In respect to your opening comment on Anna Von Reitz, allow me to state my opening reply: Anyone with a negative opinion on her work, either out of ignorance or the comments of a certain so-called patriot attorney, needs to re-educate themselves in 'true' American History going back at least to the Articles of Confederation.
Without reviewing any of the above, and knowing at least some of the above, most think she is off the wall and out to lunch. I am probably one of the few that was introduced to Bob Wangrud's work some 38 years ago, when he was with some group in Montana before he and Randy Geistler worked together in Oregon and issued a monthly publication entitled "BEHOLD Newsletter". Because I had a background in the Constitution since high school in the mid-1950s and aced my Constitutional Law course in college, I picked up on their teaching on the 14th amendment quickly. With my background with the use of Common Law trusts and the 'money issue' in the late '70s and early '80s, and my experiences with the latter in state court, then attempting to defend myself in federal court relying on the Organic Constitution in 1988, I was 'shocked' when the judge told me, after three months into motion hearings, that the Constitution did not apply in her courtroom.
All I ever heard from all sources of information, and continue to hear, that the Constitution is the Law of the Land. Bullshit! The corporate charter of D.C. is the Law of the Land, and it judiciously grants and applies 'territorial law' under IV.3.2. of that charter, subject to the purview of Congress and the administrative courts by administrative judges. Who, but Anna has ever made such wild and true statements as that? Never, never, never, never expect to hear any BAR Association clerk tell any such truth. Their allegiance is first to their Wallets, then to the Courts as an Officer thereof, then to the BAR, and finally, to their clients, the latter three assuring the foremost, with the client sucking hind teat. No attorney can demand rights for his client in the present 'administrative' court system regardless of what he might tell his client. Only the 'Belligerent Claimant in person' can demand rights, and most properly in a Common Law venue. So, the opposition must 'kidnap' the defendant and drag him into court unlawfully before such is even possible.
She, and others of us, have provided the White House with information to return the states to the Republican form 'guaranteed by' IV.4. of the Organic Constitution. 157 years of nonsense of the Law of the Sea applied to us on the land in the form of 'commercial [contract] law' is reprehensible to the Republican form. Our law is supposed to be based on the Organic Constitution, and none of us who can qualify as state nationals (Freemen) ought to suffer the impediments of federal statutory law. 'Freeman status' predates the Constitution of 1789 allowing us to do anything in our daily lives under International Law and unrestrained by federal statutes with the exception of those five laws listed in the Organic Constitution. Those unqualified for the 'Freeman status' are those living in D.C. and its possessions who are thereby under Congress's 'municipal' jurisdiction, and those living in the 'territories' which originally were those areas of the American continent, exclusive of Canada and Mexico, that had not yet attained statehood.
The so-called Civil War was a foreign bankster induced rebellion to ultimately eliminate the 'Freeman' status 'in law' so as to place all Americans into the 'state of state' 'territorial' (commercial law) jurisdiction whereby we could all be placed under one form of federal statutory law. A reading of numerous Constitutional cases decided after the Civil War evidences the courts' trends toward a clandestinely subtle redefinition of citizenship into the federal 'territorial' system along with the same movement toward a fiat monetary system effectually found in the 4th Clause of Amendment 14 promoting unlimited spending to create unlimited debt. These Organic Constitutional usurpations were accomplished clandestinely under cover of both 'slavery' and 'states' rights'. Nonetheless, the reality was it was an act of vengeful Sedition on the part of foreign interests, Britain, the Vatican, the Temple Bar, and the Khazarian Mafia, that had the same Treasonous and Seditious bent that led to our current D.C. Swamp draining opposition.
Thus, it is in the interest of all Americans to recognize the truth of Anna's 'spot on' teaching and remove the chains that have bound us to these Globalist bastards. This to resurrect the freedoms our Founders intended all Americans to enjoy except those whose preference was to benefit from an association with their state and federal governments under the disabilities of 'citizenship'. This citizenship was foisted upon all by the first clause of the 14th amendment, along with the 16th and 17th, never lawfully ratified according to Bill Benson's research in the early 1980s. This writer, along with many others, was a supporter of Bill's when he first introduced his research with Red Beckman before a group of about 80 people who met at the Mid-America Commodity and Barter Assn. in 1982 when they introduced Bill's research of the 16th Amendment, "THE LAW THAT NEVER WAS" .
It is therefore, the responsibility of all Patriot groups to get behind and support the work Anna is doing. All of us who are 'engaged' must study to understand the quality of her research. Because my primitive defense in my 1988 federal income tax trial basically centered on me not being a 14th amendment citizen raised the ire of the Seventh Circuit judge to accuse me of Sedition at sentencing, even though Sedition was not raised as an issue at trial. Nonetheless, the AUSA presented a Motion in Limine to prevent me from raising Constitutional issues before the jury at trial. They were acutely aware that it might cause at least one person on the jury to think.
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." Hosea 4:6
"Truth upsets people's perception of reality"