Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 9370 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Tuesday, May 15, 2018

The [Municipal] United States Corporation -- a Lesson About Larry Becraft

By Anna Von Reitz

Here's a good example of how attorneys deliberately avoid and obscure the actual truth and substance of things.   Larry finds an obscure reference somewhere in my writings to the Act of 1871.  It was probably a quote from someone else or part of a list of historical actions undertaken by Congress --- he doesn't say, so it's impossible to know where he picked this bit up, whether it is in context or not, but he quotes it as something I referenced: 


Contrary to your present denial, I have specifically quoted an article you wrote that was posted on Crackpot Arnie's website, which is as follows:

Claim 15. 1871: The Corporate Congress begins to set up shop for itself by creating a separate government for the District of Columbia.  The initial effort fails but seven years later the Washington DC Municipality is created as an independent international city state run as a plenary oligarchy by the members of “Congress”.   Also in 1871, the Corporate Congress claimed to own all United States corporations— 41st “Congress”– Third Session, Chapters 62, 63, 64, and 65.


Yes, Larry, Congress did do exactly what I said it did and what a lot of other patriots have said it did --- the fact that the unpopularity of their action forced them to repeal the original Act three years later, and caused them to cut it up and pass its substance in a piecemeal fashion in 1878 -- is the kind of hair-splitting and deliberate avoidance of the basic truth that does you no credit. 

Here for your education --- AGAIN --- is the entire, truthful history of the Act of 1871: 

1871 - Act of 1871 ---“An Act to provide a Government for the District of Columbia,” ch. 62, 16 Stat. 419, February 21, 1871 ---which was repealed in 1874 and then passed piecemeal via these actions---- “An Act Providing a Permanent Form of Government for the District of Columbia,” ch. 180, sec. 1, 20 Stat. 102, June 11, 1878, to remain and continue as a municipal corporation (brought forward from the Act of 1871, as provided in the Act of March 2, 1877, amended and approved March 9, 1878, Revised Statutes of the United States Relating to the District of Columbia . . . 1873–’74 (in force as of December 1, 1873), sec. 2, p. 2); as amended by the Act of June 28, 1935, 49 Stat. 430, ch. 332, sec. 1 (Title 1, Section 102, District of Columbia Code (1940)).

It doesn't really matter, Larry, that the original Act was repealed and then passed in pieces later --- what matters is the substance of the Act, which is apparently what you wish to avoid and gainsay: the creation of the US Corp.  

And it can only be the creation of the US Corp that we are looking at, Larry, because: the District of Columbia was set up in 1790 and fully chartered by 1801, so there was no need to do that in 1871 or 1874 or 1878.  

Nowadays, Larry, it isn't necessary to dig up the entire history of the Act of 1871 to prove that the US Corp exists.  It was emblazoned on every fork and spoon issued to the US Military throughout World War II, painted on canteens, and spray-painted on jeeps.  There are thousands upon thousands of such "admissions" available to anyone who cares to look. 

And as if that were not enough, there are many different commercial registries all over the planet.  Dunn and Bradstreet is just one such registry that people can look up from their comfort of their computer console and see for themselves that yes, indeed, what we think of as "the government" is in fact functioning as a commercial corporation in the business of providing "essential government services".  

A small sampling of around a hundred of the DUNNS numbers belonging to the US Corp are listed in the Appendix in the back of my book, "You Know Something Is Wrong When", and with a little poking on search engines like, and people can discover the CAGE and EIN and other proofs of the commercial nature of such things as the "US GOVERNMENT" and the "BLM" and the "STATE OF OHIO".  

People can also search the data bases of the State of Delaware, where most of these corporations maintain registration. It's all online, Larry.  No need to try to obfuscate or hide the truth anymore. 

And while people are at it, they can look up the Clearfield Doctrine, which very clearly enunciates the principle of the law which says that when a government steps down and functions in the capacity of a corporation, it is subject to all the same limitations as any other corporation.  

As everyone, even Bob Hurt, can now see, Larry's hair-splitting does him no credit and serves no truth.  He is simply obfuscating and trying to avoid admission of the fact that the Act of 1871 led to the creation -- howbeit, seven years later -- of the Municipal Corporation of the District of Columbia, more popularly known by its dba "US Corp".  

Well, there it is, folks --- the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the Act of 1871, for your knowledge and enjoyment ---  so that when some hair-splitting shyster tries to tell you that the Act of 1871 was repeated in 1874 (which it was) you are prepared to tell him the rest of the story just as I told it to Larry.  

And I trust that my credibility on the matter now stands heads and tails and nose and whiskers above anything Mr. Becraft might have (left) to say. 

See this article and over 1000 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.


  1. HALLELUJAH ANNA !!! πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘πŸ‘

  2. Waiting, Larry...tick-tock...

    1. Don't hold your breath...
      He's an attorney. He won't be saying anything until this "blows over"... you know how they operate!

  3. Being right, doesn't translate to REMEDY...All you won is a pissing fight. So to everyone else that have no clue about our Corp takeover, it doesn't amount to a hill of beens, except to us...the non- enforcers with little or no power to change anything....Larry wins every time another patriot is thrown in jail for seeking REMEDY and then reporting on the patriot site that gave them the info (even though they were right and presented truthful info to our corrupt govt) and then all Larry has to do is say....I told you so...!! Then other members of the patriot community start in on the stupid patriots that tried to use some REMEDY from a person that actually did understand how the system works, but maybe made one little mistake that some judge simply took "silent judicial notice" of and used it to bury the educated patriot who probably spent hundreds of hours of investigation while everyone else was having a good old time drinking beer while watching a Lakers game....real fair....!! It is so easy to critizise other patriots, when we should be rallying beside him and going after the judge that tricked him or simply ignored everything he said...!! No one knows the courts or the judges until you have been there and done that.....!!! My final warning to all patriots picking on other patriots.......STOP IT...!!! I know judge Anna that you had to protect your honor, but if Larry is an attorney, that usually says it all. He was trained the Corp way and is now just damaged goods...!! Although some of them do actually give us insite to what judges are ruling on from the inside looking Neil Garfield..!! (I think that's his name. Anna I remember you mentioning him once in one of your articles)...!! Is that his name..!!

  4. I used some of Garfields advice since he really understands foreclosures and knows how judges are ruling on them even when the homeowner is right...he simply says that the courts are not just going to give you a home free...they might get the banks to work with you, but trying to get quite title is an uphill battle, no matter what the bank did...!!

    1. You mean "quiet title." But the whole concept of title is one of "their" inventions, and their "quiet titles" do not convey absolute ownership, only "fee simple absolute," which is the most superior form of tenancy. Look in the scriptures and you will not find any mention of title to land. There is only lawful possession, which comes about by 1. military conquest, 2. settlement of abandoned land, or 3. purchase. (Abraham purchased a burial plot for Sarah for 400 shekels of silver, the "current money of the merchant.")

    2. The banks can't give you anything because they didn't own it or give any value for it, they gave your own credit. They are defrauder and maker of the agreements but try to tell people they are when they consent by signing. The thing is we Americans are the bank because the U.S. Bonds at the treasury are in our legal estate names. Let's not sign a contract with these crazy people unless we put t/d/c and void next to it.

  5. James, there is a new unwritten, undocumented, non-statutized law in this county that has been implemented in every state. It goes like this: Foreclosure Law 101(a): "Nobody gets a free house!" The problem with this new law is that it only applies to homeowners and not to banks. Apparently there is another new unwritten, undocumented, non-statutized law in this county that says: Foreclosure Law 101(b): "Except if you are the bank, then you can get as many free houses as you can steal with zero investment on your part!"


Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.