr. Tsanaev was plainly not guilty as charged. These views were shared by others reporting on the internet, but my opinion was meant to provide professional assurance to fellow citizens that, legally speaking, something was radically wrong with the prosecution. In fact there were then and still are a great many anomalies with the case.
The substance of the Boston marathon case, as I then saw it, and as I still see it, is that, on the day after the explosions on Boylston Street in Boston, the FBI crime lab determined from fragments at the crime scene, the FBI chief in Boston announced, and the indictment itself later confirmed that, shortly before the explosions, the culprits were carrying large, heavy-laden, black backpacks containing pressure cooker bombs. Two days later, the FBI chief in Boston stated publicly that the suspects were identified by a certain street surveillance video, which for some days was later displayed for public viewing on the FBI website. The video had been taken from Whiskey’s Steak House, and was used to create still-frame photos of Tamerlan Tsarnaev (the big brother, now deceased), and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (the little brother, later accused) as they walked up Boylson Street toward the finish line of the Boston marathon, shortly before the bombs went off. These two still frames were featured on posters distributed by the FBI in soliciting cooperation from the general public. But there is a third still-frame photo, taken from the same video, which shows unmistakably that Dzhokhar was carrying a small, light-weight, white backpack. The backpack carried by Dzhokhar was flat, and did not sag or bulge as would have been apparent if it contained a pressure cooker bomb filled with shrapnel as described in the indictment. This third still-frame photo was published by the major news media of the United States. I retrieved my first copy of this third still-frame photo from an internet report of CNN on April 19, 2015.
The bottom line is that the FBI’s own evidence eliminates Dzhokhar as a suspect, and conclusively proves he is not guilty as charged. This reality is literally as clear as the difference between black and white. The establishment press knew about it, and I cannot imagine how the federal prosecutors and counsel for the accused could not have known about it. So obvious was the actual innocence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev that there was no need for a trial at all, because a good criminal defense lawyer could have taken the FBI information published the day after the explosions, the text of the indictment, and the third still-frame photo from the street surveillance video used by the FBI to identify suspects, and employed those items to support a pre-trial motion for dismissal of the indictment. I have on many occasions made such motions or seen such motions made by colleagues in federal courts, based on facts revealed by disclosures which prosecutors must and routinely do make available to counsel for the accused under a famous decision of the United States Supreme Court. And I have seen such motions granted on not a few occasions. Such practice is not uncommon, as I know from my own experience.
What was going on in Dzhokhar’s case? Why was there no motion to dismiss the indictment based on indisputable facts? Why was there a trial at all? Why did Judy Clarke, a big-time death-penalty lawyer appointed to defend Dzhokhar, admit to the jury in her opening statement that her client was guilty? She had decisive evidence that her client was not guilty. Why did she not use it, bring the case to an end, and thereby save her client’s life? In her final summation to the jury, Mme Clarke did not even ask for a verdict of not guilty. She made no mention of the exculpatory evidence generated by the FBI and mentioned in the indictment. Available were widely published photographs of possible paramilitary agents near the crime scene in Boston about the time of the explosions, carrying large, heavy-laden, black backpacks with characteristic markings which the FBI crime lab material revealed. But these persons with black backpacks were never investigated by the FBI. Why not?
I contacted Maret Tsarnaeva, the paternal aunt of Dzhokhar living in Chechnya which is part of the Russian Federation, a lawyer trained in the old Russian school of law in the Kyrgyz Republic which was once part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, but has been independent since the conclusion of the former Cold War. A very bright and interesting woman Maret turned out to be, and, from the beginning, she maintained that her nephew was not guilty. My conversations with her over Skype led me to conclude that Judy Clarke and her colleagues in the federal public defender’s office in Boston could not stand up to the political pressure and thus threw the case instead of defending Dzhokhar.
Mme Tsarnaeva executed an affidavit on April 17, 2015, which explains events when representatives of the federal public defender’s office in Boston met with Dzhokhar’s family in Russia. For those interested in details, I attach a copy of her affidavit exactly as sent to me by Maret from Russia and later filed with the federal district court in Boston, except that the affidavit filed in the federal district court includes Maret’s original signature in Russian script which I can verify with my business records.
Maret hoped to call exculpatory evidence to the attention of the presiding judge, because Dzhokhar’s lawyers were not defending the accused and federal prosecutors were acting without probable cause. After diligent research on options was made, Maret decided to attempt an appearance before the federal district court in Boston as a friend of the court. She had to apply to the presiding judge for permission to appear in this capacity, and to make a motion asking the court to appointment me as her personal counsel for this purpose on special occasion. Normally, to be admitted to practice before the court on special occasion, I would need a motion from a member of the local bar. My paralegal assistant and I contacted many lawyers in Massachusetts. Some were sympathetic, but none dared to participate, lest their reputations be harmed. I had practiced before the federal district court in Boston some years previously, and then had no difficulty in securing the routine courtesy of a member of the local bar in sponsoring my appearance on special occasion. But not even the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts dared to assist Maret or myself. I had to assist Maret in making an intervention pro se, representing herself, while she listed me as “of counsel” so as to signal that she was guided by a lawyer, and asked the presiding judge to admit me on special occasion without sponsoring motion of a member of the local bar, due to unusual circumstances. On instructions of court personnel, we could not proceed on the electronic record, and Maret’s pro se motion with supporting documents was served upon the federal district attorney and the federal public defender in paper and by registered mail, and the papers had to be filed with the office of the clerk of the federal district court, again in paper and regular postal service. But our task was accomplished by May 29, 2015.
For your convenience, I attach herewith the formal argument made by Maret Tsarnaeva acting pro se with my guidance, exactly as filed in the federal district court in Boston, except that the copy served and filed included the signature of Maret Tsarnaeva in Russian script, as I can demonstrate from my business records. We showed by text and exhibits, and by reference to the trial record and FBI-generated evidence that Dzhokhar cannot be guilty, because the FBI determined and the indictment alleged that the culprits carried black backpacks, but the FBI’s evidence showed that Dzhokhar was carrying a white backpack.
Maret expressed her grievances against the unethical misconduct of the federal prosecutors in proceeding when they knew they had no probable cause, and the unethical misconduct of court-appointed counsel in not defending in earnest. We enclosed the four most critical photo exhibits, including the results of the FBI crime lab investigation and the exculpatory third still-frame photo from the video used by the FBI to identify the culprits.
I am aware that many incredulous citizens cannot accept that the government of the United States would stage a show trial in Boston to convict an innocent young man and sentence him to death. But such events are not unusual in history. Judicial murder spoils the history of many nations. These incredulous citizens point to Dzhokhar’s alleged confession statements inside the boat in Watertown and at the time of sentencing. But contrary to the beliefs of the uninitiated, it has been clear from ancient times that confession statements are the weakest and most suspicious of all testimony, as is stated by legal scholars going back many centuries. Maret’s pro se argument cited Sir William Blackstone, from whom the founding fathers of the United States learned the law, for this truth. False confessions are very common, and result from fabrication, artifice, duress, unfounded hopes, attempts to curry favor, even brainwashing. Hence, going back centuries the law has struggled to develop safeguards against false confessions.
The intervention by Maret Tsarnaeva in behalf of her nephew in the Boston marathon case is significant because, although denying her motion to appear as a friend of the court, the presiding judge entered an order, which appears on the electronic record, is numbered 1469, and directs that her filings be maintained by the office of the clerk of the federal district court in Boston. These documents should be accessible to those wishing to see and read them. Therefore, it is a matter of public record, not merely a matter of internet protest or gossip, that the federal prosecutors, the court-appointed lawyers for the accused, and the presiding judge are all aware of the FBI’s own evidence which excludes Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as a suspect, and proves his actual innocence. It is also clear that the major news media of the United States, which orchestrated a false appearance that Dzhokhar was guilty of heinous crimes, and called for his execution, were aware that he was not guilty. They knew, as the report of CNN four days after marathon Monday makes plain, that Dzhokhar was in fact carrying a small, light-weight, white backpack, and that the government’s own evidence shows that the culprits, whoever they were, carried large, heavy-laden, black backpacks.
John Remington Graham of the Minnesota Bar (#3664X)

John Remington Graham is an attorney with decades of experience in the fields of constitutional, environmental, and criminal litigation. He served as a federal public defender; special counsel to Brainerd, Minnesota; and Crow Wing County attorney. He has a great many publishing credits in constitutional law and history, and also forensic medicine and science. He has lectured on constitutional law and legal history in the United States and Canada. Graham was also cofounding professor of law at Hamline University in Minnesota. As a young lawyer, he quickly realized an investigation into constitutional history was necessary to properly defend his clients against the judicial machine. Since then, Graham has been a diligent student of American, Canadian, and English constitutional history and law. He recognized that the American Constitution could not be understood without a thorough knowledge of its foundation in English Constitutional law and history. He has participated in major cases raising difficult questions of constitutional law, appearing before courts in sixteen jurisdictions within the United States. Additionally, in 1998 he was the adviser on British constitutional law and history for the amicus curiae for Quebec in the Canadian Supreme Court, a position that afforded him the opportunity of shaping Quebec’s argument in its case for peaceable secession. Graham received both a bachelor of arts in philosophy and a law degree from the University of Minnesota. Graham, his wife, and children have lived in Minnesota and Quebec.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts’ latest books are The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West, How America Was Lost, and The Neoconservative Threat to World Order.

 

https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2016/04/29/fbi-evidence-proves-innocence-of-accused-boston-marathon-bomber-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-2/

CSPOA: Feds are “The Greatest Threat We Face” as a nation

Sheriffs Call for Defying Unconstitutional Gun Control:  Feds "The                    Greatest Threat                        We Face"

 

SHTFplan.com | Mac Slavo - April 29, 2016

 

 

As the 'federal government' continues in its quest to restrict the rights of gun owners across the country, local law enforcement is stepping up their response. 

For many, it is one of a line in the sand against a bevy of agencies based in Washington, and partnering state agencies, who have violated the constitution.

The still-growing Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), headed by former Sheriff Richard Mack, is standing up to these infringements, and saying no.

Of course, it has the attention of the indoctrinated Big Government folks who are apt to see a group of law enforcement officials standing up for the rule of law as – what else, a potential threat. (Of course!!  The REAL enemy doesn't like to have the general population expose and stand up to their traitorous actions!)

via the Washington Post:

[A] group called the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association is intent on strictly enforcing their view of the U.S. Constitution … “its ambition is to encourage law enforcement officers to defy laws they decide themselves are illegal.” In essence, they are troubled by the overreach of the federal government in matters concerning guns, taxes and land management, and founder Richard Mack has described the federals as “the greatest threat we face today,” and his association as “the army to set our nation free.”

[…] At the association’s 2014 convention, dozens of sheriffs signed a declaration that they would not tolerate any federal agent who attempted to register firearms, arrest someone or seize property in their counties without their consent.
At a recent training for local police, the CPI reported, Mack declared that “gun control is against the law” and that his goal was to sign up about one-fourth of the nation’s sheriffs to join the association… find a true constitutional sheriff who’ll tell the 'federal government', ‘You’re not going to abuse citizens anymore.’”

Of course, it is his backbone and conviction that has the system worried – along with his ability to activate what is arguably the most powerful group in the nation at the ground level – the nation’s 3,000 or so sheriffs, who are elected and serve as the highest law enforcement official within the county unit.

Richard Mack, who successfully staved off federal encroachment at the Supreme Court level back in the 90s, described his CSPOA association as “the army to set our nation free.”

The media has been quick to demonize the fiery rhetoric for these constitutional-minded members of law enforcement. But the battle is grounded in sound ideology, and a principle that literally millions of Americans are prepared to fight for.

Last year, a police chief from a tiny East Texas town went on a rant warning Obama that further attempts to impose gun control would “cause a revolution in this country.” It is entirely possible that this is no exaggeration or bravado:

“Now Mr. Obama, you need to understand what the 2nd Amendment is for. It is not for hunting. It is there for the American people to protect themselves against the criminal element, to protect themselves against terrorists and radical ideology, and it’s also there to protect us against a government that has overreached its power.”

“You are not our potentate, sir. You are our servant, and you were 'elected' to serve and protect us first. And I suggest, sir, since you’re a 'constitutional expert', that you better review your history on the Constitution and understand that we are a free people, and we are subject to no one other than the almighty God and Jesus Christ the King. And as such, sir, I strongly encourage you to trust the law-abiding American citizen, because we won’t fail you and we won’t let you down. But if you try to disarm us, sir, then you will cause a revolution in this country to occur. So please revise your thinking, because we are not your enemy, the law-abiding gun owner in this country.”

Richard Mack’s case originated from his defiant stand when he was sheriff of Graham County in Arizona and an attempt was made to get local LEOs to perform background checks for the federal government under the Brady Bill. 

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia led the decision upholding the stand for the 2nd Amendment under the 10th Amendment – marking one of the most constitutionally-sound decisions in recent history.

Mack struck a blow for states’ rights in the 1990s as a sheriff from Graham County, Arizona, when he and a sheriff from Montana challenged the Brady Bill’s interim requirement that local law enforcement agencies perform background checks on gun buyers. The Supreme Court ruled in Mack’s favor, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the opinion affirming the states’ sovereignty under the 10th Amendment …
[…]Mack said “the government was forcing me to participate in a gun control scheme that I knew was unconstitutional. When all law enforcement is forced into that position by state or federal legislators, which one do we side with? And I believe there is a proper way to conduct oneself in knowing the difference between enforcing stupid laws and enforcing the principles of the Constitution.”

“[W]hen all the courts are against you, all the legislators are against you, where else do you go? I believe to the local county sheriff…and if that means standing against the federal government, then so damn be it.”

SHERIFF MACK

HELL NO TO GUN CONTROL!

  

http://www.infowars.com/sheriffs-call-for-defying-unconstitutional-gun-control-feds-the-greatest-threat-we-face/

 

Sheriff Mack and all  CSPOA:  We THANK YOU and we SALUTE YOU for your bravery in standing up to the biggest THREAT in this nation - the unconstitutional criminal 'federal government' that should be disbanded by our nation's military as provided for in the original Constitution (NOT the one rewritten by and for the sole use of the rogue 'federal government'),  and our nation's TRUE GOVERNMENT, the Republic (NON-INCORPORATED) resurrected from the dark closet it has been hidden in for over 100 years.  May the Good Lord protect and bless you and give you wisdom.

 

Donald Trump Delivers Major Foreign Policy Address

DONALD  TRUMP  DELIVERS  MAJOR  FOREIGN  POLICY  ADDRESS


 Onan Coca
April 29 2016


GOP frontrunner Donald Trump delivered his first major foreign policy address of the campaign on Wednesday. 

The results have been mixed, with some pundits calling the speech “brilliant” and others calling it “rambling” and “incoherent.” 

Of course, with Donald Trump the views will often be as divided as the voters, so the very best way to judge what he had to say is likely to hear it for yourself. 

Partial Transcript (You can see a full transcript here):

I would like to talk today about how to develop a new foreign policy direction for our country – one that replaces randomness with purpose, ideology with strategy, and chaos with peace.

It is time to shake the rust off of America’s foreign policy. 
It’s time to invite new voices and new visions into the fold.

The direction I will outline today will also return us to a timeless principle. My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people, and American security, above all else. That will be the foundation of every decision that I will make.
America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration.
 …

Under a Trump Administration, no American citizen will ever again feel that their needs come second to the citizens of foreign countries.

I will view the world through the clear lens of American interests.

I will be America’s greatest defender and most loyal champion. We will not apologize for becoming successful again, but will instead embrace the unique heritage that makes us who we are.

The world is most peaceful, and most prosperous, when America is strongest.

America will continually play the role of peacemaker.
We will always help to save lives and, indeed, humanity itself. But to play that role, we must make America strong again.

We must make America respected again. And we must make America great again.
If we do that, perhaps this century can be the most peaceful and prosperous the world has ever known.
 
http://eaglerising.com/32916/donald-trump-delivers-major-foreign-policy-address/

Blistering Message on Defending Freedom

COUNTRY  MUSIC  LEGEND  CHARLIE  DANIELS  DELIVERS  BLISTERING  MESSAGE  ON  DEFENDING  FREEDOM

April 29 2016
Onan Coca


Country music legend Charlie Daniels has a message for Iran and other terror enablers around the world, and they’re not going to like what he has to say. 

In a recently recorded commercial for the National Rifle Association (NRA), Daniels delivers a blistering condemnation to our enemies and informs them not to be misled – our current leadership is not an accurate reflection of who we really are. No, the American people are not like Barack Obama; we are willing (and ready) to defend freedom, whatever the cost.

To the ayatollahs of Iran and every terrorist you enable: Listen up.
You might have met our fresh-faced flower child president and his weak-kneed, Ivy League friends.
But you haven’t met America.
You haven’t met the heartland, or the people who will defend this nation with their bloody, calloused, bare hands, if that’s what it takes. You haven’t met the steelworkers and the hard-rock miners, or the swamp folks in Cajun country who can wrestle a full-grown gator out of the water.
You haven’t met the farmers, the cowboys, the loggers and the truck drivers. You don’t know the mountain men who live off the land, or the brave cops who fight the good fight in the urban war zones.
No, you’ve never met America. And you oughta pray you never do.
I’m the National Rifle Association of America, 
and I’m Freedom’s Safest Place.

http://eaglerising.com/32892/country-music-legend-charlie-daniels-delivers-blistering-message-on-defending-freedom/