| |||||||||
|
Sunday, May 7, 2017
Victims of vaccine damage can sue manufacturers in the US....
LE PEN LOSES: The French are STILL a bunch of idiots
on
The two-round election, which has played out like something of a soap opera, was hit with another scandal, when Macron’s campaign announced it had been the target of a “massive and coordinated” hacking operation.
Around 14.5 gigabytes of emails, personal as well as business documents were posted to the text-sharing site Pastebin hours before the campaign period came to a close Friday night.
Whoever wins will look forward to elections to the national assembly in June. Macron’s party En Marche! is less than a year old and starting from the ground up. If he does not persuade enough voters to back his candidates, he will have to strike deals with other parties in order to push through his legislative agenda. Le Pen’s Front National has only two members out of 577 in the national assembly.
Macron is a former investment banker who also served as economy minister under President Francois Hollande. Macron has struggled to connect with voters in the rural and de-industrialized areas of the country.
Le Pen has also battled to broaden her appeal, announcing at the end of April, she announced that she had temporarily stepped down from her position as leader of the Front National.
Your Right to Travel Freely - State V Marple
By Anna Von Reitz
I don't usually do this, but today, I am passing on the fruit of someone else's
hard work--- at his request. For years now, New Hampshire Representative Marple
has been leading the fight to preserve basic freedoms guaranteed to the people
of his state for generations--- the right to travel freely, the right to keep
and bear arms---- all those basic rights that we have taken too much for
granted. He is currently doing battle in the court system, as he has done
battle in the chambers of the state legislature. It is a fight we all need to
be aware of and in whatever ways we can--- need to support.
When more elected members of the Territorial and
Municipal Governments stand up and stop being led around by the nose--when they
clearly realize as Representative Marple has, what is truly at stake--- the
opportunity for meaningful dialogue and peaceful resolution of the current
situation expands exponentially. These links will bring you up to date fast. I
am also in receipt of a copy of the most recent pleadings which I am attaching
(see below) as they contain an absolute gold mine of information and support for
those working on right to travel and similar basic rights issues.
Please share these links regarding NH Rep Marple's court
appearance with anyone concerned.
1_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
2_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
3_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
4_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
2_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
3_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
4_ https://www.youtube.com/wat
Most recent pleadings: Here in Word document http://annavonreitz.com/righttotravel.doc
This is one of the two now in the Article III district court mandated by FRCP 55. Please share with those interested....Dick
Concord Court NH CIRCUIT COURT - Reference: State v. A MARPLE Case Number 429-2014CR-00153
AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH - IN COMMERCE
U.S. v. Kis, 658 F.2d 526, (7th Cir. 1981) “Indeed, no more than that is necessary to make the prima facie case.” Id at 536.
Addressed to the below named Libellees in their official and individual
personal capacities as Trustees of the people, to whom a Fiduciary
relationship is contracted by OATH and for whom they must promptly act.
Libellees listed in this document admit to the truth and guilt of having
been NOTICED that Affiant had formally accepted Libellees Oaths of
Office and Constitutions as by-laws, as offers to contract, creating
said binding contract, under Oath, to provide protection of
Constitutional Secured Rights on behalf of Affiant
Hon. M. Kristin Spath, Magistrate
Theresa A. McCafferty, Clerk of Court
6th Circuit – District Division - Concord
32 Clinton Street Concord, NH 03301
Now comes the Affiant, A. Richard: Marple, Sui Juris, an Article 30 Part
II “Inhabitant“ who is a Life Member of the VFW and is in his 86th year
and who has firsthand knowledge of all of the facts enumerated within
this Affidavit. Affiant places forth his Commercial Liability and makes
his common law claim for damages, compounding now, in excess of one
million silver dollars for the injuries that he has suffered over the
past three years as a result of corporate public servant employees
maintaining silence to written Affidavits and other communication. The
courts have found such SILENCE to be FRAUD, when there is a duty to
speak, and be accountable, as required by Article Eight of the New
Hampshire Bill of Rights. Other unlawful acts perpetrated by corporate
employees acting under “color of law” are all enumerated in the ignored
Affidavits now on file at the Secretary of State office. Affiant makes
demand for prosecution and enforcement of law upon all the guilty public
servants named and un named co-conspirators in this Affidavit and those
Affidavits filed with the Secretary of State and in the exhibits
attached. It is a FACT that failure to do so will be an “Obstruction of
Justice”. The following stare decisis apply; Hafer v. Melo, 502 US 21 :
“US Supreme Court held that state officials acting by ”color of law”
may be held personally liable for the injuries or torts they cause and
that official or sovereign immunity may not be asserted.”, Scheuer v.
Rhodes, 416 US 232 (1974), 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974), “When a state
officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal
Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that
Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or
representative character and is subjected in his person to the
consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to
impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority
of the United States.”; Warnock v Pecos County, Texas, 116 F. 3d 776 -
No.96-50869 Summary Calendar. July 3, 1997. It is stipulated that all
exhibits attached are to be understood as being incorporated herein as
if written verbatim within this affidavit.
INTRODUCTION
This Affidavit is filed pursuant 18 USC 4 and by the authority of
Article 14, New Hampshire Bill of Rights, Article 32 of the New
Hampshire Bill of Rights is the authority for the instructions and
Information demanded by this Affiant which is in the nature of Claim, 42
USC 1983, 42 USC 1985(3) , 42 USC 1988 (a) (b). and nature of Quo
Warranto; Ames v. Kansas, 111 U.S. 449; Libellees are encouraged to
study this AFFIDAVIT thoroughly and carefully before making any counter
Affidavit This is a lawful NOTICE. It informs you. It means what it
says, and says what it means. NOTICE , vicarious liability, a form of a
strict, secondary liability that arises under the common law doctrine
of agency, imposes liability on one person for a tortious act committed
by another for which all libellees are at risk. A number of contexts
expressed in this instrument in which joint and several liabilities
arise and SILENCE to such is FRAUD.
This Affidavit is an offer and agreement with instructions for the
libellees to perform their duty, obey their Oaths of Office and enforce
the laws of this state. The wrong doers must be prosecuted.
Specifically, corporate employees named in all the Affidavits of Truth
on file at the Secretary of State office. The following FACTS are
itemized point for point.
In the pure Maxims of Laws of Commerce, the eternal and unchanging principles are;
1-A WORKMAN IS WORTHY OF HIS HIRE. Exodus 20:15; Lev. 19:13; Mat. 10:10;
Luke 10"7; II Tim. 2:6. Legal maxim: "It is against equity for freemen
not to have the free disposal of their own property."
2.-ALL ARE EQUAL UNDER THE LAW. "Equality before the law" Exodus
21:23-25; Lev. 24: 17-21; Deut. 1;17, 19:21; Mat. 22:36-40; Luke 10:17;
Col. 3:25. "No one is above The Law".
3- IN COMMERCE TRUTH IS SOVEREIGN. (Exodus 20:16; Ps. 117:2; John 8:32; II Cor. 13:8 ). Truth Rules, Your Word is your Bond.
4- TRUTH IS EXPRESSED BY FORM OF AN AFFIDAVIT. (Lev. 5:4- 5; Lev. 6:3-5; Lev. 19:11-13: Num. 30:2; Mat. 5:33; James 5: 12)
5- AN UNREBUTTED AFFIDAVIT STANDS AS TRUTH IN COMMERCE. (12 Pet. 1:25;
Heb. 6:13-15;) Affidavit is the highest form of truth. Legal Maxim: "He
who does not deny, admits."
6- AN UNREBUTTED AFFIDAVIT BECOMES THE JUDGMENT IN COMMERCE. (Heb. 6:16 17 ;). Nihil Dicit
7- IN COMMERCE FOR ANY MATTER TO BE RESOLVED MUST BE EXPRESSED. (Heb.
4:16; Phil. 4:6; Eph. 6:19-21). Legal Maxim: "He who fails to assert his
rights has none.)
8- HE WHO LEAVES THE BATTLEFIELD FIRST LOSES BY DEFAULT. Mat. 10:22;
Legal Maxim: "He who does not repel a wrong when he can, occasions it".
9- SACRIFICE IS THE MEASURE OF CREDIBILITY (NO WILLINGNESS TO SACRIFICE =
NO LIABILITY, RESPONSIBILITY, AUTHORITY OR MEASURE OF CONVICTION).
(Acts 7, life/death of Stephen), Legal Maxim: "He who bears the burden
ought also to derive the benefit".
10- SATISFACTION OF A LIEN (Gen. 2-3; Mat. 4;.). In commerce a lien or
claim can be satisfied by rebutting the affidavit, with a counter
affidavit, point by point. It is stipulated that In case of
non-resolution, doctrine of estoppel will automatically prevail. If
non-payment is encountered, the Sheriff will convene a common law jury,
based on the Seventh Amendment, concerning a dispute involving a claim
of more than $20.00. The only other way to satisfy a lien is to pay it.
INSTRUCTIONS, pursuant to Article 32, Part II
Attached find two “Presentments “, # 1- An order signed by M. Kristin
Spath, #2-An Unsigned notice of hearing with printed Theresa A.
McCafferty, Clerk. Both Presentments are NOTaccepted and are being
returned without dishonor pursuant to the Authority of RSA 382-A:
3-501(b)(2) which specifically enumerates “(2) Upon demand of the person
[ie: this affiant]whom presentment is made, the person making
presentment must (i) exhibit the instrument, (ii) give reasonable
identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person,
reasonable evidence of authority to do so…” The Uniform Commercial
Code, RSA 382-A is the superior authority for all commercial
transactions made by the employees of corporate government in connection
with the people as there is no lawful money in circulation. The
Clearfield Doctrine mandates governments use of Commercial paper to
achieve equal standing. The following stare decisis found in 19A Words
and Phrases Permanent Edition (West) pocket) Part 94; 8 F.3d 226, 235
will be applied to the instant case 429-2014CR-00153 for immediate
dismissal pursuant to the following:
The exemptions provided for in section 1 of the Motor Vehicle
Transportation License Act of 1925 (Stats. 1925, p. 833 in favor of
those who solely transport their own property or employees, or both, and
of those who transport no persons or property for hire or compensation,
by motor vehicle, have been determined in the Bacon Service Corp. v.
Huss, 199 Cal. 21, 248 P. 235; case to be lawful exemptions. In re
Schmolke (1926) 199 Cal. 42, 46.
“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to
transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and
business is a common right which he has under his right to enjoy life
and liberty....It includes the right in so doing to use the ordinary and
usual conveyances of the day; and under existing modes of travel
includes the right to drive horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon, or to
operate an automobile thereon for the usual and ordinary purposes of
life and business. It is not a mere privilege, like the privilege of
moving a house in the street, operating a business stand in the street,
or transporting persons or property for hire along the street, which the
city may permit or prohibit at will.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 59“In
view of this rule a statutory provision that the supervising officials
“may” exempt such persons when the transportation is not on a commercial
basis means that they “must exempt them”.
State v. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; 60 C.J.S. section 94, page 581. "Where a
court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process
of law, court is deprived of juris." Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas
170 F2d 739.
Affiant has NOT received any evidence of an “instrument” showing that
“Due Process” (59 US 272) was or has been rendered and that both
personal and subject matter jurisdiction have been proved and is upon
the record. In fact, the record shows the exact opposite exists. The
document on record entitled “Oath Purgatory,” executed over 20 years
ago, removes all presumptions of any corporate jurisdiction; An Oath
purgatory mandates the accused to obtain an acquittal. “A purgatory oath
refers to an oath by which a person destroys the presumptions which
were against him/her. Such a person is said to purge himself/herself
when s/he removes the suspicions which were against him/her. For
example, if a person faces contempt for not attending court as a
witness, s/he may purge himself/herself of the contempt by swearing to a
fact which is an ample excuse.” A purgatory oath allows defendants to
obtain an acquittal by swearing to their own innocence. [United States
v. Gecas, 120 F.3d 1419, 1438 (11th Cir. Fla. 1997), This instrument
removes this Affiant from the jurisdiction of all municipal corporate
states and all statutory schemes of “presumed jurisdiction” enacted for
the commercial enterprises operated by the municipal corporate states
for profit, Such action being contrary and repugnant to the supreme
organic law as well as Article 8, and 14 of the New Hampshire Bill of
Rights. Affiant states his firsthand knowledge of the facts herein
contained and hereby deposes this sworn affidavit as a prima facie case
pursuant to the District Court of Pennsylvania, 395 F. .Supp. 1107,
etal. Judicial NOTICE is given to the proceedings enumerated in
Article 6 and 4, Section 1 and 2, constitution for the united States of
America. General Motors Corporation v. Blevins, 144 F. Supp. 381
(D.Colo.1956). TheOath Purgatory executed is currently upon the record
in this matter, by the authority of and pursuant to 15 Statutes at
Large, Chapter 249, entitled “Rights of an American Citizen in foreign
States”. The Right of Expatriation, “Be it enacted by the Senate and
the House of Representatives of the United States of American in
Congress assembled, that any declaration, instruction, opinion, order,
or decision, of any officers of government which denies., restricts ,
impairs or questions the rights of expatriation , is hereby declared
inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government”.
“This statute is clear in the prohibition expressed as is the Estoppel
by Oath. That is the form of judicial estoppel within the class of
estoppels arising from sworn statements made in the course of judicial
proceedings generally in the form of litigation. New Hampshire v. Maine,
532 U.S. 742, 749 (2001 It is the bar of a party to deny in
subsequent litigation that which he has previously stated on oath in a
former litigation, in a pleading, deposition, or oral testimony.” See
all Affidavits on file with Secretary of State.
Further Authority to exit “corporate jurisdiction” is enumerated in
Title 8, Section 1481(A)(2) which expresses.” taking an oath or making
an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign
state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age
of eighteen years; or…” Thus this Affiant has established his political
and civil status of being a Freeborn American Sovereign,using the Remedy
and Recourse provide by Statutes. See Colten v. Kentucky (1972) 407
U.S. 104, 122, 92 S. Ct. 1953 states; "The constitutional theory is that
we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only
our agents." Julliard v Greenman, 110 U.S. 421, (1884), states, "There
is no such thing as a 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." Perry v United
States, 294 U.S. 330, 353 (1935), states "The Congress cannot revoke the
Sovereign power of the people to override itself as thus declared."
McCullock v. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316, 404, 405, states "In the United
States, Sovereignty resides in the people, who act through the organs
established by the Constitution. "Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356 @370
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the
author and source of law; but, in our system, while sovereign powers are
delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains
with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.
And the law is the definition and limitation of power.” Further, the
case ofCRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C 338, 2 SE 70, is specific regarding
“Consent”; "every man is independent of all laws, except those
prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his
fellowmen without his consent.” The 6th Circuit court Concord does not
have standing to determine Affiants political or civil status. “Freedom
from dictation, constraint, or control in matters affecting the
conscience, …not inconsistent with the peace and good order of society
and the general welfare See Frazee's Case, 63 Mich, 396, 30 N.W. 72, 6
Am.St.Rep. 310; State v. White, 64 N.H. 48, 5 A. 828.
Affiant is a sojourner in the Republic of New Hampshire, a Part II,
Article 30 “Inhabitant”. See, Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 @ 74 reads;
“The individual [sovereign] may stand upon his constitutional rights as a
citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own
way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or
to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an
investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such
duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the
protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by
the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state,
and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance
with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate
himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or
seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public
so long as he does not trespass upon their rights”.
Affiant relies upon all Courts stare decisis, as defined in Buchanan v.
Litchfield, 102 U.S. 279 and the following citations, including all
those shown in all recorded and filed un-rebutted Affidavits and Nihil
Dicit judgments. The doctrine of estoppels has tolled. Estoppels by
silence arise when a party is under a duty to speak but fails to do so.
Estoppels by silence are also known as estoppels by standing or
estoppels by inaction. Estoppel by silence arises from an obligation.
Article 8 N.H. Hampshire Bill of Rights requires “accountability” by
all who have subscribed to an OATH. The doctrine of estoppels by silence
also is an intention to mislead or at least a willingness that others
should be deceived. “To constitute an estoppel by silence, there must
not only be an opportunity, but an obligation to speak, and the purchase
must have been in reliance upon the conduct of the party sought to be
estopped”. Wiser v. Lawler, 189 U.S. 260 (U.S. 1903)
All Affidavits relative to the action alleged are on file with the
Secretary of State and are to be incorporated herein, word for word, as
if recited within these four corners . Due diligence by the court
agents and employees, requires all un-rebutted Affidavits to be placed
within the record as evidence in establishing the fact that it is the
Executive branch, and NOT the court that is making the accusations,
hence it is the Executive branch of government that has the burden of
showing how it can claim personal jurisdiction without violating the
13th amendment. This is true because the political status of one can
only be determined by the voluntary act of each sovereign, based on
their own individual choice. The prohibition for involuntary servitude
is set forth and clearly established in the Thirteenth Amendment to the
Constitution. The evidence now on record shows that the un-rebutted
Affidavits of FACTS expressed, are preeminent in that they establish the
fact that the 6th Circuit Concord cannot act on an action that has been
predetermined by Nihil Dicit judgments on record at the Secretary of
State, hence, No Personal or subject matter Jurisdiction can be
asserted.
The matters alleged RSA 263:12 and RSA 263:64, have previously been
determined by the SILENCE of libellees; estoppels has tolled, and
judgment rendered by such silence. All Affidavits are filed with the
corporate principals Secretary of State; FAULT (See RSA 382-A:
1-201(b)(17) . “Notice to Principle is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent
is Notice to Principle”. Secretary of State is the “principle” for the
corporate executive branch that must produce evidence that it has
obtained personal and subject matter jurisdiction over this Affiant.
Further, it is a fact that the Affiant has been a victim of FRAUD (See
Nudd v. Burrows, 91 US 416,”Fraud destroys the validity of everything
into which it enters. It affects fatally even the most solemn judgments
and decrees”. And Bankrupt Act, sect. 35; 1 Story's Eq., sect. 252;
Freeman on Judgments, sect. 486. also see United States v.
Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61. It is a FACTY that this Affiant, complied
with 18 USC 4, and placed upon the record on July 18, 2016, the
conspiracy and felony committed by the Magistrate of the Candia Court
and delivered copy of documentary evidence, now on file, of his
violation of 18 USC 2071
It is a fact that the Affiant is NOT the accused corporate fiction, the
artificial person, the “ens legis”, shown upon the corporate
presentments in all capital letters, pursuant to the Government Style
Manual. The fiction created by the corporation is NOT the man, this
Affiant. All corporate Presentments have shown the accused as A. MARPLE
which is semantic deceit. Affiant has never consented to any waiver of
rights or given power of attorney to anyone. It is a fact that the
Affiant is not a “Person” as defined in RSA 21:9 and is therefore
excluded from the statutes cited in Case 429-2014CR-00153. It is a
MAXIM of LAW that statutory construction follow the principle ...”
expressio unius est exclusio alterius: the express mention of one or
more things of a particular class may be regarded as impliedly excluding
all others."
Further, it is not alleged that the Affiant was Involved in a
“Commercial use of the highways”. Accordingly the following stare
decisis will prevail and is to be scrupulously followed by all public
servants who are employed, by the corporation providing governmental
services and who have subscribed to the required “OATH of OFFICE” and
understand the penalty of RSA 92:2. and risk of 18 USC 241 & 242.
Instructions given are by authority and pursuant to Article 32 N. H.
Bill of Rights.
"All persons in the United States are chargeable with knowledge of the Statutes-at-Large... It is well
established that anyone who deals with the government assumes the risk that the agent acting in the
Government’s behalf has exceeded the bounds of his authority," Bollow v. Federal Reserve Bank of
San Francisco, 650 F.2d. 1093 (9th Cir. 1981]
” ‘in common usage, the term ‘person’ does not include the sovereign
people, and statutes employing the (word person) are normally construed
to exclude the sovereign people.’ Wilson v Omaha Tribe, 442 US653 667,
61 L Ed 2d 153, 99 S Ct 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v Cooper
Corp. 312 US 600, 604, 85 L Ed 1071, 61 S Ct 742 (1941). See also United
States v Mine Workers, 330 US 258, 275, 91 L Ed 884, 67 S Ct 677
(1947)” Will v Michigan State Police, 491 US 58, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45, 109
S. Ct. 2304 b)
“The sovereign people are not a person in a legal sense”. In re Fox,
52 N. Y. 535, 11 Am. Rep. 751; U.S .v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L. Ed. 192.
"Under basic rules of construction, statutory laws enacted by
legislative bodies cannot impair rights given under a constitution. 194
B.R. at 925. " In re Young, 235 B.R. 666 (Bankr .M.D.Fla., 1999)
“A corporation is not a citizen within the meaning of that provision of
the Constitution, which declares that the citizens of each State shall
be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the
several States. Special privileges enjoyed by citizens in their own
States are not secured in other States by this provision such as grants
of corporate existence and powers. States may exclude a foreign
corporation entirely or they may exact such security for the performance
of its contracts with their citizens as, in their judgment, will best
promote the public interest.” [Paul v. Virginia, 8 Wall (U.S.) 168; 19
L. Ed 357 (1868)
U.S. Supreme Court, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
"at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are
truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without
subjects.... and have none to govern but themselves"
U.S. Supreme Court, Luther v. Borden, 48 U.S. 7 How. 1 1 (1849)
"No one, we believe, has ever doubted the proposition that, according to
the institutions of this country, the sovereignty in every State
resides in the people of the State, and that they may alter and change
their form of government at their own pleasure."
U.S. Supreme Court, Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653 (1979) "
In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and]
statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
MERRITT v. HUNTER, United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit, 170
F.2d 739, November 5, 1948.“It is only when failure to observe this
safeguard amounts to denial of due process, that the court is deprived
of jurisdiction.”
Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 U.S. 437 (1992)"Whenever it appears ... that
the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall
dismiss the action "Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411 (1969 ) “In
usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes
employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
United States v. Cooper Corp., 312 U. S. 600, 312 U. S. 604 (1941);
accord, United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 330 U. S. 275
(1947”
Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856) Security Trust Co. v. Black River
National Bank, 187 U.S. 211 (2002; “The act of 1875, in placing upon the
trial court the duty of enforcing the statutory limitations as to
jurisdiction by dismissing or remanding the cause at any time when the
lack of jurisdiction appears, applies to both actions at law and suits
in equity.” Mc Nutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. 298 U.S. 178, 189
(1936) Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization Et. Al., 307 U.S.
496 (59 S.Ct. 954, 83 L.Ed. 1423 (1939) United States v. New York
Telephone Co., 434 U.S. 159, 98 S.Ct. 36454 L.Ed. 2d 376 (1977) Chapman
v. Houston Welfare Rights Organization Et. Al., 441 U.S. 600, 99 S.Ct.
1905, 60 L.Ed. 2d 508 (1979) Cannon v. University Chicago Et. Al., 441
U.S. 677, 99 S.Ct. 1946, 60 L.Ed. 2d 560 (1979) Patsy v. Board Regents
State Florida, 457 U.S. 496, 102 S.Ct. 2557, 73 L.Ed.2d 172 (1982)
Merrill Lynch v. Curran Et Al., 456 U.S. 353, 102 S.Ct. 1825, 72 L.Ed.2d
182, 50 U.S.L.W. 4457 (1982) Insurance Corporation Ireland v. Compagnie
Des Bauxites De Guinee, 456 U.S. 694, 102 S.Ct. 2099, 72 L.Ed.2d 492,
50 U.S.L.W. 4553 (1982) Matt T. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance
Company America, 128 L.Ed.2d 391, 62 U.S.L.W. 4313 (1994)
Elliot v. Piersol, 26 US 328 @ Page 340 “But if it act without
authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are
not voidable, but simply void, and form no bar to a recovery sought,
even prior to a reversal, in opposition to them. They constitute no
justification, and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or
sentences are considered in law as trespassers. The rights of the
individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either
municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist
inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely
reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that
they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the
agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the
government, but the government's authority comes from the people.*946
The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and
when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality
invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts
to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer
restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen,
except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and
morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the
democracy.”
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 (1922) "Once j urisdiction is
challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the
court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits,
but, rather, should dismiss the action." Melo v. US , 505 F2d 1026.
"There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction." Joyce v.
US , 474 F2d 215. "The burden shifts to the court to prove
jurisdiction." Rosemond v. Lambert , 469 F2d 416. "Court must prove on
the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction
asserted." Lantana v. Hopper, 102 F2d 188; Chicago v. New York , 37 F
Supp 150. "A universal principle as old as the law is that proceedings
of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity and its judgment therein
without effect either on person or property." Norwood v. Renfield , 34 C
329; Ex parte Giambonini , 49 P. 732. "Jurisdiction is fundamental and a
judgment rendered by a court that does not have jurisdiction to hear is
void ab initio” In Re Application of Wyatt , 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt ,
118 P2d 846. "Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the
subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are
absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term." Dillon v. Dillon ,
187 P 27. "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. "A
departure by a court from those recognized and established requirements
of law, however close apparent adherence to mere form in method of
procedure, which has the effect of depriving one of a constitutional
right, is an excess of jurisdiction." Wuest v. Wuest , 127 P2d 934, 937.
"Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of
due process of law, court is deprived of juris." Merritt v. Hunter ,
C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739. "the fact that the petitioner was released on a
promise to appear before a magistrate for an arraignment, that fact is
circumstance to be considered in determining whether in first instance
there was a probable cause for the arrest." Monroe v. Papa , DC, Ill.
1963 , 221 F. Supp 685. "An action by Department of Motor Vehicles,
whether directly or through a court sitting administratively as the
hearing officer, must be clearly defined in the statute before it has
subject matter jurisdiction, without such jurisdiction of the licensee,
all acts of the agency, by its employees, agents, hearing officers, are
null and void." Doolan v. Carr , 125 US 618; City v Pearson , 181 Cal.
640. "Agency, or party sitting for the agency, (which would be the
magistrate of a municipal court) has no authority to enforce as to any
licensee unless he is acting for compensation. Such an act is highly
penal in nature, and should not be construed to include anything which
is not embraced within its terms. (Where) there is no charge within a
complaint that the accused was employed for compensation to do the act
complained of, or that the act constituted part of a contract." Schomig
v. Kaiser , 189 Cal 596. "When acting to enforce a statute and its
subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal
court is acting as an administrative officer and not in a judicial
capacity; courts in administering or enforcing statutes do not act
judicially, but merely ministerially". Thompson v. Smith , 154 SE 583.
"A judge ceases to sit as a judicial officer because the governing
principle of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from
substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and
rationale for that of the agency. Additionally, courts are prohibited
from substituting their judgment for that of the agency. Courts in
administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or hearing
arguments, presentation, or rational." ASIS v. US , 568 F2d 284.
"Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial
power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such
powers are necessarily nullities." Burns v. Sup. Ct. , SF, 140 Cal. 1.
"The elementary doctrine that the constitutionality of a legislative act
is open to attack only by persons whose rights are affected thereby,
applies to statute relating to administrative agencies, the validity of
which may not be called into question in the absence of a showing of
substantial harm, actual or impending, to a legally protected interest
directly resulting from the enforcement of the statute." Board of Trade
v. Olson, 262 US 1; 29 ALR 2d 1051.. Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp.
150."The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been
challenged, it must be proven." Maine v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502
(1980)."Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time." and "Jurisdiction,
once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided." Basso v. Utah
Power & Light Co., 495 F 2d 906, 910. "Defense of lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any time, even on
appeal." Hill Top Developers v. Holiday Pines Service Corp., 478 So. 2d.
368 (Fla 2nd DCA 1985) "Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be
assumed, it must be proved to exist." Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94
Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 389. " Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte
Giambonini, 49 P. 732. "Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment
rendered by a court that does not have jurisdiction to hear is void, ab
initio." In Re Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt, 118 P2d
846. "Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject
matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void
in the fullest sense of the term." Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27;. "Where a
court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process
of law, court is deprived of juris." Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas
170 F2d 739. "The right to travel on the public highways is a
constitutional right." Teche Lines v. Danforth, Miss. 12 So 2d 784, 787.
"The right to travel is part of the liberty of which a citizen cannot
be deprived without due process law under the 5th Amendment. This Right
was emerging as early as the Magna Carta." Kent vs. Dules, 357 US 116
(1958). "With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is
elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be
overthrown or impaired by any state police authority." --Connolly vs.
Union Sewer Pipe Co.184 US 540 "The claim & exercise of a
constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller vs. U.S.,
F486, 489 Pennsylvania v. Coxe, 4 U.S. 170, 192, “Stare decisis , is a
maxim to be held forever sacred, on questions of property.”; Cook v.
Moffat, 46 U.S. 295, 309, “So far … as the present case is concerned,
the court do not think it necessary or prudent to depart from the safe
maxim of stare decisis .” Bienville Water Supply Co. v. City of Mobile,
186 U.S. 212, 217,“We may, on the principle of stare decisis ,
rightfully examine and consider the decision in the former case as
affecting the consideration of this.”.
This affidavit complies with all known rules of evidence Rule 301 FRCP
& Rule 36 FRCP. It is understood to be accurate with known FACTS and
stare decisis as unconditionally proved. There is an express
stipulation that silence and failure to rebut, point for point, for all
issues and stare decisis expressed herein within 15 days from the date
“stamped received” by the Secretary of State Office for recording; will
be understood as a confession and acceptance, as well as tacit
acquiescence of all FACTS herein enumerated. Such Silence will, by
ignoring this Affidavit, be understood as a confession of the truths
enumerated and acceptance of all facts enumerated herein, including
nonfeasance. The doctrine of estoppels will automatically toll and
prevail, pursuant to; Carmen v. Bowen, 64 A.932 (1906) “Government
officers and agents are required to affirmatively prove whatever
authority they claim. In the absence of proof, they may be held
personally accountable for loss, injury and damages”. Ryder v United
States, 115 S. Ct. 2031, 132 L.Ed.2d 136, 515 U.S. 177, “Failure to
contest an assertion ... is considered evidence of acquiescence”. US
Supreme Court Mitchell v. United States - No. 97-7541 (Dec. 9, 1998)
;“For purposes of this subdivision an evasive or incomplete disclosure,
answer, or response is to be treated as a failure to disclose, answer,
or respond ” 85 Cunningham v. Hamilton County No. 98-727, 527 U.S. 198
All rights Reserved. None waived. “Without Prejudice UCC 1-103, UCC
1-308.
A.Richard: Marple, Sui Juris
11 Dartmouth Street
Hooksett, New Hampshire Republic
December 1, 2016
Final Reply to Thomas Deegan
By Anna Von Reitz
I have given you the facts.
You can dislike the facts all you like, but they remain the facts.
The government you were
promised and which you are still owed was overthrown at the federal level in
1860. Period. Take that fact in.
Since then, it has been under
the assault of a slow, insidious usurpation that came to another head circa 1953
when the land rightfully belonging to our states was declared "abandoned" and
the rats pretended that the actual owners were "unknown" and rolled it into a
giant land trust which they borrowed against. Take that fact in.
It came to another head circa
1965 when bribes in the form of "federal block grants" and "federal revenue
sharing" enticed all the states and counties to begin operating as corporate
franchises of the federal corporation(s). Take that fact in.
Now we are at 2017 and things
have run their predictable course. The rats have borrowed themselves up to
their asses using us and our assets and the assets of our land jurisdiction
states as collateral. The bankers have pulled the plug on them. The Secondary
Creditors were about to be allowed to come in and seize all our "abandoned"
property. Take these facts in.
I stepped in and prevented
that from happening. Take that fact in.
I have told you in plain
language what you need to do to get back the republican form of government you
are owed. Take those facts in.
There is no more or "other" or
secret information that hasn't been on display for anyone who paid attention.
I suggest that you do so or
you will continue to be out in left field cursing and swearing and wandering
around in a confused manner and blaming the wrong people.
What Chem-Trails Are Doing To Your Brain.
What Chem-Trails Are Doing To Your Brain.
We know Pres. Trump has been inside a plane that is spraying us with Chem-Trails.
We also know that he has the authority to stop this spraying now but has not.
This Brain damage is affecting all Human and Animal life on the Planet.
It is also known that there are millions of people in the US that are ready to wage war if all this spraying is not stopped and soon.
Millions of people will die if this spraying is not stopped as many are very sick now and I am one of them.
Tell me, how will viruses and radiation help the weather?
NASA has already published that CO-2's cool the planet but now the Cabal wants to deprive plant life of CO-2's so we produce less food.
Pres.. Trump may go down as the person responsible for more deaths in America from a civil war. For Pres. Lincoln it was over 750 thousand.
Can Pres. Trump make our country great again by killing it's people?
The people see this spraying as a crime and it is on many levels. Some necks need to stretch and there are many that need to stretch on this one.
Every person that has served in the Military knows that the Pres. of the united States of America has complete authority over our countries skies. If they spray, force them down or shoot them down period.
If I sprayed into the air what's being sprayed by these planes, I would be in Prison in no time. The EPA would have me arrested pronto.
Impound their planes as a forfeiture as in other crimes. If they have no planes they can't spray.
His last chance will be to announce the Restored Republic and then stop the Chem-Trails.
If you read this, viewed the video and are not angry and wanting to do something about it, you may already be to far gone. If you are ill and feel you can't fight, then fight with prayers and pray for those that can take physical action. LOL
Ken T.
What Chemtrails Are Doing To Your Brain - Neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock Reveals Shocking Facts.
The Real Reasons Why Trump Has Flipped On His Campaign Promises
The Real Reasons Why Trump Has Flipped On His Campaign Promises
http://www.activistpost.com/2017/05/real-reasons-trump-flipped-campaign-promises.html
May 4, 2017
By Brandon Smith
Back in December of 2016 I wrote an article titled “Trump Is Exactly Where The Elites Want Him”, which I think was very difficult for a large part of the liberty movement to read and accept. In that article I outlined the future of the Trump presidency; a future dominated by Washington insiders, Goldman Sachs internationalists and Neo-Con warmongers. Trump, at the very onset of his administration, broke one of his most important campaign promises — to “drain the swamp.” Instead, he filled his cabinet with all of the same swamp creatures he originally attacked; the same swamp creatures Hillary Clinton was notorious for serving.
I also warned in numerous articles that because of this initial broken promise, conservatives should not expect that Trump would fulfill most if any of his original plans. In the BEST CASE SCENARIO scenario, Trump is surrounded by enemies dictating policy from every corner and corridor of the White House.
This article, of course, triggered quite a bit of wrath from hardcore Trump supporters. And, of course, time has so far proven I was right yet again.
The only argument at this point in defense of Trump is that it is still very early in his first year and that no president should be expected to accomplish much in just a few months. Okay, I’ll entertain that notion, but let’s be realistic here and look at the current circumstances.
As I write this, Congress is on the brink of forging a spending bill which essentially removes ALL backing for Trump’s original projects, including the southern border wall. Now, given, the bill only provides funding for government until the end of September, but we have witnessed very little resistance from the Trump administration so far. Are we about to see the Republicans roll over yet again in the name of avoiding a government shutdown? I would say yes, for now.
This is one area where Trump could light a firestorm. By forcing a government shutdown, a real fight for conservative national projects and spending cuts could take place. Yet, we are still struggling with the broken monstrosity of Obamacare, we have yet to see any plan for defunding Planned Parenthood, the border wall looks to be a distant dream and military spending is slated to increase by $54 billion. At this point Trump supporters are left wondering where their limited government pit bull negotiator disappeared to?
While Trump recently indicated that a shutdown in September may be a good thing for the U.S., I’m just not buying it. On the foreign front, Trump has been backing off of his threats against NAFTA. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump explained his decision by saying that he is “a nationalist and a globalist.” Yikes. Trump has now also refused to label China a currency manipulator, which was an action many originally thought he would pursue. This decision, in my view, is likely in preparation for a strike on North Korea; a war no one asked for and which America cannot possibly afford at this time. China’s move to step back from its protective stance with North Korea supports my longstanding argument that Eastern nations are completely tied to globalist geopolitics; meaning, they do what they are told. If China remains hands-off, a conflict with North Korea is nearly a certainty. This kind of saber rattling would be contrary to Trump’s position on Iraq during his campaign, which was, to summarize his many remarks, a quagmire, a mess of a war that made little sense and gained America nothing. If Iraq was a mess, then what will North Korea be with its far better armed military and more ideologically dedicated soldiers? A war in North Korea would take twice as much time and capital to complete, but maybe that is the point… So, the question is, why has Trump flipped so completely and so quickly on is political positions since November of last year? I believe there are at least two identifiable reasons. First, it is important to note that Trump was placed in office as a means to scapegoat all conservatives and the principles of sovereignty and limited government for the disasters that will inevitably follow. This is the premise that I used to successfully predict Trump’s election win, and it is the premise that I used to successfully predict Trump’s behavior and policy shifts up to this point. Trump is in office for one reason — to destroy the name of conservatism for all time. That said, Trump’s support from many conservatives has not been as blind and faithful as the globalists might have hoped. We remain rather critical, and thankfully, ever watchful. We are not a zombie mob that can be easily exploited by some fearless leader on a white horse; unlike Obama’s sycophantic army of liberal followers, we still retain our principles. This does not necessarily save us from being scapegoated by internationalist propaganda in the years to come. I have heard many argue that Trump’s sudden flip-flop negates the idea that Trump is a conservative scapegoat because “he is not acting like a conservative.” These people are oblivious to human psychology. The fact is, Trump ran on a conservative nationalist platform, and his rhetoric continues to fuel his nationalist image, even if his actions do not. The globalists will paint him as a conservative and the majority of people around the world will continue to accept this narrative because rhetoric is often more powerful in people’s minds than tangible results. Liberals in particular will never let go of the idea that Trump is a conservative because they desperately long for vindication that conservative principles are “evil.” Every mistake Trump makes, though not conservative at all in nature, will be blamed on conservatism and nationalism as a whole. From what I have seen so far, the only people that are rationally critical of Trump as a conservative are actual liberty minded conservatives. Yes, we despise the crazed cultural Marxists of the social justice cult, and we are rightly concerned about the liberal population’s shift towards full-bore communism. Plus, we do not like Islamic extremism and won’t tolerate it within our borders. But we also are not too keen on the idea of being puppets for a fake conservative government, either. This is one reason I believe Trump has suddenly flipped; the globalist scheme to co-opt the liberty movement and constitutional conservatives has failed. It is a scheme I warned about months before the election in my article “Clinton vs. Trump And The Co-Option Of The Liberty Movement”. At this time, there is no point in Trump continuing to play his role as a stalwart of sovereignty. We have not been won over in a way that makes us easy to manipulate, which means we might not support certain globalist initiatives like martial law in the wake of a crisis, a national federalized ID card in the name of immigration control, regime changes in Syria or North Korea, etc. We may even organize in opposition to such measures. This leads to the next reason why I believe Trump has so swiftly reversed his positions: Perhaps he and his establishment handlers no longer need to maintain the conservative sovereignty facade because a full-spectrum crisis is about to take place; a crisis so consuming that the public will be completely distracted while the elites push their agenda forward and blame conservatives at the same time. The move against North Korea may be part of this event. By itself, North Korea would be a very cumbersome regional war that could bankrupt the U.S. (officially bankrupt as opposed to technically bankrupt). The level of determination to increase tensions with North Korea is truly astounding. I have not seen such senseless rhetoric from the White House since the Iraq War. Obama was a war-crazed lunatic, but with Trump and North Korea, there doesn’t even seem to be much of an attempt at an explanation as to why a war is suddenly necessary. It just seems to be scheduled to happen. However, I continue to believe that a greater crisis is brewing that is economic and global in nature. With numerous financial bubbles artificially inflated over at least eight years of central bank stimulus, the question is not “if” but WHEN the system will enter the final stages of its ongoing collapse. The behavior of the Trump administration may be nothing more than poor timing or poor planning on the part of the globalist establishment. Perhaps they just didn’t play this part of the long game in an expert manner. But, I tend towards caution rather than naive hope and unicorns. The record-setting flip-flop by Trump should not be taken lightly or simply treated as aimless schizophrenia on the part of the White House. While the Obama administration flipped on numerous campaign promises, they did so subtly while maintaining their lies in a strategic way for two full terms. This is not what is happening today. Trump’s dramatic change, in my view, should be taken as a signal that a much greater game is afoot, with far higher stakes. It should also be treated as a sign that if a crisis is on the verge of being engineered, then it will be happening rather soon, perhaps before 2017 is over. There will be ongoing arguments as to whether the Trump White House has been hijacked or if it was a controlled element all along. I lean more towards the position that it was controlled all along. I have seen little to no resistance on the part of Trump against the establishment, only rhetoric. And, as I have said so many times, rhetoric is meaningless, only actions matter. It is exceedingly positive in a way that Trump’s reversal has been so fast and so complete. It shows that conservatives and liberty champions have not been subsumed into the so-called “alt-right” (a made-up term designed to pigeonhole and demonize all true conservatives); that the elites miserably bungled their plans to co-opt us. That said, for every success there are consequences. It may be that our refusal to “buy into” the Trump momentum and cast off our skepticism has caused the establishment to adjust their timetable. And, when the elites do not get what they want, they tend to fall back on their tried and true tool kit of violence and disaster. You can read more from Brandon Smith at his site Alt-Market.com.
TRUMP IS NOW TIED INTO THE "KILL-EM" CHEMTRAILS AS HE HAS THE AUTHORITY AND POWER TO SHUT THESE "RAID BOMBS" DOWN AND HE HAS REFUSED....
A JUDGE WAS SUPPOSE TO HAVE STOPPED THE STANDING ROCK KELCY WARREN "MR. BIG BRITCHES" OIL B.S. DOWN ..... YET THE PIPELINE WAS JUST COMPETED....WHAT SAY YOU ABOUT THIS??
REMINDS ME ABOUT PLAYING CHESS, BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE PLAYER....HOW LONG DO WE KEEP OR LET THESE THUGS WIPE THEIR BOOTS ON US?????? EVEN OUR MALITIA WALKED AWAY...WHAT THE HEE-HAW IS GOING ON ????
While Trump recently indicated that a shutdown in September may be a good thing for the U.S., I’m just not buying it. On the foreign front, Trump has been backing off of his threats against NAFTA. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump explained his decision by saying that he is “a nationalist and a globalist.” Yikes. Trump has now also refused to label China a currency manipulator, which was an action many originally thought he would pursue. This decision, in my view, is likely in preparation for a strike on North Korea; a war no one asked for and which America cannot possibly afford at this time. China’s move to step back from its protective stance with North Korea supports my longstanding argument that Eastern nations are completely tied to globalist geopolitics; meaning, they do what they are told. If China remains hands-off, a conflict with North Korea is nearly a certainty. This kind of saber rattling would be contrary to Trump’s position on Iraq during his campaign, which was, to summarize his many remarks, a quagmire, a mess of a war that made little sense and gained America nothing. If Iraq was a mess, then what will North Korea be with its far better armed military and more ideologically dedicated soldiers? A war in North Korea would take twice as much time and capital to complete, but maybe that is the point… So, the question is, why has Trump flipped so completely and so quickly on is political positions since November of last year? I believe there are at least two identifiable reasons. First, it is important to note that Trump was placed in office as a means to scapegoat all conservatives and the principles of sovereignty and limited government for the disasters that will inevitably follow. This is the premise that I used to successfully predict Trump’s election win, and it is the premise that I used to successfully predict Trump’s behavior and policy shifts up to this point. Trump is in office for one reason — to destroy the name of conservatism for all time. That said, Trump’s support from many conservatives has not been as blind and faithful as the globalists might have hoped. We remain rather critical, and thankfully, ever watchful. We are not a zombie mob that can be easily exploited by some fearless leader on a white horse; unlike Obama’s sycophantic army of liberal followers, we still retain our principles. This does not necessarily save us from being scapegoated by internationalist propaganda in the years to come. I have heard many argue that Trump’s sudden flip-flop negates the idea that Trump is a conservative scapegoat because “he is not acting like a conservative.” These people are oblivious to human psychology. The fact is, Trump ran on a conservative nationalist platform, and his rhetoric continues to fuel his nationalist image, even if his actions do not. The globalists will paint him as a conservative and the majority of people around the world will continue to accept this narrative because rhetoric is often more powerful in people’s minds than tangible results. Liberals in particular will never let go of the idea that Trump is a conservative because they desperately long for vindication that conservative principles are “evil.” Every mistake Trump makes, though not conservative at all in nature, will be blamed on conservatism and nationalism as a whole. From what I have seen so far, the only people that are rationally critical of Trump as a conservative are actual liberty minded conservatives. Yes, we despise the crazed cultural Marxists of the social justice cult, and we are rightly concerned about the liberal population’s shift towards full-bore communism. Plus, we do not like Islamic extremism and won’t tolerate it within our borders. But we also are not too keen on the idea of being puppets for a fake conservative government, either. This is one reason I believe Trump has suddenly flipped; the globalist scheme to co-opt the liberty movement and constitutional conservatives has failed. It is a scheme I warned about months before the election in my article “Clinton vs. Trump And The Co-Option Of The Liberty Movement”. At this time, there is no point in Trump continuing to play his role as a stalwart of sovereignty. We have not been won over in a way that makes us easy to manipulate, which means we might not support certain globalist initiatives like martial law in the wake of a crisis, a national federalized ID card in the name of immigration control, regime changes in Syria or North Korea, etc. We may even organize in opposition to such measures. This leads to the next reason why I believe Trump has so swiftly reversed his positions: Perhaps he and his establishment handlers no longer need to maintain the conservative sovereignty facade because a full-spectrum crisis is about to take place; a crisis so consuming that the public will be completely distracted while the elites push their agenda forward and blame conservatives at the same time. The move against North Korea may be part of this event. By itself, North Korea would be a very cumbersome regional war that could bankrupt the U.S. (officially bankrupt as opposed to technically bankrupt). The level of determination to increase tensions with North Korea is truly astounding. I have not seen such senseless rhetoric from the White House since the Iraq War. Obama was a war-crazed lunatic, but with Trump and North Korea, there doesn’t even seem to be much of an attempt at an explanation as to why a war is suddenly necessary. It just seems to be scheduled to happen. However, I continue to believe that a greater crisis is brewing that is economic and global in nature. With numerous financial bubbles artificially inflated over at least eight years of central bank stimulus, the question is not “if” but WHEN the system will enter the final stages of its ongoing collapse. The behavior of the Trump administration may be nothing more than poor timing or poor planning on the part of the globalist establishment. Perhaps they just didn’t play this part of the long game in an expert manner. But, I tend towards caution rather than naive hope and unicorns. The record-setting flip-flop by Trump should not be taken lightly or simply treated as aimless schizophrenia on the part of the White House. While the Obama administration flipped on numerous campaign promises, they did so subtly while maintaining their lies in a strategic way for two full terms. This is not what is happening today. Trump’s dramatic change, in my view, should be taken as a signal that a much greater game is afoot, with far higher stakes. It should also be treated as a sign that if a crisis is on the verge of being engineered, then it will be happening rather soon, perhaps before 2017 is over. There will be ongoing arguments as to whether the Trump White House has been hijacked or if it was a controlled element all along. I lean more towards the position that it was controlled all along. I have seen little to no resistance on the part of Trump against the establishment, only rhetoric. And, as I have said so many times, rhetoric is meaningless, only actions matter. It is exceedingly positive in a way that Trump’s reversal has been so fast and so complete. It shows that conservatives and liberty champions have not been subsumed into the so-called “alt-right” (a made-up term designed to pigeonhole and demonize all true conservatives); that the elites miserably bungled their plans to co-opt us. That said, for every success there are consequences. It may be that our refusal to “buy into” the Trump momentum and cast off our skepticism has caused the establishment to adjust their timetable. And, when the elites do not get what they want, they tend to fall back on their tried and true tool kit of violence and disaster. You can read more from Brandon Smith at his site Alt-Market.com.
TRUMP IS NOW TIED INTO THE "KILL-EM" CHEMTRAILS AS HE HAS THE AUTHORITY AND POWER TO SHUT THESE "RAID BOMBS" DOWN AND HE HAS REFUSED....
A JUDGE WAS SUPPOSE TO HAVE STOPPED THE STANDING ROCK KELCY WARREN "MR. BIG BRITCHES" OIL B.S. DOWN ..... YET THE PIPELINE WAS JUST COMPETED....WHAT SAY YOU ABOUT THIS??
REMINDS ME ABOUT PLAYING CHESS, BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE PLAYER....HOW LONG DO WE KEEP OR LET THESE THUGS WIPE THEIR BOOTS ON US?????? EVEN OUR MALITIA WALKED AWAY...WHAT THE HEE-HAW IS GOING ON ????
Bad News: World War I and II Happened
By Anna Von Reitz
You don't want to believe that your government, your dear, dear sainted government, would kill you?
Well, the facts are in front of your face.
It's
not really your government. It hasn't been your government since 1860.
Two rival gangs of mostly-European commercial banks and trading
companies set up an illegal commercial mercenary "war" on our soil and
got away with it. They called it the "American Civil War" but the fact
is that it was never declared by Congress and never settled via any
peace treaty. It was a crime and it still is.
We are living through the backwash of an illegal and unresolved conflict that is now over 150 years old.
On
the way here we have endured multiple fraudulent "national
bankruptcies", two equally illegal World Wars, and constant lesser
conflicts---Korea, Vietnam, Iraq I and II, Libya, Afghanistan....
Prior
to the Second World War the Nazis based their economy on investments
made by the German People themselves---German banks, German
aristocrats, German Jews--- and sold bonds based on the labor and
assets of the German people to international investors, too.
When
the Nazis couldn't pay their debts what did they do? They killed the
Priority Creditors who were closest to home -- German bankers, German
aristocrats, and German Jews.
Why?
Because getting rid of those Priority Creditors erased a large part of
their government debt, allowed the Nazis to claim the victim's homes
and land and bank accounts and also netted the life insurance policies
the Nazis placed on their Priority Creditors.
They
loaded their Priority Creditors on cattle cars and took them to forced
labor camps, worked some of them to death, and murdered the rest. That
is what happened and that is why.
The same exact process has taken place here in America.
The
US Government has done the same thing and now they can't pay their
debts. 800 FEMA Camps. 30,000 guillotines. Thousands of "specially
equipped" train cars set up with manacles.
Why guillotines? To harvest teeth and gold fillings, just as they did after Waterloo and just as they did at Treblinka.
Those who don't remember history are condemned to relive it.
Now those who have defrauded the world and who have set up this awful situation are understandably afraid.
We know who they are. We know where they live.
They
have planned all along to do this by conventional means in order to
maximize profits, but they have also had a Plan B, known as Slice and
Dice Technology.
Many
of you have heard of EMP's --- Electromagnetic Pulse weaponry created
by exploding a nuclear bomb in mid-air, which has the effect of taking
out electrical generators and electrical equipment of all kinds. Such a
disaster could shut down the grid in an entire country, which is awful
enough to think about--- but you haven't thought far enough.
Just
as sound and other resonance frequency devices can promote and restore
health, they can also be used as weapons to destroy.
Think
of an energy device that does nothing but interrupt the electrical
pulse of your heart beat? Like an EMP for biological systems? If nobody
is there to restart your heart, you're dead.
Now
think of such a device that can be triangulated to define a specific
three dimensional space anywhere on Earth. It could be a mile high, a
mile wide, and a mile deep in the ocean or in the air or it could be at
ground level just as easily.
They
have been testing these weapons for several years. Those tests are the
cause of the "mysterious die offs" of sea creatures and birds all over
the world. Whole huge flocks of birds suddenly drop out of the sky,
dead as door nails. Turtles, porpoises, and other sea reptiles,
amphibians, and mammals destroyed en masse and just as fast.
It's
not as profitable as the old way of working them to death first, but
it works and the mess is relatively short-lived and easy to clean up.
No buildings are harmed. Just living things.
And this is what the Numbnutz have been threatening to unleash if they can't remain in control.
Obviously,
they've done such a great job of running everything that we should be
grateful and agree to let them put us in cattle cars and declare
everyone hopelessly in debt for the next 10,000 years?
There
are just a few things standing in their way--- and one of them, which I
pointed out this morning, is your own ability to project energy over
vast distances of time and space. Your thoughts are alive. Your
emotions, too. You are a creator.
Most
of you have inherited abilities that you don't begin to dream of, are
more powerful than you can imagine, and it takes only a few of us to
bend and twist and shape physical realities in such a way that these
resonance weapons are useless.
On
a more mundane level, frequency weapons can be countered with opposing
frequencies, just like canceling out any sine wave with an equal and
opposing one. We have machines that are capable of matching and erasing
their signals.
We
have advanced technologies that can take these vermin out, but the
question is--- can we do it before they devastate a whole region?
Why not use the one weapon that they have no defense for and which they won't expect?
The concentrated force of the human mind, bearing down on them?
The
Guardians among us have the ability to thwart the use of these weapons
merely by thinking about them consciously and countermanding their
use. But in order to do that, they must be aware that these things
exist and that they are deployed and where they are located and how
they operate and to some extent, who is operating them.
So
to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, the information I gave
this morning is important and won't be scoffed at or argued over. They
will simply look, see, know, and do.
And this threat will be overcome, too.
When
you hear Colonel House's chilling words (see my prior article and
Melvin Stamper's excellent book, Fruit From a Poisonous Tree) and
House's apparent satisfaction in condemning the American People to
endless enslavement, you will have some idea of the asocial, amoral,
uncaring, egocentric, snake-like, calculating nature of the vermin.
They
live only to eat, to consume, to satisfy their own pride and
appetites. They scheme endlessly. Lie endlessly. Deceive, defraud, and
destroy endlessly.
They
come in every color and pretend to embrace every creed, espouse every
nation and represent every ethnicity. They make up about five percent
of the total population on Earth and they cause nearly all of the
violence, crime, destruction, misery and death.
They are galactic-level parasites.
-----------------------------
See this article and over 500 others on Anna's website here:www.annavonreitz.com
The Best Explanation of "The System" -- Right From the Horse's Mouth
By Anna Von Reitz
Everyone please go to this link and spend five minutes to listen to this explanation of the "System"----- by the author of it's American version, Colonel House.
This explicitly and simply explains what has been done to you and how and
why and by whom and when.
Be sure to read the accompanying article which further details the history,
meaning, make-up, and operations of the "Federal Reserve" and the banking system
as a whole.
This entire presentation is worthy of memorizing.
And so is Melvin Stamper's book, Fruit From a Poisonous Tree. He
didn't get it all, but he came close--- and he explained what he did know very
well.
Those who are serious about getting to the root cause of what has gone
wrong in America and in the world at large need to deeply contemplate the
information presented in these brief resources.
I am truly grateful to the authors/organizers of the Galactic Connection
for doing such a bang-em-up job with this presentation of key information
everyone in this country ought to have and know as well as they know the "Pledge
of Allegiance" that Colonel House used to further indoctrinate and complete his
system of feudal "pledging" and eternal debt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
