By Anna Von Reitz
The Judge gives his Order and the for-hire private security force goons acting under Color of Law as "Sheriffs" and as, for example, "State of Vermont Troopers" --then swing into clueless action to bring him his booty.
But, what happens if someone intercepts and cancels his order?
"Hey, yah, Jaime, cancel that order for fries---!"
Then nothing happens. The "Order" just disappears. Nobody scurries around. The potatoes don't go in the oil. The house doesn't get sold. The whole thing gets dropped.
And that is what needs to happen with all these foreclosure cases that are taking place under false legal presumptions and color of law.
(1) All the Federal States of States and Federal State Trusts have been seized upon and rolled back into the actual sovereign States. That reverses the legal presumptions all these courts have been operating under and takes all the "franchise" property off the table. They can no longer "presume" that anyone is acting in the capacity of a federal "citizen". Instead, they have to presume that you are acting in your private trade capacity under the Public Law owed to this country.
(2) They are using your bond to fund their case. You have every right to subrogate the case and dismiss it with extreme prejudice ---and can easily put teeth into the claim by claiming the Case (Contract) Number as the collateral and the Court's Name and Address as the Debtor. Use your Trade Name (First, Middle, Last) as the Secured Party and mention that it is a Trade Name of the living-man: first-middle-last to whom all the property, assets, and interest belongs. Check the Non-UCC-Lien box on the UCC-1 Form, and present a certified copy to the Court Clerk. Then instead of them getting to claim your assets, you get to claim theirs, and they promptly start losing money as a result of their criminal racketeering, which gives them motive to stop doing what they are doing.
(3) You are indemnified in the strongest terms possible from suffering any "loss or damage" as a result of the existence of these "federal franchises". In fact, you are exempt from claims and your VESSELS are already tax pre-paid. So how is it that these "courts" are dragging YOU in and railroading you with their "Orders"? Could it be that you aren't cancelling their Orders?
Yes, it could. If you just stand there and let their "orders" be served by the clueless police, they win because you don't do anything effective to cancel their order.
It's just a little bit more complicated than saying, "Hey, Jaimie...."
You take their "Court Order" and you write: "Accepted for Indemnification Value" on it, and you write: Private Registered Indemnity Bond Number: RA 393 427 640 US -- AMRI00001 -1 (California or Ohio or whichever State) and you sign it with your Upper and Lower Case Trade Name using a by-line, that is, pretend you are an author and sign it by: Your Signature, and date it.
Take copies. And either return it to the Clerk of Court via Registered Mail as soon as you get it, Return Receipt Requested, of course.
Or take two copies into the Clerk of Court's Office, get both date-stamped, and give the original to her, keeping your own date-stamped copy for yourself.
Consider the "Order" to sell YOUR house cancelled. Along with the French Fries.
Now, the "lawful conversion" back to the States is somewhat recent and not all courts will be aware of the reversal at the same time. Several Judges will no doubt have to step on the landmine before it is universal knowledge. It could take a few months.
The subrogation of your bond can be used right now.
And you can cancel their Orders to seize upon you or your assets by claiming against the indemnity bond, too. You are insured against loss or damage and your "policy number" is there on file and up to date.
Oh, and let's add a Fourth Reason --- a really BIG Reason -- why all these Foreclosure Mills need to shut down: no living man or woman ever owed any "mortgage" to begin with.
So, time to bat your eyelashes at the Judge and say, "Oh, and by the way....., your Honor, I wish to see the Bill connected to this case....."
And if the Judge doesn't have it ready for you to sign off, then you bat your eyelashes again and say, "I wish for dismissal of this claim with extreme prejudice, and I wish for the Prosecutor to pay me three times damages and court costs in the amount of....."
Calculate this number based on current value of the property that has been put at risk and a realistic idea of what the case has cost you in terms of time and money and angst. Don't go overboard, but make your point. And then walk away.
Some judges are honorable men and some are not. Be forewarned that some will try to trick you by addressing you as "Mister" or "Miss" or by calling you a "resident" or attempting to give you an "order" from the bench, such as, "Uh, Mister Johnson, come back here..... " Or, "Miss St. James, sit down...."
When they do this, they are trying to establish a basis for claiming jurisdiction they don't have. They are grasping at straws for some excuse to claim that you are subservient to them. Object to any attempt to call you "Mister" or "Missus" or "Miss" or anything else like that, and also to calling you a "resident" or giving you any orders.
You are the sovereign and they are the servants.
Get your attitude adjusted and your facts and processes in hand --- and stop sending me sad and desperate letters and emails about these vermin taking your farms and homes.
We are doing all we can to stop this criminality on a systemic level. Until we do, you have all you need to defend yourselves one by one.
See this article and over 1200 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.
See this article and over 1200 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.
And Contempt of Court is like a Sentence.. OK!!!!?ReplyDelete
Test out this old bat-shit crazy alaskan's theories and court, why don't you.ReplyDelete
Who are you ?.. could it be that you are just a shit stirrer ?... We will fnd out who you are and pay you a visit.Delete
Hey Patriot58, when you say "We" are you also speaking for Frank O'Collins, Mr. Paul Conant, Mr. Paul Stramer, and Mrs. Anna Von Reitz?Delete
For the record, I do not accept unsolicited "visitors" at my residence. Shall I report all of those listed above to the local police?
It's done all the time bewilderedReplyDelete
Public Trust does not belong to you. Judges are not your employees. Why do you people go around claiming shit that does not rightfully belong to you. Trust of the public has been granted to Judges. They have been vested with authority when they became elected to hold office. How the hell does that equate to them being your employees hahaha!Delete
Do you folks actually take your time and think about the garbage you post on here? It is utterly idiotic.
A court order and any order from law enforcement is not like ordering fries. You comply. There is a window of opportunity for the case to be moved to a different court if the court in question does not have jurisdiction. But anything else is just you asking to be thrown in jail for contempt or thrown in a ward for psych evaluations.
Unknown: What is the purpose of a public trust?Delete
"When they do this, they are trying to establish a basis for claiming jurisdiction they don't have."ReplyDelete
Anna is insane. Judicial branch is 1/3 sovereign along side Executive and Legislative.
Judges has jurisdiction over any appropriate matter brought before.
If you think the court has no jurisdiction then argue your position. You people are idiotic enough to refuse to be represented by an attorney. So, dont be surprised if your objection on jurisdictional grounds is rejected.
In that case, the judge has 100% jurisdiction over that matter.
Wrong again... They are foriegn to us .. if you bothered to ever read or listen you would know that.Delete
An attorney can not represent a man, only the fiction. I'm not fiction.Delete
I knew it. I just knew it! You are an attorney!Delete
I'm not an attorney nor am I licensed to practice law. Nor do I wish to become an attorney in the future. Furthermore, I have no ill will against attorneys.Delete
- The Most Rev. Kerubale G. Abegaz
I strongly advise that any of you facing criminal or civil matters retain an attorney to represent your best interests. But also understand that there is always a chance of losing a case even when you are being represented by an attorney. Have realistic expectations.Delete
"Wrong again... They are foriegn to us .. if you bothered to ever read or listen you would know that."Delete
Patriot58, Depends on what is being read. You can consume a years worth of content that is meant to subvert your mind and arrive to the conclusion that you should not retain an attorney or you can read a years worth of content that gives you realistic expectations and decide that you are no expert in the law no matter how bad you want to become one and that you are better off leaving litigation or defense to experts and abide by federal, state, local statutes. It's totally up to you. God Bless America.
My, my, Rev. you are a busy man. I can understand why all of the stuff being discussed here might interfere with your myriad trusts.Delete
Unless your profile of zoominfo is incorrect "Kerubale also plans on enrolling in UNCGs graduate certificate programs in Nonprofit Management and Urban and Economic Development before persuing his dream of attending Georgetown University Law Center (GULC) in Washington D.C. to study Transactional law and become an attorney at law in the near future.", your claim "Nor do I wish to become an attorney in the future. Furthermore," rings hollow.
I confess I might feel threatened if someone were pulling the rug out from under me, too. Me thinks you doth protest too much.
Haha I never said that "I never wanted to become an attorney." I said that I no longer wish to become one.Delete
It's obvious why you are on this site trying to cause hate and discontent...no one else will listen to your nonsense...makes you feel special huh?Delete
It's in your heads all the voices mistakenReplyDelete
Shake it off shake it off
We're all dyin' in the end
Who created man? OUR Declaration of Independence says a Creator (God) gave us Life, Liberty (freedom) and the pursuit of Happiness (property). God is sovereign and we are God's children. Yes or no? Who are we supposed to serve? God. Who created the fictional entity called government? We the children of God, the People did. Who is government supposed to serve? We the People. Is the government sovereign? No. It is a fiction, it is OUR creation. That is why employees of government are called Public SERVANTS. Yes or no? We the People gave them specific authority to do specific things under specific rules. If they do NOT follow the rules, they can be punished, removed from employment, or worse. Relative to court, if one of our employees does NOT have jurisdiction to proceed in a contracted case, it must stop until jurisdiction is established. Yes or no? If the case does NOT have our consent to proceed, or acceptance relative to their offer to perform service, can they proceed anyway? Yes or no? Is there such thing as an indemnification bond? Does it have to be brought forward if someone demands to see it? Yes or no?ReplyDelete
Judge Anna is using intelligence, wisdom and knowledge, along with common sense and logic that most sheeple do not understand.
Freedom comes at a price of willing to die for. Yes or no?
If we do not stand up to tyranny, you might as well willingly get in the German train car. Don't be surprised when they offer you a hot "shower."
"That is why employees of government are called Public SERVANTS. Yes or no? We the People gave them specific authority to do specific things under specific rules."Delete
People who voted them in or voted the people that voted them in or voted for did not specifically delegate their authority. They were vested with public trust. There is a big difference that seems to escape your minds. The people vested authority from public trust to people who hire and manage employees. The people who manage employees are the ones that do all the delegating and not the citizens that merely vote and pay taxes.
You do not have access to this thing called public trust. It is a trust that is formed and managed outside of your individual purviews.
Anna is no expert in the law nor is she licensed to practice it on behalf of others. All Anna does is post weekly bullshit that is meant to subvert people. She attempts to get you all to revoke your privileges to vote. She then demonizes the Bar and the duly elected officers of the judicial branches of the governments of the U.S. And you all fall for it. You all swallow her red pill whole while she sits on top of her high horse living out the rest of her retired dignified senior citizen life. You folks will never realize this as you are all caught in her wicked trap. She preys on you people who lost your properties or risk losing your properties due to your poor past decisions.Delete
Instead of encouraging you people to be accountable for any mistakes you may have made in the past, she proceeds to making you all even more recalcitrant and she encourages you all to lash out at authorities and the objective framework that governs human relations in U.S. society.
She pulls fairytales out of her asshole and distracts, diverts, tricks you all into investing your attention towards her. Meanwhile, you will end up losing everything. You are her prey.
Ah, you just revealed your understanding, or should I say lack of understanding. Do you know the legal definition of a license? It sounds like you don't. I suggest you look it up. Why would anyone give up a Right for a privilege? Do we have an UNALIENABLE Right to Life? Yes. Under our Right to Life, does that include work? Yes. Can our servants force us to seek their permission to work by license or permit? No. You write as if you are a government troller meant to instill confusion. Judge Anna has a tremendous following of truth seekers. Perhaps you should go taint some other group?Delete
Okay Unknown, what is an Attorney? What is the B A R?ReplyDelete
An Attorney is an expert in the law that is licensed to practice it on behalf of another. The Bar is the body that accredits and issues licenses.Delete
I am no expert in the law. Therefore, it is in my best interest to relegate such matters to someone who is an expert in it to represent my best interest. Lawyers also give their clients advise to their best ability on matters.
I wouldn't perform surgery on someone without being licensed to practice medicine. So why would I think it perfectly acceptable to practice legal advice on someone? What ANNA and many in here do is the legal equivalent of performing surgeries on people despite not being an expert hahaha!Delete
Where oh where is that license to practicelaw? They only have a B.A.R. card from the good Ole boys club and each are foreign and are required to be registered as such under Foreign Agents Registration Act. Any man can be a counselor-at-law. An attorney represents a fiction because IT can't speak. Any man has a duty to know the Law. Not the private copyrighted codes they call laws. I will never vote again. I may elect at some point. The private courts can't summon my body to be on one of their fake juries now either. What a joke. They summon YOU under threat of harm and they instruck the jurors on how they must Act. So much for Justice. Big F.R.A.U.D.Delete
Annie believe what you like. Say what you will. But even better, how about you go ahead and record yourself giving legal advice without a license form THE BAR. Identity yourself in the recording. And then submit it to the Authorities. See how quickly they arrest you or how quickly you get sued for giving legal advice without a license FROM THE BAR.Delete
It's one thing to talk shit all day about frivolous stupid shit. It's another to actually live out what you speak.
I bet if you actually do all those things I said you should do and you do get in trouble, that you are so recalcitrant that you will still believe that somehow the BAR and the Authorities are in the wrong and you are in the right.
There is absolutely no reasoning with you people. You are all prepping to become ghouls in the after life because surely you will die with a similar state of mind that you have as you lived. You will continue on with that mind state after you pass. INSANE SPIRITS. Lurking about possessing the living just as you have been possessed while alive. Vicious cycle. But I'm closely observing. Carry on.
Why is it that Doctors and Attorneys have Licenses to "practice" ??? Who gave the BAR the authority to issue licenses aka dues card???Delete
Troy you simply have an issue with authority.Delete
Authority is authority. ok.. If you have an issue with authority then go ahead and take it up with them. Witness first hand the power of authority.
Otherwise, there is no point in going back and forth with your idiotic uncooperative ass. You're a retard.
This is fun, a bar card is not a license, its a private club. The- BAR- only handles charity cases as in public charge, foundling child evidenced on the record of live birth/space. At law and in law are two dissimilar things, (at) being fiction and (in), being living, mother in law, wow tough concept for a wannabe attorney. Courts are dealing with people as persons, because, the certificated person holds all your property which the State keeps in protective custody, ward of the court has no voice. All property belongs to the people, but wait, expilatio, thats right, the State steals it and charges you for its use! Perfect, where is the delegation of authority for corporations to do that? Anyone?ReplyDelete
Cube sphere.. YOU ARE NO AUTHORITY OF WHAT IS A LICENSE AND WHAT IS NOT.Delete
I DONT GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT THE BULLSHIT INFORMATION THAT YOU CHOOSE TO CONSUME DAY IN AND DAY OUT. THAT IS YOUR OPINION. 99% OF THE POPULATION DOES NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK IS A PROPER LICENSE TO PRACTICE LAW AND WHAT IS NOT.
Like are you mentally retarded or something? Look at the statistics. How can you possibly say that the BAR does not issue licenses when THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING AROUND YOU AS WE SPEAK.Delete
Do you think if you repeat that the sun does not exist many times that it will not exist?
99% of the population would admit that the BAR issues Licenses to Attorneys after they pass the BAR.
It is time to take a Valium. You are way out of control.Delete
Agent of whatever,Delete
Just post the proof, no need for all the theatrics, most can see right through it. DOG-LATIN is all the rage these days. "Chicago Style Manual 16th Edition"
Question: If Her Majesty the Queen in Right of New Zealand (the financial arm of the so called New Zealand Govt) sends its financial statements off to the Securities and Exchange Commission in DC every year, then I guess that the Indemnity Bond Number: RA 393 427 640 US is good to go for here too?ReplyDelete
Some of you need to get a life or something,you whine like a bunch of babies!ReplyDelete
Being that I am a "Counselor at Law" and have been for the past 44 years, and because I have handled many cases for/with my clients, and because I have always been accepted in the court, and because I have three cousins that are BAR attorneys and have had many conversations with them, about the above, and because I have a personal relationship with three judges, of whom I have had many talks with, over the above subjects, and many more subjects, and because I don't just read and talk, I apply my education/knowledge/experiences, i.e. what I have tested, applied, proven to be correct, not just hear-say and second-hand-information, I would suggest that all of you that read this, refer to Annie McShane, in her above statement, and Cube Sphere in the above statement, I suggest that you read, and accept as "FACT", i.e. truth, because THEY ARE RIGHT!!!ReplyDelete
A PRACTICING (i.e., not retired) attorney or Judge would take your above testimony with a grain of salt.Delete
I can proclaim that I am GOD. Would people be obligated to believe me? Nope.
So you can claim that you know all these professionals and that they all agree with you. Still a claim. Not even worth a grain of salt.
Unknown: ok so it's all claims here, I'll claim this and you claim that. So why stick around. I don't need saving from myself brother. Thanks for the concern.Delete
It is completely obvious that some here have not actually read that affidavit!ReplyDelete
back to the original subject: no more than a day later from the publication of this article, Wells Fargo proves to be a fine example of the momentum already going on in the mortgage "industry": https://www.reuters.com/article/us-wells-fargo-layoffs/wells-fargo-lays-off-more-than-600-mortgage-workers-idUSKCN1L922YReplyDelete
Ask you lawyer to explain this to you:ReplyDelete
US v Minker, 350 US 179 at 187(1956)
� Supreme Court of the United States 1795 "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial
person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with
other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from
creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other
than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."