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" or "Anonymous". Your comment will be summarily deleted. Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products.

Sunday, November 11, 2018

For the Bar Members to See and Know--- And Everyone Else, Too


By Anna Von Reitz

This is from a member of the Living Law Team a couple years ago. Read it, Bar Members, and weep.

The Role of Counselors-at—Law and The [unincorporated] Delaware Statutory Trusts

Remember when you were told you that you "had to have a Social Security Number"?

Sometimes, that is true, but only if you are applying for employment with the federal government. For of course, you would need it to enroll in their retirement and employee benefits program....but you don’t have to have one otherwise.

It is the same scenario with the Bar Associations telling new JD graduates that they have to have a Bar Card....again, that is true, if they want to be a prosecutor for the federal government corporations and their "federated state of state franchises" and become an employee of the court…………but not otherwise.

The fact is that there is no requirement for anyone to be a Bar Association Member to engage in the profession of law in this country and there never have been.

I challenge anyone anywhere to prove that there is any general requirement to be a Bar Member, in order to use the court facilities, present cases, or offer effective counsel to others with or without pay.

The fact is that the perpetuation of these "mandatory" Social Security enrollment and Bar Association Membership half-truths are undertaken in self-interest by undeclared foreign interests.

Research the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) if you have doubts and also see Trinsey v. Pagliaro and the cases that Robert F. Kennedy fought pertaining to these very issues.

Happily, quite a number of some of the best minds working in the profession of law today have awakened to this realization and they are turning in their Bar cards and leaving the association to stew in its own juice.

This was precipitated as a direct result of Bar Associations kicking members out for committing the sin of actually defending and protecting their clients' best interest, as well as, a result of lawyers waking up and going, "OMG!" -- and exiting as fast as their feet would get them out the door.

The lawyers among us are waking up along with the rest of the populace and realizing that they have been sold a total bill of goods, and don’t have to spend their lives being professional “liars”.

The fact is, lawyers can function either as attorneys-at-law or as counselors-at-law. These are "capacities" within the profession in which a lawyer can choose to work, [just as you can choose to work in the capacity of a hotel manager or a hotel bartender and still be working in a hotel].

Attorneys join the Bar to gain group insurance and bonding benefits. [Also so their buddies in the fraternity will gang up on any outsiders].

Counselors pay their own insurance and bonds and otherwise don't have any reason to join the Bar, because they aren't involved in the disposition of public property or addressing issues related to public employees-- that is, they aren't working in administrative capacities as members of an administrative court.

Attorneys-at-law traditionally function as property managers involved in the administration of civil cases in Article I courts dealing with in-house legislative "laws" and statutes.

This is why those working in administrative courts supported by the United States Districts, the Territorial States of States, and the Municipal STATES OF STATES are all required to be "attorneys" and Bar Members by their employers.

Attorneys work in administrative tribunals. Not judicial courts.

This fact accounts for these frank admissions about the nature of the federal territorial and municipal courts and their various state-of-state franchises operating on our shores:

"There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since 1789, Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statues and Codes. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators." FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1 Stat. 138-178.

"Courts are Administrative Tribunals" Clearfield Trust, et al v. United States 318 U.S. 363 (1943).

Counselors-at-law traditionally function in judicial court capacities and have the duty to protect and defend their living clientele, unlike their attorney-at-law brethren who are limited to dealing with public property and public employees and incorporated "things", either belonging to or working for or working with the government corporations.

Naturally, when a counselor-at-law appears a number of things are different about the nature and tenor of the proceedings:

A counselor-at-law is not required to enter an appearance prior to a court date and may simply walk in with a brief explanation to the judge that he or she is working in the capacity of a counselor-at-law and providing effective assistance to the Plaintiff or Defendant.

Often, to further clarify things, the judge will ask if the counselor-at-law is a member of the Bar Association…….If not, the proper response is simply, "I don't have a card (or more properly, a "ticket") with the Bar."

This is referring obliquely to the Bid Bond that the Bar Associations post in maritime cases involving incorporated entities, thus, further signaling to the judge that the Plaintiff or Defendant is appearing in the capacity of a living man or woman and that the court has to shift gears from international sea jurisdiction to international land jurisdiction.

The first difference for the court's notice when a counselor-at-law appears is the explicit revelation of the capacity in which the Plaintiff/Defendant is operating.

If he or she is operating in their actual, living capacity as a man or woman standing on the land jurisdiction of the United States, they are owed all their constitutional rights and guarantees including a counselor-at-law who can advise them but not "represent" them, because they are presumed to be free people above the age of twenty-one and competent to make their own decisions. That's why they have hired a counselor-at-law instead of an attorney.

That is also why they are forcing the court to engage them as people under the Public Law of the
United States or the General Session Law of the State instead of as "things" subject to the Private Administrative Law of any foreign territorial or municipal corporation or state of state or incorporated county franchise tribunal.

Attorneys represent "things" --- corporate franchises, wards of the state, bankrupt businesses, murdered victims of crime, mentally incompetent people, --all things that cannot "stand for" or answer for themselves. That is why they have to be "re-presented" by a substitute acting "for" them.

Counselors-at-law assist in presenting cases for living people.

Notice the difference: attorneys "represent" and administer the affairs of their clients often without regard for or even consulting with their clients. For example, they cut plea-bargains and waive rights and sell off property in whatever way best benefits the court.

This is because they work for the court and the client is at best considered a public trust subject to the court's administration. [And this is true whether you pay the traitor or not].

Notice that counselors-at-law "present" cases with and for their patrons, who administer their own affairs and make their own decisions throughout the proceedings, retain all their rights and prerogatives and do not willingly subject themselves to the court's administration.

Now, obviously, from the court's standpoint, it is very convenient to be able to dictate whatever happens in each and every case, so as to "administer" it as best suits the "public good" and the "good of the court" ---and the court's corporate employers, of course, without regard for any such niceties as equity owed to living people, or any rights owed to living people.
Just as obviously, it is a death knell to justice and an end to all freedom for living people to allow this state of affairs to go on.

When even the lawyers among us are so dumbed down and ignorant that they think the Bar Association has the power to obstruct them from pursuing their vocation, it's time to outlaw the Bar Associations, because they are clearly over-stepping any rational function or status that they have.

U.S. District, State of State and STATE OF STATE courts can demand whatever credentials they wish from people that they hire to represent their interests, just as other private and public interests can demand whatever credentials they desire from their employees.

If a "State of State" Legislature can pass a statutory "law" saying that all its court officials have to be Bar Association Members, our State Legislatures can just as easily pass a General Session law saying that none of our courts will allow Bar Association Members.

Take Note:

State of Wyoming is a Territorial Franchise Court. STATE OF WYOMING is a Municipal Franchise Court…………. Both of these are foreign corporation franchises like the local Target store.

They are limited to running administrative tribunals and they can require all the people in their "court system" to be Bar Association members until the cows come home, because these are private administrative tribunals.

But the Wyoming State Court belongs to the people of Wyoming and they run judicial courts of record that are superior to any private administrative tribunals and they can mandate that no Bar Association members are allowed to practice law in their venue ---thereby providing plenty of work for counselors-at-law.

That this great country and its people have been hoodwinked and pulled off course for so long by selfish private interests is an immense and horrifying Breach of Trust, but it is one that is being swiftly rectified, when we change/correct our own presumed political status and consequently change the "presumed" capacity in which we choose to act in court; while changing the capacity in which lawyers act.

To all former Bar Attorneys and those who are [currently] thinking seriously of tearing up their [fraud] cards?

It is time to face the truth and set yourselves free of the imaginary shackles that the Bar Associations have placed on you.

You can enter any court in this country in the capacity of a Counselor-at-Law and there is nothing any of the courts can say except, "Yes, of course...."


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

See this article and over 1300 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com

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

24 comments:

  1. Robert, it is striking how you are constantly shooting against the content of Anna v. Reitz. And I wonder for whom your are working to discredit Anna's work over and over again, even though Anna provides evidence and even asks to prove her ackknowledgement.
    There remains only one elementary question to me about your aggressive and insulting action: Qui bono?

    The above text makes perfect sense for me, especially because the 12 assumptions of the BAR which are used only in the fiction and thus also reveal that the judges and lawyers are nothing more than well-paid puppets in the system-theater.
    Anna's research can also be transferred to German circumstances, because Germany has its business location in Delaware, as well as all other "state" institutions, which are led by Admirals Law.

    People in Germany are led to believe that the rule of law is involved without questioning why the "human beings" no longer get any rights. Instead, the so-called authorities have degenerated into profit-driven companies that are trampling on human rights.

    To my knowledge, it is possible in Germany that you do not need a lawyer in court and anyone can act as a legal advisor. You can also become a judge without having completed law degree. But hardly anyone knows that. Everyone believes that a lawyer is needed in court and a judge is committed to justice. Few realize that the attorney has the status of caretaker and guardian for an incompetent child, who considers himself an adult and thus surrenders all sovereign rights. Nobody knows that the lawyer works for the BAR and not for the client.

    In Germany there is only one real statehood and that was 1914 in the German Reich. Many people have changed their status, reporting back as living men and women, asserting their claim to the property and lands of the German people.

    Only these people are treated like lepers suffering from a dangerous disease. They are discredited, discriminated against, harassed, bullied, threatened and exterminated. The peoples and human rights are trampled in this country, because the sovereigns could ruin the business and profits of the company "Germany" ... if you would allow that. It is evident that the companies are selling stolen goods (namely the property of Germans and their ancestors) and that is criminal. The actions of these companies are absolutely illegal. Even the elections in 1956 - according to the Federal Constitutional Court – are illegal. And yet the government just keeps doing as it has done ever since.

    This means that the elections are not sovereign, but serve only one purpose: to relieve the board of the associations called government, parties, etc., so that they do not have to assume liability if they operated mismanagement. The liability is assumed by the voter, who is not aware that the government is uninsured and that he will always pay the bill. But thanks to the election sheeps, who do not understand that they have to pull the child out of the well after the government has pushed it in it, this illegal liability game continues. The government continues to violate Shaef and the SMAD laws, as well as the Hague war regulations, as we are still an occupied country.

    Anna helped me a lot to understand it all. I then checked to what extent it is valid. And by and large, I can agree with Anna's findings.

    But your shootout makes me think that you are a paid troll.

    Ergo: Honi soir qui y y pense!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please use a handle that is not "unknown" or "anonymous" see our policy at the top of the page in blue.

      "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" or "anonymous". Your comment will be summarily deleted. Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products."

      Delete
  2. ANOTHER GREAT Article Anna...imo💛

    ReplyDelete
  3. MSM Pushing RFID for Medical Purposes, Comparing It to A Tetanus Shot
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyTuVactrSM
    Alarm over talks to implant UK employees with microchips
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/11/alarm-over-talks-to-implant-uk-employees-with-microchips
    Remember: Much of the cashless society talk originates from this part of the world.
    Do you all remember ABBA? Yes ABBA, do also think this is a coincidence?
    Bjorn Ulvaeus (left) back in his Abba heyday. Now he's a keen supporter of a cashless Sweden. The iconic band's Bjorn Ulvaeus is, in fact, one of the nation's most vocal supporters of Sweden's cash-free trend, after his son lost cash in an apartment burglary.Sep 12, 2017
    Why Sweden is close to becoming a cashless economy - BBC News
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-41095004

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Counselors-at-law traditionally function in judicial court capacities and have the duty to protect and defend their living clientele," (This Is what Anna IS and does to rebut/rebuke the Fraud on behalf of the living people/original Creditors/true beneficiaries of this mess )
    "unlike their attorney-at-law brethren who are limited to dealing with public property and public employees and incorporated "things", either belonging to or working for or working with the government corporations." This IS who Kim IS, and "what" she is "REPRESENTING" By "attorney in fact" as “TRUSTEE" FOR "DEAD ENTITIES/TITLES and "THINGS".
    "Notice the difference: attorneys "represent" and administer the affairs of their clients often without regard for or even consulting with their clients. For example, they cut plea-bargains and waive rights and sell off property in whatever way best benefits the court." Proof of this most recent fact/and Action against living people was "Kim" acting As "TRUSTEE“ admitting to "selling" 2 CORPORATE BANKS held in the MWHT for "$1" (debt note=No Valuable/Lawful consideration exchanged) to a "FOREIGN CORPORATE GOVERNMENT" D B.A "U.S.TREASURY" (Bankrupt DEBTOR to living people/creditor) for and on behalf of "DEAD ENTITY/BENEFICIARIES" without consulting the living beneficiaries, nor with any consent from the living beneficiaries. Kim & Co. Are perpetuating the same old fraud, playing the same old "Legal TITLES" game and the theft of "private property" and rights continue under the same FALSE MASK of "CHARITY" and philanthropy for the Worlds "BEST INTERESTS" and same OLD "BEAST" Using the Same old Bankrupt & FICTITIOUS "BEAST SYSTEM", different "TRUSTEE" being used to "sell" the "good works" to the gullible "sheep" and rebellious/stubborn "goats" among us.

    Stay True, Stand Tall and Speak Louder than ever Now!!

    Forever Grateful to you and Team Anna for All your courage and persistence and for never, ever backing down to this "BEAST"!!! You are So Loved and We the Living All Are worthy, ready to stand united, and be heard loud and clear once again!! Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

    Much Gratitude, Love, Awareness, Peace Be for All Now

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well said Anonymous, thank you for your valuable insight and contribution! Reposting for preservation due to "Anonymous" handle. "Robert, it is striking how you are constantly shooting against the content of Anna v. Reitz. And I wonder for whom your are working to discredit Anna's work over and over again, even though Anna provides evidence and even asks to prove her ackknowledgement.
    There remains only one elementary question to me about your aggressive and insulting action: Qui bono?

    The above text makes perfect sense for me, especially because the 12 assumptions of the BAR which are used only in the fiction and thus also reveal that the judges and lawyers are nothing more than well-paid puppets in the system-theater.
    Anna's research can also be transferred to German circumstances, because Germany has its business location in Delaware, as well as all other "state" institutions, which are led by Admirals Law.

    People in Germany are led to believe that the rule of law is involved without questioning why the "human beings" no longer get any rights. Instead, the so-called authorities have degenerated into profit-driven companies that are trampling on human rights.

    To my knowledge, it is possible in Germany that you do not need a lawyer in court and anyone can act as a legal advisor. You can also become a judge without having completed law degree. But hardly anyone knows that. Everyone believes that a lawyer is needed in court and a judge is committed to justice. Few realize that the attorney has the status of caretaker and guardian for an incompetent child, who considers himself an adult and thus surrenders all sovereign rights. Nobody knows that the lawyer works for the BAR and not for the client.

    In Germany there is only one real statehood and that was 1914 in the German Reich. Many people have changed their status, reporting back as living men and women, asserting their claim to the property and lands of the German people.

    Only these people are treated like lepers suffering from a dangerous disease. They are discredited, discriminated against, harassed, bullied, threatened and exterminated. The peoples and human rights are trampled in this country, because the sovereigns could ruin the business and profits of the company "Germany" ... if you would allow that. It is evident that the companies are selling stolen goods (namely the property of Germans and their ancestors) and that is criminal. The actions of these companies are absolutely illegal. Even the elections in 1956 - according to the Federal Constitutional Court – are illegal. And yet the government just keeps doing as it has done ever since.

    This means that the elections are not sovereign, but serve only one purpose: to relieve the board of the associations called government, parties, etc., so that they do not have to assume liability if they operated mismanagement. The liability is assumed by the voter, who is not aware that the government is uninsured and that he will always pay the bill. But thanks to the election sheeps, who do not understand that they have to pull the child out of the well after the government has pushed it in it, this illegal liability game continues. The government continues to violate Shaef and the SMAD laws, as well as the Hague war regulations, as we are still an occupied country.

    Anna helped me a lot to understand it all. I then checked to what extent it is valid. And by and large, I can agree with Anna's findings.

    But your shootout makes me think that you are a paid troll.

    Ergo: Honi soir qui y y pense!" Anonymous

    PS. "Robert Allan" is a.k.a youtuber alleged patriot "Robbbryder" and "Robbbryder court of record" he advocates registering your given Names and All your private property directly with D.C. as your "NAME TRUST" !! Coincidence??? No, there Are No coincidences in this BEAST Deceit System!!

    Much Gratitude, Love, Awareness and Peace Be for All Now

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anna said do not register anything, only record it at land recording office...

      Delete
    2. Jasun...THAT IS RIGHT! corporations and corporate entities: REGISTER. The People: record!

      Delete
  6. I distinctly remember in 12th grade high school here in Canada, enrolled in the 4 yr business and commerce course, my business teacher telling us not only did we have to have a social insurance card, but provided the applications to fill out during class because we wouldn't be able to get a job upon graduation without it. What was the benefit? So we could collect unemployment insurance if we lost our jobs. That is how 17 yr olds got indoctrinated in my day.

    That was September 1965. Hmmm, 38 in the class, 53 yrs, one high school, 2014 students. And we spread the word to everyone else!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you Artsy, your comment and response to unwelcome paid corporate agent is valid and living people in this battle need this valuable awareness to continue learning from, Thank you for sharing!
    Reposting for valuable preservation:
    "You seem to appreciate this current slave system so much that you are willing to defend it's validity. Thankfully they have systems in place that cater to the blind, deaf and dumb such as yourself. They call it an asylum. Anyone that agrees that this current system is valid is obviously insane or staggering about replete of all their senses.
    One thing you might want to consider "robert allen" is that everything, everything they use against us is a "service". No one is obliged to take advantage of their services.


    service noun (PUBLIC NEED)

    B1 [ C ] a government system or private organization that is responsible for a particular type of activity, or for providing a particular thing that people need:

    the postal service
    the National Park Service
    the National Health Service
    the ambulance/prison service

    Now, please provide me with valid proof of claim supporting your argument that everything posted here is untrue. Otherwise shut the hell up!" Artsy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is to both you and Dan Carpenter. Yes, it appears that their indoctrination methods were quite effective on some of us. Robert Allen comes to mind...
      Like Dan Carpenter, I too took part in business class for four years. Little did I know I was being trained to operate as one of their agents. Processing fraudulent paperwork. Even counting the money they were stealing from hard working people.
      Upon realizing this I began a hard study of the who, why's and what for's of this system we are in only to find that there is a big club that we unknowingly support with both our labor and our faith. Even the very color of the pens we use when doing business in this beast system is used to ensnare us.

      I pray that the creator opens the eyes of His people everywhere because time is running out for all of us.

      1. The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect ⌈⌈and⌉⌉ righteous, who will be living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked ⌈⌈and godless⌉⌉ are to be removed.

      Delete
    2. Yes, agreed Artsy!! The main "service" they use against us and to our innocent ignorance in voluntary "servitude" IS through the United States "Postal Service" and perpetuating the illegal & unlawful "securitization" game. Imho


      Much Gratitude, Love, Awareness and Peace-ful remedy Be for All Now

      Delete
  8. Now the crooks are working on ID2020 which is part of the digital global enslavement process
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf7sY_JNQLI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2frpU6nkb_I
    And believe it or not this all ties back to the Kniight Templars and Royalty and their quest to rule the world all through fraud
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-BFmn2S_jU&feature=youtu.be
    All comments made without prejudice and all rights reserved

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anna thank you for those 2 court rulings and this writing. I had no seen those two rulings and I am adding them to my list of court rulings. I can use them right now in an action against and attorney who on letter has represented himself as both representing South Carolina and the STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. I am pulling is oath of office right now [public records] to find out if he took the OATH within the SOUTH CAROLINA CONSTITUTION or the one in the U.S. CONSTITUTION. I am also going to see if he owns land on South Carolina. Without that, he can't claim he's a representative of South Carolina. The idiot wrote me a letter making this claim and sent it through the mail, acting as if he had authority to discard my documents. He also violated the law regarding affidavits [commercial instruments] and their right to be recorded in public records and with any office in the state of SC. So those court cases you mentioned are gold for the claim of fraud, I am making against him.
    Here's something I wanted to share with the People...because this is not used enough if at all....
    Habeas Corpus: A court order used to bring a person physically before a court in order to test the legality of the person's detention. Usually, it is directed to the official or person detaining another, commanding him to bring the person to court for the judge to determine if that person has been denied liberty without due process of law.
    TO THE PEOPLE...if your RIGHTS as secured by the Constitution as violated...then due process...another right has been violated. Then you can do a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS and you bring the court back to COMMON LAW. Habeas Corpus is a great way to challenge jurisdiction of the court. This would need to be done immediately before the court process begins, upon the issuance of a summons. To use it you better know you rights and how they are violated be willing to challenge the courts jurisdiction before trial. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/habeas_corpus

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ps. Regarding Anna's writing and habeus corpus
      FROM THE CRIMINAL CODE:
      18 USC §1512 (b) Whoever knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades
      another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person,
      with intent to - (1) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official
      proceeding; (2) cause or induce any person to -- (A) withhold testimony, or withhold a record,
      document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal
      an object with intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official
      proceeding; … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (3)
      … (c) Whoever corruptly—(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or
      other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability
      for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official
      proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20
      years, or both.
      18 USC § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally – (a) Whoever willfully and
      unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with
      intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or
      other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in
      any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under
      this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (b) Whoever, having the custody of
      any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and
      unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be
      fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his
      office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this
      subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer
      of the Armed Forces of the United States.

      Delete
  10. In addition I came up with this signed document to enter into evidence if they try to shut me down verbally...(have not tried it yet)...

    Page 1 of 2

    CASE NUMBER: ______________________

    I; John Mark Doe, would like to enter into evidence the following...

    "The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution grants me the right to know the nature and cause at this action you are bringing against me, and it grants you, the court, the duty to tell me. I do not understand the nature and cause of this action which has been brought against me."

    Under a criminal action...

    "The Constitution grants this court 2 different criminal jurisdictions: One is a criminal jurisdiction under a Common Law, and the other is a criminal action that constitutes a condition of contract under the criminal aspects of a Colorable Admiralty Jurisdiction. Under which of these 2 jurisdictions does court intend to try this criminal action?"

    Not Under Common Law But Under Colorable Admiralty Jurisdiction...

    According to the Law Merchant Codes, the very law that this contract was made under, there are certain things that constitute a valid vs an invalid contract. You must realize, that no court has the authority to enforce an invalid contract; and I deny the validity of the contract that President Roosevelt entered into with the international bankers. He borrowed bank credit on the promise to redeem in gold coins. Creating credit out of thin air, the bankers had no risk and no interest, because they didn't loan anything of value, and thus had no interest in the loan being paid: it was a 'no interest 'contract, and thus void by the international law of Nations. Therefore America owes no legal debt ."






    Page 2 of 2


    "... And now since America only owes the debt by an invalid contract, how am I as a sovereign man , legally compelled to perform to an invalid contract under the Admiralty jurisdiction of this court? You must realize that no courts in America have Admiralty jurisdiction without also having valid international contract in dispute. And I'm not aware of having entered any international contract. So I deny that any such contract exists.


    If the prosecuting attorney disagrees with my argument then...


    Instruct the "prosecuting attorney" to inform this court that there is a valid international contract in dispute, and to place this alleged international contract into evidence, and explain how I can be a party to it, and how I am compelled to perform under it.

    If the prosecuting attorney cannot comply then I request a "Motion To Dismiss"




    ___________________ _____________________
    John Mark Doe Date


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bohdi Malmberg problem with your writing...pursuant to law and history:
      1.) there is no United States Constitution...that term does not exist within the lawful or legal system
      2.) said Constitution can grant no power....as it doesn't exist
      3.) if said constitution existed...it could not grant juridictional power to the state of state or federal courts to rule because the Common Law is reserved by law to the several States and the People.
      4.) Now, true article 3 federal courts to have authority to settle disputes between the law of the several States and the equity of the federal govt. But, we don't have true article 3 courts right now, because of the reconstruction act. we have tribunals...what are tribunals? Military jurisdiction...administrative law...article 1.
      So I would not advise you attempt in any court to use your writing as it is null and void as it has no history or law or equity to back it up! It's just words on paper and that's it!

      Delete
    2. pa. Bohdi...it would be better if you studied your rights and how to use them and habeas corpus before attempting to make writings to submit to a court. You can not disavow JURISDICTION, just because you say so! Separate and distinct JURISDICTIONS exist and laws pertain to such jurisdictions. You are not MAKING USE OF THE CONSTITUTION...you are attempting to use it...but you don't even know its LAWFUL NAME!

      Delete
    3. "Thanks for your input...appreciate it greatly."

      Delete
  11. Ahh, title 18, the toolbox for the freedom mechanic.


    ReplyDelete
  12. PS. Attorneys lack the authority to practice law. Law is [COMMON LAW] and is reserved to the several States and the people. Now, pursuant to the Reconstruction Acts, all state governments were temporary shut down and a military system for state governments was instituted. This was to be temporarily, to continue to provide the People with governing bodies, which is the right of the People. However, those state govern. [STATE OF STATES operated by the Military of the UNITED STATES] are still in power as the Reconstruction never occurred. The attorneys for the military states are bar attorneys. They were never given the authority to PRACTICE LAW as that law is reserved for the several States and the People. They do not have law licenses. They have CERTIFICATES issued by Bar Association. Thus, TRINSEY V PAGLIARO they cannot rule men, women, children by their attorney crap, because they have no jurisdiction over men, women and children. Men, women and children of the several States have rights [unalienable] the supersede the rights of the corporate military and corporate govts, which include [the military STATE OF STATES/U.S. DISTRICT STATES/12 OF THEM KNOWN AS CONTINENTAL IN LAW.] So, what do the attorneys [bar certified fraudsters] have to do with People [non-persons]? NOTHING! FYI, why do you think the military put Trump in office? What does Trump continue to say...WE [WHOSE WE] are giving THE NATION...back to the PEOPLE! Who pursuant to LAW can give the NATION back to the People? THE MILITARY...because the UNION ARMY HAS BEEN IN CONTROL SINCE RECONSTRUCTION. Why do you think Grant was the reconstruction president? BECAUSE HE WAS A MILITARY GENERAL of the UNION FORCES! Trump...he's the commander and chief of the U.S. MILITARY and every other hat he wears is an illusion. ATTORNEYS? THEY HAVE NO POWER OVER THE PEOPLE AT ALL and the MILITARY NEVER GAVE THEM ANY! Anna was right, there are no judges...no counselors at law...there are only MILITARY ADMINISTRATORS of LAW! NO law: in fact, being practiced by any attorney, because law: in fact is reserved for the several States and the People [that's the Constitution]. So, Robert pursuant to law and history, you are the idiot and Anna is correct again. How, if you would like to challenge law and history, go ahead! But I can tell you the heads of the military know they are in control of the state of states!
    Here's is a great writing from Yale Law School: the Law of the several States. The law of the several States is separate and distinct from the law of the United States. It is not being practiced by bar attorneys, as they have no jurisdictional rights to make use of it. The law of the several States is reserved to men, women and children and the several State courts [IE…JUDGE ANNA…XOXOXO]. And such law, is the superior court law article 3, because it supersedes….administrative law of the lower article 1 courts. All courts in the U.S are now article 1 [including military courts].
    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c3ea/b53b4d68932590cf0a1aad1fa3f240c8232a.pdf

    Now, Robert that you know how law is established, jurisdiction is established and courts are established....you gotta ask yourself is ANNA a real SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE and is she right in her writing? No, forget it....I'll answer the question....YES, SHE IS!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you C. J.!!! All filed and safely saved for future use and reference!! Much appreciated!!
      Have a Great Day!

      Much Gratitude, Love, Awareness and Peace Be for All Now

      Delete
  13. How to stop attorneys fast: TRINSEY V PAGLIARO
    https://www.youarelaw.org/stop-attorneys-from-heresay-with-trinsey-v-pagliaro/

    ReplyDelete