1. Stocks start off holding yesterdays gains, metals continue to pull back
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Good Tues Am. Gold continues to roll back and down 4.9 to 1272. Silver is down 3 to 1782. Crude is +12 to 4935, while the USD is down 3 to 9894
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 4/22/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1289.10-- UP 0.60 Silver $17.85-- down 66 Oil $49.62-- down 3.80 USD $99.88 -- down 58

Lex mercatoria / Law Merchant

Discussion in 'Topical Discussions (In Depth)' started by BarnacleBob, Feb 11, 2017.



  1. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    "....After all, the chief business of the American people is business. They are profoundly concerned with producing, buying, selling, investing and prospering in the world." -- Calvin Coolidge

    Lex mercatoria (from the Latin for "merchant law"), often referred to as "the Law Merchant" in English, is the body of commercial law used by merchants throughout Europe during the medieval period. It evolved similar to English common law as a system of custom and best practice, which was enforced through a system of merchant courts along the main trade routes. It functioned as the international law of commerce.[1] It emphasised contractual freedom and alienability of property, while shunning legal technicalities and deciding cases ex aequo et bono. A distinct feature was the reliance by merchants on a legal system developed and administered by them. States or local authorities seldom interfered, and did not interfere a lot in internal domestic trade. Under lex mercatoriatrade flourished and states took in large amounts of taxation.

    Continued:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_mercatoria

    ARE YOU A MERCHANT?

    (1) "Merchant" means a person who deals in goods of the kind or otherwise by his occupation holds himself out as having knowledge or skill peculiar to the practices or goods involved in the transaction or to whom such knowledge or skill may be attributed by his employment of an agent or broker or other intermediary who by his occupation holds himself out as having such knowledge or skill. --UCC §2-104 (1)

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-104

    § 2-105. Definitions: Transferability; "Goods"; "Future" Goods; "Lot"; "Commercial Unit".

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-105#Goods_2-105

    Equity

    n. 1) a venerable group of rights and procedures to provide fairness, unhampered by the narrow strictures of the old common law or other technical requirements of the law. In essence courts do the fair thing by court orders such as correction of property lines, taking possession of assets, imposing a lien, dividing assets, or injunctive relief (ordering a person to do something) to prevent irreparable damage. The rules of equity arose in England where the strict limitations of common law would not solve all problems, so the King set up courts of chancery (equity) to provide remedies through the royal power. Most eastern states had courts of equity or chancery separate from courts of law, and others had parallel systems of law and equity with different procedural rules. Now most states combine law and equity and treat both under "one cause of action."

    http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=646
     
    Eyebone likes this.
  2. Winston_Room101

    Winston_Room101 Seeker

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    28
    ...
    so liens could be Attached to Property.

    whereas unalienable describes that to which liens may not be Attached.

    :oriental:
     
  3. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right






    “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise— the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”

    U.S. Code
    Title 1Chapter 1 › § 1


    ------------------------------------------------------

    Let me re-arrange this so it is easy to read


    “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.” ....., unless the context indicates otherwise—

     
  4. REO 54

    REO 54 Midas Member Midas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,546
    Likes Received:
    4,637
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Like to see David Merrill chime in on this......
     
  5. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    23,119
    Likes Received:
    24,049
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This has been going on for awhile when BB and I discuss the current status of things.

    For years we have been trying to resolve how the laws are created or justified vs the constitution.

    Even the most recent ruling on appeal by the 9th, begs the question.

    Bringing us to this subject, which is they are not following constitutional law, but are following law of merchants, and that is what gives them the authority to do what they have done.

    (Your proof will simply be if there are any arrests for treason re the 9th or if it gets swept under the rug. Potus has already stated he won't pursue it ie being complicit in the result. He is tackling it from another angle)

    But from what I have seen, the documentation of said statutes, laws, and rules never mention this, as they are always promoted as constitutional or not.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2017
  6. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    23,119
    Likes Received:
    24,049
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there are endless examples of this in real life also, guys who have went down the real rabbit hole that is the labyrinth of the judicial system.

    for instance, in traffic courts or others, you can lay out the perfect case, and have constitutional records and rulings to promote your position, and in the end the answer:

    'that is a real nice dissertation, and while I may agree with you, this ruling is in favor of the plaintiff. Story over.' For those that still do not get it, you lose.

    So you can be totally right in constitutional law, and have the perfect case to support your argument, and you still lose.

    Why is that?

    Law of Merchants

    I remember the days when the battle was going on for kenyan care. Where it was not constitutional at all, and the arguments were made, then a black robe spoke up and stated if you declare it a 'tax', then it will be constitutional.

    This is what was done, but even that too was not constitutional, because only the designation of it changed, and not the actual bill itself.

    The bill was and is unconstitutional, always has been.
     
    TAEZZAR, Oldmansmith and REO 54 like this.
  7. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Best I can tell we are legally classified in law as merchants operating in commerce. This is evident, as commerce is a privilege, not a right. Unknown to many people in America, the SSI# also has a sister # at the IRS called an EIN#, "employer identification number" ergo employers in commerce subject to the progressive income excise tax on commercial activities & privilege. It should also be noted that "driving" is a commercial term, also namely exercising a privilege in commerce and subject to the commercial statutory licensing & regulatory police powers, i.e. commercial registration, commercial insurance, driver license, etc..

    Merchants & their activities are regulateable by the state by & thru the legislative statutory scheme, these schemes are judicially noticed as suits in EQUITY.... It must be noted that public civil equity suits at the bar do not possess criminal penalties. They are strictly 100% civil matters.

    EQUITY is a jurisdiction & body of law that is employed to remedy areas of the common & statute law that are silent & not recognized yet demand justice, remedy & relief for the injured and complaining party. Its basically contract enforcement to cure & remedy injustices in both public & private contracts, both written & instant oral contracts. Everytime you tender money or create an instant agreement you have created a instant contract.....

    The constitutional EQUITY jurisdiction is strictly civil & DOES NOT include or sanction criminal penalties when seeking remedy & relief. Its purely a civil matter between the complaining plaintiff & defendant. It should also be recognized that in EQUITY the burden of proof lays on the defendant not the complaining party (plaintiff). The complaining party & their allegations who brought suit before the court are presumed to be fact. Thus it is the defendants duty to defend himself against the allegations. It is for this reason that failure to respond to a civil summons & civil suit will always result in the complainant being awarded the remedy & relief sought after in the complaint via "default" judgement.

    LAW MERCHANT EQUITY

    The major distinction between EQUITY & LAW MERCHANT EQUITY resides in the use of criminal penalties & the states police powers over commerce. For instance when you are criminally "charged" you are being summoned to answer a civil law merchant complaint. Since the criminal proceeding is in commercial equity, the complaining parties allegations are treated as truth & fact... as the respondent, it is your responsibility to defend against the allegations. It is for this reason that the states agents (LEO's, IRS & other AUTHORITIES, etc.) as complainants are always regarded as speaking the truth in their allegations. REMEMBER these proceedings are civil matters, hence the state & its agents are the complaining party... ergo your not answering an indictment whereas your presumed "innocent until proven guilty," nay, this is civil equity, equity is brutal, your presumed to be responsible (guilty) of the allegations complained of. This condition has not gone unnoticed by the corrupt elements in law & judicial enforcement. For instance your traveling at 35 mph & a LEO stops you and alleges your traveling at 50 mph. He issues you a civil summons for your TRESSPASS. In court you dispute his allegation & complaint w/o corraberating evidence. The Judge will always award relief judgement to the complainant in a he said, she said complaint. In the above hypothetical case, there is no means to defend yourself against the allegations... Law Merchant equity is the perfect tool to exploit the general public, as in most cases the complaints are styled in such a way that the respondent (plaintiff) cannot reasonably defend himself against the allegations... the complaining party then almost always wins judgement by default for failure of an adequate defense against the complaint. For these reasons sojourning into traffic or tax court is usually a complete waste of time & resources.

    For over 40 yrs I've listened to the IGNORANT myths that the LEO's, persecuters & judges were all CORRUPT. Its an absurdity on its very face to believe such nonsense. The fact is these so called authorities are employing & using hidden in plain sight foreign private civil commercial law against the populace. There is no possible means of avoiding a judgement against your interest when you use the wrong body of law to defend yourself against the allegations contained in the complaint. And you better understand that since these are civil matters, the constitutional protections DO NOT APPLY!

    The law schools no longer teach constitutional law for a reason. They do teach the rules of procedure in equity, namely the art of litigation. All criminal allegations across the land of the free from traffic misdemeanors, tax avoidance to murder, robbery, rape & prostitution, etc. are civil matters tried & remedied in commercial equity using law merchant. See 27 USC 72.11

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/72.11

    Considering the above facts and the recent 9th circuit court of appeals opinion, it becomes axiomatic that the sitting judges are NOT judicial activists politically legislating from the bench, they are however operating in the jurisdiction of law merchant equity which is designed to seek & find solutions to remedy, relief & justice for the complaining party. Hopefully the 9th opinion will awaken the general population that the private civil Law Merchant equity jurisdiction has and is being employed & deployed to subvert the peoples constitutional & common law protections from the predatory exploititive state & the globalist elites that have hijacked the nation..... !!!

    Learn more about Law Merchant (infra):

    http://famguardian.org/subjects/Taxes/Articles/DispatchOfMerchants.htm

    NOT LEGAL ADVICE... PRESENTED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY.
     
    TAEZZAR and Scorpio like this.
  8. nickndfl

    nickndfl Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    Messages:
    9,540
    Likes Received:
    6,711
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Florida
    I run my own business and try to do the right thing all of the time. I stay well within the law AND never scam any of my clients. Now it has been done to me by former bosses and by contracted service people, but I would rather eat a loss than go back on my word or not do right by my clients.
     
  9. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Allow me to add this to the above...the State has subverted constitutional protections using law merchant... no longer are you innocent until proven guilty in a civil equity court, you guilty until YOU prove your innocence... this has relieved the prosecutors & investigators of many of their constitutional burdens. The result is the worlds largest incarcerated population per capita.

    It must also be stated that a SYSTEM of civil allegations & complaints have been created with the burden of proof laid upon the respondents (defendants) shoulders that is almost impossible to defend from the civil litigation with criminal penalties. Defending yourself from the litigation results in the use of very expensive lawyers, you may win the litigation but it comes at the high expense of your wallet & wealth accumulations.... lets call it what it is, the lawyering classes & the state have co-ordinated to shake down & fully exploit the population at every turn...

    Observe that most of the states litigation is styled as a TRESSPASS or infringement upon the states private commerce... For example a merchant operating on the roads without the proper agency licensing & registration is a tresspasser & tax evader usurping the priviledge of commerce. The entire scheme of controlling the populace to create revenues for the state rests upon subverting the constitutions via classifying the people as merchants subject to the private civil law merchant jurisdiction.

    If your not a merchant & can prove it, the commercial statutes, etc. are not applicable to you.... only then can you reach the constitutional protections & the common law.
     
  10. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Sounds like your an astute business man avoiding expensive civil equity litigation at all costs.... in many cases thats the cheapest means of avoiding commercial disputes & litigation when dishonor is alleged....

    I gotta ask, what does your statement have to do with or add to the subject matter concerning equity, merchants, goods & lex merchatoria???
     
  11. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    The government has NO authority over PEOPLE.

    We the PEOPLE are the masters, they are the servants...PUBLIC SERVANTS

    HOWEVER, The Government has ABSOLUTE authority over commerce


    ..................................................................................................................................




    PEOPLE or CITIZEN WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

    http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/pvc.htm


    =============================================================================

    THE STORY OF THE BUCK ACT


    by
    Richard McDonald
    edited by Mitch Modeleski

    In order for you to understand the full import of what is happening, I must explain certain laws to you.


    When passing new statutes, the Federal government always does everything according to the principles of law. In order for the Federal Government to tax a Citizen of one of the several states, they had to create some sort of contractual nexus. This contractual nexus is the “Social Security Number”.

    In 1935, the federal government instituted Social Security.

    The Social Security Board then created 10 Social Security “Districts”. The combination of these “Districts” resulted in a “Federal area” which covered all the several states like a clear plastic overlay.

    In 1939, the federal government instituted the “Public Salary Tax Act of 1939”. This Act is a municipal law of the District of Columbia for taxing all federal and state government employees and those who live and work in any “Federal area”.

    Now, the government knows it cannot tax those state Citizens who live and work outside the territorial jurisdiction of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 (1:8:17) or Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) in the U.S. Constitution. So, in 1940, Congress passed the “Buck Act”, 4 U.S.C.S. Sections 105-113. In Section 110(e), this Act authorized any department of the federal government to create a “Federal area” for imposition of the “Public Salary Tax Act of 1939”. This tax is imposed at 4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 111. The rest of the taxing law is found in the Internal Revenue Code. The Social Security Board had already created a “Federal area” overlay.

    4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(d). The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States. ( Note: the use of the capital “S” in “State” is reference to the designated territorial “States” and possessions held by the Corporate “United States”.)

    4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(e). The term “Federal area” means any lands or premises held or acquired by or for the use of the United States or any department, establishment, or agency of the United States; and any Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the exterior boundaries of any State, shall be deemed to be a Federal area located within such State.

    There is no reasonable doubt that the federal “State” is imposing an excise tax under the provisions of 4 U.S.C.S. Section 105, which states in pertinent part:
    Sec. 105. State, and so forth, taxation affecting Federal areas; sales or use tax

    (a) No “person”
    (NOTE: the term person references a fictional entity) shall be relieved from liability for payment of, collection of, or accounting for any sales or use tax levied by any State, or by any duly constituted taxing authority therein, having jurisdiction to levy such tax, on the ground that the sale or use, with respect to which such tax is levied, occurred in whole or in part within a Federal area; and such State or taxing authority shall have full jurisdiction and power to levy and collect any such tax in any Federal area within such State to the same extent and with the same effect as though such area was not a Federal area.


    Irrespective of what the tax is called, if its purpose is to produce revenue, it is an income tax or a receipts tax under the Buck Act[4 U.S.C.A. Secs. 105-110]. Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Calvert, 464 SW 2d. 170 (1971), affd (Tex) 478 SW 2d. 926, cert. den. 409 U.S. 967, 34 L.Ed. 2d. 234, 93 S.Ct. 293.

    Thus, the obvious question arises: What is a “Federal area”?

    A “Federal area” is any area designated by any agency, department, or establishment of the federal government. This includes the Social Security areas designated by the Social Security Administration, any public housing area that has federal funding, a home that has a federal bank loan, a road that has federal funding, and almost everything that the federal government touches through any type of aid. Springfield v. Kenny, 104 N.E. 2d 65 (1951 App.). This “Federal area” attaches to anyone who has a Social Security Number or any personal contact with the federal or state governments. Through this mechanism, the federal government usurped the Sovereignty of the People, as well as the Sovereignty of the several states, by creating “Federal areas” within the boundaries of the states under the authority of Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 (4:3:2) in the federal Constitution, which states:
    2. The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States, and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

    Therefore, all U.S. citizens [i.e. franchised citizens of the District of Columbia] residing in one of the states of the Union, are classified as property, as franchisee’s of the federal government, and as an “individual entity”.
    See Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773.
    Under the “Buck Act”, 4 U.S.C.S. Secs. 105-113, the federal government has created a “Federal area” within the boundaries of all the several states.

    This area is similar to any territory that the federal government acquires through purchase, conquest or treaty, thereby imposing federal territorial law upon all people in this “Federal area”. Federal territorial law is evidenced by the Executive Branch’s yellow-fringed U.S. flag flying in schools, offices and all courtrooms designating a mercantile jurisdiction.



    I suggest reading the whole article here:
    https://keystoliberty2.wordpress.com/tag/wheeling-steel-corp-v-fox/


    .......................................................

    b. "the contracts between them" involve U.S. citizens, which are deemed as Corporate Entities:
    c. "Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union,
    are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual

    entity"",
    Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773




    =====================================================


    “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise— the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.”

    U.S. Code
    Title 1Chapter 1 › § 1


    ------------------------------------------------------

    Let me re-arrange this so it is easy to read


    “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.” ....., unless the context indicates otherwise—



    ================================================================


    Title 15 USC Section 44 even provides for an "unincorporated corporation"....
    Are you an unincorporated corporation???

    Does endorsing private credit constitute a contract between you and a private corporation called the Federal Reserve Bank....USAGE TAX???


    Remember, you can not be coerced or deceived into contract

    “Party cannot be bound by contract that he has not made or authorized. Free consent is an indispensable element in making valid contracts.”
    Alexander v. Bothsworth, 1915
     
    Scorpio likes this.
  12. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    No disrespect but thats certainly a wall of worthless legislative & judicial diversions of drivel....

    If one gives credibility to these "walls of words" one would be led & inclined to believe that properly assembling & presenting these legislative acts & stare decisis judicial decisions that the prosecutor would cower down in disgrace with your presentments & the judge would immediatel dismiss the civil action suit at first mention of dismissing the case. Many a good intentioned patriot, tax protester, freedom fighter, and tax evader has been sentenced to the federal gray bar motel using this & other subject matter in their defense. I read about a tax protester that used the private 26 & 28 USC statutes to prove he was not a taxpayer within the meaning of these codes... He was absolutely correct in his determinations, but he still went to prison for 18 months for failure to file. The gremlins in equity took their pound of flesh from the poor fella.

    I have read all the myths that the judges & prosecutors are corrupt and therefore you cannot win in a kangaroo court... its all nonsense!

    For instance the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE is a private COMMERCIAL corporation domiciled in Puerto Rico congressionally licensed to operate in the federal United States & its territories....

    http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

    If or when you are confronted by these gremlins forget about 26 & 28 USC, stare decisis or any legislative acts... they're suing you in law merchant equity as the complainant. The court as a private civil proceeding doesnt care about statutes, constitutions or stare decisis, only the complaint!

    Their time barred assessments for damages (back or current taxes owed) stand as facts before the court when they are the complainents that filed suit against you. It is your civil legal duty & responsibility to prove the allegations have no standing or merit, or you will be found in default judgement.

    Its as simple as that.... this isnt "rule of law", its "law of rule" in a system thats rigged against you, and the statist gremlins mean business!
     
    TAEZZAR likes this.
  13. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    Well, in some respects I agree with you, but in some I don't.
    You see, in order to understand how to get out of the hole, it helps to know how you got into it first

    Every Federal officer is bound by that wall of statute, but are you?? No you're not

    The Constitution says that WE THE PEOPLE' are the Masters, King or Sovereign and the government is our SERVANTS.
    Now if you are the King and your Servant demands you do something...do you SUBMIT to his demands?
    Do you SUBMIT yourself to their jurisdiction???

    I'd say that would be a stupid thing to do


    So tell me....what is it that binds me to this PRIVATE CIVIL PROCEEDING???

    Would that be a contract?
    What contract??? a presumed contract?

    They always presume that you have voluntarily entered into a contract with them...Did you??

    Did you know that you entered into a contract...with full disclosure???

    Can they produce that contract, with 2 wet ink signatures???

    Did you demand that they produce that contract? ...You F---ing better, because no one else will do it for you

    You have the right to confront the other party of any contract that you signed...will they produce the other party?
     
  14. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    23,119
    Likes Received:
    24,049
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Try,

    I would argue what you state is the exact problem that is spoken to,

    It is implied contract by force, or with threats of seizure, or incarceration, not by wet signatures

    Therein lies the rub, and the vast chasm that is practiced between what we believe to be true and what is in fact real.

    Remember that thread recently of the couple who didn't want to tramp stamp their kid with SSN and vaccines? They took the kid away and vaccinated it anyway. The kid was sent to foster care.

    How cool is that?
     
    TAEZZAR and TRYNEIN like this.
  15. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Contracts come in many, many, many flavors! They dont even need to be written to become executed and/or enforced, as most are generally instant or self executing oral contracts. My Blacks Law Dictionary 4th Ed. has at least 10 or more pages describing the most common contracts, their elements & usages.

    George Merciers "Invisible Contracts" does a wonderful job of explaining the numerous "invisible contracts" that essentially we agree to via our actions & activities, actions & activities that bind us into the field of commerce that directly & indirectly subjects us to the .gov regulatory police powers & taxing authorities.

    All that patriot & tax protester nonsense such as 2 signed wet copies, etc. is pure bunkum!

    When you walk into a retail store, select a good & offer legal tender for the purchase an instant contract was created & executed. There are also hidden & unrevealed contracts operating with your consent & acceptance. For instance all of the regulatory agencies involved with the contractural sale of a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread. The Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Transportation, FDA, Energy, EPA, SEC, Treasury, Osha, and many other federal & state regulatory agencies are involved with the production of both the bread & milk. Just because you purchased these items, these agencies still retain a compeling interest in their use & safety. IOW, they retain jurisdiction over these products... And you agreed to this via instant contract by your purchase... And it, like the purchase did not require two wet ink signed contracts....

    In the 1906 landmark case of Hale v Henkel SCOTUS judicially noticed that our "power to contract is UNLIMITED"!!! This is codified in the constitution 1787 @ Article I, sec 10, "No state shall impair the obligation of a contract". All CONTRACTS whether they be expressed, implied, oral, written, hidden, or unconscionable require duties, responsibilities & rights to the contracting parties. For instance its against the regulations to pump gasoline in a milk jug, even if you prepaid for the gas. There is a legal standing & existing contractural nexus between you & the alphabet agencies that provides them the regulatory authority to prohibit using such a container. Same applies to the tags on pillows, bedding & furniture that states "federal law prohibits removing this tag", even after you have purchased the good.

    This is commerce, contracts and contract disputes are settled via civil equity & law merchant.... Now if ya want to argue, the best argument is 1. that the state has entered private commerce and is using & abusing its police powers to provide monopoly advantage to itself for the express purpose of enriching itself, 2. that when the state operates in commerce it must follow & abide by ALL the rules of commerce no differently than any other corporation or enterprise pursuing advantage, profits & powers....

    Again it must be stated that when summoned into the court system the subject matter is commerce & contract enforcement.... IOW you better know how to instantly recognize a contract and the duties, responsibilities & obligations attached to them, including the hidden, unrevealed & invisible ones...

    I highly recommend reading & understanding "Invisible Contracts" by Mercier @ the link below. I assure you that you will be blown away by the info presented and how deeply it has been thrust upon us in our lives.... If you dont understand this info, your a sitting duck ready to be fleeced by the statist gremlins...


    George Mercier's "Invisible Contracts

    http://www.constitution.org/mercier/incon.htm
     
    TRYNEIN likes this.
  16. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right

    Yes, I am aware of the subtle contracts

    This is my favorite example:
    From Mary Croft writings


    The following “Toothpick Story” illustrates this concept.
    A fellow went to court and had managed not to contract right to the end when he said, “It seems my public business is finished here so I am now leaving”, and headed to the door. The judge yelled, “And take that toothpick out of your mouth!” and the man did. As soon as he did, the judge yelled to the Bailiff, “Arrest that man.” Why? Because by removing the toothpick from his mouth the man had contracted with the court.


    One could also claim that the man had submitted to the Judges authority when he did as he was told, either way he was dead meat at that point.
     
  17. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    It's a very rigged game and unfortunately most people have no clue and what is even worse...most will not believe you even if you explain it to them
     
    TAEZZAR, REO 54, BarnacleBob and 2 others like this.
  18. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I have Updated the LinkedIn Article at the bottom to reflect that some new EO's have been published but the EO #13772 is skipped, and remains privatized.

    I took a roundabout way here. Please notice how TRUMP was signing about one EO/day for his first week, and then he stopped on the 30th. - The same day I issued my Directive:

    UPDATE: The EO's are published in the Index but for the first time, a number is skipped - #13772!


    Federal Register moving again 2 14 17.jpg


    I can't say that you are all wrong. I admire how much fun you seem to be having with One Form of Action without resorting to squabbling. The way I will say it is found scribed into Rosalyn Chapel:

    Wine is strong,
    The King is stronger,
    Woman is strongest;
    Above all is the Truth.

    strength of truth supreme.jpg

    It is so simple. The "judges" deviate their oaths just enough to dodge bonding. Then they will grant each other judicial and sovereign immunity to protect the illusion of their own. Criminal syndicalism. But that is where you have them if you are clever. They prefer that you chase your tails forever with the UCC and trying to project something more complicated than simply changing a minor detail. You will have to meditate on this. Changing the oath is not taking an oath at all.

    Oath TYMKOVICH R4C.jpg

    So true. But how do you express it so as to be practicable? Or even better, how are you expected to teach an attorney about law? How did you get stuck in Equity? Doesn't that require consent? Did you endorse private credit from the Fed?

    So drop all the US citizen rhetoric. Quit fighting. Fraud vitiates all contracts ab initio. So get off the battlefield because the actual theater of war, is where the Constitution is suspended. But the War is over. Read the entire Directive. All the way to the end, the proof of service I showed at the top.

    Directive to the President.

    You cannot fight your way off the battlefield. Bluntly put, the much more difficult path is proposed - forgiveness. The warehouse on Water Street flooded during the hurricane. The Alien Property Custodian has nothing! If you want to build a warehouse for your chattel asset then imprison your mind without me please.

    This LinkedIn Article may shed some light.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    Goldhedge and REO 54 like this.
  19. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,714
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.” ....., unless the context indicates otherwise—

    This is code.

    In the code an individual is a United States Citizen.

    Not an individual as in the English language.
     
  20. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,714
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If we go into one of their courts the presumption is we are US Citizens, unless we have put it in the record that we are NOT US Citizens.
     
  21. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Good luck with that.... Slaves can declare themselves "free" of the bond all they want, in the end they remain slaves regardless of their decrees or declarations.
     
  22. Bigjon

    Bigjon Silver Member Silver Miner Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,714
    Likes Received:
    1,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you don't make a demand to be free than you are admitting to being a slave.

    They haven't come and rounded up Judge Anna von Reitz who has made her demand.

    There is another fellow who is fighting the good fight for freedom.
    posted here:
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
  23. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    23,119
    Likes Received:
    24,049
    Trophy Points:
    113
    some of the original links were taken out as they were broken,

    don't know what format they were in?
     
  24. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Why even travel down the path of presumption? Why not use the UCC in your favor?

    Why not stop it with the code @ UCC 3-501 "REFUSAL FOR CAUSE" ? You'll generally never get anywhere in a law merchant equity court using subject matter jurisdiction arguments if you understand equity, as equity operates outside of constitutions, legislation, statutes, etc... In equity it doesnt matter whether your a U.S. citizen, a Mexican national or a transnational corporation. Thats why its commonly used nowadays, its an all encompassing "Jurisdiction-R-Us" scheme.
     
  25. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    23,119
    Likes Received:
    24,049
    Trophy Points:
    113
    which I had not considered prior, so that is pretty cool

    yet I will add, that if the oath is not taken, then the serving in the office is a fraud committed if you choose to use that as your argument when the shtf. Especially when you consider it is 'willful' disregard for the oath of office.
     
  26. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    Had an acquantence who's son was busted for a loaded handgun under his front seat. Dad took to defending his son. They discovered that every judge in the case & most judges DO NOT possess a legitimate constitutional oath of office. They challenged the judges dejure authority to try the case for lack of oath & standing but the were shot down...

    Note that judges do not sign any orders with a wet ink signature, they almost always use a "rubber stamp" with their name. All of the defacto oaths, etc. are more or less for show... The custom & long history of law merchant provides us with the "no acceptable oath" answer. The merchants of time immemorial would select a member or members (all private) from within their trade groups to arbitrate & try complaints to provide justice, remedy & relief among the members of the trade group(s) when disputes & complaints arose. These were ad hoc private summary equity proceedings operated outside of the sphere of .gov. The kings court & judicial officers had no jurisdiction in these private courts. The men selected & elected by the merchants to serve as the private arbitrators, i.e. defacto judges to settle disputes were not required to possess an official .gov oath of office to hear the private disputes that would arise from time to time.

    Most of the several states "state" constitutions were amended & revised between 1966 & 1971. The revisions in these constitutions required that all judges must be members of the American Bar Association (ABA), which is a PRIVATE commercial membership association. By 1973 the ABA members were seated on the now defacto private judicial benches as "private" merchant judges enforcing private law merchant. Hence since they are private entities they are not oath bound nor bonded.

    When one looks at the transmutation & transformation of common law & equity judicial power courts (where landed judges were elected men of good standing of the community & not franchised ABA members) into law merchant courts one must ask who are the merchants that the ABA represent? At first glance it appears they are charged with hearing merchant equity cases arising between the states commerce & the citizenry. This is true.... !!! But then we must ask who then is the state actually operating its private commerce for that necessitated the state abrogating the peoples dejure constitutional common & equity law and replacing these with private law merchant courts & private arbitrators (hint: their not judges but rather private ABA actors filling color of office).

    Best I can tell its the private bond holders that have invested into the municipal, county, state & federal .govs.... they basically installed private ABA arbitrators employing private equity to insure their investments would earn returns without those pesky constitutions, or the Article III common law or equity power courts getting in the way of fully exploiting the people economically, financially & politically....

    Indeed, the money power has overthrown the constitutions & bill of rights without firing a shot... and its all done using commerce & law merchant actors!!!
     
    REO 54 and Scorpio like this.
  27. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,394
    Likes Received:
    2,364
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right

    Nobody here is denying that they use Private Equity Courts and Law Merchant against people.

    HOW you protect yourself from it is the key to having success

    I am putting something together on how to fight the beast, but I will post it as a thread so it can be saved....give a little time





    Let me fix that
    I should have posted it as a USAGE FEE for using PRIVATE SCRIPT






    COLOURABLE LAW FOR COLOURABLE MONEY



    ========================================



    What does the word "colorable" mean when used by a lawyer?

    Who knew that U.S. law had a totally different use for this word than elsewhere in the world? Cool!


    In American law
    In America, "colorable" gets thrown around a lot with a sort of colloquial, common meaning that everyone uses all the time without thinking about it too hard. The word refers to an argument and means, more or less, "plausible". When someone says "you are making a colorable claim", she means "the thing you claim in this complaint seems like it could be reasonable, we'll evaluate the facts and the law in court".

    (The word can also carry a special meaning in trademark law — when used in the phrase "colorable imitation", it refers to an object and means "so similar to that people might be confused about which is which". One might say "the old Watsi logo was arguably a colorable imitation of the Blue Cross logo, so I'm not surprised they got rid of all their T-shirts".)

    In law elsewhere in the world
    In other systems, including India and Canada, the word colorable (usually colourable) means "disingenuous" and is used to refer to a law. Suppose you're a state legislature and you want to make a law regulating something, but a pesky Constitution says only the federal government can regulate those somethings. You might take your not-okay law and "color it" by adding provisions that makes your law nominally regulate a different class of things which you are allowed to regulate.

    Let's get concrete. The word shows up in in Canada's 1988 Supreme Court case R. v. Morgentaler, where a province passed a law that restricted the locations of clinics doing certain medical procedures. The court decided that the province was actually regulating abortions and that you weren't allowed to regulate abortions at the provincial level. So under the "doctrine of colourability", the Canadian province's law was ruled unconstitutional. The province had taken an anti-abortion law and "colored it" with a sort of zoning color (which didn't work).

    Now, this sort of state behavior happens in America, too, but we don't use that word. A judge in Alabama just threw out a state law that required doctors doing certain kinds of procedures (abortions) to do a certain administrative thing (get "admitting privileges" at a local hospital). The judge ruled that because that administrative thing was virtually impossible for many doctors, the law effectively limited access to abortion in the state, which was unconstitutional for a state law to do. See writeup in The New York Times. But the ruling didn't use the word "colorable". That meaning of the word is just not part of the American legal lexicon .

    (For an in-context definition of the word as used throughout the world, here is some discussion of this "doctrine of colourability" from Judicial Review and the Constitution, a 2000 collection of essays about law in Commonwealth countries and how exactly it comes to be that courts think they have the right to overturn laws.
    A contested Act may appear on its face to relate to a subject matter over which the legislature has authority, but it may have a purpose or effect that relates to a subject matter over which the legislature does not have authority. The Canadian cases describe such Acts as colourable", and declare them ultra vires
    . Thus, in the Alberta Bank Taxation case, a provincial statute imposing high rates of tax on banks was held invalid because although the tax was, in form, within provincial competence it was, in effect, a tax that would have discouraged the establishment of banks in the province, and the regulation of banking is within the federal Parliament's authority.Huh. This is not how American law works. Our judicial review comes from Marbury v. Madison, not from any kind of flexible interpretation of the idea that certain laws are ultra vires, "outside your authority". Things must be tricky in those other countries.)

    https://www.quora.com/What-does-the-word-colorable-mean-when-used-by-a-lawyer
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    Scorpio likes this.
  28. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The demand is best made by demanding lawful money. This is the method prescribed by Congress.

    [​IMG]

    I am seeing the images brought off Google Images. You find them broken? So I will try a different way unless you get in there and approve uploading to the library here?

    Use refusal for cause in conjunction with an evidence repository. Cite the UCC if you please, the record is what attorneys understand.

    [​IMG]

    Enjoy the Olympia Ordeal - out of Washington:

    Criminal Complaint.
    Delegation of Authority on the Triumvirate.
    Notice of Lien and Service on China and Israel.


    In my case I have integrated the Refusal for Cause process into statecraft. More often than not I seal my office with the full sized Great Seal for the State of Colorado. The Lesson Plan is simple:

    1) true identity
    2) record forming (Refusal for Cause)
    3) redeeming lawful money.​

    [​IMG]

    It was done, in my opinion, by capturing your mind. Do you sign naked contract on the backside of paychecks and with your account Signature Card? Why? Watch this young lady's training very carefully. (gdrive MP4 video)

    Sanctions against bankrupt nations PL 48-112.jpg

    I have been studying chi kung for over thirty-five years. By reshaping and balancing the elecro-magnetic field and other self-cultivation and breathing techniques unify with the cosmos may be attained in a sustained condition of spiritual enlightenment. This unity becomes the law. When one becomes separate from the congregation then one is an individual subject to law. Watch carefully. The master is not using telekinesis like the title implies. He is able to plant his idea into the EMF of the attacker. This is a most fundamental example of the legal point:



    True. The Fourteenth Amendment is a sham. Much better to get the big picture, like who the Sixteenth Amendment effects. The US citizen became the "enemy" in the 1933 use of the Trading with the Enemy Act too. But that is now "Omitted" from the Bankers' Code. The War is over if there is no public notice of your US citizen obligations to perform for the SDR system.

    I have been drafting remedy for people for twenty-five years now. I realize that you have to hash this through and see you doing so very effectively here. There is a much simpler solution. If you are interested in the Lien held by CASTLE CHURCH TRUST linked above then you will very likely find this Notice very enlightening too.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
  29. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Okay. Now I get it. Upload and paste images. Or like above grab .pdf files. Thanks!

    The Masons and the Golden Rectangle on Colorado Springs played a great role in my education here.

    [​IMG]

    There is the POPE - BISHOP OF ROME right there in custody of the Square and Compass - and LEVI the METRO organization. The priests did not have territory, they were District (municipal) jurisdiction. See I Chronicles 6:55 - cities and their suburbs. I have free run of the Mason Library and Museum (so do you if you smile just right. I am not a Mason). So I have folders and folders of docs and photos.

    Be elected out of equity. Melchizedek, not Levi. With technology, communications and travel today we can no longer limit ourselves to "Israel" and the "Noahide" in our territorial boundary. For example there is no interest allowed. Like the chi kung video demonstrates, we are all One - Brethren. The Masons are redacted to custodians of the record and they were waiting for me - probably you too. If you continue to think of them, you cheat yourself by being an individual.


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    I am not a Mason. These mental archetypes are Biblical. Hermon is Dan - Judgment. Mt Hermon is north of Israel and is the source of the Jordan River.

    Philip Jesus not Initiate until John.jpg

    That is from the Gospel of Philip 1938. The same year Law and Equity were blended in the Federal Jurisdiction. But in the Mason Library I discovered that Colorado did it first, in 1935:

    colorado law books 1935.jpg

    Just as the fiat started here, One Form of Action too:

    colorado law books 1935 one form.jpg

    I am posting this mainly to convince you that I know what I am talking about when I have been paid by many suitors over the years to help shift out of the complicated drudgery of scripting Patriot Mythology into simpler and more elegant form prescribed by Congress.

    These two Keys are:

    1) the Judiciary Act of 1789 - 'saving to suitor's clause' on Page 77
    2) the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 - §16 is Title 12 USC §411 on the stamp above. Call Tim at (719) 635-0943 for your order. Or just show it to the Office Supply Store.​


     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    Goldhedge likes this.
  30. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
  31. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Thank you Barnacle Bob;


    I like to teach with Crosstalk from the brain trust. I hope the reader is rewarded. I have about 125 'suitors' on the brain trust currently. We enjoy the discussions. This began in a private email conversation:


    "Typically it is a county court judge who does the arraignment. You may have already gotten an explanation earlier this morning. It can't hurt to explain it again."


    "I see now. My other question is, per your reference today to "The defendant is the state trial court judge" (presumably a County Ct judge?), how are you involving a U.S. Circuit Ct chief judge? "
    "The Circuit Courts are known as the Circuit Court of Appeals. Once I asked a Circuit Justice (having lunch across the street, I overheard his conversation) "Are you an Article III Judge?" He thought it over and replied, "Hardly! Barely ever." Then he looked at me curiously and added, "I am going to check into that."


    "What I mean is that any federal judge is only so after invoking Rule 17.1. Since he is appointed by the President under Article III of the Constitution the clerk of court will tell you, "All our judges are Article III Judges." But there are two sides to the court, one that is scarcely ever invoked called "Original Jurisdiction". Of course the other is "Appellate Jurisdiction". Interestingly the clerk came to the doors of the courthouse to transact this document (attached below) when she saw the guards were not letting me in without Government-issued ID. - And she did not need the $10.


    "Back to the question. The chief justice is who you complain to about any federal judge. In my case I introduced Timothy TYMKOVICH as in collusion by refusing for cause his oath, presenting him with a good one to sign.

    Oath TYMKOVICH R4C.jpg

    The clerk of court construed this as a complaint against TYMKOVICH and directed me to the Circuit Executive. I gather that this is the President's liaison and there is one in every Circuit. I noticed that there are some mentioned on the webpages as I was seeking the chief justices. The list of oaths is from a private attorney now in California. He gathers the oaths for his clientele so it is not complete or even current. I spoke to him email and he says it costs a bit for any oath and if you click on any doc package you will see it is a bit of work and if the clerk produces no oath then the judge is recused by the default Notice and Demand.


    "I am grateful for his diligence and for sharing the list. I saw his resume or a biography online and am really impressed.


    "Still on the question. A chief justice is basically the principal over the entire Circuit, and all the justices. But you could use the oath of a justice or judge but that is pretty distant from the arraignment in county court for a misdemeanor. So use the senior chief justice to demonstrate that the magistrate trying to educate you about your appeal rights is a fraud or at best in error. You have no appeal "ladder" to the US Supreme Court. The chain of appellate judges is broken down.


    "Of course in my imagination I script myself saying, "I have not been arraigned." And something this suitor brought up - accepting the "Advisement" as testimony. "The advisement you said at the beginning of this open court session, reciting the large billboard on the wall to my left; Are you saying that all those details are true, for the record, under the penalty of perjury?" See where we are going? If the judge has no clue there is no real appeals process, he is incompetent to be arraigning you. If he does know, then he just went into collusion with fraud. The altering of any oath is fraud.


    "There is some discussion about how we are dragged into equity (lex mercatoria). Also Michael Joseph has explained apologetically (maybe just Devil's Advocate) that these judges set in equity and if you consent then the janitor can sit at the equity bench. But to truly give consent, you must be informed truthfully. If your consent is gained by fraud then it is not consent and your being dragged into equity simply did not happen. You cannot be arraigned if you are misled about the nature and cause of the accusation which includes the court environment. I think that is in the Bill of Rights - Articles IV and V.


    "This boils over into the Fourteenth Amendment and US citizenship in the city of Washington, District of Columbia too. In my mind I can easily redact it to endorsement of private credit or demanding lawful money. I am getting pretty good at explaining it to others too. So if you would recommend your friends and family to enjoy my Lesson Plan, I would sure enjoy that!


    From:
    Sent:
    Tuesday, February 14, 2017 12:44 PM
    To: David Merrill
    Subject: Re: re Oath


    I see now. My other question is, per your reference today to "The defendant is the state trial court judge" (presumably a County Ct judge?), how are you involving a U.S. Circuit Ct chief judge?



    On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:21 PM, David Merrill <> wrote:

    If you want to, duplicate this attorney process to get an oath FOIA.


    http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#CLAIMS


    I went to the Circuit Court websites, found the chief justice name and then pulled up the process.


    Sixth Circuit

    http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/

    http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/cole.guy/oath.gif
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    REO 54 and Goldhedge like this.
  32. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    @ David Merrill:

    Indeed, some of us at GIM have previously realized & recognized that most of the so called 1776 revolutionary war story is a myth as is the "Treaty of Paris" 1783.... The same can be said of the Constitution 1787.... as you have pointed out there hasnt been one single lawful legitimate oath of office administered in conformance with the constitution to any of the authorities or actors that have assumed any political offices since the so called constitution 1787 was adopted & enacted. Essentially as you point out, the tripartite separation of powers doctrine has never been effectuated under the constitution. Its been an illusion of constitutional governance since 1776.

    Lysander Spooner called it & got it right! Filing briefs, etc. et al is fighting the morally good fight, however the entire damn thing is rigged, and has always been so! How can you find justice in a system of deceptive injustice?

    JMO
     
    Bigjon likes this.
  33. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    That is not what I am saying:

    When dogged John William SUTHERS finally complied.

    SUTHERS fungible fidelity bond 2011.jpg

    Even so, this oath has been written in italics. Getting him there was a long slow process. In Colorado judicial officers must swear before the ever-living God. But this is not about religion or God. It is about changing the Form of Oath.

    Form of Oath.jpg
    See the Form required by the Secretary of State?




    Oath Form from SoS Secretary of State.jpg

    My point being that these gyrations are much like Executive Order #13772. I can intuitively feel the attorneys looking for loopholes so that they are not bound in their own and each others' eyes.

    A suitor called me from Denver for consultation because the Secretary of State would not provide a Certificate of Fact that SUTHERS had file no oath. They get in too much trouble. I will show you back when he was DA, not AG. They promised him they would mail it. But they called him on his way out of Denver and gave him this the next morning.

    suthers oath 1.jpg

    The Form is altered and furthermore he pulled the chief justice of the State Supreme Court into the mess.

    In the mid-nineties he was badgering me so I published this:

    suthers indictment 3.jpg

    I heard he was cleaning out his office the next morning. He only had two weeks left but the press wanted to know why early? No comment.

    So not to ignore your post, I am of the opinion that the mischief began in 1861.​
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2017
    REO 54 likes this.
  34. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    I'm of the opinion it began with the constitution 1787 itself overturning the true .gov articles... the Brits then came in 1812 burning up the evidence... all was well until the southern states figured out the scam and tried to secede 1861.... the money power then went to work to prevent any future secession movements... a.k.a. the mischief.

    The Hanseatic League is now global! The U.S. was constructed using the same model that built India, China & Japan.
     
    REO 54 and Bigjon like this.
  35. REO 54

    REO 54 Midas Member Midas Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    6,546
    Likes Received:
    4,637
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow. Are we screwed or what?
     
    Bigjon likes this.
  36. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it." --
    Frédéric Bastiat
     
    Bigjon likes this.
  37. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Thank you for bringing that up! My "perpetual inheritance" - 13th Son from Teunis Jansen Laenan VAN PELT is the piracy of the Hanseatic League, in fact. The VAN PELT MANOR was never a manor subject to the manorial law of the Hanseatic League, Dutch East/West Indies Trading Company, British and even now, American law boundaries. The ideas manifest and the right-brain hemisphere processes in parallel; without the boundary of time genome manifests heritage and destiny coherently. I was describing your proclamation as METRO organization, or Levi. I am Melchizedek in reference to that terminology.

    President TRUMP has apparently decided to continue LINCOLN's martial rule through Executive Order, even though I warned him there might be consequences.

    Milestone Park - Brooklyn

    [​IMG]

    Here is what that placard looks like close:

    milestone park milestone monument 2 s.jpg

    The Van Pelt Milestone is preserved in the Brooklyn Historical Society with George Washington's Revolutionary War memorabilia.

    [​IMG]

    At the end of the Revolutionary War George WASHINGTON visited the Van Pelt Manor and blessed young Peter VAN PELT with a special anointing:

    "Washington rode over the old highway in 1790, and was greeted in New Utrecht by the village people. There was great excitement when word came that the general was shortly to arrive...Litte Peter VAN PELT was on the end of the line, and he was the last boy to whom George Washington spoke; and to little Peter he looked very tall, as he came near to him and laid his hand on Peter's head.

    "Be a good boy, my son," said Washington, "and you will be a good man."

    Little Peter VAN PELT probably remembered this admonition, but how far it shaped his life's course is not known. He did grow up to be a good and a great man, entering the ministry and achieving fame throughout the county. When Washington died, Peter VAN PELT delivered a sermon wherein he extolled the great general and President; and this sermon was printed in something like a twelve-page leaflet. Only a short time ago a single copy of the discourse was sold for five hundred dollars."

    I believe your perspective, albeit I have never read Lysander's writings, may have first originated by Dr. LIVINGSTON. During Tim TURNER's reign as the President, LIVINGSTON ranted from a soapbox about how the whole diversion from the Federalist Papers was a treacherous fraud. I am not saying that is incorrect, simply that the Masons and Levites (same party) organized America and American Jurisprudence in a constitutional republic, whether people like that or not.

    [​IMG]

    Dr. LIVINGSTON probably felt the tug of genome too. As our contemporary historian is bloodline of the other guy in the drawing. - The one administering the oath.

    [​IMG]

    My continued statecraft, and the use of the Great Seal is appropriate as trustee of the resulting trust described in the Directive. I say that in light of the 153 War (Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars) being over, whether TRUMP abides in peaceful ways or not.

     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
    REO 54 likes this.
  38. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    P.S. It may be difficult to get the gist.

    George WASHINGTON evaded the presumption of American Manorial Law on my estate. The piracy I describe is like a non-initiate graduating without license. I complete the testing for reverse-engineering Levi for Melchizedek's mission plan. Like I did with Science of Mind and A Course in Miracles to fashion CASTLE CHURCH TRUST upon the Gospel of Pragmatism. This is the same thing with my use of a driver "license". I only use it for competency purposes. Not for Identification. I am not State Issue so there is not call for me to use Government-issued ID.

    Heritage Acknowledgement.jpg
    In other words it has always been the intent to use both Jim's (BISHOP OF ROME is POPE) and my (VAN PELT is SON OF THE PATROON) heritage for much bigger purposes in the art form of Bishop Castle than a roadside family attraction.

    aerial photo.jpg

    But I keep it in the glove box to show competency - that I passed the test and that the insurance policy will help the State cover any accident I am involved in. Notice there is no property tax. Simply say the purchase price is "private".

    One in the Same Tax Receipt $0 tax sanitized s.jpg
    A suitor duplicated my process in Florida.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  39. BarnacleBob

    BarnacleBob GIM Founding Member & Mod. Founding Member Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,087
    Likes Received:
    9,048
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ten-Oh-Cee
    It was the usage of law merchant equity by the King & his agents that neccessitated the English elites to force the king to create the Magna Charta.... Law Merchant is also tied to the usage of the ad hoc star chamber courts.

    Spooners "NO TREASON: The Constitution of No Authority" is a great analysis & read of the hoax that stands today as the constitution. Highly recommend the read.

    https://mises.org/library/no-treason-constitution-no-authority-0

    Even former SCOTUS Justice Scalia mentioned Spooners insights in some of his opinions.... Some have attempted to save it using the concept of its construction as a perpetual trust, which it is styled as. However I think Spooner destroys this idea.... as you have discovered, it literally binds no one to it. It provides no real instruction to the judiciary.... for instance no where in the constitution can it be found that the document provides SCOTUS or the federal judiciary with the authority to declare ANYTHING unconstitutional... it was Chief Justice Marshall who invented this authority before the ink had dried, a power that violates the separation of powers doctrine, which is a joke!

    Do you really believe the lightly armed disorganized voluntary militias composed of farmers & revolutionary war soldiers that didnt even have a navy actually forced the most powerful & best financed, equipted & trained army & navy in the world into a capitulation with the king??? The modern equivalence of Porto Rico declaring independence from the United States and defending itself from the U.S. army, marines & navy, forcing the U.S. into capitulation & gaining independence. An absurdity.

    Much can be gleaned from reading the transcipt of the "Treaty of Paris" 1783....

    https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=6&page=transcript


    Eight Elements of the Spooner-Insight

    1. The pretended "U.S. constitution" has been a fraud and a hoax from the outset. It was never signed as a contract in any legal way by anyone. It never bound anyone. It was foisted on a naive, gullible, credulous populace.


    2. Therefore, the pretended "United States of America" has been a fraud and a hoax from the outset. It is pure imagination or make-believe.


    3. The pretended "government of the U.S.A." has no legal authority whatsoever. It is a hoax and a fraud in its entirety.


    4. All the people claiming to be "presidents," "senators," "representatives," "secretaries," "judges," "generals," "ambassadors," etc. of the pretended "U.S.A." are liars and impostors, whether they realize it or not. They are hucksters and hoaxers.


    5. The pretended "laws" of the pretended "U.S.A." are in reality no more than absurd noises and scribbles made by liars and impostors.


    6. The same applies to all other pretended "states" and "countries" of the world. Their pretended "emperors," "kings," "queens," "prime ministers," etc. have all been liars and impostors all along. Likewise, all their pretended "laws" have in reality been no more than absurd noises and scribbles of liars and impostors.


    7. The real rulers all along have been the major money lenders behind the scenes. The pretended "presidents," "senators," "representatives," "secretaries," "judges," "generals," "ambassadors," "emperors," "kings," "queens," "prime ministers," etc. are mostly pawns of the money lenders.


    8. In reality the whole world is ruled by secret bands of money lenders, tyrants, robbers, and murderers.
    http://www.mind-trek.com/treatise/ls-cona.htm
     
  40. David Merrill

    David Merrill Seeker Seeker

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I believe you. But that is a certain perspective. I want you to take another look at my Posts because I have been editing while you posted.

    What you do not take into account is the Treaty of 1213 nullified the Magna Carta before it was ratified. This paved the way for the 1666 cestui que vie trust used for a DEAD declaration even today. The American Bar Association put the Magna Carta to rest:
    Magna charta aba.gif
    magna charta memorial.jpg
    Your perspective is likely why the Treaty of 1213 has been removed from the Avalon Project.

    Magna Carta no Treaty 1213 on Avalon.jpg

    So I am not arguing. I am simply taking the rightful perspective of Owner. Like law is written for the Individual. The Owner is the Lienholder. Proof of Service.

    I like to stand on the catwalk, by the Fibb Spiral and proclaim, Everywhere you go, anything you see; I own it all so long as you believe you are You and me is Me.

    [​IMG]


     

    Attached Files:

    REO 54 likes this.

Share This Page