|
|
I Am A Proud
Member Of:
|
It is a felony to willfully make false statements to federal law enforcement. I am willing to testify within a state or federal U.S. court of law that my statements are true to the best of my knowledge if the U.S. Department of Justice stops depriving me of my First Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. |
Attorney General Consolidated Guidelines for FBI Domestic Operations
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 4
§ 4. Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Having full knowledge of [§ 1001] why would I make all of this up then contact the U.S. Attorney General, Office of the Inspector General & the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by certified mail requesting a thorough investigation of my statements?
In this debacle someone has to be lying how can we all be telling the truth? If they believe that I have lied, why have I not been formerly accused of making false statements & how could they prove that I made false statements without conducting an official investigation of my statements? A simple question you would think that I requested something complex such as who or what is "Rosebud"? So what exactly is the purpose of obtaining a law degree, passing the bar exam & working for the U.S. Department of Justice?
How is it legally & logically possible that every time I contact the the U.S. Department of Justice with my complaint I receive an illegitimate "documented' response? Then when I respond to the U.S. Department of Justice with proof that one or more federal statutes of law were violated by their illegitimate documented response nothing ever happens as far as enforcing the federal statues that they violated. They merely respond with some invalid rubber stamped "personal opinion" while actually ignoring the law. To date, the U.S. Department of Justice has not legally under any federal statute of law invalidated one piece of documented evidence that I've presented to them. I'm not naive or ignorant of the law as it is written & neither are they.
Simply reviewing my site is not going to resolve the issues. To the U.S. Department of Justice employee's who are reading this very sentence when are you going to open an official investigation? Don't look around the room I'm talking to you.
Title 28 > Part IV > Chapter 85 > § 1361
Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty
My official complaint is that "Yvonne Bonner" the former Chief of the U.S. Marshals Service Office of Inspection (Internal Affairs) told me in "writing" that they would conduct an official "internal" investigation but "due to privacy issues I was not entitled to know the outcome of the investigation". Why not? THAT CONSTITUTES OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
When questioned about the "integrity" of said investigation by a U.S. Senator & Congressman "John J. McNulty, III" the former Chief of the U.S. Marshals Service Congressional Affairs Division concealed material facts in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal executive department when he knowingly & willfully conspired, confederated, & agreed to commit the following offenses against the United States
"conspiring to obstruct justice" by willfully "contradicting" the written statements of the former U.S. Marshals Service Chief of Inspection by "making false statements" in writing to "Congress" denying the existence of "any" such internal investigation.
When I contacted the U.S. Marshals Service Office of Inspection again by certified mail with this additional complaint with documented proof that senior members of their agency had contradicted themselves several times in writing including false statements made within official documents which they sent to Congress. They continuously ignored my complaints once again "obstructing justice" by failing to investigate senior members of their agency. If convicted, they only face a "statutory" maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on
each count of obstruction of justice, five years for perjury, and a $250,000
fine on each count. Some might deem that as a conflict of interest. The 5th Amendment anyone?
The U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General & the Federal Bureau of Investigation willfully ignores these documented facts. I have the documentation which proves that the U.S. Marshals Service violated § 1001 making false statements to Congress. The U.S. Department of Justice does not seem to think that senior members of a federal law enforcement agency making false statements to Congress is a felony worth prosecuting. You can enter the site to review detailed information or download the (pdf) documents from the link below.
So why did "Mark J. Kappelhoff" the section Chief of the U.S. Department of Justice > Criminal Section > Civil Rights Division willfully send me the document below containing "arbitrary & capricious" statements in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?
Where he clearly states in writing that if I have been the victim of "illegal" electronic surveillance conducted "UNDER COLOR OF LAW" by a federal law enforcement agency:
THAT IT IS NOT A PROSECUTABLE OFFENSE IN VIOLATION OF MY CIVIL RIGHTS AS PER THE 4TH AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION
|
|
|
|
|
Hon. Charles E. Schumer & Mr. Reynolds |
|
Hon. Hillary Rodham Clinton & Mr. Reynolds |
Strengthen Civil Rights Enforcement
Obama and Biden will reverse the politicization that has occurred in the Bush Administration's Department of Justice. They will put an end to the ideological litmus tests used to fill positions within the Civil Rights Division.
I'M PREPARED TO GO OVER EVERY DETAIL OF MY ALLEGATIONS WITH THE USDOJ INSPECTOR GENERAL GLENN A. FINE & SPECIAL COUNSEL PATRICK J. FITZGERALD.
TITLE50 > CHAPTER 36 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1810
§ 1810 Civil liability
An aggrieved person, other than a
foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, as defined in section
1801 (a) or (b)(1)(A) of this title, respectively, who has been
subjected to an "electronic surveillance" or about whom information
obtained by electronic surveillance of such person has been disclosed
or used in violation of section 1809 of this title shall have a cause of action against any person who committed such violation and shall be entitled to recover—
(a) actual damages, but not
less than liquidated damages of
$1,000 or $100 per day for each day of
violation, whichever
is greater;
(b) punitive damages; and
(c) reasonable attorney’s fees and other investigation and
litigation costs reasonably incurred.
|
United States Constitution
Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall
issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons
or things to be seized. |
In reference to the letter I received from your office dated September 29, 2008. At which time you stated in "writing" that my complaint does not involve a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes. Your statement "contradicts" one of the federal criminal civil rights statutes that your division is responsible for enforcing.
Are you taking personal responsibility for the unlawful actions of the U.S. Marshals Service & are you willing to testify to the legality of your documented statement under "oath" explaining why you refuse to investigate a nonfrivolous complaint? According to the Civil Rights Division my complaint constitutes a violation of statute:
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 >
§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Criminal Section
OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT (18 U.S.C. § 242) Intentional acts by law enforcement officials who misuse their positions to unlawfully deprive individuals of constitutional rights, such as the right to be free from unwarranted assaults, illegal arrests and searches, and theft of property.
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
Summary:
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of "any law" to “willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States”.
VERIFIED HERE USDOJ WEBSITE LINK
Click here to view the agencies that have visited my site & done nothing. Verified Visits
Click Here To E-Mail Me@gmail.com
