It is the job of local,state, and federal prosecutors to enforce and prosecute all laws with fairness and equity and not deny any person the equal protection of the law (14th and 5th Amendments. This Link Political Patronage Briefly reviews how the political patronage system entices local prosecutors and others to refuse to enforce the law. This Link former US Attorney General Eric Holder also addressed serioius abuses of prosecutorial authority

US Congressman Bill Pascell has efforts to have nursing homes regulated by CMS by US Department of HHS which was revolked by Trump Administration.2 Million dead (250,000 a year) since 2014 as a result of medical error. The online databases show that actually began paying in 2010 to deny patients treatment for pre-existing conditions and block prosecution:

9-23-2009-Attorney General Eric Holder today issued a memorandum instituting new Department of Justice policies and procedures in order to ensure greater accountability in the government's assertion of the state secrets privilege in litigation. "This policy is an important step toward rebuilding the public's trust in the government's use of this privilege while recognizing the imperative need to protect national security," Holder said. "It sets out clear procedures that will provide greater accountability and ensure the state secrets privilege is invoked only when necessary and in the narrowest way possible."

Earlier this year, Attorney General Holder ordered senior Justice officials to conduct a review of the Department's existing state secrets policies and procedures, including an internal evaluation of the pending cases in which the privilege had been invoked. The results of that internal review were shared with an interagency group comprised of officials from the Department and the intelligence community, which provided input into the formulation of the new policies and procedures. The new policy and procedures take effect October 1, 2009.

The Attorney General's memorandum outlines several aspects of the new administrative process that increases accountability and oversight, including:

Facilitation of Court Review – The policy ensures that before approving invocation of the state secrets privilege in court, the Department must be satisfied that there is strong evidentiary support for it. In order to facilitate meaningful judicial scrutiny of the privilege assertions, the Department will submit evidence to the court for review.

Significant Harm Standard – The policy adopts a more rigorous standard to govern when the Department will defend assertions of the state secrets privilege in new cases. Under the new policy, the Department will now defend the assertion of the privilege only to the extent necessary to protect against the risk of significant harm to national security.

Narrow Tailoring of Privilege Assertions – Under this policy, the Department will narrowly tailor the use of the states secrets privilege whenever possible to allow cases to move forward in the event that the sensitive information at issue is not critical to the case. As part of this policy, the Department also commits not to invoke the privilege for the purpose of concealing government wrongdoing or avoiding embarrassment to government agencies or officials.

State Secrets Review Committee – A State Secrets Review Committee will be formed consisting of senior Department officials designated by the Attorney General who will evaluate any recommendation by the Assistant Attorney General of the relevant Division to invoke the privilege. The Committee would make its recommendation to the Associate Attorney General, who would review and refer to the Deputy Attorney General for a final recommendation to the Attorney General or his designee.

Approval by the Attorney General The policy requires the approval of the Attorney General prior to the invocation of the states secret privilege, except when the Attorney General is recused or unavailable. Previously, the invocation of the state secrets privilege could be approved by the appropriate Assistant Attorney General. Referral to Inspectors General. The policy implements a referral process to relevant Offices of Inspector General whenever there are credible allegations of government wrongdoing in a case, but the assertion of state secrets privilege might preclude the case from moving forward. Under the policy, the Department also commits to provide periodic reports on all cases in which the privilege is asserted to the appropriate oversight Committees in Congress.

Policies and Procedures Governing Invocation of the State Secrets Privilege

AP WASHINGTON: The Justice Department has reined in electronic surveillance by the National Security Agency after finding the agency had improperly accessed American phone calls and e-mails.

The problems were discovered during a review of the intelligence activities, the Justice Department said in a statement Wednesday night. The New York Times, which first reported the matter on its Web site, said the NSA had been improperly intercepting communications by Americans.

In its statement, the Justice Department said it has taken "comprehensive steps to correct the situation and bring the program into compliance." The Justice Department did not elaborate on what problems it found. Once corrective measures were taken, Attorney General Eric Holder sought authorization for renewing the surveillance program, officials said. Government officials have also briefed lawmakers on the issue.

Domestic eavesdropping has been a contentious issue since 2005, when the Times revealed that for years following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the NSA intercepted international phone conversations and e-mails involving U.S. citizens without a warrant. That program ended in 2007, and the following year Congress passed legislation requiring the NSA to get court approval to monitor the purely domestic communications of Americans who came under suspicion.

ABC News By Jennifer Loven Washington Dec 17, 2005 President George Bush acknowledge he authorized the National Security Agency to engage in extensive survillence and covert activities against American citizens outside of the bounds of the law.

Cost to print these documents at Kinko & Computer usage was $95,00
3 Hours at $110.00 Hour=$330.00
Total $445.00

1. #468700010170747Delivered Signed for by: LMILES To US Senator Patrick Leahy Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 2, 2009 Delivery date Nov 4, 2009 3:08 PM DestinationHyattsville, MD.

2. #468700010170747Delivered Signed for by: LMILES To US Senator Patrick Leahy Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 2, 2009 Delivery date Nov 4, 2009 3:08 PM DestinationHyattsville, MD.

1. #468700010170747Delivered Signed for by: LMILES To US Senator Patrick Leahy Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 2, 2009 Delivery date Nov 4, 2009 3:08 PM DestinationHyattsville, MD.

2. 468700010170754 Delivered Signed for by: MHERNANDEZ To US Congressman Lamar Smith. Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 2, 2009 Delivery date Nov 5, 2009 10:52 AM Destination San Antonio, TX

3. 746677810043463 Delivered Delivered Signed for by: PPALMER Director Robert Mueller of Federal Bureau of Investigations Delivered Signed for by: PPALMER Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 3, 2009 Delivery date Nov 5, 2009 2:39 PM Destination Washington, DC

4. 746677810043470 Delivered Signed for by: CANDERSON US Circuit Court of Appeals District of Columbia Delivered Signed for by: CANDERSON Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 3, 2009 Delivery date Nov 5, 2009 1:54 PM Destination Hyattsville, MD

The House Judiciary Committee released a 700 page report on efforts by White House Advisor Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to fire New Mexico US Attorney David Iglesia in order to tamper with the bar of justice in the State of New Mexico. report can be viewed on line at this link

2005 White House "Decision" to fire David Iglesias – It has previously been known that New Mexico Republicans pressed for Iglesias to be removed because they did not like his decisions on vote fraud cases. New White House documents show that Rove and his office were involved in this effort no later than May 2005 (months earlier than previously known) - for example, in May and June 2005, Rove aide Scott Jennings sent e-mails to Tim Griffin (also in Rove's office) asking "what else I can do to move this process forward" and stressing that "I would really like to move forward with getting rid of NM US ATTY." In June 2005, Harriet Miers e-mailed that a "decision" had been made to replace Iglesias. At this time, DOJ gave Iglesias top rankings, so this decision was clearly not just the result of the White House following the Department's lead as Rove and Miers have maintained.1

Iglesias criticized by Rove aide for not "doing his job on" Democratic Congressional Candidate Patricia Madrid – An October 2006 e-mail chain begun by Representative Heather Wilson criticized David Iglesias for not bringing politically useful public corruption prosecutions in the run up to the 2006 elections. Scott Jennings forwarded Wilson's email to Karl Rove and complained that Iglesias had been "shy about doing his job on Madrid," Wilson's opponent in the 2006 Congressional race. Just weeks after this e-mail, Iglesias’ name was placed on the final firing list.2

An "agitated" Rove pressed Harriet Miers to do something about Iglesias just weeks before Iglesias was placed on the removal list – Karl Rove phoned Harriet Miers during a visit to New Mexico in September 2006 – according to Miers’ testimony, Rove was "agitated" and told her that Iglesias was "a serious problem and he wanted something done about it."3

Senator Domenici personally asked Bush's Chief of Staff Josh Bolten to have Iglesias replaced – In October 2006, Senator Domenici stepped up his campaign to have Iglesias replaced. According to White House phone logs and emails, as well as Rove's own testimony, Domenici spoke with President Bush's Chief of Staff Josh Bolten about Iglesias on October 5, 2006, and during October 2006, Domenici or his staff spoke with Karl Rove at least four times.4

Todd Graves removed in Rove–approved deal with Republican Senator – Kansas City U.S. Attorney Todd Graves was removed as part of a White House–brokered deal with U.S. Senator Kit Bond. In exchange for the administration firing Graves, Senator Bond agreed to lift his hold on an Arkansas judge nominated to the Eighth Circuit federal appeals court. A White House e-mail stated that "Karl is fine" with the proposal.5

Miers obtained favorable statement on Rick Renzi in violation of DOJ policy – When rumors of the FBI investigation of Rep. Rick Renzi surfaced in October, 2006, one of Rove's subordinates contacted Harriet Miers, who called Deputy Attorney General McNulty seeking a possible statement that would have "vindicated" Renzi. Even though this was contrary to standard DOJ policy, such a statement was issued several days later.6

In August 12, 2009 US Senator John Cornyn explained the Senate Committee on Judiciary had finally cut through the layers of lies and bullshit from the Bush Administration to establish that White House Advisor Carl Rove had played a central role in firing the US Attorney David Iglesi for New Mexico for political reasons. Which would explain why the US Attorney never filed a brief in USDC at this time.

Chris Walters
vs.
Michael Astrue
Commissioner SSA
Civil #C080380

1. The ORDER of the Court disappeared in the US Mail and is either lost, missing, or stolen? A Notice of Appeal to US Supreme Court and Answer for ODAR Monday, May 19th, 2008 on technical question for Judical Review SSI Claim from Kinko Copies 4418 Broadway Street, San Antonio, Texas 78209:

Cost to print these documents at Kinko & Computer usage was $150.00
3 Hours at $110.00 Hour=$330.00
Total $480.00

1. #468391510048409 Delivered Signed for by: AWOOD Shipment Dates Ship date May 19, 2008 Delivery date May 27, 2008 9:36 AM Destination Denver, CO To US Congressman Lamar Smith. Shipment Dates Ship date Nov 2, 2009

2. #468391510048416 Delivered Signed for by: JHERNANDEZ Shipment Dates Ship date May 19, 2008 Delivery date May 22, 2008 10:01 AM Destination Albuquerque, NM

3. #468391510048423 Delivered Signed for by: BBECKELHEIMER Shipment Dates Ship date May 19, 2008 Delivery date May 22, 2008 1:31 PM Destination Albuquerque, NM

4. #468391510048430 Delivered Delivered Signed for by: JPORITS Shipment Dates Ship date May 19, 2008 Delivery date May 20, 2008 5:30 PM Destination Dallas, TX

5. #468391510048444 Delivered Signed for by: AZERTUCHE Ship date May 19, 2008 Delivery date May 20, 2008 2:55 PM Destination San Antonio, TX Shipment Dates Ship date May 19, 2008

6. #468415010042160 Delivered Signed for by: DWEHEAM Shipment Dates Ship date May 27, 2008 Delivery date Jun 2, 2008 1:04 PM Destination Falls Church, VA

7. #468415010042177 Delivered Signed for by: MMARTINEZ Shipment Dates Ship date May 27, 2008 Delivery date May 28, 2008 1:30 PM Destination Albuquerque, NM

8. #468415010042184 Delivered Delivered Signed for by: DGAMBLE Shipment Dates hip date May 27, 2008 Delivery date Jun 2, 2008 9:58 AM Destination Washington, DC

9. #To US Supreme Court???? Jonder to Congress was filed May 24, 2008 from Fed Ex Kinko 1001 E University Ave, Las Cruces, NM 88001 Transaction #210110154963:

In 2009 FBI Officials admitted they had been intercepting federal Court ORDERS and other documents for some years under color of Title 18 Chapter 113b Terrorism or the US Patriot Act. Exactly how a Federal Court ORDERs; my SSI check; eye glass prescriptions... threatens the national security remains a profound mystery.

PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt
07/11/2007 13:08:05
PACER Login: cw2281 Client Code:
Description: Docket Report
Search Criteria: 1:07-cv-00257-JCH-RLP
Billable Pages: 2 Cost: 0.16

1. Case Law: Walters v Apfel & Asture CA: SA-97-CA-1313 USDC, WDT and being Affirmed by 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals (99-50174). the Social Security Administration lacks the jurisdictional authority to review the finding of a USDC Judge and is required to request hearings in Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:

2. Case Law: Walters v Astrue UNDC, NM #: 1:07-cv-00257-JCH-RLP The Social Security Commissioner made a determination of fact and law that Chris Walters is disabled and the only review which can be had is Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:

3. Case Law: Walters v Astrue 09-05206 US Circuit Court DC at the request of the parties a 3rd party request to interplead was Quashed and no hearing can be held without the Commissioner filing for a Judicil Review

4. Title 18 USC 1509. Obsruction of Court ORDERS Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime

5. US Supreme Court rulings that all parties are entitled too fair hearing:
a. Fundamental request of due process is opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in meaningful manner. Matthews v. Eldridge VA 1976 96 S.Ct 893, 424 US 319. 47 L.Ed.2d.18

b. The absolute fundamentals of due process of law; are jurisdiction,adequate notice, and a fair hearing US v Certain Parcels of Land in Price George County Md. D.C. Md 1941, 40 F Supp 436

c. Fair Play is the essence of due process Galveston vs.Press Ca1954,74S Ct 737,347 U.S. 522.98 Led.911.

We have a rather large going theft of Court ORDERS, legal instrumentalities,,, which some persons have alleged are being engineered by law enforcement or intelligence persons. Certifed Mail 7008 3230 0001 8958 5146 or USPS IG Complaint 13578487

1. Title 18 USC 402 Contempt

2. Title 18 USC 242Deprivation of rights under color of law

3. Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction of Court ORDER

4. Title 18 USC 1505 Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

5. Title 18 USC CHAPTER 115Treason, Sedition, and Subversive Activities

From CWalters chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
To: herrerachambers@nmcourt.fed.us,
PuglisiChambers@nmcourt.fed.us,
ScottChambers@nmcourt.fed.us,
usanm.webmaster@usdoj.gov
ccnims2006@gmail.com,
chris.saidthanks2006@gmail.com
Date Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Subject Brief obstruction Court ORDER/Interception Brief to 10th Circuit Certified Mail

Addressed To the Honorable
Emaied Too: To the Honorable USDC Judge Judith Herrera
US District Court New Mexico
333 Lomas NW
Albuquerque,New Mexico

Your Honor:

The attached Amicus Curiea brief addressed to 10th US Circuit Court of Appeals cv-08-02094 questioned tampering/obstruction your previous ORDER Walters v Asture Civil Docket For Case #: 1:07-cv-00257-JCH-RLP The text of the brief to the clerk of 10 Cicuit is that the brief and documents mailed by certified US Mail in Denver, CO have apparently intercepted by an unknown 3rd party:

From Author nims2006@gmail.com
To 10th_Circuit_clerk@ca10.uscourts.gov,
jeffrey.dorschner@usdoj.gov,
nims2006@gmail.com
Date Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM
subjectRe: Certified Mail

Dear Clerk of 10th Circuit:

Many thanks for your reply to an Amicus Curiea brief in (Walters v Asture 08-2094) mailed by certified US Mail last week in Denver to your Court where the online tracking shows the item didn't transit the 4 blocks to your office: On Line Postal Shows:

Label/Receipt Number: 7008 3230 0001 8958 5146

Your item was accepted at 9:29 AM on August 6, 2009 in DENVER, CO 80202. Information, if available, is updated periodically throughout the day. Please check again later. I have attached a copy of the brief and exhibits on CD-Rom can be viewed online:

ssi/index.html

ssi/fgj/index.html

Sorry for any inconvience concerning obstruction of the Court previous ORDER which is also attached 08-2094
Appellant Chris Walters

From 10th_Circuit_clerk@ca10.uscourts.gov
To nims2006@gmail.com
Date Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:25 AM
Subject Certified Mail
mailed-byca10.uscourts.gov

We checked with our mail room. Nothing received. The mail room deputy called the USPS and nothing received yet. You may track your certified material by contacting the United States Postal Service.

1. Case Law: Walters v Apfel & Asture CA: SA-97-CA-1313 USDC, WDT and being Affirmed by 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals (99-50174). the Social Security Administration lacks the jurisdictional authority to review the finding of a USDC Judge and is required to request hearings in Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:

2. Case Law: Walters v Astrue UNDC, NM #: 1:07-cv-00257-JCH-RLP The Social Security Commissioner made a determination of fact and law that Chris Walters is disabled and the only review which can be had is Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:

3. Case Law: Walters v Astrue 09-05206 US Circuit Court DC at the request of the parties a 3rd party request to interplead was Quashed and no hearing can be held without the Commissioner filing for a Judicil Review

4. Title 18 USC 1509. Obsruction of Court ORDERS Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime

5. US Supreme Court rulings that all parties are entitled too fair hearing:
a. Fundamental request of due process is opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in meaningful manner. Matthews v. Eldridge VA 1976 96 S.Ct 893, 424 US 319. 47 L.Ed.2d.18

b. The absolute fundamentals of due process of law; are jurisdiction,adequate notice, and a fair hearing US v Certain Parcels of Land in Price George County Md. D.C. Md 1941, 40 F Supp 436

c. Fair Play is the essence of due process Galveston vs.Press Ca1954,74S Ct 737,347 U.S. 522.98 Led.911.

We have a rather large going theft of Court ORDERS, legal instrumentalities,,, which some persons have alleged are being engineered by law enforcement or intelligence persons:

1. Title 18 USC 402 Contempt

2. Title 18 USC 242Deprivation of rights under color of law

3. Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction of Court ORDER

4. Title 18 USC 1505 Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

5. Title 18 USC CHAPTER 115Treason, Sedition, and Subversive Activities

Cites Inability To Govern
United States Circuit Court of Appeals
District of Columbia
333 Constitution Ave, NW
Washington, D.C. 20001

Chris Walters,      		)
      Appellant Pro Se 	)
			)
Civil NO: 09-5206		)	
USDC Civil # 090956		)
			)
v.   			)
                        	) 
Michael Asture, Commissioner 	) 
Of Social Security et all  	)

Appellant's Cross Brief
In Reply To Interlocutory ORDER USDC
Addressed to Office of International Prosecutor
Cover Sheet pursuant D.C. Cir. Rule 28(a)(8);Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(2)

NOW COMES THE APPELLANT Chris Walters from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Case cv-09-956 on the Interlocutory ruling Judge Friedman in the lower Court to Quash an existing jonder to the United Nations Organs previously permitted by several US Circuit Courts of Appeals in this Appellant Cross Brief addressed to wit:

Addressed Too International Criminal Court
Mr. Luis Moreno-Ocampo-Prosecutor
Information and Evidence Unit
Office of the Prosecutor
Post Office Box 19519
2500 CM The Hague
The Netherlands

Jurisdictional Statement Statutes & Regulations
Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(4);D.C. Cir. Rule 28(a)(4) Appellant's Briefs;

1. Generally question of International Law are filed with the United States Supreme Court pursuant to Title 28 USC 1251 Original Jurisdiction

(b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of:

(1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties;

2. The scope and purpose of the 1503 International Treaty is to provide technical assistance to a UN state which might be having human rights problems. Some of the technical assistance provided to the United States already generated several federal law and other relief

Certificate of Service

Certified US Mail showing the pleadings have been served on the other Courts and parties is attached Certified US Mail Cross Brief filed with office of International Prosecutor regarding statements the United States lacks the ability to govern.

1. #7009 1410 0001 1124 8858
Status Delivered SSA General Counsel David Black Status: Delivered Your item was delivered at 8:52 am on August 03, 2009 in BALTIMORE, MD 21235

2. #7009 1410 0001 1124 8889<
Status Delivered UN Disabilities, NY Your item was delivered at 11:56 am on August 03, 2009 in NEW YORK, NY 10017

3. #7009 1410 0001 1124 8872
Status Delivered Channy Phillips USA, Wash DC Your item was delivered at 11:33 am on August 07, 2009 in WASHINGTON, DC 20530

4. #7009 1410 0001 1124 8865
Status Delivered Clerk USCA District Columbia Your item was delivered at 3:06 pm on August 03, 2009 in WASHINGTON, DC 20001.

5. #7008 3230 0001 8958 5146
Status Delivered 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Status: Acceptance Your item was accepted at 9:29 AM on August 6, 2009 in DENVER, CO 80202.
Status: Notice Left. We attempted to deliver your item at 11:34 am on June 15, 2009 in WASHINGTON, DC 20001 and a notice was left. No further information is available for this item.

1. Case Law: Walters v Astrue UNDC, DC #: Civil NO: 09-5206/USDC Civil # 090956 and being Affirmed by US Circuit Court of Appeals DC the Social Security Administration lacks the jurisdictional authority to review the finding of a USDC Judge and is required to request hearings in Title 28 Sec 405 (g)(h) Final decisions of district courts Attempts by mere Administrative Law employees to over rule or Quash the ORDER of the Courts is nonsensical and could be addressed pursuant to:

2. Title 18 USC 1509. Obsruction of Court ORDERS Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime

3. Title 18 USC 115 Treason, Sedition, and Subversive Activities an extensive set of statutes which address persons engaged in treason;insurrection; and subsersive activities.

Addressed Too All Officers & Agents
United States of America
in 10th and 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals

Dear Friend:

A deputy US Marshal, resident FBI Agent, and Special Agent for Social Security Administration recently requested clarification on a proposed sanction document emailed under color of UN treaty. These excellent persons explained they are not familiar enough with UN law to clearly understand the content so the document is as of this date retracted.

A revised generic sanction document is appended where the several US Circuit Court of Appeals; US Courts; and Congress have ruled that further conversations related to the Social Security question are prohibited to be addressed to Appellant Counsel or record as cited on this website:

this link

The appended document filed in US District Court of Columbia shows the Court (civ 090956)has denied the Social Security Administration's request for a hearing under Title 42 USC 405(g)(H) Judicial Review which the US Circuit Court (0905206) has declined to overturn.

Persons having further questions are requested to address them in writting to the Honorable US Congressman Lamar Smith US House Committee on Judiciary or the Honorable Chairman Patrick Leahy US Senate Judiciary Committee since Congressman has claimed exclusive jurisdiction...

Many Thanks Chris Walters,
Appellant Counsel of Record

Mr. Chris Walters,
Plaintiff Pro Se

Kenneth D. Lewis CEO
Bank of America
Attorney James E Shively
(602-840-1400) Vs. Civil #Civil # 09-811-BB-LAM

Addressed To Honorable
US Congressman Barney Franks
House Financial Services Committee
2129 Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515
Ph: (202) 225-4247
Fax: (202) 225-6952
While the IRS can't seize my SSI benefits and several Federal Courts have ruled my benefits exempt from seizure I wanted to thank Bank of America Attorney James E Shively for appearing and explaining the USDC lacks jurisdiction to what Bank of America openly admits:

1. Bank of America seized $73.00 in funds from my SSI monies to pay for year rent on Safe Deposit Box 259 at 250 Amador, in Las Cruces, NM and has declined to return the contents Since April, 2009.

2. Safe Deposit Box 259 contains Counsel's papers and it is an apparent violation of Title 18 US 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law to pilfer legal papers as cited in US V John Edwards, Haldeman, Erlichman, and Dean.

3. Bank of America (Claim 2231626MAR09) After Greyhound Bus Lines hospitalized me 3 times I filed a challenge to payment of the $251.00 which Bank of America paid even when Greyhound failed to complete the service and has done similar seizures (Claim 1795606MaR09) in other situations where services paid for were not completed.

1. It appears in processing debits that Bank of America holds out payment of completed Customer transactions to create artificial float time or basically a short term interest free loan from the customers account and business transactions.

2. This practice generates a false account balance which is likely to cause the customer to overdraft and the customer is required to pay overdraft fee's on all items caused by Bank of America's writing itself a short term interest free loan.

When I worked at National Bank of Commerce in 1983 we had float time because it took bank items up to 14 days to physically travel to other banks across the United States and get their items credited. In the electronic world today debits travel at the speed of light and transactions and printed receipts for purchases are virtually instantaneous. In creating unneeded float time on debits it appears that the Bank of America and other banking institutions have adopted a commonly used practice of holding out debits to garner interest they are not entitled too. The abuse of this practice is to have the customer penalized by refusing the complete electronic transactions and then charge the customers for overages caused by Bank of America.

Any changes in Chris Walters SSI benefits or case status is protection from seizure by anyone as cited in #: 1:07-cv-00257-JCH-RLP US Magistrate Judge Richard L Puslisi Presiding Judge Judith Herrera USDC NM; 3 US Circuit Courts of Appeals****…. The right of Bank of America to seize property from anyone without the due process and equal protection of the law does not exist.

Respectfully Submitted By Chris Walters
PO Box 266 Greensboro, NC 27402

By Jonathan Stempel Jonathan Stempel 46 mins ago

NEW YORK (Reuters) Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) has agreed to pay $410 million to settle lawsuits accusing it of charging customers with excessive overdraft fees, court documents show.

The largest U.S. bank by assets is among the more than two dozen U.S., Canadian and European lenders named as defendants in the class-action litigation, which in 2009 consolidated lawsuits filed across the country. JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), Citigroup Inc (C.N) and Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N) are among the other defendants named in the case, court records show.

Bank of America spokeswoman Anne Pace in an email said the bank has already changed its overdraft practices, eliminating fees for debit transactions and significantly lowering fees for customers who overdraw excessively. he also said the Charlotte, North Carolina-based lender has "fully accrued funds" to cover the settlement. Notice of the January 27 accord with Bank of America was filed on Friday with the U.S. district court in Miami. The settlement requires court approval.

Many banks let customers overdraw their accounts in exchange for fees, typically $25 or $35. Critics say the fees disproportionately burden lower-income customers and others who often maintain low account balances. In a November 2009 complaint filed with the Miami court, customers said Bank of America routinely processed debit transactions from largest to smallest rather than in chronological order, causing account balances to fall faster and boosting potential overdraft fees.

They said the bank also did not clearly tell customers they could decline overdraft protection, and typically charged the fees to debit card users rather than decline transactions. Bank of America customers would often rack up hundreds of dollars of overdraft fees, even when they may have been overdrawn by only a few dollars, the complaint said. Overdraft fees industry wide totaled about $23.7 billion in 2008, up from $10.3 billion just four years earlier, according to the Center for Responsible Lending.

Last year the Federal Reserve imposed a rule that prohibits banks from charging overdraft fees on electronic and debit card transactions without advance customer approval. In August, a federal judge ordered Wells Fargo to pay $203 million to California customers who complained about overdraft fees. The bank is appealing. The case is In re: Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, No. 09-md-02036.

(Editing by Mohammad Zargham)

Upon returning to Winston Salem, NC on 9-29-2009 I found my PO Box blocked. The Clerk explained the temporary notice of a move I made for a month had developed into a request to forward my mail to Medford, Oregon until 8/1/2010. The Postal Clerk was able to rectify the problem.

Title 18 Sec 1702 Obstruction of correspondence Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from any letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail carrier, before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes, embezzles, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Mr. Chris Walters
SSI 261-90-xxxx
PO Box 266
Greensboro, NC 27406
Friday, September 25th, 2009
Social Security Inspector General
Social Security Administration
Office of Public Inquiries
Windsor Park Building
6401 Security Blvd.
Baltimore, MD 21235

RE: Your field rep request clarify National Security Death Warrants and other Exotic sanctions:

Dear SSA Inspector General:

I wanted to thank your El Paso field office for fielding a representative recently to inquire about a proposed sanction or sanctions possibly including UN legal action. I am sorry that the meaning of a proposed sanction is so exotic that the scope and purpose are not clear.

The standardized FYI cites request for National Security Death Warrants filed with various Committees of Congress where officials are requested to impose sanctions. In Walters v Astrue 1:07 cv 00257 JCH-RLP a request was made for a John Doe who intercepted several final ORDERS of the Court which I described in Docket #19 as an act of Sedition. The envelope from Treasury was received by US Post Office here on Sept 1, 2009 apparently reappeared and was stamped received again on Sept 4, 2009 and finally released on September, 21, 2009. Request for sanctions should never be considered personal and are only actionable by Officials in government acting under color of their law ful authority.

As your staff can see I have moved back to North Carolina and deferred questions of law which might involve proposed changes in Title 42 USC Chapter 7 Social Security Act to the Office of the President with a notice being filed in USDC, NM.

I am sorry for any confusion and am with regards.
Chris Walters,
Appellant Counsel of Record

Cc: Social Security office of Legal Counsel

Mr. Chris Walters,
Appellant Pro Se

Vs Civil: 09-05206
USDC DC 09-0956
Honorable Rosemary Collyer Presiding

Michael Astrue, et all
Social Security Administration
Appellee

Addressed To Circuit Executive
US Circuit Court of Appeals
District of Columbia
333 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20001

Dear Circuit Executive

I wanted to thank Director Robert Mueller of the FBI for inquiring about sanction questions in a family of legal actions known as Walters v Asture or Walters v SSA where additional litigation has been denied by the US Supreme Court; 5th, 10th, and DC Circuit Court of Appeals and several US District Courts (Attached Legal Notice). Request for sanctions or "Death Warrants" are generally requested from the US Congress pursuant to several statutes including Title 18 USC § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees ; questions of judicial disability or misconduct are heard pursuant to Title 28 USC 372 §... and or UN Organs such as the UN Security Council under color of Geneva Convention or International Treaty.

Request for summary execution of US officers, agents, representatives, or other persons acting under color of law are generally instituted when the "actor" as they frequently do gives "the bird" to the bar of Justice; rulings of the Court; Obstructs delivery of Court ORDERS; intercepting legal brief to 10th US Circuit Court of appeals (Certified US Mail # 7008 3230 0001 8958 5146 ) and other acts which are generally described as "sedition". The US District Court ruled in Paula Jones v William Jefferson Clinton that public officials are not above the law and the US Senate Committee on Judiciary and US House Judiciary Committee have recently neutered former US Attorney General Gonzalez; former White house official Karl Rove; former US Attorney Johnny Sutton; and others for misuse of law enforcement and intelligence assets and can be reviewed online:

http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/issues_WHInterviews.html

During the course of proceedings various US Officials allocuted to what appear to be serious violations of International Law or Treaty including Genocide; Crimes Against Humanity; and terrorist activities which are described online in Plaintiff Exhibit C:

ssi/fgj/index.html

It might merit mention that UN officials are likely to summarily execute any Officer; agent; or representative of the United States engaged in many of these activities without benefit of arrest or trial and return their mortal remains to the US Department of State with a toe tag "executed terrorist". The current status of these matters under the 1503 Treaty is an Amicus Curiae or "Friend of the Court Proceeding" designed to permit the United States to resolve it's problems internally.

Respectfully Submitted By
Appellant of Record Chris Walters
PO Box 266
Greensboro, NC 27402

#841348910019897 Delivered Delivered Signed for by: PPALMER Delivered Signed for by: RCARSON Shipment Dates Ship date Sep 30, 2009 Delivery date Oct 2, 2009 2:28 PM Destination Washington, DC

#841348910019903 Delivered Signed for by: Signature on File Shipment Dates Ship date Sep 30, 2009 Delivery date Oct 5, 2009 9:26 AM Destination Denver, CO

3. Fax transmission to US Senate and House Committee on Judiciary 9/30/2009 20222249516 and 20222250072 from Fed Ex Kinko Memphsis Tennessee.

Mr. Chris Walters
c/o PO Box 266
Greensboro, NC 27402
Wednesday, September 29th, 2009

Director Robert Mueller
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
(202) 324-3000

RE: Your request information on National Security Death Warrants;
Exotic Sanctions; and Terrorist-Background Info:

Dear Director Robert Mueller:

I was recently doing some volunteer work at the Las Cruces Gospel Rescue Mission and was approached by 2 men who failed to produce any identification but claimed to be FBI agents and wanted to ask about a recent proposed Notice of Sanctions on a US Government employee…. If I am not mistaken the gentlemen explained you said that “I am a Terrorist”. In order to assist and clarify your efforts and make sure your organization gets a fair shake I though we might review:

Request for National Security Death Warrants & Exotic Sanctions

As your probably aware most Courts of Law, Congress and the UN have legal criteria for authorizing legal sanctions as a process of law which are quite different from “terrorist activities”. You can see from the attached enclosure the ongoing request made by the Social Security Administration for legal conversations have been prohibited by ORDER of 3 US Circuit Courts of Appeals; US Supreme Court; and a variety of federal Courts. On finding a government employee; organization; or others giving the Bar of Justice the Finger as it were I usually make a timely and lawful request to have their summarily executed for sedition. Other criteria for requesting summary execution might include government employees attempting to writer or empower their own federal laws without asking Congress or in some cases obstructing US Court ORDERS…. Persons in a position of authority such as Chairman of Congressional Committees receiving such a request might elect to do something completely different based on what they feel is compelling national interest.

2. 1983 Worked for US Intelligence group in San Antonio, Texas doing research. The moron I worked for pulled a police department through his operational area and the resulting mess was addressed by Special Agent Paul Hosslocker.

3. 1984-1985 Lived and worked under assumed name in South Florida intelligence materials created by the intelligence group in San Antonio, Texas.

4. 1986-1996 Given contract to be primary field investigator for some HUD programs over an area 1 third of the United States.

5. 1999-2009 US first National 911 Administrator created and maintained a portable 911 interoperability program for a 15 state area which super ceded the command and control functions of the Department of Homeland Security by about a decade.

6. 1997-2009: First national operational audit of the Social Security process and operational Impediments.

How many employees does the Bureau have whose field work created at least 4 federal statutes? How many employees does the Bureau have who create the first national 911 system which is field portable? You don’t have any employees who have cripple as many organized criminal interest or terrorist without the power or arrest or use of physical violence. A cursory examination of my medical records and 200 some odd doctors suggest chronic medical problems would keep me from completing basic training in the Army or training at your facility at Quantico, VA: D://ssi/access/index.html

I am with kindest regards Chris Walters, Appellant & Opposing Counsel

Signed for by: JANDRESON Ship date Sep 29, 2009 Delivery date Oct 1, 2009 11:21 AM Destination Hyattsville, MD

You may have never even have been arrested; however the FBI probally has an extensive criminal history on you. The United States District Courts have ruled that Congress did not authorize the Federal Bureau of Investigation to slander, liable, and defame your good name and reputation:

(1994)11 165 App DC 293. 507 F2d 1116. case remanded (DC Dist Col) 407 F Supp 1083 "Congress did not intend to authorize FBI to damage reputation of innocent individuals in contravention of settled common law principles hence, Congress did not intend through USCS 534 to authorize FBI to disseminate in accurate criminal information without taking reasonable precautions to prevent inaccuracy; dissemination of inaccurate criminal information without precaution of reasonable efforts to forestall inaccuracy restricts subject's liberty without any procedural safeguards designed to prevent such inaccuracies to permit FBI to disseminate inaccurate criminal information without FBI making reasonable effort to prevent inaccuracy would be tantamount to accuse individuals of criminal conduct without ever providing such individuals opportunity to disprove that accusation: reliable and responsible performance of record-keeping function requires such reasonable care as FBI is able to afford to avoid injury to innocent citizens through dissemination of inaccurate information."

The Court also rules in McKnight v Webster
(1980,Ed PA 499 F Supp 420)

"FBI has duty to request correct information from local law enforcement agencies which initially reported Plaintiff arrest when Plaintiff informs FBI it's records are inaccurate."The scope and intend of the law Title 28 USC 534 Acquisition, preservation.... was clearly to acquire and maintain records on crime and "criminals" for the good of the country>

The Court also rules in Mendard V Mitchell

(1971, DC Dist (24 Col) 328 F Supp 718, remanded on other grounds 162 App DC 284, 498 F2d 1017,28 ARL Fed 248...( superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in Utz v. Culliname, 172 App DC 67, 520 F2d 467)
"File of arrest records is designed only to facilitate coordinated law enforcement activities between federal and local government, that is, to assist arresting agencies, courts, and correctional institutions in apprehension, conviction, and proper disposition of criminal offenders."

Jurisdiction over rights to due process can also
be found in Constitutional Laws 318 56,257, and 992.
As the Constitution Guarantees:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy or life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

5 revelations from the Washington Posts Monitoring America investigation
By Liz Goodwin
By Liz Goodwin liz Goodwin – Mon Dec 20, 10:05 am ET

The FBI is assembling a massive database on thousands of Americans, many of whom have not been accused of any crime, the Washington Post's Dana Priest and William Arkin report. The reporters' latest look at the country's ballooning national security system focuses on the role that local agencies -- often staffed by people with little to no counter-terrorism training -- have played in combating terrorism since 2001.

Here are five striking revelations in their piece:
1. The FBI's Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative, or SAR, currently contains 161,948 suspicious activity files, into which authorities can put information they've gathered about the people at the center of the files: employment history, financial documents, phone numbers, photos. In many cases, the people in the files have not been accused of any crime but have attracted the suspicions of a local cop, FBI agent or even fellow citizen. The files have led to five arrests but no convictions, the FBI says. Some of the files are unclassified so that local police agencies and even businesses can submit reports on anyone they deem suspicious.

2. The Department of Homeland Security does not know how much it spends in funding state fusion centers, which synthesize security information from all state agencies and feed information to SAR. But since 2001, the department has doled out $31 billion to states and localities for domestic security initiatives.

3. Local officials at these fusion centers are tasked with understanding terrorism, but have little or no training. To fill the void, self-styled experts with fairly extreme views on the scope of the Muslim terrorist threat are asked to come in and train local authorities, the Post reports. Professed ex-terrorist Walid Shoebat told a group at the first annual South Dakota Fusion Center Conference in Sioux Falls this year that they should monitor local Muslim student groups and mosques and try to tap their phones. "You can find out a lot of information that way," he said.

National intelligence officials told the Post they preferred that people with "evidence-based" approaches to Islam were lecturing instead, but that no guidelines are in place to determine the qualifications of a given speaker.

4. The localities are often left without guidance from the Department of Homeland Security, which can lead to confusion about the counter-terrorism actions they're supposed to be carrying out. Virginia's fusion center named historically black colleges as "potential" terrorism hubs; Maryland State Police infiltrated local groups that lobbied for bike lanes and human rights; and a contractor in Pennsylvania writing an intelligence bulletin flagged meetings of the Tea Party Patriots Coalition and environmental activists.

5. Many states and towns are taking the unprecedented amounts of money handed out to fight terrorists and are using it instead to fight crime. "We have our own terrorists, and they are taking lives every day," Memphis Police Director Larry Godwin said.

McClatchy Newspapers WASHINGTON — An undisclosed number of FBI agents have cheated on tests on how to legally conduct domestic surveillance cases, FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged Wednesday, but he added that he is waiting for the results of an inspector general's investigation to determine how widespread the cheating has become.

"I've got a general idea. But I do not know how many" have cheated, he said in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "And I'm not sure the IG knows how many either." But, Mueller added, the IG "has pointed out instances orally to me where there may be persons and a particular office where it was widespread. And it may be attributable to a lack of understanding and confusion about the procedures."

The FBI head was asked about the controversy by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who heads the committee. Leahy he said he knew that some agents had been caught cheating on the tests, in which they were supposed to show they understood the limitations in conducting domestic surveillance and beginning cases without first having evidence of a crime. The test is mandatory, and it is put on by the bureau's Domestic Investigation and Operations Guidelines section.

"We learned last year that a small number of agents were accused of cheating on the test. That's what I was told," Leahy said to Mueller. "I was amazed when I went online this morning to find from press accounts that the cheating was reportedly more widespread." Mueller strongly defended the bureau and said his agents are instructed not to purposely target Muslim-Americans and other religious and ethnic groups for investigations. "That is at the heart of these guidelines. And that is what we teach each of our personnel," he said.

He said the guidelines require agents to undertake more than 16 hours of training, followed by an open-book test. He said that a year ago, problems surfaced because some agents were taking it with the help of other agents. At that point, he said, the FBI's IG office began to investigate. Since then, he said, the IG "has indicated that there are additional personnel that did not abide by those procedures."

"We are expecting a letter from the IG pointing out other occasions, where there were abuses and the procedures were not followed, with recommendations. And we will follow those recommendations." Mueller added that "it is quite obviously my concern that all of our personnel understand the parameters in which we are to work." He pledged that eventually all the agents will understand "the limitations of what we can do."

History of Electronic Warfare attacks apparently by the United States against domestic and foreign interest led to creation of USA Freedom Act of 2015

Chris Walters

vs 2:13-cv-00001-TOR

Hon. Michael Horowitz
US Department of Justice
Inspector General

Exhibit Page Question of Constitutionality of US Patriot Act based on serial stalking; computer hacking...creation of fictious convictions...

Strange I thought medical professionals were supposed to be healers who resolved medical problems instead of dragging them out for years and years to increase profits 10 Doctors 5 years to do minor surgery for cancer in office. 45 Doctors took 15 years to do colon exam. 160 Doctors treated chronic blood clots and 4-5 hospitalizations a year at $400,000 until 1 doctor prescribed Xarelto-a pill a day..131 Doctors Treat Chronic Infection 1 doctor solves problem with hospital visit. Primary Care Physicians prescribe assisted living as needed for hip replacement...., how many years will pass before this occurs

You are looking at part of Exhibit C a United States source document submitted as Evidence and Testimony to the several committees of the United States Congress since 1986. The survey data is occassionally used for creation of federal statutes; considering possible improvements in operation of federal programs; and study of operational field impediments. Because of the Separation of Powers found in US Constitution and various Rules of Congress it not possible to serve summons, subponeas; or other court process on Capitol Hill and persons attempting to can be detained and arrested by Capitol Police or otherwise sanctioned. Obviously the only legal reviews which can occur would require permission of the Chairman of a Congressional Committee reviewing the matters at public hearings

Beginning in 1997 the Social Security Administration issued an Executive ORDER or Fia before a USDC, WDT link restricting legal discussions to places and times authorized by statute and have successfully defended their statutory rights from a over 500 challenges A small host of poor bastards who appear to have challenged the Sovereign rights of the Social Security Administration or Congress appear to have been thrown down the political 5 ton wood chipper and the confirmed kill list appears to include at least 1 or 2 federal judges; maybe a couple of cabinet level officers; a bunch of US Attorneys and a many more lesser persons. Whispered in the background are the strange, sacred, and holy legal incantations muttered by federal officials including Title 18 USC 402 Contempt; Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction Court Order; tampering with federal agency, Contempt of Congress...

1. Title 18 USC 402 Contempt might include practicing, vending, or dispensing federal law without license or actual contempt of Court

2. Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction of Court ORDER; Whoever, by threats or force, willfully prevents, obstructs, impedes, or interferes with, or willfully attempts to prevent, obstruct, impede, or interfere with, the due exercise of rights or the performance of duties under any order, judgment, or decree of a court of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. No injunctive or other civil relief against the conduct made criminal by this section shall be denied on the ground that such conduct is a crime

3. Title 18 USC 913 Impersonator Making Arrest Whoever falsely represents himself to be an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, and in such assumed character arrests or detains any person or in any manner searches the person, buildings, or other property of any person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

4. Title 18 USC 371 Conspiracy to Committ an Offense To defraud the United States If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.

5. Title 18 USC 1701 Obstruction of Mail Generally Whoever takes any letter, postal card, or package out of any post office or any authorized depository for mail matter, or from any letter or mail carrier, or which has been in any post office or authorized depository, or in the custody of any letter or mail carrier, before it has been delivered to the person to whom it was directed, with design to obstruct the correspondence, or to pry into the business or secrets of another, or opens, secretes, embezzles, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

7. Title 18 USC 1512 Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to— (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to— (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; (C) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (D) be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

7. Deprivation of rights under color of law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The Political Patronage Systems controls the government and prevents normal protections to entire classes of citizens aiding acts of genocide, criminal activities; terrorist activities... A large number of 3rd party casualties appear to have gone to meet Jesus or lesser sections while trying to explain to those who run they country they merited no respect. Title 18 USC 1505 Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees concerns acts such as Contempt of Congress while Chapter 115-Treason, Sedition, and Subversive Activities

1. Maybe I got the facts wrong but I thougt North Carolina is supposed to be the "Bible Belt" where Christians show their stuff or moral values? Almost a decade later the facts and these website links suggest "Bible Belt" is about a twisted as it gets. No filth or depravity or violation of basic moral decency seems to be beyound the folks who live here in this period of time.

2. Has your family been fagged in the public library?100 Breaks ins of my email and websites helped write new federal law.

3. North Carolina Bible Fags? 2003-2006 hard to believe these folks preach this from the pulpit and are sexual predators later NC 2005 and North Carolina 2006

4. Our Program Will Run Your Life? October 2008 followed by first attempt to challenge Social Security Commissioners final determination

5. Federal Court Quashes challengs 2009 to Social Security Awards in 2007 Link

6. Samaritan Ministry Janurary 2010 tells federal bar to kiss off just about time US Attorney was sacked... Generally called tampering with federal agency

7. Minor frauds March 2010 medical providers attempt to defraud Medicaid

8. Recommended Federal Grand Jury December 2010 serious abuse of medicaid process by local medical providers

9. Genocide American Style history of NC involvement in sedition and insurrection and class based Genocide. Profile Report NC request to seceed from Union in 2012 after losing Presidential Elections.

10. Assassinaton Attempts July 2012 attempt to cause injury or death to SSI recipient by refusing to issue Medicaid

11. Interference With Medical Work Hickory NC April 2013

12. North Carolina Nuring Home Janruary 2015 makes illegal transfer to Skilled Nursing Home in Charlottes Virginia

14. Extensive Denial of Medical Treatment April 2018 extremely well coordinated effort to cause death or injury through denial of medical work in Virginia and North Carolina