Early this year, following the decision by DOJ and the IRS to renege on their agreement to appear before the People, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (Maryland) formally requested that DOJ respond, in writing, to specific legal questions that had been submitted by Bob Schulz and the We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education as part of a Petition for Redress of Grievances.

On the People’s behalf, Rep. Bartlett sought to obtain official government responses regarding significant matters of US income tax law, federal jurisdiction and Constitutional violations posed by the current law enforcement practices of DOJ and IRS relating to the federal income tax system.

On November 21, 2002, We The People Foundation came into possession of a letter dated April 18th, 2002 sent from US Assistant Attorney General Daniel Bryant to Rep. Bartlett articulating the reasons Department of Justice was offering for refusing Bartlett’s request and refusing to answer the People’s questions.

US Assistant Attorney General Daniel Bryant holds the number three position at the U.S. Department of Justice.

It was Mr. Bryant who called Congressman Roscoe Bartlett on July 19, 2001, at the urging of Lawrence Lindsey (Assistant to the President for Economic Affairs, at the White House) to say that if Bob Schulz would end his hunger fast, DOJ would send its experts to meet with representatives of the We The People Foundation, in a public forum, to answer questions regarding the legality of the income tax system.

Mr. Bryant’s call to Rep. Bartlett followed the call that day by IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti to Rep. Bartlett, to say that if Bob Schulz would end his hunger fast the IRS would send its experts to meet with representatives of WTP, in a public forum, to answer questions regarding the legality of the income tax system.

It was Mr. Bryant who, on July 19, 2001, asked Rep. Bartlett to pen and deliver a letter to him requesting DOJ to meet with Bob Schulz and representatives of WTP to answer questions regarding the income tax because the administration wanted the official record to show that the government was responding -- not to a citizens’ Petition for Redress of Grievances -- but to a request by a Congressman. That is, the administration did not want to establish the precedent that government had an obligation, under the 1^st Amendment, to respond to a Petition for Redress.

It was Mr. Bryant who met with Bob Schulz, Roland Croteau, Burr Deitz and Rep. Bartlett on July 20, 2001 to receive the letter from Rep. Bartlett and to negotiate the details of the upcoming meeting.

It was Mr. Bryant who, on July 20, 2001 agreed that the upcoming hearing would be two days in length, would be held on September 25 and 26, would be held on Capitol Hill, would be presided over by Rep. Bartlett (or Henry Hyde), would be open to the public, could be broadcast by C-SPAN, would be transcribed and would be recorded on video tape by WTP and the government.

It was Mr. Bryant who, during the meeting, agreed with Bartlett and Schulz that under the 1^st amendment to the Constitution the American people are entitled to answers.

It was Mr. Bryant who agreed with Bartlett and Schulz that the upcoming hearing was in the nation's interest because for many years many individuals and groups have asked for answers to similar or identical questions.

It was Mr. Bryant and Rep. Bartlett who Bob Schulz was referring to when he said after the meeting, "I have met with these gentlemen face-to-face and have looked in their eyes. I am satisfied they are men of honor.  We have cemented our verbal and written agreements with a handshake.  The fast ends today."

It was Mr. Bryant who received our written questions on March 16, 2002, following the events of September 11, 2001, the rescheduling of the hearing to February 27 and 28, 2002, the decision by DOJ to renege on its commitment to participate in the event, and the decision by Rep. Bartlett to cancel the hearing and, instead, to have our written questions submitted to DOJ and IRS for answers.

Having received the questions, the administration has now responded.

Mr. Bryant, writing to Rep. Bartlett, now says DOJ will not answer the People’s questions and he has attempted to bring Bob Schulz and the We The People Foundation into disrepute.

Mr. Bryant has issued an official written statement that is not in the public interest and appears designed to expose the We The People Foundation to public ridicule and contempt and appears intended to deliberately injure the Foundation’s reputation.

Mr. Bryant, with a reckless disregard for the truth, has falsely accused the Foundation of promoting "tax fraud schemes" that have been used to "defraud honest American taxpayers" who have then been "convicted by juries of their peers and sentenced to serve time in prison."

Mr. Bryant’s words not only contradict his written word and official behavior as Assistant Attorney General on July 20, 2001 (and that of Lawrence Lindsey at the White House and IRS Commissioner Rossotti), they disclose an enthusiastic willingness to declare what he know to be falsehoods for the express purpose of harming WTP and deceiving others.

We have been treated with gross insolence. We have been provoked to anger.

We have demanded an apology.

Never before have the People gone to such lengths, and acted with such intelligence and with such professionalism and respect, to Petition the government for Redress of Grievances. Never before have the People, in such a dramatic, high profile, attention-getting but entirely proper and constitutional manner been called upon to exercise their 1^st Amendment Right to Petition. Never before have the People felt the need to do so. Never before have the People felt so moved to utilize the Right to Petition to remedy any issue of concern.

Bob Schulz’s response to Mr. Bryant is overextended in length due to the historical significance of Mr. Bryant’s letter and the need to provide an abundance of authentic, real and factual evidence in rebuttal.