Chicago Top Cop Say Law Abiding, Pro-Second Amendment Activists Are “Corrupt” And “Endanger Public Safety”

Just pose a few questions to Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy and you’ll end up either enraging him or having him SHUT THE HELL UP and RUNNING AWAY FROM YOU!!
1) Mr. McCarthy, is it your belief that the Fed/State CONstitution and laws apply to someone because they are PHYSICALLY in “name any state”.. he will undoubtedly reply YES!
2) Then what evidence do you rely on that PROVES that assertion and or, what witnesses do you rely on that have first hand knowledge that just because someone is PHYSICALLY in “name a state” that the Constitution and laws apply to that flesh and blood living being!… He CAN’T answer this because THERE IS ABSOLUTELY ZERO EVIDENCE PROVING JURISDICTION over a flesh and blood living being!

Remember these question because you can ask the same questions of prosecutors and judges! They “just like the chicago idiot” only PRESUME they have jurisdiction.. they think it, the believe it, the assume it, it’s their opinion that they have it BUT THEY CAN’T BLOODY WELL PROVE IT!

Here’s a question to proffer to the court;.. Ask the Judge this.. On and for the record, am I presumed innocent of ALL ELEMENTS of the charge/charges.. he/she can only answer YES!
THEN YOU SAY,.. On and for the record, am I not ALSO PRESUMED INNOCENT OF JURISDICTION!!! The judge will absolutely HATE THIS QUESTION!

Judges and prosecutors who “assume, presume, insist, believe, think, or hold a dogmatic opinion that they have jurisdiction” are hallucinating and committing FRAUD.. assumptions, presumptions, Insistence, beliefs, thoughts and opinions are NOT EVIDENCE PROVING JURISDICTION!

They “the priesthood of STATISM” attorneys/judges love to make claims that have no basis in reality, desperately hoping that you REMAIN IGNORANT OF THE FACTS or are too scared to QUESTION THEIR BASELESS PRESUMPTIONS! They’ll even make THREATS of Contempt of Court against you for questioning their COMPLETE LACK OF JURISDICTION!!
Stand tough!!

A traffic ticket is only an allegation and is NOT evidence of jurisdiction!
An indictment is only an allegation and is NOT evidence of jurisdiction!
Keep in mind The STATES are ALL CORPORATIONS,.. For instance
State Of Arizona is a PRIVATE FOR PROFIT CORPORATION
http://www.manta.com/c/mm2l0s5/state-of-arizona

They’ll “claim” that because you are allegedly a RESIDENT of the STATE OF __, that the laws apply.. but HOW PRECISELY does a flesh and blood living being, exist within the pages of a PRIVATE FOR PROFIT CORPORATE FICTION THAT EXISTS ONLY ON PAPER and MASQUERADES AS GOVERNMENT??
YOU CAN’T! Try sleeping in a book sometime, you’ll never fit!
They also love to claim having a drivers license or state issued ID, establishes jurisdiction! but we only possess those types of documents to avoid being brutalized or worse by their murderous, mindless badge monkeys.. We only have those forms of ID under THREAT, DURESS and COERCION! and BECAUSE OF THE THREAT, DURESS AND COERCION they are inadmissible as evidence establishing jurisdiction! Who would willingly and knowingly subject themselves to FRAUD via a CORPORATE FICTION!?!?

WHEN A JUDGE BELIEVES THAT HE/SHE HAS JURISDICTION OVER EVERYONE THAT APPEARS BEFORE HIM/HER, and they will insist they have jurisdiction,.. all without the slightest shred of evidence PROVING IT!
That is “under their own rules” a due process violation and FRAUD!
Vlandis v. Kline, 412 US 441 – irreversible and irrebuttable statutory presumption is a due process violation Supreme Court
Heiner v. Donnan,285 U. S. 312 conclusive presumption
holding that this irrefutable assumption was so arbitrary and unreasonable as to deprive the of due process. Court stated that it had “held more than once that a statute creating a presumption which operates to deny a fair opportunity to rebut it violates the due process.
Likewise, in Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U. S. 645 (1972), the Court struck down, as violative of the Due Process Clause, Illinois’ irrebuttable statutory presumption.

Also remember; The courts have ruled that the PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL is NOT a party to the CONstitution!
Padelford, Fay & Co., vs. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 520
“But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it.”

If we, as private individuals, are not parties to the CONstitution. What pray tell is the nexus that ENSLAVES us to the CONstitution and laws?? NOTHING BUT OUTRIGHT FRAUD!

The next time one of the STATIST fanatics hallucinates jurisdiction over you,. Demand that they produce irrefutable evidence PROVING that the CONstitution and laws are applicable to you simply for being in the STATE OF __ “insert state here” FYI the CORPORATE STATE is NOT the GROUND and the ground IS NOT THE CORPORATE STATE!

DEMAND THAT THE PROSECUTION PROVE JURISDICTION ON THE RECORD! “fyi, they can’t prove it”
U.S. Supreme Court The Clara, 102 U.S. 200 (1880) The Clara 102 U.S. 200
the maxim applies, quod non apparet non est. The fact not appearing is presumed not to exist.”

“The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings.”
Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U. S. 533

Where there is no jurisdiction over the subject matter, there is, as well, no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction. [John J. Joyce v. United States of America, 474 F.2d 215, 219] Joyce v. U.S., 474 F.2d 215, 219 (C.A.3 (Pa.), 1973)

“Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.” Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp. 150.

“The law provides that once State and or Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).

“A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act, and a court must have the authority to decide that question in the first instance.” Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles, 171 P2d 8; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S.Ct. 1409.

“Sovereign immunity does not apply where (as here) government is a lawbreaker
or jurisdiction is the issue.”
Arthur v. Fry, 300 F.Supp. 622