20210115-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Vice President Mike Pence-WARNING

Vice President Mike Pence (Australia) 15-1-2021
White House, USA

@VP
Cc: Senator Lindsay Graham @LindseyGrahamSC

FBI @FBI
AND TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.
20210115-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Vice President Mike Pence-WARNING

Sir,
In my view you should consider my WARNING that any person who conceals or otherwise
fails to disclose relevant details to a crime contemplated, in progress of having eventuated may
be held an accessory of any crimes that were contemplated or occurred.
I an Australian am very interested in USA constitutional issues because the Commonwealth of

Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) was partly based upon the US Constitution and its first 4
Amendments. Obviously, I am aware that there are differences in application of each
constitution, however, certain legal principles can be applied to both.
Much is discussed about what the Framers of the US Constitution intended but reality is that, as I
understand it, there were no formal records kept at the time they debated the text of the US
Constitution. All they rely upon is to interpret what some of the Framers of the US Constitution
claimed AFTERWARDS. Such commentary may or may not be correct. In Australia we do have
the Hansard Debate records and I view that Quick & Garran (A book about what the constitution
stands for)many relied upon at times fails to precisely disclose what really was debated.
Hypothetically, if I had been a Member of (USA) Congress I would have pursued that you and
Mitch McConnell both be impeached for being accessory to TREASON.
Let me explain why.
I will use a quotation of a statement of the Framers of the Australian Constitution which I view is
also applicable to the US Congress.
.
Hansard 9-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
Convention)
QUOTE
Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I know that my right honorable friend, judging probably from the time I am taking
now, thinks that in such a case I would take a long time, if I were in the Senate. I admit that his surmise is
quite right in my case. I admit there are persons on whom this terrorism could not be practised, or on
whom, if practised, it would probably not be effective. But I am thinking of persons of weaker minds and
wills, and I say that, as far as this Constitution is concerned, it is absolutely necessary to put some provision
in this Bill which will strengthen the Senate and prevent it being intimidated in the way indicated. We have
been frittering away the first principles of the Federal Constitution long enough.
END QUOTE
As you may recall, there was an Omnibus Bill allegedly of more than 5,500 pages which was
within hours passed in the House of Representatives, despite that many Members of the House
p1 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
had not attended to the House since about May 2020. In my view, each and every members of the
House should have objected to the voting on a Bill which denied them appropriate time to read
and consider the legal, financial and other implications, however it seems that it was passed
nevertheless. Once however the Bill was submitted to the Senate I view that you as President of
the Senate and Mitch McConnell as the majority leader in the Senate should have refused to
allow any vote on this Omnibus unless there was provided sufficient times for each Senator to
reasonable read and consider all legal, financial and other implications. In my view the House,
So Speaker Nancy Pelosi was pursuing an act of TERRORISM upon the Senate and each
Senator by seeking to force the Omnibus in those circumstances to be denied proper
consideration. In my view, both you and Majority Mitch McConnell should have refused to
accept the Bill and made clear it had to be broken up in different parts in such manner that the
Senate could reasonable consider each part that was submitted separately. I understand that
Speaker Nancy Pelosi prevented the relief part to be submitted to the Senate for about 8 months
allegedly wanting to prevent the Bill to be passed by the House before the presidential election to
avoid having President Donald J Trump name on it.
In Albert Langer case the High Court of Australia made clear that voters (electors) are entitled to
all relevant details governing those candidates who are standing for election/re-election as to be
able to make an “informed” decision. The legal principle of this case can be applied also to the
USA. As such, I view, Speaker Nancy Pelosi was in her conduct preventing US voters to have
the appropriate information as to what each candidate stood for. This I view is to violate the US
Constitution as well as each relevant State constitution where presidential elections were held.
Likewise, the MSM (mainstream media) and Big Tech concealing relevant information I view
were also accessories of this crime against the constitution(s).
I do not watch television for some 10 years and until last December 2020 neither was a
subscribers to any newspaper or magazine. In December 2020 I happen to receive a “sample” of
The Epoch Times, and I was quite frankly impressed with how FACTUAL he articles were.
When my wife started to read some articles, she urged me to subscribe and I did so immediately.
I do my own research via the internet and during the 2012 presidential election became aware
how people were claiming that some counties had 100% vote for Obama and many had more
votes then there were eligible voters.
I at the time didn’t take much interest in it as after all it was seemingly a real big issue, at least
not that I was aware of.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact-check-biden-voter-protection-not-idUSKBN27E2VH
QUOTE
The clip shared by Trump, McEnany and others starts around the 19:13 mark, when Biden
tells Pfeiffer and Lovett, “Secondly,
we’re in a situation where we
have put together—and you guys did it for President
Obama’s administration before this—we have put
together I think the most extensive and inclusive voter
fraud organization in the history of American politics. ”
END QUOTE
While it might be claimed this was a slip of the tong. Nevertheless, it may have been a slip of the
tong only to have unintendedly revealed that election fraud was a big issue.

Hence, no need to get out but remain in the basement if election officials were to have been
bribed that no matter what Joe Biden would win the election by hook or by crook.
Now it donned to me that the many comments about the 2012 presidential election was not
validated that indeed there was an elaborate election fraud that had been going on.
https://trishintel.com/eric-swalwell-compares-trump-to-osama-bin-laden/
Eric Swalwell compares Trump to Osama Bin Laden
QUOTE
January 14, 2021
‘Osama Bin Laden did not enter U.S. soil on September 11, but it was widely
acknowledged that he was responsible for inspiring the attack on our country,’ Rep. Eric
Swalwell told PBS on Wednesday.
‘And the president, with his words, using the word ‘fight’ – that is hate speech that inspired
and radicalized people to storm the Capitol.’
PBS host Judy Woodruff pressed Swalwell if he was comparing President Trump to Bin
Laden, and Swalwell replied: ‘I’m comparing the words of a individual who would incite
and radicalize somebody, as Osama Bin Laden did, to what President Trump did.”
‘You don’t actually have to commit the violence yourself, but if you call others to
violence, that itself is a crime.’
END QUOTE
Lest apply this to Senator Kamala Harris:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5THZGzrXmU
Dan Bongino – Media Sit in Shameful Silence as Pres Sec
interviewer: ...... protest still happening..

That is right. They are not going to
Senator Kamala Harris:
stop. They are not going to stop. And this is a
movement they are not going to stop. And everyone
be aware that they are not going to stop. They are
not going to stop before election day in November.
And they are not going to stop after election day.
And that should be everyone taking notice of this
on both levels. This is, they are not going to let up.
And they should not, and we should not.
Now, this will be a beauty to confront Eric with when he is also presenting the Impeachment if
he did since the statement was made pursue impeachment of Senator Kamala Harris and if not
why not?
At the end of this correspondence I will set out why in my view more than likely Senator
Kamala Harris may have been a master mind behind much of what happened on 6 January
(consider also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire) and while there is a publication
https://www.westernjournal.com/fbi-reverses-told-america-confirms-agency-knew-people-coming-capitol-ready-fight-
cause-trouble/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=WJBreaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=western-
journal&ats_es=14d63ad63339a8c4f9a817f5e715c34b

Report: FBI Reverses What It Told America, Confirms Agency Knew People Were
Coming to Capitol 'Ready to Fight' and Cause Trouble
I view it absurd that where I am sitting in Australia behind my computer not at all watching any
television (for years) I somehow understood that so to say both sides of the political divide were
planning to pursue a “Reichstag fire” (home of the German parliament in Berlin, on Monday 27
February 1933) kind of incident.
Why 6 th of January 2021 one may ask. Well if you sacrifice fellow Members Congress their lives
then more than likely the blame will go to a non-congressional person President Donald J Trump.
And, this really eventuated by many Republican Members of Congress having turned against
President Donald J Trump, regardless that he took no part in any of it. This is how to gain
majority to defeat the Republican Party, as even if President Donald J Trump was to have left the
office of the president the aftermath would be that the ground support of Americans would still
be there and so to get rid of this sacrifices of other peoples lives had to be made as much as was
during the 2020 murderous riots where essentially politicians not just pretended not to know
about it but many even supported it. For all relevance President Donald J Trump could have been
on the International Space Station and he would still have been accused of leading the unlawful
entry into the Capitol. FACTS no longer matter.
QUOTE Dowling v Dowling, Exchequer (Ireland) (1869) 10 ICLR 236

Facts showing the circumstances and position of the parties whose conduct is in question are
generally relevant to such conduct. So, evidence of opportunity is relevant to the question
whether a certain act was done. Circumstantial evidence is admissible not only in the
absence of direct evidence, but also in aid of direct evidence.
END QUOTE
Then I came across an article where an “organiser” of the “movement” claimed he was where
Ashli was shot dead as an “OBSERVER”. Ashli may simply have been following others not
realising they were BLM/Antifa members of the “movement” and not TRUMP supporters.
In my view, an “OBSERVER” isn’t there to be co-incidental but rather when something is pre-
planned. As such likely a kind of “Reichstag fire” to possibly kill most if not all Members of
Congress so that President Donald J Trump could be accused of mass murder (and Eric Stalwell I
view is precisely pursuing this) while in reality it is to overthrow the current Trump
Administration and take control by way of an armed coup, albeit not involving the military itself.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/sen-kelly-loeffler-other-gop-lawmakers-drop-plans-to-object-after-us-
capitol-protest_3647120.html
After Riot in Capitol, Sen. Kelly Loeffler, Other GOP Lawmakers Drop Plans to Object
QUOTE
tamlew57
Jan 7, 2021 at 23:32
Further investigations will reveal that this was merely a Trump supporter impersonator. There is a
video taken on the phone of a citizen showing 3-4 white vans full of antifa members dressed as trump
supporters that were escorted in by state troopers to the capitol. THESE PROTESTERS WERE
ANTIFA, marxist communists who stole our election, rally, country and children’s future.
INSURRECTION ACT MR. PRESIDENT!
END QUOTE
I do not know what, if anything, of this is true. But, considering how the CIA and FBI in the past
were involved in FALSE FLAG operations, then one must remain open minded. And if indeed
they were “that were escorted in by state troopers to the capitol ” then this may appear why the BLM
so called “OBSERVER” was right at the front inside the building.
Remember Senator Kamala Harris aid in police uniform.

California ballots as I understand it were all in violation of California laws and could not validly
be counted. This means that .
https://uncoverdc.com/2020/12/17/california-clearly-violated-election-law-votes-are-invalid/
California Clearly Violated Election Law—

Votes are Invalid
QUOTE
California violated its own election laws
In California state law, the election code is titled “Division 13. BALLOTS, SAMPLE
BALLOTS, AND VOTER PAMPHLETS.”
In Article 1 of this code we find Election Code 13200, which reads as follows:
“Ballots not printed in accordance with the chapter [Chapter 3] shall not be cast nor
counted at any election.”
That’s straightforward English. It’s at the 9th-grade reading level, so assuming California’s
election officials can understand it, here it is one more time, with emphasis:
“Ballots not printed in accordance with the chapter [Chapter 3] shall not be cast nor counted at
any election.”
When we read a little further, we find Section 13205. Since we’re talking about the election
of the President and Vice President, we’ll look at the applicable subsection:
13205 (b). In elections when electors of President and Vice President of the United States
are to be chosen, there shall be placed upon the ballot, in addition to the instructions to
voters as provided in this chapter, an instruction as follows:
“To vote for all of the electors of a party, mark the voting target next to the names of the
presidential and vice presidential candidates of that party. A mark of the voting target next
to the name of a party and its presidential and vice presidential candidate, is a vote for all
of the electors of that party, but for no other candidates.”
END QUOTE

This 17 December 2020 article surely should have been known to the National Security branch.
And as Vice President I understand involved in national Security matters you should have been
fully aware of the same. It means that where all ballots were invalid then none of those standing
for political election can be deemed to have been elected wither. Neither any other item on the
ballot was validity carried or defeated. The purported election simply never existed in legal
terms. It means when the House voted for a Speaker then the about 50 Democrats from
California had no legal standing and neither so Nany Pelosi and she therefore neither could be
elected Speaker. It means that McCarthy rightfully is the Speaker since January 2021.
This also means, that the purported Article of Impeachment has no legal basis because the vote
count must be reduced by those who were not validly elected to the House. Neither was there any
power by Nancy Pelosi to approve any Impeachment to be submitted to the House.
http://familyguardian.tax-
tactics.com/Subjects/LawAndGovt/ChallJurisdiction/AuthoritiesArticle/AuthOnJurisdiction.htm
QUOTE
37 Am Jur 2d at section 8 states, in part: "Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts.
Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys
the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts,
documents, and even judgments."
END QUOTE
On this basis alone Vice President Mike Pence never could have accepted any certification of
Electoral College where at the very least 55 California Electoral College slate votes were in
question. And, then the fact that he had been I understand in writing requested by some State
legislature(s) to not count votes until AFTER State legislature(s) could verify Electoral College
slates.
In my view, there was clear evidence that there was a question about the integrity of the Electoral
College slates and the vice President was therefore duty bound by the implied legal principles
such as in the 14th Amendment that being subsequent to the 12th Amendment, therefore is
directive to the 12th Amendment also.
Hence, the decision of Vice President Mike Pence of 6-7 January 2021 is legally of no value.
Hansard 11-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National
Australasian Convention)
QUOTE Mr. ISAACS (Victoria).-
And if it is within clause 73, then I come back to the point to which I directed the attention of the
Convention a few days ago in regard to the meaning of the word "matters." It is put that it is a
"matter." Now, if that is a matter, I do not know what is not a matter; and if the High Court is to be
asked to decide any matter between states, or between the Commonwealth and states, it is putting a
construction on the word "matter" that we ought to stop short of putting on that word. I understand
the word "matter" means a question of ordinary judicial interpretation in a controversy that is known
as an action or a suit, and I think that we may well hesitate to put such a large construction on the
word "matter," because if we do we are asking the High Court to accept a responsibility and a
jurisdiction that is not found elsewhere.
END QUOTE
Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE
Mr. CARRUTHERS (New South Wales).-It is worth while considering the stages that a proposed law has
to go through, and the opportunity afforded to a member of either House or a member of the Executive to call
attention to any infraction or infringement of the Constitution. It does not require a majority of the members
of the House of Representatives to insist that the Constitution shall be obeyed in the matter of procedure; it
only requires one solitary member to rise to a point of order, and the Speaker has to give a legal

interpretation of the rules of procedure. It only requires one member of the Senate to call the attention of
the President to the fact that a Bill is introduced contrary to the Constitution for that proposed law to
be ruled out of order. It does not require a majority of the states to insist that the Constitution shall be
obeyed, because a majority of the states cannot by resolution infringe the Constitution. Neither House
could pass the standing order which would give the majority power to dissent from the Speaker's or
President's ruling. The standing orders only confer certain explicit power. They give no power to either House
to pass an order which would enable its members to amend the Constitution.
END QUOTE
QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
. The arguments of the Hon. Mr. Carruthers appear to have fallen on deaf ears, but, [start page 2042] as he
pointed out, if there be embedded in the Constitution a direct enactment that no proposed laws for taxation
including more than the one subject of taxation, and no proposed Appropriation Bill going outside the
ordinary services of the year, can be legally dealt with, both the Speaker of the House of Representatives
and the President of the Senate would not only be authorized, but would be imperatively required, in the
discharge of their duty, to rule such a measure out of order at any stage of its existence.
END QUOTE
This latter I view should be deemed also to apply to the Omnibus Bill, where it relates not just to
ordinary government expenditure but is also mixed up with foreign aid nothing to do with
ordinary government expenditure.
QUOTE
Sir JOHN DOWNER.-Now it is coming out. The Constitution is made for the people and the states on
terms that are just to both.
Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause.
Sir JOHN DOWNER.-I do not think so. If you say "Trust the Parliament," no Constitution is required
at all; it can simply be provided that a certain number of gentlemen shall be elected, and meet together, and,
without limitation, do what they like. Victoria would not agree to that. But there is a desire to draw the very
life-blood of the Constitution, so far as the states are concerned, by this insidious amendment, which would
give the Houses authority from time to time to put different constructions on this most important part
of the Constitution. I hope we will do as we have done in many instances before, in matters that have been
much debated-adhere to the decision we have already arrived at.
END QUOTE
QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-
. The arguments of the Hon. Mr. Carruthers appear to have fallen on deaf ears, but, [start page 2042] as he
pointed out, if there be embedded in the Constitution a direct enactment that no proposed laws for taxation
including more than the one subject of taxation, and no proposed Appropriation Bill going outside the
ordinary services of the year, can be legally dealt with, both the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President of the Senate would not only be authorized, but would be
imperatively required, in the discharge of their duty, to rule such a measure out of order at any stage
of its existence.
END QUOTE

QUOTE
Mr. ISAACS.-What questions of law could the Inter-State Commission decide apart from questions of
fact?
Mr. DOBSON.-The Inter-State Commission could decide questions of law arising out of the fact that you
have, in spite of our friends from New South Wales, federalized your waters for navigation and irrigation,
and I do not believe that the High Court will ever hold that the waters of a river flowing between the
boundaries of two colonies belong to one state or the other. The court will say-"You have federalized your
waters," and will deal with them accordingly. For these reasons I shall feel bound to oppose the amendment.
Mr. OCONNOR (New South Wales).-I hope that the Right Hon. Sir George Turner will not press this
amendment. I quite assent to the position that this Inter-State Commission should have the power of final
decision on questions of fact, and that there should be no appeal to the High Court on questions of fact.
Therefore what the honorable member fears could not possibly happen. The High Court ought not to have,
and could not have, any power to deal with questions of policy.
Mr. ISAACS.-Why?
Mr. OCONNOR.-Because there ought to be no power in the court to review decisions of the commission
on any question whatever except a question of law.
Mr. ISAACS.-But what is to prevent the High Court reviewing other decisions under this clause?
Mr. OCONNOR.-I am speaking of the clause as it ought to be. I am quite willing to accept the amendment
Mr. Holder suggests that the decisions of the Inter-State Commission shall not be reviewable except as to
matters of law. But I would point out to Sir George Turner that if some power is not given over the Inter-
State Commission you will make that commission an absolutely irresponsible body.
Sir GEORGE TURNER.-That power ought to be in the Parliament, and not in the High Court.
END QUOTE
QUOTE
Mr. DEAKIN (Victoria).-The position of my honorable and learned friend (Mr. [start page 2092] Higgins)
may be perfectly correct. It may be that without any special provision the practice of the High Court, when
declaring an Act ultra vires, would be that such a declaration applied only to the part which trespassed
beyond the limits of the Constitution. If that were so, it would be a general principle applicable to the
interpretation of the whole of the Constitution.
END QUOTE
The latter makes it very clear that the powers of a Speaker of the House and/or the President of
the Senate (Vice President) must be “If that were so, it would be a general principle
applicable to the interpretation of the whole of the Constitution.” As such the Vice President
to deal with the Count of the Electoral College Slate clearly was bound also by the 14th
Amendment of equality of the States, which clearly was ignored by the Vice President.
The following should be also considered as to the Powers of the Vice President regarding the
counting of Electoral College slates.
In my view, SCOTUS would lack any legal powers to interfere with the reasoning of the Vice
President but would be able to make a decision based on law if the Electoral College slates are
legally valid. As such, the Vice President was well within his right to place the matter before

SCOTUS to determine which of the disputed Electoral College slate as well as the California
Electoral College slates should be deemed to be lawful certified.
This is particular critical where there were FRAUDLENT election issues before the courts and
some still in process. Indeed, already some persons appears to have admitted to it.
Vice President Mike Pence despite allegedly claiming he was obeying the provisions of the
Constitution in my view he did act in violation of the constitution, as to validate counting of
disputed Electoral College slates without seeking the States (even so requested) neither SCOTUS
to make any decisions in that regard. In my view the vote counting was therefore in violation of
constitutional principles and should be revoked.
I understand that in law any judge who has made a decision but then discover that he did so in
violation of certain legal provisions is duty bound by the oath to uphold the constitution to
immediately rectify this legal error. Likewise so, I view, that the same applies to the Vice
President in counting the Electoral College slates.

QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH:
With respect to the qualification of the electors-a subject discussed in this Convention-the proposal of
the committee is that it shall be the same as that for the electors for the more numerous branch of the
parliament of each state.
END QUOTE
What is clear is that the votes in disputed States Electoral College is that certain person voted
more than once in different or the same State(s). It should be that a voter can only vote in one
particular state and only once in any political election. This would legally prevent any person to
vote more than once in any State or in totality in various states.
In my view, the TEXAS case before SCOTUS should have been held deals with the rights of all
Americans, in that a Presidential election is one for all Americans and not just each State
separately. While State legislatures are entitled to provide for their own system of how to vote
for a presidential election, nevertheless it must always be based upon the decision of the
legislature and not some outsider who may on political grounds perverse any political election
outcome.
.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/mi-judge-orders-dem-sec-state-release-
communications-dominion-facebook-apple-amazon-
google/?ff_source=Email&ff_medium=the-gateway-
pundit&ff_campaign=dailyam&ff_content=daily
MI Judge Orders Dem Sec of State To Release All
Communications With Dominion, Facebook, Apple, Amazon
and Google
This underlines that the Court having since early December issues orders then to ignore those
legal proceedings on foot is so to say thumb once nose on the judicature making clear to ignore it
all. And that from a Vice President to claims to uphold the provisions of the Constitution.
Moreover her conduct to seek to have the armed forces to intervene in the powers of the sitting
President Donald J Trump must be understood to be another attempted coup.
https://www.westernjournal.com/mike-pence-issues-forceful-response-nancy-pelosis-25th-
amendment-

demand/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=WJBreaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm
_content=western-journal&ats_es=a706e995ec590e9480340416ca68a7e0
Mike Pence Issues Forceful Response to Nancy Pelosi's 25th

Amendment Demand
Where Nancy Pelosi is not the duly elected Speaker because her purported successful election by
California law was invalid, then she neither had any legal standing to pursue the invoking on the
25th Amendment as she did then.
https://www.westernjournal.com/defense-officials-confirm-trump-still-commander-chief-
refuse-participate-military-coup-oust/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservative-
brief-WJ&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=western-journal&ats_es=%5B-MD5-
%5D
Defense Officials Confirm Trump Is Still

Commander in Chief, Refuse to Participate in
Military Coup to Oust Him
And I view that likewise she should be charged with unlawfully seeking to undermine the
Powers of the sitting President Donald J Trump as again as she is not validly elected as Speaker
she cannot exercise those powers and pretending to be an office holder I view is a very serious
matter, a criminal offense.
https://www.westernjournal.com/fbi-reverses-told-america-confirms-agency-knew-people-
coming-capitol-ready-fight-cause-
trouble/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=WJBreaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_
content=western-journal&ats_es=14d63ad63339a8c4f9a817f5e715c34b
Report: FBI Reverses What It Told America,
Confirms Agency Knew People Were Coming to
Capitol 'Ready to Fight' and Cause Trouble
If Senator Kamala Harris aide was even entering a police station in a stolen/fake uniform then ask how
often did so at other places/times and what purpose, etc? How many police uniforms and weapons may
have been stolen over the years by them? Was it planned to use for murderous riots?
https://www.theepochtimes.com/black-lives-matter-activist-took-part-in-storming-of-
capitol_3648749.html?utm_source=morningbriefnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-
01-09
QUOTE
A Black Lives Matter activist was part of the group that entered the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.
John Earle Sullivan, who has advocated for an armed revolution on social media, was arrested in July 2020 for
making a threat of violence and criminal mischief. He organized a protest with Black Lives Matter activists
and members of the far-left Antifa network. According to the Deseret News, Sullivan damaged vehicles and
urged people to block roadways. Video footage captured him threatening to beat a woman.
Photographs showed Sullivan inside the Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6. Sullivan has since given interviews
claiming he took part in the illegal breach of the building as part of an effort to understand supporters of
President Donald Trump.
“For me, it’s important from the group and the people around me to see that side of things, to see the truth,”
Sullivan told KSL-TV. “I don’t care, like what side you’re on, you should just see it raw.”
Sullivan has not been charged with unlawful entry or any other charges that police say other people who
entered the building face. His picture is not among those circulated by authorities of persons of interest in the
incident. Sullivan said he was detained on Thursday night and questioned about what he saw during the
storming of the Capitol. The Metropolitan Police Department didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Police said Thursday that 68 people had been arrested in the city, including 41 on Capitol grounds. Charges
included unlawful entry and unlawful possession of a firearm, according to arrest data.
END QUOTE
When you have an aid to Senator Kamala Harris entering a police station in what appears to me
stolen police uniforms then one has to question what were they trying to achieve? When then
there is an Antifa member wearing a police bullet prove vest then clearly there is a lot more to it,
in particular where allegedly pipe bombs were discovered.
Nancy Pelosi I view should not in the first place have been in the Congress where I view she was
never validly elected but what is appalling of her and others to attack President Donald J Trump
for insurrection, etc, where as now appears to come out, as I all along suspected, that the member
of the “movement” to “OBSERVE” was actually reportedly the organiser for BLM and
ANTIFA. If therefore Senator Kamala Harris was the MASTERMIND to invite her
“movement” to enter the Congress and to possibly destroy the building with those in the building
to be killed then this raises the question as to why didn’t the democrats at the very least hold
Senator Kamala Harris accountable. Oh she is one of them and the Democrats were often
supporting the murderous riots and the MSM and Big Tech were concealing it.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/another-leftist-arrested-capital-protest-
identified-democrat-34-year-old-son-new-york-judge/?ff_source=Email&ff_medium=the-
gateway-pundit&ff_campaign=dailyam&ff_content=daily
Another Violent Leftist Arrested at US Capitol
Protest: Registered Democrat and 34-Year-Old
Son of a New York Judge
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/house-democrats-say-trump-should-be-impeached-
because-insurrection-attempt-threatened-the-lives-of-the-top-3-people-in-line-to-succeed-him-
creating-a-huge-national-security-risk/ar-BB1cHK40?ocid=msedgntp
House Democrats say Trump should be impeached because insurrection attempt
threatened the lives of the top 3 people in line to succeed him — creating a huge national
security risk
Actually, what my take is that Vice President Mike Pence could be considered to have been an
accomplish to TERRORISM.
.
Further as the senior Officer of the Congress he had a legal duty to ensure that the Capitol was
well prepared for any unlawful act. This in my view he in this regard miserably failed.
While the Constitution may require for a new President to be sworn in on the 20th of January
after an election, this however clearly in the circumstances cannot be complied with as no
presidential candidate have been lawfully declared the successful candidate.
.
It would indeed be absurd to declare any candidate validly elected when he/she has acknowledge
o be involved in serious criminal conduct. In my view, the constitution never intended that a
criminal could circumvent legal principles embedded in the constitution by hook or by crook.
.
Why indeed bother at all having a constitution if FRAUD can circumvent it all?
Is in my view a very serious issue that a Vice president well aware or should have been well
aware of national Security concerns about Joe Biden to be come president and as to Senator
Kamala Harris condoning, supporting, promoting and also inciting her “movement” to continue
the deadly riots before and AFTER the election in itself should have been to disqualify her for
even becoming Vice President, let alone President.
.
In my view in the circumstance the Vice President is obligated to advise the Chief Justice that no
successful candidate can be deemed to have been determined, due to the criminal issues involved
and for this the current sitting President is to continue as a “CARE TAKING PRESIDENT”
until the courts have made its ultimate decision who shall be the rightful deemed presidential
successful candidate where the Vice President is unable to do so.
Obviously the issue is if Vice President Mike Pence tainted, as I view it, by his own failures
could possible remain to be as a “CARE TAKING VICE PRESIDENT”.
Never again should a sitting president be so viciously and undignified be vilified not because of
what he actually did but how in my view insane Members of Congress purport the president to
be.
In my view, the voting system companies also should be considered to have undermined the
constitution by their conduct and equally should be prosecuted for their participation in it all.
In my view, Sidney Powell is the right person to be appointed to be the PROSECUTOR to be
appointed for all this.
People have lost their lives and for what, because of what I consider gross incompetence to
ensure appropriate security to be in place.
I my view, you ought to revoke your decision as to the voting of the Electoral College and then
submit your resignation as Vice President so that the President can still replace you with
someone who will actually ensure that the rule of law and so the legal embedded principles of the
Constitution is properly applied.
In my view, the Chief Justice could not legitimately swear in Joe Biden nor can Kamala Harris
be sworn in considering their involvement in criminal issues, including Joe Biden admission to
threaten the Ukraine Government to withhold taxpayers monies if they didn’t fire one of their
officials. Even if the Chief Justice were to proceed nevertheless then I view he would make
himself an accessory to any crimes, and the purported swearing in would be without legal
validity. This I did set in my correspondence to President Donald J Trump also.
USA politicians demand that people respect their House (Congress) after one of their own
was disrespecting Americans their houses, businesses, and even lives. Eric Stalwell should
compare Kamala Harris with bin Laden, instead of Trump
This document can be downloaded from:

https://www.scribd.com/document/490728488/20210115-Mr-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-to-
President-Donald-J-Trump-Have-Charges-Any-Legal-Validity
Obviously, Nancy Pelosi cannot resign, this as I view she was never lawfully elected either as a
candidate neither as Speaker. She merely can acknowledge not to have any “legal standing”.
However she can still be impeached for what she was directly and/or indirectly involved in.
Joe Biden in my view would be wiser to decline to be sworn in as if he accept to be sworn in,
regardless it lacks validity, then once he is charged he cannot then claim that he is not mentally
competent to stand trial because this would be conflicting too willing to accept to be sworn in as
President. As for Kamala Harris I view she too better decline to become sworn in this, as she too
could be held liable for seeking to benefit from the various criminal conduct. Likewise, I view,
Mitch McConnell should resign as I do not view he is trustworthy and failed to act appropriately.
There are numerous other Members of Congress I view should resign at masses to accept their
shameful conduct to ignore their oath of office to uphold the constitution and viciously attack a
sitting president Donald J Trump for something that one of their own members seems to have
been organising.
There obviously should be a full investigation why reports were not provided as per 12
September 2018 Executive Orders.
While this seemed to be the top of success to destroy a sitting President it now is coming to be
exposed to be an organised insiders job to perhaps kill as many Members of Congress to achieve
the of “Reichstag fire” end result.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-blasts-democrats-
supporting-riots-triggers-media-censored-mask-anti-impeachment-
speech/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=the-gateway-
pundit&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=daily
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Blasts

Democrats for Supporting Riots,
Triggers Media With ‘CENSORED’
Mask During Anti-Impeachment Speech
By Kristinn Taylor
Published January 13, 2021 at 2:36pm
478 Comments
QUOTE
“Thank you. Madam Speaker I am against the impeachment
effort by the Democrats. President Trump has held over six
hundred rallies in the last four years. None of them included
assaulting police, destroying businesses or burning down
cities. Democrats have spent all this time endorsing and
enabling violent riots that left billions in property damage and
forty-seven dead across the United States. Democrats are on
record supporting violence when it serves their cause–in
their own words, on social media, on interviews and on
fundraising platform ActBlue. Democrats support defunding
the police when it’s someone else’s city, someone else’s
home and someone else’s business. Democrats will take
away everyone’s guns just as long as they have guards with
guns. Democrats’ impeachment of President Trump today
has now set the standard that they should be removed for
their support of violence against the American people. I yield
back. Thank you.”
END QUOTE
In my view, you have a legal obligation to inform Chief Justice John Roberts about relevant
matters and as to the alleged involvements of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden and the issues
relating to the question of validity of the Impeachment. In my view it would be appropriate in
the circumstance to place the matter as an Application before SCOTUS to obtain an
emergency ruling that the swearing in on 20 January 2021 in the circumstances cannot proceed
and President Donald J Trump continue in the circumstances as the “CARE TAKING
PRESIDENT” until relevant legal matters have been appropriately determined.
In my view, SCOTUS has this power where due to the circumstances there is no validly declared
successful presidential candidate. The Court would not override the constitution but merely
provides a temporary solution where the requirements of the constitution cannot be complied
with, until it can be.
To fail to act appropriately and to allow Joe Biden to be sworn in and then face that in the end
the courts may find that indeed the validity of the Electoral college slates was and remained to be
a legal disputed issue could mean that your conduct for this also failing to appropriately address
this issue further can go against you.
.
I always warned persons/groups that if you go along with unlawful conduct (silently or
otherwise) then be prepared to face any legal consequences that may result from doing so.
And this also I view applies to the FBI and whomever else who may have participated for
unlawful conduct.
As I understand it, President Donald J Trump had ongoing made clear to observe and comply
with the Rule of Law. If just Members of Congress and politicians in State Government functions
had heeded this much of the 2020 and 2021 destruction and killing may never have eventuated.
One need to return to the organics and legal principles embedded in of the federal constitution!
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (Our name is our motto!)


20210115-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Vice President Mike Pence-WARNING

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

20210115-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. To Vice President Mike Pence-WARNING

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Vice President Mike Pence (Australia) 15-1-2021

White House, USA

Cc: Senator Lindsay Graham @LindseyGrahamSC

20210115-Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Vice President Mike Pence-WARNING

I an Australian am very interested in USA constitutional issues because the Commonwealth of

p2 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Lest apply this to Senator Kamala Harris:

interviewer: ...... protest still happening..

p3 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

QUOTE Dowling v Dowling, Exchequer (Ireland) (1869) 10 ICLR 236

p4 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

California Clearly Violated Election Law—

California violated its own election laws

p5 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

p6 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

Mr. DEAKIN.-It is made for the lawyers under this clause.

Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates

QUOTE Mr. DEAKIN.-

p7 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

p8 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Hansard 31-3-1891 Constitution Convention Debates

p9 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Mike Pence Issues Forceful Response to Nancy Pelosi's 25th

Defense Officials Confirm Trump Is Still

This document can be downloaded from:

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Blasts

Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

p14 15-1-2021 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

Potrebbero piacerti anche