|
"Welcome! I claim this website as a place for all people peaceably to
assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." It is my humble
understanding the Congress "shall make no laws..." to prevent this.
It is an old respected covenant and
agreement. We share with our neighbors and take care of each other. Sadly, bad thing
happen when good men and women do nothing. Happily, there is always hope for tomorrow.
I'm going to tell you
a story that is very important to you and everyone you know.
The
reason that it is important to you is because 85% of every dollar was yours and only 15% was
mine. I'm going to assume that your 85% is important to you. And then again, we aren't talking
about just $1.00. The original, identified amount, in this case alone was approximately
$1,600,000,000.00. So you lost $1,360,000,000.00 of your money. Interested yet?
Every one of the Executive Branch's government agencies, that spend tax dollars, are
serviced by an in-house law firm and an investigation department. The Department of Justice
("DOJ") is the dedicated "in-house law firm" and the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI")
is the agency's "private investigators". They represent the Government agency and common
sense dictates that, in any proceedings, everyone else is an adversary or opponent. Common
sense also dictates that the "private investigators" work for the "attorneys" and almost never
vice-versa. This sets the stage for some amazing, potentially explosive,
conflicts-of-interest between (1) the Taxpayers and (2) the DOJ, FBI and the agency.
In
an Opinion, dated 11/15/99, by Jerry E. Smith, Circuit Judge, stated in Note # 35:
"...Qui tam
actions ...aim to redress purely public injuries."
SOURCE: No. 97-20948 - Joyce Riley, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. St. Lukes
Episcopal Hospital, et. al., Defendants - Appellees, in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit, before Smith, DeMoss, and Stewart, Circuit Judges, Opinion by
Jerry E. Smith, Circuit Judge.
The Government's handling, or mishandling, of these "Whistleblower Lawsuits" are especially important because it is being replayed everyday and you are paying for it.
Immediately below you will find a silly little metaphorical story so you can quickly understand the
concept of what generally is happening in my true, ongoing horror story.
METAPHORICAL STORY: The second largest used car lot in the world
was having trouble with its sales to a particular large customer. After trying
unsuccessfully to solve the problem in-house, the Owner rehired a retired, ex-employee,
Salesman with a very successful sales and problem solving record. The Owner, by legal agreement,
assigned the rehired Salesman one specific responsibility. The Salesman's job was to
investigate and solve all problems with this particular, large Customer. He offered the
Salesman a 15% guaranteed-commission contract if he would come back to work and find and
fix the problems. The salesman accepted and was assigned all commissions on that particular
customer account, by signed contract. After a full year of research and investigations, he
found the problems, tried to fix them in-house, and, finally, sold some cars to the now
happy Customer. Later, the customer intentionally called the used car lot's Sales Manager
(when the Salesman was out to lunch) and negotiated a 15% discount (by excluding the
Salesman's commission.) Then the Customer bought more cars. Both hid it from the both the
Salesman and the Owner.
THEORETICAL FACTS OF THE METAPHOR:
The final results were that the used car lot Sales Manager:
(1) gave the customer a 15% discount and secretly sold more cars to the customer,
(2) intentionally concealed the sales and didn't deliver the money to the Owner,
(3) intentionally concealed both the principal and profit received from the secret sales,
(4) used the money as a secret, Sales Department slush fund and intentionally concealed the slush fund, and
(5) perpetually evaded paying the Owner and the contract's commissions to the Salesman.
TEST QUESTIONS:
A. What if the secret sales' value was more than $ 360,000,000.00? What if this was "x 3"?
B. What if the Owner was really the U.S. taxpayers?
C. How does the Owner get his 85% back?
D. Who was the big loser, the Owner at 85% or the Salesman at 15%?
E. Should the Owner insist on being paid his money?
F. Should the Salesman insist on being paid his money?
G. Who are the "bad guys" and what are the laws that cover this situation?
Now that you have the
idea of the story, you can go to the very bottom of this page and click on "My Story"
to read the true story.
I think it is a story that was designed for the
freedom of the web and vice versa. Also, I've put the actual documents
here so you can read them and think for yourself. I've added some emphasis in some places but
copies of most of the actual documents can be read here also. Finally, I'm going to ask for your help.
Relax, it won't cost you a penny (unless you
choose not to be as outraged as I am and then choose not to help.)
I respect the rule of law. The laws by
which we live are created, changed or repealed by the elected members of our national
legislature and our state legislatures. They are not changed or voided or to be overlooked
because any individual within a federal agency, like the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
or U.S. Coast Guard, doesn't like them.
Please contact your Senators and Representatives.
Tell them you want this stopped! Please help in any way you can.
Finally, please recognize this series of
webpages and documents for what they are. This is an attempt to correct an ongoing problem
within our government. The vast majority of government employees are wonderful, honest,
hard-working men and women that are under-paid, over-worked, and under-appreciated. Remember
that the sweet aroma of all of the "good apples" in the barrel is the only thing that can
possibly make the odor of the "rotten apples" bearable. I openly offer my respect,
appreciation, and best wishes to those that serve our country every day. From the lowest
paying or ranking job to the highest. The military says it best with "Salute the rank, not the person."
Thank you and Keep Well!
Respectfully, R.C. Ballew, dated 06/01/02
|
