CLICK HERE FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

INTRODUCTION

THE 50 STATES EX REL SHARON BRIDGEWATER PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND/OR RELATOR bifurcate stages of criminal trial, sentencing, criminal forfeiture of all tangible and intangle property, CRIMINAL PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP ________________________________________________________________________________________brings chares against one or more Joe Biden, Barak H. Obama, Donald Trump, major corporations, et al with violation of the Racketeered Influenced and Corrupt Organization act for having intentionally,  _______,  Treason, conspired to overthrow the US Government, terrorism usurpation of public office of the United States President(AND OTHER PUBLIC OFFICES),     An actual controversy exist between Merrick Garland the U.S. Attorney General

and Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, all committed mail fraud, extortion and a host of other unlawful acts against my business, Temporary restraining order, the rights of the the “50 States”  Plaintiffs to books, documents, as private attorney general and standing to obtain relief,

For conspiracy statutes which do not require proof of an overt act, such as RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961) or 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must allege and prove that the conspiracy continued into the limitations period. The crucial question in this regard is the scope of the conspiratorial agreement, and the conspiracy is deemed to continue until its purpose has been achieved or abandoned. See United States v. Northern Imp. Co., 814 F.2d 540 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 973 (1984).Retroactive law as a law
that, in respect to past transactions or considerations, does one of the following:
• takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under existing laws
• creates a new obligation and imposes a new duty
• attaches a new disability
retroactive statutes, finding that a retroactive
statute is a law that:
• intended to affect transactions that occurred, or rights that accrued, before the law
became operative; and
• ascribes effects to the transactions or rights not inherent in their nature, in view of the
law in force at the time they occurred.
The court focused on how the retrospective application of a law could destroy a right or create a
duty where one did not previously exist. Retroactive laws have a wide variety of applications,
including judicial and administrative procedures

In order to prove a Rico violation government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt  that #1 an enterprise existed(a public/private “transnational, international” bioweapons terrorist group – ongoing organization, formal or informal, with a common purpose and by evidence that various core personnel of the group functioned as a continuing unit) of a group of people informally associated together for the common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct which have a common purpose,  a core of personnel who function as a continuing unit, to defraud Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater of money and/or property without from Jan. 1, 1993 and continuing thru to present. #2 And all Defendants are associated with or employed by the enterprise. #3 All the defendant knowingly willfully engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity and committed at least two incidents of racketeering activity that have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims or methods of commission or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics, including a nexus to the same enterprise, and are not isolated incidents, against one or both Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater – Two Witnesses and victim)and within five years after a prior incident of racketeering activity(“Racketeering activity” to commit, to attempt to commit, to conspire to commit, or intentionally aid, solicit, coerce or intimidate another person to commit crimes at the time of its commission, was a felony(attempted murder, theft, assault, battery, list) #4 All Knowingly conducted or participated in enterprise through pattern of racketeering 

The Plaintiff is a victim and Federal Witenss with first hand knowledge and will show and prove to this “”PUBLIC OPEN COURT” THAT JOE BIDEN(AND PREDECESSORS ARE GUILTY OF MULTIPLE CRIMES” OF WAR CRIMES, GENOCIDE, TREASON, RACKETEERING CONSPIRACY ETC. WHICH ESTABLISH MORE THAN PROBABLE

THE 50 STATES EX REL SHARON BRIDGEWATER PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND/OR RELATOR bifurcate stages of criminal trial, sentencing, ________________________________________________________________________________________brings chares against one or more Joe Biden, Barak H. Obama, et al with violation of the Racketeered Influenced and Corrupt Organization act for having intentionally,  _______, Obamacare,  Treason, conspired to overthrow the US Government, terrorism usurpation of public office of the United States President(AND OTHER PUBLIC OFFICES),     An actual controversy exist between Merrick Garland the U.S. Attorney General

and Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, all committed mail fraud, extortion and a host of other unlawful acts against my business, emporary restraining order, the rights of the the “50 States”  Plaintiffs to books, documents, as private attorney general and standing to obtain relief,

In order to prove a Rico violation government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt  that #1 an enterprise existed(a public/private “transnational, international” bioweapons terrorist group – ongoing organization, formal or informal, with a common purpose and by evidence that various core personnel of the group functioned as a continuing unit) of a group of people informally associated together for the common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct which have a common purpose,  a core of personnel who function as a continuing unit, to defraud Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater of money and/or property without from Jan. 1, 1993 and continuing thru to present. #2 And all Defendants are associated with or employed by the enterprise. #3 All the defendant knowingly willfully engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity and committed at least two incidents of racketeering activity that have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims or methods of commission or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics, including a nexus to the same enterprise, and are not isolated incidents, against one or both Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater – Two Witnesses and victim)and within five years after a prior incident of racketeering activity(“Racketeering activity” to commit, to attempt to commit, to conspire to commit, or intentionally aid, solicit, coerce or intimidate another person to commit crimes at the time of its commission, was a felony(attempted murder, theft, assault, battery, list) #4 All Knowingly conducted or participated in enterprise through pattern of racketeering 

The Plaintiff is a victim and Federal Witenss with first hand knowledge and will show and prove to this “”PUBLIC OPEN COURT” THAT JOE BIDEN(AND PREDECESSORS ARE GUILTY OF MULTIPLE CRIMES” OF WAR CRIMES, GENOCIDE, TREASON, RACKETEERING CONSPIRACY ETC. WHICH ESTABLISH MORE THAN PROBABLE CAUSE!! probable cause.

1

Section 1962(c) makes it a crime to conduct the affairs of an enterprise affecting interstate

or foreign commerce “through” a pattern of racketeering activity or through the alternative theory of collection of an unlawful debt.

Section 1962(d) makes it a crime to conspire to commit any of the three substantive RICO

offenses.

THIS IS A CRIMINAL CASE BROUGHT BY THE 50 STATES EX REL SHARON BRIDGEWATER PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND/OR RELATOR “PROSECUTOR” VIA THE RACKETEERED INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATION(WHICH PERMITS A PRIVATE PERSON INJURED AND DAMAGED TO “ACT” AS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND USE COMMON LAW REMEDIES VIA ADMIRALTY AND MARTIME LAW WHICH PERMITS A PRIVATE PERSON INJURED AND DAMAGED TO “ACT” AS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND USE COMMON LAW REMEDIES VIA ADMIRALTY AND MARTIME LAW. (BURIFICATION . (War Crimes, violations of the Nuremberg code, Genocide, Healthcare fraud, Treason, conspired to overthrow the US Government, conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity to defraud the two witness(Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater)out of money and/or property. In addition to illegal restraints in trade, conspiracy to restrain interstate and/or foreign commerce. Usurpation of public office of the United States President and multiple, multiple other crimes.

JURISDICTION

    

This “OPEN PUBLIC COURT” have jurisdiction via Admiralty and/or Maritime common law remedies in which the Claimant/Plaintiff(“THE 50 STATES EX REL SHARON BRIDGEAWTER PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL) have no other adequate remedies at law, for denial of court access, dismissal of 45 or more cases(judicial racketeering) and continued predicate acts as defined in 18 U.S.C. section 1961 conspiracy to restrain interstate and/or foreign commerce continued scheme to defraud two witnesses Sharon and/or James S. Bridgewater(Representatives of the 50 States and/or the people of the 50 states) out of money and/or property without due process of law(U.S. public officials acting in joint participation with Foreign Officials and Major Corporation to enslav

“Common Common Law Jurisdiction”

This admiralty and/or maritime claim “open court proceeding” have Common law jurisdiction for deprivation and denial of court access via 42 plus dismissed complaint of valid claims(judicial racketeering- see below related cases) of the two witnesses right to file a first amended complaint[pursuant to a Superior Court Judge Order see below (pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure every Plaintiff is allowed to file a first amended complaint “by right” without leave of the court –  plaintiff to amend their complaint one time within 21 days of serving the original complaint or at any point before the defendant answers – Rule 15 provides that the court should allow the plaintiff to amend the complaint when justice requires it)from August 4, 2008 and continuing thru present provides and this admiralty and/or maritime claim by operation of law is “the first amended complaint.” Congress allowed state courts to exercise concurrent jurisdiction over admiralty cases in which plaintiffs seek traditional common law remedies.

dismissal of all valid clurts in admiralty is therefore an amalgam of the general maritime law insofar as it is acceptable to the courts, modifications of that law by congressional amendment, the common law of torts and contracts as modified to the extent constitutionally possible by state legislation, and international prize law. This body of law is at all times subject to modification by the paramount authority of Congress acting in pursuance of its powers under the Admiralty and Maritime Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause and, no doubt, the Commerce Clause, now that the Court’s interpretation of that clause has become so expansive. Of this power there has been uniform agreement among the Justices of the Court.

Admiralty and Maritime Cases.—Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction comprises two types of cases: (1) those involving acts committed on the high seas or other navigable waters, and (2) those involving contracts and transactions connected with shipping employed on the seas or navigable waters. In the first category, which includes prize cases and torts, injuries, and crimes committed on the high seas, jurisdiction is determined by the locality of the act, while in the second category subject matter is the primary determinative factor.⁹¹⁴ Specifically, contract cases include suits by seamen for wages,⁹¹⁵ cases arising out of marine insurance policies,⁹¹⁶ actions for towage⁹¹⁷ or pilotage⁹¹⁸ charges, actions on bottomry or respondentia bonds,⁹¹⁹ actions for repairs on a vessel already used in navigation,⁹²⁰ contracts of affreightment,⁹²¹ compensation for temporary wharfage,⁹²² agreements of consortship between the masters of two vessels engaged in wrecking,⁹²³ and surveys of damaged vessels.⁹²⁴ That is, admiralty jurisdiction “extends to all contracts, claims and services essentially maritime.”⁹²⁵ But the courts have never enunciated an unambiguous test which would enable one to determine in advance whether or not a given case is maritime.⁹²⁶ “The boundaries of admiralty jurisdiction over contracts—as opposed to torts or crimes—being conceptual rather than spatial, have always been difficult to draw. Precedent and usage are helpful insofar as they exclude or include certain common types of contract. . . .”⁹²⁷

Maritime torts include injuries against “ALL INTERNATIONAL HEADS OF STATE(FOREIGN OFFICIALS) IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY” FOR JOINT PARTICIPATION WITH U.S. PRESIDENTS, MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND ONE OR MORE REAL ESTATE INVESTORS, WALL STREET INVESTORS AND MAJOR CORPORATIONS INVESTORS FROM JAN. 1, 1993 AND CONTINUING THRU TO PRESENT(and claim arising out of malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights and/or any claim based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function regardless – whether the discretion be abused – and they are not immune by Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA), 28 U.S.C. 1330, 1441(d), 1602 et seq., which provides that a foreign state and its agencies and instrumentalities are immune from the jurisdiction of federal and state courts in civil actions, subject to limited exceptions. ALL COMMITTED ACTS OF TERRORISM WHICH RESULT AND WILL CONTINUE TO RESULT IN PERSONAL INJURY AND/OR DEATH(and/or arbitrary deprivation of life -extrajudicial killing ) OF ONE OR BOTH WITNESSES – SHARON AND/OR JAMES S. BRIDGEWATER ALL ARE “STATE SPONSOR TERRORIST AND/OR A STATE SPONSOR TERRORIST BIOLOGICAL WARFARE ENTERPRIZE” ACTING IN JOINT PARTICIPATION and provide material support or resources for such an act to each other to injure and harm the two witnesses(and/or humanity). International law prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of life, and extrajudicial killing. [t]errorism exception” provides that a foreign state that has been designated a state sponsor of terrorism is not immune from jurisdiction in certain civil actions for damages arising out of personal injury or death “caused by an act of * * * extrajudicial killing * * * or the provision of material support or resources for such an act”)  in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment, and acting in joint participation with U.S. Public Officials acting under the color or law to commit and continue to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity(violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity against the two witness in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1959 – Violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity racketeering act

in which the action is based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state; or upon an act performed in the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere; or upon an act outside the territory of the United States in connection with a commercial activity of the foreign state elsewhere and that act causes a direct effect in the United States VIA ONE OR MORE COVID PANDEMIC – ILLEGAL RESTRAINTS IN TRADE, AND CONSPIRACY TO RESTRAIN COMMERCE AND/OR WHO WERE employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) AND CAUSED THE TWO WITNESSES INJURIES AND DAMAGES!

This court has jurisdiction providing for declaratory and equitable and/or injunctive relief to prevent the deprivation under color of law of the “50 States,” rights, privileges, and immunities under the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 28 USC sections 1333 to 1364, 2201, and 2202; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985 and 1988 and the Constitution of the United States and more particularly the second ninth, tenth, and fourteenth amendments thereto. Further relief sought in this against racial discrimination, and/or discrimination based on religion, gender, disability, national origin, via the Class Plaintiff Bridgewater and thos similarly situated. (an international class/and/or national class of persons);  This court further have jurisdiction under Rule 23 and/or 28 USC section 1332 amounts in controversy exceeds $5,000,000 and one or more members of the class plaintiffs are citizens of different state from the defendants and/or one or more members of class plaintiffs and/or class defendants are citizens of a State and/or are citizens of a foreign state or subject of a foreign state. Class Representative Defendant Merrick is a citizen of the State of Delawas, Virginia and/or Maryland.  The Class Petitioner/Appellant/claimant Representative is a citizen of the State of Michigan.  There is complete diversity of Citizenship between Lynch and/or Bridgewater. (Class Representatives).This district Court also has jurisdiction to issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction. 28 USC section 1651. Exceptional circumstances warrant the exercise of this court discretionay powers and adequate relief cannot be obtain in any other form from any other court. Also, the parties opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the class(CRIMINALS) as a whole. The questions of law or fact common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting individual members, and a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. The existence of intimidation and threats by the defendant class have and will deter potential plaintiffs from joining the suit as named plaintiffs, making class action status essential to ensure all victims receive justice. This Court have “common law jurisdiction for International Crimes, including but not limited to violations of the Nuremberg Code, War Crimes, Human rights violations, list

POOL OF REAL ESTATE INVESTORS

SCHEME TO DEFRAUD ALL U.S. CITIZENS, HUMANITY THE TWO WITENSSES AND/OR ANCESTORS

GENOCIDE OF CHRISTIANS LIVING IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

(INCLUDING MURDER AND STARVATION)

Sometimes called the first genocide of the twentieth century, the Armenian genocide refers to the physical annihilation of Armenian Christian people living in the Ottoman Empire from spring 1915 through autumn 1916. There were approximately 1.5 million Armenians living in the multiethnic Ottoman Empire in 1915.

ROTHCHILD(AND CO-CONSPIRATORS) SCHEME TO DEFRAUD – ALL U.S. CITIZENS AND ALL!!

WOODROW WILSON – U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE ACT

National Security and Defense by Encouraging the Production, Conserving the Supply, and Controlling the Distribution of Food Products and Fuel” and became law on August 10, 1917

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Fuel_Control_Act

What happened in Iran during World war 1?

At least 8–10 million Iranians out of a population of 18–20 million died of starvation and disease during the famine of 1917–1919. The Iranian holocaust was the biggest calamity of World War I and one of the worst genocides of the 20th century, yet it remained concealed for nearly a century.

IRAN DEAL

HITLER’S GOAL TO CHANGE MEN GENETIC MAKE – UP AND EXTERMINATE ALL RACES, AND ALL PEOPLE OTHER THAN “ARYAN” ALL WERE TARGETED FOR ANNIHILATION BY GERMANY(HITLER)

FRONT PAGE CONTENT #5