Step 1. Legal Notice

Notice of Violation

William Jackson

Last Update a day ago

Step 1

Affidavits are sent to the public officer whose unconstitutional actions have

perjured his oath, violated the Constitution(s) and violated the rights of the

people who were damaged by his actions. Affidavits can also be sent to Corporation Officers whose unconstitutional actions have harmed the community. When the Affidavit recipient(s) fail to rebut, in kind, then, go to step 2.

Do you want to reach out in a friendly way to your local candidate or your 

existing elected or selected representative to find out if they follow the Constitution?



Presumptive Affidavit

Do This

Send a sworn affidavit. Instructions presented in our next Video Call. How to send a Presumptive Affidavit. Join the Citizens of the American Constitution Workshop Video Call.


Letter.01

Certified Letter


Merrick B. Garland

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington DC 20530


Presumptive Letter and Affidavit/Declaration of Truth


Attention Mr. Garland,


I, Dr. Frederick David Graves, American Justice Foundation® 19420 Heritage Harbor Parkway Lutz, Florida 33558. Questions? Call 866-LAW-EASY,

the undersigned, make this Affidavit/Declaration of Truth of my own free will, and I hereby affirm, declare and swear, under my oath, that I am of legal age and of sound mind and hereby attest that the information contained in this Affidavit/Declaration is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.


This letter is lawful notification to you, pursuant to The Bill of Rights to the National Constitution, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Ninth Amendments, and Constitution of the State of Florida Article 1: Declaration of Rights, Section 1 - 27 and Constitution of the State of Florida Article 2 General Provisions, Section 5(b): Public Officers and Constitution of the State of Florida Article 6 Suffrage and Elections, Section 3: Oath, and pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to me specific to the subject matter. Your failure to respond, within 30 days, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, everything in this letter with which you disagree is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal, lawful and binding upon you, in any court, anywhere in America, without your protest or objection or that of those who represent you. Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391. Notification of legal responsibility is “the first essential of due process of law.” Also, see: U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F. 2d. 297. “Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.”


Are you an enemy of the 1787 Constitution? Please reply. We would like to know if you are an elected official who follows the 1787 Constitution.


Basis of Law and Facts in this Presumptive Affidavit of Complaint:


1. The Constitution for the United States of America is the Supreme Law of the land and supersedes all other lesser law, statutes, codes, regulations, ordinances and the State Constitution.


2. What is written in the referenced national Constitution is valid, authorized and enforceable. What is not written in the national Constitution is prohibited by that Constitution.


3. Article I, Section 1 of the national Constitution vests all legislative power in Congress. The Constitution does not authorize legislative power in any form to the Executive and Judicial Branches.


4. Article I, Section 10 of the national Constitution declares No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.


5. Article III, Section 2 of the national Constitution and Article IV, Section 4 guarantees to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and also, Article VI, Clause 2-3 of the national Constitution declares All Americans are guaranteed a Constitutional Republic.


6. When the State Legislature creates law for the people, that law must be constitutionally compliant specific to the Bill of Rights or it is not valid law binding upon the people.


7. A law must be valid to exist and must exist to be lawfully enforced.


8. All elected and appointed public officials who serve the people, including you, Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice, are required to take an Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution before assuming office.


9. Any act passed by any legislature and any action committed by any public officer either supports and upholds the Constitutions, national and state, or opposes and violates them. No public officer has the constitutional authority—or any other form of valid, lawful authority—to oppose and violate the very documents to which s/he swore or affirmed his or her oath.


10. Any unconstitutional actions committed by any public officers, including you, Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice, invoke the self-executing Sections 3, 4 & 5 of the 14th Amendment, by which the errant public officers immediately vacate their offices, upon commission of their crimes, can no longer hold public office and forfeit all benefits thereof, including salary and pension.


11. Executive orders are not authorized in the national Constitution, therefore are prohibited by the national Constitution.


12. The national Constitution and the Supreme Court recognize and protect the right to interstate travel. The travel right entails privacy and free domestic movement without governmental abridgement.


13. Please provide your Dun & Bradstreet D-U-N-S® Number for the court.


If you disagree with anything in this letter, then rebut, in kind, that

with which you disagree, in writing, with particularity, to me, within 30

days of this letter’s date, and support your disagreement with evidence,

fact and law. Your failure to respond, as stipulated, is your agreement

with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true,

correct, legal, lawful, and is your irrevocable agreement attesting to this,

fully binding upon you, in any court in America, without your protest or

objection and that of those who represent you.


All Rights Reserved,


Dr. Frederick David Graves

Full Printed Name, Affiant


Notary Statement

In the State of ________________

County of _________________

I swear that on this ____ day of __________________, the above named Affiant/Declarant,

_____________________, appeared before me, and, of his own free will, signed this Affidavit of Complaint.


__________________________________

Notary Public Seal:







My Commission Expires:______________ Date:


References


Oath of Office

files.floridados.gov/media/702653/dsde56-oath-acceptance-sept-2023.pdf


Constitution

files.floridados.gov/media/693801/florida-constitution.pdf







END OF COPY

Brief Summary

BRIEF SUMMARY OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL METHODS

Since the Constitution for the United States of America, circa

1787, as amended in 1791 with The Bill of Rights, is the declared

Supreme Law of America, we and followers of our Constitutionally based methods have enforced the Constitutions upon reluctant

government officers and judges for many years. All of our methods are

outlined on our website, and we would encourage you to review

them. This section will give a very brief synopsis of these methods.

As previously stated, anytime we have concern with government

or corporate America, we write what is called a presumptive letter, in

which we make the presumption that everything we claim and charge is

true and correct, unless specifically rebutted, with particularity, by the

letter recipient(s). The letter contains two "presumptive paragraphs",

presented first and last, which contain a lawful notification warning the

recipient(s) that, if they do not respond and rebut that with which they

disagree, then, they admit to all charges and claims made in the letter(s),

fully binding upon them in any court, without their protest, objection or

that of those who represent them. Lawful notification is the first

essential of due process of law.

The body of the letter(s) contains all the specific charges and

claims we made against the offending government or corporate

officer(s). Other presumptive letters are sent to all supervisory and

oversight personnel within that jurisdiction or within that chain of

command. The intent is to notify everyone who should be notified, so

that someone will take action to remedy the problem. The purpose of

the letter(s) is to resolve the problem administratively and

Constitutionally, before it goes further and probably requires for court

action. It is obvious to anyone who has dealt in these matters that the

2

courts in this nation are corrupt and rife with fraud. Thus, it is best to

strive to resolve the matter before one must resort to court action.

The time limit we allow for the recipients’ response is always

thirty (30) days, and if no response is made within that time period, we

usually wait another ten (10) days and then send an Affidavit of Truth to

all letter recipients. The Affidavit has three basic components: (1)

lawful notification to the recipients that, by their failure to respond to the

letter, or if a meaningless, non-specific response was made, they admit

to and agree with all charges and claims made in that letter, fully binding

upon them in any court, without their protest, objection or that of those

who represent them, meaning, of course, their attorneys; (2) a list of

some of the charges and claims made in the letter to which they have

admitted; (3) a challenge to the recipients to rebut our Affidavit with

their own sworn, notarized affidavits, certifying that their affidavit is

based in fact, law, truth and valid evidence, under the pains and penalties

of perjury under the laws of the United States of America. In over fifty

(50) years of doing this, we have written thousands of affidavits, and no

one has responded with a rebuttal affidavit. This is easy to understand,

since we are based in truth, fact, law and valid evidence, all founded in

and supported by the Supreme Law of the Land. Clearly, it is

impossible for any public officer, pursuant to his oath, to rebut truth,

fact, law and valid evidence, by means of his own sworn and notarized

affidavit.

If there is no response to our Affidavits, within thirty (30) days, we

wait another ten (10) days or so, then, record our Affidavits with the

county clerk-recorder to place them on the public record. Should the

matter eventually end up in court, we have supportive documents which,

pursuant to both state and federal rules of evidence, are considered "selfauthenticating"; thus, admissible in court as evidence against our

opponents and with which we can invoke "estoppel by acquiescence" to

bar our opponents from making defenses against issues to which they

have already admitted. We send copies of the recorded instruments to

3

our opponents, so that they know we are totally serious and ready to go

to court and invoke rules of evidence, if necessary.

If our opponents do not respond to the copies of the recorded

Affidavits and if we are the moving party in the action, namely, the

Plaintiff, then, we send a Notice of Suit to our opponents. This Notice is

the last step in the administrative and Constitutional process to resolve

the issue before having to go to court. As Defendants, we obviously do

not send a Notice of Suit, and wait until the resolution of the matter,

before it goes to court, or ready ourselves for court action as

Defendants.

By and through this process, we have achieved the following: (1)

our positions are supported by our Affidavits, recorded on the public

record, self-authenticating and admissible in court; (2) our opponents

have tacitly admitted to our positions by failing to rebut them, pursuant

to the cautions in our lawful notifications to them; (3) since the

opponents admit to our charges and agree they will present no defense to

them in court, if they then attempt a defense against our charges, we

charge them with putting fraud upon the court; (4) we invoke positions

of estoppel by acquiescence, by which our opponents cannot defend

against their prior admissions; (5) since the court only convenes to hear

matters in controversy, and there is no controversy for the court to hear,

due to our opponents’ prior admissions, victory lawfully should be

ours. On a scorecard of 1 to 100, our score is 100 and our opponents’

score is zero.

In the rare case, opponents may state that they have no duty or

requirement to respond to the letters or the affidavits. We disagree, and

so do the Constitutions. Public officers are required to take oaths of

office. The oath is required by the national Constitution, state

Constitution, federal law, state law, and sometimes, county and local

law. Therefore, it is well established, lawfully and legally, that the oath

is Constitutionally and statutorily required – no exceptions! Thus,

pursuant to their oaths, public officers must abide by the Constitutions in

4

the performance of their official duties. The oath is given in exchange

for the Public Trust, and the oath taker is lawfully bound to uphold the

Public Trust. The First Amendment guarantees the Right of free speech

and the Right to petition government for redress of grievances, which,

the oath taker, pursuant to his oath, is mandated to uphold. If he fails

this requirement, then, he has violated two provisions of the First

Amendment, the Public Trust and perjured his oath. Further, by not

responding and/or not rebutting, the oath taker denies the Citizen

remedy, thus, denies the Citizen Constitutional due process of law, as

stated within the Bill of Rights. An American Citizen can expect, and

has the Right and duty to demand, that his government officers uphold

their oaths to the Constitution(s) and abide by all Constitutionally

imposed mandates of their oaths. This is an un-enumerated Right

guaranteed in the Ninth Amendment. No oath taker has the authority to

defy and deny the very document to which he swore his oath and to

which he owes his limited, delegated authority. The oath taker must act

within the lawful scope of his duties and authority. Pursuant to the

delegation of powers clause, within the Tenth Amendment, no power is

delegated to any oath taker to deny, defy, or oppose the very document

to which he swore his oath.

In light of the foregoing, there is no legitimate argument to support

the claim that oath takers are not required to respond to letters, which, in

this case, act as petitions for redress of grievances, stating complaints,

charges and claims made against them by their constituents or by

Citizens injured by their actions. The Declaration of Independence

requires all Citizens to oppose all enemies of this Republic, foreign and

domestic. When public officers harm the Citizens by their errant

actions, and then refuse to respond to or rebut petitions from Citizens,

then, those public officers are domestic enemies, acting in sedition and

insurrection to the declared Law of the land and must be opposed,

exposed and lawfully removed from office.

As previously stated, the purpose of the presumptive letters and

affidavits is to resolve problems before it becomes necessary to go to

5

court. However, once the matter comes before the court, we use

Constitutional Court Challenges from the very inception of the court

action. We support everything we do with the Supreme Law of the

Land, and when we get to court, this is very difficult for anyone to

lawfully oppose. When the judge convenes court, he usually asks the

attorney for the opponent if he is ready to proceed, and then asks us if

we are ready to proceed. We then state: "No, we are not, since there are

several matters we need to clarify before we go further." The person

acting as judge usually says: "Go right ahead." We then immediately

say: "You and the prosecuting attorney have sworn oaths of office to

support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and

the Constitution of the state of…. Is that correct?" In our court

appearances, the judge says, "Yes." This response binds not only him,

but also the opposing attorney to their respective oaths. We then

state: "With all due respect, you and the opposing attorney are required

to abide by those oaths in the performance of your official duties,

especially those before this Honorable Court. Is this correct?" When we

receive two affirmative answers to these two confirming questions for

our prior statements, then, we have brought the court under the authority

of the Constitution, by holding the judge and opposing counsel to their

oaths.

If the Citizen before the court understands what he has

accomplished and how he can protect himself Constitutionally, and if he

can articulately advocate his Constitutional argument(s), then, he has a

much greater chance of a successful outcome. To do this, one must be

well vested in the Constitution(s) and know how to competently and

convincingly present his Constitutionally-based positions. While using

the Constitution is not a guarantee of success, not using it is almost a

guarantee of failure. Our Constitutional Court Challenges are on our

website and provide additional information, including how we would

proceed should the judge respond in a negative fashion. Basically, if the

judge tries to avoid confirming his and the opposing counsel’s oaths and

duties thereunder, we politely inform him that the confirmation of the

oath and adherence thereto are required to assure the Citizen’s Rights are

6

upheld, including, but not limited to, all aspects of due process of

law. We would then say that, by his evasion and reluctance to confirm

his oath, it appears he either has no oath or does not intend to abide by

it. Therefore, it is unlikely he will uphold our Rights and due process of

law, so we would then state: "You are disqualified, sir; step

down." Every Citizen has the Right to disqualify a judge, especially one

who refuses to confirm his oath and his sworn duties thereunder.

Prior to appearing in court, we file several Constitutionally based

motions, including a Motion to Claim and Exercise Constitutional

Rights, which would be very difficult for any judge, pursuant to this

oath, to deny. Because of our opponents’ prior admissions, which are on

the public record; thus, very difficult for any judge or opposing attorney

to ignore, we could also file a motion for a declaratory judgment on

those admissions, and, if necessary, a subsequent motion to enforce

estoppel by acquiescence. Both of these make it very obvious and put it

on the court record that our opponents have admitted to all of our claims

and charges, and to deny this would be impossible. This does not mean

our opponents cannot advocate their positions or defend themselves, but

they cannot do so on the points to which they have previously

admitted. Since our presumptive letters and our affidavits cover all

salient points at issue and in controversy, there is virtually nothing

remaining for our opponents to argue or defend.

The Constitutional Court Challenges also specifies our status to the

court and how we lawfully appear before that court. The confirmation

of the oaths and our status are very important. If we appear as

Defendants, and if we know that the charges alleged against us are

invalid and without any substance, then, right after the status statement,

we make a verbal motion to dismiss the charges alleged against us

because they are fraudulent, bogus, and without substance. If the

opposing counsel objects, then, we respectfully demand, by and through

the judge, that the opposing counsel certify the charges, as valid, lawful

and Constitutionally compliant, specific to the Bill of Rights, by means

of his own sworn, notarized Affidavit, so attesting, under the pains and

7

penalties of perjury of the laws of the United States of America. In the

rare instance in which this needs to be done, there is usually an

immediate conference among the judge, the opposing counsel and us,

and the charges alleged against us miraculously disappear for, of course,

some convenient, but obscure, "reason". No prosecuting attorney would

ever execute such an affidavit and no court can lawfully hear and

adjudicate bogus, fraudulent charges.


Jack and Margy Flynn

Instructions

1. Our presumptive letter is the first part of a process intended to

HONORABLY resolve a matter before it goes further and/or proceeds to

court.

2. Our intent is to stay away from court and government agencies, by

honorably resolving this matter, since very few people have the

capability of successfully arguing valid Constitutional grounds in the

present corrupt

American court system.

3. This type of letter has two presumptive paragraphs, first and

last. These paragraphs contain lawful notice and warning to the letter

recipient that the claims and charges we make in the letter must be

rebutted within 30 days of receipt and that his failure to rebut is his

admission to all of the claims and charges we make.

4. Between the first and last presumptive paragraphs, we make our

charges and claims, all of which we fully base only in truth, fact, valid

law and evidence. The charges and claims we make against the letter

recipient are made pursuant to his unconstitutional, unlawful, deceptive

actions.

5. The charges and claims we make must simply and directly, and as

efficiently as possible, state the “Who, What, Where, When, Why and

How” of the unlawful actions committed by the letter recipient and how

those actions specifically harmed us, pursuant to oaths taken by public

officers.

6. As stated, we base our claims and charges ONLY in truth, fact, law

and evidence, which, again, are honorably intended to effectively and

quickly resolve this matter. Our charges, so based, are extremely

2

difficult, if not impossible, for the letter recipient to rebut, then, support

his rebuttal with truth, fact, valid law and evidence.

7. Since most letter recipients cannot truthfully and lawfully rebut our

claims and charges, usually they do not do so, or if they respond, usually

do not rebut our specific charges and claims. In either case, the letter

recipient, pursuant to the lawful notification contained in the

presumptive paragraphs, admits to all of our charges and claims, fully

binding upon him in any court, without his protest, objection or that of

those who represent him. Words have lawful and legal

meanings. When the letter recipient admits to our charges and claims,

when he has a duty to respond, but fails to do so, his admission to our

charges looms very large in any lawful court proceedings.

8. The time limit provided in the presumptive paragraph is 30 days

from receipt of the letter. If we do not receive a written response within

that time period, we usually wait a few extra days, and then, we send the

letter recipient our sworn and notarized affidavit, which is the second

step in our process.

Presumptive Letter

DRAFT

This is the first “presumptive” paragraph. It should be used as the

first paragraph of your letters:

This letter is lawful notification to you, pursuant to The Bill of

Rights to the National Constitution, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth,

Sixth and Ninth Amendments, and The Bill of Rights of the New

Mexico Constitution, in particular, Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 17 and 18, and

pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to me specific

to the subject matter. Your failure to respond, within 30 days, as

stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, everything in this letter with

which you disagree is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and

admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal,

lawful and binding upon you, in any court, anywhere in America,

without your protest or objection or that of those who represent you.

Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General

Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391. Notification of legal responsibility

is “the first essential of due process of law.” Also, see: U.S. v. Tweel,

550 F. 2d. 297. “Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a

legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would

be intentionally misleading.”

IN THE MIDDLE, MAKE ALL OF YOUR STATEMENTS OF

ALL THE FACTS REGARDING THE ACTIONS TAKEN

AGAINST YOU BY THE COP, DA, JUDGE, ETC.

THEN INSERT THIS FINAL “PRESUMPTIVE” PARAGRAPH

AS THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF YOUR LETTERS.

2

If you disagree with anything in this letter, then rebut, in kind, that

with which you disagree, in writing, with particularity, to me, within 30

days of this letter’s date, and support your disagreement with evidence,

fact and law. Your failure to respond, as stipulated, is your agreement

with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true,

correct, legal, lawful, and is your irrevocable agreement attesting to this,

fully binding upon you, in any court in America, without your protest or

objection and that of those who represent you.

All Rights Reserved,

Your Printed Name

DRAFT Affidavit of Formal Complaint

1

EXHIBIT TWENTY ONE

Affidavit of Formal Complaint

To: ___________________________________ , (Law enforcement officer)

Title and full address

I,_________________________________, the undersigned, hereinafter, Affiant, domiciled at

__________________________________________________, hereby make this Affidavit of

Complaint of my own free will, and I hereby affirm, declare and swear, under my oath, that I am

of legal age and of sound mind and hereby attest that the information contained in this Affidavit

of Complaint is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

I file this Affidavit of Complaint with _________________________________, in his capacity

as a law enforcement officer, against the unconstitutional actions committed by

__________________________________.

Basis of Law and Facts in this Affidavit of Complaint:

1. The Constitution for the United States of America is the Supreme Law of the land and

supersedes all other lesser law, statutes, codes, regulations and the State Constitution.

2. What is written in the referenced national Constitution is valid, authorized and

enforceable. What is not written in the national Constitution is prohibited by that

Constitution.

3. Article I, Section 1 of the national Constitution vests all legislative power in Congress.

The Constitution does not authorize legislative power in any form to the Executive and

Judicial Branches.

4. When the State Legislature creates law for the people, that law must be constitutionally

compliant specific to the Bill of Rights or it is not valid law binding upon the people.

5. A law must be valid to exist and must exist to be lawfully enforced.

6. All elected and appointed public officials who serve the people, including you,

_________________________, are required to take an Oath of Office to support and

defend the Constitution before assuming office.

7. Any act passed by any legislature and any action committed by any public officer either

supports and upholds the Constitutions, national and state, or opposes and violates them.

No public officer has the constitutional authority—or any other form of valid, lawful

2

authority—to oppose and violate the very documents to which s/he swore or affirmed his

or her oath.

8. Any unconstitutional actions committed by any public officers, including you,

__________________________, invoke the self-executing Sections 3 & 4 of the 14th

Amendment, by which the errant public officers immediately vacate their offices, upon

commission of their crimes, can no longer hold public office and forfeit all benefits

thereof, including salary and pension.

9. Executive orders are not authorized in the national Constitution, therefore are prohibited

by the national Constitution.


Complaint:

The Affiant has previously sent an Affidavit/Declaration of Truth to

_____________________________, who by his actions, perjured his oath, violated and opposed

the Constitution(s), the inherent rights and due process of law guaranteed to the people therein,

and by those actions caused harm to the people, in the instant case, me. In the Affidavit,

_______________________ was provided a lawful warning to rebut in kind the charges and

claims made in the Affidavit, supported by truth, fact, valid law and evidence.

____________________ failed to rebut Affiant’s Affidavit, in kind, by means of his own sworn,

notarized Affidavit, supported by truth, fact, valid law and evidence, within the specified time

limit, therefore, _________________________ tacitly admitted to and agreed with all of the

charges, claims, averments and information contained in the referenced Affidavit. See: Connally

v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391. Notification of legal responsibility is “the first

essential of due process of law.” See: U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F. 2d. 297. “Silence can only be

equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left

unanswered would be intentionally misleading.”

This Affidavit of Complaint calls for the immediate removal and arrest of

________________________ whose unconstitutional actions and violations of secured rights

and due process of law are fully described and enumerated in the attached Affidavit/Declaration

of Truth sent to __________________________ on date, which Affidavit/Declaration is

incorporated herein and made part hereof. Pursuant to your oath and the constitutional mandates

imposed upon you thereby, you must act lawfully to remove from office and arrest

_________________________, since you cannot lawfully uphold, support, excuse, and condone

the unconstitutional actions ___________________________ has committed, and to which

actions he has admitted.

Further, Affiant sent Affidavits to the oversight and supervisory personnel of

_____________________ in which Affiant clearly stated that __________________________

committed unconstitutional actions that violated and denied guaranteed rights and due process of

law, which actions harmed the people, in the instant case, me. As stated in the Affidavits sent to

these oversight and supervisory personnel, they were notified that they are required, pursuant to

3

their oaths, to stop and correct the unconstitutional actions committed by

_______________________, under their watch, and remove ________________________ from

office. The Affidavits further stated that if they failed to so act, then, they support, abet and

condone ____________________________’s actions committed under their supervision.

Therefore, by their unconstitutional support of __________________________ and his

unconstitutional actions, the supervisory and oversight personnel have invoked the self-executing

Sections 3 & 4 of the 14th Amendment, thus, have lawfully vacated their offices and forfeited

any benefits thereof, including salaries and pensions. This Affidavit of Complaint calls for the

removal from office of _________________________ and the supervisory and oversight

personnel who were so notified by Affiant. The supervisory and oversight personnel failed to

rebut Affiant’s Affidavits sent to them, therefore, tacitly admitted to and agreed with all of the

charges, claims, averments and information contained therein. A copy of the Affidavits sent to

the supervisory and oversight personnel are attached to this Affidavit of Complaint and made

part hereof.

You, _____________________________, pursuant to your oath, must abide by that oath

in the performance of your official duties and must lawfully act upon this Affidavit of Complaint

filed by an American injured and damaged by the unconstitutional actions of the recipients of the

Affidavits specified herein. If you fail your constitutional duty and your oath, then, YOU will

also step outside the lawful scope of your limited, delegated duties and authority and will have

invoked the referenced self-executing Sections 3 & 4 of the 14th Amendment, specified above.

Affiant further sayeth naught.

All Rights Reserved,

By__________________________________

Full Printed Name, Affiant

Notary Statement

In the State of ________________

County of _________________

I swear that on this ____ day of __________________, the above named Affiant/Declarant,

_____________________, appeared before me, and, of his own free will, signed this Affidavit of

Complaint.

__________________________________

Notary Public Seal:

4

My Commission Expires:______________ Date:

BREAK

AFFIDAVIT/DECLARATION OF TRUTH

I, Full Name and address, the undersigned, make this Affidavit/Declaration

of Truth of my own free will, and I hereby affirm, declare and swear, under my

oath, that I am of legal age and of sound mind and hereby attest that the

information contained in this Affidavit/Declaration is true and correct to the best of

my knowledge.

This Affidavit/Declaration of Truth is lawful notification you, and is hereby made

and sent to you pursuant to the Federal Constitution, specifically, the Bill of

Rights, in particular, Amendments I, IV, V, VI, VII, IX and X, and The Bill of

Rights of the New Mexico Constitution, in particular, Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 17

and 18, and requires your written rebuttal to me, in kind, specific to each and every

point of the subject matter stated herein, within thirty (30) days, via your own

sworn and notarized affidavit, using fact, law and evidence to support your rebuttal

of the specific subject matter stated in this Affidavit/Declaration. You are hereby

noticed that your failure to respond, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity and

specificity, anything with which you disagree in this Affidavit/Declaration, is your

lawful, legal and binding agreement with and admission to the fact that everything

in this Affidavit/Declaration is true, correct, legal, lawful, and fully binding upon

you in any court in America, without your protest or objection and that of those

who represent you. Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General

Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385,391. Notification of legal responsibility is “the first

essential of due process of law”. See also: U.S. V. Tweel, 550 F.2d.297. “Silence

can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or

where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading.”

I, [Full Name of Affiant], hereby affirm that the following actions and

events took place:

[Make all of your true statements as to what specifically took place in your

situation in chronologically-ordered, numbered paragraphs, citing your personal

2

experiences and your personal, direct observations of others’ experiences, and/or

their actions, if this applies. The Affidavit should present your claims and charges

based upon the unlawful, unconstitutional actions committed against you by the

person to whom you are sending the affidavit and how you were damaged by the

actions. The affidavit must be based in truth, fact, valid law and evidence.]

Lawful notification has been provided to you stating that if you do not rebut,

in kind, the statements, charges and averments made in this Affidavit/Declaration,

then, you agree with and admit to them. Pursuant to that lawful notification, if you

disagree with anything stated under oath in this Affidavit/Declaration of Truth,

then rebut that with which you disagree, with particularity, within thirty (30) days

of receipt thereof, by means of your own written, notarized affidavit of truth, based

on specific, relevant fact and valid law to support your disagreement, attesting to

your rebuttal and supportive positions, as valid and lawful, under the pains and

penalties of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and this state.

An un-rebutted affidavit stands as fact and truth before any court. Your failure to

respond, as stipulated, is your agreement with and admission to the fact that

everything in this Affidavit of Truth is true, correct, legal, lawful, and is your

irrevocable admission attesting to this, fully binding upon you in any court of law

in America, without your protest, objection and that of those who represent you.

Affiant further sayeth naught.

All Rights Reserved,

____________________________________

_____________________

Full Name, Affiant/Declarant Date

NOTARY STATEMENT

In the State of Your State,

3

County of Your County

I swear that on this____day of month 2022, the above named Affiant/Declarant,

Full Name, personally appeared before me, and of his own free will, signed and

executed this Affidavit/Declaration of Truth.

_________________________________

Notary Public

My Commission Expires:______________

Seal:

Content

Merrick B. Garland

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington DC 20530



Attention Mr. Garland,


I, Dr. Robert Levy, ADDRESS, 

the undersigned, make this Affidavit/Declaration of Truth of my own free will, and I hereby affirm, declare and swear, under my oath, that I am of legal age and of sound mind and hereby attest that the information contained in this Affidavit/Declaration is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.


This letter is lawful notification to you, pursuant to The Bill of

Rights to the National Constitution, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth,

Sixth and Ninth Amendments, and State of Florida Constitution Section 3: Oath, and pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to me specific to the subject matter. Your failure to respond, within 30 days, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, everything in this letter with

which you disagree is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and

admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal,

lawful and binding upon you, in any court, anywhere in America,

without your protest or objection or that of those who represent you.

Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General

Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391. Notification of legal responsibility

is “the first essential of due process of law.” Also, see: U.S. v. Tweel,

550 F. 2d. 297. “Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a

legal or moral duty to speak or where an inquiry left unanswered would

be intentionally misleading.”


Basis of Law and Facts in this Affidavit of Complaint:


1. The Constitution for the United States of America is the Supreme Law of the land and supersedes all other lesser law, statutes, codes, regulations and the State Constitution.


2. What is written in the referenced national Constitution is valid, authorized and enforceable. What is not written in the national Constitution is prohibited by that Constitution.


3. Article I, Section 1 of the national Constitution vests all legislative power in Congress. The Constitution does not authorize legislative power in any form to the Executive and Judicial Branches.


4. Article I, Section 10 of the national Constitution declares No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.


5. When the State Legislature creates law for the people, that law must be constitutionally compliant specific to the Bill of Rights or it is not valid law binding upon the people.


6. A law must be valid to exist and must exist to be lawfully enforced.


7. All elected and appointed public officials who serve the people, including you, Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice, are required to take an Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution before assuming office.


8. Any act passed by any legislature and any action committed by any public officer either supports and upholds the Constitutions, national and state, or opposes and violates them. No public officer has the constitutional authority—or any other form of valid, lawful authority—to oppose and violate the very documents to which s/he swore or affirmed his or her oath.


9. Any unconstitutional actions committed by any public officers, including you, Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice, invoke the self-executing Sections 3 & 4 of the 14th Amendment, by which the errant public officers immediately vacate their offices, upon commission of their crimes, can no longer hold public office and forfeit all benefits thereof, including salary and pension.


10. Executive orders are not authorized in the national Constitution, therefore are prohibited by the national Constitution.


If you disagree with anything in this letter, then rebut, in kind, that

with which you disagree, in writing, with particularity, to me, within 30

days of this letter’s date, and support your disagreement with evidence,

fact and law. Your failure to respond, as stipulated, is your agreement

with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true,

correct, legal, lawful, and is your irrevocable agreement attesting to this,

fully binding upon you, in any court in America, without your protest or

objection and that of those who represent you.


All Rights Reserved,


Dr. Robert Levy

Full Printed Name, Affiant


Notary Statement

In the State of ________________

County of _________________

I swear that on this ____ day of __________________, the above named Affiant/Declarant,

_____________________, appeared before me, and, of his own free will, signed this Affidavit of Complaint.


__________________________________

Notary Public Seal:





My Commission Expires:______________ Date:




Sample

Here is a sample document you can find online.

Top of the List

The opm.gov Deep State Senior Executive Service (SES) lead America’s workforce. As the keystone of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, the SES was established to “...ensure that the executive management of the Government of the United States is responsive to the needs, policies, and goals of the Nation and otherwise is of the highest quality.” These leaders possess well-honed executive skills and share a broad perspective on government and a public service commitment that is grounded in the Constitution.


Members of the SES serve in the key positions just below the top Presidential appointees. SES members are the major link between these appointees and the rest of the Federal workforce. They operate and oversee nearly every government activity in approximately 75 Federal agencies.


The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) manages the overall Federal executive personnel program, providing the day-to-day oversight and assistance to agencies as they develop, select, and manage their Federal executives.



Merrick B. Garland

Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington DC 20530



Office of Governor Ron DeSantis
State of Florida
The Capitol
400 S. Monroe St.
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0001



Role of the Office of the Solicitor General

As Florida’s chief appellate attorney, the Solicitor General serves the Attorney General in defending the interests of the people of Florida in state and federal court. The Office of the Solicitor General is responsible for handling the State’s most sensitive and complex litigation, supervising the State’s civil and criminal appeals, and advising the Attorney General, especially on amicus curiae matters and multi-state litigation. The Solicitor General’s staff includes eight attorneys and an administrative assistant. Aside from his duties within the Office of the Solicitor General, the Solicitor General serves as the Richard Ervin Visiting Professor at the Florida State University College of Law.


Henry Whitaker

Florida Solicitor General

Office of the Attorney General
State of Florida
PL-01, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050



Ashley Brooke Moody

Florida Attorney General

PL-01 The Capitol

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050



Joseph A. Ladapo, MD

State Surgeon General Florida Health

4052 Bald Cypress Way Tallahassee, FL 32399



About the U.S. Attorneys' Offices 

justice.gov/usao Charged with ensuring “that the laws be faithfully executed,” the 93 United States Attorneys work to enforce federal laws throughout the country. The President appoints a United States Attorney to each of the 94 federal districts (Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands are separate districts but share a United States Attorney). The United States Attorney is the chief federal law enforcement officer in their district and is also involved in civil litigation where the United States is a party.


Norman Wong

Acting Director, Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys


Jason R. Coody

United States Attorney North

111 North Adams Street

4th Floor U.S. Courthouse

Tallahassee, FL 32301


Roger B. Handberg

United States Attorney Middle

400 North Tampa Street

Suite 3200

Tampa, FL 33602


Markenzy Lapointe

United States Attorney South

99 N.E. 4th Street

Miami, Fl. 33132





John G. Roberts
Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Clarence Thomas

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Samuel L. Alito

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Sonia Sotomayor

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Elena Kagan

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Neil M. Gorsuch

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Brett M. Kavanaugh

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Amy C. Barrett

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543


Ketanjl B. Jackson

Supreme Court of the U.S.
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543







EMERGENCY PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Joseph Sansone, Petitioner
27499 Riverview Center Blvd.
Bonita Springs, FL 34134


Florida

Steven Meiner

Miami Beach Mayor

Miami Beach, FL 



Mark Warner

Committee on Intelligence

211 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510



Marco Rubio

Committee on Intelligence

211 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510



Florida Supreme Court

Chief Justice Carlos G. Muñiz

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice Charles T. Canady

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice Jorge Labarga

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice John D. Couriel

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice Jamie R. Grosshans

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice Renatha Francis

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


Justice Meredith L. Sasso

Florida Supreme CourtAttn: Clerk's Office500 South Duval StreetTallahassee, FL 32399


The American Presidency Project

William McKinley

25th President of the United States

(March 4, 1897 to September 14, 1901)


Cabinet:


Secretary of State

John Sherman (1897-98)

William R. Day (1898)

John M. Hay (1898-1901)


Secretary of the Treasury

Lyman J. Gage (1897-1901)


Secretary of War

Russel A. Alger (1897-99)

Elihu Root (1899-1901)


Attorney General

Joseph McKenna (1897-98)

John W. Griggs (1898-1901)

Philander C. Knox (1901)


Postmaster General

James A. Gary (1897-98)

Charles Emory Smith (1898-1901)


Secretary of the Navy

John D. Long (1897-1901)


Secretary of the Interior

Cornelius N. Bliss (1897-99)

Ethan A. Hitchcock (1899-1901)


Secretary of Agriculture

James Wilson (1897-1901)


Source potus.com/william-mckinley



Donald J. Trump
45th President of the United States
(January 20, 2017 to January 20, 2021)


Vice President: Michael R. Pence (2017-2021)

Cabinet:

Secretary of State
Rex Tillerson (2017-2018)
Michael R. Pompeo (2018-2021)

Secretary of the Treasury
Steven Mnuchin (2017-2021)

Secretary of Defense
James Mattis (2017-2018)
Mark Esper (2019-2020)

Attorney General
Jeff Sessions (2017-2018)
William P. Barr (2019-2020)

Secretary of the Interior
Ryan Zinke (2017-2019)
David Bernhardt (2019-2021)

Secretary of Agriculture
Sonny Perdue (2017-2021)

Secretary of Commerce
Wilbur Ross (2017-2021)

Secretary of Labor
Alex Acosta (2017-2019)
Eugene Scalia (2019-2021)

Secretary of Health and Human Services
Thomas E. Price (2017)
Alex M. Azar II (2018-2021)

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Ben Carson (2017-2021)

Secretary of Transportation
Elaine Chao (2017-2021)

Secretary of Energy
Rick Perry (2017-2019)
Dan Brouillette (2019-2021)

Secretary of Education
Betsy DeVos (2017-2021)

Secretary of Veterans Affairs
David Shulkin (2017-2018)
Robert L. Wilkie, Jr. (2018-2021)

Secretary of Homeland Security
John F. Kelly (2017)
Kirstjen M. Nielsen (2017-2019)



Joe Biden
46th President of the United States
(January 20, 2021 to Present)


Vice President: Kamala D. Harris (2021- )

Cabinet:

Secretary of State
Antony Blinken (2021- )

Secretary of the Treasury
Janet Yellen (2021- )

Secretary of Defense
Lloyd Austin (2021- )

Attorney General
Merrick Garland (2021- )

Secretary of the Interior
Deb Haaland (2021- )

Secretary of Agriculture
Tom Vilsack (2021- )

Secretary of Commerce
Gina Raimondo (2021- )

Secretary of Labor
Marty Walsh (2021-23)

Secretary of Health and Human Services
Xavier Becerra (2021- )

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Marcia Fudge (2021- )

Secretary of Transportation
Pete Buttigieg (2021- )

Secretary of Energy
Jennifer Granholm (2021- )

Secretary of Education
Miguel Cardona (2021- )

Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Denis McDonough (2021- )

Secretary of Homeland Security
Alejandro Mayorkas (2021- )




Was this article helpful?

0 out of 0 liked this article

Still need help? Message Us