The simple and plain purpose of this trial 2257 as has been stated and proven as fact.   IS REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES!  OR more simply let the people decide for themselves, in court, as provided by our constitutional guarantees.  I am allowed to speak for we the people/ because I am equal by the terms of this redress to any other citizen here. Thereby rest assured, I do legally ask, for us all.
The further relief being sought:   is an absolute accounting of government in all financial concerns.  That fact does not limit itself to, whatever the employees desire that we should know/ but illuminates everything; as WE THE PEOPLE DO, need or desire to know.  If the accounting completed of this governing body of employees is proven to be “true and correct” IS THAT NOT an honor to these employees.  Do not all workers wish to be identified as having done their job, with discipline/ honesty/ value for the people/ and duty to their job as our workers, in this our nation/ if they did in fact do that.  How can that not be so?  Therefore when any suggest that an accounting is too much to ask: the reality of that suggestion is then : WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO HIDE.  Because those who have been truthful and fair, have nothing to hide.  Therefore they welcome an inspection to prove the truth, and receive the praise appropriate for their doings.  Should this not be true of our employees of we the people/ do they not handle and spend our money.  It absolutely CANNOT be said, that we have no interest here.  Instead we HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT!
This judge suggests the weight of evidence as presented by the defense is in some way or method greater than the right of democracy which is “to govern ourselves”.  REDRESS is that method by which when all else fails, or is failing:  we become the authority in charge.   Having a job/ being employed/ or being elected to the honorable position of working for us, does not grant anything related to immunity from prosecution.  Does not grant “sovereign anything” to you the employees.  It simply gives you a job to do based upon the instructions found in OUR GOVERNMENT:    THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT, which united this people; as this nation.  OUR DECISION, that this nation shall be: according to these words, which establish the governing and accountability required of you as an employee to establish.   Our words are sovereign, because they are the democracy we created as one people.  Our words are immune, because they represent all of us/ NOT our employees as rulers.  We are rulers of ourselves!
YOU are under oath to do the things we require of you: particularly to defend this constitution and its founding documents which are “our government/ THE VERY FOUNDATION OF LAW, upon which all assertion of “lesser” law must comply”.  You are not, our government/ you are employees under oath to do the job you were hired to do.

The judge suggests this is not fundamentally or critically correct.  The judge suggests this “financial collapse” is not a matter ultimately about the nation/ or that redress is not a fundamentally guaranteed right.   Therefore as is the amended complaint a matter before us all: the judge is required to state how that conclusion came to be.  The judge demands: that redress according to the first amendment of the US constitution is nothing more than fodder for fire, and it has no meaning nor bearing upon his decision than does any other excrement or waste that the judiciary discards, without cause or ruling.  This is in denial of constitutional law and mandate/ wherein the law is the authority, and the judge is merely the servant of its power over him and us.
The judge is wrong.  Because in the end, there is no court/ there is not job/ there is no nation/ there is no presidency or any other:   WITHOUT   WE THE PEOPLE!  The judge stands as one person, employed to do what the constitution tells us all, MUST BE DONE, for this nation.  Because that is the agreement we made ourselves.  He has refused here, in this trial 2257.  Or more simply: every nation is one life standing beside the other/ proving that what we have agreed to, is in fact the nation we deliver to ourselves.  It is not the employees that do this/ it is the people themselves.   It is the law called redress that serves the people/ rather than the employees.  Our law, is our right.  Our democracy is called OUR TRUTH!  This employee has served us not, and in fact rebelled against our very nation/ proving the law shall not be served here.  He has no right.
The relief sought as well the judge knows:    is REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES, as provided by the constitution. That has little to do with me, as the plaintiff/ because it is a guaranteed right of every citizen that they should and shall be allowed the legal right to call for redress/ but it is the people themselves who shall decide.   There is no possible reality wherein this is not within the jurisdiction of this court.  It is the proof of democracy/ it is our authority over the employees.  There is no possible reality wherein this is not within the concept and capabilities of both court and constitution. It exists as the foundation of this nation.  Which means the court broke constitutional law, and there are penalties for that.  It is an oath discarded and destroyed.  How is that not treason?  Explain it to me?  Be specific.
Because this is such a serious matter: the judiciary and this judge are asked if they might not wish to reconsider this decision.  Appeal begins on 3/ 18/ 11; if you find no cause to remove, BOTH of the orders created 3/ 9/ 11 .  Should you consider yourself immune from oaths and constitutional law.  Criminal contempt issues shall follow.

This additional warning does exist:  The elemental relationship of this trial to all our lives, is very simple:   PEOPLE DO RISE UP, when their money is attacked; good or bad. The news is clear on this issue.  And we are plainly and severely attacked by the consequences and doings of our employees, both past and present.  In very simple terms as has been explained.  1.65 trillion dollars is borrowing or not paying our lenders $16,500.00 per each of one hundred million people, nearly one in three citizens regardless of age, or situation.  It is not a debt/ this is inflation and it is robbing us all, of our ability to own anything.  “The few” use these numbers to defeat us, and they are deliberately:   redistributing our wealth” to themselves.  We must have protection; we must have our day in court;  as you already know.  The intended budget for this year is 3.7 trillion dollars, which is just the federal government employees:   intending to spend $37,000.00 per each and every one, of one hundred million people.  Instead of us.  Cause they apparently say of us/ they we are too stupid to spend or control our own money; they know better.  It is not so, the employees have proven to be too stupid, blind, careless, and inept; among other signs of absolute failure.  For these two reasons, which need no further evidence or proof.  The fact that we all have a say in this trial CANNOT be more clear.  Thereby it is a traitor, and as has been proven in trial,  throughout the judiciary, A REBELLION AGAINST REDRESS EXISTS,  that forces a gun into our ribs and says “get out of court”.   That is an UNWISE choice.  Because the people DO care about money.  It is the one thing, that brings a clear response, every time; whether they say anything or not; “they feel it”.  And that, has consequences.
The relief sought is again REDRESS ACCORDING TO THE US CONSTITUTION, and its guarantee, within the first amendment.  Prove me wrong/ or there is no instance,  wherein the guilty shall not be charged for their crimes.  Let the people themselves prove it is not so. 

These are the initial questions that appeal is required to answer: prepare or state your answer.

1.  What is it that you do not understand about constitutional law, as the foundation of this democracy : which literally means, “we govern ourselves”?  Be specific.

2.   If constitutional law is not the foundation of all law in this nation/ thereby the critical authority governing what can or cannot become law in this nation.  What Can or cannot be enforced/ or must be enforced.   THEN if not the constitution,  what is the foundation of law and all authority, in your opinion?  DO back up these statements with law, as it applies to constitutional authority, and most distinctly to   WE THE PEOPLE.    I say:  The    Law   outranks you/ therefore you are its subject, and you must be correct, or the law shall punish those who disrespect it.
 The purpose of a judge is:   to rule according to the “greatest law” first/ and then the last in order of importance.  But in no way can a rule or least important law, rule over the greatest law; as is all constitutional demand.  Including redress of grievances!        Prove it is not so.

3.  WHAT do you not understand about DEMOCRACY:   or more simply, we the people shall rule ourselves with law?  Where is your allowance for “we the employees shall rule over the people instead of themselves”?  Be specific. Because to assume that a position or a job or a title is sufficient to evade or destroy our authority as rulers here, is gravely mistaken.  Rather by oaths taken we assert that the constitution shall rule over you, IF you accept this job on our behalf.  In other words, FAIL to obey our rule over you/ and we will take you to prison.  Is that not what your oath is for?  Prove me wrong.  Let the people decide.

4.  Do you deny redress of grievances is the law?  By what authority, is any other interpretation validated?  The judges of the supreme court do NOT rule over us.  The judges of the supreme court do not rule over the constitution.  The constitution rules over them, and we the people DO RULE over our court.  Do prove it is not so!  Because as owners and rulers here, as described by democracy, I ask you plainly HOW can it be any other way.  A jury of nine, DOES NOT control a population of 309 million people.  We control ourselves.  We decide if the interpretation FITS our agreement as WE THE PEOPLE.  Or is a rebellion against us.

5.   The authority of we the people MUST be clear in democracy.  Apart from our vote/ the constitution provides in redress:   IF the elected officials fail to do their job/ presenting us all with consequences that we the people then do assert:   are intolerable, blind, or without respect for our lives. Redress is the legal action by which we shall remedy these problems/ this blight and disease infecting our democracy. The legal accounting of evidence and truth by which we then shall decide for ourselves, as rulers and owners of this nation, what must be done.   That is our guarantee, as WE THE PEOPLE of this USA.  Prove me wrong.

  THEREFROM:    DO WE, OR DO WE NOT, BY THE AUTHORITY OF DEMOCRACY, have the LEGAL right to declare a tax strike.  Call for accountability from our employees. And prove this is our money/ NOT yours!
And have the constitutional authority within ourselves, AS THE TRUE AND REAL OWNERS HERE:   to make the changes we deem necessary, in governing our lives, however we see fit.   How is that not “we the people”!

 Assert what is true by constitutional law/ declare what is not true, by constitutional interpretation:   and support each, in clear and certain terms.   Consistent with the need, the values, and the reality;   why you believe this is true:   so that  WE THE PEOPLE shall understand.
 Because we are the owners here, it is our right!  To KNOW the law, which governs our lives.   Prove what is true.

6.  What is the job of the court/ or the people’s paid attorney for the United States of America?   If not to prove, we are a democracy/ governed by the laws we have born with our lives/ sacrifice/ blood/ and work.   If not to obey the foundation documents and accept the proof of what we did choose as a nation, within these words.
 THIS IS,   OUR NATION/ and we will not be robbed.  Let the people prove this is not so.

7.   Prove we are not threatened, with financial chaos/ and failure in basically every aspect of this USA.   Even though that has NO place in redress; it is the people who decide.  Even so,  THE EVIDENCE INFILTRATING from  “EVERYWHERE”.  Says, we are literally in trouble, here and now/ and it is our duty as a nation to act in our own defense.   In what can only be called “university politics and control”.  The graduate came, took over, and claimed to know better.   This is where we are;  and the evidence proves:   Liars/ thieves/ cheats/ and failure surrounding us all.  Prove it is not so.
  Prove to dismiss this case involves anything less than is treason:  The willful disregard for life, property, work, law, and truth.
BECAUSE I SAY:  discarding our lives,  in this USA, here and now under the evidence that is constant and fairly known as a threat to our lives: is treason.   Shall not reality,  prove it is.  This is not a game.  It is our lives, and our nation; we do have legal rights/ or there is a thief and traitor hiding. Behind the cloak of judiciary employment.