Hi Dave, I watch your site daily. Do you think you can work within a court system that are BAR? See below.
Crown Temple in Chancery All royal sovereignty of the old British Crown since that time has passed to the Crown Temple in Chancery.
desertspeaks
I’ll bet you believe that you are in the UNITED STATES!! You’re wrong!! UNLESS
you live in washington dc,.. YOU ARE NOT IN THE UNITED STATES!!!
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-307 (h) [Location of United States.] The United States is located in the District of Columbia.
“The United States Government is a municipal CORPORATION .” Volume 20: Corpus Juris Secundum, (P 1785: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S.Ct. 1973, 41 L. Ed. 287)
28 USC 3002 (15) “United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002
congressman West Of Florida Admits The United States Is A CORPORATION Incorporation Date 4/19/89 File No. 2193946 Registered in Delaware Congressman West: The United States Is A CORPORATION
“A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government …” (Kitchens v. Steele 112 F.Supp 383)
If you’re a citizen of the United States, you’re a corporation, so says the US Supreme Court. Metropolitan Life Ins. v. Ward Ala. 470 U.S. 869, 105 S.Ct. 1676 at 1683, 84 L.Ed. 2d. 751.
Now about those PESKY federal MUNICIPAL STATUTES!!
The United States district courts are NOT District courts of the United States! United States district courts are FEDERAL TERRITORIAL COURTS!
rule of statutory construction “inclusio unius est exclusio alterius,” Inclusion of one is exclusion of others.
Since federal courts are creatures of statutes only, they can only cognize subject matters which are assigned to them expressly by statutes.
When it comes to criminal jurisdiction, the controlling statute is 18 U.S.C. 3231. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3231
This statute grants original jurisdiction to the District Courts of the United States (“DCUS”), but does not mention the United States District Courts (“USDC”)!
“District Court of the United States” refers to federal courts for the State territory; and the phrase “United States District Court” refers to federal courts for the federal territory.
Further proof of this can be found by comparing 18 U.S.C. 1964(a) and 1964(c). Both statutes grant authority to issue remedies to restrain racketeering activities prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 1962. Section 1964(a) grants civil jurisdiction to issue injunctive relief to the DCUS; Section 1964(c) grants civil jurisdiction to issue injunctive relief to the USDC. Both refer to the exact same subject matter, namely, RICO (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) activities.
These two statutes are otherwise identical, why did Congress need to enact two separate statutes?
The answer is simple: one authority was needed for the DCUS, and the other was needed for the USDC. Simple, really, when the sedition by syntax is explained in language which penetrates the deception.
What do we do with this earth-shaking discovery? Well, when any federal case is filed, the criminal defendant should submit a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request immediately, for such things as any regulations which have been published in the Federal Register, pursuant to the Federal Register Act, for 18 U.S.C. 3231.
It won’t hurt to submit similar FOIA requests for the credentials of all federal employees who have “touched” the case in any way.
Since we already know that there are no regulations for 18 U.S.C. 3231, and that federal employees will usually refuse to produce their credentials, your FOIA requests will be met with silence, whereupon you will file a FOIA appeal. Once the appeal deadline has run, you are in court.
But which court? Guess …
A United States District Judge in Arizona, in late Spring of 1996, ruled that the United States District Court (“USDC”) is not the proper forum to litigate a request under the FOIA. That can only be because FOIA requests must be litigated in the District Court of the United States (“DCUS”).
Now we have the United States checkmated. The proper forum for FOIA is now res judicata. If the DCUS is the proper forum for FOIA, and if the USDC is NOT the proper forum for FOIA, then the USDC is not the proper forum for prosecuting violations of ANY FEDERAL TITLE either, because the USDC does not show up in 5 U.S.C. 552 or in 18 U.S.C. 3231!
They cannot provide factual evidence PROVING that the CONstitution and laws/statutes apply to you simply for PHYSICALLY being within the exterior boundaries of a PRIVATE FOR PROFIT CORPORATE FICTION commonly called the STATE OF __.. !
Fyi; The STATE is not the ground and the ground is not the STATE!
They have no jurisdiction!

“Waivers of Constitutional Rights not only must be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts, done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and consequences.” ~ Brady v. U.S., 379 U.S. 742 at 748 (1970)

The Constitution does not Delegated Authority. Show me???? When you are not a corporation no one can sue you??????????
“ Ultra vire. An act preformed without any authority to act on a subject. Haslund v. City of Seattle, 86 Wash. 2d 607 547 P.dd 1221, 1230. The term has broad application and include not only act prohibited by the charter, but acts which are in excess of powers granted and not prohibited, and generally applied either when a corporation has no power whatever to do an act, … People ex rel. Barrett v. Bank of Peoria, 295 Ill. App. 543, 15 N. E. 2d 333, 335. Act is vltra vires when corporation is without authority to perform it under any circumstances or for any purpose. Ultra vires act of municipality is one which is beyond powers conferred upon it by law. Charles v. Town of Jeaneratte, Inc. La. App,. 234 So. 2nd794, 798.” Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Edition.

By fraud the United Nation banksters have created a cestui que trust in the name of every living soul when they are given birth to be use to finance their factious debt, and to facilitate the slaver
( bondage) of we the people.

“ The governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them. But the people, as the original fountain might take away what they have delegated and entrust to whom they please. The Sovereignty in every state resides in the people of the state and they may alter and change their form of government at their own pleasure. Luther v. Borden, 48 US 1, 12 Led 581.
“ There is no such thing as power of inherent Sovereignty in the government of the United States. In this country sovereignty resides in the People, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it; All else is withheld.” Jullird v Greenman 110 U. S. 421

Attorneys Non –Positive Law must have contract.
“(a) The controlling rule is that “ absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense … unless he was represented by counsel at his trial. “ Argersinger, 407 U. S. , at 37. Pp. 5-6.” Alabama v Shelton 535 U. S. 654
.”… when the trial of a misdemeanor starts that no imprisonment may be imposed , even though local law permits it, unless the accused is represented by counsel” Argersinger v Hamlin 407 U. S. 25-40
The practice of Law Can Not be licensed by any state/State.” “The practice of Law is an occupation of common right.” Sims v. Aherns, 71 S. W. 720 (1925)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JnRJ8R7ccy8

Color of law. “ That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit feigned, having the appearance of truth.” Windle v. Flinn, 196 Or. 654, 251 P. 2d 136, 146.
Color of law, The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state is action taken under ‘color of law.” Atkins v. Lanning. D. C. Okl., 415 F. Supp. 186, 188.
The US Supreme Court Rule 45- “ All process of this Court issues in the name of the President of the United States.”
All Courts in Canada and the United States are United Nations Courts under the UNIDROIT Treaty for 30 years. All Courts are facto courts. Only can be used in federal areas.
“ Unconstitutional” !!!

Bearing in mind the legal maxim that no man can judge in his own cause, it should be crystal clear that no judge in the Commonwealth could lawfully rule on a challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of the monarch. It is a question of their own authority, so they are obviously not impartial to the outcome. That is why the ONLY way the question of jurisdiction can lawfully and impartially be decided is by a jury. And that is exactly why John Anthony Hill requested a jury trial to decide his challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of Elizabeth.
No judge under any circumstances can deny someone their right to request a jury trial. No judge can lawfully rule in their own cause. That doesn’t mean they won’t try, it only means that when they do, they are committing a criminal act (just as Judge Jeffrey Vincent Pegden did at John Anthony Hill’s trial) and that their decision is immediate grounds for an appeal and for a citizen’s arrest. The fact that the court and its corrupt judge tried to ignore this particular point is proof that they are well aware they have no lawful authority.
That is one of the reasons why this is a landmark case. If everyone began using this defence tomorrow, in all of the Commonwealth courts and in the United States, the entire legal system could be brought to its knees in a matter of weeks if not days
For those of you less familiar with this landmark case, John Anthony
Therefore, never having been Lawfully crowned,
she has NO authority to put the defendant on trial and the judge has NO authority to try him, because the judge’s “authority” comes from her.

http://jforjustice.co.uk/77
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
http://terroronthetube.co.uk/2011/05/12/muaddib-acquitted/
7/7/ Ripple effect http://jforjustice.co.uk/77/
http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes Bullet proof defence.

http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes Bullet proof defence.
For those of you in the United States who may be thinking “hey, we aren’t a Commonwealth country, why would this affect us?” all you really need to know is that these three little letters:- B.A.R., stand for the British Accreditation Registry. It doesn’t matter whether it is the Australian BAR or the Canadian BAR or the American BAR association; they ALL report to the British monarch, who is the head of the BAR.
Whilst E2 is committing treason, explained in full detail in the Lawful Argument, the signed oath orders obedience to all subjects to maintain only the Laws of God.
Judges/lawyers have taken an oath (B.A.R.), thus ordered to comply to Exhibit 1, and Exhibit 2 (Bible), and it is as simple as that. People lacked awareness of that which was in place, and there for people to use, but didn’t know. We know now.

Exemption account, which is identified by a nine-digit number that you will recognize as your Social Security number without the dashes. It is your EIN, which stands for Exemption Identification Number. BAR (British Accredited Registry/Regency), owned and operated by the Crown, for the purpose of contracting the fiction (which most of us think is ourselves) into a third party action. Do not underestimate the power behind this trick. It is to con us into contracting with the feds so that they can ‘legally’ confiscate our property. “Prepaid Treasury Account,”
Right now even though they have no legal right or claim or lien, the bankers hold the “title” to YOU through your birth certificate. You can regain control by simply filing a notice of lien against the birth certificate. Filing notices of lien is done every day.
. This is done very simply by contacting the Secretary of State or Department of Commerce and filing a UCC-1 financing statement and listing the property as collateral on the statement. The same can be done with your birth certificate, which is your property. You and only you can file this notice of lien… You and only you can determine the value of the property. Since you are priceless in God’s eyes the value of your UCC-1 should be UNLIMITED.
(HJR) 192 back in 1933 shortly after the National Emergency and Bank Holiday declared by President Roosevelt. You’re already signed up for this program from birth; it’s just that no one told you about it, UNTIL NOW

The specific method for reserving your common law rights – for choosing to operate under common law jurisdiction – is to write below your signature “Without Prejudice UCC 1-207.” You could use this phrase on your driver’s license, on bank signature cards, and on contracts.

I would add, I am not here to plea as you have no jurisdiction as there is no judiciary before which to plea.
First — I do not consent to these proceedings
Second – Your offer is not accepted
Third — I do not consent to being surety for this case
and these proceedings
Fourth — I demand the bond be immediately brought forward
so I can see who will indemnify me if I am damaged.
Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

The judge dismissed the case immediately and told her to leave the court.
Someone had listened to what she said and when they were called for their case, they repeated her words, and the judge dismissed his case, told him to leave the court, got up and told everyone the court was closed and would not be open till the next day and left the court.

__________________________________________________________________________________
If any law applies outside the District of Columbia it is required by the Federal Register Act to be an implementing regulation and published in the Federal Register to give notice to the American people.
“Our records indicate that the Internal Revenue Service has not promulgated (published) in the Federal Register a requirement to make an income tax return.”
As such, the Federal Income Tax is only applicable within the District of Columbia and validated by the Legislative Intent of the 16th Amendment. Thus, there is no imposed duty for Americans to make any income tax return.
__________________________________________________________________________________

GENERAL CASE LAW ON JURISDICTION
“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.
“It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefor.” U.S. v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).
“The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
“Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack.” Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381; and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.
“The United States is entirely a creature of the Federal Constitution, its power and authority has no other source and it can only act in accordance with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“The rights and liberties of the citizens of the United States are not protected by custom and tradition alone, they are preserved from the encroachments of government by express/enumerated provisions of the Federal Constitution.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“The prohibitions of the Federal Constitution are designed to apply to all branches of the national government and cannot be nullified by the executive or by the executive and the senate combined.” Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2nd. 1148 (1957).
“Where rights as secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which will abrogate them.” Miranda v. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966).
“Congress may not, by any definition it may adopt, conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution.” Eisner v. McComber, 252 U.S. 189 at 207.
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Readers interested in finding out more about the practical application of these principles should contact Free America Institute for further information.

Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)
Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/03/time-hang-elected-traitors-washington-legislation/#ffjsb3ez8GqJ9o1g.99
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer’s life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. http://www.constitution.org/us…

o United states of America Constitution Article 1 section 9
No Bill of Attainder or EX POST FACTO Law shall be passed.
2nd Amendment; shall NOT be infringed!
They took an oath to uphold and preserve the constitution.. Perjury of oath is a FELONY!
18 U.S. Code § 1001

o Brookfield Construction Co. v. Stewart, 284 F.Supp 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government.”
in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), to wit:
Congress … cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.
U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431 a statute that regulates without constitutional authority is a nullity even though it be published in the books, recognized by the police and lowers courts, and even though it be unchallenged for decades.
The Legislature, either by amending or otherwise, may not nullify a constitutional provision
Rost v. Municipal Court of Southern Judicial District of San Mateo (1960)

Sufficient number so states never ratified the 16th Amendment never ratified. U.S. District Court Judge James C. Fox in Sullivan Vs. United States, 2003

When a judge leaves the court room he is re-establishing “his Honor” and new jurisdiction. Perfect notice of dis-honor.
Not on you oath of office is treason.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YJ4c5atUjsE

Well, the best way is to get us into court and trick us into unwittingly doing so. But, if we know what has transpired, prior to our being there, it is easy to know what to say so that this doesn’t happen. The court clerk is the hot shot, even though it appears as if the judge is. The clerk is the trustee for the CQV owned by the state/province and it is s/he who is responsible for appointing the trustee and the executor for a constructive trust––that particular court case.

So s/he appoints the judge as trustee (the one to administer the trust) and appoints the prosecutor as executor of the trust. The executor is ultimately liable for the charge because it was s/he who brought the case into court (created the constructive trust) on behalf of the state/province which charged the CQV trust. Only an executor/prosecutor can initiate/create a constructive trust and we all know the maxim of law: Whoever creates the controversy holds the liability and whoever holds the liability must provide the remedy. This is why all attorneys are mandated to bring their cheque-books to court because if it all goes wrong for them…. meaning either they fail to transfer their liability onto the alleged defendant, or the alleged defendant does not accept their offer of liability, then someone has to credit the trust account in order to off-set the debt. Since the prosecutor is the one who issues bogus paper and charges the trust, it is the Prosecutor/Executor (“PE”) who is in the hot-seat.

When the Name (of the trust), e.g.: JOHN DOE, is called by the Judge aka Administrator aka Trustee (“JAT”), we can stand and ask, “Are you saying that the trust which you are now administrating is the JOHN DOE trust?” This establishes that we know that the Name is a trust, not a live man. What’s the JAT’s first question? “What’s your name?” or “State your name for the record”. We must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust because doing so makes us the trustee. What does this tell you about the judge? If we know that the judge is the trustee, then we also know that the judge is the Name, but only for this particular, constructive trust. Now, think about all the times that JATs have become so frustrated by our refusal to admit to being the Name that they issue a warrant and then, as soon as the man leaves, he is arrested. How idiotic is that? They must feel foolish for saying, “John Doe is not in court so I’m issuing a warrant for his arrest” and then, the man whom they just admitted is NOT there is arrested because he IS there. Their desperation makes them insane. They must get us to admit to being the name, or they pay, and we must not accept their coercion, or we pay. Because the JAT is the trustee––a precarious position, the best thing to say, in that case, is “JOHN DOE is, indeed, in the court!” Point to the JAT. “It is YOU! As trustee, YOU are JOHN DOE, today, aren’t you?!”

During their frustration over our not admitting to being a trust name––the trustee and/or executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are. “Before we go any further, I need to know who YOU are.” Address the clerk of the court––the trustee for the CQV trust owned by the state/province, “Are you the CQV’s trustee who has appointed this judge as administrator and trustee of the constructive trust case #12345? Did you also appoint the prosecutor as executor of this constructive trust?” Then point to the JAT: “So you are the trustee”, then point to the prosecutor, “and you are the executor? And I’m the beneficiary, so, now we know who’s who and, as beneficiary, I authorize you to handle the accounting and dissolve this constructive trust. I now claim my body so I am collapsing the CQV trust which you have charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all laws!” Likely, we will not get that far before the JAT will order “Case dismissed” or, even more likely, the PE, as he clings tightly to his cheque-book, will call, “We withdraw the charges”.

We have exposed their fraud of the CQV trust which exists only on presumptions. The CQV has no corpus, no property, ergo, no value. Trusts are created only upon the conveyance of property and can exist only as long as there is value in the trust. But, there is no value in the CQV trust, yet, they continue to charge the trust. That is fraud! The alleged property is we men and women whom they have deemed to be incompetent, dead, abandoned, lost, bankrupts, or minors, but that is an illusion so, if we claim our body, then we collapse the presumption that the trust has value. They are operating in fraud––something we’ve always known, but now we know how they do it. Our having exposed their fraud gives them only three options:
1. They can dissolve the CQV trust––the one for which the clerk of the court is trustee and from which s/he created a constructive trust––the case––for which s/he appointed the judge and prosecutor titles which hold temporary liability––trustee and executor, respectively. But they cannot dissolve the CQV or the entire global system will collapse because they cannot exist without our energy which they obtain via that CQV trust.

2. They can enforce the existing rules of trust law which means, as trustee, they can set-off their debt and leave us alone. Now they know that we are onto their fraud and every time they go into court to administer a trust account, they will not know if we are the one who will send them to jail. The trustee (judge) is the liable party who will go to jail, and the executor (prosecutor) is the one who enforces this. This is why they want us to take on both titles, because then, not only do we go to jail but also, by signing their paper, we become executor and enforce our own sentence. They cannot afford to violate the ecclesiastical canon laws, out of fear of ending their careers, so they are, again, trapped with no place to run.

3. They can dismiss the cases before they even take the risk of our exposing their fraud …. which also makes no sense because then their careers, again, come to a screeching halt.

Affidavit is treated as “Evidence” within the meaning of Section 3 of the Evidence Act. However, it was held by the Supreme Court that an affidavit can be used as

A living, breathing human being, as opposed to a legal entity such as a corporation.

Different rules and protections apply to natural persons and corporations, such as the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, which applies only to natural persons.

A natural person is legally defined as a living human being. This definition is meant to set a natural person apart from a legal person, which is a group of people acting in a unified, often commercial enterprise but are considered by law to be acting as a single fictional or virtual individual. Legal persons are also known by the terms artificial and juristic persons. Companies, trusts, partnerships and similar entities are considered legal persons. The distinction between natural and legal persons is found in most systems of law.
The natural person and the legal person are entitled to many similar rights as well as duties. Both may sue, be sued and sign contracts. Certain rights apply only to natural persons, such as the United States’ Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. In many countries, citizens are guaranteed a set of basic rights, including life, liberty, equality before the law and the right to vote in elections. Obviously, only natural persons can marry, vote and hold public office. Most countries recognize an individual’s full rights as a natural person when he or she reaches the age of 18.
In jurisprudence, a natural person is a real human being, as opposed to a legal person, which may be a private (i.e., business entity) or public (i.e., government) organization.
Natural person n. a real human being, as distinguished from a corporation which is often treated at law as a fictitious person.

“Every person (this includes EVERY government official) who under color of law, deprives any citizen of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution is subject to civil and/or criminal penalties pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 241 and 242. Penalties include up to $10,000 fine and/or 10 years to life imprisonment, or both, if death results.”
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ignorance of the Law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least
of all a sworn officer of the law. (Maxim of law)
No one is believed in court but upon his oath. (Maxim of law)
AFFIDAVITS

All Affidavits are TRUTH AFFIDAVITS-for they are the manner for the Sovereign
People to address other Sovereign people or government. The Constitutions statethat all cases of
Common Law will be tried by Affidavits. Affidavits state only the facts
provable by the maker.
Affidavits
are mainly in COMMERCE and deal with COMMERCIAL MATTERS.
Affidavits entered in the County Records/Public Records become
PUBLIC POLICY and are established as the facts of the case/issue.
Affidavits entered in the County Records/Public Records and not REBUTTED
after 30 days becomes the Law of the (particular) Case/Issue.
Affidavits establish the Law for the cases in COMMON LAW and
through the County Recorder/Public Record they become PUBLIC POLICY. PUBLIC
POLICY is not for the Sovereign People. It is for the PUBLIC (SERVANTS)
OFFICIALS, OFFICERS, WORKERS, AGENTS, etc.
Sovereign People are PRIVATE, the government is PUBLIC (including
everything in the public corporations).
After entering the AFFIDAVIT into the County Record/Public
Record, three certified copies should be obtained from the Notary Public, if
the case is in a CORPORATE COURT (which it always is).
One copy is entered into the Records of the Court (file stamp into case)
and take the other two copies to court.
Upon the court appearance, present one to the Plaintiff and give the other to
the bailiff to hand to the Judge.
From this point on you are the Creditor or Secured Party in the case and
the case cannot proceed until your AFFIDAVIT has been rebutted.
At that point simply notify the Judge (administrator), My AFFIDAVIT has
not been rebutted, I am Creditor and Secured Party to this action and

I, Sui Juris, John,
a competent natural man of the genealogy of Doe, on the Land do
hereby choose to honor your offerand accept the
constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Illinois and
your mandated Oath of Office as the designated PUBLIC SERVANT, doing
business as “Judge – Circuit Court Cook County,” as found filed and recorded in
the official public records of Cook County Illinois, as instrument 2003023744
dated the 19 day of January 2012,successor, assigns and
Court Clerks and all PUBLIC SERVANTs relating, as your open andbinding offer of promise
to form a firm and binding contract between the respective governments, their
political instrumentalities and all the above so recognized PUBLIC SERVANTs and
Me, in My private capacity. Certified copy of instrument
2003023744 attached. By My acceptance for
“full acquittance and discharge” with prejudice and I am leaving.
If you do not want to go to the court-simply write an order to the court for
Full Acquittance and Discharge with prejudice.
Any papers received after this can be sent back refused for
“failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted” in
REBUTTAL of your Affidavit.
Affidavits must be entered into the County Record/Public Record for it
is here that PUBLIC POLICY LAW is established by the Sovereign People.
If it is not put into the County Record/Public Record – it must
be placed in the Newspaper for 3 weeks or posted on the court bulletin board
for 3 weeks. or posted on the Internet.
COMMON LAW-THE FACTS
Common Law is the beginning of all Law and in its perfection is
the absence of all Law and in today’s society it is known as PUBLIC POLICY.
Common Law summed up in simple terms is the will of the people and will
manifest itself in separate cases as people so rule with their conscience and a
sense of fair play.
Common Law is a Law that is Common to all People.
Common Law is Common Sense and is the Law of the Creator of this
Universe – Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Common Law supersedes all Law and is Superior in all Cases to Statutory
Law, Codified Law, and Rules and Regulations, Codes etc.
Common Law establishes Constitutions as all Power is inherent in the People.
Common Law establishes through the Constitution all restrictions on the
corporate government (public servants).
Constitutions never give the corporate government power for legislating
People.
Government only has the power to Legislate the workings of the different
functions of the various departments to allow the people Life, Liberty, and the
Pursuit of happiness.
Constitutions can never establish Common Law…for then all Power would
not be in the People, but would be in the Constitution and it is only a piece
of paper, and the Peoples right to redress grievances or to amend, change, or
address any problem could not be.
The Creator created man… man (with help) created government,
government started CORPORATIONS.
The Creator rules over man,
man rules over government,
and government rules over CORPORATIONS.
Governments are mere pieces of paper to be altered and changed to the whim of
the living souls.
CORPORATIONS are mere pieces of paper that government can change and alter at
their whim.
The Creator is Superior over Man,
government, and CORPORATIONS.
Man is superior to government and CORPORATIONS.
If man says they do not exist-they do not exist.
Simply said, Common Law – PUBLIC POLICY – the Will of the People, a Law
Common to all People.
____________________________________________________________________
Simply ask the public servant will you swear to that in writing
signed under your commercial liability?
Simple say I will hold you personally liable for any injury,
violation of rights to me, my family, my property.
______________________________________________________________________
thank you for your consideration NESARA- Restore America – Galactic News

Source: http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2013/07/power-of-affidavits-common-law.html

N THE COURT OF . . . .
Petitioner Ticket # or Document #
HEARING OFFICER:
Vs
FICTTIOUS PLAINTIFF
NO JUDICIAL POWERS
ELEVENTH AMENDMENT NOTICE,
ELEVENTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION,
And DEMAND FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARING AGAINST PLAINTIFF
NOTICE and AFFIDAVIT
All “judicial power” of the “inferior courts” comes from the
Judiciary Act of 1789, as did the Attorney General position. “Judicial
power” comes from Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution. The
Eleventh Amendment removed all “judicial power” in law, equity,
treaties, contract law, and the right of the State to bring suit against
the People.
“There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since
1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive
Administrators enforce Statutes 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 1Stat. 138-178)
The positions of Attorney General and Prosecutor, of both the United
States and the several states, come under the Judicial branch not the
Executive branch of the government. All attorneys come under the
Judicial branch and are judicial officers under the Supreme Court, not
under the Secretary of State as licensed professionals, which means they
can only represent the Court and not the People or the State. The
Eleventh Amendment removed all “judicial power” from the “inferior
courts” and the prosecutor’s office as well as from all court officers
in law, equity, and so forth. The Eleventh Amendment also makes a
foreign state separation from the position of the Public
Office positions to throw off the People. The People have Eleventh
Amendment immunity, because there is NO “JUDICIAL POWER” of the
“inferior courts” AND the People have FOREIGNSOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. Article
III, Sec. 2, U.S. Constitution “The
judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;–to all Cases
affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls;–to all Cases
of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;–to Controversies to which the
United States shall be a Party;–to Controversies between two or more
States;–between a State and Citizens of another State;–between Citizens
of different States;–between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands
under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens
thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.”Eleventh Amendment

“The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of
another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.”
NOW, COMES, ____________________________, the Petitioner, with this NO
JUDICIAL POWER, ELEVENTH AMENDMENT NOTICE, ELEVENTH AMENDMENTVIOLATION
and a DEMAND FOR an ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AGAINST PLAINTIFF

The Hearing Officer in charge is aware that the Eleventh Amendment
removed all” Judicial Power” from this hearing, turning it into an
Administrative hearing with no “judicial power” to rule in OR on law,
equity, treaties, contract law OR issues between the State OR the UNITED
STATES and its People. The Hearing Officer is aware, as is the
Petitioner, that the authority delegated by Article III, Section 2 of
the Constitution for the United States of America was amended and
revoked by the Eleventh Amendment on February 5th, 1795.The Hearing
Officer is also aware that the Offices of Attorney General and
Prosecutor were created under the same Judiciary Act as were the
“inferior courts.” When the Eleventh Amendment removed “Judicial Power”
from the Courts, it also removed “judicial power” from the prosecution.
Any prosecution done in law, equity, contract law, treaties or claims by
the State against the People now constitutes Putative Fraud and
Dishonest Service due to the salary contract that the public official
has with the People to perform his/her duties as a Hearing Officer and
Prosecution Officer. These contracts of these Public Officers are
private contracts under the Constitution, Article I, II, and III and
under the Compensation clause for services to the People. It is a fact
that a pleading cannot be placed before a court without “judicial power”
and 12(b) (1) or 12 (b) (2) of the FRCP
and the Civil Rules of Procedure,

clearly defines why there is no “judicial power” before which to make
such a pleading. The Petitioner now Demands dismissal due to lack of
judicial power and jurisdiction, and Demands a grant of sweat equity to
the Petitioner for labor and time required to address this hearing at a
rate of $1500.00 dollars for appearance, $250.00 dollars per hour for
labor and any part of such hour for the time required to deal with this
issue, with Payment in Full at time of dismissal of this hearing. This
is Option A.
Or. Option B requires the Hearing Officer to convene this court as
“administrative” under Congressional mandate S.7, 60 Stat 237 of the
Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, so that the Petitioner can set
forth such claim of injury under Civil Rights violation, R.I.C.O.,
threat of a firearm to compel Petitioner, threat of extortion,
kidnapping, misuse of emergency lights, assault with intent to injure,
violation of domestic terrorism, and contract-default violation
increasing the public debt. The Petitioner now places a 14th Amendment,
Section 4 bounty against the plaintiff and against the public debt and
demands $150 million dollars for any such contractual violation against
the public debt, plus any amount of public debt accrued by that private
party(s) in such a contractual agreement between that party and the
Petitioner at such time and place that is agreed upon to conduct such
contractual agreement. Such public debt then shall be paid to the
Petitioner in FULL at the time and place specified, upon the conclusion
of such agreement by the party(s) entering into such contractual
agreement. The plaintiff has now created more public debt which now
needs to be paid back to the public. The citizen’s share of the debt
owed is $40,871.33, which is to be paid to the petitioner as their part
of this public debt. The Petitioner will remind the Hearing Officer of a
“sanction” for such violation under Administrative Procedure, Title 5,
USC, Section 551, which includes repaying the public debt under 14th
Amendment bounty by removal from office of the Plaintiff and other
parties involved, loss of benefits, loss of performance bonds and any
other bond to that position to pay the public debt, as well as paying
back all wages collected when carrying out judicial fraud, and “LOSS” of
the plaintiff and other parties’ property such as homes, vehicles, bank
accounts, stock share in all court cases due to illegal gain of such
items by way of fraud perpetrated on the defendant. All of this creates
the public debt by the Plaintiff and the courts and parties by this
action against the Petitioner. ______________________________ NOTARY
_______________________ STATE OF ____________________ COUNTY
OF_____________________ PROOF OF SERVICE NOW, COMES,
___________________________, Petitioner with this
ELEVENTH AMENDMENT NOTICE, ELEVENTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION, And DEMAND FOR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AGAINST PLAINTIFF
before the Clerk of Court of___________________ on this
day_____________ and month of________________ in the Year of Our Lord,
2013, AD. All copies delivered directly or by U.S. Postal
Service. ______________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

All seats of government have been vacated!
December
26, 1933 49 Statute 3097 Treaty Series 881 ( Convention on Rights and
Duties of States ) stated CONGRESS replaced STATUTES with international
law, placing all STATES under international law.
December 9, 1945, the International Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of United States to United Nations.
22 CFR 92.12-92.31 FR Heading “Foreign Relationship” states that an oath is required to take office.
Title
8 USC 1481 states once an oath of office is taken, citizenship is
relinquished, thus one becomes a foreign entity, agency, or state. That
means every public office is a foreign state, including all political
subdivisions. ( i.e. every single court is considered a separate foreign
entity ).
Title 22 USC ( Foreign relations and Intercourse ) Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.
Title
28 USC 3002 Section 15A states United States is a Federal Corporation
and not a government, including the Judicial Procedural Section.
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ( FRCP ) 4j states that the Court jurisdiction and immunity fall under a foreign state.
The
11th Amendment states “The Judicial power of the United States shall
not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or
prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another
State, or by Citizens or Subjects of a Foreign State.” ( A foreign
entity, agency, or state cannot bring any suit against a United States
citizen without abiding the following procedure. )
Title
22 CFR 93.1-93.2 states that the Department of State has to be notified
of any suit, and in turn has to notify the United States citizen of
said suit.
Title
28 USC 1330states that the United States District Court has to grant
permission for the suit to be pursued once the court has been supplied
sufficient proof that the United States citizen is actually a corporate
entity.
Title 28 USC 1608 One has Absolute Immunity as a Corporation.
Title
28 USC 1602-1611 ( Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ) allows the
jurisdiction of a court to be challenged, and a demand of proper
jurisdiction to be stated.
July
27, 1868, 15 Statutes at Large Chapter 249 Section 1 “Acts Concerning
American Citizens in a Foreign State,” expatriation, is what is broken
when jurisdiction is demanded, and is not met with an answer.
Under
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12b 6, the prosecution has failed
to provide adequate proof that the parties involved in this situation
are actually corporate entities. There is ample proof that the
prosecution and other agents are actually corporations.
In
1950, the 81st Congress investigated the Lawyers Guild and determined
that the B.A.R. Association is founded and run by communists under
definition. Thus, any elected official that is a member of the B.A.R.
will only be loyal to the B.A.R. and not the people.
In
1933, elected officials and the alleged “country” have been given to
the United Nations Government system. Under Senator Barack Hussein
Obama’s Bill, SB2433, the Poverty Act of 2007, the UN military forces
can step on American soil to confiscate weapons from U.S. citizens.
Under the Bush Administration, B.A.R. Attorney General Ashcroft and
Haliburton established FEMA Concentration Camps for U.S. citizens who
refuse the new world order/one world government.
“That
the Pan American treaty of 12-26-1933 (49 STAT 3097) Treaty Series 881 –
(Convention on Rights and Duties of States) stated CONGRESS replaced
STATUTES with international law, placing all states under international
law.
That
the International Organization Immunities Act of 12-9-1945 – – Congress
relinquished every public office over to the UN. Local governments up
to the president fall under UN jurisdiction. Congress gave the UN the
right to dictate what laws will be international & gave them the
right to tax the States.
That
the International Reorganization Rescind Act- Congress put this into
form but they never took action to rescind the act. Fairly recently an
Ohio judge filed suit claiming that Congress did not have the right to
relinquish government authority over to the UN (a corporation or foreign
country) and that the Congressional act was a constitutional violation
because they didn’t put it to the States or the people to agree on it.
In 2005 the US Supreme court declined to hear the case therefore all
public offices are under UN jurisdiction & they are not American
Citizens.
That
the Oath of Office – Title 5 USC 331, 332, 333 backed up by Title 22
CFR Foreign Relations 92.12 – 92.31 and Title 8 USC, section 1481 – the
public official relinquishes his national citizenship and are thus
foreign agents as stipulated under Title 22 USC, chapter 11, section
611, loss of national citizenship – Public officials are no longer US
Citizens, but rather are foreign agents and must register as such.
That
Title 8 USC 1481 stated once an oath of office is taken citizenship is
relinquished, thus you become a foreign entity, agency, or state. That
means every public office is a foreign state, including all political
subdivisions. (i.e. every single court is considered a separate foreign
entity).
That Title 22 USC (Foreign Relations and Intercourse) Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.
Title
28 USC 3002 Section 15A states that the United States is a Federal
Corporation and not a Government, including the Judiciary Procedural
Section.
That the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 4j states that the Court jurisdiction and immunity fall under a foreign State.
That 28 USC CHAPTER 176 – FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE.
The Federal Debt Collection Procedure places all courts under equity and commerce and under the International Monetary Fund.”
That
in 1950 81st Congress investigated the Lawyers Guild and determined
that the B.A.R. Association is founded and run by communists under
definition. Thus any elected official that is a member of the B.A.R.
will only be loyal to the B.A.R. and not the people.

__________________________________________________________________________________

The United States is a “Federal Corporation”: 28 U.S.C. § 3002 Which only has power within the 10 mile sq Look up the Act of 1871
________________________________________________________________________________________
“Every person (this includes EVERY government official) who under color of law, deprives any citizen of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the United States Constitution is subject to civil and/or criminal penalties pursuant to Title 42, United States Code, Section 241 and 242. Penalties include up to $10,000 fine and/or 10 years to life imprisonment, or both, if death results.”

Jurisdiction “We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given that to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the Constitution.” Cohen v Virginia. 19U.S. 264