A Must Read! Cease and Desist Your Mandatory Mask Policy by Jason Hommel

September 8, 2020 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Attorneys, Banksters, beaches, big brother, BLM, brains eaten away, California, Caution, CDC, climate engineering, Congress, constitution, contaminated, corruption, Danger, death, degenerative brain disorder, Disappears you, disaster, foreclosure, globalists, Health, Idiots, Judges, Judicial Corruption, killing us, Legal, manifest injustice, mass die offs, Maxine Waters, Mayors, Murder, panic, pro-cop killing, Pro-Life, propaganda, Public safety, resigns, super-deadly virus, surveillance, takeover, Toxic, traitors, Trump, UN, United Nations, United States, US Senate, US Supreme Court, vaccines, Warning

CEASE AND DESIST YOUR MANDATORY MASK POLICY

Posted byJason Hommel 1st August 2020

44 Comments

Jason Hommel
(530) 559 2974

On 7-31-2020, just before 1:30pm in the afternoon, my wife and I were asked to leave the Sprouts Store located on 82nd and Quaker, in Lubbock, TX, because they specifically said they do not recognize medical exemptions to wearing masks. We were wearing medical exemption badges, which are not required by law to be worn, to help inform others. I was given a store policy sheet, and I was invited to shop online, from home.

I hereby demand that you cease and desist requiring wearing masks to shop at your stores owned and operated by Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.

I hereby demand that you stop violating the law in numerous ways, as follows.

You are in violation of both the City of Lubbock and the State of Texas masking laws, both of which make provisions for medical exemptions. You are not allowing medical exemptions, in violation of both laws, laws which you are fraudulently attempting to enforce.

1A. You are not a police officer. You are not empowered to enforce laws.

You are practicing medicine without a licence, which illegal in all States in America, which is a felony, and carries with it a prison term from 1 to 8 years. A mask to prevent viral transmission is a medical intervetion that carries with it risks, such as reduced oxygen intake, increased CO2 intake, increased risk of viral and bacterial and fungal lung infections, fungal face infections, and potential brain damage from reduced oxygen. A list of up to 131 scientific articles and reasons to avoid wearing a mask can be found online at https://revealingfraud.com/2020/05/health/refuse/ You are overriding both the science, the law, and other doctor’s orders, in overriding the legal medical exemptions, without a medical license, in violation of numerous laws. When engaged in practicing medicine without a licence, you can be sued for damages that your advice might cause, there not need be any actual damages. You can be sued for “possible brain damage” that often carries rewards exceeding $1-10 million dollars in damages, and you can be held personally and corporately liable. I hereby again claim my own medical exemption, and I’m not required by law to tell you my medical history, nor are you allowed to ask, because of medical privacy laws protected by HIPAA. But my medical history is published online at revealingfraud.com anyway.

2.(A) Medical Professionals can only “prescribe” medical procedures, which means to give advice. They are not even legally allowed to mandate a medical procedure. In order for Doctors to mandate a medical procedure, they first need to either obtain a medical power of attorney document over a patient, and/or declare the person unconscious and/or unfit to decline a life saving procedure. You neither have a medial power of attorney over me, nor have I hired you to be my doctor, nor am I unconscious. Nor am I mentally compromised in any way. By wearing a mask, you restrict your own oxygen, and you mentally compromise yourself. You might want to take off your mask, and take a few deep breaths to get oxygen to your brain, to help you understand the rest of this.

You are violating the ADA Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, that requires that you make reasonable accommodation to those with disabilities that could include numerous medical disabilities that could prevent people from wearing masks, such as, but not limited to, the following: asthma, allergies, anemia, fungal infections, blood clotting disorders, diabetes, PTSD, autism, pre existing lung problems, “being a human”, and needing to meet basic OSHA air quality requirements of more then 19.5% oxygen, and less then 400 parts per million CO2. Masks have been shown to reduce oxygen to 18% and increase CO2 to over 10,000 ppm.

3.(A) To help you understand the level of offense of your illegal discrimination, try demanding that black people not enter your store on the basis that give off particles that are offensive, and requiring them to shop at home. That is as offensive as refusing service to those not wearing masks for reasons of a medical exemption. The ADA also requires you to make reasonable accommodations for people with a religious exemption to wearing masks, because discrimination based on religion is also illegal.

Your demand that customers wear masks, with no medical exemptions, fraudulently assumes that masks work. They do not. Air easily slips around all masks, such as the very large air gaps around the nose, cheeks and chin. Furthermore, the particle size of the coronavirus is typically 1/1000th of the size of the spacing between threads of the mask itself. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. Holes in cloth masks are up to 100 microns. If you “zoom in” this is like expecting two threads, spaced as far apart as three football fields, 900 feet, to filter out a shoe the size of one foot. That is insane. Furthermore, there are 1000 microns per millimeter. The air gaps around the mask, by the nose, if they are half a centimeter, are 5000 microns. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. The difference is 50,000 times in size. This gap is so big, and the virus is so small, it’s like two lines, 10 miles apart, (52,800 feet) trying to filter out a basketball (just under a foot). Mask wearing is mental insanity. In both theory and actual fact, masks cannot possibly work to do what you expect them to do, so your position is not based on science, but rather, irrational fear, and irrational expectations that masks work, when they cannot. Since your position is based on insanity and the fraud that masks work, it cannot be said to follow the law and be “reasonable”. Furthermore, restaurants are open, with up to 60-100 people eating at once, with nobody wearing a mask while eating, and that fully complies with the law. So how could one person not wearing a mask in a grocery store be a danger compared to that? Fraud also carries with it a prison sentence, as fraud is a felony.
When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/
The COVID19 scare is a fraud, from top to bottom. Politicians and the Media are immune from the consequences of lying, but commercial stores have no such immunity from practicing fraud. COVID19 is fraud for the following reasons.

A. The test kits do not work. The tests have a 50% to 80% false positive rate.

B. The rate of positives has always been about 10%, from the very beginning of the crisis. The rate of people testing positive has not gone up, they have only increased the number and rate of tests given.

C. The test kits have been reported to be contaminated. June 23, 2020: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200623/early-cdc-covid-19-test-kits-likely-contaminated Unswabbed swabs are reported to test positive.

Nurses’ Lawsuit Claims ‘Fabricated’ COVID-19 Tests at Georgia Hospital
Max Blau June 22, 2020 https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/932722

D. While “confirmed case” counts have been going up, there is no such thing as a “confirmed case” because the test kits say directly on them “not to be used for diagnostic purposes” and therefore a fraudulent test with a high false positive rate cannot “confirm” anything.

To determine the lethality of any disease, they need to compare cases to deaths. Both numbers suffer from massive fraud. Regarding death counts:

A. The death counts are overinflated, as States have been directed by the CDC to include presumptive or presumed cases that would not even include the fraudulent test kit non confirmation, which, itself, over counts things with that false positive rate of from 50% to 80%. “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf

Furthermore, Birx says government is classifying all coronavirus death cases as COVID19 caused deaths, regardless of the cause, such as underlying health issues. See point B for further corroboration. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/birx-says-government-is-classifying-all-deaths-of-patients-with-coronavirus-as-covid-19-deaths-regardless-of-cause

B. Other nations have determined that 99% of their “died with COVID” cases did not die “from COVID” as 99% of other patients were elderly and had from 1-4 other co-morbid chronic conditions. If that is true, it takes the real death rate down to nearly nothing. This was reported by Bloomberg, back on March 18th, which basically shows and admits that this is all a media hoax. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says

C. The real death counts are not higher than the rate of normal rates of pnumonia. People vastly overestimate their chances of “catching” COVID, and vastly overestimate their chances of death, with younger people, aged 18-34 giving the highest estimations, at 90% estimated chances of catching it, and a 20% chance of death if they do catch it. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27494.pdf see chart on p. 12. These estimates would have COVID killing about 328 million x .9 x .2 = 59 million Americans. Even the White House estimations of the deaths of 2 million Americans were vastly over exaggerated, and the man responsible for that model resigned in disgrace. The “official” death toll, which is grossly over exaggerated, for multiple reasons, as I am going over, stands at 137,922, per the CDC as of July 31: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm see Table 1. That is a total death rate of the population of 0.04%, which is substantially lower than the CDC’s latest death rate estimate last month of 0.26%. Typical flu deaths in a year vary from 50,000 to 80,000.

D. Death counts are inflated from putting people into a very risky coma plus a ventilator, and that process kills people from 88% to 90% of the time. https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/nearly-90-of-covid-19-patients-put-on-ventilators-in-new-yorks-largest-health-system-died-study-finds/

E. The real death rate could well be 137,922 x 1% (no comorbidities) x 50% due to false positives, which would be 689! Given that there is no higher overall death rate than normal, the risk from a fraudulent disease that is not increasing the total death rate is zero. A real pandemic would not require fraudulently overstating things at all levels, from test kits that don’t work, to fraudulently claiming an increase in the infected, to inflated death counts, to masks that don’t work.

F. The false pandemic is a “live exercise” planned in advance, in October 18th, 2019. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

People with honor do not practice nor support games of fraud. If managers wish to stop participating in the COVID media lies, they may wish to remind their employer of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which makes it illegal to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Sections 703 A(1)(2). My own religious beliefs also prohibit me from participating in fraud, or from lying in any way.
Managers of businesses cannot be hired to break the law. You may have been told by a supervisor to “enforce store policy”, but you cannot be hired to break the law nor be hired to commit one felony, let alone multiple felonies. You always have the right to tell your supervisor, “You cannot legally require me to break the law.” You may wish to present this letter to your immediate supervisors and/or human resources department, and/or legal department and/or corporate board and/or company owners.
Even if you were a doctor, and a lawyer, and a police officer, you would still not have the right to demand that free people wear masks to shop at your store.
Even if you petitioned congress to change all the laws above, you would still not have the right to trample on people’s Constitutional rights, and it would remain unwise to do so.
Numerous “emergency COVID orders” have already been struck down as un-Constitutional in various other states.
Several other large retailers in Lubbock, at their corporate level, such as Market Street United Supermarkets and Wal-Mart, have decided to honor medical exemptions to mask wearing, presumably because they have been informed of the legal issues involved, or maybe because they are already involved in litigation over it, and are engaged in actions designed to settle the disputes.
After having been informed of the law, such as through a cease and desist letter like this one, if you continue to violate the law, it will be presumed that you are “willfully” violating the law, which often carries with it additional penalties, such as double the criminal prison sentence to be served, and/or double the civil fines to be paid.

Sincerely,

Jason Hommel

Posted byJason Hommel1st August 2020

The CDC Proves the CDC is LYING!

You know my response. It would take one of the masks below, to protect you from a deadly disease spreading. The stupid little masks that people wear, does not even cover their eyes.

Is common sense so lacking for people?

Damn it sheeple wake up, you act like idiots.

A Timeline—Pandemic and Erosion of Freedoms Have Been Decades in the Making

June 11, 2020June 11, 2020 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, Africa, Alert, Attorneys, Banksters, big brother, borders, California, Canada, Caution, CDC, Censorship, Confederate Flag, constitution, contaminated, corruption, Courts, Danger, deaths, Disappears you, Disasters, DNA, dying, Feds, Health, Judicial Corruption, Killary, killing us, law, Legal, manifest injustice, mass die offs, Maxine Waters, Mayors, Mortality Event, Murder, Obola, super-deadly virus, surveillance, takeover, Trump, United States, US Bank, US Senate, US Supreme Court, vaccines, Washington DC, weapons

MAY 21, 2020
A Timeline—Pandemic and Erosion of Freedoms Have Been Decades in the Making

A Timeline—Pandemic and Erosion of Freedoms Have Been Decades in the Making

By the Children’s Health Defense Team

From the moment of “COVID-19’s” naming—and particularly since the imposition of unprecedented restrictions on “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”—some people have smelled a rat. And with each passing week, the smell becomes worse. A growing chorus of ordinary citizens and world-renowned medical and scientific experts is raising questions about matters ranging from the coronavirus’s origins to the rationale for continued lockdowns (see here, here and here).

The mainstream media have shown themselves only too ready to lob ad hominem attacks against any and all such non-conformists. However, one does not have to be insensitive to the illness and deaths associated with COVID-19 to recognize that powerful agendas are riding on the coattails of SARS-CoV-2. Citizens are waking up to the fact that the countries, officials and public figures who embrace draconian interventions such as immunity certificates, microchipping, forced vaccination and the removal of children from their homes also approve of making our sovereign rights—whether to earn a living, maintain bodily integrity, congregate to practice our spirituality, enjoy the arts or protect and educate our children—contingent upon our acceptance of these Big Brother measures and technologies.

To make it easier for the public to assess what is happening and what is at stake, Children’s Health Defense has put together the following timeline of selected events. We invite readers to consider how these events—some of them seemingly unrelated—and the network of partnerships and relationships that they illustrate have contributed to the unfolding set of circumstances in which we now find ourselves.

While the lockdown is a cataclysm for the world economy, it is an opportunity for Gates” and his billionaire brotherhood…

Notes/Explanatory Context

Gain-of-function research: COVID-19 has prompted renewed questioning about a long-debated branch of virology that, around 2012, scientists benignly rebranded as “gain-of-function” (GOF) research. GOF experiments seek to generate viruses “with properties that do not exist in nature” or, stated another way, “alter a pathogen to make it more transmissible or deadly.” One of the leading proponents of GOF work is Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC), a “legend in coronavirology” and “trailblazer of synthetic genomic manipulation techniques” who specializes in engineering lethal coronaviruses from “mail-order DNA.” Baric and other GOF enthusiasts argue that this type of viral tinkering is “critical to the development of broad-based vaccines and therapeutics,” but critics, such as Dr. Thomas Inglesby (director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security), dispute this putative benefit.

Big Data and Big Telecom: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dafna Tachover (director of CHD’s “Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project”) wrote on May 8: “5G has almost nothing to do with improving your lives; it’s all about controlling your life, marketing products, and harvesting your data for Artificial Intelligence purposes. The 21st century’s ‘black gold’ is data.” They note that Bill Gates, along with a number of other players and companies, is helping set up a “microwave radiation-emitting spider web [that] will allow Big Data/Big Telecom and Big Brother to capture what happens inside and outside every person at every moment of life” using a sinister brain-machine interface and other technologies, many financed by Gates. In short, “While the lockdown is a cataclysm for the world economy, it is an opportunity for Gates” and his billionaire brotherhood, ably assisted by an unadmirable fleet of medical and scientist yes-men.

Timeline of selected events
1998
May 18: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 20 states file antitrust charges against Microsoft.

2000
2000: Bill Gates steps down from his position as Microsoft CEO, and Bill and Melinda Gates launch their eponymous foundation.

2000: The Gates Foundation (along with other partners) launches the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI), known today as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The foundation has given $4.1 billion to Gavi over the past 20 years.

2001
November: After initially losing the antitrust lawsuit and appealing the decision, Microsoft settles its case with the DOJ out of court.

2002
November 2002: University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC) researcher Ralph Baric publishes a “breakthrough work” in gain-of-function research (studies that alter pathogens to make them more transmissible or deadly, see Notes above), describing the creation of a synthetic clone of a natural mouse coronavirus.

November 2002: China’s Guangdong province reports the first case of “atypical pneumonia” (later labeled as SARS).

The speed of the Baric group illustrates how quickly a qualified team of virologists can create a synthetic clone from a natural virus, and therefore make genetic modifications to it.
2003
October 28: A paper by the Baric research group at UNC describes their synthetic recreation of the “previously undescribed” SARS coronavirus. (Writing in 2020, a scientist states, “The speed of the Baric group illustrates how quickly a qualified team of virologists can create a synthetic clone from a natural virus, and therefore make genetic modifications to it. Moreover, that was back in 2003. Today, a qualified laboratory can repeat those steps in a matter of weeks.”)

2005
December: Congress approves the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “to issue a PREP Act Declaration . . . that provides immunity from liability for any loss caused, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administration or use of countermeasures to diseases, threats, and conditions determined in the Declaration to constitute a present or credible risk of a future public health emergency.”

2009
2009-present (and earlier): The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awards millions of dollars in global health funding to Imperial College London; funding covers areas such as polio, HIV, family planning, malaria, health care delivery, agricultural development, information technology and “public awareness and analysis.”

2009: The Gates Foundation funds human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine trials in India, administering the vaccine to 23,000 young girls in remote provinces. Seven die and approximately 1,200 suffer autoimmune conditions, fertility disorders or other severe reactions. Ethical violations include forged consent forms and refusal of medical treatment for the injured girls.

October 2009: Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), goes on YouTube to declare that serious adverse events for the H1N1 influenza vaccine are “very, very, very rare.” Months later, serious adverse events such as miscarriages, narcolepsy and febrile convulsions explode in multiple countries.

2010
January: Bill Gates pledges $10 billion in funding for the World Health Organization (WHO) and announces “the Decade of Vaccines.”

May 18: Senator and physician Tom Coburn calls out Dr. Fauci for misleadingly touting “significant progress in HIV vaccine research”—research that has ushered millions into NIAID’s coffers. Dr. Coburn stated, “Most scientists involved in AIDS research believe that an HIV vaccine is further away than ever.”

2011
December 30: Dr. Fauci promotes gain-of-function research on bird flu viruses, arguing that the research is worth the risk. The risks worry other “seasoned researchers.”

2012
April 20: Baylor College researchers publish their evaluation of four vaccine candidates for SARS, concluding that “Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated.”

May: The 194 Member States of the World Health Assembly endorse the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), led by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in collaboration with NIAID, WHO, Gavi, UNICEF and others. Dr. Fauci is one of five members on the GVAP’s Leadership Council.

2014
2014: Dr. Deborah Birx takes the helm of PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), which Dr. Fauci helped launch (in 2003) and which benefits from generous Gates Foundation support. Birx and Fauci are long-time allies, having worked together during the early years of AIDS and sharing overlapping career paths.

October 7: National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Francis Collins announces a “new phase of cooperation” between NIH and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, including partnering for vaccine development.

October 17: Under President Obama, the NIH halts federal funding for gain-of-function (GOF) research (see Notes) and asks federally funded GOF researchers to “agree to a voluntary moratorium.” The funding hiatus applies to 21 studies “reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.” NIH later allows 10 of the studies to resume.

[T]hese data and restrictions represent a crossroads of [gain-of-function] research concerns; the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens.
2015
2015: NIAID, under Fauci, awards a five-year, $3.7 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance (whose director gets credit on subsequent publications for “funding acquisition” rather than scientific work) to conduct gain-of-function studies on the “risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” Ten percent of the award goes to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which does “the bulk of the on-the-ground sample collection and analysis.”

January: In a public appearance, Bill Gates states, “We’re taking things that are genetically modified organisms and we’re injecting them into little kids’ arms; we just shoot ‘em right into the vein.”

September 24: UNC’s Ralph Baric is granted a patent for the creation of chimeric coronavirus spike proteins.

November 9: Baric and the Wuhan Institute’s Shi Zheng-Li (the leading GOF coronavirus researcher in China) publish what some refer to as “the most famous gain-of-function virology paper” (in Nature Medicine), describing their creation of a synthetic chimeric coronavirus. The authors state: “[T]hese data and restrictions represent a crossroads of GOF research concerns; the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens [emphasis added]. In developing policies moving forward, it is important to consider the value of the data generated by these studies and whether these types of chimeric virus studies warrant further investigation versus the inherent risks involved.”

2016
2016: The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity states that “very few government-funded gain-of-function experiments [pose] a significant threat to public health.”

…researchers blame the Gates-funded polio vaccination campaign for almost half a million cases of childhood paralysis.
2017
February 8: The Modi administration in India severs ties with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, after researchers blame the Gates-funded polio vaccination campaign for almost half a million cases of childhood paralysis.

November 30: Shi Zheng-Li and coauthors publish a paper in PLoS Pathogens describing the creation of eight new synthetic coronaviruses.

December 19: The NIH and Dr. Fauci’s NIAID restore federal funding for gain-of-function research, ending the moratorium that began in October 2014.

December 19: Dr. Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard School of Public Health tells the New York Times that the type of gain-of-function experiments endorsed by Dr. Fauci’s NIAID have “done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics, and yet risked creating an accidental pandemic.”

NIAID awards a six-year renewal grant of $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology to continue their gain-of-function studies on bat coronaviruses.
2019
2019: NIAID awards a six-year renewal grant of $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology to continue their gain-of-function studies on bat coronaviruses. The renewal is approved “unusually quickly,” receiving a “really extremely high priority for funding.”

August 14: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) records show that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation owns 5.3 million shares of Crown Castle International Corp., representing the Foundation’s second largest tech holding after Microsoft. Crown Castle dominates ownership of 5G infrastructure throughout the U.S., including cell towers, small cell nodes and fiber.

October: A report released by NBC News in May, 2020 declares, “The analysis of commercial telemetry data in Wuhan suggests the COVID-19 pandemic began earlier than initially reported” and “supports the release of COVID-19 at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” NBC’s May 8 summary states, “there was no cellphone activity in a high-security portion of the Wuhan Institute of Virology from Oct. 7 through Oct. 24, 2019, and that there may have been a ‘hazardous event’ sometime between Oct. 6 and Oct. 11.”

October 6: On May 5, 2020, British and French researchers publish a study estimating that COVID-19 could have started as early as October 6, 2019.

October 18-27: Wuhan hosts the Military World Games (“Wuhan 2019”), held every four years. More than 9,000 athletes from over 100 countries compete. The telecom systems for the Athletes’ Village constructed for the event are powered by 5G technology, “showcas[ing] its infrastructure and technological prowess.”

October 18: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security convene an invitation-only “tabletop exercise” called Event 201 to map out the response to a hypothetical global coronavirus pandemic.

November-December: General practitioners in northern Italy start noticing a “strange pneumonia.”

December 2-3: Vaccine scientists attending the WHO’s Global Vaccine Safety Summit confirm major problems with vaccine safety around the world.

December 18: Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) report the development of a “novel way to record a patient’s vaccination history,” using smartphone-readable nanocrystals called “quantum dots” embedded in the skin using microneedles—this work is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

December 31: Chinese officials inform the WHO about a cluster of “mysterious pneumonia” cases. Later, the South China Morning Post reports that it can trace the first case back to November 17.

Dr. Peter Hotez of Baylor College … tells a Congressional Committee that coronavirus vaccines have always had a “unique potential safety problem”
2020
January 7: Chinese authorities formally identify a “novel” coronavirus.

January 10: China makes the genome sequence of the new coronavirus publicly available.

January 11: China records its first death attributed to the new coronavirus.

January 20: The first U.S. coronavirus case is reported in Washington State.

January 23: Shi Zheng-Li releases a paper reporting that the new coronavirus is 96% identical to a strain that her lab isolated from bats in 2013 but never publicized.

January 30: The WHO declares the new coronavirus a “global health emergency.”

Jan. 31, 2020: A group of Indian scientists publishes a study finding HIV sequences in the 2019-nCoV coronavirus. The scientists withdraw the study within 24 hours, presumably under some pressure.

February 4: Sixty-seven year-old scientist Dr. Frank Plummer, head until 2015 of Canada’s level-4 National Microbiology Laboratory, dies under mysterious circumstances while in Nairobi, Kenya. During the SARS outbreak in the early 2000s, Plummer told the New York Times that 60% of “probable” and “suspected” SARS cases had failed the test needed to confirm a link between coronavirus and SARS: “[W]hether it is the entire explanation for SARS I am just not sure yet.”

February 4: With just 11 people in the U.S. who are confirmed to have COVID-19, HHS issues a Declaration, published on March 17 in the Federal Register, that places the new coronavirus under the umbrella of the 2005 PREP Act, making medical countermeasures (including vaccines) immune from liability.

February 5: Bill and Melinda Gates announce $100 million in funding for coronavirus vaccine research and treatment efforts.

February 10: French and Canadian scientists publish a paper about the new coronavirus describing an “important” anomaly—12 additional nucleotides—not observed in previous coronaviruses. They suggest that the distinct feature “may provide a gain-of-function . . . for efficient spreading in the human population.”

February 11: The WHO gives the disease thought to be caused by the new coronavirus a name: “COVID-19.” WHO’s Director-General explains, “We had to find a name that did not refer to a geographical location, an animal, an individual or group of people, and which is also pronounceable and related to the disease.”

February 24: Moderna, Inc. sends the first batch of its experimental coronavirus vaccine, mRNA-1273, to its research partner, NIAID.

February 25: Moderna stock shares trade 15% higher.

February 29: The U.S. reports its first COVID-19 death.

March 5: Dr. Peter Hotez of Baylor College (who has previously tried to develop a SARS vaccine) tells a Congressional Committee that coronavirus vaccines have always had a “unique potential safety problem”—a “kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon.”

March 6: President Trump signs an $8.3 billion emergency coronavirus spending package, much of which “directly benefit[s] the drug industry.”

March 10: Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia expresses concerns about the push to “rush [a vaccine] through,” particularly in the absence of “any history of making a coronavirus vaccine.”

March 10: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome and Mastercard commit $125 million to identify, assess, develop and scale up COVID-19 treatments, forming the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator. The $50 million in Gates Foundation funding is part of the $100 million in COVID-19 funding announced by Gates on February 5.

March 11: The WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic.

March 13: Bill Gates steps down from the Boards of Microsoft and Berkshire Hathaway to “dedicate more time to philanthropic priorities.”

March 16: Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, scientific advisor to the UK government, publishes his computer simulations warning that there will be over two million COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. unless the country adopts “intensive and socially disruptive measures.”

March 16: Dr. Fauci tells Americans that they must be prepared to “take more drastic steps” and “hunker down significantly” to slow the coronavirus’s spread.

March 16: NIAID launches a Phase 1 trial in 45 healthy adults of the mRNA-1273 coronavirus vaccine co-developed by NIAID and Moderna, Inc. The trial skips the customary step of testing the vaccine in animal models prior to proceeding to human trials.

March 17: The Nation publishes an analysis covering conflicts of interest in the Gates Foundation’s charitable giving, describing “close to $2 billion in tax-deductible charitable donations to private companies,” including GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and “close to $250 million in charitable grants . . . to companies in which the foundation holds corporate stocks and bonds,” including Merck, GSK, Sanofi and other pharmaceutical corporations. A critic states that the foundation has “created one of the most problematic precedents in the history of foundation giving by essentially opening the door for corporations to see themselves as deserving charity claimants at a time when corporate profits are at an all-time high.”

March 22: U.S. bioweapons expert Dr. Francis Boyle repeats earlier statements that the purpose of Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) labs such as the Wuhan Institute of Virology “is the research, development, testing and stockpiling of offensive biological weapons” and that the new virus is a “weaponized” SARS coronavirus that leaked out of the Wuhan BSL-4 lab.

Bill Gates announces significant funding for a company, EarthNow, that will blanket Earth with $1 billion in video surveillance satellites.

March 24: Bill Gates announces significant funding for a company, EarthNow, that will blanket Earth with $1 billion in video surveillance satellites.

March 26: Microsoft announces that it is acquiring Affirmed Networks, a company focused on 5G and “edge computing.”

March 26: Dr. Fauci publishes an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine (with senior NIAID official H. Clifford Lane and CDC director Robert Redfield), stating that “the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza,” with a case fatality rate of perhaps 0.1%.

March 27: President Trump signs the $2 trillion CARES Act into law.

March 27: Children’s Health Defense publishes its video and article, “Dr. Fauci and COVID-19 priorities: therapeutics now or vaccines later?” Shortly thereafter, Mailchimp deactivates CHD’s account with no advance notice and no violation of Mailchimp’s rules.

March 29: President Trump extends nationwide social distancing guidelines until April 30.

March 31: White House coronavirus advisors Dr. Deborah Birx and Dr. Fauci cite models showing a potential 100,000 to 240,000 coronavirus deaths “even if the country keeps stringent social distancing guidelines in place.” Fauci describes social distancing and lockdowns as “inconvenient” but “the answer to our problems.”

April 2: Bill Gates states that a coronavirus vaccine “is the only thing that will allow us to return to normal.”

April 3: Forbes reports that Moderna’s CEO has become an overnight billionaire after the company ended 2019 with a net loss.

April 6: Dr. Fauci describes a COVID-19 vaccine as a “showstopper” and states, “I hope we don’t have so many people infected that we actually have . . . herd immunity.”

April 9: Dr. Fauci states that the U.S. death toll from the coronavirus “looks more like the 60,000 [range],” adding the “models are really only as good as the assumptions that you put into the model.”

April 9: The Gates-funded Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) reports that 115 COVID-19 vaccines are in the pipeline.

April 9: Children’s Health Defense publishes “Gates’ globalist vaccine agenda: a win-win for pharma and mandatory vaccination.”

April 11: Children’s Health Defense publishes “Here’s why Bill Gates wants indemnity… Are you willing to take the risk?”

April 15: Bill Gates pledges another $150 million to coronavirus vaccine development and other measures. He states, “There are seven billion people on the planet. We are going to need to vaccinate nearly every one.”

April 16: Moderna announces up to $483 million in funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to speed up the mRNA-1273 vaccine’s development.

April 18: Professor Luc Montagnier, recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of HIV, appears on French television and states that SARS-CoV-2 has been “manipulated” to include “added sequences” from HIV. Professor Montagnier asserts that this “meticulous” insertion could only have been carried out in a laboratory. Others raise similar questions about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

April 18: News outlets report that the country’s first coronavirus tests are ineffective due to CDC lab contamination and the CDC’s violation of its manufacturing standards.

April 21: Washington State announces plans to have a 1,500-person contact tracing team in place by mid-May.

April 23: Researchers issue a preprint reporting “direct evidence” of at least 30 different SARS-CoV-2 genetic variants.

April 23: News outlets report that American billionaires’ wealth increased by 10% during the first few months of COVID-19.

April 23: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “The Bill Gates effect: WHO’s DTP vaccine killed more children in Africa than the diseases it targeted.”

April 24: The NIH cancels the funding awarded to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain-of-function research on coronaviruses (funding awarded continuously since 2015). The NIH and Dr. Fauci decline to comment.

April 27: Former FDA head Scott Gottlieb (now with Pfizer) and former Medicare/Medicaid official Andy Slavitt urge the Trump administration to dedicate $46 billion to contact tracing and isolation.

April 28: A Newsweek article reports, “Dr. Fauci backed controversial Wuhan lab with U.S. dollars for risky coronavirus research.” Fauci does not respond to requests for comments.

April 29: Bloomberg publishes a story about President Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed,” a planned pharmaceutical-government-military collaboration to shrink the development time for a coronavirus vaccine.

April 30: Bill Gates writes that “the world will be able to go back to the way things were . . . when almost every person on the planet has been vaccinated against coronavirus.” Gates also states that “Governments will need to expedite their usual drug approval processes in order to deliver the vaccine to over 7 billion people quickly.”

April 30: Dr. Fauci states that it is “doable” to have hundreds of millions of doses of a coronavirus vaccine available by January 2021.

May 1: Dr. Thomas Inglesby (director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security), discussing gain-of-function research, states that “laboratory systems are not infallible, and even in the greatest laboratories of the world, there are mistakes.”

May 1: Democratic Representative Bobby Rush of Illinois introduces the TRACE Act (“HR 6666: COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, and Contacting Everyone”). The conspicuously vague Act would allocate $100 billion to CDC-hired entities for contact tracing and “other purposes,” including family separation. (See also May 15.)

May 4: Bill Gates pledges another $50 million toward COVID-19, for a total of $300 million in commitments.

May 4: President Trump states that the U.S. will have a coronavirus vaccine by the end of 2020.

May 5: British and French researchers publish “Emergence of genomic diversity and recurrent mutations in SARS-CoV-2,” suggesting that the recurrent mutations detected “may indicate ongoing adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 to its novel human host.”

May 5: Neil Ferguson resigns from the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) after flouting his own social distancing rules. The married lover with whom Ferguson has his trysts works for an organization “loosely connected with Bill Gates, through the World Economic Forum.”

May 5: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “Redfield and Birx: can they be trusted with COVID?”

May 6: An anonymous software engineer (ex-Google) pronounces Neil Ferguson’s COVID-19 computer model “unusable for scientific purposes.”

May 6: New York governor Andrew Cuomo announces that the state will partner with “visionary” Bill Gates to restructure education by placing “technology at the forefront.” Cuomo appoints former Google CEO Eric Schmidt to lead a blue-ribbon committee for this purpose. Critics push back, describing past Gates-Foundation-funded educational fiascos that amassed “detailed personal information about millions of students” in the cloud.

May 7: Business Insider reports that over 33 million Americans have filed for unemployment over the seven-week period since COVID-19 restrictions began.

May 7: NPR reports that 44 states and the District of Columbia have plans to deploy a contact tracing workforce of over 66,000 workers.

May 8: NBC News releases a private report describing an unconfirmed shutdown of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in October 2019.

May 8: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dafna Tachover (director of CHD’s “Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project”) publish “The brave new world of Bill Gates and Big Telecom.”

May 11: UK chief medical officer Dr. Chris Whitty (an insider who has received millions in malaria research funding from the Gates Foundation and who endorses stigma as a useful public health intervention) states that COVID-19 is “harmless to [the] vast majority.”

May 13: Australian researchers report that “SARS-CoV-2 is uniquely adapted to infect humans, raising important questions as to whether it arose in nature by a rare chance event or whether its origins might lie elsewhere.”

May 14: Microsoft announces that it is acquiring UK-based Metaswitch Networks “to expand its Azure 5G strategy.”

May 15: The House passes the 1,815-page, $3 trillion HEROES Act (“Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act”), sneaking in portions of the TRACE ACT that would funnel $75 billion to the CDC for “coronavirus testing, contact tracing and isolation measures.”

May 18: Moderna announces interim results from the Phase 1 trial of its mRNA-1273 coronavirus vaccine. The company reports that three out of 15 healthy participants (20%) experienced Grade 3 systemic adverse events following a second dose. (The Merck Manual defines Grade 3 as “severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care.”)

May 18: Discussing the interim results from Moderna’s Phase 1 trial of its mRNA-1273 vaccine—co-developed with NIAID—Dr. Fauci states: “I must warn that there’s also the possibility of negative consequences, where certain vaccines can actually enhance the negative effect of the infection.”

May 18: After describing its interim Phase 1 results as “promising,” shares of Moderna stock soar 25%, closing at a “record high.” The company’s stock has gained 241% since the beginning of 2020.

May 19: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “How Bill Gates controls global messaging and censorship.”

May 20: Microsoft announces its new supercomputer intended to create “human-like” artificial intelligence.

Stop the conveyor belt
Around the world, many people are understandably reeling in shock at the rapid economic, social and cultural changes that have followed in the wake of the phenomenon called “COVID-19.” Many of these changes involve ever-tighter restrictions on our rights and freedoms, accompanied by inexorable messaging—both public and subliminal—that a “vaccine for all” and 24/7 tracking and surveillance are the only way out. Increasingly, however, there are hopeful signs that more members of the public are recognizing the duplicity and self-interest of those offering false salvation. Each of us needs to do our part to expose these issues, standing up for individual sovereignty and working to halt the transition “to a totalitarian singularity more despotic than Orwell ever imagined.”

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

Republishing Guidelines

TREATY OF PEACE 2020: What every U.S. Citizen needs to know

May 25, 2020 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, access to injustice, Alert, Artificial Intelligence, Attorneys, Banksters, beaches, big brother, California, Canada, CDC, Censorship, climate engineering, Clinton, CNN News, confiscation, Congress, constitution, contaminated, corruption, Danger, death, DeKalb County, disarmament, geoengineered, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial ethics, Legal, manifest injustice, Maxine Waters, Monsanto, president, Public safety, surveillance, takeover, traitors, Trump, United Nations, United States, US Supreme Court, vaccines, Warning, weapons

← CLIMATE CHANGE: ALL YOUth ‘deserve’ to know
TREATY OF PEACE 2020:
What every U.S. Citizen needs to know and respond to asap! →

Press Release: USA Treaty of Peace 2020 | OPT IN CLOSES SOON
Posted on October 2, 2019 by ourgreaterdestiny

Press Release: USA Treaty of Peace 2020 | OPT IN CLOSES SOON

Lawful action taken in the USA
Never before have Americans been offered a peaceful, lawful process to free themselves and their immediate family from the illegitimate government construct, detailed in a video with transcript at https://ourgreaterdestiny.org/2019/07/exit-tyranny-usa-private-immunity-law-inherent-autonomy/

Award against the United States granted Aug 19.19 on behalf of all Americans
From CLAIMANT Phil Hudok

After 4 years, a monumental battle has resulted in an arbitration award that returns to whomsoever choose, the status of heir of the Creator with free will choice vs. subject of the state and forced compliance. And the best part, it applies to you via an opt-in clause.

The award is in-hand and cannot be challenged.

Anyone can opt-in with no risk, monetary or otherwise.

The settlement is yet to be decided and is somewhat contingent on the numbers that demand it. [Spread the word so people opt in]

The documents for download verify the following three aspects:

The scope of this Arbitration Award is without precedent.
The Arbitration Act passed a recent test in the Supreme Court.
A 2016 Congressional Bill on the private side produced the settlement of an arbitration award that while quite impressive, pales in comparison to Treaty of Peace 2020.

A deadline for Opt-In is approaching and the window is short
Simply put, with freedom comes responsibility. Claim the free will and responsibility as heirs of the Creator or linger as a subject of the state where compliance is the rule.

Bill of Peace 2020 defines who can opt in …..
By and Between Gene Stalnaker, Phillip Hudok, Alicia Lutz-Rolow, Leonard Frank house of Harview, Keith Lawrence Moore, any and all natural born men/women so opting in by Free-will choice (born on the soil of the United States of America to a father and/or mother who is natural born or naturalized by and through lawful means) and the United States of America [etc.]
(7) The term “Beneficiaries” means any one of the following beneficiaries either individually or in any combination thereof or both-
Gene Stalnaker
Phillip Hudok
Alicia Lutz-Rolow
Leonard Frank house of Harview
Keith Lawrence Moore
Any and all natural born men/women so opting in by Free-will choice and the immediately family thereof [etc.]

Read the many benefits that await Americans who opt in https://www.dropbox.com/s/cfzqe18hjtagmwy/Remedy%20Relief%20Locked.pdf?dl=0

Everyone who opts in claims the immunity, privileges, and freedom Americans should have had under the original Contract [Constitution] breached several hundred years ago.

All required documents including an Award Summary and detailed Opt In instructions are at http://www.hudok.info/

Please disseminate!

With No Apologies,
Phillip Hudok

Private Law Immunity
Private law and arbitration are international however you need to know how your governance system is set up before taking lawful action. USA Private Immunity Law case will not work in Canada because of the Canadian system of governance.

Please share widely to inform Americans of this rare opportunity. Thank you.

DISCLAIMER
This information is not intended to provide legal or lawful advice. It is for educational purposes only.

Sincerely,
Doreen A Agostino
Without Prejudice and Without Recourse
http://freetobewealthy.net
Sent via hardwired computer
All wireless turned off to safeguard life

arb

Senate To Be Replaced With Room Full Of Monkeys Throwing Feces

September 30, 2018September 30, 2018 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, access to injustice, Artificial Intelligence, Banksters, corruption, criminal injustice, Feds, globalists, Judicial Corruption, law, Lawyers, manifest injustice, strong arm, sux, US Senate, US Supreme Court

Senate To Be Replaced With Room Full Of Monkeys Throwing Feces
September 28th, 2018
https://babylonbee.com/news/senate-to-be-replaced-with-room-full-of-monkeys-throwing-feces/

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In an emergency, overnight referendum, the American people voted on Thursday to replace the United States Senate with a room full of monkeys throwing feces. The measure passed with 57% of the vote. 22% of voters thought the Senate should be replaced by barking seals, while 17% voted that the replacement should be the pit of venomous snakes from Indiana Jones. 3.97% voted that Senate members be replaced by screaming goats. “About 100 people” voted for the current Senators to keep their jobs, with this tiny voting bloc centered in Washington, D.C.

Highland Ape Rescue out of West Virginia will be teaming up with Cornwell Primate farms to supply hundreds of monkeys and apes to the Senate. The animals will be fed a nutritious mixture of foods that produce easily throwable feces. Protective glass will be put up around the Senate for camera crews to safely film, but anyone being interviewed by the new senators will have to sit in the middle of the poo-flinging octagon, coming under a heavy barrage of projectile excrement.

“It will be a huge improvement from how things were before,” said ape trainer, Marlena Henwick. “No more 10-12 hour hearings. With these monkeys, all the fecal projectiles will have been flung in under 30 minutes. One and done.”

The recently replaced senators will be placed on display at the National Zoo in Washington, D.C. for families to park attendees to observe and zoologists to study.

Must Read: The Coming Deep State Massacre (Part One) TheCommonsenseshow.com

June 24, 2018June 24, 2018 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, access to injustice, analysis, Banksters, big brother, cement, Censorship, child porn, Congress, corruption, Disappears you, Fast and Furious, Feds, globalists, gun ban treaty, gun-running, Judicial Corruption, Justice Dept., Killary, Lawyers, Legal, Mainstream News Media, manifest injustice, Money Laundering, Murder, Obabma Treason, Obama, president, propaganda, Russians, Trump, UN, United Nations, United States, US Supreme Court, Washington DC, Whistleblower, World Health Organization

The Coming Deep State Massacre (Part One)
http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/the-coming-deep-state-massacre-part-one/

There is a plot that is so intricate, so detailed, so complex and so very brilliant, it is very difficult to explain to others who already don’t know some, or most of the story. The revelation of this plot may cause me, in the near future, to reverse my position on Jeff Sessions and my expressed to desire to have him removed as Attorney General.

Unlike when I stood alone for months on reports of the near coup against the Obama administration over Benghazi, what I am about to reveal is known by others, either in part or in whole. My preference would have been to have waited and several journalists report what is known at the same time. However, I just conducted a telephonic interview with Paul Preston. In addition, one of my best sources, after months of telling me big things are going to become public with regard to Deep State minions, I have concluded that I am a bit ahead of the knowledge curve and it would not be wise for me to hang onto what I have learned.

In a nutshell, this paper will reveal that high profile figures have been involved in treasonous activity against the United States, coupled with illicit criminal behavior at the same time. I have learned that some of these figures are on the verge of being arrested and indicted y the Trump administration. Unlike my Benghazi revelations, I do not stand alone in my discoveries. Without the information I have recently learned, I could have made a strong circumstantial case supporting what is going to be revealed here today. Subsequently, from a credibility standpoint, this is very low risk. However, from a personal safety perspective, it would not be wise to reveal my discoveries and recent conclusions.

Part one of this series consists of contextual background which will provide the factual justification to make the allegations against key Deep State operatives in Part two.

Relevant Contextual Background

The brief summary of what I have already reported in the past is highly relevant to what is coming.

The following events have already been documented and reported on The Common Sense Show will be revealed in this section.
John Cruz-Vice President of HSBC Bank

I first interviewed John Cruz in 2011 and again in 2o12. Most recently, I interviewed Cruz in 2016. This person is an unique position to connect keep members of the Deep State with treason against the United States as well as overt criminal behavior.

Here is a summary of what I reported in 2016 and unfortunately, the nation was ready, at that time, to fully embrace the Cruz revelations.

John Cruz is your ordinary family man. He put himself through college and worked his way up the corporate ladder.  He excelled at working with bank customers. He rose to the position of Sr. Vice-President of HSBC Bank. Everything was fine was until he discovered that his bank was laundering drug money for the cartels and terrorists and some of the money ended up in the hands of the elite.

John Cruz was fired from his job at HSBC Bank in New York for whistle-blowing on the bank’s illegal activity, his family was threatened. and yet,  he still feels that everyone needs to know what goes on behind the scenes of a major bank. Cruz even reported the illegal money laundering to Homeland Security, but to no avail. He should be an American hero, but instead, he was chastised, employment was hard to find and he lives in constant fear of his life. If it were not for the tapes he’s made and held back, for leverage sake, he would already be dead.

John Cruz discovered that massive amounts of drug cartel and terrorist money was being laundered through HSBC. Cruz investigated and found evidence of multiple money-laundering operations. He went to his bosses and reported what he found after he had conducted field operational investigations and found evidence of boiler rooms operations and fake business addresses, etc. His bosses told him to get back to work and to forget what he had told them. The head of HSBC security told him “This is how we make money, forget what you think you have seen”.

One of the by-products of this criminality has impacted millions of Americans. Cruz revealed that the scourge of identity theft is headquartered deep in HSBC bank as fake accounts done so in order to launder illicit drug sales, funding terrorism, gun running and child-sex-trafficking. There are some of you reading these words whose names appear on HSBC bank accounts that are being used tos upport money laundering for one or all of the interest listed above and if you run afoul of the Deep State, this information could be used to falsely set you up.

I previously documented how FBI director Comey served on the Board of Directors at HSBC during the time of the coverup of the criminal activities. Comey is not the only senior federal government official implicated in the crimes of HSBC either through participation or cover up. I asked Cruz about Comey and he was aware that Comey had been on the board of directors at HSBC bank and was responsible for “moving money” (ie laundering terrorist-based activities as well as organized crime. We now know that moving money meant, in part, included moving money to the Clinton Foundation. And are we surrpised that Comey gave Clinton a free pass for her illegal emails? Comey should be in jail.

When I first printed these documentable allegations against Comey, he was not quite the household public figure that he is now. Now, people are going to pay attention.

Cruz also stated that the Clinton emails undoubtedly deal with her involvement iwth HSBC and the connection to the Clinton Foundation.

Eric Holder’s DoJ did not investigate money-laundering charges in deference to bank clients of his very own Washington-based law firm, where Holder was a senior partner prior to joining the Obama administration. Obama participated in this coverup after the fact. Do you remember the classic movie The Firm, starring Tom Cruise in which the law firm’s purpose was to provide cover for organized criminal activity? This is Eric Holder, pre Attorney General activities. Remember, Holder was also cited for Contempt of Congress, for his role in Fast and Furious in which, under his direction as the AG, he supplied the drug cartels with weapons which resulted in the murder of Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry. Today, Holder is the spokesperson for the unconstitutional and illegal CALEXIT, in which California is trying to exit the United States as a protectorate of the United Nations.

Cruz went far and wide with his allegations. DHS told him to go away. Manhattan’s District Attorney’s told him that this would cost him his job, and that is if he was lucky. The head of the New York Eastern District covered up the crime as well, after Cruz provided her with irrefutable prof of his allegations. And who was the head of the Eastern District of New York? Why, it was none other than Loretta Lynch, the current Attorney General.

Lynch, to cover her legal behind actually found HSBC guilty of violation the “Banking Secrecy Laws”, but ignored the 800 lb. gorilla in the room, the money laundering and the violation of national laws on terrorism. I asked Cruz why Lynch would pursue the one charge and not the other. He told my audience that she could prosecute on a far lesser charge to make the serious charge go away.

This fact actually came up in the confirmation of Lynch’s nomination to the AG position, but it was quickly swept under the rug. However, the Cruz two hour testimony before the Senate Judiciary committee was so damning, that the Senate had to withhold Lynch’s nomination vote for three weeks in order “to let things calm down”.

ON THE COMMON SENSE SHOW (7/31), CRUZ STATED THAT LYNCH “HAD FULL KNOWLEDGE” OF WHAT TRANSPIRED AT HSBC BANK. HOW DOES HE KNOW THAT? BECAUSE HE GAVE HER SECRET TAPE RECORDINGS HE MADE ALONG WITH DOCUMENTS DEMONSTRATING, NOT ONLY THE ABOUT MONEY LAUNDERING, BUT THE SENIOR OFFICIALS AT THE BANK ENGAGED IN A COVERUP. LORETTA LYNCH IS AN ACCOMPLICE TO MONEY LAUNDERING FOR THE DRUG CARTELS AND TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS SUCH AS THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD.

And according to Cruz, all of thee Deep State minions and notable public figures, former members of the Obama administration, have intimate connections with the Clinton Foundation.

When Lynch and Bill Clinton had their conflict of interest meeting in the Phoenix airport, what do you think they talked about?

Please keep in mind that these are the revelations from an insider of the most corrupt bank on the planet. By the way, I have learned that HSBC is laundering money into the CALEXIT movement.

Here is the last interview I did with John Cruz, who should be getting a lot more attention from the Independent Media than he is.

Scott Bennett-Former Army PSYOP

Dr. Scott Bennett served in the U.S. Army 11th Psychological Operations Battalion, attempted to blow the whistle by contacting the corporate controlled media as well as reaching out to US politicians after being removed from his job as a terrorist finance investigator after he proved to be too good at his job. This was due to the fact that the Obama administration and DHS were too cozy with various terrorist groups.

Dr. Bennett served in U.S. Special Operations Command, U.S. Central Command, the coordinator for the State Department Counter-terrorism and many other agencies in the US government.

If one wants to understand the close relationship between former high level operatives of the Obama administration and current Deep State interests, this is a can’t miss interview and the interview is listed below this narrative. On The Common Sense Show, Bennett laid out how terrorism was funded by key member of the Obama administration. Like John Cruz, Bennett, was not told this information. As an insider, he lived it. When Bennett began to leak the intelligence related to funding terrorism, he was imprisoned for two years by Obama for FILING A FALSE BUSINESS EXPENSE REPORT. This was to minor to imprison someone, but he served two years on totally false charges in order to cover up these crimes.

Bennett started out his intelligence career in the George W Bush administration. He transitioned into the Obama administration where they funded and supplied terrorist groups such as ISIS. These events, from a logistical and time frame perspective perfectly coincide with the Cruz revelations listed above.

The amount of information regarding the degree of the threat of terrorism which all of us face, is laid out in exquisite detail by Dr. Bennett in this interview.

Hillary Clinton and ISIS

In 2016, WikiLeaks continued to reveal criminal and outright treasonous behavior on the part of Hillary Clinton. WikiLeaks, with their “retrieval” of Clinton emails continued to show ties between Clinton and foreign governments,through the Clinton Foundation, criminally corrupt corporations and serious human rights violations.

At the center of the WikiLeaks revelations of Clinton’s treason and criminal behavior demonstrates undeniable Clinton links to Lafarge. Lafarge paid taxes to ISIS in order that they could protect its cement factory from destruction. The factor is located approximately northeast of Aleppo, Syria.

Another criminal investigation conducted by a Syrian news agency, Zaman al-Wasl, an independent news organization, stated that Lafarge bought oil from ISIS on a consistent basis.

In a 2007, a Washington Post article, at the time, when Clinton provided the bulk of the Clinton family income. in the 1990’s before husband Bill was elected President of the United States. Hillary Clinton, at that time, was “earning more than $100,000 a year from her law firm salary and corporate board fees.” At the time, she also served on Lafarge’s board, making about $31,000 a year from the company. the year 2007, was the year that Lafarge built its cement plant in Syria. By the way, CEMEX was a part of this operation. Who is CEMEX? They own the land in Tucson where a large child-sex-trafficking operation was discovered earlier this month.
John McCain and ISIS

My disdain for McCain is well known. Therefore, I will let ex-CIA clandestine officer, Robert David Steele speak to the terrorist related activities of John McCain, who remains a globalist till the end.

From Mr. Steele:

“We do now know (I did not know this at the time the below video was recorded and I have no link for this, it comes to me from an inside source) that former CIA Director John Brennan plotted this false flag attack, which may have involved some real sarin allegedly destroyed during the Obama Administration, with Senator John McCain and National Security Advisor Herbert McMaster…”

There are a couple of important considerations here. First, I have a deep-inside source that confirms Independent Media reports which places Senator John McCain at the scene of the crime. In other words, he visited Syria only days before the false flag. Further, I have had it confirmed by the same source that McCain has been tabbed to be the public source espousing Deep State propaganda to push to America towards war based on false allegations of election tampering by the Russians.

Previously on The Common Sense Show, I have documented several times, with interviews with people like Scott Bennett, that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in starting ISIS. John McCain has reportedly taken this relationship to a whole different level when he allegedly met with ISIS representatives when he was in Syria in which my source alleges that John McCain helped to coordinate the false flag attack in question. Further, my source claims that there is a Sandy Hook component to this flag attack in which he claims that First Responders were not even wearing gloves when they arrived on the scene and they should have been attired in hazmat suits and of course, crisis actors abound.

Robert David Steele continues:

“Brennan (Editor’s note: Ex-CIA director) got the Saudis to pay half and McCain got Israel to pay half. They blind-sided – this is clearly treason – not only the Director of the CIA, but the President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. In my personal view, both John McCain and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be impeached by their respective legislative bodies. Whether true or not I cannot certify – it is consistent with my evaluation of each of these people, and a good starting point for an international investigation. I have long felt that John Brennan should be standing before the International Court of Justice as a war criminal, not least because of the CIA’s drone assassination program that I recently denounced in a book review article for Intelligence and National Security.”

Conclusion

So, what did we learn? We have learned that prominent members of our government, both past and present haver served to undermine the country’s national security interests. In doing so, they have associated with terrorists and their organized criminal activities.

These summaries simply provide evidence that what is going to be revealed tomorrow has basis in verifiable fact. Based on what I already know and what I have recently learned, Part Two of this article will be revealing that we are sitting on revelations of unparalleled treason and corruption including attempted assassinations of President Trump, and his counter strike which will be described as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre of Deep State Operatives.

Wells Fargo Employees Are Said to Improperly Alter Documents By Hannah Levitt

May 18, 2018 by nootkabear, posted in above the law, access to injustice, Attorneys, Banksters, big brother, corruption, disaster, fallout, foreclosure, Fraud Upon the Court, Injustice, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Judicial Corruption, law, Lawyers, Legal, manifest injustice, Money Laundering, Poniz Scheme, United States, US Bank, US Senate, US Supreme Court, Wells Fargo

Wells Fargo Employees Are Said to Improperly Alter Documents
By Hannah Levitt
May 17, 2018, 10:06 AM EDT
Updated on May 17, 2018, 2:57 PM EDT

Wells Fargo & Co. found that employees in its wholesale unit added information to internal customer records without the clients’ knowledge, according to a person briefed on the matter.

The bank discovered the improper activity and reported it to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the matter hadn’t been publicly disclosed. The employees altered the documents in 2017 and earlier this year as they sought to satisfy regulatory demands related to anti-money-laundering controls, according to the Wall Street Journal, which reported the issue earlier Thursday.

Wells Fargo has struggled to move past a wave of scandals, which led to a Federal Reserve ban on increasing assets until the lender fixes missteps. The bank’s first-quarter results were marred by a charge of $800 million tied to a settlement with U.S. regulators. Earlier this month, the bank rolled out a new marketing campaign built around its efforts to regain customers’ trust.

Bryan Hubbard, an OCC spokesman, declined to comment. Wells Fargo spokesman Alan Elias said in an emailed statement that the bank can’t comment on regulatory matters, but that it takes “swift action to correct” any behavior that violates the firm’s values.

“This matter involves documents used for internal purposes,” Elias said. “No customers were negatively impacted, no data left the company, and no products or services were sold as a result.”

The bank’s shares dropped 1.6 percent at 2:40 p.m. in New York trading, the biggest decline in the 24-company KBW Bank Index.

— With assistance by Laura J Kelle

Same Old Story: Paper Trail vs, Money Trail (Freddie Mac) Posted on May 15, 2018 by Neil Garfield

May 18, 2018 by nootkabear, posted in Attorneys, Banksters, corruption, Courts, criminal injustice, fallout, foreclosure, Fraud Upon the Court, globalists, Housing Bubble, Housingwire, JPMorgan Chase Bank, Judicial Corruption, manifest injustice, Poniz Scheme, Rescission, United States, US Bank, US Senate, US Supreme Court

Same Old Story: Paper Trail vs, Money Trail (Freddie Mac)
Posted on May 15, 2018 by Neil Garfield
Payment by third parties may not reduce the debt but it does increase the number of obligees (creditors). Hence in every one of these foreclosures, except for a minuscule portion, indispensable parties were left out and third parties were in reality getting the proceeds of liquidation from foreclosure sales.
The explanations of securitization contained on the websites of the government Sponsored Entities (GSE’s) clearly demonstrate what I have been writing for 11 years and reveal a pattern of illusion and deception.

The most important thing about a financial transaction is the money. In every document filed in support of the illusion of securitization, it steadfastly holds firm to discussion of paper instruments and not a word about the actual location of the money or the actual identity of the obligee of that money debt.

Each explanation avoids the issue of where the money goes and how it was “processed” (i.e., stolen, according to me and hundreds of other scholars.)

It underscores the fact that the obligee (“debt owner” or “holder in due course” is never present in any legal proceeding or actual transaction or transfer of of the debt. This leaves us with only one conclusion. The debt never moved, which is to say that the obligee was always the same, albeit unaware of their status.

Knowing this will help you get traction in the courtroom but alleging it creates a burden of proof for you to prove something that you know is true but can only be confirmed with access to the books, records an accounts of the parties claiming such transactions ands transfers occurred.

GET A CONSULT
GO TO LENDINGLIES to order forms and services. Our forensic report is called “TERA“— “Title and Encumbrance Report and Analysis.” I personally review each of them for edits and comments before they are released.
Let us help you plan your answers, affirmative defenses, discovery requests and defense narrative:
954-451-1230 or 202-838-6345. Ask for a Consult. You will make things a lot easier on us and yourself if you fill out the registration form. It’s free without any obligation. No advertisements, no restrictions.
Purchase audio seminar now — Neil Garfield’s Mastering Discovery and Evidence in Foreclosure Defense including 3.5 hours of lecture, questions and answers, plus course materials that include PowerPoint Presentations.

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.

For one such example see Freddie Mac Securitization Explanation

And the following diagram:

Freddie Mac Diagram of Securitization

What you won’t find anywhere in any diagram supposedly depicting securitization:

Money going to an originator who then lends the money to the borrower.
Money going to a named REMIC “Trust” for the purpose of purchasing loans or anything else.
Money going to the alleged unnamed beneficiaries of a named REMIC “Trust.”
Money going to the alleged unnamed investors who allegedly purchased “certificates” allegedly issued by or on behalf of a named REMIC “Trust.”
Money going to the originator for sale of the debt, note and mortgage package.
Money going to originator for endorsement of note to alleged transferee.
Money going to originator for assignment of mortgage.
Money going to the named foreclosing party upon liquidation of foreclosed property.
Money going to the homeowner as royalty for use of his/her/their identity forming the basis of value in issuance of derivatives, hedge products and contract, insurance products and synthetic derivatives.
Money being credited to the obligee’s loan receivable account reducing the amount of indebtedness (yes, really). This is because the obligee has no idea where the money is coming from or why it is being paid. But one thing is sure — the obligee is receiving money in all circumstances.
Payment by third parties may not reduce the debt but it does increase the number of obligees (creditors). Hence in every one of these foreclosures, except for a minuscule portion, indispensable parties were left out and third parties were in reality getting the proceeds of liquidation from foreclosure sales.
Spread the word

OPINION: The heightened pleading standard established in 2009 is based on faulty propositions. Arthur H. Bryant, The National Law Journal

May 26, 2016 by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, above the law, access to injustice, Attorneys, Big Law, Congress, corruption, Court Cases, Courts, criminal injustice, ethics cases, Injustice, Judicial Rulings, judicial watch, Justice Dept., law, Lawyers, Legal, Trump, United States, US Supreme Court

National Law Journal
http://www.nationallawjournal.com/printerfriendly/id=1202758245088

‘Iqbal’ Brings Seven Years of Bad Luck for Plaintiffs

OPINION: The heightened pleading standard established in 2009 is based on faulty propositions.
Arthur H. Bryant, The National Law Journal
May 23, 2016

The seventh anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal was May 18. It’s a date that should live in infamy.
A 5-4 decision, Iqbal ignored reality — and the fact that truth is stranger than fiction. It flouted the process for amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. And it particularly limited access to justice for civil rights, employment discrimination and individual plaintiffs.
Seventy years before Iqbal, in 1938, the Federal Rules were adopted to get rid of “fact” pleading, which the rule-makers thought “led to wasteful disputes about distinctions that … were arbitrary or metaphysical, too often cutting off adjudication on the merits.” Under the new Rule 8, to start a lawsuit, the plaintiff had to file a complaint with “a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief.”
As the court later explained in Conley v. Gibson, the complaint did not have to “set out the facts in detail.” It just had to give the defendant “fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” A motion to dismiss would only be granted if “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Then, the plaintiff could take discovery, to find out what the defendant and other relevant people knew and when they knew it. After that, the court would determine whether there was sufficient proof to require a trial.
In Iqbal, the court rejected a complaint alleging that high-level U.S. officials had a Pakistani Muslim and thousands of other Arab men illegally arrested and detained after the 9/11 attacks because of “their race, religion, and national origin … and not because of any evidence” of their “involvement in supporting terrorist activity.”
To do so, the court changed the rules. It held that, from now on, to “survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Dismissal no longer turned on whether the complaint provided “fair notice” to the defendant; it turned on whether the claim was “plausible on its face.” How were judges to determine that? By drawing on their “judicial experience and common sense.”
Motions to dismiss were immediately filed throughout the federal courts. Judges’ and lawyers’ workloads increased enormously. The lower courts and lawyers are still struggling to figure out how the new system is supposed to work — and, if they can, make it fair.
For three reasons, however, it’s become increasingly clear that Iqbal was a mistake.
First, whatever one thinks about the allegations in the case, the Iqbal pleading standard is based on a proposition — allegations probably aren’t true if they’re not plausible on their face — that is false. Reality keeps teaching us that. None of us, including federal judges using their “judicial experience and common sense,” would have believed that any of the following was plausible a few years ago:
• Donald Trump would be the presumptive Republican Party nominee for president of the United States of America.
• A prominent candidate for president would propose banning all Muslims from entering America or call women “fat pigs,” “dogs” and “disgusting animals.”
• Same-sex marriage would be legal nationwide.
• The U.S. government would obtain and be able to search virtually all Americans’ phone records.
• Olympic champion Bruce Jenner would become a woman, Caitlyn Jenner.
• Federal, state and local governments would battle over what kind of bathroom people such as Caitlyn Jenner could use.
Similar implausible things happen every day.
Second, Iqbal effectively rewrote the Federal Rules without following the legally established rules for amending them. Under the Rules Enabling Act, before rules are changed, detailed procedures must be followed involving the Advisory Committees to the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure; the Standing Committee itself; notice to and comment from lawyers, judges and the public; the U.S. Judicial Conference; the Supreme Court; and Congress — so the changes are fully considered and fair.
In 2002, the court unanimously rejected a company’s plea for a heightened pleading standard in employment discrimination cases, saying that result “must be obtained by the process of amending the Federal Rules, and not judicial interpretation.” It should have said that in Iqbal, too.
Third, Iqbal is especially harmful to civil rights, employment discrimination and individual plaintiffs. Last year, the most comprehensive study of Iqbal’s effects, “Measuring the Impact of Plausibility Pleading,” was published in the Virginia Law Review. It found that Iqbal increased dismissals of most cases by 10 percent, but employment discrimination and civil rights cases much more (16 percent and 19 percent, respectively). Cases filed by individuals were also dismissed far more often (18 percent), but not cases filed by corporations.
In theory, this could mean that only bad cases were dismissed more promptly. But, if that were true, a higher percentage of the cases remaining in court would succeed. They didn’t. These plaintiffs were just disproportionately denied a chance to prove their claims.
The high court should reverse the Iqbal decision. Whether cases proceed should turn on the facts and the law, not on whether judges think the allegations are plausible.
Arthur H. Bryant is the chairman of Public Justice, a national public interest law firm dedicated to advancing and preserving access to justice. His practice focuses on consumers’ rights, workers’ rights, civil rights, environmental protection, and corporate and government accountability.

2016 STATE OF THE JUDICIARY ADDRESS THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE HUGH P. THOMPSON SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA January 27, 2016, 11 a.m. House Chambers, State Capitol

February 18, 2016 by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, above the law, access to injustice, Attorneys, Banksters, big brother, Big Law, Censorship, Confederate Flag, Confederate Memorial Holiday, confiscation, Congress, Court Cases, Courts, criminal injustice, ethics cases, Fast and Furious, foreclosure, Fraud Upon the Court, Georgia, Governor Deal, IAEA, Idiots, impeachment, Injustice, Judges, Judicial Corruption, Judicial ethics, Judicial Rulings, judicial watch, judicial watchdogs, Justice Dept., law, Lawyers, Legal, Legal Aid, Lester Tate, manifest injustice, mass shootings, Monsanto, Mortality Event, Nathan Deal, plutonium, propaganda, Public safety, The American Lawyer, too little too late, Toxic, United States, US Senate, US Supreme Court, Veterans Today, Warning, Washington DC, water, weapons, Whistleblower

016 STATE OF THE JUDICIARY ADDRESS
THE HONORABLE CHIEF JUSTICE HUGH P. THOMPSON
SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA
January 27, 2016, 11 a.m.
House Chambers, State Capitol

Lt. Governor Cagle, Speaker Ralston, President Pro Tem Shafer, Speaker Pro Tem Jones, members of the General Assembly, my fellow judges and my fellow Georgians:
Good morning. Thank you for this annual tradition of inviting the Chief Justice to report on the State of Georgia’s Judiciary. Thanks in large part to your support and the support of our governor, as we move into 2016, I am pleased to tell you that your judicial branch of government is not only steady and secure, it is dynamic; it has momentum; and it is moving forward into the 21st century with a vitality and a commitment to meeting the inevitable changes before us.
Our mission remains the same: To protect individual rights and liberties, to uphold and interpret the rule of law, and to provide a forum for the peaceful resolution of disputes that is fair, impartial, and accessible to all.
Our judges are committed to these principles. Each day, throughout this state, they put on their black robes; they take their seat on the courtroom bench; and they work tirelessly to ensure that all citizens who come before them get justice.

Our Judicial Council is the policy-making body of the state’s judicial branch. It is made up of competent, committed leaders elected by their fellow judges and representing all classes of court. They are assisted by an Administrative Office of the Courts, which is under a new director – Cynthia Clanton – and has a renewed focus as an agency that serves judges and courts throughout Georgia.
A number of our judges have made the trip to be here today. Our judges are here today because the relationship we have with you is important. We share with you the same goal of serving the citizens of this great state. We could not do our work without your help and that of our governor.
On behalf of all of the judges, let me say we are extremely grateful to you members of the General Assembly for your judicial compensation appropriation last year.

Today I want to talk to you about Georgia’s 21st century courts – our vision for the future, the road we must travel to get there, and the accomplishments we have already achieved.
It has been said that, “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.”
Since a new state Constitution took effect in 1983, our population has nearly doubled to a little over 10 million, making us the 8th most populous state in the country. We are among the fastest growing states in the nation, and in less than four years, our population is projected to exceed 12 million.
Because it is good for our economy, we welcome that growth. Today, Georgia ranks
among states with the highest number of Fortune 500 companies, 20 of which have their global headquarters here; we have 72 four-year colleges and universities; we have the world’s busiest airport and we have two deep-water ports. Georgia is a gateway to the South, and for a growing number of people and businesses from around the world, it is a gateway to this country.
All of this growth produces litigation – increasingly complex litigation – and just as our state must prepare for this growth by ensuring we have enough roads and modes of transportation, enough doctors and hospitals, and enough power to reach people throughout the state, our courts also must be equipped and modernized for the 21st
century.
While our population has nearly doubled since 1983, the number of Georgia judges has
grown only 16 percent. We must work together to ensure that our judicial system has enough judges, staff and resources in the 21st century to fulfill the mission and constitutional duties our forefathers assigned to us.
A healthy, vibrant judiciary is absolutely critical to the economic development of our state. Thanks to many leaders in the judiciary, as well as to our partnership with the governor and to you in the legislature, we are well on our way to building a court system for the 21st century.

This time next year, with your support, we will have put into place an historic shift in the types of cases handled by the Georgia Supreme Court – the highest court in the state – and by the Court of Appeals – our intermediate appellate court. Thanks to Governor Deal’s Georgia Appellate Jurisdiction Review Commission, this realignment will bring the Supreme Court of Georgia in line with other state Supreme Courts, which handle only the most critical cases that potentially change the law. Serving on the Commission are two of my colleagues – Justice David Nahmias and Justice Keith Blackwell – as well as two judges from the Court of Appeals – Chief
Judge Sara Doyle and Judge Stephen Dillard.
I thank you, Justices and Judges, for your leadership.
Under the Georgia Constitution, Supreme Court justices collectively decide every case that comes before us. Currently the state’s highest court hears divorce and alimony cases; we hear cases involving wills; we hear cases involving titles to land; and we hear disputes over boundary lines.
But the Governor’s Commission, and a number of reports by other commissions and
committees issued since 1983, have recommended that such cases should be heard by our intermediate appeals court, not by our highest court.
Both of our courts are among the busiest in the nation. But unlike the Supreme Court, which sits as a full court with all seven justices participating in, and deciding, every case, the Court of Appeals sits in panels of three. With your approval last year of three new Court of Appeals judges, that court will now have five panels, so it will have the capacity to consider five times as many cases as the Supreme Court.
Modernization of the Supreme Court makes sense. In a 19th century court system, when
most of the wealth was tied up in land, maybe title to land cases were the most important. Maybe they had the greatest implications for the public at large. But as we move into the 21st century, that is no longer true.
In answer to questions such as who owns a strip of land, what does a will mean, and who should prevail in a divorce settlement or an alimony dispute, most judicial systems believe that three judges are enough to provide the parties with a full and fair consideration of their appeal. It no longer makes sense to have seven – or nine – justices collectively review these types of cases.
There is no doubt these cases will be in good hands with the Court of Appeals.
Let me emphasize that all these cases the Commission recommended shifting to the Court of Appeals are critically important to the parties involved.
Let me also emphasize that the purpose of this historic change is not to lessen the burden on the Supreme Court. Rather, the intent is to free up the state’s highest court to devote more time and energy to the most complex and the most difficult cases that have the greatest implications for the law and society at large.
We will therefore retain jurisdiction of constitutional challenges to the laws you enact, questions from the federal courts seeking authoritative rulings on Georgia law, election contests, murder and death penalty cases, and cases in which the Court of Appeals judges are equally divided.
Significantly, we want to be able to accept more of what we call “certiorari” cases
which are appeals of decisions by the Court of Appeals. The number of petitions filed in this category during the first quarter of the new docket year is nearly 14 percent higher this year over last. Yet due to the amount of appeals the law now requires us to take, we have had to reject the majority of the petitions for certiorari that we receive.
These cases are often the most complex – and the most consequential. They involve
issues of great importance to the legal system and the State as a whole. Or they involve an area of law that has become inconsistent and needs clarification.
Businesses and citizens need to know what the law allows them to do and what it does
not allow them to do. It is our job at the highest court to reduce any uncertainty and bring consistency and clarity to the law.
Under the Commission’s recommendations, our 21st century Georgia Supreme Court will
be able to accept more of these important appeals.

As we move into the 21st century, plans are being discussed to build the first state Judicial Building in Georgia’s history that will be dedicated solely to the judiciary. We are grateful for the Governor’s leadership on this. The building that now houses the state’s highest court and the Court of Appeals was built in 1954 when Herman Tallmadge was governor. Back then, it made sense to combine the state judicial branch with part of the executive branch, by locating the Law Department in the same building.
But the world has changed since 1954, and the building we now occupy was not designed with visitors in mind. It was not designed with technology in mind. And it surely was not designed with security in mind. Indeed, it was designed to interconnect with neighboring buildings that housed other branches of government.
A proper Judicial Building is about more than bricks and mortar. Outside, this building will symbolize for generations to come the place where people will go to get final resolution of civil wrongs and injustices; where the government will go to safeguard its prosecution of criminals; and where defendants will go to appeal convictions and sentences to prison for life.
Inside such a building, the courtroom will reinforce the reality that what goes on here is serious and solemn; it is a place of great purpose, in the words of a federal judge. The parties and the lawyers will understand they are all on equal footing, because they are equal under the law.
There is a majesty about the law that gets played out in the courtroom. It is a hallowed place because it is where the truth must be told and where justice is born. The courtroom represents our democracy at its very best.
No, this building is not just about bricks and mortar. Rather it is a place that will house Georgia’s highest court where fairness, impartiality, and justice will reign for future generations.

We are no longer living in a 1950s Georgia. The courts of the 21st century must be
equipped to handle an increasingly diverse population. Living today in metropolitan Atlanta alone are more than 700,000 people who were born outside the United States. According to the Chamber of Commerce, today some 70 countries have a presence in Atlanta, in the form of a consulate or trade office. We must be ready to help resolve the disputes of international businesses that are increasingly locating in our state and capital. Our 21st century courts must be open, transparent and accessible to all. Our citizens’ confidence in their judicial system depends on it. We must be armed with qualified, certified interpreters, promote arbitration as an alternative to costly, courtroom-bound litigation, ensure that all those who cannot afford lawyers have an avenue toward justice, and be constantly updating technology with the aim of improving our courts’ efficiency while saving literally millions of dollars. For all of this, we need your help.

When I first became a judge, we had no email, no cell phones, no Internet. People didn’t Twitter or text, or post things on YouTube, Facebook or Instagram. The most modern equipment we had was a mimeograph machine.
This past year, by Supreme Court order, we created for the first time a governance
structure to bring our use of technology into the 21st century. Chaired by my colleague Justice Harold Melton, and co-chaired by Douglas County Superior Court Judge David Emerson, this permanent Judicial Council Standing Committee on Technology will lead the judicial branch by providing guidance and oversight of its technology initiatives.
Our courts on their own are rapidly moving away from paper documents into the digital age. At the Supreme Court, lawyers must now electronically file all cases. This past year, we successfully launched the next phase by working with trial courts to begin transmitting their entire court record to us electronically. The Court of Appeals also now requires the e-filing of applications to appeal, and this year, will join the Supreme Court in accepting electronic trial records.

Our goal is to develop a uniform statewide electronic filing and retrieval system so that lawyers and others throughout the judiciary can file and access data the easiest way possible.
Using a single portal, attorneys will be able to file documents with trial courts and appellate courts – and retrieve them from any court in the state. This is the system advocated by our partner, President Bob Kaufman of the State Bar of Georgia, and by attorneys throughout the state.
Such a system will not only make our courts more efficient at huge savings, but it will make Georgia safer. When our trial judges conduct bond hearings, for example, they often lack critical information about the person before them. They usually have reports about any former convictions, but they may not have information about cases pending against the defendant in other courts. The technology exists now to ensure that they do.
Also on the horizon is the expanded use of videoconferencing – another electronic
improvement that will save money and protect citizens’ lives. After a conviction and sentence to prison, post-trial hearings require courts to send security teams to pick up the prisoner and bring him to court. Without encroaching on the constitutional right of confrontation, we could videoconference the inmate’s testimony from his prison cell. Again, the technology already exists.
Our Committee on Technology will be at the forefront of guiding our courts into the 21st century.

As Georgia grows, it grows more diverse.
Our Georgia courts are required by the federal government to provide language services free of charge to litigants and witnesses, not only in criminal cases but in civil cases as well.
Even for fluent English speakers, the judicial system can be confusing and unwelcoming.
My vision for Georgia’s judiciary in the 21st century is that every court, in every city and every county in Georgia, will have the capacity of serving all litigants, speaking any language, regardless of national origin, from the moment they enter the courthouse until the moment they leave. That means that on court websites, signs and forms will be available in multiple languages, that all court staff will have the tools they need to assist any customers, and that court proceedings will have instant access to the interpreters of the languages they need.
Chief Magistrate Kristina Blum of the Gwinnett County Magistrate Court has been
working hard to ensure access to justice for all those who come to her court, most of whom are representing themselves.
Recently her court created brochures that provide guidance for civil trials, family
violence matters, warrant applications, garnishments, and landlord-tenant disputes. These brochures provide basic information about each proceeding – what to expect and how best to present their case in court.
Judge Blum, who is in line to be president of the Council of Magistrate Judges and is a member of our Judicial Council, has had the brochures translated into Spanish, Korean and Vietnamese. Such non-legalese forms and tutorial videos that our citizens can understand go a long way toward building trust in the judicial system, and in our entire government.
The Supreme Court Commission on Interpreters, chaired by Justice Keith Blackwell, is
making significant strides in ensuring that our courts uphold the standards of due process. With the help of Commission member Jana Edmondson-Cooper, an energetic attorney with the Georgia Legal Services Program, the Commission is working around the state to educate judges,court administrators and lawyers on the judiciary’s responsibilities in providing language assistance.
The essence of due process is the opportunity to be heard. Our justice system is the envy of other countries because it is open and fair to everyone seeking justice. By helping those who have not yet mastered English, we reinforce the message that the doors to the best justice system in the world are open to everyone.
Our law demands it. Our Constitution demands it.

The courts of the 21st century will symbolize a new era. A turning point in our history occurred when we realized there was a smarter way to handle criminals.
Six years ago, my colleague and then Chief Justice Carol Hunstein accompanied
Representative Wendell Willard to Alabama to explore how that state was reforming its criminal justice system. Back in Georgia, Governor Deal seized the reins, brought together the three branches of government, and through extraordinary leadership, has made criminal justice reform a reality. Georgia is now a model for the nation.
Today, following an explosive growth in our prison population that doubled between
1990 and 2011 and caused corrections costs to top one billion dollars a year, last year our prison population was the lowest it has been in 10 years. Our recidivism rate is the lowest it’s been in three decades. And we have turned back the tide of rising costs.
For the last five years, the Georgia Council on Criminal Justice Reform – created by the governor and your legislation – has been busy transforming our criminal justice system into one that does a better job of protecting public safety while holding non-violent offenders accountable and saving millions in taxpayer dollars. I am extremely grateful to this Council and commend the steady leadership of co-chairs Judge Michael Boggs of the Court of Appeals and Thomas Worthy of the State Bar of Georgia.
Throughout this historic reform, Georgia’s trial court judges have been in the trenches.
Our number one goal in criminal justice reform is to better protect the safety of our citizens.
Central to that goal is the development of our specialty courts – what some call accountability courts.
These courts have a proven track record of reducing recidivism rates and keeping our
citizens safe. Nationwide, 75 percent of drug court graduates remain free of arrest two years after completing the program, and the most conservative analyses show that drug courts reduce crime as much as 45 percent more than other sentencing options. Last year, these courts helped save Georgia more than $51 million in prison costs.
From the beginning, you in the legislature have steadfastly supported the growth in these courts, most recently appropriating more than $19 million for the current fiscal year.
Georgia now has 131 of these courts, which include drug courts, DUI courts, juvenile and adult mental health courts, and veterans courts. Today, only two judicial circuits in the state do not yet have a specialty court, and both are in the early stages of discussing the possibility of starting one. In addition to those already involved, last year alone, we added nearly 3500 new participants to these courts.
Behind that number are individual tales of lives changed and in some cases, lives saved.
Our judges, who see so much failure, take pride in these success stories. And so should you.

Chief Judge Richard Slaby of the Richmond County State Court, speaks with great pride of Judge David Watkins and the specialty courts that have grown under Judge Watkins’ direction. Today the recidivism rate among the Augusta participants is less than 10 percent.
The judges who run these courts are committed and deserve our thanks. We are grateful to leaders like Judge Slaby, who is President-Elect of the Council of State Court Judges and a member of our Judicial Council; to Judge Stephen Goss of the Dougherty Superior Court, whose mental health court has been recognized as one of the best mental health courts in our country; to Chief Judge Brenda Weaver, President of the Council of Superior Court Judges and a member of our Judicial Council. Judge Weaver of the Appalachian Judicial Circuit serves on the Council of
Accountability Court Judges of Georgia, which you created last year by statute. Its purpose is to improve the quality of our specialty courts through proven standards and practices, and it is chaired by Superior Court Judge Jason Deal of Hall County. Judge Deal’s dedication to the specialty court model in his community, and his guidance and encouragement to programs throughout the state, are described as invaluable by those who work with him.

We may not have a unified court system in Georgia. But we have judges unified in their commitment to our courts. Among our one thousand four hundred and fifty judges, Georgia has many fine leaders. I’ve told you about a number of them today. In closing, I want to mention two more.
When the United States Supreme Court issued its historic decision last year on same-sex marriage, our Council of Probate Court Judges led the way toward compliance. Three months before the ruling was issued, the judges met privately at the behest of the Council’s then president, Judge Chase Daughtrey of Cook County, and his successor, Judge Don Wilkes of Emanuel County. Together, they determined that regardless of what the Supreme Court decided, they would follow the law. Both Governor Deal and Attorney General Sam Olens also publicly announced they would respect the court’s decision, despite tremendous pressure to do otherwise.
These men are all great leaders who spared our state the turmoil other states endured. The bottom line is this: In Georgia, we may like the law, we may not like the law, but we follow the law.

The day-to-day business of the Georgia courts rarely makes the news. Rather judges,
their staff and clerks spend their days devoted to understanding the law, tediously pushing cases through to resolution, committed to ferreting out the truth and making the right decision. It is not easy, and they must often stand alone, knowing that when they sentence someone to prison, many lives hang in the balance between justice and mercy.
So I thank all of our leaders, and I thank all of our judges who are leading our courts into the 21st century.
May God bless them. May God bless you. And may God bless all the people of Georgia.
Thank you.

Agendas Acc0rding to the Federal Bar Association

November 25, 2015 by nootkabear, posted in 10-15 million people, above the law, access to injustice, Big Law, Congress, contamination, corruption, Court Cases, Courts, criminal injustice, Danger, Disappears you, disarmament, ethics cases, fallout, Fast and Furious, Feds, Fraud Upon the Court, globalists, gun ban treaty, Injustice, invasion, Judicial Corruption, Judicial ethics, judicial watch, Justice Dept., law, Lawyers, Legal, manifest injustice, Public safety, stability issues, studies, The American Lawyer, Toxic, United States, US Senate, US Supreme Court, Warning

I ran across this tonight, looking for something else, but it caught my eye and so I read it.
Knowing what I know about this country and being “awake”, I find the following pretty fucking interesting. What are your thoughts?:

FEDERAL BAR ASSOCIATION
2015-16 ISSUES AGENDA
http://www.fedbar.org/Advocacy/Issues-Agendas.aspx

Active Issues | Monitored Issues
ACTIVE LEGISLATIVE ISSUES

Independence of the Federal Judiciary

The Federal Bar Association reaffirms the importance of the independence of the judiciary, recognizing that judicial decisions are not immune from scrutiny, but are to be made solely on the basis of the law.

Funding for the Federal Courts

The Federal Bar Association supports adequate funding for the general and continuing operations of the federal courts, including an equitable level of rent and facilities expense consistent with actual costs, budgetary constraints, staffing needs and security considerations, to permit the courts to fulfill their constitutional and statutory responsibilities

Federal Judgeships and Caseloads

The Federal Bar Association supports the authorization and establishment of additional permanent and temporary federal judgeships, including bankruptcy judgeships, along with support personnel, as proposed by the Judicial Conference of the United States, when rising caseloads in the federal courts threaten the prompt delivery of justice. The Federal Bar Association also supports efforts to educate Congress, the legal profession and the general public about how the overwhelming case loads threaten the ability of the Third Branch of the federal government to function.

Federal Judicial Vacancies

The Federal Bar Association calls upon the President and Congress to act promptly and responsibly in nominating and confirming nominees to the federal appellate and district courts. The Federal Bar Association supports the development of strategies to reduce the time required to fill federal judicial vacancies.

Courthouse Security

The Federal Bar Association supports the adoption of adequate security measures to protect the federal judiciary, their families and court personnel in and outside the courthouse, while preserving meaningful public access to judicial proceedings.

Federal Judicial Pay

The Federal Bar Association support equitable compensation and regular periodic adjustments for the federal judiciary, as well as senior officials of the Executive Branch and Members of Congress, to promote the recruitment and retention of the highest quality public servants.

Respect for the Federal Courts

Declining public confidence in our courts undermines public respect for the courts and the legitimacy of their rulings. To counter that influence, the Federal Bar Association supports programming and other efforts to educate the public about the federal courts and the role they serve in assuring a just society.

Professionalism and Stature of Federal Attorneys

The Federal Bar Association supports and promotes efforts to improve the professionalism and stature of attorneys employed by the federal government, including: enhancements to the compensation packages of federal attorneys, including pay and retirement benefits, to assist in recruitment and retention; the expansion, consistent with applicable conflict of interest laws, of policies encouraging full participation of attorneys employed by the federal government in professional organizations and pro bono legal activities, including approval for use of administrative leave; enhanced federal funding for participation in continuing legal education and training programs, including paid tuition and administrative leave; and the establishment of programs for student loan deferral and repayment assistance for all federal attorneys, including federal law clerks, federal defenders and judge advocates of the Armed Forces, in support of recruitment and retention efforts.

Social Security Disability Appeals Backlog

The Federal Bar Association supports adequate funding and resources for the Social Security Administration to remove the significant backlog of disability benefit appeals awaiting adjudication and to assure the fair and timely administration of justice for all appellants.

Authority of Bankruptcy Judges in “Core Proceedings”

The Federal Bar Association supports amendment of bankruptcy law to expressly allow bankruptcy judges to issue proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in core proceedings in which they are otherwise barred from entering final judgments under Article III of the United States Constitution.

Commission on Nazi-Confiscated Art Claims

The Federal Bar Association supports the Congressional creation of a commission to address identification and ownership issues related to Nazi-confiscated artworks, pursuant to the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art, as signed by the United States and the international community.

Article I Immigration Court
The Federal Bar Association supports the transfer of responsibilities for the adjudication of immigration claims from the Executive Office of Immigration Review within the Department of Justice to a specialized Article I court, as established by Congress, for the adjudication of claims under the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

Federal Criminal Sentencing
The Federal Bar Association supports efforts to advance fairness and consistency in federal sentencing, while preserving judicial independence and discretion to deal with the particular circumstances of individual cases.

Military Spouse Attorney Mobility
The Federal Bar Association supports state-level legal licensing accommodations, including bar admission without additional examination, for attorneys who are spouses of service members, i.e., members of the uniformed services of the United States as defined in 10 USC §101(a)(5), when: (1) those “military spouse attorneys” are present in a particular state, commonwealth, or territory of the United States or District of Columbia due to their service members’ military assignment; (2) they are graduates of accredited law schools; and (3) they are licensed attorneys in good standing in the bar of another state, commonwealth, or territory of the United States or District of Columbia.

Patent Litigation Reform
The Federal Bar Association supports legislation that curbs abusive patent litigation practices and other responsible measures to improve the quality and clarity of patents. The FBA opposes legislation that reduces judicial discretion in adjudicating patent actions or circumvents the Rules Enabling Act by mandating changes that depart from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in patent cases.

MONITORED LEGISLATIVE ISSUES

Courthouse Construction

The Federal Bar Association supports the full funding of courthouse construction proposed by the Judicial Conference of the United States.

Cameras in the Courts

The Federal Bar Association encourages a discussion of the competing considerations vis-a-vis proposed legislation which would authorize federal judges, in their discretion, to permit photographing, electronic recording, broadcasting, and televising of federal court proceedings in appropriate circumstances.

Division of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

The Federal Bar Association opposes the division of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, consistent with its capacity to effectively and efficiently render justice.

Continuing Legal Education Funding for the Federal Judiciary

The Federal Bar Association supports the expansion of and enhancement of federal funding for continuing legal education and training programs for the federal judiciary.

Expansion of Federal Jurisdiction Over State and Local-Prosecuted Crimes

The Federal Bar Association advocates strict scrutiny of legislation proposing to grant original jurisdiction to federal authorities over crimes traditionally reserved to state and local prosecution.

Criminal Justice Act Panel Attorney Compensation

The Federal Bar Association supports Congressional funding to permit an increase in compensation rates for Criminal Justice Act panel attorneys.

National Security and Civil Liberties

The Federal Bar Association encourages the discussion of the competing considerations in the nation’s war against terror between the protection of civil liberties and the interests of national security.

Prevention of Epidemics and Civil Liberties

The Federal Bar Association encourages and contributes to a discussion of the competing considerations between governmental restrictions to guard against epidemics and pandemics and the preservation of individual rights, as well as the use of technology to ensure the continuance of participatory governance.

Safety of Administrative Judges

The Federal Bar Association supports the efforts by the Social Security Administration and the Executive Office of Immigration Review to take appropriate steps to ensure the security of their administrative law judges and immigration judges, and all others who participate in its proceedings.

Veteran Disability Claims Adjudication

The Federal Bar Association supports legislative and administrative improvements to the veterans disability claims process in the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to assure equitable and expeditious determinations.

Attorney Fee-Based Representation of Veterans

The Federal Bar Association supports proposals to expand the availability of fee-based representation of veterans in the disability claims process and to oppose any efforts to repeal the authority of attorney representation to veterans in the furtherance of such claims.

Frivolous Litigation

The Federal Bar Association opposes legislative proposals to eliminate judicial discretion in the imposition of sanctions for frivolous litigation, including proposals to revise Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by imposing mandatory sanctions and preventing a party from withdrawing challenged pleadings on a voluntary basis within a reasonable time.

Adopted by the Board of Directors
Federal Bar Association
July 10, 2015

The compass of FBA’s government relations program is its Issues Agenda, a roster of policy priorities to which the Association devotes its advocacy resources. The policy priorities embraced by the Issues Agenda are associated with active issues that concern the health and welfare of the federal judicial system and effective federal legal practice. For example, they concern the preservation of judicial independence, adequate funding and facilities for the federal courts, sufficient numbers of federal judgeships, equitable compensation for the federal judiciary, fairness and consistency in federal sentencing and a host of other matters

Take the Time to Read the US Supreme Court Ruling on JESINOSKI ET UX. v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., ET AL.

February 12, 2015 by nootkabear, posted in Countrywide Home Loans, Jesinoski, Rescission, TILA, US Supreme Court

(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2014 1
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as isbeing done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has beenprepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus

JESINOSKI ET UX. v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., ET AL.

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

No. 13–684. Argued November 4, 2014 — Decided January 13, 2015

Exactly three years after borrowing money from respondent Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., to refinance their home mortgage, petitionersLarry and Cheryle Jesinoski sent Countrywide and respondent Bank of America Home Loans, which had acquired Countrywide, a letterpurporting to rescind the transaction. Bank of America replied, refusing to acknowledge the rescission’s validity. One year and one daylater, the Jesinoskis filed suit in federal court, seeking a declarationof rescission and damages. The District Court entered judgment onthe pleadings for respondents, concluding that a borrower can exercise the Truth in Lending Act’s right to rescind a loan, see 15 U. S. C. §1635(a), (f), only by filing a lawsuit within three years of the datethe loan was consummated. The Jesinoskis’ complaint, filed four years and one day after the loan’s consummation, was ineffective. The Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Held: A borrower exercising his right to rescind under the Act need only provide written notice to his lender within the 3-year period, not filesuit within that period. Section 1635(a)’s unequivocal terms—a borrower “shall have the right to rescind . . . by notifying the creditor . . . of his intention to do so” (emphasis added)—leave no doubt that rescission is effected when the borrower notifies the creditor of his intention to rescind. This conclusion is not altered by §1635(f), which states when the right to rescind must be exercised, but says nothing about how that right is exercised. Nor does §1635(g)—which states that “in addition to rescission the court may award relief . . . not relating to the right to rescind”—support respondents’ view that rescission is necessarily a consequence of judicial action. And the fact that the Act modified the common-law condition precedent to rescission at law, see §1635(b), hardly implies that the Act thereby codified rescission in equity. Pp. 2–5. 729 F. 3d 1092, reversed and remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
_________________
_________________

Cite as: 574 U. S. ____ (2015) 1
Opinion of the Court

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in thepreliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested tonotify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in orderthat corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 13–684
LARRY D. JESINOSKI, ET UX., PETITIONERS v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
[January 13, 2015]

JUSTICE SCALIA delivered the opinion of the Court.

The Truth in Lending Act gives borrowers the right to rescind certain loans for up to three years after the transaction is consummated. The question presented is whether a borrower exercises this right by providing written no- tice to his lender, or whether he must also file a lawsuit before the 3-year period elapses.

On February 23, 2007, petitioners Larry and CheryleJesinoski refinanced the mortgage on their home by borrowing $611,000 from respondent Countrywide HomeLoans, Inc. Exactly three years later, on February 23,2010, the Jesinoskis mailed respondents a letter purporting to rescind the loan. Respondent Bank of America Home Loans replied on March 12, 2010, refusing to acknowledge the validity of the rescission. On February24, 2011, the Jesinoskis filed suit in Federal District Court seeking a declaration of rescission and damages.

Respondents moved for judgment on the pleadings, which the District Court granted. The court concluded that the Act requires a borrower seeking rescission to filea lawsuit within three years of the transaction’s consummation. Although the Jesinoskis notified respondents of their intention to rescind within that time, they did not file their first complaint until four years and one day after the loan’s consummation. 2012 WL 1365751, *3 (D Minn., Apr. 19, 2012). The Eighth Circuit affirmed. 729 F. 3d 1092, 1093 (2013) (per curiam).

Congress passed the Truth in Lending Act, 82 Stat. 146,as amended, to help consumers “avoid the uninformed useof credit, and to protect the consumer against inaccurate and unfair credit billing.” 15 U. S. C. §1601(a). To this end, the Act grants borrowers the right to rescind a loan “until midnight of the third business day following the consummation of the transaction or the delivery of the [disclosures required by the Act], whichever is later, bynotifying the creditor, in accordance with regulations of the [Federal Reserve] Board, of his intention to do so.” §1635(a) (2006 ed.).* This regime grants borrowers anunconditional right to rescind for three days, after which they may rescind only if the lender failed to satisfy the Act’s disclosure requirements. But this conditional right to rescind does not last forever. Even if a lender never makes the required disclosures, the “right of rescission shall expire three years after the date of consummation of the transaction or upon the sale of the property, whichever comes first.” §1635(f). The Eighth Circuit’s affirmance in the present case rested upon its holding in Keiran v. Home Capital, Inc., 720 F. 3d 721, 727–728 (2013) that, unless aborrower has filed a suit for rescission within three years of the transaction’s consummation, §1635(f) extinguishesthe right to rescind and bars relief.

*Following the events in this case, Congress transferred the authotity to promulgate rules implementing the Act to the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, §§1061(b)(1), 1100A(2), 1100H, 124 Stat. 2036, 2107,2113.

That was error. Section 1635(a) explains in unequivocal ——————terms how the right to rescind is to be exercised: It provides that a borrower “shall have the right to rescind . . .by notifying the creditor, in accordance with regulations of the Board, of his intention to do so” (emphasis added). The language leaves no doubt that rescission is effected when the borrower notifies the creditor of his intention to rescind. It follows that, so long as the borrower notifies within three years after the transaction is consummated, his rescission is timely. The statute does not also requirehim to sue within three years.

Nothing in §1635(f) changes this conclusion. Although §1635(f) tells us when the right to rescind must be exercised, it says nothing about how that right is exercised. Our observation in Beach v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 523 U. S. 410, 417 (1998), that §1635(f) “govern[s] the life of the underlying right” is beside the point. That case concerned a borrower’s attempt to rescind in the course of a foreclosure proceeding initiated six years after the loan’s consummation. We concluded only that there was “no federal right to rescind, defensively or otherwise, after the 3-yearperiod of §1635(f) has run,” id., at 419, not that there was no rescission until a suit is filed.

Respondents do not dispute that §1635(a) requires only written notice of rescission. Indeed, they concede that written notice suffices to rescind a loan within the first three days after the transaction is consummated. Theyfurther concede that written notice suffices after that period if the parties agree that the lender failed to makethe required disclosures. Respondents argue, however,that if the parties dispute the adequacy of the disclosures—and thus the continued availability of the right torescind—then written notice does not suffice.

Section 1635(a) nowhere suggests a distinction betweendisputed and undisputed rescissions, much less that a lawsuit would be required for the latter. In an effort to sidestep this problem, respondents point to a neighboring provision, §1635(g), which they believe provides supportfor their interpretation of the Act. Section 1635(g) states merely that, “[i]n any action in which it is determined thata creditor has violated this section, in addition to rescission the court may award relief under section 1640 of thistitle for violations of this subchapter not relating to the right to rescind.” Respondents argue that the phrase “award relief ” “in addition to rescission” confirms that rescission is a consequence of judicial action. But the fact that it can be a consequence of judicial action when §1635(g) is triggered in no way suggests that it can onlyfollow from such action. The Act contemplates various situations in which the question of a lender’s compliance with the Act’s disclosure requirements may arise in alawsuit—for example, a lender’s foreclosure action in which the borrower raises inadequate disclosure as anaffirmative defense. Section 1635(g) makes clear that acourt may not only award rescission and thereby relievethe borrower of his financial obligation to the lender, but may also grant any of the remedies available under §1640 (including statutory damages). It has no bearing upon whether and how borrower-rescission under §1635(a) may occur.

Finally, respondents invoke the common law. It is true that rescission traditionally required either that the rescinding party return what he received before a rescission could be effected (rescission at law), or else that a court affirmatively decree rescission (rescission in equity). 2 D. Dobbs, Law of Remedies §9.3(3), pp. 585–586 (2d ed. 1993). It is also true that the Act disclaims the common-law condition precedent to rescission at law that the borrower tender the proceeds received under the transaction. 15 U. S. C. §1635(b). But the negation of rescission-atlaw’s tender requirement hardly implies that the Act codifies rescission in equity. Nothing in our jurisprudence,and no tool of statutory interpretation, requires that a congressional Act must be construed as implementing itsclosest common-law analogue. Cf. Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. Solimino, 501 U. S. 104, 108–109 (1991). The clear import of §1635(a) is that a borrower need onlyprovide written notice to a lender in order to exercise his right to rescind. To the extent §1635(b) alters the traditional process for unwinding such a unilaterally rescinded transaction, this is simply a case in which statutory lawmodifies common-law practice.
* * *
The Jesinoskis mailed respondents written notice oftheir intention to rescind within three years of their loan’s consummation. Because this is all that a borrower must do in order to exercise his right to rescind under the Act,the court below erred in dismissing the complaint. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Eighth Circuit andremand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.

	nootkabear on Biden Signals Death Of…
	Are We Ready to Stic… on Are We Ready to Stick Our Head…
	Are We Ready to Stic… on Are We Ready to Stick Our Head…
	Democrats In Terror… on Democrats In Terror Of Trump W…
	Covid Mass Murderer… on Covid Mass Murderer Biden Slam…

	nootkabear on Biden Signals Death Of…
	Are We Ready to Stic… on Are We Ready to Stick Our Head…
	Are We Ready to Stic… on Are We Ready to Stick Our Head…
	Democrats In Terror… on Democrats In Terror Of Trump W…
	Covid Mass Murderer… on Covid Mass Murderer Biden Slam…

Post navigation

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Rate this:

Like this: