MANDATORY NOTICE of Liability, from the
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act
Sections
1605 and
1607
NOTICE OF LIABILITY:
18 USC 2333
18 USC
1341 and
1342
This MANDATORY NOTICE is provided to all Territorial United States District and State and County Courts, their officers, clerks, bailiffs, sheriffs, deputies, and employees and all Municipal Appointees including their DISTRICT, STATE, and COUNTY COURTS, their OFFICERS and EMPLOYEES:
The soul "celeste", of the oversoul group "crystal faeries", and of the ishnaans of the spirit tomril, known throughout the galaxy as "celeste:crystalfaery" and the vessels trading as "ANGELA ANANDA KIRSTEN", "Angela Ananda Kirsten", "ANGELA KIRSTEN", "Angela Kirsten", "Angela Kahealani", "ANGELA KAHEALANI", together with all derivatives and permutations and punctuations of these names, are not acting in any federal territorial or municipal capacity and have not knowingly or willingly acted in any such capacity since the day of nativity: June 23, 1950. All vessels are duly claimed by the Holder in Due Course and held under copyright in divine jurisdiction, since June 23, 1950.
These vessels are publishing MANDATORY NOTICE that they are Foreign Sovereigns from the California state, and the Colorado state and the Hawaii state of The United States of America. This is your MANDATORY NOTICE that these above-named vessels are owed all material rights, duties, exemptions, insurances, treaties, bonds, agreements, and guarantees including indemnity and full faith and credit; you are also hereby provided with MANDATORY NOTICE that these vessels are not subject to Territorial or Municipal United States law and are owed The Law of Peace, Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-161-1, from all Territorial and Municipal Officers and employees who otherwise have no permission to approach or address them. Any harm resulting from trespass upon these vessels or the use of fictitious names or titles related to them shall be subject to full commercial liability and penalties: 18 USC 2333, 18 USC 1341 and 1342.
So said, signed, and sealed this 2nd day of February on Kaua'i island.
By celeste:crystalfaery, agent
Living Soul Mailing Location:
celeste:crystalfaery
c/o: General Post Office; Keneke Street - 1
Kilauea; Kaua'i; United States Minor; Outlaying Islands; [96754-9998]
Clearfield Doctrine
"Governments descend to the Level of a mere private corporation
[like Walmart or Honda], and
take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen...
where private corporate commercial paper [Federal Reserve Notes] and
securities [checks] [are] concerned... For purposes of suit,
such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities
entirely separate from government." -
Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 (1942)
What the Clearfield Doctrine is saying is that when private commercial paper is used by corporate government, then it loses its sovereign status and becomes no different than a mere "private" corporation.
As such, government then becomes bound by the rules and laws that govern private corporations, which means that if they intend to compel an individual to some specific performance based upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules, then the government, like any private corporation, must be the holder-in-due-course of a contract or other commercial agreement between it and the one upon whom demands for specific performance are made. And further, the government corporation must be willing to enter the contract or commercial agreement into evidence before trying to get to the court to enforce its demands, called statutes.
This case is very important because it is a 1942 case after the Erie RR v. Tomkins 304 U.S. 64, (1938) case, in which the Legislatures and Judiciary changed from legislating under "Public Law", which was in consonance with the CONstitution, to legislating under "Public Policy" according to the wishes of the "Creditors of the US Corporation".
Clearfield Doctrine
By
Anna Von Reitz
Friday, May 18, 2018
The Clearfield Doctrine arises from a 1943 Supreme Court Case, Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 US 363-371.
The essence of the case is that when an incorporated government uses private bank script as its currency it sinks to the level of any other incorporated entity, loses its sovereign status (if it ever had any) and becomes subject to the same laws as any other corporation.
You can look up the actual case to your heart's delight, but it is also reprised in CJS, as I was kindly reminded tonight by a friend:
Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS) 91 CJS United States sec. 4 ".....when the United States enters into commercial business it abandons its sovereign capacity and is to be treated like any other corporation." Now, if you have followed along you know that the British Territorial United States was never sovereign with respect to us. It was merely a contractor providing us with specific governmental services and acting under our delegated power to do so. All "federal" powers were delegated to them and all federal powers are limited to the international jurisdiction of the sea.
So the Territorial United States was never sovereign on our shores and by operating as an incorporated entity, it suffered no loss of sovereignty it never had, nor did it affect the sovereign status of our lawful government by its actions.
It did however reap the wrath of the court for its self-serving semantic deceits and corrupt attempts to exercise the coercive powers of our government for its own business advantage and enrichment.
Just like BLM and the Territorial United States franchise doing business as the "State of Nevada" and the Municipal United States franchise doing business as the STATE OF NEVADA.
All these agencies and entities play upon our ignorance and let us assume that they are "government" entities, when in fact, they are commercial corporations in the business of providing governmental services --- no different than Burger King, International.
The Clearfield Doctrine strips these pretenders of their "government" cloak and when they attempt to use the abusive powers of government to enrich themselves, it's time to remind them of exactly who and what they are.
This can be used against them in any number of contexts.
They claim to have a commercial interest in your marriage and children? Prove it.
They claim to have a commercial interest in your home and land? Prove it.
They claim to have a commercial interest in your estate? Prove it.
They have a right to tax you for anything? Income? Property? Prove it.
They're not the government and they don't have any special government powers when they are operating as commercial corporations. Instead, they are subject to all the same regulations and limitations as any other corporation -- including the requirement that they operate lawfully -- not "legally", lawfully.
If you are standing on the land and soil jurisdiction of this country neither they nor their courts have any excuse for even addressing you, and if you are operating as a private American "vessel" conducting international trade and not allowing yourself to be misrepresented as a federal franchise PERSON, they are obligated to protect you and dismiss any action against you.
Use the Clearfield Doctrine to expose their feet of clay and then stomp on them, assuming that you have completed your own due diligence and re-conveyed your Trade Name and Assumed NAMES to their permanent domicile on the land and soil jurisdiction of this country, they have no right to trespass upon you or presume the existence of any contract with you.
Use the Clearfield Doctrine and object the moment any of these jokers contact you. Remember that a "Summons" from a court of foreign jurisdiction is a solicitation for business that you can object to and deny with the same impunity that you would reject a proposal to sell you twenty tons of cheap pizza.
Persistent Questions
By Anna Von Reitz
Saturday, February 24, 2018
-
I have had people saying, "Oh, no! You don't want to have anything to do with the STRAWMAN!" --- but just like in the Wizard of Oz, the STRAWMAN is your friend. I also have people running off and registering their NAMES with State of State organizations. Does it make sense to pay pirates for the use of your own name, however it is styled? Hello?
There is a logic to everything and you must follow the logic of things to the end conclusion.
When you claim and reconvey your Trade Name (also known as your Given Name) which is your Upper and Lower Case First Middle Last name just like you were taught in Grade School----that is, your name in this form: "John Mark Doe" and reconvey it back to the "land and soil" of the state where you were born --- you in the same breath claim "all styles, orderings, permutations, variations, spellings, and punctuation(s)" of that name and establish their "permanent domicile" on the "land and soil" of the state where you were born. You bring the STRAWMEN -- JOHN DOE, JOHN MARK DOE, and JOHN M. DOE -- right along with you and put them back on the land jurisdiction, too.
But, but, but....I hear some people saying, you don't want the STRAWMAN! The STRAWMAN is a public slave and owes tons of debt! Why would you ever want to claim the STRAWMAN?
To control the STRAWMAN, first and foremost. Does it make sense that you would leave any version of your name under the control of faceless bureaucrats? And as I secondarily explained, while the STRAWMAN is a debtor and a public trust when it is operating in the international jurisdiction of the sea, it is a creditor and a private trust when operating on the international jurisdiction of the land. When you bring HIM/HER back ashore, a little magic happens--- the debtor becomes the creditor.
Think of it this way: so long as the STRAWMAN is defined as a sea-going British chattel, HE is a debtor, a criminal, a slave, and a public trust. The instant HE is redefined as an American land asset, HE is a free and honorable creditor and a private trust that the rats can't mess with. So which condition do you want your NAME to be in?
Yes, you do want to claim all the variations of your name at the same time you claim and reconvey your Trade Name, and you want to record their permanent domicile on the land and soil of the state where you were born. Not only do you reconvey the STRAWMEN to a permanent domicile on the land and soil jurisdiction, you issue Certificates of Assumed Name for them and record those, too. You want to claim back the proper use and identity of absolutely everything associated with you and your estate, including whatever other new "names" they dream up for you.
And please be aware that even now they are scrambling around trying to keep their old schtick going by dreaming up new variations of NAMES and Names for you. If you watch your mail and your bank statements, you will see all sorts of peculiar things appearing: JOHN Mark DOE, J. Mark Doe, JOHAN M. DOE, JOHN-MARK:DOE, Doe: John Mark, and so on.
But your claim of all variations and permutations and spellings and punctuation and orderings will already be on the public record and they will all be predefined with a permanent domicile on the land and soil of the state where you were born, so no matter what, when the rats come to charge their newest "derivative" -- you will be ready to say, "Sorry, that's not a British prize. That's an American vessel. And here is my Certified Copies of the Public Records proving that I am the controller and owner of that name and trademark."
The paperwork also shows the recorded permanent domicile of these "vessels" on the land and soil of a sovereign state. End of story.
-
How to deal with THEIR courts?
Once you have your own paperwork together and recorded, the only responsibility you have with respect to their courts in most situations is: (1) presentation of the Mandatory Notice required under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act; (2) proper rebuttal to any summons; (3) duty to inform.
The FSIA Notice is required so that they are given fair warning that you are claiming your status. The reply to summons is to keep you out of trouble via any claim that you evaded them or showed them contempt. You are not obligated to respond to any summons other than rebutting it in a timely manner, which basically means "returning service to the court" with a registered mail letter saying, "Sorry, I am not obligated to appear and decline to do so." You will want to include a brief signed "Testimony in Fulfillment of Duty to Inform". This is just a brief statement of numbered facts in which you say whatever is true about the referenced issues you were summoned about. If you know nothing about them, you just say--- By Special Limited Appearance I testify from without the United States on my honor that: (1) It is a fact that I know nothing about the people or issues referenced in the summons dated_________. And if you do know anything that would be helpful to the court, you enumerate the facts in a similar manner. You sign that Testimony using a by-line, meaning you claim authorship like in a newspaper article--- by:________, agent [...] Send it in with the Mandatory Notice and your Summons Rebuttal.
For 9/10th of the supposed infractions people are summoned to appear for, this IS all that is necessary to avoid any further contact from the court or any possible claim that you showed them contempt or evaded anything. The key is to be polite and remember that these people are supposed to be working for you, so you do have a reasonable cause to assist them in the discharge of their duties and a duty under the Public Law to inform them regarding crimes that you may have witnessed.
For the other 1/10th, you have to recall that while they do not have any nexus of authority related to you most of the time, they do have a general law enforcement duty related to the delegated powers and their governing constitution. If you stray into their jurisdiction, you become subject to their administration. For example, the federales have delegated authority over sales of alcohol, tobacco and firearms across state lines. If you are a gun shop owner engaged in selling guns across state lines, you come under federal jurisdiction for those activities and have to hop through their hoops and pay any applicable sales and manufacturing taxes related to those activities--- and if you fail to do so, their courts can legitimately call you to account for that.
Similarly, if you are directly involved in any event on actual federal land, such as a fistfight on a Naval Base, you can be legitimately summoned as a Witness, even though you are a Foreign Sovereign with respect to them. If you participated in the fight, you can be held for 72 hours and then released to the local Sheriff.
The rules are similar for the "federated" State of State and County corporate franchise organizations. Their General Sessions laws may arguably apply to (and for) you via administration of the Public Trust established for the actual state in the wake of the Civil War, but none of their statutory laws do.
The thing to remember is that nobody wants a bunch of violent criminals ramrodding around the country doing what they please. We are all obligated in our own small sphere to keep the peace and avoid harming other people and their property. It's a very simple and common sense standard when you get down to it and once you know who you are, who they are, and what is supposed to be happening.
The other thing I want everyone to remember is that the American Common Law is very straightforward and often Draconian. You rustle cattle, you get hung. Period. You get drunk and drive and run over and kill a teenager walking home from school, you get tried for murder no ifs, ands, or buts.
I say this to point out that while the American Common Law offers people a lot more freedom, it also requires a lot more social responsibility. There is no moddlecoddling of criminals and no discretion for judges. What the jury decides, the jury decides. And that's that. Any other mitigating circumstances, your bad childhood, your fear of dogs--- doesn't count.
So when you put your Trade Name back on the land and soil and place yourself under the American Common Law--- be aware that true freedom requires the responsible exercise of that freedom.
-
What about people born in the District of Columbia or the members of the military serving overseas?
If either one (or both) of your parents was born on the land and soil of an American state, you can claim your nationality through either one them.
If neither parent was born on the land and soil of an American state, you are stuck being a Federal Citizen, and have to claim Equal Civil Rights as your remedy, until you establish your own permanent domicile within an actual state of the Union.
A similar situation pertains to first generation immigrants. They are naturalized as United States Citizens and retain that public status until and unless they meet the requirements (varies from state to state) to become state nationals-- what the Federales call "United States Nationals".
Generally speaking you have to live in a state for a specified period of time, have to declare your intention, have to establish a permanent home, have to avoid any felony convictions, and demonstrate that you are self-supporting, of age, of sound mind, and generally good character. It's a rigorous but reasonable standard established in the General Session Laws of each state, and if you meet the standard and follow the instructions established by the law, you can claim to be a Floridian, Vermonter, or Wisconsinite like everyone else there.
-
What about Social Security and other federal programs? Won't I lose all that I paid for if I do this?
See Item 1. You don't lose anything. You gain control of what is rightfully yours and cease to be treated as a mentally incompetent ward of the State of State.
For people already getting payments from Social Security the key word is "retired". The "federal government" is nothing more or less than corporations in the business of providing stipulated governmental services, just like GM is in the business of building and selling cars, and Dell is in the business of building and selling computers. If you are like most Americans, you have never been employed by the federal government at all and have been misidentified as a federal worker and "taxpayer" most of your life. You paid into their social welfare/retirement fund, called the Public Charitable Trust, by mistake, as the result of disinformation and coercion telling you that you were required to get a Social Security Number and required to pay federal income taxes and required to act as a federal citizen.
It's still the same situation as if you had worked for GM or Dell and vested in their retirement program. Once you are retired, you no longer have to wear a GM uniform or name tag or carry a Dell Employee ID. Same thing with the federal government. You are retired from any and all such obligations of their "citizenship" and are free to return to your birthright status without it impacting any iota of what you are owed.
But, but, but.... OMG! What happens if these federal corporations go bankrupt and I lose my pension?
Not to worry. You are actually their Priority Creditors. The Veterans and the Pensioners get first dibs. Just claim up your Name/NAMES and remove their permanent domicile to the land and soil of your birth state. We have already set up the Indemnity Bond for your State and an Equal Protection Claim for you, and since your whole problem has been caused by fraud and Breach of Trust in the first place, you are triply indemnified.
The Social Security program established by the Federales was a cheapskate program that was mismanaged---a bureaucratic nightmare, and on top of everything else, anything you got back from it was taxed. This makes more sense when you realize that Social Security was twisted around and redefined as part of the Public Charitable Trust that was established in the wake of the Civil War as a welfare trust to take care of displaced plantation slaves--converting the pension payments you are owed into welfare benefits that are a non-obligatory debt of a bankrupt corporation.
There can be little to no doubt that the rats in Congress intended to bankrupt their governmental services corporations and stiff the American Veterans and Retirees.
However, this was observed and objected to twenty years ago, and doggedly pursued all this time, to prevent that from ever happening. Instead of you-all suddenly facing old age without a penny and no medical care and all the other nightmarish possibilities that present themselves to your imaginations, you will be in receipt of far better care, far better payments, and far less red tape.
The new system will be far better than anything currently available and provide a much broader spectrum of care and higher retirement payments for both Veterans and Retirees in general, whether public or private sector. It will also provide services that are currently unavailable-- counseling and physical therapy options that don't exist now, in-house treatment programs for alcoholism and drug addiction, nutritional and natural healing options that aren't currently covered, hospice and caretaker respite services and much, much more.
So, instead of fear-mongering and spreading rumors and sitting around on your duffs feeling helpless and scared, get up on your hind legs and start walking with your heads up and your shoulders back. You have worked hard all your lives and paid your dues in Good Faith. You have nothing to be ashamed of. Those who have defrauded you and abused your trust are the ones who need to rethink their values and blush.
Bevins Declaration at the start of every meeting public or private:
"Anyone here acting as an undisclosed federal agent or provocateur,
anyone seeking to collect information for Third Parties,
anyone working for some other agenda such as
entrapment or solicitation or redirection of our group
is now invited to declare themselves or leave."
To All White Hats Everywhere
By: Anna von Reitz
Thu, 2 Aug 2018 11:19:02 -0800
Our effort to restore our lawful government is being interfered with by low-level minions of bankrupt "states of states" who are still trying to prey upon Americans using their old mis-characterization and identity theft routine. It is also being tampered with by "Homeland Security" and the British "Taskforce on Money Laundering" -- both of which are trying to extort money from us and control our access to our own money and also trying to censor us using German affiliates.
It is well past the time for these impediments to go away. Please make sure that this message goes viral and is forwarded to President Trump.
Destry Payne has been arrested again by "COUNTY OF" officials who have absolutely no authority to even address him.
They need to be informed by the Governor and the President that their "County" is a corporate franchise of a failed governmental services corporation and that they have no cause and no authority to arrest any American for regulatory infractions that do not apply to them.
85% of all the Acts of Congress do not apply to Americans or extend to the States of the Union and they are not published in the Federal Register as a result.
Neither Territorial nor Municipal franchises operating as "States of States" nor "STATES OF STATES" have any separate or greater or different authority than their parent corporations.
So if you are not a Federal Employee or Dependent and you are not "knowingly and willfully" accepting enfranchisement as a Territorial or Municipal corporation, you are owed immediate statutory exemption.
What we have here are the equivalent of Dairy Queen employees attacking and arresting Americans off our streets under the false presumption that the victims are also Dairy Queen employees who are out of uniform or guilty of some other "infraction" against company policy. Oh, and add that the "Dairy Queen" in question is bankrupt.
This is an unconscionable violation against Destry Payne's Natural Person and against his guaranteed rights and freedoms and it doesn't matter whether you address it as a constitutional issue under Article IV freedom from unlawful arrest and attainder, or under the Lieber Code and Hague Conventions or under the conventions of Law Merchant.
Identity theft and the utilization of false legal presumptions as a result of identity theft is a crime in all venues and all jurisdictions. Period. So the meatheads need to understand that and stop doing it.
Now.
We are well-aware of the false "dossiers" that have been concocted by the IRS under the guidance of the IMF, which are made-up-out-of-thin-air totally fictional "stories" about each and every American. According to these grossly falsified "Master Files" I am or have been employed as the manager of a rum distillery in Barbados and my husband has been selling guns in South America -- all without leaving our kitchen table in Big Lake, Alaska.
These criminal practices seeking to provide an excuse for false prosecutions and false presumptions against Americans have to stop. The whole damned "system" needs to be thrown out in the dung heap of history and replaced by the actual government we are owed without delay and any employee that doesn't agree needs to be fired.
That includes both Territorial and Municipal employees, agency personnel and departmental personnel, State of State and County Of personnel, too.
We are restoring and "reconstructing" the Federal level of our Federal Government, a task that is long overdue. If anyone doesn't like it, they can find the nearest river and jump. Mr. Trump knows what has to be done and the Queen has been given her marching orders.
We expect:
- all interference with our communications and attempts to censor our communications to stop;
- all interference in our banking transactions and transfers of actual assets as well as credit owed to us to cease;
- all "Company" personnel at the State of State, STATE OF STATE and "county" levels of all government service organizations to be fully informed and kept within the bounds of their limited jurisdiction. This includes "County of" Sheriffs and Patrol Officers and Judges.
All Delegated Powers have returned to us by Operation of Law. We have acknowledged and accepted the return of those Powers. Any other exercise of those Powers is extended on a month-by-month basis to President Trump and his Administration only.
Proper communications are necessary to expedite progress and cessation of any infantile notion that we are "the enemy" must cease. We are the employers, owners, operators, underwriters, shareholders, and sovereigns and we are sick and tired of our employees being misdirected, misinformed, and allowed to run rampant.
Please pass the word to the rank and file and up and down the food chain in both directions -- and make sure that everyone is informed and understanding -- or fired.
Pernicious Claims of "Incompetency" in Conflict of Interest
by Anna von Reitz
Sun, 30 Sep 2018 14:37:20 -0800
The latest trick of the Foreign Vermin on our shores is to call our "competency" into question using their own bought and paid for "Uniformed Officers" --- medical doctors conscripted against their will and licensed under the old Federal Title 37 provisions -- to testify against us and claim that we are not "competent".
This has been part and parcel of their deception and racketeering plan from the start.
However, the "competency" that they are actually trying is our financial competence. They assume that we, like them, are bankrupt and therefore "incompetent". If so, they will gladly steal anything of value you have to underwrite their own debts.
It's time for these criminal gangs to be (1) ignored and (2) arrested.
The first question to the Judge should be --- "Are you a U.S. Citizen?"
They will say, "Yes."
And your second question should be --- "By what right then, are you addressing me, a national of The United States of America (Unincorporated)?"
They are operating in a Foreign Jurisdiction on our shores and they have no right whatsoever to address any of us.
Third question --- if there ever is one --- "By what right and for what reason do you question my competency?"
Fourth question --- if there ever is one -- "By what stretch of imagination do you propose to use your own employees as supposedly expert and unprejudiced third party witnesses? Your doctors are all licensed to your State of State organization, therefore are incompetent witnesses for conflict of interest."
Fifth question --- "Under what Treaty are you operating on our shores?"
Sixth question --- "Are you aware that our Government, The United States of America (Unincorporated) has a permanent Treaty of Amity and Peace dated November 19, 1794 --- and that you are in violation of that Treaty right now? "
Seventh question --- "Where is your proof that the entity you are citing as DEFENDANT or Defendant exists? I wish to see the incorporation documents, and provenance, if you please?"
Start holding these vermin feet first to the fire. Use questions to do it. Give them no opportunity to gain any kind of excuse. If summoned, don't go to their courts. If you do know anything about a crime they are addressing, send your "Crime Report" to the District Attorney, Registered Mail, Return Receipt Requested. Otherwise, stay away from these courts and if they interfere with you, refuse to sign or say anything to them and never give them any identification. Give them a card with your Counselor-at-Law's name and address and nothing more.
If they seize upon you and detain you creating a charge of False Arrest, complain directly to the District Attorney.
NOTICE & DECLARATION
I REVOKE, RESCIND, CANCEL, VOID AND DO NOT CONSENT TO ANY POWER OF ATTORNEY I MAY HAVE AUTHORIZED
I DECLARE & CLAIM ARTICLE III COURT JURISDICTION AND DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY
If you do not know what this is, then verify with your supervisor if they wish to be responsible for your actions before making an unauthorized legal determination which may place you, your supervisor and your principal (Secretary of State) in an Article III impeachable felony situation which is treason. You were in violation of your job and oath of office the moment you declared an emergency by turning on the red lights to stop me which is a felony when there is no emergency. By interfering in my Right To Travel you are violating the constitution of the United States becoming an impostor in office and an outlaw employee committing fraud by taking wages under false pretenses. Any decision on your part to continue after advisement will place you in jeopardy and possible penalties under full commercial liability in your, your supervisor's, and principals' public AND private capacity. The implementation of codes, rules, regulations and statutes are nothing more than ex post facto law absolutely forbidden by the united states constitution and the state constitutions to which you swore oaths to uphold. It is Gross Negligence to fail to distinguish between a statute and a law. "No state shall convert a liberty [e.g.Right To Travel] into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it."
Murdock v Peon, 319 US 105 1943
"If the state converts a liberty [Right To Travel] into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity"
Shuttlesworth v Birmingham, 373 US 262 1963
"The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the constitution is null and void of law."
Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 1803
"Qualified immunity defense fails if public officer violates clearly established right because a reasonably competent official should know the law governing his conduct"
Jones vs Counce 7-F3d-1359-8th Cir 1993; Benitez v Wolff 985-F3d 662 2nd Cir 1993
In Common Law, which is the law of the land, am I lawfully required to answer your questions?
An answer of yes means you are committing fraud, whether you are aware of it or not, and you must now provide me with your full name and bonding information, so I can contact Risk Management to report this crime.
I'm your employer -- I'm your boss -- You serve me -- I don't serve you -- I don't want you to lose your job
"The Fifth Amendment provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. The Amendment not only protects the individual against being involuntarily called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution but also privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings."
Lefkowitz v. Turley, 94 S.Ct. 316, 414 U.S. 70 (1973)
"Where an individual is detained, without a warrant and without having committed a crime, (traffic infractions are not crimes), the detention is a false arrest and false imprisonment."
Damages Awarded: Trezevant v. City of Tampa, 241 F2d. 336 (11th CIR 1984) Motorist illegally held for 23 minutes in a traffic charge, was awarded $25,000 in damages. The above case sets the foundation for $75,000 dollars per hour, or $1,800,000 dollars per day.
Police Officer; A re-venue agent that enforces corporate government contracts and protects the assets of the corporate government including human resources. Compels performance, no injured party necessary. One who has policing powers as found in a "POLICE STATE" for example; Nazi Germany
OR
Peace Officer; Maintains the peace and the safety of the people
Update on Court Matters for State Nationals/Citizens
By Anna Von Reitz
2020-07-02 13:30
All those who are awake will be seeing some very odd things going on in the courts and with the nomenclature they are trying to use, and even with the way they are stating purported charges.
For example:
Court Orders signed by judges using names styled like this:
John M CHAMBERS or LISA S White
Charges brought by entities styled like this:
State Of Florida or FLORIDA
Charges restated in ways that make no sense,
like this:
Fleeing of Justice (instead of Fleeing from Justice)
Defendants addressed like this: John Maynard Keynes, but with the number (2) in parenthesis, indicating that there are two Defendants present, albeit only one name.
All these details are important, and all of them need to be severely questioned when and if you are snagged into dealing with these courts.
"Just what is this Plaintiff entity doing business as "State Of
Florida" styled in this manner?
I have never seen this entity before in my life and certainly have no contract
with it or obligation to it."
"Why does this docket present one three-part Proper Name, yet indicate the presence of two Defendants?"
"What does this charge --
"Fleeing of Justice" --
mean?
One could flee from justice or flee to justice,
but fleeing "of" justice seems an impossibility,
as it would mean "fleeing apart from justice" or "fleeing
separate from justice" or "fleeing belonging to justice".
How is anyone supposed to answer a nonsensical charge?"
And that is just for starters.
The very names of the courts are also being changed to amount to gibberish,
for example:
The STATE Court of Missouri The State Court of MISSOURIthe Superior Court for
TENNESSEEetc.,
etc.,
etc.,
"Pardon me, your Honor, but I have never seen the name of any court styled in the way that this court is presenting itself, and it appears that the very name of the court is gibberish, a combination of English and Latin amounting to fraud. How do you answer for this anomaly -- on the record, please?"
So, they are piling on a lot of new crappola and still trying to make their scheme work and are still trying to address false commercial claims made by the erring Municipal Government contractors.
But their situation is getting more and more desperate and all their attempts to deceive people are more threadbare by the hour, as Americans are tuning up their brains and observational skills.
There are always many "gurus" out there offering answers and selling their pet legal theories like so many pastries in a shop. Quite often the purveyors of these wares are well-intentioned and eager to test their latest theories -- on you and your case.
Let me stress the fact that if you have to deal with these courts at all, you should not (unknowingly) allow yourself to be a Test Case.
And in no case should you dabble in such activities with Other Parties and then attempt to implicate me or my processes because you added them in as an afterthought. That will get you nothing but Minus Brownie Points with me.
Changing your political status is not a Magic Bullet and is not, generally speaking, retroactive with respect to charges brought by these foreign courts.
There are two reasons for this, the first of which is simply that if you are already in trouble with these courts and you then change your political status, it may be interpreted as "self-serving" and as an attempt to "flee justice". If applicable, this will have to be answered successfully before any other consideration.
The second reason is that crimes that occur in one jurisdiction may or may not also apply in other jurisdictions. Murder, for example, is murder. Armed robbery is armed robbery. No matter which jurisdiction you are in, these are crimes and they will be prosecuted as crimes.
So in no case should you think of the change of political status as a "Get out of jail free card."
And in no case should you ever imply that I am responsible for your actions taken in respect to any court case when you are "mixing and matching" bits and pieces from other sources.
For example, I have long warned everyone against presenting "writs" of any kind in these courts, as they do not, generally speaking, apply to anything these courts entertain. Writs belong to a different species of law.
In particular, I have discouraged the use of Writs of Habeas Corpus for the following reasons: (1) Writs of Habeas have been suspended in Territorial Courts since 1863; (2) Writs of Habeas are allowed in Municipal Courts only to the extent that the parties are Federal Civil Service Employees or Federal Municipal Dependents owed "Equal Civil Rights" and as we have all learned, "Equal Civil Rights" are privileges that can be suspended at any time.
Mr. Trump signed an Executive Order a few months ago declaring a "National Emergency" and suspending "Equal Civil Rights" -- including any right that Federal citizens have with respect to Writs of Habeas Corpus.
So, if you know your butt from buttercups, you would not present a Territorial Court with a Writ of Habeas Corpus and you would not present a Municipal COURT with a Writ of Habeas Corpus at this time.
Despite the above explanations being given to people,
explicitly,
just as I have given it to you above,
there are still those who are insisting on trying to enter Writs of Habeas
Corpus into Territorial and Municipal court cases --
even Writ Law from England published in the 1600's, which --
if it applied to anyone --
could only apply to
(1) Englishmen and/or
(2) British Territorial Citizens, except that
the entire reason that Americans would present
a Writ of Habeas to a Territorial Court in the first place,
is that they are NOT British.
And then, having made this obvious blunder, against my advice, these same people have the unmitigated gall to come back to me and complain when they are (rightly) rebuffed.
In order to profit from anything I teach or recommend, you must take the time to learn and educate yourself about the logic and history of things, pay attention to what you are doing, and then, actually take my advice. Follow my recommendations.
Don't take someone else's advice, fall on your nose and look like a loon in court, and then think you are going to blame me for it. Okay? Everyone got that?
Here for the record is the general protocol for an avowed and recorded American State National or State Citizen being addressed by one of these foreign courts.
When you hear your name called, you stand up without going into the court arena that is separated from the public by a railing, and you ask the important question: "Is the Defendant being called a corpse-orat, or a corporate officer, or a living man (woman)?"
This is the crucial question. The court will not want to answer. The judge will most likely answer with another question, like, "Why do you ask?"
"Because before God, I am a living man (woman) and I do not belong in this court."
And that is the coup de grace. That is the entire issue. If, in the unlikely event that proceedings continue and you are questioned more severely, you will want to know what kind of court is addressing you -- whether it is a Municipal COURT or a Territorial Court. So ask.
Most likely, they will have to admit that it is a Territorial Court, but regardless of the answer, you know how to respond.
1. If it is a Municipal COURT, you answer that you are exempt from all Municipal duty and service and you claim your exemption found at Title 50, Section 7 (c) and (e) of the 2012 Edition of the Federal Code.
2. If it is a Territorial Court, you answer that you are a Foreign Sovereign and you give them your mandatory Foreign Sovereign Immunity Notice, and you claim your exemption under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of The Constitution of the United States of America and Amendment XI thereof, which provides that no American is subject to foreign law.
That's it, whether a Municipal COURT or a Territorial Court, you have your answer ready and you have your proof in your handy-dandy file folder. If there is ANY continued "offer" to contract presented to you at all, you look at the Clerk or the Prosecutor, and gently inquire, "May I ask the birthdate of the Defendant?"
The Clerk will rattle around and offer one of two dates -- what you would normally recognize as your birthday, and another date a few days or weeks later, that is completely unfamiliar to you.
If they offer the familiar birthday, they are trying to identify you as a Ward of the Federated State of State organization in the State where you were born, and you are in Territorial Court.
If they offer the unfamiliar birthdate, they are trying to prosecute you as a commercial corpse-orat under Municipal Law.
In either case, the answer is the same. "Your Honor, I have court admissible evidence in my hand of a crime committed against me while I was still a baby in my cradle. My identity was stolen and I was impersonated and a foreign political status was unconscionably conferred upon me, an American civilian. Here's the proof."
Wave the Birth Certificate at them, let them examine it -- if they dare.
"Let the record show that as a living man (woman) I have a day of creation that nobody knows and no certain name, either."
"The Clerk has submitted the evidence that the Defendant has a birthday and is therefore an individual created under 1 USC 8 and is a Territorial Citizen."
Or:
"The Clerk has submitted the evidence that the DEFENDANT has a birthdate (different from the normal birthday) and is therefore an individual corpse-orat created under Municipal law."
I have presented proof (the BC) that both these entities were created and attached to me without my conscious knowledge or permission when I was still a baby in my cradle. I am in fact a living American, a non-combatant and peaceful civilian, who has been grossly presumed upon by my employees and subjected to unconscionable contracting processes.
I owe no duty to this court, but this court has a duty to me to set me free from any presumption of obligation under any foreign law, and to return to me my assets and my freedom without debt or encumbrance."
Period. The end.
This is the course that I recommend when answering anything to these courts at any initial hearing at all. Cut to the chase. Do not "entertain or encourage" any false suppositions.
If the validity of your presentation is questioned at all, you may refer them to the State Assembly Recording Secretary to affirm your political status and also refer to the recorded evidence -- in particular, the 1779 Declaration.
Thus you stand acquitted of any charge these courts can bring, though in a serious case, like murder charges, they will hold you and refer you for trial under our American Common Law, which is considerably more harsh in such cases than the Territorial or Municipal law.
Why? Because the Territorial and Municipal law both regard you as property, and keeping their property alive so as to profit from incarceration fees and taxes and other emoluments is often more attractive than putting an end to your criminality, whereas the Public, which is charged the expense for your incarceration has the opposite motivation, and a sincere desire to protect those who are not causing trouble from violent criminals.
I often use the example of a drunk driver swerving off the road onto a sidewalk and hitting and killing an innocent pedestrian. Under American Common Law, you are facing capitol punishment and Murder One, because you had cause to know how drunk you were and you chose to drive anyway -- and the all-important point is that you killed someone.
Under the foreign corporate forms of law, you are facing a host of lesser charges -- vehicular homicide, involuntary manslaughter, drunk driving, etc., etc., etc. -- and looking at jail time and fines and property losses. Not the loss of your own life.
So it pays to know where your bread is buttered and which form of law you are standing under and why. And if you don't "get it" -- brother, sister -- it isn't my fault for trying to clue you in.
Finally, I recommend that whenever you are mis-addressed, coerced, or presumed upon by any of your erstwhile public employees and certainly any time that your constitutional guarantees are challenged or violated in any way, that you produce a complaint and Witnessed Testimony in Lieu of an Affidavit and deliver it to the Office of the State Prosecutor. It's their duty to ride herd on the rest of the animals in this zoo and to defend your constitutional guarantees. Call upon them to do so.
And if all else should fail, take it to the United States State Department, because at the end of the day, mis-addressing and importuning an American civilian as if they were Territorial or Municipal persons, is a diplomatic issue requiring prompt action by the Secretary of State.
If the Secretary of State does not provide remedy and relief, it goes higher.
Pray God our system is never so broken that the Secretary of State doesn't know their duty and their job, and in the meantime, work like hamsters in a wheel to build your own State Assembly and get your own court officers elected, fill your jury pools, and set up your American Common Law Court for the civilian populace, so that Ex Parte Milligan, 71 US 2, kicks in, and there is no longer any excuse for these foreign courts to ever address you at all.
All They Wrote [Paul Stramer - Lincoln County Watch] By Anna Von Reitz It is sometimes --- often --- necessary for us to educate not only ourselves and our children, but our public officials as well. I do not suggest that any American quote U.S. Supreme Court cases lightly, as these are foreign courts, and your purpose in referencing their decisions should be spelled out for the erring public officials. Use a disclaimer, verbally or in writing, something to the effect: "I am saying this to educate and instruct you concerning the decisions of your own Supreme Court, not for any other purpose and not to seemingly subject myself to their opinions. You, however, owe them duty and due diligence." And then, here's a couple real good examples that a reader left in the comments section earlier today, to either hand to the "government officials" or quote or read or whatever you have to do to get the take home message drilled into their heads: U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION: "All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accordance with God's laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lack due proces"¦-- Rodrigues v. Ray Donovan U.S. Department of Labor, 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348, decided in 1985. And again, in Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2nd) 261. "The common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are "not the law". So, now, let them prove that you are a government official or government authority --- and are agreeing to act in that capacity. Especially now that your actual State Assemblies are in Session, there is no reason for any public employee to presume that they have any custodial role or executor-ship related to you --- which is another factoid they need to hear when and if they misaddress you. In a way, these two excellent citations above, are a perfect and complete defense against anyone presuming that you are subject to private tribunals. It's well-worth remembering them and using them whenever appropriate. ----------------------------