Obstruction of Justice Is Here

The following letter went out to the special counsel
yesterday. "Whatever you do to the least of my
brothers you do to me." Donald Trump bragged that
he could go out on 5th Avenue in New York and shoot
someone and still get elected. In my case, he has
knowingly behaved that way and doesn't care a whit.

Is it any wonder his parents had to send him to military
school, where all the bad kids were sent in order to
keep them out of reform school? That he did well
whenever all his peers were bad boys tells us something
the voters of 2016 didn't want to hear, so they ignored.

========================================

14 September 2018
Special Counsel’s Office
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Room B-103
Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Mr. Mueller:

Since you’re actually looking for an obstruction
of justice case against Donald J. Trump, there is
already one that is complete and ready to go.
Details follow.

Let me start by stating that politically I am a
conservative but I am not a Republican nor am
I a blind follower of any party’s agenda. The
mess that is the US government today is
unforgivable.

I sued the justices of the Michigan supreme
court in the federal district court at Marquette,
MI, over an unconstitutional rule they imposed
and have promulgated without any legal authority
to do so. From the beginning to the end it has
been clear that the federal courts acted in
complicity with their republican brethren on the
Michigan benches. It is clear that the primary
motive driving all the judges was prevention of the
case ever being given to a jury. And Donald J. Trump
added the definitive act to assure that could never
happen.

With full knowledge of the facts above, at the very
time that this case was before the 6th circuit court
of appeals, Donald J. Trump nominated Joan L.
Larsen, one of the defendant Michigan Supreme
Court justices, to the bench of the 6th circuit. That
immediately compromised all of the judges at the
6th circuit. After all, regardless of the minutiae,
which of the already sitting 6th circuit judges could
possibly find against a fellow judge destined to join
them on the 6th circuit bench, another judge with
whom they would be sharing cases for the rest of their
judicial careers?

To compound the illicit act, the Trump administration,
with the President’s encouragement, actively promoted
Larsen for that position despite the fact that the two
sitting Michigan senators were initially against this
appointment for their own reasons. And naturally
SCOTUS said “ho hum, the circuit found against you
and we don’t care that your constitutional rights to a
jury trial were violated by the judges below.” I would
favor some impeachments because we cannot dismiss
the whole lot without a complete revision of government,
something this country probably isn’t prepared for at this
time despite the banana republic antics we’ve been
seeing of late. The 6th circuit docket number was
17-1509 and the SCOTUS docket was 17-1416.
The SCOTUS case has much pertinent detail.

That President Trump is responsible for his
unconstitutional acts is without question. Knowingly
acting in a way that absolutely violates a citizen’s
constitutional rights is a violation of the responsibilities
of his office, in this case obstruction of justice.

Please bring your investigations to get rid of him to a
speedy conclusion.

            Sincerely,

Letter to Senator Booker

8 September 2018
Senator Cory Booker
359 Dirksen Office Building
Washington  DC  20510

Dear Senator Booker:

    I have no idea what you and the other senators
on the Judiciary Committee think you are achieving
with hearings and the questioning of potential
federal Judges and Justices.   

    Last year President Trump nominated
Joan L. Larsen for a seat on the 6th Circuit Court
of Appeals, Your committee approved the
nomination, and the entire United States Senate
voted to confirm her and she was sworn in and
took a seat on that court. During this entire process,
beginning to end, Larsen was a defendant before that
same court.

    If we have a balanced government, that is, the
promised checks and balances actually work, how
could an event that compromised the integrity, and
the neutrality, of that court, have been allowed to
happen with the complicity of your committee?

   The pledge of allegiance promises
“…with liberty and justice for all.” Where was the
justice in my case when a defendant is seated on
the very court reviewing the case in which a
defendant becomes a judge on that court?

   As I was preparing the next appeal to the
Supreme Court I sent Senator Grassley a Freedom
of Information request for documents showing
whether Joan Larsen had disclosed her defendant
status to the committee. Are you surprised to hear
that my request was completely ignored? The
6th circuit docket number was 17-1509 and the
SCOTUS docket was 17-1416. I am not your
average sore loser.

The legal battle is over, the political one barely
begun.

    Furthermore are you surprised to hear that
the Supreme Court said, “ho hum, we don’t care
that your constitutional rights were violated by
the judges below.” Why are they there then? 

I knew my chances of  success were small, but
I never thought that the entire judicial system in
the US was, to use a Donald Trump favoritism,
completely rigged. 

I grew up in New Jersey and am writing to you
despite the fact I presently live in Michigan
because you appear to have a reasonable head
on your shoulders, something apparently in short
supply in Washington. 

                    Sincerely,

Letter to the US Supreme Court Clerk

Scott Harris is the current clerk of the US Supreme
Court. This presents an interesting constitutional
question, because this challenge has never been
raised before so far as I have been able to find out.
====================================


Scott S. Harris
1 First Street NE
Washington  DC  20543

REF: Docket 17-1416 and FOIA request

Dear Mr. Harris:

A SCOTUS web page reports that the Justices
of the US Supreme Court rely on a summary
of my petition in the docket referenced above
as written by recent law school graduates
lacking any significant life or legal experience
in lieu of the Justices directly understanding
my submitted document. This task to which
the young lawyers are put is beyond their capacity,
otherwise the Justices would include young lawyers
on the bench. Generally they are not even qualified
to practice before this Court.

I hereby request a copy of that internal summary
complete with associated recommendation, also
reported on the SCOTUS web page.

    Should you be inclined to deny this request,
please consider this an FOIA request to which
the judiciary is usually immune but is here
required to comply because of Rule 45(1) stating
that all process in the US Supreme Court is done
in the name of the President of the United States.
That rule was originally invoked in the
February 5, 1790 session of the Supreme Court and
has continuously been in effect ever since.

    As such, the process by which the information
I provided in my petition allegedly landed before
the Justices in the summary I am requesting, is a
function of the executive branch of the US
Government and as such is subject to extant FOIA
statutes. Thus failure to provide the requested copy,
without redaction, would be a violation of federal
law under which you are personally responsible as
keeper of the records for the US Supreme Court.

                    Sincerely,

Donald-Trump-letter

I this what Trump's "make America Great
Again is all about? Failure to assure
the "justice for all" that is promised 

in the Pledge of Allegiance? I hope not. 

Alas Mr. Trump is still an amateur 

politician who is learning the ropes.

Please get with it! 

===================================== 

19 June 2018

The President
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington DC 20500

Mr. President:

Please be advised that in your name the 
United States Supreme Court has arrogantly 
approved deprivation of my of due process 
rights and my right to a jury trial in a 
civil case with Docket No. 17-1416. 

Since this has been done in your name, 
thereby under your authority, I felt 
it important to bring this matter to 
your attention for correction. You are, 
as chief executive of the United States 
of America, naturally free to act or not 
on my complaint for a matter I respectfully 
ask you to correct. Failure on your part 
to act in a way that resolves these issues 
makes a lie out of most of our founding 
documents and most notably of the Pledge 
of Allegiance. Without the Rule of Law  
predictably guiding legal outcomes our 
lives become a crapshoot and America 
herself becomes a lie.

While it is not my place to set deadlines 
for you time is of the essence since I am 
presently age 78 and not in good health, 
thus if I do not receive word of positive 
results correcting the constitutional 
infractions noted above by the end of 
September 2018 I will understand that 
positive results are not forthcoming 
and I will be free to advertise all the 
facts internationally.

   Respectfully, 

Status 180523

The present case before the courts began as an
outgrowth of the City of Iron River charging for
water, sewer, and garbage collection, when the
water was shut off by the city. The state court
system has a "rule" that permits dismissal of
any such case brought without a legitimate
judgment, and they did just that. So I brought a
case in the federal courts challenging the
constitutionality of the rule and kept getting a
massive run-around in the federal courts, eventually
landing before the US Supreme Court in the
docketed case 17-1416 with the current status of the
case t be found on the internet at


https://tinyurl.com/ya3gewk4



The documents were distributed to the justices and
their law clerks yesterday with a conference scheduled
to decide how to proceed on June 7th.

My petition is readable by anyone without charge
and I urge everyone to avail themselves of that
service provided by the court. I urge attention to
the introduction and the questions presented to the
court on the first few pages.

I think it an interesting case, and it will be even more
interesting to see how the Supreme Court deals with it.
Please bear in mind I am not a lawyer so my presentation
lacks the smoothness of similar documents submitted by
high priced professional lawyers. Nevertheless, the
challenge is to rule on some of the most elementary
principles that determine how the courts deal with
complaints brought.

Bill Vajk

What Will History Say?

What I am reporting here is only part of the
story, a story that keeps getting worse the
deeper I dig into it. So let's start with the
initial submittal I made to the US Supreme
Court, a submittal that is being reworked
into the odd format that they demand. But you
can read the entire text at:

bill-vajk.angelfire.com/SCOT.pdf

It is a good jumping off point. The underlying
case has to do with charging for a produce we
do not receive, water. The state courts get
around it with an unconstitutional court rule
that I challenged in federal court, and at every
turn the "swamp" that President Trump
promised to drain only got bigger, and at one
stage even Trump himself helped make that
swamp bigger.

Enjoy a good read, it really isn't full of
esoteric stuff, just plain old fashioned wisdom.
The facts presented are quite bad, but what
more damage the court system is willing to
do to this nation remains to be seen. There
will be more on this and associated topics
coming to this site quite soon, so please keep
an open eye for the rest of the story, some of
which has already developed.

The above is the opinion of the author, Bill Vajk