By Anna Von Reitz
Tariffs do fall under the auspices of the Federal Government and especially Trade Policies fall under the Federal Government -- however, it was never intended that the part of the Federal Government that was making these decisions would be the British Territorial Subcontractor.
What was intended and agreed upon was that the United States Federal Subcontractor run by the American Confederation of States would be making those decisions and its Congress, The United States in Congress Assembled, would have control of our country's trade policies and tariff structure.
Unfortunately, as part of the arrangements ending the Soviet Union and the decision to move their base of operations to China, the usurping British Territorial Subcontractor sold out their American Hosts, set up conditions that sent greedy corporations running to China to tap the slave labor base available there, and began using American wealth to corrupt Chinese banks, Chinese business moguls, Chinese politicians, and members of the Chinese military.
Now that hasn't worked out so well as they intended -- for themselves, of course, because they are all that matters in their view -- we are left with the noxious claw-back position that the Trump Administration is heir to, admittedly, through no fault of their own.
It's like an engagement gone bad the day before the wedding.
And our British Territorial employees are left with the results of their bad decisions made while "representing" us, back pedaling to return industrial base to our shores and dismantling the system of illegal peonage they have used to capture the value of our labor -- the entire IRS and Federal Reserve System has to go because it has been illegal since 1926, despite their attempts to excuse it on the basis of "freedom to contract".
Now they've shuffled around, found new trading partners, expanded upon old trade relationships, and been forced to share the spoils -- but they are well on the way to establishing a repeat of a bipolar monopoly system, in which Britain will hold the leverage over both the BRICs monopoly on physical assets, and the QFS monopoly on credit assets.
As we've said before, just because more paws are in the pie doesn't change the nature of the monopoly interest in a set up like they are anticipating. Britain, if allowed, will still hold the monopoly interest over both commodities and credit, and will crack the whip over man and beast for its traditional 40/60 share in the profits.
The only actual changes that they anticipate will be that they will have a small committee to deal with concerning BRICs, and will have to deal with the unseemly American politicians when it comes to QFS. This is a small potatoes exercise for them, so long as they ultimately control both sides of a monopolized money and credit system.
And, instead of dealing with the Pope as the figurehead representing the Continental European interests lapping up the 60% of the profit, they will have to deal with the UN --- which will function as a storefront for the Pope and the same old interests anyway.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Now, faced with the imminent forced demise of the illegal Federal Reserve / IRS Blood Money System, Mr. Trump has to find new ways to fund his operations.
He proposes to do two things at the same time that are logically incompatible --- gain political kudos for ending the Federal Reserve
and IRS, touting the end of the central banks, while at the same time, using the primary instrumentality of central banks, tariffs, to accomplish this.
He presents the case that tariffs are paid by people in other countries wishing to access our consumer market -- which is true, however, he fails to add that those people simply add the cost of this to the cost of the product, and the consumers pay for it all in the end.
Tariffs were invented as a means to control the availability and cost of commodities in the marketplace. They have been commodity rigging tools since their invention in Prussia during the reign of Frederick the Great. They were first used to limit coffee imports into Prussia and at the same time raise money for the Prussian Government.
Rigging commodities, which is illegal, and raising money for government spending is what tariffs still do. Tariffs are, in essence, a tax by a different name --- and anyone who uses a commodity subject to tariffs is forced to pay the tax.
So, Mr. Trump's misrepresentation that the tariffs are a source of "external" revenue -- meaning external to this country -- is disingenuous at best. Yes, manufacturers in other countries will have to overcome the extra burden imposed by the tariffs, but the consumer of the goods is the one who ultimately pays for this.
The tariff barriers Trump proposes are fair and reciprocal. The idea that American manufacturers should have to overcome punishing tariffs imposed by other countries, like Canada, often adding 50%, 100%, 200% or even more to the cost of our goods in their markets, while we lay down all barriers to our own markets and provide no protection for our commodity producers, was an obvious sell-out of American interests and gross pandering -- especially to the British Commonwealth countries.
Tariffs will have the effect of driving manufacturers back to this country. Tariffs will protect various producers and markets. They will limit and change price parameters and commodity availability. Compared to our supine position for the past hundred years and the continual rape of our manufacturing and agricultural sectors, America will gain some worthy relief from tariffs.
All that said, consumers on both sides of the borders will be paying for it, because manufacturers and shippers simply pass the cost of tariffs on to us.
The best world would have been one in which tariffs and their administrators, central banks, were never created.
But here we are. We are forced to deal with the issue in an intelligent fashion and try to determine when, if ever, commodity rigging can be legal or fair, and use "mind floss" to clear our logic circuits enough to understand that we can't do away with central banks by becoming central banks ourselves, nor can we delude ourselves into thinking that tariffs are different from taxes, simply because "tariff" and "tax" are two different words.
A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but the same applies to dung heaps.
Given the past history and present manipulations, we should all be gathering around and promoting decentralization of trade and banking functions for all we are worth.
A direct banking system such as we have designed, which actually allows free trade and land-based commerce to occur at the level of individuals without middleman interference or government profiteering, is much to be desired.
Freedom of choice, healthy market competition, and a minimum of coercive practices such as transfer monopolies, money laundering, and secondary taxes, guarantee that consumers drive the market instead of the market driving consumers.
In addition to the tariffs that consumers would have to endure under the bipolar monopoly system being advocated and put in place by the Brits and other known Bad Actors, Mr. Trump is trying to sell at 17% Sales tax to be applied to "non-essential" commodity purchases. They propose that food, second sale housing, and medical costs for prescription drugs and doctor-approved treatments would be excluded from this tax.
Unfortunately, we have experienced the slippery slopes provided by British Territorial Congresses too many times.
The infamous "Social Security" program is a good example. An old age pension program for Federal Government Employees that was based on setting up a separate Social Security Trust, was promptly misapplied and forced upon people who never held a "federal" job in their lives, the pension part of it was relabeled a "benefit", and the trust was dissolved so that all the money went directly into a General Fund for the villains in this story to waste however they pleased.
DOGE recently reported that $2.7 trillion dollars worth of Social Security money has been sent overseas, largely to people who never worked for the federal government and never paid a penny into the Social Security program.
Strangely, as disgusting and outrageous as this is, we are not surprised by the gross abuse of our country and our countrymen, by public employees who have clearly not only been acting in gross breach of trust, with no sense and no accountability, but who expect to get away with it.
We have a different plan, and insist on new employees and new programs, under a better and different system -- and we insist on being in charge of our own affairs from now on. The Subcontractors have failed their primary mission, which is and has always been very simple: protect the people and their assets.
Nobody can blame us when these same Actors tell us that their new bipolar monopoly scheme is the best thing ever, and that a simple tariff plus 17% sales tax is the answer --- we wrinkle our noses and turn away.
The Brits have finagled everything for so long, in cooperation with their "Roman" co-conspirators, that they actually think everyone else is stupid and that we don't keep track of their record of offenses. We do.
We definitely do recognize what has gone on here, what has failed to be done, and what needs to be done. All three of the phony, fraudulently constructed public trusts -- the Municipal ESTATE trusts, the British Seaman's Trusts, and the American infant decedent estate trusts that have been operated in our names have to be liquidated in our favor. The assets and the credit must be returned to us.
That is the Law, and wherever statutory "law" may attempt to contravene, it must be set aside.
We are not missing, lost at sea; we are not British Merchantmen in the business of being Taxpayers collecting taxes and tariffs for the King; we are not subject to the mistakes of people acting on hearsay and stealing the value of our birthrights when we were still babies in our cradles. The vile system of the "Three Crowns and Three Keys" seeking to enslave our bodies, our minds, and souls, must end.
Among the most repugnant of the concepts of the Catholic Counter-Reformation, along with "killing for Christ", is the idea of "benevolent enslavement".
We are done with it, and we trust that anyone acting from a sane and mature perspective can now see that (1) killing for Christ is in fact anti-Christ and against both the teachings and example of Yeshuah, and (2) slavery of any kind is never "benevolent".
Issued by:
Anna Maria Riezinger -- Fiduciary
The United States of America
In care of: Box 520994
Big Lake, Alaska 99652
April 30th 2025
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
How do we use your donations? Find out here.
