View video.

The N.H. Attorney General’s Office has been selective in its prosecutions and does hold a double standard of justice. Now that Kelly Ayotte is “out of the office”, let’s see how New Hampshire’s newly appointed A.G., Joseph Foster, handles criminal complaints. With the same “entourage” under him, will things change? Will he take the bull by the horns? Time will tell…shortly!

“In a brilliant move of strategic journalism, the Guardian held on to this revealing PRISM slide until today, allowing all these tech companies to dig themselves into deep holes of denial regarding participation in the NSA spy program. Once all the companies were on the record claiming government has no “direct access” to their servers, the Guardian slapped down this jaw-dropping top secret slide image shown below. It reveals, in plain English, that the NSA’s “FAA702″ operations engage in “collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.”" Read more, click here.
“NSA’s Prism surveillance program: how it works and what it can do.”  Read more, click here.

 
Is Facebook a massive spy network whose primary purpose is to get you to upload and post all your personal information so that all that information can be data-mined by government spooks? Is the primary purpose of Gmail not to provide a free email services, but rather to get people to send and receive emails through an online service that’s directly scanned by the NSA?

Do all these tech giants — Hotmail, YouTube, Apple, AOL, Yahoo Mail — exist to spy on you and turn over your information to government spooks… in total violation of U.S. law and basic human dignity?

Louis A. and Jane A. Rossi claim they have purchased her home for $12,500 and have filed a Landlord Tenant Writ in the Rochester District Court. Why would NationStar Mortgage, LLC spend years in court for a profit of $12,500?

Courtwatchers are needed for Marie.

Rochester District Court
76 North Main Street
Rochester, N.H. 03867

Friday, June 14, 2013
10:00 a.m.

Marie Miller foreclosure case.

Judges:

“Since all power is inherent in the people, then it follows that all power is not inherent in the judges.

Can judges sit on the bench in secrecy with “superior” knowledge in that they know that they have never been named in a commission which vests the office, a public office?

In other words, the judges have prior knowledge, which is not known to the public at large, knowing full well that they are not a public officer without a commission and possess no judicial powers and immunity plus they do not operate from a public office. Remember, that a public office is a place of trust, and the judges are suppose to acknowledge, recognize, and uphold the constitutional secured rights of the people.

The judges, in turn, have a fiduciary relationship with the people who enter his or her court and must protect their rights. A fiduciary relationship arises when one places trust in another, and that the people’s rights must be upheld as a matter of those judges operating from a constitutional public office.

Do they actually do that when they sit on the bench in secrecy?

Of course not!

Is it not a breach of trust when the so-called judges sit in silence and do not fully disclose the truth of the matter in that they are not commissioned judges, and that they are only “mere” employees of the state? In other words, they are only ministerial judges otherwise known as hearing examiners.

They have a duty to fully disclose their “superior” knowledge otherwise it is a violation of the canon rules of being impartial judges meaning that secretly they will not administer justice and will favor the side of the prosecution. It is a fraud to conceal information from the public where there is a duty to disclose such knowledge, and that disclosure must be complete and free of any misrepresentation.

Failure to speak on the part of the judges is a very wrongful act and is a betrayal of the people’s rights. Judges cannot be permitted to avoid liability for their actions by deceitfully concealing any wrongdoing of any kind. They are legally and morally bound to reveal such “superior” knowledge to the public at large.

Where there is a fiduciary duty, there is an active duty to inform the public otherwise there is not an “equal footing” while in their courts. Causing a person to remain ignorant of the fact that the judges hide that they do not possess a commission is a form of self-concealment, and it is a wrongful act.

Silence or concealment where there is a duty to speak out is creating a false impression and is a deception on the part of the judges who do so. It is called lying by omission. They are avoiding divulging “superior” information that they possess by the use of silence and cover up the fact that they are not genuine, constitutional judges.

Of course, this is all shrouded in secrecy and mystery, and where there is secrecy and mystery, there is a high potential for danger. This particular knowledge is available to only privileged people, and it is all a semblance of assumed appearance in order to obstruct from view the fact that they are not public officers by wearing the black robes. Wearing the black robes is used as a mask or veil in order to mislead the public into believing a material fact that they are genuine constitutional judges, and this wearing of the black robes is intended to induce a false belief by the public at large.

Is it not treason against the original, constitutional State of Maine and the people when the judges act deliberately in suppressing the truth of the matter?

Of course it is!

The judges are supposed to be in court to make certain that everyone’s constitutional rights are upheld but is that what really happens in these state-wide courts today? State-wide courts are courts that have been taken over by the state, and we no longer have county courts within and for the county. In other words. we no longer have local control. It is gone.

Lastly, judges are not allowed to engage in:

1. Secrecy
2. Misrepresentation
3. Pretense
4. Suppression of truth
5. Hiding information
6. Non-disclosure
7. Cover up
8. Deception
9. Defrauding the people
10. Lying by omission
11. False representation
12. Concealment
13. Obstruct from view/sight
14. Deceitfulness
15. Assumed appearance
16. Intent to deceive
17. Have an unfair advantage by possessing “superior” knowledge and concealing it
18. False impression
19. Fraud
20. Wrongdoing/misconduct
21. Etc, etc, etc.”

Thanks for this info and the unmasking of judges.

This book is about the need for court reform and the abolishment of judicial and quasi-judicial immunity. The book is filled with the courts’ tricks and traps for the unwary.”

Barbara was the attorney from Massachusetts who came to Maine to defend me, pro bono, on my case of criminal trespass upon my property. York County Superior Court Judge Arthur Brennan did not permit her to enter evidence, call witnesses, or challenge a judicial writ requiring I leave my home. York County D.A. Mark Lawrence prosecuted me with my evidence in his hands. She argued the state failed to prove that I had acted in defiance of a lawful order. “You can’t defy a lawul order if you don’t have one,” she told the jury. Such educated York county jurors!

Barbara Johnson summarized the court proceeding. See summary of Criminal Trespass charge, click here.

Biddeford property summary, click here.

Maine Supreme Court letter, November 17, 2003, click here.  I was removed from my home on November 19, 2003 with full knowledge by the Maine Supreme Court that there was pending litigation against the City of Biddeford.

D.A. Mark Lawrence letter, June 6, 2003, click here. Mark was working with me, prior to my unlawful arrest. He jumped the fence and prosecuted me.

Was the ransacking of my home necessary?  View the video of the SWAT Team‘s aftermath. (Scroll down)

To order Barbara’s book, click here.

Players in my case are the same ones reported by Michael Doyle, Editor Falmouth Today. Click here.

I’m asking for your help in contacting Governor LePage and Attorney General Janet Mills seeking the reasons for their refusals to investigate these crimes.   So many Mainers have suffered irreparable harm and losses due to the failure of our governors/attorneys general/judges to uphold their oaths, duties, obligations and the law. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

I thank you for your support. It is crystal clear that there is more behind this “curtain” than meets the eye.

Governor Paul LePage
Office of the Governor
#1 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0001

Phone 207-287-3531
Fax 207-287-1034
E-mail

Attorney General Janet Mills
Office of the Attorney General
6 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333

Phone: 207-626-8800
E-mail

Debby Reagan writes the Governor with the law admitting “that paying income taxes is a VOLUNTARY program, then no one can LAWFULLY make the people pay it!”

Read Debby’s correspondence on For The People, click here.

Does the Governor have the muster to uphold the law and his duties, obligations and oath of office?

Great job, Debby!

Attorney Jens-Peter Bergen and Judges named in this article are the same players in the theft of my business property,  my home and property in Arundel, Maine.

I went public with a public access t.v. talk show, The Maine Forum, from April 18, 2001 to July 2002 when (now former mayor) Donna Dion and (now former city councilor) Jim Grattelo banned me from Biddeford Public Access. My reasons for going public was due to the controlled mainstream media’s refusal to print or broadcast the truth that people had a right to know. I was tired of having issues brushed under the rug. The Maine Forum was a vehicle used to educate and inform the public on issues that involved everyone at the local, county, state and federal levels. It was time to take a stand for my (our) rights before we no longer had any rights left. Many wonderful and interesting people from Maine to California were guests on my program.

The July 4, 2001 program “What Price Justice?’ featured Philip Castora, a licensed Private Investigator, who gave a report containing his opinions and conclusions with respect to various public documents relative to his investigation into fraudulent confiscations of property through the concerted actions of city officials, bankers, the courts…….and let’s not forget William Zafirson, HAZA Auctioneer who went crying to the mayor because I mentioned his name on my program.

Read more, click here.

Read more about:

Jens Peter Bergen, Esq.

Attorney Jens-Peter Bergen, one of the client’s charged in the Zumba Prostitution Case, was also involved in the theft of Dorothy Lafortune’s home in concert with officials in the City of Biddeford and Biddeford District Court Judge Christine Foster.

As with both cases, Atty. Bergen knows, or should know, the law. In the Zumba case he chose to commit a criminal or unlawful act that reflects adversely on his honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as an attorney. Since the beginning of this case it was obvious there would be a double standard of justice and selective prosecutions where it concerned public officials/attorneys. Attorney Bergen and his cronies in the City of Biddeford, including Judge Christine Foster, are NOT above the law! This is NOT the first time he violates the law! The proof is in the pudding!

Wouldn’t you agree that Attorney Jens-Peter Bergen, who knows, or should know, the law and pled guilty to violating state law is conduct unbecoming an attorney and in violation of BAR rules and professional conduct? He gets away with just a slap on the wrist and still practices law in Maine.

She was not afforded the opportunity, consideration and fairness in the reporting of her side of the story. She was not ensured a fair trial. She was maliciously prosecuted when (now former) D.A. Mark Lawrence had her evidence in hand and working with her. She lost her home, removed by a 13 member SWAT team, armed and masked, arrested and charged with criminal trespass upon her own property and thrown out into the street like a wild animal. She most certainly resents the fact that she paid the salaries of these official “scabs” to defraud and “rape” her.

See summary of Criminal Trespass charge, click here.

Judge Arthur Brennan, click here and here.

Judge Thomas Humphrey

Paper trail to my complaint against Judge Christine Foster, dismissed by the Committee on Judicial Responsibility and Disability also leads to Judge Humphrey.

Related, click here.

Well, if  ”you haven’t heard of a docket, any docket, being removed from the court system locally or statewide”, you’ve got more proof that this is “procedure” within Maine’s courtrooms.

Take Notice:

Members on the Committee on Judicial Responsibility and Disability include Judges Paul Fritzsche, Robert E. Crowley. Is this not a conflict of interest? Judge Thomas Humphrey previously sat on the committee. He is the current Chief Justice of the Superior Courts.

The Committee on Judicial Responsibility and Disability is a Personal appointment which does not require a public hearing or approval of the State Legislature. If Governor LePage’s priority is to “put Maine people ahead of politics”, he must remove the members with this committee.

The corruption is rampant, blatant and more visible with greater exposure. It’s time to take this “bull by the horns.”

Has anyone examined the enacting clause in the original Constitution of the State of Maine and the 2003 constitution?

Well, I did and what a revelation!

In the original constitution in Article IV Part First, legislative power, house of representatives, section 1 states in part:
…….”and both to be stiled the Legislature of Maine, and the style of their Acts and Laws, shall be, “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in Legislature assembled.”

Keep in mind that this enacting clause was created by the constitution “itself.” This is vital to comprehend.

In the Constitution of the State of Maine of 2003 in Article IV Part First, house of representatives, section 1 states in part:
…….”and both to be styled the Legislature of Maine, but the people reserve to themselves power to propose laws and to enact or reject the same at the polls independent of the Legislature, and also reserve power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls any Act, bill, resolve, or resolution passed by the joint action of both branches of the Legislature, and the style of their laws and Acts shall be, “Be it enacted by the people of the State of Maine.”

Does anyone see anything wrong with this “new” enacting clause?

I see plenty wrong with it.

It all appears to be beautiful that the people has this power granted to it but it rears its ugly head.

What does this mean?

The legislature had NO delegation of authority to change the original enacting clause and CONVERT our republic here in Maine into a democracy which actually mean “mob rule.”

This new enacting clause has “weaken” the legislature just like the so called 17th amendment (1913 along with the fed reserve system) did, and has also “weaken” the people when 51% of the people can vote against 49% of the people and create a new law and take away the people’s rights. Some of the people (51%) have no right lawfully to take away other people’s rights.

None at all.

The people operating in a republic were NEVER granted such powers, and they can’t give it to themselves. The original constitution of the State of Maine was a limitation on the state and FOR the benefit of all and NOT just some of the people.

This is dictatorship. This is fraud, deception, pretense, secrecy, and false representation. In a republic this does not happen and cannot happen at all.

Read Article IV, Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Maine again and “clearly see” what this actually means and its devastating effects on the people themselves and even the 51% when they vote a right away from themselves plus the 49% of the people. In other words, they vote themselves (new laws) into slavery. This is the statutory state and NOT the original state.

Understand that having the new enacting clause is a CLASSIC case of “divide and conquer.” It divides the 51% from the 49%, and then it “unites” them into slavery by voting a certain way, for ex., taking away gun rights for all, etc. This is fraud and communism at its worst.

In People ex rel. Burry v. Howland et al (1898) it states that the office of the Justice of the Peace cannot be abolished by the New York legislature because this office was created by the Constitution of New York itself.

The original enacting clause was created by the Constitution of the State of Maine itself so, therefore, it cannot be abolished, and the legislature operates underneath it plus the legislature has no delegation of authority to create a democracy.

Now do you see the fraud foisted upon the people? Both the legislature and the people are weaken by this “new” enacting clause.

Divide and conquer! It divides the 51% of the people against the 49% of the people plus it divides the legislature and the people, too. How nice!

In a democracy it is majority rule, and in a republic the people elect their representatives to represent them for their benefit and NOT just some of the people.

This was so “clever” to change the enacting clause and pretend that the people were granted such powers to take away their own rights plus the rights of others and create a democracy by taking away our republic.

This is deception and fraud at its best.

The worse part is that it “looks nice” but in actuality it is really ugly, and I mean real ugly.

When did the “new” enacting clause come into being? I don’t know yet but I do possess some laws created in 1931 and those laws have the “new” enacting clause established within them.

Feedback anyone?

““I mean no disrespect to you, but … I know there’s a lot of politics at play here,” Hill said.

“No,” LePage interrupted. “There’s no politics. I’m a pragmatic person. I do not play politics.”

The exchange went on for about two minutes. At one point, LePage rose to leave the room. He then stopped and returned to the dais, saying the committee was denying him the chance to speak.

“It’s unfortunate that the people of the state of Maine are being played for patsies,” he said.

Read more, click here.

View video, click here.

NEWS CENTER 6 reports “Strimling & Harriman on Governor denied “on the record” comments, click here.

Governor LePage got a little taste of what we the people go through!