By Anna Von Reitz
Let's begin with the First Amazing Fact in reverse order: no Constitutions.
Americans don't "derive their substance" from Constitutions. We derive our standing and substance from The Declaration of Independence. That is what forms the backbone and substance of our political identity. We, and our ancestors, are the ones who fought and bled for that freedom and earned the right to be called "the free, sovereign, and independent people".
So, we, Americans, don't stand "under" any Constitution and that includes any State of State Constitution.
Even though people tend to be stubbornly egocentric, and to assume that everything is about them, the Constitutions are not about us.
The Constitutions are 95% about our Federal Subcontractors, the organization of their activities, the stipulated services they are to perform, and the limitations placed on them---- which is why our Federal Subcontractors are responsible for obeying the Constitutions and supporting them---- as a condition of their employment.
The Constitutions are what grant our Federal Subcontractors their political status as U.S. Citizens and/or as Municipal citizens of the United States, so they are also intrinsically vital to our Federal Employees. Without the Constitutions, they become "stateless"--- but we sail right on.
We are only mentioned, largely in Amendments, like X and XI, and as afterthoughts -- in the Preamble and the Bill of Rights.
So as Americans who aren't Federal Employees, please wake up and realize where your strength and identity comes from: The Declaration of Independence.
And don't expect any Constitution to tell you who you are, because the Constitutions are not about you--- aren't now and never were.
This is probably a big surprise to people who have been indoctrinated all their lives to place an inordinate emphasis and importance on the Constitutions ---without, however, understanding what the Constitutions are.
The Constitutions are the implementation agreements resulting from the peace process that ended The War of Independence. The Treaties that underlie the Constitutions are what drive them and caused the Constitutions, which are Power-Sharing Agreements, to exist.
Many Americans don't even realize that there is more than one Constitution involved. Such is the ignorance promoted by the "Public" School System-- but it is an ignorance which we must now overcome.
I went over the "news" that there are no contracts under American Common Law in some detail yesterday in an Article titled bluntly, "There Are No Contracts Under American Common Law". In it, I explained why we don't do contracts and why contracts are not applicable to Americans.
The final two points speak to the same issues of identities and capacities.
Living people can't do affidavits. Only Officers or elected Officials of corporations can issue affidavits because affidavits are "statements" made by Persons -- those occupying Offices of Personhood.
People have a voice, so we speak, we say.
Persons make statements.
See the difference?
Thus, a Borough Mayor can give an affidavit. A British Warrant Officer working for the IRS can give an affidavit. A billing clerk working for the Big City Electric Company, Inc., can give an affidavit.
But you cannot stand as a living American, someone asserting all your Natural and Unalienable Rights, and issue any kind of affidavit. You have to provide testimony in the "form" of an affidavit, which is a different beastie entirely.
I have said this before and again and again, and still, not a day goes by without some "affidavit" drafted by a clueless American coming across my desk.
These are worthless pieces of paper, often composed in some weird combination of English and all capital letters Dog Latin, in which some pitiful ignoramus claims that he has Natural and Unalienable rights to do something or other---- while issuing an affidavit, and therefore, apparently serving as a member of a foreign government acting under delegated power.
Right. So ask yourselves--- does an Officer in the British Merchant Marines have the Natural and Unalienable Rights of an American?
No, he does not.
So why would you ever issue an affidavit as if you were such an Officer, claiming that you had Natural and Unalienable Rights? The condition (being an Officer of a Corporation or Military Service) precludes the possibility that you have any such rights.
No wonder their judges throw your crap on the floor and don't read it. It's nothing but gibberish and constructive oxymorons from start to finish --- endless reams of it. You talk endlessly about rights that you--at the same time-- admit you don't have, by submitting an affidavit and thereby admitting to be a Brit or an officer of the Holy Roman Empire.
It would be funny, if it didn't matter who you are and if it didn't matter in what capacity you stand --- but for millions of Americans, it does matter. It's the difference between being prosecuted under foreign law or not prosecuted at all. It's the difference between losing your home and not losing your home. It's the difference between thousands of dollars of fines and fees, versus owing nothing.
For God's sake, wake up. Know who you are. See what you are giving away to these snakes. And learn to defend yourselves from your own misguided employees.
Finally, let me address the latest rage in some patriot circles --- claiming executorship of your own estate.
Obviously, if you have an estate that requires executorship, you are "dead" and you admit that you are "dead". And if you volunteer to play "executor" of such an estate, there is no doubt whatsoever that you know and agree that you are "dead" with respect to your birthright.
The moment that you say that you are "competent to manage my own affairs" you are admitting to being a Brit and an "Authorized Representative" of the King, and yes, you may then administer your own estate --- for the benefit of the King, to whom you surrender it.
This is more of the same crap that Phil Hudok accepted, in which the perpetrators proposed that if he agreed that he was a "natural person" ---- that is, admit that he was dead, they would pay him off using his own credit card to do it.
After World War II the Powers That Were put everyone's assets into Cestui Que Vie trusts, on the pretense that so many people and so many governments were disrupted, it was impossible to know who owned what --- so the Allied Governments stepped in and seized everything belonging to everyone via legal chicanery and used this as an instrumentality to pillage and plunder and control.
They did this even in places like America and Canada, where little or none of the war actually touched our shores, where there was no bombing, and no excuse for taking such measures.
There are only three positions in a trust --- donor, trustee, and beneficiary. It is possible for a donor to also serve as the intended beneficiary of a trust, but it is not possible to be the donor and the trustee, too.
So when you claim to be the "Executor" --- the King's Man in charge of the trust, acting as the Trustee, you are unavoidably claiming to be: (1) a Brit and an Officer of the King, administering a British Estate for the King, and (2) someone having no interest in the trust being administered.
That is, by volunteering to act as the Executor of your own estate, you are gaining a secondary control of it, but you are giving it up at the same time.
I doubt that that is what most American patriots are aiming for.
No, the position of power in a trust is that of the Donor, and they have "presumed" you to be the Donor and intended Beneficiary of this trust that they have created "for" you. So take up the position of the Donor and tell them what you want done.
Make it explicit and simple.
I am an American and I am the presumed Donor of the trust and I wish it to be disgorged and liquidated in my favor. Settle any debts before the court and set me free.
See how simple that was?
Or, alternatively, enter your own vacated Trust Court, reserved for the Donors as a condition of remedy to make all this crappola "legal"----- and directly nullify and set aside whatever nonsense the rats have offered to do to your estate.
Remember that I told you that they set up all these State Trusts in the wake of the Civil War? And they operated these things under names like Ohio State and Nevada State and Wisconsin State ---- and just neglected to add the word "Trust" so that you wouldn't know what was going on?
They should have called it what it was --- Ohio State Trust, Nevada State Trust, Wisconsin State Trust --- but they didn't and they didn't for a reason. Hiding the truth of what they'd done and hiding your position of power as the Presumed Donors of these trusts (or your parents or grandparents or great-grandparents position as "presumed" Donors) would have destroyed any secondary power they had as foreign executors de son tort.
So, no, children, you don't want to ever claim to be foreign executors charged with the job of administering estates of "persons lost at sea", whereabouts unknown. You want to stand there flat-footed as the long-lost "Presumed" Donor of your own estate, or, in the case of our States, the Lawful Inheritor thereof, and ream these self-satisfied crooks all the way to Banff and back.
Knowing who you are and who you aren't, is the absolute key, both to your freedom and to control of your own assets.
Please stop tripping over your own feet? Stop issuing affidavits. Stop claiming to be executors of your own estates. Stop signing contracts--- good faith agreements are what Americans use to conduct business. Stop looking to Constitutions to tell you much of anything about your status or history, because the Constitutions are 95% about your foreign Federal Employees and have precious little to do with you.
Virtually everything I have said here has been said before in multiple other articles, but the information isn't getting out to the patriot community fast enough --- with the result that thousands more Americans are suffering and going to jail and fiddling around and getting entangled in these identity scams, and being victimized by those who are pillaging these fraudulently constructed public trusts. Form up, fellows. See through it and put an end to it.
See this article and over 2700 others on Anna's website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal buttons on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
So, for example, instead of titling a document, "Affidavit of Truth" we would title it "Testimony of Truth in Affidavit Form" ??ReplyDelete
Affirmation not Affidavit!Delete
More like "Declaration" as in Declaration of Independence as Anna said.Delete
To declare or not to declare, that is the question!!!Delete
Since the all caps name is a strawman, a dead thing. Do we not need to be the executor of the dead entities estate? If not how do we handle the all caps name?ReplyDelete
Does Executor imply fiduciary capacity vs. Ownership of those "strawmen" by filing 928 documents...different capacity.??ReplyDelete
Names & Dates of the Four U.S. Bankruptcy Constitutions
1789-1793 CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT FILES CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY #1 VIA
"The Constitution *for* the united States of America"
1859-1863 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FILES CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY #2 VIA
"The Constitution *of* the United States of America"
1929-1933 US GOVERNMENT FILES CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY #3 VIA
"The Constitution *of* the United States"
1999-2003 US GOVERNMENT FILES CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY #4 VIA
"The United States Constitution"
Like the previous 1871 de facto Federal Government, a new corporate entity began. This newer U.S. Government corporation and all of its assets became property of the international bankers (whom control the FRS).
The bankruptcy started in 1929. Roosevelt came into office and immediately declared a banking holiday.
Under the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public law 89-719, expressed in Roosevelt's Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111, and 6260 "Trading With The Enemy Act," House Joint Resolution 192 (since repealed), Public Law 73-10, of June 5, 1933, 31 USC § 5118, confirmed in Perry v. U.S., 1935, 294 US 330-381, 79 L.Ed. 912, as well as 31 USC § 5112, 5119, Senate Report 93-549, and 12 USC § 95a, which made all obligations, public or private, no longer collectable in gold.
Maximus - why is it I cannot find any record of these Chapter 11 Bankruptcy filings? I mean, from initial filing, listing of creditors, proofs of service/ notice account statuses, reversions, closings, any specific Proceedings to your four listed US Government Bankruptcies.Delete
Please forward to me links to your sources.
Maximus- Very nice and informative!!! The Assembly is very fortunate to have law researchers like you!!! Thanks from The Assembly!!!Delete
Fed-created and lent into circulation "Federal Reserve Notes" ("promissory notes" which are promisses to pay real money if any ever exists again) became that legal tender.
As of October 27, 1977 a Federal U.S. Court of Appeals ruled on Title 31 USC § 5118 that legal tender for discharge of debt is no longer required.
These promissory notes were called Federal Reserve Notes and our future treatment by the U.S. Government was to be redefined in 1933 under 50 USC, the 1917 Trading With The Enemy Act 5(b) in which American Citizens are now defined as, "an enemy of their government" and this is the reason why a Declaration of War is renewed yearly by Congress and the President!
The National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933), and Executive Orders 6073, 6102, 6111 and 6260 prove that in 1933, the United States Government formed under the executive privilege of the original martial rule, beginning when Congress was sine die March 27, 1861, went bankrupt.
A new state of national emergency was declared under which United States citizens were named as the enemy to the government and the banking system as per the provisions of the Trading With The Enemy Act of 1917.
Question to Anna if possible.ReplyDelete
Dear Anna, our civil code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch), here on German soil,
was issued in 1900; it replaced the previous Prussian common law.
The first paragraph is describing the term "natural person" and after
your specification of this term as a dead entity could it be that the
German Empire since those days is also a trust where all land-assets
of all peoples were administered by the pope`s trustee and all the
act`s of state were only a Punch-and-Judy show ??
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Nailed it Maximus.ReplyDelete
Bankruptcy is a dirty trick the banisters.Hypothicate debts on to the deepest pockets .
Lincoln used it to his advantage how is it they were bankrupt one bought Alaska 1865 end of expensive war?
Thank you. The information within this letter addresses questions and concerns I held in other matters I am currently addressing.ReplyDelete
One question: Would acting as Secure Party Creditor, operating in the Commercial world, with the specific purpose of closing contracts/accounts opened with the 'sounds similar to what I have been called' named fiction, negate the work done to change my political Status? I am not attempting to double dip, but to close all doors.
Once the true government of the people, by the people and for the people is set up and running, you might want to update or do a new Declaration of Independence and this time leave us "merciless Indian Savages" out.ReplyDelete
The Assembly is going to hold these federal contractors and employees to the letter of the law, absolutely no exceptions, period!!! I will personally make sure of that, getting closure to the objectives of The Assembly and the Father in Heaven!!! Life is awesome when you stand up for the disadvantage children of our Father in Heaven!!! It's an adrenaline rush!!!ReplyDelete
You have to provide testimony in the "form" of an affidavit, == an Asseveration witnessed by two, if using a notary, put the jurat/acknowledgement in a box with a line around out or even a double line and use the :Caveat: Using a notary on this document does not constitute any adhesion, nor does it alter my status in any manner. The purpose for the notary’s compliance with verification and identification only and not for entrance into any foreign jurisdiction, a benefit for the Pagans and Heathens so they whom I pray may become knowledgeable of the Law of Laws in the truth in our Holy Father in Heaven and repent, so they will no longer be alienated from their true God, Yahweh.ReplyDelete
Instead of "Donor" use True Bailor. The donor pays the tax on the donated value, not the donee. As True Bailor the Sec. of State is the True Bailee as Trustee [22 USC 271c(a)(1)(G) - Conservation of Estates]. A bailee who does not receive a benefit is a trustee, a bailee that does get a benefit is a debtor.ReplyDelete
Bailments and Insurance "for identifying purposes only"
Bailor Beware: Limitations and Exclusions of Liability in Commercial Bailments
A more modern system of classification, which was adopted by Professor Williston, recognizes the presence or absence of compensation as the distinguishing feature among varieties of bailments.
This scheme consists of four categories:
(1) bailments for the bailor's sole benefit;
(2) gratuitous bailments for the bailee's sole benefit;
(3) bailments for mutual benefit; and
(4) bailments to which the law attaches exceptional obligations for public policy reasons."
38. Bailees in the fourth category include common carriers and innkeepers, both of which were strictly liable for bailed property under the common law. N. PALMER, supra note 1, at 91 n.9; see also Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp. v. Nunley, 671 F.2d 842 (4th Cir. 1982) (holding that an ar- rangement in which the debtor left its mining equipment with another company constituted a bailment under West Virginia law even though the bailee's acceptance was constructive rather than actual).
225. Id. While the UCC neither defines the concept of unconscionability nor provides the elements or parameters of the doctrine, courts have identified a number of factors that aid them in determining the applicability of the doctrine of unconscionability to a given fact situation. These factors include:
(1) the use of printed forms or boilerplate contracts drawn by the party in the stronger economic position which establish industry-wide standards on a "take it or leave it" basis to the party in a weaker economic position;
(2) a significant cost-price disparity or excessive price;
(3) a denial of basic rights and remedies to a buyer of consumer goods;
(4) the inclusion of penalty clauses;
(5) the circumstances surrounding the execution of the contract, including its commercial set ting, its purpose and its actual effect;
(6) the hiding of disadvantageous clauses in a mass of fine print or in places that are inconspicuous to the party signing the contract;
(7) phrasing clauses in language that is incomprehensible to a layman or that divert his attention from the problems raised by them or by the rights given up through them;
(8) an overall imbalance in the obligations and rights imposed by the bargain;
(9) exploitation of the underprivileged, unsophisticated, uneducated and illiterate; and
(10) inequality of bargaining or economic power
6 kinds of BailmentReplyDelete
on Page 15 of 421
And there are six sorts of bail
ments. The first sort of bailment is a bare
naked bailment of goods. delivered by one
man to another to keep for the use of the
bailor: and this I call a depositum, and it
is that sort of bailment which is mentioned
in Southeote’s case. The second sort is.
when goods or chattels that are useful are
lent to a friend gratis, to be used by him;
and this is called commodatum. because
the thing is to be restored in specie.
The third sort is, when goods are left with
the bailee to be used by him for hire; this
is called locatio et conductio, and the lend
er is called locator, and the borrower con
ductor. The fourth sort is, when goods or
chattels are delivered to another as a pawn,
to be a security to him for money borrowed of him by the bailor;
and this is called in Latin vadium, and in English a
pawn or a pledge. The fifth sort is when
goods or chattels are delivered to be car
ried, or something is to be done about them
for a reward to be paid by the person who
delivers them to the bailee, who is to do the
thing about them. The sixth sort is when
there is a delivery of goods or chattels
to somebody, who is to carry them, or do
something about them gratis, without any
reward for such his work or carriage, which
is this present case. I mention these things,
not so much that they are all of them so
necessary in order to maintain the proposition
which is to be proved, as to clear the
reason of the obligation, which is upon
persons in cases of trust.
As to the first sort, ....
I , You, We are the full faith and credit evidenced by the COLB as my,your,our Bailment receipt. We bailed out a bankrupt United States - We Are the Bailors !ReplyDelete
We have a super priority claim under the Doctrine of Strong Arm Clause.
the US became a bankrupt, my COLB is the bailment receipt that I hold as True Bailor and the Sec. State D.C. is the True Bailee without benefit and therefore a Trustee - Sec State then turns around as quasi-Bailor with the full faith and credit Seal that is delegated to the State level who issues the Birth [counterfeit] Certificate used to setup the IMF CQV Trust w\ SSN that is used to create Public Persons [e.g. DL, Passport, DD214, Loan accounts, etc.] as quasi-Bailees who Do receive 'benefits' and therefore are Debtors
As True Bailor we instruct the True Bailee/Trustee [Title 22 Sec. 2715c (a)(1)[A thru H] where G states the Sec State DC is the trustee for the claimant.
The Strong Arm Clause Outmuscles the Constructive Trust- In re General Coffee Corp.: City National Bank of Miami v. General Coffee Corp