To Free A Lender-Owned Nation
The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.
Part II. The Right to Petition v. Government Misrepresentations
This is the second of four articles writing up a litigation I filed in federal court in San Francisco on December 28, 2011, against the U.S. Treasury. Johnson v. Department of the Treasury of the United States, et al. , case No. CV11 6684 (NJV). The suit alleges suppression of the great benefits that would accrue to the government, if United States notes were to replace Federal Reserve notes.
Part I introduces the issues.
Part II explains the scaffolding of facts and law that raises the issues
Part III details the "Treasury-Fed Coin-Swap Cover-Up."
Part IV will add context
1. My Deficit Reduction Proposal and the Treasury's Misinformations
What I tell you three times is true.
[Lewis Carroll, The Hunting of the Snark ]
My complaint against the Treasury alleges that its official and authoritative publications deceitfully deny every advantage of United States notes, impairing my first amendment right to petition the government for new issues of them. I cite two personal petitions; specify categorical and financial Treasury misinformations; attach an ignored demand for corrections; and ask the court to declare that the Treasury publications are false and misleading, and repugnant to the constitution's reservation of the powers to tax and to issue paper money, under Article 1, section 8.
Apart from the additions below, the substance of the lawsuit is explained in two prior OpEd "American Crisis" articles, namely: A Common Sense Deficit Reduction Proposal; and Deficit Reduction Proposal Snags Treasury Misinformation. The former article presents a proposal submitted to the deficit "Supercommittee," urging that a few hundred billion dollars of automatic Social Security payments be made with new issues of United States notes, thus fully paying and retiring that debt, instead of shaving it or rolling it over at reset rates of compounding interest, with dealer fees et alia added.
Given the Fed's extraordinarily bloated balance, this would not be inflationary, nor would it impermissibly interfere with monetary policy. As Alan Greenspan observed in a June 30, 2011 CNBC interview: "If it weren't for the psychological effects, we could probably take a trillion dollars off the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve, it would essentially be removing the double counting that is going on."