J.A.I.L. News Journal
Los Angeles, California                                                July 6, 2005
Mission Statement                  JNJ Library                     PayPal Support
Federal J.A.I.L.
                           FAQs                    What?MeWarden?
Simple, Isn't it?
Editorial by Barbie, ACIC, National J.A.I.L. Admin.
Hello folks, I just read the below exchange, sent to us by one of our Texas JAILers, Aleithia Artemis (thanks Aleithia), and it is so illustrative of what routinely happens when the "powers that be" are not accountable to the People. That's the nitty-gritty of it all! Once J.A.I.L. is in place, these things will not continue.
Just imagine (you don't have to imagine-- it's happening!) the ease with which government-- whatever branch-- simply (and I mean SIMPLY) changes what they don't "like" in our Constitution, or laws in pursuance thereof, to "fit" their agenda-- as THEY see fit. The thing I can't imagine (but yet it's been happening for over two centuries-- incredible!) is that a relatively small handful of men (and women)-- what, maybe a hundred or so? -- are able to carry off this tremendous scam on the entire American People-- how many hundreds of millions?-- and the People not only allow it to continue, but worse-- they allow themselves to be brainwashed into thinking it's FOR THEIR GOOD!! 
The judiciary routinely dismiss suits filed against judges, saying they're filed by "disgruntled litigants" who don't "like" the decision made against them. That's mighty convenient, isn't it? But it's okay for government to --not file suit-- but simply change unilaterally what they don't "like" in the law and especially the Constitution, even ignore it altogether! 
The fact is --which judges simply throw off-- that there has been no decision in many, if not most, of the suits against judges. That has certainly been the case of Ron Branson! There has never been a decision in Ron's several cases against judges because there has never been the process due in order to litigate the merits of the case to bring about a decision! Yet the judiciary "conveniently use" the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to summarily dismiss suits against judges for lack of due process, that says a suit may not be brought to federal court after a final state court decision--  and even presenting evidence on an appeal that there could not have been a decision due to the lack of due process in order to reach one-- all of which is ignored-- the appellate court writes up an opinion containing so-called "facts" totally misrepresenting the true facts brought on appeal, to fit their conclusion: Dismissal AFFIRMED.  --SIMPLE!
Of course if it's not the Rooker-Feldman abuse, there's always the "judicial immunity" abuse used to stonewall judicial accountability for their misconduct of law, even shown by black-and-white evidence on the record. It's really quite SIMPLE, isn't it?
Besides arbitrarily denying redress of grievances, the judiciary can as a "bonus," at their whim, capriciously impose sanctions against a plaintiff or petitioner in any amount they dream up, for filing a "frivolous" appeal (or "frivolous" motion, or whatever the charging document may be). The term "frivolous" is a conclusion-- not a fact. There are certain criteria that must be established by evidence in order to conclude an action is "frivolous." But how often are findings of facts offered by a judge when deciding "frivolous" anything? Opposing counsel don't even have to write up a script for the judge to sign. SIMPLE, isn't it?
You see, folks, all of this legal trash ultimately winds up washing up on the steps of the United State Supreme Court. That's where it all ends up. The judiciary, and government in general, may think that it's all gone and "settled" once the decision by the SC is made, (more and more 5-4 decisions-- I like how Aleithia describes them: "the five Supremacists")
but it isn't. It's all still there, piled up in front of the SC. The rubbish must be approaching the front doors by now after so many years of accumulation. While the system may consider the matters "closed" -- far from it! The People are slowly waking up to the fact that the system of government is a FRAUD, being led by the final backstop-- the judiciary.
Folks, We the People are in truth and in fact the "final backstop" of government in this country. All the People have to do is exercise their inherent political power! Government power is not omnipotent power-- it is delegated power by the People for the purpose of protecting their inherent, unalienable rights. Was that purpose carried out in the recent USSC case (another 5-4 decision) of Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. _____, decided 6/23/05?  
Think about it-- how simple it is for five people to overthrow a most fundamental Right of the People throughout this country to own private property and have it protected (that's secured, not seized) by government. The "greater good" is not government's interests, but the People's interests. "Raising tax revenues," "providing jobs," "beautifying cities" are NOT in the People's interests if they are at the expense of People's sacred and fundamental Rights. The term "public" when used by government turns out to be "government" regarding interests, or "good."  The Kelo decision is supposedly in the "public's interests" --yet who actually benefits? As the saying goes, "Follow the money."  All the rationality in the world doesn't negate the fact that People's fundamental Rights are taken from them by government. Rights that are unalienable, are indeed alienated. The Rights themselves are nonetheless unalienable as a matter of self-evident truth however alienated (i.e., stolen) they are by government greed and fraud. How simple it is-- by a measly five human beings!
Folks, is it time for J.A.I.L. yet?
I'd say it is way past time.
Signature gathering is happening now in South Dakota.
Anyone at least 18 years of age can help-- no other requirement.
Contact sdja@sd-jail4judges.org
or call  (605) 231-1418

----- Original Message -----
From: T.N.T.
To: smtl_discuss@showmethelaw.net
Cc: concon@isomedia.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 9:23 PM
Subject: RE: - who owns who.........for due considerations..........

Talk about legislating from the bench!   My own comments in Bill Walker's amended text, below.   Mr. Walker, feel free to contact me if you like, at info in sig-line.


Aleithia   Artemis

Tel:   832-253-1160

P.O. Box 601

Bellaire, Texas  77402



-----Original Message-----
From: Big Al [mailto:bigal123@ncol.net]
Subject: Fw:- who owns who.........for due considerations..........


 ----- Original Message -----

From: aqu8rianman

Dear Mr. Schulz,

a recent federal court decision completely refutes any challenge to the legality of the 16th Amendment.   In sum, this case, Walker v United States, in combination with other judicial rulings grants Congress complete control of the entire Constitution itself.   the power of Congress is now unlimited.

Does this mean Congress has power over judges?   Over the Prez and armed forces?   If we had power over Congress, then this could be a good thing.

the repeal of the 16th Amendment has received more applications for a convention from the states than any other subject in the history of this nation. In total, 39 states have applied to Congress for a convention to repeal the 16th Amendment. As Congress has not acted to accept any recessions of these applications, it is clear these applications remain in effect to this date. (Please see pages 689, 776 in the overlength brief referred to in the accompanying court order for more specific information. This brief can be downloaded at website www.article5.org.) The total of 39 states is at least one more state than is required for ratification of an amendment repealing the 16th Amendment and five more states that are required for a convention to be called for that purpose.

So a Repeal here seems to be a pretty popular idea.

until the ruling by Chief Judge Coughenour in Walker v United States it was universal opinion, that it was obligatory Congress call a
convention if the proper number of states applied
 However, because there had been a judicial ruling in this matter this universal has now been replaced by an official government policy entirely contrary to that opinion.

Talk about legislating from the bench!    Perhaps Coughenour could benefit from a petition similar to the one circulating about the 5 Supremacists in the Kelo v. New London decision.    http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/scotus.property.ap/     Impeachment Petition:

That basic policy is Congress may ignore any directive of the
Constitution imposed on it by the word "shall."   In short, Congress or any agency created by it is not bound by the Constitution. In his ruling Judge Coughenour altered the meaning of the word "shall" from its previous obligatory meaning to that of an option on the part of the government.

THIS is how some judges legislate from the bench!  

And how easy it is to do an end-run around the Constitution, or ANY law, ordinance, statute, code, etc.   You just capriciously invent a conveniently different meaning from the original intent when the law went into effect.

 Indeed, under the Walker v United
States ruling, there is nothing to prevent Congress from passing an "amendment" to the Constitution with the issue never even being submitted to the states or people for ratification.
Brrrr.   Frosty indeed.

Therefore, if the IRS states the 16th Amendment is legal, that agency
as representative of Congress is correct regardless of any facts to
the contrary.

Hold on there, Nellie.  Exactly when did IRS become a "representative of Congress?"  

And yes, I have direct personal experience (although not w/the IRS on this) of Facts and Law not mattering.


Thus, any "right" granted to the people in the Constitution from voting, to free speech, to trial rights are totally at the discretion of the government as they all are expressed by the word "shall" in the Constitution and thus are now merely options controlled entirely by the national government.

Very conveniently different meaning of a term from when law first went into effect. 


Congress approved of the legal tactics used by the local United States Attorney to achieve this goal.
None of the officials contacted have refuted a single allegation made in that letter.

My experience with the local US atty in my case was that he (politely) said over the phone, that all he ever does is defend dirty government agents.   OK, he phrased it much better than that, and took a long time to say it.   But that was the gist.

Thank you for your time.

Bill Walker

Cc: Dan Bryant, DOJ
Charles Rossotti, IRS
Connie Brod, C-Span
Roscoe Bartlett, U.S. Congress
Ron Paul, U.S. Congress

Webmaster's Note: Please see our page on Eminent Domain Abuse for more information.

J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash,
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on at
Get involved at
To be added or removed, write to info@jail4judges.org
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

South Dakota Vote Fraud
FTC Comments on the Definition of the Practice of Law

Responses to Articles and Shows

Join J.A.I.L.
Donate To J.A.I.L.
Buy A J.A.I.L. T-Shirt & Bumper Sticker
State and Federal Sites
Black Collar Crime
J.A.I.L. News Journal
Judicial Horror Stories
Branson's Legal Briefs
National J.A.I.L. Contacts and Groups
Animated Introduction
Spread The Word
J.A.I.L. Constitution & By Laws
Mission Statement
J.A.I.L. Cannot Give Legal Advice
Website Comments
Current Events
Links Of Common Interest
Yahoo Group