King County Ordinance 2009-0393 Illegal

November 15, 2009

All Canadian provinces have found out that the only reason someone is getting the H1N1 flu is because they have received a H1N1 vaccine immunization. The H1N1 immunization shot is a direct killer. In the United states alone over 114 children have been killed by H1N1 since April. Hungary, Ukraine, Russia, China and Japan all are either not requiring or prohibiting the H1N1 vaccination shot from being given. This is a man made disease which originated from a vile and is directly construction from the 1918 influenza virus which killed over 30 Million U.S. citizens.

Evidently the H1N1 flu virus does discriminate. It discriminates only toward those who have taken the H1N1 flu vaccination shot. Since the Baxter lab like companies are not liable would this mean that King County would be liable for any complications or injuries which beset the client recipient. In the United states Constitution “Relief in Law” must be provided and would this mean that the Congress or King County would have to pay for any complications. Perhaps this is why the Congress is pressing for Health Insurance coverage so their mistake is actually paid by the citizenry.

Also, the ordinance is not in alignment with federal statutes and it is directly unconstitutional in its ordinance. Congress has the right to all Bills referring to Naturalization. Since illegal immigrants are a Naturalization situation then and only Congress can write bills protecting illegal immigration. King County needs to have direct permission from Congress in order to have this Ordinance enforceable. Working with Congressman McDermott and Congressman Reichert and Congressman Inslee and Senator Murray and Senator Cantwell for legislation needs to be done first before any type of legislation can be passed or considered.

Also, the ordinance was illegally passed because public testimony was not completed prior to its passage at the eleven o’clock hour. Public testimony continued after the one o’clock session which I testified in. The process needs to be where the ordinance needs to be voided and re-entered with full public testimony.

No provision was giving to attempt to have the clinic clients enter into a health insurance policy thus to mitigate or reduce future expenses to the King County Clinics.


 Also, I am working on a project which may decrease our King County budget by somewhere from 5% to 10% for next year. This will be due to incorrect calculations from prior year data which I have observed. Am trying to assemble the information at the present time and will be making a presentation hopefully by the end of the month. So cost saving measures need to be put into ordinance format and perhaps encouragement of people making or getting medical insurance would be a great cost saving idea. Obviously the ball is in your court. **********************************************


Keith Ljunghammar


On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:16 PM, wrote:

Dear Keith,

Thank you for your email. Ordinance 2009-0393, relating to undocumented immigrants, was adopted by the Council this week. Fully consistent with federal law, the legislation adopts the current practices of King County departments, including the Sheriff’s Office, Public Health, Adult and Juvenile Detention, and the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office.

Under the legislation, all King County residents, regardless of immigration status, can now feel safe in coming forward to report crimes, assist in police investigations and seek preventive medical treatment, such as vaccinations, protecting the public at large and saving taxpayer dollars. King County is a local service provider and does not have the authority to enforce immigration laws or detain people – that is the federal government’s role.

 The Sheriff’s office has stated that they could not do their job if people were afraid to come forward as witnesses or victims. That cooperation is essential to completing effective investigations and protecting the public. With regard to public health, if an epidemic starts in a population that doesn’t have access to care, it’s only a matter of time before it spreads to everyone. Diseases like H1N1 flu don’t discriminate based on whether or not you’re a legal citizen, and therefore, restricting access to care for some hurts us all.

Therefore, providing this protection makes sense from a moral perspective, as well as an economic one. Again, thank you for your email. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions regarding this issue or any other issue in King County.

Sincerely, Julia Patterson, District 5


Vaccination H1N1 Shot by Police Unconstitutional

October 7, 2009

We do not have an America Police force.  That is specifically Unconstitutional.  Only the Senate can wage war and not the President.  Only the Governor’s can invite the United States military into a state.  The President can only order the Military into a state to

 Article I, Section 8. 

 The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water:

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years:

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; …

I do not remember the Congress giving Obama the authority to round up citizens.  I do not see any insurrections from the citizens.  That is the only part here which specifically addresses the flue vaccinations in the slightest.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.


 Amendment III

 No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 

 or likewise

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 or likewise

 Amendment V

 No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

 or likewise

 Amendment VIII

 Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

 or likewise

 Amendment IX

 The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

 Back off Jack.  You’re violating my Constitutional Rights.  Since you are acting illegally according to the Constitution then you no longer have rights delegated from the Constitution.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.      

 Show me the court order.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.      

 That is cruel and unusual punishment.  I demand my rights as a free citizen of the United states of America.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.     

 Sticking that needle in me is tantamount to excessive bail and excessive fines being inflicted.  By definition if you stick that needle in me I am being “inflicted”.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.     

 When did Congress pass this law.  What is the number of the bill.  When was it signed.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.      

Congress did not declare an “Insurrection”.  Only Congress has this power to declare an “Insurrection”.  The President does not have the Power to declare an “Insurrection”.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.        

I am going back into my house.  You are not to follow because I am not going to quarter you in my house.  That would be Unconstitutional.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.     

 You’re in my house.  Show me the law where it says that the Senate has declared “War”.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.     

What deems “Probable Cause” that you have entered my house.  Where is the Grand Jury indictment showing any relevancy of Probable Cause.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.

What rules has Congress made concerning my Capture or Reprisal.  Only Congress can make these laws.  The President does not have this Power.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.  

Are you a medical doctor.  Show me your credentials.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.

National Police do not have a right to vaccinate me.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.

Canada does not require mandatory vaccinations.  We never do something which Canada does not do.  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.

If that does not work then say:  “All hail the Obama Nation.  Put her right here!!”  OR  You are in Violation of My Constitutional Rights.  Leave right now.


Non-Compliance Issues Non-Profits MUST watch out for

October 2, 2009
Non-profit Corporation for Compliance

The below is not a complete list but will be looking at other sources to complete my list for this important issue.  These are just some of the major issues which some large non-profit corporations are missing.  Will be addressing and updating this list later and possibly with explanations.

What to look for in a Non-profit Corporation for Compliance.

1) Criminal background checks of all personal. Members of the Board, executives and line-workers.

2) Whistleblower rules and policies in place and strickly enforced.

3) By-laws followed. They also must be legal.

4) Audit after change of top Executive leave office.

5) Non-transparency in the hiring process of top executives. This does not make for a smooth transition.

6) Schedule approved by the Board.

7) Approval by the Board.

8) i.e., due diligence from all executives, board members and policies and procedures are in place to enforce due diligence necessities.

9) Personel files have all documents in them or separate from them.

10) By-laws pertaining to scheduling criteria are in place and abided by.

11) Directing grant money to other sources other than specific designated tasks.

12) Tax deduction mentioned for Schedule. A charity purpose on excess amounts given to general public.






King County Politics and Illegal Aliens/Undocumented Immigrants

July 3, 2009

The below are the comments about King County Metropolitan King County Council Committee of the Whole Staff Report in reference to the Proposed Ordinance 2009-0393.

This proposed ordinance is trying to say that illegal immigrants are members of the “immigration status” residents and they should also be receiving health benefits under King County rules. 

Comment about the above. See reference to the line numbers.

9) Article 1, Section 8 reserved the (ALL) law to federal jurisdiction.

Article I, Section 8 parts of –
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions,
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
11) technically a resident who is here illegally is a non-resident as determined by tax code so this provision does not apply.

13) other estimates go to 30 million based upon social security recipients.

15) if 12% illegal immigrant population and we have 9.5% to as high as over 50% in the Yakama Indian Tribal Land area we have a problem. 32,000 Yakama Indian Tribal member residents to 61,000 illegal immigrants and other legal residents.

17) full-time is an assumption.

18) taxes do not exceed benefits if not a high school graduate. So $46MM divided by 362,900 is $126.75 or if 793,800 Washington illegals then $57.94 per illegal in income. For the cost of illegal immigrants to the State of $800,000 the ratio of costs is lopsided.

22/15 362,900 people versus 203,000 jobs lost. So.

25) Illegals are not residents by definition.

26) Historically – U.S. Constitution preserved to federal mandate enforceable by State Militia by the President. Article I, Section 8.

32) Only if illegal immigrants are not allowed to use rights reserved for citizens and legal immigrants of which this proposal does.

39) Legislation is the job of the Council and and not the judiciary.

42) These laws are specifically reserved to the federal via U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8.

49) Implied is legal or illegal but wording really refers to legal only.

50) The council could establish cooperative agreements with ICE to allow this. So the problem is with the Council and not the federal in this enforcement. By non-compliance of legislation the Council has already artificially stated that it will not comply with the U.S. Constitution.

52) Simple ICE computer input could determine this. Proper credentialing and cooperation with ICE and County could alleviate this.

61) Washington Secretary of State’s office should already have done this prior to acceptance of voter registration.

68) The federal ICE accepts this as a legal precedence for articulating whether the possibility of being illegal may be present.

78) See 49.

81) or sponsors should be included here.

91) All I-9’s should be E-Verified with the employment processes.

95) Unions should be using E-Verify also as well as subcontractors and contractors and their employees. Federal law exempts union from penalties at the present time.

102) But the prior use of E-Verify should be confirmed for validity of immigration status.


Still to do/Illegal immigrants/junker credit

July 1, 2009

I still need to follow up on the old junkers and the economic stimulus which they could help with.

Also, with reading the U.S. Constitution there is an article in one of the San Francisco newspapers about illegal immigrants and loopholes in the law for underage illegals who commit crimes.

The U.S. Constitution specifically holds these laws to their creation only by the Congress and enforceable by the President via the Militia.  Either the State or the using of the State Militia by the President to enforce ALL laws pertaining to naturalization.  I will spell out later specifically what I am refering to.  Have to get to a meeting 44 miles away and the traffic is usually bad to leaving at 4 to go 44 miles and be there at 6 p.m. 

This illegal immigrant thing is out of hand.

See my post about the King County Council and proposed ordinance 209-0393 and the reference to line 9 and below this is a reference to the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8 and wording relating to naturalization.  aka illegal immigrants and/or undocumented aliens.

Unconstitutional – VOTEing Rights

June 1, 2009

Unconstitutional – VOTEing rights.

The way I am reading the Constitution I do not see why EX-Convicts cannot vote right away. Do I agree with this. No. But it is the way the U.S. Constitution reads. Please advise if I am wrong.

Article XIV, Section 1.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United State and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Article XV, Section 1.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Previous condition of servitude here means incarcerated. See Article XIII Section 1. I would interpret this to mean while in the slammer and also under house arrest and also while under parole.

Article XXIV, Section 1

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the Untied States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

My question on this is the questioning of what a tax is. If a tax is someone having to pay restitution then having to pay restitution prior to having your voting rights restored would be unconstitutional by definition.

Article XIII, Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly conviced, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to its jurisdiction.

This define what involuntary servitude is supposed to mean in todays terms since it was more extension back in the writting of the Constitution.

So for my conclusion. I have the definition as from the Constitution as to how long the condition of servitude is supposed to last which is until the end of parole. Article XV, Section 1 also limits restrictions on voting to not be denied because of previous condition of servitude.

If one would complain about this then in the States the condition of restitution can still be maintained but a different and separate role for voting of U.S. candidates must be upheld. If “other tax” is not interpreted as from above then this condition must be changed because it directly includes States in the requirement of conditions.

Is this just politics or what.  Is this a sign of the times to reject the Constitution of is this country acting like a Democracy and not like a Republic which it is “guaranteed” to act like as per the Constitution. 

Or is the only solution to Impeach the President so this can be enforced by the next President.   A softer approach would be for the Attorney General of the U.S. and the several States to enforce this provision by demanding the President and respective Governors to call the Congress or Legislature back to enforce this provision in the Constitution.  The President could enforce this without the Legislatures by the State Executive changing the provision.  But it would be less of a headache if the Legislatures are called back into session. 

See also I-1043



Unconstitutional – Illegal Immigration

June 1, 2009
Unconstitutional – Illegal Immigration
Look at the following Constitutional Articles and Sections. See the wording at the bottom.

Will make an explanation after each one of the Articles or Sections.

1) Article IV, Section 4.

Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

This can be a little bit tricky sometimes in its interpretation. For the meaning of a Republican Form of Government this would essentially mean that no State government could transform its government style to a Democratic, Socialist, or Communistic, or Fascist Form of government or other no conceived of at the time of the forming of the Republic. This in my intepretation means that Jodge Sotomayer cannot be elected because this would be interferring in this interpretation. But another way of reading this is that the U.S Government has to be a Republican in form type of Governement. It could also mean that the U.S. Govenment will come in an force a State to revert back to a Republican Form of Government. No special interest or Nobilities can be created. No Democrat style of government can be created. Voting must be guaranteed.

All states must be protected from Invasion from without the Countries borders and from within. If a disturbance would come from another State then the federal government would step in to settle the disagreement. If an Invasion would come from the Federal Borders then the Federal Government would have to come in to stop the problem.

This would also mean that if the Legislature of the Executive branches of government could not convene then the Federal Government would step in and take over to get the State government back to a Republican Form of Government.

2) Article VI

… both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to Support this Constitution…

This part of the Constitution does not seem to be working at this time. To protect the Constitution of Article IV, Section 4. Well, I do see Invasion from outside forces at this time. If we have 850,000 illegal immigrants with 500,000 staying each year then this is an Invasion. The federal government needs to be stepping in and squelching this Invasion.

3) Article I, Section 8.

… to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…

Each State has its own Militia. The States could provide its own Defence if the Federal Government does not step in to do this. Overpowering and setting up Habeas Corpes could be instituted to round-up all of the illegal immigrants.

4) To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on th esubject of Bankrupties throughout the United States.

The establishment of a uniform Rule of Naturalization has been established. But we need enforcement of these rules as well. This is where the federal government is lacking in is enforcement. This is really the job of the Executive Branch.

5) To provide for calling for the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions:

This would be just a wording of what was being stated above and who has the responsibility to do the enforcement.

6) The Privilege of Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Casees of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Evidently we have had a need for Writ of Habeas Corpus suspension 500,000 per year for each of the last dozen years and more to get the borders guarded.

7) Article II, Section 1.

…will to the best of my Ability, preserve protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

If the President is not Defending the Constitution then he should be Impeached so someone that wants to defend the Constitution will be the President. Unfortunately this illegal immigrant mismanagement goes along ways. But at least let’s start to enforce this provision now.

My conclusions on this are that the U.S. Constitution has been badly hammered and is waiting for someone or some President to enforce the Constitution. The problem of illegal immigration is not just a casual affair. The strong wording of GUARANTEE is not just a warrantee but a GUARANTEE. The gentlemen farmer who was on the U.S./Mexican border was not being GUARANTEED his property rights because the U.S. Government was not GUARANTEEing the Constitution are required by the Constitution. Perhaps on the border there is a different Constitution?

See also I-1043