UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS Respond to Appellees Opposition to Join Cases on Appeal

8/9/2019 UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS Respond to Appellees Opposition to Join Cases on Appeal

1/22

1

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT---------------------------------No. 10-1594

PAUL L. MUCKLE, ET AL.Plaintiffs, Appellants,V.FREMONT INVSTMENT AND LOANS,ASC/WELLS FARGO, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATES,S.G. MORTGAGE SBAC, THE ENTIRE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY,THE SECURITIES/ DIVIDENT INDUSTRY, ET AL.Defendants, Appellees--------------------------------------------

&No. 10-1652PAUL L. MUCKLE,Plaintiff- Appellant.V.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,PRES. BARACK H. OBAMA, PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH,

TIMOTHY GEITHNER, HENRY M. PAULSON JR., WILLIAM H.DANOLDSON, THE GOVERNORS OF ALL 50 STATES, ET, AL.

Defendants, Appellees

APPELLANTS RESPOND TO ALL APPELLEES MOTION INOPPOSITION TO CONSILIDATE CASES, AND PREEMPTIVE STRIKE INRESPONSE TO THE ANTICIPATED MOTION OF THE DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES IN CASE No. 10-1652 MOTION TO STRIKE APPEALBASED ON THE IMMUNITY AFFORDED THEM BY THE ELEVENTHAMENDMENT

Now comes Paul L. Muckle, Muckle pro se, on behalf of the Appellants and

respond to Any/All the defendants Motion in Opposition to Consolidate the above


2/22

2

mention cases for purpose of briefing and oral argument. The Appellant(s) also request

that this be treated as a Response to the anticipated States Governments Motion to

dismiss the Appeal based on the purported immunity afforded them by the

unconstitutional Eleventh Amendment. Yes, this appeal does seek to challenge the

constitutionality and applicability of the Eleventh Amendment in a time of great

national crisis that is wreaking havoc on the livelihood of all the residents in all the fifty

states in the Union. Muckle also states that the motions of Attorney Goar, and especially

that of Attorney Sean Higgins, contains nothing but a whole lot of weeping, wailing and

gnashing of teeth; the cry of a fox caught up in his own pit and pity. Now Muckle shall

send those tears back from whence they came and bind the foxes some more. As reasons

herein, Muckle states the following:

1. The issue of whether the two cases should be joined in appeal and perhaps in trialis a matter as simple as that of the Principal and the Agent. The governments,

both the federal and states are the Principal which hired/licensed Wall Street, the

private sector to handle the financial affairs of the government and the people of

the United States of America. When the agent commits fraud because the

Principal turned a blind eye and failed to regulate his agent, and when the

Principal fails to give the agent a direct order to cease and desist and to correct

his mistakes, then the only other option is to hold the Principal liable alongside

his agent. The federal government and the governments of all the fifty states gave

the Banksters license and permit to operate in and across the borders of all fifty

states. The federal government and the governments of all fifty states were

responsible for regulating the Banksters and responsible for protecting our


3/22

3

national treasures, our taxes, our pensions and retirement funds, and our

investments from these Banksters. The federal government and the governments

of all fifty states are responsible for preventing the Banksters from unlawfully

foreclosing on the property of the people when the governments themselves have

gone on the record and accused the very mortgage lenders and Wall Street

investors of committing fraud against all the people in order to get those very

mortgages they are foreclosing on and selling. What a tragedy!

2. Both states and federal government are too tightly wrap up in bed under thecovers with the mortgage and financial industry to be able to effectively go after

these Banksters and bring them to justice for their ills against all the people. If the

governments were to go after the banks, the banks will just turn around and say

that they did nothing illegal because it was the government that allowed them to

operate and run rampant the way they did; and they would be right. The

government cannot go after these banks because they are too closely embedded

together. Therefore, the First Circuit Court should not intervene on behalf of the

governments nor the Banksters and separate the cases. The First Circuit Court is

encourage to defer to the doctrine of In pari delicto. Actually the phrase

means, in essence, that since both parties are equally at fault, the court will not

involve itself in resolving one side's claim over the other, however, I am now

using it in the context that the court should not involve itself in separating the

Principal from the Agent, they are both at fault and must be bind together. It is the

only way we a will ever get anything done.


4/22

4

3. Havent anyone figure out the matter as yet? Paul L, Muckle is not seeking tooverthrow the government nor to destroy Wall Street, all I am demanding is

accountability and that liability be established on behalf of all the people. There is

a Gulf Course Fund for the oil well flood, what of the fund for the financial

tsunami? I do not hear anyone crying for that, no, they care more about fishes,

marshes, and their habitat, than they care about people, their financial wellbeing,

and their habitat. Very intriguing indeed.

4. In addition, here is an irony, Attorney Sean Higgins argues that the two cases arenot related in anyway, yet his clients, Wells Fargo and SG Mortgage were the

beneficiaries of about $30 Billion in bailout with of our tax dollars. That is part of

the complaint against the government. SG Mortgage is a foreign corporation from

France. SG Mortgage, a foreign corporation committed fraud and help caused the

destruction to the American economy and harm to the financial wealth and

stability to the people, yet this foreign corporation, which Attorney Higgins

defends to his own detriment, was able to receive $30 Billion from our treasury,

in violation of Section 4 of the United States Constitution. Do we need any more

ties to bind them together? Here we go:

5. Richard Riley, former Governor of South Carolina and United StatesSecretary of Education, is a senior partner at the law firm of Nelson

Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP. Just look at his title, he is a former

government official whose firm has now come to the rescue to defend

Wall Street and the Banksters against the American people who he

once served. Shame, shame.


5/22

5

6. Philip Lader, former administrator of the Small BusinessAdministration and former United States Ambassador to the United

Kingdom, is a senior partner at the law firm of Nelson Mullins Riley &

Scarborough LLP. Just look at his title, he is a former government

official whose firm has now come to the rescue to defend Wall Street

and the Banksters against the American people who he once served.

Shame, shame.

7. David H. Wilkins, former United States Ambassador to Canada,former Speaker of the South Carolina House of Representatives, is a

senior partner at the law firm of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough

LLP. Just look at his title, he is a former government official whose

firm has now come to the rescue to defend Wall Street and the

Banksters against the American people who he once served. Shame,

shame.

8. Butler Derrick, former U.S. Representative for South Carolina's 3rdcongressional district, is a senior partner at the law firm of Nelson

Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP. He is a former United States

Government official. Just look at his title, he is a former government

official whose firm has now come to the rescue to defend Wall Street

and the Banksters against the American people who he once served.

Shame, shame.


6/22

6

9. David E. Dukes, managing partner, in the lobbying department at thelaw firm of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP. His Department

lobbies the United States government on behalf of his firm.

10.The point being, the law firm which is arguing the loudest that thecases should not be joined because there is no relationship between the

defendants, is the very firm which has former government official who

are the ones defending the banks. What more cozy relationship could

there be? What more reasons to join the two cases? Is no one curious to

know why such a high powered former government officials have come

to the rescue of the Banksters who their very government said robed

all the people? What a contradiction! The government says the banks

committed fraud and robbery, and the ones who has stepped up to help

the banksters to continue with the robbery are government officials,

whose firm also lobbies the United States government. Intriguing!

Very intriguing indeed. These guys have no shame. When they were

running for public office, they begged the American people to trust

them and vote for them, but now that they are out of office, and they

no longer need our votes and support, they have gone over to the other

side. Now we see whom they had truly worked for all along, the

Banksters who financed their elections to begin with. Do we need any

more proof of the revolving doors of corruption that controls the United

States governments? It is indeed a financial oligarch.


7/22

7

11.What more reasons for a joinder than the fact of who are representingthe Banks and Investors, Nelson Mullins, former governments official

who still enjoys close contact and access to the government. They have

joined themselves and are caught up in their own pit.

12.The relationship between Wall Street, the Mortgage Industry and the federal andState governments is no ordinary relationship. Wall Street, the private sector, is

solely responsible for the economy and prosperity of the American people. The

governments are sole responsible for licensing and regulating Wall Street. The

government and Wall Street are bind to each others survival and the survival of

the American society as much as a child and its mother are bind by that umbilical

cord.

13. The federal governments and the states governments have gone on television andaccused the banks and investor defendants of cheating and robing all the people,

then these governments then went and supported and gave our tax dollars to bail

out the thieves, then these governments told the Banksters to give the people loan

modification. The Banksters laughed at the governments and instead gave their

employees million dollars bonuses and took luxury trips and threw lush parties

with our money. Yet the government stood and did nothing but pay lip service to

the masses. They allow the Banksters to run rampant through our neighborhoods

like neutron bombs, killing all the people and leaving empty houses standing.

14.Therefore, the point being, the Banks and investors would not have been able todo as they please and destroy the United States economy if the federal and state

governments had being doing their duty and enforcing the laws and regulating the


8/22

8

banks and Investors. So you see, it is a matter a simple as that of the Agent and

the Principle; the agent cannot run rampant unless the Principle allows him too.

Therefore, if you complaint to the Principle about the crimes and violations of the

agent, but the Principle fails to take action and the agent refuse to cease and

desist, and you have no power to stop him, and the courts wont intervene, then

there is only two other choices left; exercise our Second Amendment Rights and

take up arms against these foreign Banksters to stop them, or sue the Principle and

bind him with his agent to force him to get up out of the Banksters pockets and

help the people. I am not going to mince words. I have no fear of what may come

of it. However, I tell you one thing, give me Liberty or give me death, no foreign

Bankster is going to waltz onto my turfand unlawfully take away my home. I

have chosen the latter option. It is now the First Circuit Courts move.

15.Now here is the reason why this Honorable Court must cast the defendants motionand unconstitutional legal mumbo jumbo into that bin where they truly

belongs, and give thought and consideration to this simple laymans wisdom. The

one and only reason why I filed a lawsuit against the federal and state

governments is simple. From April 2007, up till the district court dismissed the

case, I ran to the various federal and state governments and agencies, showing

them the evidence I was uncovering about the massive mortgage and financial

fraud that was rearing its menacing head and threatening the very survival of the

American economy, and the prosperity of its people.

16.I went to the FBI and gave them evidence, they promised to investigate, when Icalled back to check up on the progress, the agent hanged up the phone in my face


9/22

9

after rudely telling me not to call back, they would contact me when they were

ready. I went to their office with documents of fraud in August and October of

2007; I am still waiting for that call in June 2010.

17.Next I went to the United States Attorney Office in the federal courthousebuilding. What a waste of time, the interviewer looked at my evidence and me as

if we were both aliens from outer space. She had no clue whatsoever about what I

was talking about. She knew nothing about mortgage fraud. The situation was so

embarrassing that I took up my papers and ran out of there. People was about to

lose their homes by the millions, and the government had no clue. I tried to warn

them, but they treated me as if was the black plague.

18.As soon as I left The U.S Attorneys office, I ran straight down to the districtcourt and demand to see Judge Woodlock and refused to leave until I saw him. I

had to show him the evidence. Within two hours of my request, I was granted an

emergency audience with the then Honorable Judge Woodlock. Upon seeing

the evidence, that very same Judge Woodlock agreed that it was fraud, and he

agreed that what I was uncovering could get me into a lot of trouble. He instructed

me to re-file a complaint. He instructed me not to put anything in the complaint

that would hint to the defendants of what I was uncovering and that could get me

hurt. He instructed me to go to the FBI and show them what I had showed him.

Yes people, that very same Judge Woodlock who has now become insincere was

the very one who spurred me on to fight this case, he instructed me to re-file my

complaint. It is all on the transcripts of the federal court dated, August 17, 2007.

Read it! Whosoever diggeth a pit shall fall in it.


10/22

10

19.However, it did not end there; I informed Judge Woodlock that this fraudperpetrated was not only against the plaintiff alone but also against millions of

Americans who were on the verge of losing their homes if the court or

government did not do something to stop it. Despite the evidence I gave him

which showed that the mortgage and financial fraud perpetrated against the

American people would cause our economy to collapse, the judge basically told

me that it was a dog eat dog world and that I could not fend for anyone elses

bone by my own. He wanted me to let whom was dying die, and who were

starving starve; he was not going to feed them or allow me to share my good

fortune with them.

20.Then on August 28, 2007, the hearing transcript says it all. On that day, after thecase was call for a hearing on my motion for injunctive relief, and the

introductions were made, the very first words that came out of the then

Honorable Judge Woodlocks mouth as he turned to address Attorney Christine

Murphy for the defendants went almost as follows, There have been violations.

There will be liabilities. There will be no foreclosure of the plaintiffs home.

Then the judge right there and then ORDERED the defendants to modify the loan

and give us a lower payment. It is all on the transcripts let them be read!

21.Therefore, the then Honorable Judge Woodlock, recognizing fraud when he sawit, and applying the rule of law where it was appropriate, placed the defendants on

notice that there would be liabilities if the defendants were to foreclose on and sell

the plaintiffs home. What has changed since? Certainly not the evidence, certainly

not the law.


11/22

11

22.It goes on. After the judge ordered the defendants to modify the loan, I asked thejudge to order the same for every American who was also the victim of the Great

Subprime Loan Fiasco. He refused, stating that I had no standing to fend for

others, to look out for myself. He basically said, Muckle, your feet is just too big

for your shoes, you have no standing to defend anyone else.

23.Next, I began to spread the evidence of massive fraud in the mortgage industry allover the internet. I sent video tapes and written document to President Obama, to

members of Congress and the Senate. I called up the Center for Responsible

Learning, HUD, The Attorney General of Massachusetts, and Governor Duval

Patrick. I send evidence to everyone who allowed me to send it and those who

would not. Those who agreed to look at what I send suddenly disappeared after

they read or saw it. No one wanted any part to do with what I was proposing; to

free the people from the hands of the financial oligarch who was running our

government and the people from behind the scenes with their checkbooks. It was

as if everyone was afraid that Muckle had brought on the bubonic plague. No one

wanted to help all the people, they all told Muckle to look out for himself. Some

even suggested that he might even be killed in the process.

24. Now!- what have we here that Muckle should be as a home grown slave, anUncle Tom who would discover that the Master had been cheating him and all the

people all the time, but when he catches the master red-handed, the master tries to

appease him with settlements and briberies in return for him sweeping the

evidence under the rug; thus allowing the master to keep robbing all the people

and tossing them out into the streets, while Muckle take the cash bribes they


12/22

12

offered him and the only $100 monthly mortgage payments he would be making

if he just drop the case and shut up?

25.My respond to their offers of bribery and settlements went as follows, By thewill of MY GOD, and on the grounds of the Federal Truth In Lending Act,

TILA, the federal Home Ownership And Equity Protection Act, HOEPA, and

MGLc. 183C, also known as the Predatory Home Loan Practices Act, and the

federal Trade Commission Act, the plaintiffs now officially rejects any offer of a

settlement by any of the defendants even if they were to offer to pay us a

hundred million dollars to settle and make the case go away. We do not have

the power to prosecute you in criminal court, but we will surely prosecute you in

the civil court. You will not pay your way out of this one. Money is not the

motivating factor here. MY GODS will is being done. Read it! ( page 6

paragraph 21 of Plaintiffs Motion to Append motion for Injunctive relief and

Subsequent Response to Defendant U.S bank Answer to the Complaint)

26.Now the point being, I went to the government seeking help for all the people andthe governments respond was to ignore me and tell me that either they could not

help me to help the people, or that I should forget about everyone else and look

out for myself. I am a human, I have compassion, would it not make me even

more evil than these banksters if I was to accept their bribes and settlements and

allow them to keep robing all the people while my children and I live easy?

Therefore, I warned everyone, the governments, Judge Woodlock and the

Banksters, Give all the people a loan modification, because if you dont, and

they find out what these Banksters had done to them, it would be terrible for the


13/22

13

industry, because they would feel the peoples wrath. They all ignored me. So

what was I to do?

27. I made one last warning, Give all the people a loan modification, because if youdo not, I will give them the evidence that you cheated them, and then they will

take their houses clean away from you. Again I was ignored as if I was some

annoying fly to be shooed away. However, I did not immediately carry out my

threat by releasing the evidence; instead I decided to give them one last chance by

filing a motion to join multiple defendants and multiple plaintiffs. That motion

was not granted, so I decided to take tact. I realized that the only way that the

American people would ever get any justice is if I was to somehow tie the

governments into the pit with the Banksters, then it would be every man for him.

The day the two cases get join and a trial date set, would be the day that America

would be free from the hands of the financial oligarch.

28.My whole tactic was not to sue the government but rather to force them to go afterthe banks and stop them from stealing the peoples home, taxes, investments, and

retirement funds. But instead of standing up and doing what is just and

honorable, my brother and president, Barack Obama, who ran on a campaign of

change, and Governor Duval Patrick and all the other governors and congress and

senate people sat silent and allow the judge to swat me down like that pesky fly I

mentioned earlier. Funny thing about a black fly is that if you are eating and a

black fly buzz you and you try to swat him down, make sure that you get him with

your first swat because if you hit that fly and not knock it down completely, it will

come back and deliberately land into your food, whether to die or to defy you. It


14/22

14

is its way of telling you, you want all the food, you gonna get none of it at all. It

is a quite intriguing observation, try it. You could learn a lot from a fly

29.The law states. Any violation of the Truth In Lending Act, regardless oftechnical nature must result in finding of liability against lender. Truth In

Lending Regulation Z,

Section 226.1 et seq., 15 U.S.C. Sections 1700; Truth In Lending Act Section 130

(a, e); 15 U.S.C Section (a, e) In Re: Steinbrecher. 110 Br. 155, 116 A.L.R Fed.

881. Once Creditor violates the Truth in Lending Act, no matter how technical

the violation appears, unless one of the statutory defenses applies [the] court has

NO discretion in imposing liability. Truth In Lending Act, Section 102-186 as

amended, 15 U.S.C Section 1601-1667e. Solis V. Fidelity Consumer Discount

Co. 58 Br. 983.

30.According to the Truth in Lending Law, so long as the lender has violated any ofthe TILA rules, no judge in the land have the authority to dismiss a complaint

against that lender and allow them to foreclose on the property in question. Is

anyone paying any attention to these laws, which they have sworn to uphold and

enforce? It is so very intriguing to watch how mankind is self-destructing. They

make laws to secure themselves, but they do not enforce those very same laws,

but turn their faces the other way when it is the big guys and moneymen who

breaks them, but pounces on the poor and defenseless whenever they transgress.

Very intriguing indeed.

31.Furthermore, when Judge Woodlock granted the motion for Injunctive Relief, hewent on record saying that the lawsuit was not frivolous and that the plaintiffs had


15/22

15

a shot at prevailing at trial; the very same trial which he himself has now denied

to the plaintiffs, the very same trial which the Appellate Court promised plaintiffs

would have a chance to prove their case when the plaintiffs appealed the decision

to discontinue the injunction because of plaintiffs refusal to settle. What ever

happened too those promises? What has changed since? Certainly not the

evidence. Based on the evidence before him and his actions leading up to now,

one should really begin to seriously question Judge Woodlocks knowledge of the

Truth In Lending Laws, or perhaps his integrity. The evidence does not match his

opinion; in fact, it is the total opposite and could not be any further to the extreme.

32.The dignity and stability of government in all its branches, the morals of thepeople and every blessings of society depends upon an upright and skillful

administration of Justice. John Adams, 1776. Those are the words permanently

etched into the wall as you approach the entrance to the Joseph Moakley federal

and Courthouse Building in Boston. However, I doubt if the defense attorneys

have ever taken notice of them, much less overstand theirsignificance. If you

ask them, they will tell you that they do understand it. Of course they

understand it; its meaning is above their heads and they are beneath it... Why

else would they be trying so desperately to stop Muckle from seeking Justice for

ALL THE PEOPLE? The two lawsuits at issue here do convey the meaning of

those words. The ENTIRE purpose of the lawsuits is to hold all the branches of

government, both the public and the private sectors, the Banksters, feet to the very

fire which they themselves lit


16/22

16

33. All I ever asked was for them to do good. I came to the house of justice seeking afew good men who would see it from a laymans point of view, and put the rules

of man aside and pick up the rules of moral and ethics, and stand up for all of the

people who are being victimized every day by the failed economic policies of the

government and the Banksters they put in charge of the Peoples Forty Acres and

a Mule. Never have that phrase meant so much because that is exactly what our

homes have become; mules for Wall Street Banksters to ride all over the worlds

market until they break ours and our mules backs . However, in my desperate

search for a few good men who would have the audacity to stand up and set their

faces against this great evil, all I found was one, that Honorable One in Brockton

Superior, The Honorable Judge Jeffrey Locke who put people before Banksters

and Corporation. He is a true American Hero. He has stored up some good virtues

for himself.

34.Justice is but TRUTH in action. Louis D. Brandeis, 1914. Those words greetyou as you approach the stairway to the second floor where the First Circuit Court

Of Appeals. Though one may be able to enter the building without first being

confronted by the words of John Adams on the exterior, they would not be so

fortunate to escape the echo of Mr. Brandies. Should that be the case, then it

would not be hard to guess that that individual did not enter that building to seek

justice, but rather to conduct some other affair, or to obstruct Justice.

35.The point of the quotes in paragraphs 24 and 25 is to illustrate the following. Inboth lawsuits, at no time have the Appellants ever asked anyone for anything,

except to ask the district court judge to prevent the Banksters from stealing my


17/22

17

childrens inheritance before we had a chance to get to a jury. All the Plaintiffs-

Appellants ever asked for was a fair chance to prove to a jury of their peers that

laws were broken, injury was sustained, and that the defendants are at fault and

should be held accountable to ALL of the American people who have suffered

because of the failed economic policies of the government, and the Banksters they

placed in charge of our financial affairs.

36.A judge has the authority to grant a motion for summary judgment ONLY in theevent that there are no material issues in dispute that would merit a trial. Of

course, a less than prudent judge may pick and choose which issues to address

with the intentions to come out at the desired outcome. However, when the

plaintiff has raised several substantial issues meriting a trial, and the judge pick

and choose to address the issues which he feels goes against the plaintiff, while

deliberately ignoring the actions of the defendants in the transaction, then that

judge have no right to tell the First Circuit Court what issues they should or

should not review, and the Banksters and their attorneys have no right to tell the

First Circuit Court what issues they should review, and the First Circuit Court

have no authority to restrict the issues to be appealed. That would be a violation

of my rights to seek redress against the defendants.

37.If the First Circuit Court was to go along with Judge Woodlock and the Bankstersand restrict the freedom of the debate by restricting what I can or cannot address

in the appeal, how will they ever be able to arrive at truth? Would not ignoring all

the evidence cause one to come out at the same unprecedented and out of this

world opinion such as that of Judge Woodlock? How would the First Circuit


18/22

18

Court ever arrive at truth if they chose to only look at what was dictated to them

by the almighty Judge Woodlock and what the defense wishes? Is that Justice as

Truth in action? What have we here then, should My Lord send a lightning strike

to erase the inscription etched into the walls of the court building? The

Touchdown Jesus statute in Ohio was not immune; My Lord is not impressed by

the follies of man.

38.Therefore, in this present situation where the district court judge cast Truth inAction aside and picked and choose what issues his misconception told him

would seal this case forever in favor of the defendants, then in the interest of

Justice and the Stability of the government in all its branches, and the moral of

the people the First Circuit Court have no ethical choice but to (a), cast the

district courts unprecedented opinion and rulings aside and look at this case de

novo, as if it had never been looked at and ruled upon. and send it back to the

district court with instructions on the issues to be tried, or (b), reverse the judge

and send the case back with instruction to conduct its own evidentiary hearing to

see what issues merits a trial and what does not.

39.Not that it matters which singular issue the plaintiffs are allow to bring to thecourt, we will win if the court is fair and honest; I want all of the issues on the

table because Attorney Sean R. Higgins and these Banksters need to be taught a

lesson. Can any man stand up against Creation? Is not The Creator the symbol of

TRUTH? Therefore, If Justice is but Truth in action, how can any man stop that

without obstructing Creation itself?


19/22

19

40.As to the subject of the right to sue the states, without giving too much away, Ihave the secrets on how to overturn and repeal the Eleventh Amendment and give

the Federal Court back the Power and Authority granted it by the founding fathers

at the time of the inception of the United States Constitution. However, the

federal court will never enjoy the luxury of that power again unless it gives me a

fair shot at granting it back to them. I know I will win that war if they do not

restrict the battlefield. Give me a shot at arguing this, and I will not disappoint.

These renegade states must be reign in and held accountable for their ills against

the rest of the Union.

41.When it comes to their own political fortune, these renegade states official love toclaim sovereignty, but when it comes to the other states licensing corporations to

conduct the peoples financial affairs, and the other states granting these

corporations the rights to cross over into their borders unchecked and unregulated

to commit financial crimes against the citizens in the rest of the Union, these

states do not hold the offending state accountable, they just sit silent and allow

their citizens to suffer the consequences.

42.Did Massachusetts hold California accountable for allowing the defendantFremont Investments & Loans to operate across state lines unchecked and

unregulated, causing mass destruction to thousands of citizens of Massachusetts?

Did Massachusetts go after New York for failing to regulate the defendant SG

Mortgage Security Backed Assets? What about the defendant Wells Fargo and

The American Servicing Company? Each one of these defendants has its home

office in a totally different state, they have caused destruction to the economy of


20/22

20

Massachusetts and the other 50 states in the Union, yet no states is looking out for

its citizens best interest and hold the offending states accountable. So what have

we here then that a citizen who has seen the Light will not stand up and set his

face against such an evilous system? When all the fifty states in the Union allow

the corporations they are supposed to regulate to run rampant and commit

financial crimes to the detriment of all the people, and these very same states, or

the people of these other states fails to take action, then under the United States

Constitution, in its True and Original form, any citizen of any states has the

standing to seek redress against all of the states in the Union in a federal court of

law. Give me the fair opportunity to brief and argue the matter and I will prove

this.

43.Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court does support cases of citizensagainst other states where it is inconceivable that any other government or any

other person would bring any such suit. I have searched; I have not found any

such suit. So what have we here then, is the Supreme Court support for action

against the other states only for some selective suit where the plaintiff does not

seek to tip the boat over?

44.Furthermore, the cases against the federal government and the states have beenjoined! The citizens of the United States of America from all across the Union

have signed a petition asking the district court to allow them to join in the suit.

The Motion was drafted and the petition placed on line months before the judge

dismissed the case. He dismissed the case as I was about to file the motion.


21/22

21

45.The motion by the people of the United States of America to be allowed to join inthe suit against the federal and states governments along with the signatures

collected are attached for the courts consideration. It is not just Paul Muckle and

Irene Wood alone now. (See attachment, petition with list of signatures)

46.The defendants motions to restrict the issues to be briefed, and to restrict whichdefendants has to answer to what and which defendants can be sued, is nothing

but an attempt at obstruction of Justice In Action All I ever asked for was a

fair chance to prove the matter. I have never asked anyone to give me the house or

anything else. All I ever asked for was for the courts protection until I can prove

my case; but even that protection was denied me by the houses of justice,

including this court. Had it not been for My Lord on my side they would have

already invaded my home and taken it away?

47.As to attorney Sean Higgins allegation that Muckle want to delay this case, this isMuckles respond, can the Court please schedule the briefs to be filed the day

after reading this and schedule oral arguments to begin on the very next day after

the filing? I am very anxious to end this battle; I have a bigger one to wage. I have

the devil in London to go capture and bind. He is the cause of the worlds

financial and religious Armageddon

48.. As My Lord like to say, if you gonna try and change the world, then you cantbe afraid to throw everything out on the table. If want the people to rebel, then

you got to tell them what it is they are rebelling against, and if you expect them to

rebel then you got to take the lead and rebel first. I have rebelled Your Honors, I

cannot tell you how to rule and decide, Personal Responsibility is the only way


22/22

22

America and the rest of the world will ever escape their present precarious

situation. All the plaintiffs and the American people ever asked is for you guys to

protect us all from these banksters until we have the fair and justifiable

opportunity to prove the matter to a jury of our peers.

Wherefore, based on the My Lords command of Personal and Individual

Responsibility, I will not beg this Court to grant me any favors as to how these

appeals are handled. Let Justice be the voice and motivator of those who claim to

uphold, defend, and enforce her.

Respectfully Submitted,

_______________________________

Paul L. Muckle, on behalf of the Plaintiff-Appellants, including the citizens of the

Union.

Documents

UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS Respond to Appellees Opposition to Join Cases on Appeal