Criminal Complaint shines light on RICO Enterprise in Stevens County

There appears to be a RICO enterprise operating in Stevens County Washington where the inmates are running the asylum. Evidence suggest it is being run by attorneys and judges (attorneys) who have been elected or appointed to public office but have failed to “duly qualify” to perform the functions and duties of those offices.

Each attorney, upon admission to the Washington BAR Association, must subscribe an Oath of Attorney according to RCW 2.48.210. His sworn and subscribed Oath of Attorney filed with the Washington State Supreme Court states: “I am fully subject to the laws of the State of Washington and the laws of the United States, and will abide by the same.”

BAR attorneys and Oaths seem to blend like oil and water. Together they form a murky slimy greasy mess as the two are forced to embrace each other. However the two will quickly separate when the constant vigilance of the people temper their oversight duty.

At this moment in time, there is no lurking in the shadows for Timothy Rasmussen who has been criminally impersonating a public officer and criminally usurping the public office of Stevens County Prosecutor since around 2006. Rasmussen is the focal point of a criminal complaint recently delivered to the FBI in Seattle, the US Dept. of Justice in Washington DC, The US Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington, the American Bar Association, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Washington Bar Association, the Washington Supreme Court, Washington’s “Governor” attorney Jay Inslee, Washington’s Attorney General Bob Ferguson, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The full Criminal Complaint and Exhibit Package can be read here:

The People on Stevens County are getting tired of being berated by Rasmussen’s rants in the local newspapers. Last summer, Rasmussen responded to a served 76 question letter entitled Questions that Require a Response submitted to him by the People’s Oversight Commission. He responded by stating:

 “I recently received a communiqué from a group who call themselves, “We the People.” It was a DEMAND that I answer 75 carefully worded questions within three days. All elected officials and I have received other demands and deadlines from this group, usually that we vacate our offices because we are not legally in office or some other such nonsense.
Many of the questions they demand I answer, are like the questions a slimy lawyer would use to trick a witness rather than get at the truth. Questions like “when did you stop beating your wife?” There is no answer, yet this group says it is my DUTY to respond to them and answer these questions.
You say I have three days to respond to your DEMAND, I say, OR WHAT?”

Rasmussen’s rant can be viewed here:

“Silence can only be equated to fraud when there is a legal or moral duty to speak”. United States v. Tweel.  Every legitimate “duly-qualified” public servant has a duty to respond to his employer, the People. Perhaps Mr. Rasmussen’s denial of “DUTY to respond” is his admission that he is not a bona fideduly-qualified” public servant.

Mr. Rasmussen said there were 75 questions. Perhaps Mr. Rasmussen did not like Question 76 which stated:

“76. Tim Rasmussen, are the people correct that – because you did not empower the County Auditor to properly file your Oath of Office by paying the requisite fee to have it incorporated “into the official public records” in full compliance with Washington State Law before assuming the Office of County Prosecutor – you should be placed under arrest for impersonating a public official and/or intruding into or refusing to surrender an office you do not legally hold? Yes or No. If “No”, please explain.”

This writer has it on good authority that every question of the 76 were simple “Yes” answers and approximately half of them were footnoted with Supreme Court and other Court rulings, Statutes, the Constitutions, etc. “Questions that Require a Response is part of the Exhibit package in the Criminal Complaint.

It should be noted by all People and Citizens that a criminal impersonator of a public official and Intrusion into a public Office has no “official status” or “office” to “resign” from. He can only turn himself in to the authorities, defend his actions, pay back all the “salary” paychecks and benefits he has extorted, forgo any “pension” entitlement and go to prison.

According to the Criminal Complaint, Rasmussen cannot prove his “duly-qualified” status to perform the functions and duties of a legitimate county prosecutor. Election to public office is only the first step to “duly qualify” for office. Following the balance of the legislature’s mandates is necessary and qualification is of a continuing nature.

Washington Attorney General Opinion – AGO 63-64, no. 17  states “Eligibility to public office is of a continuing nature, and must subsist at the commencement of the term, and during the occupancy of the office.


View and read the Complaints for Disbarment and Referral for Prosecution filed with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Washington BAR Association against Rasmussen and others in the links near the bottom of the article found at: for a more thorough understanding of the legislative mandates to duly qualify to hold public office.

RCW 42.20.030 Intrusion into and refusal to surrender public office.
Every person who shall falsely personate or represent any public officer, or who shall willfully intrude himself or herself into a public office to which he or she has not been duly elected or appointed, or who shall willfully exercise any of the functions or perform any of the duties of such officer, without having duly qualified therefor, as required by law, or who, having been an executive or administrative officer, shall willfully exercise any of the functions of his or her office after his or her right to do so has ceased, or wrongfully refuse to surrender the official seal or any books or papers appertaining to such office, upon the demand of his or her lawful successor, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

RCW 9a.60.040 Criminal impersonation in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of criminal impersonation in the first degree if the person:

(a) Assumes a false identity and does an act in his or her assumed character with intent to defraud another or for any other unlawful purpose; or

(b) Pretends to be a representative of some person or organization or a public servant and does an act in his or her pretended capacity with intent to defraud another or for any other unlawful purpose.

(2) Criminal impersonation in the first degree is a class C felony.



Senior Citizen Jailed after Traveling Five Miles per Hour UNDER Speed Limit

Senior Citizen Jailed after Traveling Five Miles per Hour UNDER Speed Limit

That cold, rainy, foggy evening in February 2015, 66-year-old, 106-pound Connie LaRue was traveling north from Chewelah, Washington on Highway 395 in a Toyota pickup.   Three miles outside the city limits, lights came on behind her and LaRue continued slowly to the first lighted area three miles away.

Chewelah City Policeman JOHNATHAN L. BOWERS approached the driver door of LaRue’s truck, stated “I am CHEWELAH CITY POLICE OFFICER BOWERS.   You attracted my attention when you were driving through Chewelah past the park, five miles under the speed limit, and when the speed limit increased to forty five, you were going forty, and when it increased to sixty, you were going fifty five. When I turned on my lights, you slowed down to 50. So I am ticketing you for Failure to Yield to an Emergency Vehicle; you did not stop when I turned on my lights. Your registration is expired for over a month, so I am citing you for expired registration.”

BOWERS asked several times for LaRue’s name and she stated that she did not answer questions, would stand on her Constitutionally secured rights to provide no information and that she would not give up one right to secure another. LaRue stood firm on her right not to answer questions according to the information and education she received from Professor James Duane of Regent Law School “DON’T TALK TO POLICE” which can be viewed at:

BOWERS told LaRue that she would be arrested if she did not talk to him, and that he was going to impound her truck.  LaRue reached for her cell phone, saying she was going to call a friend to get the truck.  BOWERS grabbed the phone and denied her any calls to anyone, then he dragged her from the truck, cuffed her behind the back and double-locked the cuffs.  LaRue asked if BOWERS had a warrant.  “No” was his retort.

BOWERS and his backup searched, inventoried and photographed the truck.   Items found in the cab included flyers REGARDING “SHERIFF” KENDLE ALLEN’S questionably illegal activities and an unpublished newspaper article about Stevens County elected officials having no legal oaths of office.    He then told LaRue he was changing her charge to “Failure to Comply”, saying she had the right to remain silent (which was a direct contradiction to his statement that if she refused to talk to him, he would arrest her) and the right to talk to an attorney (and yet he had denied her a phone call to her attorney.)

LaRue was taken to the STEVENS COUNTY JAIL where she politely refused to “book”, saying she would “be happy to book as soon as you show me the law that requires me to do so.”  This statement was met with torture from two deputy sheriffs who put her into a double hammerlock and pressed fingertips into her wrists to inflict excruciating pain, taking LaRue to her knees with loud screaming.  The attempt to get finger prints was unsuccessful, but one huge jailer grabbed LaRue by the hair, slammed her head against the cinder-block wall and held one hand on her head very tightly while saying to another, “Take the picture” and a photo was snapped.

The following day there were two Probable Cause Hearings before usurper to the office of “District Court Judge” GINA TVEIT.  They were identical: the prosecutor read the police report (charges filed under CITY OF CHEWELAH jurisdiction), TVEIT asked if Defendant would be “representing” herself, and LaRue said, “No, I AM myself.”  MR. LIAM MIKE GOLDEN approached LaRue and introduced himself as her “appointed attorney”.   LaRue’s response:  “You MAY have a contract with the county, you probably DO have a contract with the county, but you have NO CONTRACT WITH ME.  NOW SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!”  When LaRue was asked her name, she spelled it in upper- and lower-case letters, saying that she is “a living woman, created by God.”  She stated that she is “NOT an ALL-CAPS CORPORATION, a person, and by ALL means, not a DEAD person.”  She maintained that GINA TVEIT is sitting behind the bench illegally, having an imperfect oath of office with no fee paid, no return-to address, no book and page number, NO FILE STAMP and a bond that has been purchased by the taxpayers of STEVENS COUNTY rather than by herself.   GINA TVEIT, therefore, has no jurisdiction in the court and no jurisdiction over”  LaRue.  “I DO NOT CONSENT TO BEING RULED BY CRIMINALS, and this case needs to be dismissed with prejudice.”   TVEIT “found” probable cause and ordered LaRue to “book” into the jail and sign the papers before she would be released.  LaRue did not book and did not sign papers, but she was released that evening and paid $250.00 to recover the impounded truck.

One week later at an Arraignment Hearing, LaRue stood talking to “JUDGE” GINA TVEIT.  TVEIT ordered LaRue out of the courtroom, then issued a warrant for LaRue’s arrest.  The charge:  Failure to Appear!  LaRue recused TVEIT and TVEIT (without lawful authority) “appointed” LLOYD NICKEL (Judge ProTem/Commissioner) to hear the case.  As TVEIT had done, so did NICKEL deny LaRue’s Constitutionally guaranteed rights of due process, the right to know the nature and cause of the exact charges against her, to have a copy of the police report, to defend herself  and to have standby counsel. Nickel told LaRue that she had to waiver her right to counsel before he could rule on her right to have standby counsel. When LaRue stated she was not going to waive any of her rights, NICKEL told LaRue that GOLDEN would be her representation (over her objection) and that she was not allowed to speak further in the case.

Attorney GOLDEN did question the arresting cop (BOWERS) on the stand and immediately made a motion to dismiss based on BOWERS lack of jurisdiction.  BOWERS had been three miles outside his jurisdiction when he turned on lights and siren.  Case dismissed.

Six days later the charge of Failure to Yield [to an emergency vehicle] was filed again under the jurisdiction of STATE of WASHINGTON.  LaRue NOTICED the DISTRICT COURT that she was removing her case to the WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT for review under an Application for a Pre-emptory Writ of Prohibition, Injunction and Show Cause Order. The Washington Supreme Court said there was no state actor and suggested she file the Application for Writ with the STEVENS COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT.  There, usurper “judge” ALAN C. NIELSON has refused for over two months, to rule on LaRue’s indigent status so the case may progress.  LaRue made a demand of the SUPERIOR COURT CLERK that only a “duly-qualified” judge may hear her case, and STEVENS COUNTY has NOT ONE  “duly-qualified” judge and it appears there is not one duly-qualified SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE in Washington state.

This property is in the peaceable possession of a private Citizen
This property is in the peaceable possession of a private Citizen

While NIELSON has been sitting on this case, the WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING (DOL)  notified LaRue of a suspension of Driver License.    Before it was suspended, LaRue “VOIDed” the license and returned it to DOL with a NOTICE OF DRIVER STATUS.  LaRue then returned all plates, registrations and certificates of title for her automobiles to the local STEVENS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES.  She installed “EXEMPT” plates and notified [in writing]  all STEVENS COUNTY law enforcement offices of her actions.

The actions of the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office (TIMOTHY RASMUSSEN, JESSICA TAYLOR (REEVES), and NICHOLAS FORCE) and District Court (GINA TVEIT and LLOYD NICKEL) and the Superior Court (ALLEN C. NIELSON) have prompted LaRue to take the following proactive measures.

LaRue’s Letter to TIMOTHY RASMUSSEN, Addendum, Fee Schedule and DOL Rescission/Revocation of Driver License and Driver Status package.


RASMUSSEN Complaint on Scribd


TAYLOR Complaint on Scribd

Both Complaints were sent to: the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Washington State Bar Association, 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600, Seattle, WA 98101-2539, and the Washington State Supreme Court, 415 12th Ave SW , Olympia, WA 98501.


NICHOLAS FORCE 1st Complaint on Scribd


NICHOLAS FORCE 2nd Complaint on Scribd

NOTE: LaRue unsuccessfully ran as a candidate for County Coroner during the 2015 elections in Stevens County. The validity of the Elections process is of great importance to LaRue. After research conducted by others in Stevens County, it was uncovered that delegations to serve on the Elections Canvassing Board were fraught with irregularities and violations of state law nullifying the Stevens County Elections.  This prompted the 2nd Complaint for disbarment against NICHOLAS FORCE.

The FORCE Complaints were also filed with the Washington BAR Association and Supreme Court.

Following the Complaints filed against the 3 usurpers of public office in the Stevens County Prosecutor’s Office, LaRue filed Complaint against GINA TVEIT (usurper of District Court Judge), LLOYD BECKWITH NICKEL (usurper of District Court Judge Pro Tem/Commissioner) and ALLEN C. NIELSON (usurper of Superior Court Judge). Why are they referred to as usurpers of public office? The evidence packages attached to each Complaint contains the proof.

The following three Complaints for Disbarment and Referral for Prosecution were filed with the Washington BAR Association (address above) and the Commission on Judicial Conduct at: State of Washington, Commission on Judicial Conduct, P.O. Box 1817, Olympia, WA 98507.

TVEIT Complaint on Sribd

NICKEL Complaint on Scribd

NIELSON Complaint on Scribd

Until the empire finds a way to strike back, LaRue now freely travels in Washington State.

Common Law Maxim: “Where there is no injured party, there is no crime”.  [The State cannot be a victim] and “For every wrong, the law provides a remedy.”


Notice to Principal is notice to Agent. Notice to Agent is notice to Principal.

If you are an elected or appointed official, law enforcement officer, a peace officer or any other employee of government, municipal (city), county, state, or federal, in any state of the Union, the following applies equally to you as it does if you live and/or work in the State of Washington.

LaRue claims all her God-given unalienable rights and the protection of same equal to the rights of other Citizens throughout the States of the Union.


Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal – Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

The Agency Director of the Department of Licensing is required to copy and distribute this correspondence to the Governor, Attorney General, all County Prosecutors, all County Sheriffs,  the Director and Officers of the Washington Highway Patrol, the judges of every county district and superior court, and any other municipal, city, county or law-enforcement agencies, and note this Rescission of Driver Status in the various electronic databases that law enforcement uses in this state or in the United States to check the status of drivers in Washington State.  Your failure to comply will constitute an abrogation of your duties as Agency Director and you can be sued in your individual capacity with unlimited liability. As a government agency and an employee of the State, you are required to have an Oath of Office and a surety bond and provide a copy of each, forthwith to the sender of this correspondence.

Most public servants simply do not have the basic understanding of how their Oaths of Office are their solemn binding commitment to support, protect, defend and insure that the People they serve and the Peoples’ Creator-endowed, unalienable Rights are to remain inviolate. There is no public servant in America in general, and Washington in particular, that possesses the authority to devalue, diminish, abrogate, subjugate, subordinate, usurp, invade, or violate the Peoples’ Creator-endowed rights, period! The Oath actually forbids the Oath-taker, public servant from attempting or even thinking of attempting to injure a right of the People.  At the very least, you should be made aware that violating this Oath is felony perjury, insurrection, sedition, and treason against the Constitution and the People whom it was written to protect.

I, Connie LaRue, will be monitoring, maintaining a record and evaluating any and all communications and actions by all parties specific to this matter.  Should any infringement of my guaranteed and secured rights occur, on your part or by any party with whom affiliation with you is claimed, I will scrutinize said infringements and any injury therefrom pursuant to 42 USC §1983 and 18 USC §241-§242 at minimum, and I will proceed accordingly.

 The People of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The People, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the People to know and what is not good for them to know. The People insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created. This chapter shall be liberally construed and its exemptions narrowly construed to promote this public policy and to assure that the public interest will be fully protected. In the event of conflict between the provisions of this chapter and any other act, the provisions of this chapter shall govern. [RCW 42.56.030]

Should you decide to challenge the Declaration/Asseveration of Status of Connie LaRue herein below, you have ten days from constructive receipt plus three days for service to rebut those statements of fact with your own sworn affidavit with facts, evidence and law that would impeach the veracity of LaRue’s attestations herein. If you do not rebut the Declaration/Asseveration of Status of Connie LaRue within the time allotted, you will be in default and barred by the doctrine of estoppel from any future claim. You are so NOTICE!

Any attempt to contract with Connie LaRue or to force subjection to any state or federal code/statute masquerading as law without evidence or probable cause that LaRue has commited a felony or is about to commit a felony or where there is no injured party, will, without exception, bind you to the Fee Schedules attached in the package served upon Timothy Rasmussen and the Washington State Department of Licensing Rescission/Revocation of Driver License and Driver Status packages.

You are so NOTICED!

Dedication to the contest for freedom

This new blog is dedicated to the good men and women who engage in the animated contest for freedom, liberty and the free and unfettered exercised of their unalienable God-given rights. Watch for the story of one such woman who has stared the tyrants down and is exercising her right to travel as a private Citizen.

This property is in the peaceable possession of a private Citizen
This property is in the peaceable possession of a private Citizen

From the speech of William Wallace from “Braveheart”:

“I am William Wallace. And I see a whole army of my countrymen, here in defiance of tyranny! You have come to fight as free men. And free man you are! What will you do without freedom? Will you fight?” “Two thousand against ten?” – the veteran shouted. “No! We will run – and live!”

“Yes!” Wallace shouted back. “Fight and you may die. Run and you will live at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance, just one chance, to come back here as young men and tell our enemies that they may take our lives but they will never take our freedom!”