Tag Archives: Jerry O’Neil

Indian Reservations, John Collier, the New Deal, and the Advance of World Communism

“Any man who thinks he can be happy  and prosperous by letting the 
Government take care of him; better take a  closer look at the American Indian.”
Henry Ford
           Your quote for the Day is very timely!  In today’s paper is the announcement of the beginning of a $1.9 Billion land buyback program for reservation real estate.  The intent of this program is to purchase land from individual Indians and place it in the common tribal trust.  In other words, the federal government is using $1.9 Billion of the Cobell settlement to advance communism on Indian reservations for United States citizens.  This will further the ideals that were set forth by John Collier in the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934.
         It is my belief that John Collier wanted to make Indian reservations showcases for the communistic system, to show how wonderful it would be for those living under it.  By now we should all know how good that has actually worked.  Henry Ford was right!
*(See full text of Jerry’s Letter Below)
Jerry O’Neil
Dear Jerry:
                 Yes, live on the government reservation, or “life on the government plantation” is a fairly apt analogy and metaphor for the life we’re moving towards in this country…..  New Orleans, where I am staying right now, certainly has characteristics of both reservation and plantation life….. and yet the memories in the buildings and city plan hear of a far, far better America, the echoes in the walls and over the levees and bayous….even across the vast and mighty Mississippi, is somehow still hauntingly inspirational—the river flows on as his has for a hundred thousand years, and life will go on, so even if our children are slaves…..they will someday be free again.
           Strangely enough, I knew John Collier’s son (Donald Collier) at the Field Museum in Chicago during my Chicago Law School years.  Donald Died in 1995 and has about a dozen obituaries on-line, because he really was an outstanding scientist.
         He was a delightful old gentleman and NO kind of Communist himself.  Apparently his Dad’s idea of being a good communist was to own the northern tip of the Door Peninsula at the northern tip of Green Bay, Wisconsin, specifically the 500 acres just on both sides of the WI-42 Trunk (connecting to the Door County-to-Washington Island Ferry) facing the Pilot Island and Plum Island Lighthouses at the entrance to Lake Michigan.
                 Donald Collier was so proud of his little kingdom up there, and no, although he was a graduate of the University of Chicago he never invited disadvantaged boys and girls from the South Side to camp out on his property.  Donald Collier was a fine (if distinctly “old school”) archaeologist specializing in the Middle Horizon of Peru-Bolivia who pioneered the calibration-correction of radio-carbon dating with tree ring sequences from California and Norway/Sweden.
                 One classmate of Donald Collier was my mother, Alice Eugenie.  My mother attended and graduated from the University of Chicago when the basement of Stagg Field was still used for the first controlled nuclear reactions during and after the Manhattan Project (the Joseph Regenstein Library of the U of C sits on that site now).
                   That was back in the days of Chicago’s semi-legendary “Aristotelian Method” Chancellor Robert Maynard Hutchins, two of whose closest friends were the young Marshall Field III, and Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Second Vice-President Henry Agard Wallace.  My mother was a drawling Southern girl (nicknamed “Alice Magnolia”) used to northern/Yankee derision and ridicule of Southern racism, but she always thought it strange that each of these strong leftists, Hutchins, Field, and Wallace always went around town in chauffeur driven limousines with Negro Chauffeurs…..
               Former Vice-President H.A. Wallace in addition had three Negro Bodyguards, apparently, everywhere he went (he felt he was in danger since he was the duel nominee of the Progressive and Communist Parties of the United States—few today may remember or realize that Roosevelt and Wallace were the nominees of the Communist Party (as well as the Democratic Party) in 1940 and (Roosevelt Truman) in 1944.  But in 1948, Wallace was just running as a Progressive and Communist candidate.
                For my part, the first avowed Communist I ever knew personally was one Daniel Villa Milleda in Honduras, who grew up on a Plantation waited on by 24 house servants, each of whom was paid less than $1/day (2 Honduran “Lempiras”).  I met him, perhaps not coincidentally, while participating in a World Bank-Financed Archaeological and Regional Development Project in Honduras, Central America, for the Departamento de Copan.
                    It seems that, throughout history, but somewhat counterintuitively, many of the strongest supporters of Communism have extremely rich people (like Marshal Field III, Daniel Villa Milleda, and, I guess, Franklin D. Roosevelt).  In Marshall Field’s case it might be understandable—there’s really nothing more communistic than a Department Store, is there?  Well, possibly fast food and especially McDonald’s, but they have those in shopping malls right next to all the big department stores, everywhere, for all the people, equal access and all that….  Even Great Britain’s King Edward VII is rumored to have said, either while he was still Prince of Wales or as Emperor of India, that “We are All Socialists Now.”
             The former Soviet Union was famous for the rather ugly anachronism of Communist Party Leaders “owning” seaside “Dachas” by the warmer Black Seaside of the Ukraine…. many formerly belonging to the very highest elite of the Tsarist Inner Circle.
                So I have concluded, and I don’t think I am alone, that Obviously one of the (unspoken) attractions of Communism is that it only works with a truly entrenched and established Elite who control the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
                  When I pointed out to Daniel Villa Milleda in Honduras that, at least from my “bourgeois” perspective, it seemed that if Communists ever really came to power in Honduras, his family might be among the first to be expropriated or dispossessed he responded emphatically and enthusiastically:
                  “Nonsense—the masses will always need to be guided by the Intelligensia—do you really expect a bunch of ignorant peasants to understand how to guide the world?  We Intellectuals are the very soul of Communism.  My father and I have been to Cuba and seen how Comrade Castro and his brothers rule—they all have palaces of their own. Did you know that Cuba is almost all black except for the Communist Inteligensia—do you really think they (in Spanish “estos pinches negros”) could govern themselves?”
               In short, Communism is and always has been among the greatest and most hypocritical frauds of the world: it is the tool by which the Elite hope to extend their power through popular support forever—they have no such modest and humble goals as a “thousand year Reich”, but really and truly, forever.
                 This, I think explains how the Elites of the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and France (even the relics of the Ancien Regime aristocracy) were so early on in the late 19th/early 20th century persuaded to become Fabian enthusiasts of Central-Planning and (even worse) Centralized Banking and Credit (all of which were the primary goals of the February 1848 Communist Manifesto Published by Marx & Engels).
                   Communism has, I suppose this obvious appeal to old-time Aristocrats—they get to justify their position “at the top” by saying that they support the rights and well-being of the humblest in society, while simultaneously guaranteeing that there will be no waives of competition for membership in the “Intelligensia” from upstart Upper Middle Class renegades—like the ones who started the American Revolution in 1775, for instance, or their grandchildren and great-grandchildren who resisted centralization of power in 1860-1865.   Communism offers the Elite the Chance to endure forever, and not just for any paltry “thousand year Reich” but really, and truly, absolutely, forever…….. and to freeze all the rest of society and the human race in subservient, dependent positions…..in awe of and ever respectful of the “Intelligensia” who make it all possible….

De : Jerry O’Neil <oneil@centurytel.net>
A:   Charles E. Lincoln <charles.lincoln@rocketmail.com>
Envoyé le : Mercredi 19 décembre 2012 20h27
Objet : Quote for the Day

“Any man who thinks he can be happy  and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a  closer look at the American Indian.”

Henry Ford

Fred,

Your quote for the Day is very timely!  In today’s paper is the announcement of the beginning of a $1.9 Billion land buyback program for reservation real estate.  The intent of this program is to purchase land from individual Indians and place it in the common tribal trust.  In other words, the federal government is using $1.9 Billion of the Cobell settlement to advance communism on Indian reservations for United States citizens.  This will further the ideals that were set forth by John Collier in the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934.

It is my belief that John Collier wanted to make Indian reservations showcases for the communistic system, to show how wonderful it would be for those living under it.  By now we should all know how good that has actually worked.  Henry Ford was right!

It perplexes me how Native Americans could become U.S. citizens by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924; and relegated to live under communist land ownership only 10 years later.  But given the present similarity between the politics of FDR and of our current federal government under Obama, I suppose it could happen to all of us in the near future.

I believe the land fractionation problem was caused by the conflict between the 1887 Dawes Act, which split tribal lands into individual allotments of 80- to 160-acre parcels, and the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 which placed those parcels in trust to be administered by the federal government or the individual tribes.  Those allotments were inherited by multiple heirs with each passing generation and held in trust for them by the government.  Because of the difficulty of selling land held in trusts administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, there are now more than 92,000 land tracts with 2.9 million fractional interests.

I agree something has to be done about the fractionation, but believe it would be far better to loan this $1.9 Billion to individuals living on the reservations to purchase the other ownership interests on their land and thus allow them to own it in fee simple.

Jerry O’Neil
Representing HD-3
406-892-7602

“Any man who thinks he can be happy  and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a  closer look at the American Indian.”

Henry Ford

Jerry O’Neil Demands Payment in Constitutional Currency, but “All that Glisters is not Gold, Often have you heard that told”. As for me, I was born in Texas and I’d rather be paid in the most traditional of all Indo-European Currencies: Cattle! (OK, I’d take sheep, just to show I’m not prejudiced). Sub-liminal comparison: what is the difference between a Federal Reserve Note and a Viking Ice Skate?

The Best, most honorable and ethical political office-holder I know (State Representative Jerry O’Neil of Kalispell, Montana, who also happens to be one of the most constitutionally rigorous elected officials of the 21st century) has raised one of the oldest and most contentious constitutional issues in the modern history United States: what IS constitutional currency?  Jerry O’Neil Wants to be paid in gold and silver coin.

Although I am very partial to strict construction and enforcement of the constitution as written (especially in clear and unambiguous terms), I also understood that gold and both finite and useless on the one hand, and randomly and irrelevantly distributed in relation to other productive human activities, on the other.  (The huge concentration of the world’s gold in 16th Century Mexico, mid-19th century California, the late 19th century Yukon in Canada, or late-19th/Early 20th Century South Africa never meant that those were the ideal places to live in the world; in fact, the abundant gold in those places led to MANY economic, socio-cultural, and political problems).

The key question in whether to endorse the gold standard is this: if the potential production of human labor is unlimited and infinite, how can the compensation of human labor justly be limited and finite?   On the other hand, Gold is real in the sense of being substantive, tangible and universally recognizable in human cultures all over the world, its recognition as “precious” does not depend on any particular bank or government or even any particular cultural formulation.  

But still, as the Confused but Gold-Rich Aztec told the Gold-hungry Spanish invaders: Gold is not edible.  Gold has no universal practical applicability.   So it is not as useful as cotton, iron or steel.  But neither cotton, iron, nor steel are as easily rendered into currency as completely useless paper, which is totally dependent upon individual banks or governments.

I like to point out that the English word “pecuniary” (matters of or relating to money) is closely related to Spanish “Agro-pecuaria” (the general field of 4H-Agricultural Fairs—”Field & Cattle”).    Our Ancient Indo-European Ancestors up through Roman times knew only one common currency and that was Cattle.   (The Greek preferred “Sheep” and I’m quite fond of Lamb…).  With all due apologies to vegetarians, NOTHING serves better as currency than Cattle (and “Sheep” and “Goats” are also subsumed under Spanish “Agro-pecuaria“).  

If you’re down to your last one pound gold-bar during a war, you may FEEL rich, but if you can’t exchange the gold-bar for food, because of the war, you’re going to starve.  But as an alternative, imagine, if you will, that you’re a neutral non-combatant, in the middle of that great war, down to the your last 16-32 head of cattle (the approximate market value in cattle of one gold bar at present rates, depending on the breed and quality of the cattle), you can not only survive the war without speaking or trading with anyone (assuming you have a few rudimentary tools to butcher and cook your own animals), you may actually end up “richer” at the end of the war even if you’re not trading with any of the combatants, if you care not to slaughter your female cows, take care of the calves, and keep a minimum of one healthy and happy bull around at all times.  

In addition to their widely prized meat, cattle can be used while living as agricultural implements (non-gas-guzzling, in fact gas producing, tractors), their skins can be made into leather for clothing and furniture and their bones and horns can be made into all manner of tools and ornaments.   As a matter of fact, it was a famous and glorious moment in my graduate career at the Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology when Dr. Stephen Williams, then eponymous Peabody Professor, stumped me at my oral exams by showing me an bovine foreleg bone, heavily striated on one side, heavily compressed on the other, with two holes at distal and proximal ends.  I had identified every other piece of Peabody Museum arcana he could throw at me, but I finally gave up on this one: it was a VIKING ICE-SKATE, made of cattle bones.  Try making anything more useful than a paper aeroplane out of Federal Reserve Notes, I dare you…..

Montana State House of Representatives
REP. JERRY O’NEIL    SESSION COMMITTEES:
    TAXATION; ETHICS;
HELENA ADDRESS DURING SESSION:    TRANSPORTATION;
PO BOX 200500    RULES; and
HELENA, MONTANA  59620-0500    LOCAL GOVERNMENT
406-444-4800    
    
    
HOME ADDRESS:    
985 WALSH ROAD    
COLUMBIA FALLS, MONTANA  59912        
406-892-7602; 406-892-7603 FAX     The Big Sky Country    oneil@CenturyTel.net

November 12, 2012

State of Montana Legislative Services
Central Services Office
Post Office Box 201706
Helena, Montana  59620-1706

Re:    Legislator Compensation

Dear Legislative Services:

    Last week I was re-elected to serve the people of House District 3 as their Representative in the Montana Legislature. Once again it will be my privilege to take the oath of office, promising to obey and protect the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Montana.
    When campaigning, some of my constituents informed me I was not honoring my duty to uphold and defend the United States Constitution. The area of their concern is the prohibition, contained in Article I, Section 10, that states, “No state shall – - make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts – -.” They ask me how I, a policy maker for the State of Montana, can ignore this clear constitutional prohibition.
    Over the 10 years I have previously served in the legislature I have considered this a trivial matter that would show me to be out of step with our national rulers if I made an issue out of it. I did not want to be branded as a fanatic over an issue of no consequence.
    Today I am looking at this issue in a new light. When I was going to my constituents homes I agreed with them the most important issue for the coming legislative session will be to protect them from the economic debacle hanging over our heads.
    With just a cursory look at history we know a country that lives beyond its means faces dire consequences. Having a $16,000,000,000,000 national debt is a warning sign we can only ignore at our peril. Having such a debt and allowing it to increase unchecked is an invitation for national suicide.
    It is very likely the bottom will fall out from under the U.S. dollar. Only so many dollars can be printed before they have no value. The Keynesian era of financing government with debt appears to be close to its demise.
    If and when that happens, how can we in the Montana Legislature protect our constituents? – The only answer I can come up with is to honor my oath to the U.S. Constitution and request that your debt to me be paid in gold and silver coins that will still have value when the U.S. dollar is reduced to junk status. I therefore request my legislative pay to be in gold and silver coins that are unadulterated with base metals.
    I am not asking for you to give me gold and silver American Eagles at their face value of $50.00 and $1.00,  but rather at their current market prices that today are $1,801.00 and $35.28. Hopefully this will be an example for our Montana citizens and prompt them to also have some of their own wealth in money that has intrinsic value.
    Yours truly,
    Jerry O’Neil

Re: Really Bad Patriot Mythology—When Ideas can be applied practically, stick with them….when they only lead you down rabbit-trails…..”just say ‘no’”….

I have had friends and mentors present some of those ideas to me for close to 40 years. The conclusion I have came to is, if there is something to these theories I still don’t know how to use it to my benefit. In my battles to clean up our legal system I have had more positive affect by holding up a sign in front of the courthouse letting the public know the judge was unfair or dishonest than I believe I could have had by standing mute or saying the court does not have jurisdiction over me. I have also used my campaigns for political and judicial office as a soapbox to inform the public to some affect. Maybe someone can use those ideas to gain some advantage. Although it took a lot of patience and the help of Charles Lincoln, Roger Kehew and others, I am proud of our contribution to getting the Montana Supreme Court to come out with the attached opinion using methods that made sense to me.

I carried a couple of bills during the last legislative session that would have helped the system some more. It is too bad they were killed in the process. Would you like to help get similar bills passed in the coming session if I am lucky enough to get re-elected?

Jerry O’Neil
Montana HD 3
406-892-7602

Treason against the Constitution in the Senate, Treason by the Executive Branch, “Treason against the Constitution” as defined by the Courts: Our Government Hates Freedom and Subverts the Constitution Daily

Treason in the Senate, summarized in a newscast:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv1O6goo7qE&feature=share

Senator Mark Kirk (Republican from Illinois) speaks in favor of the too weak and only belatedly offer “Feinstein Amendment”, which failed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBsaePlbLJk&feature=related

But Senators Feinstein and 92 others voted in FAVOR of the Unamended, Unlimited “indefinite detention” version of Senate 1867—Senator Kirk correctly says this bill is blatantly unconstitutional, that the bill unconstitutionally transfers the power to “indict” on charges of terrorism from the grand juries mandated by the Sixth Amendment to the President, and thereby gives dictatorial powers to the President.  Senator Kirk also correctly identifies this Bill as one of the greatest assaults on freedom ever to have taken place.  But the Senate, 93-7, bulled forward and apparently decided to “leave it to the Courts”, and the Courts have no will to overturn a statute approved by 93 Senators.  Scalia in particular seems to believe that every Constitutional provision is effectively subject to legislative limitation and abrogation.  Anthony Kennedy is the last even remotely “libertarian” justice on the Court.

If the prisons are overcrowded now, how many more prisons will be needed once all the Antiabortion Protesters, Tea Party Members, Occupy Wall Street and related movements, and Antiwar Protestors are gathered up and detained indefinitely?  THIS IS THE END OF AMERICA FOLKS: MAKE NO DECISION—DIANNE FEINSTEIN and BARBARA BOXER BOTH VOTED FOR IT!

Good time in the midst of this debate for us to remember what is the historical context of and evidence for terrorism in this country since 9/11:

http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/

and what has been done to people who question the facts of 9/11 just this year, PRIOR to the enactment of Senate Bill 1867 and the “National Defense Reauthorization Act.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIU9j_qwzOE&feature=player_embedded#!

and what former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neil said was the truth about the planning of the war against Iraq, how it was planned from George W. Bush’s inauguration in January 2001 forward, with Iraqi oil and the removal of Saddam Hussein as the main purposes—despite Bush’s campaign promises to the contrary in 2000:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMCxheXPjtc&feature=related&mid=546

The Concept of “Treason against the Constitution” traces back to this March 5, 1821 Opinion rendered in the case of Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. 264, 5 L.Ed. 257.  Treason against the Constitution can, as a matter of fact, ONLY be committed inside the United States of America, not elsewhere, and the only people with real power to commit treason against the constitution are those who subvert it by infringing and violating its protections for the people.  A very interesting historical read, and if anyone asks you where the idea of “Treason against the Constitution” ever came from, well, this is it:

Cohens_v_Virginia_19_US_264_Judicial_Treason

That Cohens case has been cited quite recently, both in Justice Ginsburg’s opinion and Justice Stevens’ concurrence in Vicki Lynn Marshall v. E. Pierce Marshall,  547 U.S. 293; 126 S. Ct. 1735; 164 L. Ed. 2d 480 (2006), in trying to dispose of the Constitutionally Treasonous “Rooker-Feldman” Doctrine of Federal abstention from hearing collateral constitutional challenges to certain state court decisions (which Doctrine Justice Stevens pronounced “dead” at the end of his concurrence, although an “undead” Vampiric Rooker-Feldman perniciously continues to haunt the Federal Courts ever since then in spite  of his dictum—if elected to the U.S. Senate, I will submit legislation to outlaw and overturn the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and restore the balance of powers by review to State-Federal relations).

But seriously, the attached (sent to me by Montana State Senator Jerry O’Neil) is JUST an example of the people who will now be called and considered TERRORISTS (almost for sure) under Senate Bill 1867 if (once) Obama signs it into law.  You see, it appears some people are getting fed up with the fed, and these people are ALL going to be indefinitely detained as terrorists, you mark my word.  Yes, Gentle Reader, your Friends and Neighbors will Start Disappearing and they will soon be arrested without warrant or indictment and carted off with their heads in black bags to indefinite detention on President Obama’s (or President Newt Gingrich’s) orders, HAVE NO DOUBT!  Remember that Newt Gingrich was the chief sponsor of the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act which preceded the Patriot Act by Five Years, and the Patriot Act mainly served to enact into law those provisions which Congress was not yet ready to pass over the Constitution to promulgate prior to 9-11 (which just shows you why 9-11 was so completely necessary for the government, right?)

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/armed-and-ready-new-mexico-residents-defy-government

As of 3:23 AM on Monday, December 5, 2011, Charles Edward Lincoln, III is the ONLY announced candidate for U.S. Senator from California (including Dianne Feinstein and Orly Taitz) to have announced his opposition to Senate Bill 1867.  Orly Taitz continues to live in her dreamworld that it is sufficiently “Patriotic” to question Obama’s eligibility for President and ignore all other grave issues facing this Country.  Dianne Feinstein continues to believe that she is sufficiently well-esconced in the Bankers-Financial Club and Military-Industrial Complex Establishment that she cannot possibly lose her seat in the senate—if she chooses to run again—EVEN IF she voted for a bill to which she proposed an amendment which failed, and thus she failed to protect the people of the United States or California.  It amazes me that not even Rand Paul offered to filibuster this bill.

If you would like to help the fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens, please support Charles Edward Lincoln, III, for U.S. Senator from California.  We are fighting one of the most entrenched establishment seats in Congress—Dianne Feinstein who tried to make cosmetic changes in S.B. 1867 to hide and disguise its truly oppressive nature (and to claim she had “done the best she could”, perhaps?)—and we ask you to send your check or money order to Lincoln-for-Senate 2012 to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, 952 Gayley Avenue, #143, Los Angeles, California 90024.  Call 310-773-6023 for more information.  

Understanding the law as it is vs. living in denial (Orly Taitz & Gary Kreep before the Ninth Circuit)

If elected to the United States Senate, I will fight for the enactment of laws which restore power to the people and diminish the power of the United States Government at every possible turn and in every possible way.  I will seek to reform the judiciary, by the abolition of judicial immunity, but also by seeking Congressional override of the cases and rules which have all but closed the Federal Courts to the people of the United States with regard to any questions of real importance.  I have learned by trial-and-error, quite literally, that the judicial system and the laws of the United States now support an oligarchy rather than a democratic-republic, and that in doing so they support what Dwight D. Eisenhower christened the “Military-Industrial Complex”, except that the only industry really left in the United States now is the manufacture of nearly worthless money through “credit” backed only by the bullying threats of the United States Military-Industrial Complex, which has since the end of World War II engaged in a nearly perfect Orwellian constant, continuous war against enemies whose identities are constantly shifting.  At the end of 1984, of course, Winston Smith, aka “6079 Smith W”, ”had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother”.   It was that love of Big Brother which shaped the world which Aldous Huxley had portrayed in Brave New World, published 18 years before Orwell’s 1984, and it is something very much like Winston’s love of Big Brother which seems to dominate the American media and popular culture lifestyle all over America today.  I, for one, do not love Big Brother or anyone who loves him, although I might forgive and try to educate some of the latter.

To that end I will tell you that even many of those who call themselves Patriots live just as much in denial as Winston Smith did at the end of 1984: they believe that the law is on their side, and that if they just keep trying, they can make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and restore democratic values in America without wiping the slate virtually clean.  I demur.  I have been involved in many causes over the past twenty years, some more catastrophic than others.  The only consistent “winner” in this fight I know is among the most modest of leaders, with among the most modest of goals, namely former State Senator and now State Representative Jerry O’Neil of Kalispell, Montana, who lives in the beautiful shadow of the Continental Divide and Glacier National Park.   But I have spent all too much time with one of the most consistent “losers” in the game—and so it was

With more than a little curiosity I tuned in to watch Orly Taitz & Gary Kreep “do their best” before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on May 2, 2011, in Pasadena.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBLA2NdQZoM.  There are many personal, professional, and political reasons for my interest.  As is fairly well known, I had worked with Orly, been represented by Gary against Orly, and long before either of those experiences, I knew the Courtroom because I had worked with Judge Harry Pregerson, as well as Judge Alex Kozinski whenever they sat in Pasadena, during my first actual job in law which was a judicial extern for Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals*.  I found the Judges of the Ninth Circuit very high minded and informal to deal with, whether liberal or conservative—even as a humble extern I was invited separately to the homes of Judges Pregerson and Reinhardt (even met Dean Pregerson before he was a U.S. District Judge—I always cannot help but wonder whether Dad still “reviews” his son’s homework—or does dad recuse himself from any appeals from his sons’ cases).

But I also found the subject matter of the Obama eligibility case interesting in 2009, while I was in fact working on it, and my interest has not much diminished, nor has my concern that this country rapidly is going to the dogs.

The arguments of counsel disappointed but did not surprise me.  What disappointed me most was that neither Gary nor Orly gave even a single reason which would have convinced me (if I were still an extern working on the case for one of the Judges) why the Court of Appeals should have granted the Plaintiff’s motion to reverse Judge Carter (when I could have thought of at least a few).

Among the greatest mysteries of 2009 (to me at least) is why Orly failed or refused (I think it was refused) just really and carefully to read Judge Carter’s Order of dismissal.  Because the truth is that Judge Carter’s order was about as positive and a wonderful order as an order granting a Motion to Dismiss could possibly be for a Plaintiff.  Carter gave us a very well-thought out roadmap of how to restructure the complaint, which had been cobbled together EXTREMELY quickly because of Orly’s paranoia—or her very genuine desire and determination to lose the case.

And yes, I still believe that Judge Carter was initially very favorably disposed to the case and very willing to tolerate Orly’s psychologically unfathomable behavior in and relating to Court.  Or at least I believe that Judge Carter was favorably disposed while I was working with Orly to temper her madness—before and until Orly backed Carter into a corner and forced him to clarify his original order of dismissal was WITH prejudice.

Orly was just determined to throw the case. I remain convinced of it.   She was determined to make a hash out of everything she touched so that she could either (a) do what she was planning to do, to destroy the eligibility movement or (b) achieve status as a martyr in her own mind, an enigma in her own time.  Orly never listened to a thing I said or suggested about the case or litigation strategy 99% of the time, but under the rules, a district court order of dismissal not accompanied by a final judgment of dismissal under Rule 58 is always presumed to be without when it is not specified to be with prejudice, or some other rule or circumstance requires such a determination.   I told Orly—and she didn’t care or didn’t listen—or her “orders” were that she not listen.  And so she ranted and raved that Judge Carter was a traitor and that some pimply-faced fresh lawclerk from Perkins Coie was an Obot planted by the President of the United States in Judge Carter’s Court to give the Judge instructions and orders on what to do and how to do it.

If Orly had really wanted even to have a chance to win—she would have listened to me and just carefully reworked the Barnett et al. Complaint—and followed Judge Carter’s instructions—and I think we could have—and either we might have made it to discovery and at least a Motion for Summary Judgment or else the appeal of this case would have been quite different—”if things had been different, well, things would have been different.”

But as it was, the sole question before the Court was whether the Plaintiff’s had injury standing to bring suit.  Gary Kreep all but totally conceded the repeated question that the case was filed too late for his (former client) candidates to have any special standing, and Orly Taitz simply wasted her time saying less than nothing pertinent, trying instead to make an issue of the President’s April 27, 2011 release of a document which was not and because of its timing could not possibly be before the Court of Appeals.

Accordingly, I submit that the ideas I framed and drafted as Orly’s lawclerk were the best in the case (and if elected to the United States Senate I promise to push for the enactment of laws enshrining these ideas as litigation rights in the United States Code): that the unique circumstances of the Presidential eligibility before Court more closely resembled Flast v. Cohen taxpayer standing than anything else, in that if taxpayers were not afforded standing to object, then certain clauses of the constitution (among them Article II, Section 1, and the establishment clause of the First Amendment) are left without any advocates for judicial remedy whatsoever, and the Constitution was written to constitute a document of “fundamental law,” not just a series of non-binding resolutions to be followed at political convenience or discretion.

Had I been able to appear before the Ninth Circuit, I would have argued for taxpayer standing together with my firmly held belief that the Constitution expressly grants First Amendment standing to petition the Courts for redress of any and all grievances, and that the Ninth Amendment reservation of rights also accords similar standing to petition for redress of any and all grievances.  The second best line of argument presented to Judge Carter was that concerning the obligation and remedies available to those who took specific oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States, especially Military Officers.

All these issues were before the Court, because I drafted documents which put them before Judge Carter, although he largely ignored them, yet Orly and Gary did not pick up on these details at all.  It is almost as if, in particular Orly, really wanted to lose.

Orly had failed to develop any of the ideas of Flast v. Cohen taxpayer standing or First or Ninth Amendment Standing before Judge Carter—before or after she accused him of treason (which I would like to make very clear I repeatedly counseled her NOT to do) and she did not even mention them in her oral argument.  The Court of Appeals Judges had little or nothing to say to Orly or ask her.  They probably knew anything they said would have just encouraged her.  My collaboration with Orly has caused a lot of problems in my life.  That’s still a story that hasn’t been completely told and this is not the place to tell it.

So, just for the historical record, or for a partly egotistical, partly altruistic, attempt to salvage some of the ideas and pass them on for future use in other cases, I attach the two documents I consider to be the “best” of all Orly’s filings in connection with the question of whether Barack Hussein Obama should occupy the White House or not, and yes, I did have something to do with their creation while I was overlooking the Pacific from Suite 4 of the Casa del Mar in San Clemente.  It was a pleasant place where I spent five-and-a-half-to-six of the most pleasant months of my recent life, only five-and-a-half-to-six weeks of which were spent in the professional and personal company of Orly Taitz.   What can I say—I kind of wish she had stayed and been a sane person, but then she just wouldn’t be Orly I guess.   We could have done a lot of things, and had a lot of worthwhile projects and case number 09-cv-00082-DOC was not even close to the most important of the projects we needed to do—although it was the most famous and the only one Orly ever cared about.

The documents in question to which I refer here are:

09-cv-00082-DOC – Flast v Cohen

09-cv-00082-DOC Motion for Leave to File Surreply

09-cv-00082-DOC – Plaintiffs’ Sur-Reply 10-01-09

(*There being no such things as judicial “interns” in the Ninth Circuit or CDCA, the job description for a “judicial extern” still  sounds to most folks very much like an “internship”, and J.D. students compete for these positions much in the manner that J.D. recipients compete for post-J.D. “judicial clerkships”)

Jerry O’Neil wins major victory against the Montana Bar, strikes a blow against “Legal” Monopoly restrictions on freedom of speech and association

Of all my friends, I think I brag about knowing Jerry O’Neil more than anyone else, even though I have only known him since December 2004 or January 2005.  Jerry O’Neil is a great American Patriot and a hero to all who fight against corruption and oppression on behalf of the individual citizen.  He has never been to law school, but knows the law and applies it better and more constructively than 99% of the lawyers I have ever met.  Jerry: CONGRATULATIONS.  This is Jerry’s own:

PRESS RELEASE            May 24, 2010         For immediate release

For more information contact:

Jerry O’Neil
985 Walsh Road
Columbia Falls, MT   59901
406-892-7602
oneil@centurytel.net

LEGISLATIVE CANDIDATE JERRY O’NEIL WINS LANDMARK COURT CASE

Former State Senator Jerry O’Neil, presently a candidate for House District 3 for the Columbia Falls area, has achieved a historic victory in his ongoing crusade to increase public access to Montana’s judicial system.
According to O’Neil, the Montana Attorney General’s Office has dismissed their case against him rather than make an unsuccessful attempt to persuade a jury it is “deceptive” for an Independent Paralegal to advertise competitive services in the
Attorneys section of the yellow pages.
The complaint against O’Neil was originally filed by the Montana Attorney General in 2007. Earlier this year, the AG’s Office was denied a summary judgment motion that they had requested. Their motion would have taken away O’Neil’s right to a jury trial.
Judge Sherlock in Helena allowed the Attorney General’s staff until May 24th to answer several of O’Neil’s discovery demands and to explain why they could not identify a single person who claimed to have been deceived by O’Neil’s alleged deceptive advertising. Instead of admitting there was no deception, the Attorney General’s Office chose to dismiss their case.
O’Neil is also asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to increase the allowable scope of para-professionals’ abilities to help the public access their judicial system. Defendants in that case are the Montana State Bar Association and the Montana Supreme Court Commission on Unauthorized Practice, which the Montana Supreme Court recently found to be operating outside of their Constitutional jurisdiction.
O’Neil says, “This win, along with the
Montana Supreme Court disbanding their Commission on Unauthorized Practice of Law, will make it easier for people of modest means to receive legal services. I am proud and grateful to have made a contribution to the publics access to their judicial system.”

Completing the First 1% of the Third Millenium….

I remember New Year’s Eve, December 31, 1999 in New Orleans—what an amazing party it was.  My then 8 year old son rode on my shoulders as we were crushed among the crowds at Jackson Square.  I recall we had a really good view and nearly a perfect vantage point at one early point about an hour before midnight, but got distracted by something and then by midnight we were just in the square crushed by what seemed like millions, looking at the fireworks from the Riverwalk by the Old Jax Brewery.   Elena and I had discussed when deciding it was time to “get pregnant” with Charlie that it would be fun to have a child who would remember the transition between the 20th and the 21st century, and having Charlie in 1992 was almost the last chance to have such a child.  Charlie was born during Hurricane Andrew in 1992 on August 23, 1992, in Palm Beach, Florida.  It was an amazing event.  We were on the first page of the Palm Beach Post the next day—a beautiful picture of Elena holding Charlie with me on the telephone in the background.  We knew we were going to have a boy and it was a foregone conclusion he was going to be Charles Edward Lincoln IV, but we added the name “Andrew” as a second middle name, and among other oddities, the windows of St. Mary’s Hospital in West Palm Beach were all duck-taped with gigantic X-es, which on the horizontal hospital windows looked like transparent Scottish flags bearing St. Andrews’ Crosses.

This holiday vacation, as I mentioned before, is the first time since 2001-2002 that Charlie and I have been able to spend the entire Christmas and New Year’s holiday together.  The fact that we have done so (in California) as well as the fact that we spent the past two summers together in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is a tribute to Elena K. Lincoln’s spirit and willingness to compromise and/or admit de facto defeat or mistake, in the face of her de jure victory in Court, which was the event or series of events which changed my life, and caused me to take the paths I have taken in life since 2002.

Yes, during the past decade, the first 1% of the Third Millenium, I dedicated my life in large part to attacking the Texas Family Code, a tradition which I continue now in Florida, and would like to begin in California.  The Texas Williamson County Family Court establishment was my first great confrontation with a major establishment.  The City of Lago Vista Police abuse cases in my hometown/backyard in 1997-98, which ultimately got me disbarred in the W.D. Texas and , were just a very mild warmup to what became a major anti-establishment civil rights and reform career.  Lago Vista Police Chief Frank Miller and his “prize” officer Bart Turek were my first major civil rights adversaries, but I did not hate them or even particularly dislike them.   They had just instituted and upheld a misguided and injurious police policy in Lago Vista.  The people I came to hate were those who destroyed my family and took my son away from me for during 2002-2007, with only a few respites.  I have dedicated my life to exposing the lies and the evil embodied by Williamson County Judge Michael P. Jergins, Laurie J. Nowlin, J. Randall Grimes, and Michael Davis, as well as their henchment such as the crew of psychologists including Don Jones.

But this moment, these two weeks with my son, overlooking the Pacific Ocean, with the low hills of Catalina Island in the background, is one of the sweetest moments of my life, and I thank God, and Elena for it.  I should note that I invited Elena here to share this moment not once but many times.  There’s enough sleeping space here for three to be in private rooms, as was proved when Peyton and Charlie were both here for Thanksgiving.  But Elena demurred, preferring to go to Cancun, ironically enough, since the Yucatan Peninsula was where Elena and I met in 1985.

Anyhow, to everyone out there, I wish a glorious and prosperous New Year 2010, and I hope that whatever happens to me, Charlie, and Elena, and to everyone else, that the next decade will be as full of emotional, psychological, and spiritual growth as the past decade has been for me.  In every defeat and setback I have found the inspiration to move forward and see deeper truths and meanings, and for such experiences I can only be thankful to all who gave me such opportunities, even if they meant me harm by doing so.  The absolute rock bottom low-point of this decade for me was clearly the death of my grandmother Helen in May 2001.  But not a day goes by that I do not recall fondly and given thanks for the century of life my grandmother enjoyed on earth and at all the time I shared with her and her husband, my grandfather Al, who predeceased her by 21 years in 1980.   The high points of the decade were all spent with my son, and none were higher than our days on Harvard Square and in California.

On this beautiful New Year’s Day looking West, I remember and give thanks to all my good friends and allies during the past ten years (whether we’re in contact to this day or not), in particular to my trustee, Peyton Yates Freiman, a more honest and truer soul does not exist!   I also recall my oldest friends Helen S. Carr (the only person not related to me by blood who has remembered every birthday, Christmas, and intercardinal solstice or equinox to me since the 1970s) and John K. Naland, but also to my newest best friends just made in 2009, Robert J. Ponte, Dennis & Milenne DeLeon, Renada Nadine March, and (irony of irony’s, because I first heard of her as an adversary) Lisa Liberi.  In this transitory life, in this “shake and bake” world we live in, there are many people who were once important to me whom I never see anymore, even if I have not forgotten them, but I hope that my new friends from 2009 will remain with me always.

No inventory of my most steadfast friends could ever be complete without “honorable mention” of Lisa Cook, my sister-in-law in Michigan, who talked to me and understood me and listened to me for years when to do so meant that her own husband’s family (my wife Elena’s relatives) would heap scorn upon her during “the war years” when Elena was calling me “Not Family, but Cancer in the House.”  Lisa was always there for me and I tried always to be there for her, even when nobody else was.  Charlie’s Brazilian Godmother Helir Arlotta from Palm Beach and Tarpon Springs, Florida, falls into this same category….  I don’t have Lisa’s new telephone number (I tried to reach her over the holidays) and Helir has vanished, but we do not and will not forget each other, I’m sure.

Throughout it all, the priests at St. Luke’s-on-the-Lake in Austin provided genuine friendship and support—and I will never forget them even though I might never spend much time in Austin again.  Father James P. Jameson, a fellow Harvardian, Father Philip May, and Father Mike Wyckoff were there for me (during the “war years” with Elena) when I had no one else to whom I could turn.  They are true Christians, true gentlemen, and truer friends than I ever deserved.  Father May was actually willing to meet with me and Charlie in secret in 2005, to provide “aid and comfort” like the Church Martyrs of old….

I remember more often that they will imagine possible the close relationship I had over three years of tumultuous conflict with my steadfast attorneys during the “War Years” (withe Elena of 2003-2006 Francis Wayne Williams Montenegro and Valorie Wells Davenport.  They worked mostly for free, certainly without any profit, and their dedication to my cause was incomparable, encapsulated in Francis Williams’ statement that he would support me even if threatened with a firing squad, and I believe he meant it at the moment, even though he and Valorie, once actually faced with an “offer they couldn’t refuse” by way of extortion or a “constructive bribe” from the Deputy Texas Attorney General James Carlton Todd, Mike Davis, J. Randall Grimes, and the obviously intimidated visiting Judge James F. Clawson (who replaced Jergins after the Federal suits), ultimately gave up the struggle rather than face sanctions.  Francis and Valorie also introduced me to two good people Corinne Irwin and Rod A. Dal Sasso.  I remember and pray for my late father Charles Edward, Jr., who supported my struggles until he could not stand to hear about them anymore.

I remember my friends in the Southern District of Texas early mortgage note battles: Dan Swank, Jacques S. Jaikaran, Mike Palma, Robert Bruce, and David A. Sibley (who despite some ironic vicissitudes, started off a friend and returned to friendly status) from 2006 and  Jon Drew Roland, my first trustee and closest friend and ally from 2004-2007.

Daniel Louis Simon of Liberty Hill joined my crusade against the Texas Family Courts and Code and has become a steadfast and probably last-long friend.  He holds the dubious distinction of having been sanctioned for following my lead against the Texas Family Courts and Code by Judge Walter Smith, who sanctioned Dan and me jointly and severally to the tune of $150,000.00 in March 2008 for the sole purpose of preventing us from continuing our crusade against the Texas Family Code in Federal Court.  His continued friendship and support is a great comfort to me, and I hope I can provide the same for him.

Between January 2005 and September 2007, I went through major ideological transformations in my life, realizing that the “normal” paths to reform were all but closed in the United States.   It was during these years that I also met and first had the privilege of meeting and working with Senator Jerry O’Neil of Columbia Falls and Kalispell, Montana.  Many friends, even on this ten year list, have already come and gone out of my life, but I hope Jerry will remain my friend for all the rest of the days we might both be living on earth.  He is the truest Patriot I know, one of the greatest constitutional scholars of the “Old School”, and one of the most honorable men on earth (in addition to being, as my son says, “the coolest guy I ever met”).

I remember my Florida friends and accomplices Nancy Jo Grant, Bob Hurt, Bill Trudelle, Pearl Lanier Bryan, and Kathy Ann Garcia-Lawson.  Nancy is a hero who should be known to all Patriotic Americans.  Bob, Bill, & Pearl have provided me with so much support and courage.  Pearl is a warrior among warriors.  Kathy Garcia-Lawson is in so many ways my soulmate, with regard to our parallel paths crusading against (respectively, the Texas and Florida) Family Law and Domestic Relations Courts.  Kathy is such a paragon of the devoted, virtuous spouse committed to and still in love with her husband, even after five years since he left her, I can only stand in awe of her.  Kathy breathes new meaning into the words “family” and “until death do we part.”  Kathy’s funny, sassy, and spunky daughter Alexandra, and all of their friends whom I have met in Palm Beach Gardens, especially Claire and Rebecca.  I love Kathy, her character, and her mind, and hope that she and I will also forever be friends.  And yes, in connection with a person to whom Kathy introduced me, I even will toast on this day Orly Taitz whose affection and company “woke me up” in so many ways up through November 4, 2009—May she find peace and harmony and achieve freedom from want and freedom from fear sufficient that she might break free from the golden shackles that hold her prisoner in what may be a comfortable or even palatial prison.

And I would especially like to remember Vance Fecteau and Moshe Leichner, whom the Federal government continues to hold in prison, who were my closest friends during the worst 54 day period of my life, and who made even that extreme low moment a much brighter, more enlightened, and so more bearable moment.  I doubt that it will happen within the next decade, but I pray for a day when America and the rest of the world will be truly free again, when 1-2% of the population will no longer be incarcerated or on supervised release of some sort, when crimes will be established and measured only by their actual injury to others, so that no person will ever again be incarcerated merely to increase the arrest rates and the prison population so that large corporations owned by major politicians can make larger profits.  I can honestly say that all my experiences in the past decade have educated me and made me a better person and patriot.