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 3300 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 unwarranted personal attacks. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Do not attempt to comment using the handle "Unknown". Your comment will be summarily deleted. Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products.

Sunday, August 19, 2018

The Department of Injustice


By Anna Von Reitz

I am re-posting this seminal article from "Four Winds" for all those who need to know the nature and status of the "Department of Justice" --- and the fact that it's an Executive Branch entity not connected with the Judicial Branch of government at all. 

This makes the  "Department of Justice" an instrumentality of political policy and executive power and divorces it (from inception no less) from any actual role vaguely related to ensuring any kind of justice for anyone, including the President of the United States.

This is why you are continuing to see the DOJ Witchhunt in the national media: it is a political organ, and always has been.  Ironically, as you will see, DOJ is also meant to be a creature under the thumb and forefinger of the President, and a means for him to exercise Executive power.  

Always remember that your actual land jurisdiction government, The United States of America, [Unincorporated] has never been at war, never been bankrupt, and is not subject to any form of martial law.  And when you reclaim your birthright, neither are you affected by any of this drama. 
All this "reconstruction" --- is within and a function of the Federal Government operating under Delegated Powers.  And now that the Delegated Powers have 
reverted by Operation of Law to the Delegators of those "Powers" it is time for us to settle this hash once and for all.  

It is left to us, those who are awake and alive, to determine the fate of the "Federal Government" and finish not only its reconstruction, but determine its role in the modern world.  Read on--- and all our many thanks to the original "Four Winds" who dedicated many years of worthy scholarship to the effort:

U.S. Under Martial Law Since The Civil War
Please be aware that what you are about to read will be very difficult to digest. All our life we have been living under a lie to keep us enslaved. The truth is now known. The problem is, what do we do now? Like you, I became aware of this same truth today and I don’t where to go from here.
I learned judges in California are not “public officials”  I wanted to know why, if they are elected by the people.
Now I know why, and so will you after reading this information.  
It will take many educated and creative minds to solve our problem. I pray you are up to the challenge.
Further proof that martial law remained in effect after the Civil War can be found in the “Congressional Globe” (now called the “Congressional Record”).  The following are excerpts from the April 20th through 29th, 1870 “Congressional Globe” concerning H.R. 1328 which established the Department of Justice to CONTINUE TO CARRY OUT MARTIAL LAW nearly five years after the end of the Civil War:
“The following bureaus shall be established in this department [the Department of Justice]:  a Bureau of International Law, a Bureau of Revenue Law, a Bureau of Military and Naval Law, a Bureau of Postal Law, a Bureau of Land Management Law.”
Congressman Lawrence then said in the record:
“This Bill, however, does transfer to the Law Department, or the Department of Justice as it is now called, the cognizance of all subjects of martial law, and the cognizance of all subjects of military and naval law, except that portion of the administration of military justice which relates to military court martial, their proceedings, and the supervision of records.
“If a question of martial law is to be determined by the law officers of  government, it will now belong to the Attorney General, or to this Department of Justice.  It will not belong to the Judge Advocate General of  the Army.  He will not be called upon for any opinion relating to martial law or military law except as to that portion of the administration of military law which relates to military justice.
“In other words, the Judge Advocate General, instead of giving legal opinions to the Secretary of War relating to the status of the states of the union, their right to call upon the government for military protection, or military aid, and other grave Constitutional questions, will be limited.  The Judge Advocate General will perform duties administrative in their character and almost exclusively so.
“But I will state to the House why, in my judgment, no transfer of the Judge Advocate General or of his duties to the Department of Justice has been proposed in this Bill.  If this had been done, the Bill would have encountered the opposition of some of the officers of the Bureau of Military Justice and their friends, and so great is the power of men in office, so difficult is it to abolish an office, that we were compelled in the consideration of this subject to leave officers in this Bureau untouched in their official tenure in order that this Bill might get through Congress.
“But so far as the Solicitor and Naval Judge Advocate General is concerned, he is transferred with all his supervisory power over naval court partials and the records and proceedings of such courts, so that to that extent, this Bill accomplishes the great purpose which it has in view of bringing into one department the whole legal service of the government. It is misfortunate that there should be different constructions of the laws of the United States by different law officers of the United States.”
WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT:
These traitors knew they would have encountered opposition from the military with the provisions of H.R. 1328, so they decided to leave the military officers untouched during their tenure, and transfer them to supervisory positions over court partials.  This appeased the military leaders, who didn’t have the foggiest idea as to what was really going on.
Had the traitors fleeced the military of all their powers during their tenure in office, the military would have realized and possibly taken some military action.  But as nothing was happening at the hen house, they slept through this entire situation which resulted in an overthrow of the Constitution — an overthrow under which government pretended to operate in 1933, and under which it continues to pretend to operate today.
The traitors were now faced with a very serious problem, namely, what to do with the powers of the Office of the Judge Advocate General when their tenure in office expired. And they solved this dilemma by adding the following amendments, detailed in that same “Congressional Globe”:
Congressman Jenks:  I move to amend Section 3 by inserting the word “naval” before the words “Judge Advocate General”.
The amendment was agreed to and later Congressman Finkelburg stated:
I would suggest the propriety of amending the third section of this Bill by inserting after the words “the Naval Solicitor and Naval Judge Advocate General” the words “who shall hereafter be known as Naval Solicitor”.
Mr. Jenks: I have no objection to that amendment.
This amendment was also agreed to, and the Office of the Judge Advocate General became known as the Naval Solicitor.  Thus, when the existing tenure was over, the new office would have a different set of rules and regulations so that the Bill accomplished the great purpose which it had in view of bringing into one department the whole legal service of the government without the power of the Office of the Judge Advocate General getting in their way.
 This was a necessary step to bring the President into the position of  dictator over America. 
But they had one other problem facing them, namely, DIRECT ACCESS to the Treasury for the Department of Justice without interference.  They accomplished this by the following three sections of the Bill:
“…The Eighth Section provides that the Attorney General is hereby empowered to make all necessary rules and regulations for the government….
“…The Eleventh Section provides that all monies hereafter drawn out of the Treasury upon requisition of the Attorney General shall be dispersed by such one of the clerks herein provided for the Attorney General as he may designate, and so much of the First Section of the Act, making appropriations, past March 3rd, 1859, as provides that money drawn out of the Treasury upon requisition of the Attorney General shall be dispersed by such dispersing officer as the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby repealed….
“…The Fifteenth Section provides that the supervisory powers now exercised by the Secretary of the Interior over the accounts of the district attorneys, marshals, clerks, and other officers of the courts of the United States, shall be exercised by the Attorney General….”
It is important here to remember that under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the District Courts of the United States are:
   “…hereby given jurisdiction to make and enter all such rules as to notice and otherwise and all such orders and decrees and to issue such process as may be necessary and proper in the premises to enforce the provisions of this Act.”
It is here that we find out that the district attorneys, marshals, clerks and other officers of the courts are under the Department of Justice. That seems an obvious statement, given the state of the nation today.  But the REAL PROBLEM — given the broad scope of powers granted the District Courts under the Trading with the Enemy Act — is that the Department of Justice is *NOT* a part of the Judicial Branch of Government!
According to Section 101 of Title 5 of the United States Code, the Department of State, the Department of Treasury, the Department of Defense, the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Energy, the Department of
Education, and the Department of the Veteran Affairs are *ALL* under the Executive Branch of Government.
All of the above departments are under the Executive Branch–which raises quite a few questions about the balance of powers between the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches of government.
How can this be?  There is no balance of power under a declared state of  emergency.  And we’ve been living under a declared state of emergency ever since the Civil War began, and have been living under a declared state of martial law ever since the Reconstruction Act.
This overthrow of the Constitution occurred long before the War Powers Act, and if we are going back in history to find our roots of legality — and if we stop our search when we reach the War Powers Act — we are NOT going to succeed in this venture. 
Where is the separation of powers if the Department of Justice is under the Executive branch? Shouldn’t it be part of the Judiciary?  The answer, of course, is yes; but it’s not.  Again, just check Section 101 of Title 5 of  the United States Code. There is no Judiciary!
If only Congress has the power to regulate Commerce, under Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution, why are the Department of Commerce and the Department of Transportation under the Executive branch and not under the Legislative branch?
And if only the Congress has the power to coin money, according to the Constitution, why is the Department of Treasury under the Executive branch?
The Commerce Department (from Title 5):
 “…part of the Executive branch of federal government, headed by a Cabinet member, the Secretary of Commerce, which is concerned with promoting domestic and international business and commerce.”
To further illustrate the take-over by the Executive branch of government via martial law rule, the following offices, bureaus, divisions, and organizations are under the Department of Justice.  And remember, the Department of Justice is under the Executive branch — NOT under the judicial branch.
The Office of Solicitor General
The Federal Bureau of Investigation
The Drug Enforcement Agency
The Bureau of Prisons
Immigration and Naturalization
United States Marshal Service
Office of Justice Program
United States Parole Commission
United States National Central Bureau
The Office of the Pardon Attorney
Executive Office of the United States Attorney
Criminal Division
Civil Division
Anti-Trust Division
Civil Rights Division
Tax Division
Environmental and Natural Resource Division
Community Relations Services
Foreign Claim Settlement Division
Executive Office of United States Trustees
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Justice Management Division
Office of Legal Counsel
Office of Policy Development
Office of Legislative Affairs
Office of Public Affairs
Office of Liaison Services
Office of Intelligence and Policy Review
Office of International Affairs
Office of the Inspector General
Office of Professional Responsibility; and
Interpol — (Note: Interpol is a private corporation, yet it comes under (in this country) the Executive branch of government.)
In my opinion:  if the matter of the repeal of the Reconstruction Act and the old H.R. 1328 are not addressed, we will remain in a state of declared martial law. But  few people do any research anymore, and even fewer read the results of  research done by others.  Yes, we are already, and have been all our lives, living under declared martial law.
The source of this law is from 1875.
‑CITE‑  2 USC Sec. 118
‑EXPCITE‑
TITLE 2
CHAPTER 4
‑HEAD‑
Sec. 118. Actions against officers for official acts
‑STATUTE‑
In any action brought against any person for or on account of anything done by him while an officer of either House of Congress in the discharge of his official duty, in executing any order of such House, the United States attorney for the district within  which the action is brought, on being thereto requested by the officer sued, shall enter an appearance in behalf of such officer; and all provisions of the eighth section of the Act of July 28,  1866, entitled ‘An Act to protect the revenue, and for other purposes’, and also all provisions of the sections of former Acts  therein referred to, so far as the same relate to the removal of suits, the withholding of executions, and the paying of judgments against revenue or other officers of the United States, shall become applicable to such action and to all proceedings and matters whatsoever connected therewith, and the defense of such action shall thenceforth be conducted under the supervision and direction of the Attorney General.
‑SOURCE‑
(Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 130, Sec. 8, 18 Stat. 401; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, Sec. 1, 62 Stat. 909.)
‑REFTEXT‑REFERENCES IN TEXT
The provisions of section 8 of act July 28, 1866, ch. 298, 14 Stat. 329, referred to in text, were contained generally in R.S.Sec. 643, which was incorporated in the former Judicial Code, Sec. 33, and was repealed by act June 25, 1948, ch. 646, Sec. 39, 62 Stat. 992. See sections 1442, 1446, and 1447 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure. Other provisions referred to were contained in R.S. Sec. 771, 989, which were also repealed by act June 25, 1948. See sections 509, 547, and 2006, respectively, of Title 28.
‑CHANGE‑
CHANGE OF NAME
Act June 25, 1948, eff.  Sept. 1, 1948, substituted ‘United States attorney’ for ‘district attorney’.  See section 541 of Title
28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
‑CROSS‑
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
Judgment against certain public officers, satisfaction of, see Rule 69, Title 28, Appendix, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
‑SECREF‑
SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS
This section is referred to in section 118a of this title.
‑END‑
Statutes Relating to Commissions, Appointments, etc.
Sections in this file relate to required commissions, oaths, etc., for officers and employees of United States government and the government of the District of Columbia. All sections have been pasted directly from the 1996 CD-ROM edition of the United States Code produced and distributed by the Government Printing Office. Notes in Italics that follow the sections list regulations for each section listed in the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules.It is significant that the “Seal of the United States” is no longer affixed to commissions of “judicial officers” appointed by the President with advice and consent of the Senate; commissions are filed with the Department of Justice under the D.O.J. seal, which is an executive seal. This is suggestive that there are no longer any Article III[constitutional] judges in the United States.
-CITE-
4 USC Sec. 41                                               01/16/96
HERE’S THER REAL KICKER   
THIS IS WHAT ENSLAVES US AS 14th AMENDMENT CITIZENS
The Insurrection Act (enacted in 1807) delegates authority to the President to federalize and deploy the National Guard domestically during an insurrection or civil disturbance (10 U.S.C. Sections 331-335).  Section 331 authorizes the President to use federal military forces to suppress an insurrection at the request of a state government.  Section 332 authorizes the President to use armed forces in such manner as he deems necessary to enforce the laws or suppress a rebellion.  Section 333 authorizes the President to use federal military forces to protect individuals from unlawful actions that obstruct the execution of federal laws or which impede the course of justice under federal laws.  Section 333 was enacted to implement the Fourteenth Amendment and does not require the request or consent of the governor of the affected state. 

30 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Hi!
      One question if I may? How can something stolen be law? That is not the original 13th or 14th Amendment
      All the writing they did...it still doesn’t take our God given rights...
      Thank you Miss Anna.💕

      Delete
    2. This isn't about "stolen" this is about FORCE/POWER and the ones that have that can make any "law" that they want!!! A point lost on this forum!!! When I was dealing with the irs I received a certified letter stating that one of the things they were not going to deal with was "constitutional" items!!! Really!!!?? They received a scathing rebuke in reply but...as usual, "he who has the gun makes the rules" and no amount of "paperwork/documents" is going to change this. Why doesn't queen annie here take all of this info to that touted Michigan Jural Assembly that we are all supposed to emulate to restore our Laws/Rights etc. and have them enforce the Constitution!? Either it works and it is Truth or it isn't, and if that Assembly can't change anything then this site is the fraud that so many like me think it is!!! But...I digress, the toadies on this site need something to hop about and this site delivers in spades!!! Good for them but nothing suggested on this site is ever going to change anything!!!

      Delete
    3. Check out this formate for an "interpleader" law suit against the Federal Reserve, which I got off the comment section from the "Soverign Warriors" site:


      Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
      Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
      c/o Forwarding Agent
      7115 N. Division St. #B-354
      Spokane 99208
      WASHINGTON STATE, USA

      Fax: (509) 466-4999 (use cover sheet)

      All Rights Reserved
      Without Prejudice




      UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
      EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON


      In re: Roland and Virginia Fox, ) Bankruptcy Case No. 07-00105-PCW7
      )
      Debtors, ) Adv. Proceeding No. 09-80003-PCW
      )
      Anthony E. Grabicki, )
      )
      Plaintiff, )
      )
      Roland R. Fox et al., )
      )
      Defendants. )
      ----------------------------------)
      )
      United States ) DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY AS TO
      ex relatione ) OBLIGATIONS PAYABLE TO THE
      Paul Andrew Mitchell, ) FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS:
      ) 11 U.S.C. 362;
      Interpleader. ) 12 U.S.C. 411 (obligations);
      ) 28 U.S.C. 1335, 1397, 2361;
      ) Bankruptcy Rule 7022; and,
      __________________________________) FRCP Rules 20 and 22.
      TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
      The United States ex rel. hereby notoriously interpleads in the above entitled case for the purpose of formally declaring insolvency as to obligationsallegedly payable to the Federal Reserve Banks.
      Said obligations have been tentatively identified to include all United States Government securities of which the Federal Reserve Banks are presently holders in due course, including but not limited to all evidence(s) of such alleged indebtedness presently in official records now in the legal custody of the Bureau of the Public Debt in the United States Department of the Treasury in Washington, D.C. The Internet website of said Bureau of the Public Debt is here:
      http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/

      Delete
    4. continued..

      In addition, it is the position of the United States ex rel. that said indebtedness should be identified to include all Federal Reserve Notes(“FRN”) currently in circulation anywhere on planet Earth, due to the fraudulent origins of all such FRNs: they are not “Federal”, there is no “Reserve”, and they are not Promissory “Notes” because the Federal Reserve Banks now refuse to redeem them in gold or silver.
      To avoid confusion and unnecessary legalisms here and elsewhere during all future proceedings in the instant case, the United States intends to simplify the stated objectives of this DECLARATION.
      To that end, the United States desires to achieve the requisite reorganization by instituting a well publicized public program for exchanging all FRNs one-for-one with United States Notes duly issued by the United States Department of the Treasury. That exchange is to occur at qualified banks and other qualified financial institutions without the need to produce any personal identification, and without the need to complete Cash Transaction Reports (“CTR”) of any kind.
      FRNs in possession of the public at large will be treated in a manner similar to bearer bonds: if an individual is in possession of one or more FRNs, the qualified banks and other financial institutions will be permitted to presume that said individual(s) have an absolute right to those possessions. This policy is expected to accelerate the recall and ultimate destruction of all FRNs, no exceptions.

      AUTOMATIC STAY: 11 U.S.C. 362
      It is also the intent of the United States for this DECLARATION to effect the automatic stay authorized by pertinent statutes in the bankruptcy laws of the United States, as authorized by Article I, Section 8, Clause 4, in the Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended. See Title 11 of the United States Code, and its implementing Regulations, for governing details.
      This automatic stay is intended to bar any and all Federal Reserve Banks henceforth from any and all further efforts to collect from the United States, or from the People at Large, either the principal or interest amounts previously owed by the United States to the Federal Reserve Banks.

      Delete
    5. continued..


      This intent necessarily also bars the Internal Revenue Service from performing, or claiming any authority to perform, any further collections of income taxes allegedly imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code. See IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.
      It is now a well established fact that Congress never enacted any Statute(s) at Large creating a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code. By comparison, Congress has enacted Statutes at Large creating specific liabilities for taxes imposed by subtitles Band C of the Internal Revenue Code. On this key point, see 26 CFR 1.1-1(b) and Commissioner v. Acker, 361 U.S. 87, 4 L.Ed.2d 127, 80 S.Ct. 144 (1959), quoting in pertinent part:

      But the section contains nothing to that effect, and, therefore, to uphold this addition to the tax would be to hold that it may be imposed by regulation, which, of course, the law does not permit. United States v. Calamaro, 354 U.S. 351, 359; Koshland v. Helvering, 298 U.S. 441, 446-447; Manhattan Co. v. Commissioner, 297 U.S. 129, 134.
      [bold emphasis added]

      INCORPORATION OF EXHIBITS
      Interpleader now attaches true and correct copies of the following Exhibits and incorporates same by reference, as if set forth fully herein, to wit:
      Exhibit Description
      ------- ------------------------------------------------------------

      A Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1289 (9th Cir. 1982)

      B NOTICE OF INTENT FORMALLY TO DECLARE INSOLVENCY AS TO
      OBLIGATIONS PAYABLE TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS (3/4/2009)

      C “Return to Constitutional Money,” by Dr. Edwin J. Vieira, Jr.
      transcript of lecture at Denver, Colorado (8/30/1991)

      D 2 Am.Jur.2d, page 129 (1962), Administrative Law,
      Section 301, Particular applications (cf. Footnote 2)

      E Press Release: “U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Falls Silent
      in Face of SUBPOENA for Tax Liability Statutes” (11/7/2002):

      SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE (PAST DUE and now IN DEFAULT)
      Directions for Delivery of Documents required by SUBPOENA
      U.S. Postal Service Registered Mail Receipts (2x)
      PROOF OF SERVICE of SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE (9/14/2002)
      PS Form 3811, Domestic Return Receipt (green card)
      Courtesy Reminder to Hon. Paul H. O’Neill (10/15/2002)

      F NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (2x IN DEFAULT)
      To: Frank L. Kurtz, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Spokane, Wash.

      G NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (2x IN DEFAULT)
      To: John A. Rossmeissl, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Spokane

      H NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (2x IN DEFAULT)
      To: Patricia C. Williams, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Spokane

      I NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (1x IN DEFAULT)
      To: Anthony E. Grabicki dba Chapter 7 Trustee, Spokane

      J NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (2x IN DEFAULT)
      To: Robert D. Miller dba Assistant U.S. Trustee, Spokane

      K “Obama Must Stand Up Now Or Step Down,” by Edwin J. Vieira,
      Jr., at NewsWithViews.com (October 29, 2008)

      VERIFICATION
      I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (Federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). See Supremacy Clause (Constitution, Laws and Treaties are all the supreme Law of the Land).

      Dated: March 31, 2009 A.D.


      Signed: /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
      ______________________________________________
      Printed: Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General
      All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

      Delete
    6. Interpleader is civil procedure that allows a plaintiff or a defendant to initiate a lawsuit in order to compel two or more other parties to litigate a dispute.

      Delete
  2. I am posting this again for those who thought no notice was given for emergency powers.

    cube sphereAugust 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM
    Here is your so called abandoned property/AKA-easment, certificated person.
    3705.11 Report of foundling child.

    Whoever finds a living infant of unknown parentage shall immediately report such finding to the local registrar of vital statistics of the registration district in which the child is found, on a prescribed form which shall state:

    (A) Date of finding;

    (B) Place of finding;

    (C) Sex of child;

    (D) Race of the child;

    (E) Approximate age of the child;

    (F) Name and address of the person or institution with whom the child has been placed for care. The place where the child was found shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation.

    The person, superintendent, or manager of the institution with whom a foundling child is placed for care shall give such child a name within ten days and shall promptly report the name given to the local registrar of the registration district in which the child was found. The foundling report shall constitute the birth certificate for such foundling child and sections 3705.01 to 3705.29 of the Revised Code, relating to birth certificates or records, shall apply in the same manner and with the same effect to such report. If a foundling child is later identified and an original birth record is found or obtained, the foundling report shall cease to be a public record. Such foundling report shall be placed in an envelope which shall be sealed by the department and shall not be open to inspection or copy unless so ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction. All copies of the foundling report in the possession of the local registrar or the probate court as well as any and all index references thereto shall be destroyed.

    Delete

    cube sphereAugust 18, 2018 at 6:16 AM
    For those that need further confirmation where jurisdiction is established. Hospitals are under the National emergency Act, "sign, sign everywhere a sign"

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have made available Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to supplement existing guidance concerning enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations and clarify what types of locations are covered by these policies. ICE and CBP conduct their enforcement actions consistent with the Department of Homeland Security’s November 2014 memorandum prioritizing the removal of national security, border security, and public safety threats.

    The ICE and CBP sensitive locations policies, which remain in effect, provide that enforcement actions at sensitive locations should generally be avoided, and require either prior approval from an appropriate supervisory official or exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action. DHS is committed to ensuring that people seeking to participate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so without fear or hesitation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In what body of "law" does 3705.11 appear?

      Delete
  3. Do the Department of Homeland Security’s policies concerning enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations remain in effect?
    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have each issued and implemented policies concerning enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations. The ICE Sensitive Locations Policy and the CBP Sensitive Locations Policy (http://foiarr.cbp.gov/streamingWord.asp?i=1251) remain in effect, and these FAQs are intended to clarify what types of locations are covered by those policies. ICE and CBP conduct their enforcement actions consistent with the Department of Homeland Security’s November 2014 memorandum, which prioritizes the removal of national security, border security, and public safety threats.

    What do the Department of Homeland Security policies require for enforcement actions to be carried out at sensitive locations?
    The policies provide that enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations such as schools, places of worship, and hospitals should generally be avoided, and that such actions may only take place when (a) prior approval is obtained from an appropriate supervisory official, or (b) there are exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action without supervisor approval. The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking to participate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation.


    Delete

    cube sphereAugust 18, 2018 at 6:16 AM

    ReplyDelete
  4. Does anyone believe officials in the Corporate United States do not know this? Think their is anyone on the side of right? Joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha ha ha... the " government" is the enemy

      Delete
  5. BTW, 14th Amendment is for fictional persons and the reason they need you to believe you are their creation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Looks to me we are DOOMS !!! 😕

    ReplyDelete
  7. My Vote is to dismantle the whole damn system, kick everyone out and start over with Anna Von Reitz in charge.Satan himself must have designed our government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Olddog, you are correct. Satan has designed our government. In 2 Corinthians 4:4 it tells us that satan is the god of this world, and that he runs the show, if people will let him, and they have...because most people serve him, rather than God Almighty.
      4 ''in whom the god of this world (little ''g'') has blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious (true) gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.''

      Another verse tells us that ''and he has deceived the whole world''. It is this deception that has brought us to the mess we are in. They have used every power position to take us over and run us into this muck; that is how satan IS and has designed our government.

      In a nutshell, God gave Man dominion of the earth, and Man failed miserably to follow Gods ways, but went the ways of satan and so here we are.
      'The whole damned system' is going to be dismantled and start over, when Jesus goes into action and starts tearing it apart (called the last days great tribulation) and then Returns and runs this place Himself, which will be a Theocracy.

      But we are also told in the Book that before that happens, ''all that has been done in secret, will first be exposed openly''.
      It is my belief that that is the role that Anna and Team are playing as we speak. It is pretty obvious that everything is being exposed, daily and hourly, now.

      Delete
    2. Glad to hear you are doing better

      Delete
  8. Insurrection act 1807 also the date of a bankruptcy and bankers getting into our nickers.
    later 1813 full control of treasury fed.res...
    They have run amok

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bubbapatric -- don't you mean 1907 and 1913?

      Delete
  9. No matter how you look at it We have been , without any doubt , totally raped pillaged and plundered , brainwashed and poisoned . There is but one way to deal with " them " .

    My offer of building the gallows stands

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep! It's kill (in self-defense) or be killed time. "A time to kill" as the old book put it. Kill off once and for all this evil plague that's destroying the planet, ecology, and life and liberty as we know it.

      Delete
    2. Can I punch Hillary in the face before we hang her and Bill? It might make me feel better.

      Delete
  10. It is my opinion that this present way of ''doing' is not looking like it is working. Its not only been confusing, has too many obstacles, is perhaps very inconvenient (people have to take off work to go Record, and maybe cant get off work, or cant afford to), too many papers, and uncertainty.
    So it just seems to me why keep doing the same ole thing the same way. Maybe its time to consider changing to a different tactic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. People who work 40 or more hours a week are too tired to catch up on 200 years of corruption and the volumnist laws they have generated during that time frame. If the Executive branch is now a dictatorship, Trump can do anything he wants. Including changing all laws that are repugnant to the continental united states of America. He's already taken control of the Federal Reserve. I'm waiting to see how we can transition back to real money and get rid of these central bankers once and for all. All their power is in their fiat currency with ruinist interest that gradually bankrupts every country so they then can change all their laws.

      Delete
  11. Replies
    1. We might refresh our memory here....as I recall Anna told us months ago she/they needed to do some filing of Papers and the cost was $50 per Page. And she was asking for donations to pay for that, and other filings as well, over the recent past.

      So we might ask What papers were those, what were they for, and what did donors get for their money? Some might wonder where are the results of those filings; and there were many of them, here and there.

      So where did all that just drift off to, never to be heard of again. How does so much just vanish in here, into thin air with never any Results. Anna, are you sure you didn't put them thru the paper shredder; except that we don't even see the shreds out here.
      So after all that filing, and Expense, why is it all back in the laps of we the People to DO this and DO that........or else?

      Delete
    2. You sure are jealous of Anna aren't you Abby.

      When was the last time you sent her thoughts of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness goodness, meekness, temperance and faith, The Galatians teaching of the fruit of the spirit.

      I cannot see even one of these fruits of the spirit even remotely granting you license to denigrate your fellow spirit in the manner which you have.

      Delete
  12. In the last section, titled, “THIS IS WHAT ENSLAVES US AS 14th AMENDMENT CITIZENS”, it reads in part: “The Insurrection Act (enacted in 1807) delegates authority to the President to federalize and deploy the National Guard domestically during an insurrection or civil disturbance (10 U.S.C. Sections 331-335). Section 331 authorizes the President to use federal military forces to suppress an insurrection at the request of a state government.”

    My questions; 1) the use of the term, “domestically”, appears to refer to the District of Columbia ONLY inasmuch as it as the “several states” are foreign to DC, per the USC. Is my reasoning correct?

    Also, the term “state government”; does this mean the “several states”? I think it must because the STATE of STATES had not yet been formed, correct? If this is the case, it clearly states that, “Section 332 authorizes the President to use federal military forces to suppress an insurrection AT THE REQUEST OF A STATE GOVERNMENT.” (emphasis added)

    2) The above would require an invitation form the respective state of the “several states”, correct?

    Additionally, Sections 332 & 333 do not reference to a state or specific geographical area or body politic.

    3) Are we correct in presuming that these Sections pertain ONLY to the District of Columbia and NOT the “several states”?

    Lastly, has any “President” ever took an oath to uphold the original, organic Constitution for the united States of America?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is what I believe, and why. "Domestic" refers to the territory under the exclusive control and legislative authority of the United States aka the federal government. Within each union state is some geographic territory that has been ceded to the federal government for needful buildings, forts, magazines, arsenals, etc. This geographic territory within each union state comprises the territory of the "State of X." The holding in a Georgia Supreme Court case (which I cited in another post) states that since the adoption of the federal constitution, the State of Georgia has been an integral part of the United States of America. The present Georgia constitution identifies military bases as being "within the State of Georgia." The trick deployed against us has been to get everyone to believe and act as though they are either federal citizens, or dwelling on federal territory through the use of Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) federal district codes, or both. The present federal government and its 1868 political subdivisions over which it rules through military dictatorship likes to pretend as though there is no longer an American Union of sovereign nations joined in a confederacy called "The United States of America." So it is incumbent upon us to remind the creatures holding office in the United States that we are still here. I also maintain that the southern states did not intend to secede from the first union (described by the Georgia Supreme Court as the American Union), but from the second union formed by the constitution of 1789 (described by the Georgia Supreme Court as "the United States of America").

      Delete

Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.
Do not comment using the handle "Anonymous". Your comment will be deleted.