Here is an e-mail (some alignment formatting missing) that I sent to an alleged Sarah Orr:
I never did receive a paper response.Dennis Francis Blewett
[email protected]
Madison, Wisconsin
To Attorney Sarah J. Orr of the UW-Madison Consumer Law Clinic of the Economic Justice Institute,
This message is a request for assistance from the UW-Madison Consumer Law Clinic. In relation to <https://law.wisc.edu/eji/clc/>, I meet the criteria for assistance because I am dealing with at least one type of problem, namely an alleged debt collector is harassing me. I have communicated to the U.S. Department of Education and the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Education that I deny that I need to pay any alleged debt. One argument was that, relative to Title 41, Subtitle III of U.S. Code (which involves the Contract Disputes Act), [1] six years of time have tolled since the signing (presumed) of any alleged "Federal government" contract for Federal student loan monies, whereby I was "contractor" to such contract to obtain "property" of the U.S. Government, namely U.S. dollar and [2] I did not hold intent to defraud anyone in the partaking of any alleged Federal government contract, particular the one being argued about being Federal student loan related. My interpretation of things has been that the U.S. Department of Education has been engaged in racketeering by seeking monies from persons ("contractors") of whom have already tolled the six-year mark and the department means to extort monies from such persons through wrongful prosecution, etc. because upon the six-year mark, the U.S. Department of Education would have otherwise developed an allegation of fraud (were it to have "believed such") and pursued prosecution (such interpretation may be derived from interpreting how Title 41, Subtitle III relates to Federal student loans. The end-game of such extortion would then be the embezzlement of such monies (billions of dollars), for whatever or however the U.S. Department of Education has been using such. The other argument I made was "I do not think that I should have to repay any loans because no one has the authority to claim that I am liable for having to repay any one or more loans." This argument was covered in a former e-mail sent to [email protected] on December 15th, 2021, of which I never received a reply. The Consumer Law Clinic of UW-Madison should provide me with a scheduled appointment because the UW-Madison Consumer Law Clinic provides legal services to people who cannot afford to hire an attorney, such as myself.
Sincerely,
Dennis Francis Blewett
P.S.
As I am not sure if my e-mail communications are being intercepted and/or prevented, please leave a response to my request in the Economic Justice Institute mailbox of the UW-Law building (if possible) for me to acquire with the label "For Dennis Francis Blewett." I am referring the mailbox of which I put this in (I "mean" to put a printed copy of this e-mail in the Economic Justice Institute mailbox.