Misprision of a Felony

Misprision of a felony is the offense of failure to inform government authorities of a felony that a person knows about. A
person commits the crime of misprision of a felony if that person:
 Knows of a federal crime that the person has witnessed or that has come to the person’s attention, or failed to
prevent.

 Fails to report it to a federal judge or other federal official (who is not themselves involved in the crime).
The common law misprision of felony doctrine has been put into statutory form. But it continues to be controlling in case
of people in specific positions of authority or responsibility who fail to act when made known of a federal crime. This
would apply, for instance, to federal judges, to Department of Justice employees, to members of Congress, and others. That
doctrine has been codified in the federal crime reporting statute, Title 18 U.S.C. § 4.

Repeated Misprision of Felony

Crimes by America’s “Leaders”
Overwhelming evidence exists at this site and in the related books of repeated misprision of felony crimes by people in
key government positions. These include, for instance:
 Members of Congress that had been repeatedly informed by present and former government agents and others of
continuing federal crimes.

 Employees of the U.S. Department of Justice, and other government departments.

 Media people and media corporations.

 Lawyers who compounded the obstruction of justice with sham legal attacks paralleling the obstruction of justice
tactics by federal judges and Department of Justice employees.

 Media people and media corporations.

One hundred percent cover-up, year after year, suggesting control by a source high in government, and probably the
people in control of the political U.S. Department of Justice.

Federal Crime Reporting Statute

The federal offense of failure to disclose a felony, if coupled with some act concealing the
felony, such as suppression of evidence, harboring or protecting the person performing the
felony, intimidation or harming a witness, or any other act designed to conceal from
authorities the fact that a crime has been committed.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 4. Misprision of felony. Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission
of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible
make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the
United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
A federal judge, or any other government official, is required as part of the judge’s
mandatory administrative duties, to receive any offer of information of a federal crime. If
that judge blocks such report, that block is a felony under related obstruction of justice
statutes, and constitutes a serious offense.
Upon receiving such information, the judge is then required to make it known to a government law enforcement body that
is not themselves involved in the federal crime.

Government Personnel Repeatedly

Violating Crime Reporting Statutes
For over 40 years, former federal agent Rodney Stich has attempted to report the continuing corruption in the
government’s aviation safety offices related to a series of continuing aviation disasters, and of criminal activities inflicting
great harm upon the American people and upon the United States, to:
 Federal judges.

 Supreme Court Justices.

In every instance, the judges and Justices blocked the reporting of the federal crimes. They became enablers to
subsequent tragic, sometimes, deadly, and sometimes catastrophic events.

Article 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states or their subdivisions from entering into any “treaty, alliance
or confederation” with a foreign political organization. Contracts with ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability
headquartered in Bonn, Germany fit into this prohibition. Increasingly, American citizens are becoming aware of this
fact.There are no U.S. Supreme Court cases under Article 1 Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. That is because no state has
engaged in the prohibited action during America’s history. The present situation is a first, de novo, circumstance.

According to www.iclei.org, ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the ‘International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.’
The ‘International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives’ became ‘ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability’ in
2003 with a broader international mission to pursue Sustainability issues. ICLEI is an international association of local
governments as well as national and regional government organizations who have made a commitment to the United
Nations program of Sustainable Development – Agenda 21.
Many elected city officials are indoctrinated through their League of Cities seminars and other associations to embrace
Sustainable Development – Agenda 21 principles. This often leads to an ICLEI contract which accelerates the ride down
the path of ruin.

At Freedom Advocates we recommend that a Misprision of Treason be presented to elected officials who fail to attempt to
sever the ICLEI association. Let the honest and brave politicians who do attempt to sever and who stand for their oaths to
the Constitution be left out of the misprision notice. A misprision is described as: “Misprision of treason is the failure to
perform a public duty. A person who knows that a treason is being or is about to be committed but does not report it to a
proper authority commits a misprision of treason.” (Misprision of Treason Law & Legal Definition, USLegal.com)

First Amendment Administrative Commercial Lien Process

Posted on May 19, 2013 by arnierosner
First Amendment Administrative Commercial Lien Process
State of Georgia )
) ss.

County of _____________)

I, Affiant, Randall David Due aka Randy Due, Public Minister, certify under my own commercial liability, that the
following is true, correct, materially complete, and not misleading to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Notice of the Existence of a First Amendment Administrative Commercial Lien Process of the United States of
America
May 19, 2013

A Consensual Public Commercial Lien is:

>1. A Commercial Lien against a Public Official’s violation of their required Official Oath, which is equal to the
Military Oath, to support this Nation and its Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, [This Lien is
supported by the filing of a Criminal Complaint.]
>2. And also is, a Commercial Lien against the Public Official’s Rebellion, Insurrection or Treason committed
against the Nation and its Constitution,
>3. And also is, consequently, a Commercial Lien against the Public Official’s violation of the Natural and Civil
Rights of Freedom; Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, of the People of the United States of America.
>4. And also is, a penalty against the Public Official’s failure to provide the necessary, proper and lawful Services,
which have been paid for by the Public through Taxation, and a penalty against the Public Officials for
substituting False, Fictitious and Fraudulent Services,
>5. And also is, therefore, to provide restitution and rebate of taxes back to the Public as an exercise of the First
Amendment “…right of the People peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances.” —-to guarantee “Just Compensation” for Taxes.

“This Constitution shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby,
anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.” (U.S. Constitution, Article VI, paragraph
2.) See also Amendment 5 –“Just Compensation”.

The Military Soldiers, who are serving this Nation, losing their sanity and body parts, shedding their Blood, and Dying on
battle fields, presumably to protect and defend the Nation and its Constitution against all enemies, and serving to protect
our Freedoms, Liberties and Pursuit of Happiness, and serving to protect the soldiers’ own futures and their families’
futures, are being cheated out of “Justice” in the court system, as is happening to the Public Citizens.

Internationally, an Administrative Commercial Lien Process contains a very gracious Grace Period of 3-months
(Jewish), 90 days (Statutory), in which the Defendant(s)/Lien Debtor(s) party receiving this Commercial Lien Process can
contest the Commercial Lien Claim (Claim of Commercial Lien) categorically point-for-point, if they feel or believe that
any part of the Administrative Commercial Lien Process is False, Fictitious or Fraudulent.

The 3-month (90-day) Grace Period allows ample time for the Defendant/Lien Debtor to expose the Commercial Lien
Claimant’s Claim and the Commercial Lien Claimant to the strict Remedies of Commercial Law, enough time to discover
and reveal whether or not any part of the Commercial Lien Claim is False, Fictitious or Fraudulent.

Upon refusal or failure of the Commercial Lien Defendant(s)/Lien Debtor(s) to fully contest the Commercial Lien
categorically point-for-point within the Grace Period, a condition that is called “Default”, that Commercial Lien
becomes activated as an account receivable collectable by marching and seizing, also known as debt collection.
The Grace period can be extended for reasonable cause.

It is “Patently “ obvious that, if the Officials, Officers and Agents of an All-Powerful Government have not
“contested” the Commercial Lien within the 3-month (90 day) Grace Period, then it must be because its Public
Officials, Officers and/or Agents cannot contest the Commercial Lien without exposing their own “Fraudulent
Behavior, Incompetent Behavior, or Criminal Behavior”. Let them prove otherwise.

When the Government’s Public Officials, Officers and/or Agents dishonor the Administrative Grace Process, by
Contempt or other Default, they waive their Legal and Lawful ability to claim that the Administrative Commercial Lien
Process is False, Fictitious or Fraudulent.

NOTICE TO PUBLIC OFFICIAL, OFFICER AND/OR AGENT

Should you disagree with or contest any part of this international Administrative Commercial Lien Process
document, you must immediately show, by an Affidavit sworn to be true, correct, materially complete and not
misleading under your own Commercial Liability, your specific “Just Cause” of Findings of Facts and Conclusions
of Law to support your contesting of the Administrative Commercial Lien Process.

Failure or refusal to “Contest” this Administrative Commercial Lien Process shall be construed to mean that you
are in total agreement with all points of this document.
Affiant, Randall David Due, exercise the right to amend this and/or any other document if necessary, in order that the
truth be more fully and certainly ascertained and justly determined.

Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal; Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

Executed this ______ day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen.

By:__________________________________

(Signature of Affiant/Public Minister)

Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this ______day of May, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen by
Randall David Due.
__ Personally Known__ Produced Identification Type and # of ID______________________

_______________________________

(Signature of Notary)

(Seal)

________________________________

(Name of Notary Typed, Stamped, or Printed)

Notary Public, State of _________________

Randall David Due aka Randy Due, Public Minister; Ex. Military (Civil Rights Advocate) acting as a Non-union Lawyer
(not a member of the bar association) pursuant to 42 USC § 1986 (acting with Reasonable Diligence) & 18 USC § 4
(Mandate to act), 18 USC §§ 241 & 242 (Protection of the Nation, its Constitution and Civil Rights)
Public Minister pursuant to and protected by Public Law 94-583, Oct. 21, 1976 Stat. 2891 [Codified in Title 28 U.S.C §
1602 et esq.]; and Public Law 1790, 1 Stat. At L. 117, Ch 9 [Codified in 22 U.S.C. § 252]; Public Law 1948, Ch 645, 62 Stat.
688 [Codified in Title 18 U.S.C § 112] and Public Law 1871, Ch 22, § 6, 17 Stat. 15; [Codified in 42 U.S.C. § 1986]

“For every thousand men who hack at the branches of evil, there is only one who is striking at the root.” Henry David
Thoreau

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/
 Applying these code changes in reverse order, we can reconstruct the IRC definitions of "State" by using any word
processor and simple "textual substitution" as follows:

Time 1: Alaska is a U.S.** Territory

Hawaii is a U.S.** Territory

7701(a)(10): The term "State" shall be construed to include the Territories and the District of Columbia, where such
construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.

Alaska joins the Union. Strike out "Territories" and substitute "Territory of Hawaii":

Time 2: Alaska is a State of the Union

Hawaii is a U.S.** Territory

7701(a)(10): The term "State" shall be construed to include the Territory of Hawaii and the District of Columbia, where
such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.

Hawaii joins the Union. Strike out "the Territory of Hawaii and" immediately after the word "include":

Time 3: Alaska is a State of the Union

Hawaii is a State of the Union

7701(a)(10): The term "State" shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is
necessary to carry out provisions of this title.

The "exception" cited in this statute tells the whole story here. In section 1421, Congress needed to refer to courts
of the 50 States, because their own local constitutions and laws have granted to those courts the requisite jurisdiction to
naturalize. For this reason, Congress made an explicit exception to the standard, federal definition of "State" quoted
above. The following is the paragraph in section 1421 which contained the exceptional uses of the term "State" (i.e. Union
State, not federal state):

1421. Jurisdiction to naturalize

(a) Exclusive jurisdiction to naturalize persons as citizens of the United States** is hereby conferred upon the
following specified courts: District courts of the United States now existing, or which may hereafter be
established by Congress in any State ... also all courts of record in any State or Territory now existing,
or which may hereafter be created, having a seal, a clerk, and jurisdiction in actions at law or equity,
or law and equity, in which the amount in controversy is unlimited.

[8 U.S.C. 1421(a), circa 1987]

[emphasis added]

In a section entitled "State Courts", the interpretive notes and decisions for this statute contain clear proof that
the phrase "in any State" here refers to any State of the Union (e.g. New York):

Under 8 USCS Section 1421, jurisdiction to naturalize was conferred upon New York State Supreme Court by virtue of
its being court of record and having jurisdiction in actions at law and equity. Re Reilly (1973) 73 Misc 2d 1073,
344 NYS2d 531.

Within the borders of the 50 States, the "geographical" extent of exclusive federal jurisdiction is strictly
confined to the federal enclaves; this extent does not encompass the 50 States themselves.
 We cannot blame the average American for failing to appreciate this subtlety. The confusion that results from the
vagueness we observe is inherent in the Code and evidently intentional, which raises some very serious questions
concerning the real intent of that Code in the first place. Could money have anything to do with it? That question answers
itself.
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/