It is the rule of clandestine services to spread about 90% truth to rope people in but the 10% lies will get everyone off course. It was explained to me by someone who was taking to their ship's captain that just a few degrees off can insure you never make your destination.
It might have been Glen Kealey who said that the Amish had an agreement with the Pope to be left alone. Within the Three Clans that would suggest that that power broker is no longer calling the shots
The best defence they can get is one challenging their claim of jurisdiction. Without that they have absolutely no case. Wouldn't matter what reason they say.
> SEVEN ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION:
1. The accused must be properly identified, identified in such a fashion there is no room for mistaken identity. The individual must be singled out from all others; otherwise, anyone could be subject to arrest and trial without benefit of “wrong party” defense. Almost always, the means of identification is a person’s proper name, BUT ANY MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION IS EQUALLY VALID IF SAID MEANS DIFFERENTIATES THE ACCUSED WITHOUT DOUBT. (There is no constitutionally valid requirement you must identify yourself, see 4th Amendment; also see, Brown vs. Texas, 443 US 47 and Kolender v. Lawson 461 US 352.)
2. The statute of offense must be identified by its proper or common name. A number is insufficient. Today, a citizen may stand in jeopardy of criminal sanctions for alleged violation of statutes, regulations, or even low-level bureaucratic orders (example: colorado National Monument Superintendent’s Orders regarding an unleashed dog or a dog defecating on a trail). If a number were to be deemed sufficient, government could bring new and different charges at any time by alleging clerical error. For any act to be triable as an offense, it must be declared to be a crime. Charges must negate any exception forming part of the statutory definition of an offense, by affirmative non-applicability. In other words, any charge must affirmatively negate any exception found in the law.
3. The acts of alleged offense must be described in non-prejudicial language and detail so as to enable a person of average intelligence to understand nature of charge (to enable preparation of defense); the actual act or acts constituting the offense complained of. The charge must not be described by parroting the statute; not by the language of same. The naming of the acts of the offense describes a specific offense whereas the verbiage of a statute describes only a general class of offense. Facts must be stated. Conclusions cannot be considered in the determination of probable cause.
4. The accuser must be named. He/she may be an officer or a third party, but some positively identifiable person (human being) must accuse; some certain person must take responsibility for the making of the accusation, not an agency or an institution. This is the only valid means by which a citizen may begin to face his accuser. Also, the injured party (corpus delicti) must make the accusation. Hearsay evidence may not be provided. Anyone else testifying that they heard that another party was injured does not qualify as direct evidence.
5. The accusation must be made under penalty of perjury. If perjury cannot reach the accuser, there is no accusation. Otherwise, anyone may accuse another falsely without risk.
6. To comply with the five elements above, that is for the accusation to be valid, the accused must be accorded due process. Accuser must have complied with law, procedure and form in bringing the charge. This includes court-determined probable cause, summons and notice procedure. If lawful process may be abrogated in placing a citizen in jeopardy, then any means may be utilized to deprive a man of his freedom, and all dissent may be stifled by utilization of defective process.
“The essential elements of due process are notice and an opportunity to defend. “Simon v. Craft, 182 US 427.
“one is not entitled to protection unless he has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer. The mere assertion of a privilege does not immunize him; the court must determine whether his refusal is justified, and may require that he is mistaken in his refusal. “Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479 (1951)
7. The court must be one of competent jurisdiction. To have valid process, the tribunal must be a creature of its constitution, in accord with the law of its creation, i.e., Article III judge.
Lacking any of the seven elements or portions thereof, (unless waived, intentionally or unintentionally) all designed to ensure against further prosecution (double jeopardy); it is the defendant’s duty to inform the court of facts alleged for determination of sufficiency to support conviction, should one be obtained. Otherwise, there is no lawful notice, and charge must be dismissed for failure to state an offense. Without lawful notice, there is no personal jurisdiction and all proceedings prior to filing of a proper trial document in compliance with the seven elements is void. A lawful act is always legal but many legal acts by government are often unlawful. Most bureaucrats lack elementary knowledge and incentive to comply with the mandates of constitutional due process. They will make mistakes. Numbers beyond count have been convicted without benefit of governmental adherence to these seven elements. Today, informations are being filed and prosecuted by “accepted practice” rather than due process of law.
Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. The court is only to rule on the sufficiency of the proof tendered. See, “McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp, 298 U.S. 178 (1936). The origins of this doctrine of law may be found in “MAXFIELD v. LEVY, 4 U.S. 330 (1797), 4 U.S. 330 (Dall.) 2 Dall. 381 2 U.S. 381 1 L.Ed. 424
The real fight is in court. And lawyers aren't cheap, and court costs aren't cheap either.
You bring out the most important aspects of this judicial fraud that has been afoot since the beginning. I'm pleased that you did the retrograde analysis that if proper Notice isn't given then the previous steps are inconsequential.
The Article 3 issue is the biggest yamulke wearing elephant in the room since congress committed tree son when they forced through the Administrative Procedures Act in 1947 thus getting rid of those courts and using the legerdemain of swapping them for administrative courts. They also turned the entire Executive Branch into AGENCIES so there has never been a President/commander in chief since 1947. The title now is the equivalent of the CEO of Walmart.
I never met or had the dealings with a lawyer reported to me that actually did any work.
Most people don't even know that their purpose is to seek Remedy & Relief; Care & Maintenance; and.... I forgot the third.
The link stated the account has been terminated this the video along with it.
Those 7 points I pulled from the internet but not without carefully analyzing it.
Again, research into marc Stevens, his method in fighting court in challenging jurisdiction is usually always a win.
Or more so, it's a proposition to the government that they can't win against nor dare lose. So expect lots of fear tactics and threats and many many many lies.
Listen to this 25min audio of a real court hearing. Pay close attention to how many times the judge tries to deceive, dodge questions, blatantly lie ñ, threat for asking legitimate questions, etc. They are pure manipulators. Yes this is one judge, and yes they are ALL that way when you challenge their authority.
So many people while I was locked up gave positive affirmations for their lawyer and judge for "going easy" on them when they committed no crime at all. It was sad to see how many people don't know or understand their own true power in sovereignty, otherwise they would at least emotionally understood that they were being conned.
Yeah Amish would be cool except for the passivity and religion and church domination. I would like to be a belligerent, well equipped, super violent Amish, like the avenging archangel Gabriel with Tesla force fields and decent array of laser cannons and even a bunch of industrial sized rail guns. Perhaps a bunker buster proof airtight dome with super efficient filtering system... And lots of low carb organics with a decent water supply. I would grow the proper facial hair and only ride my bike when necessary. Any internet activity would be done through a VPN...
To assert rights, one must be a belligerent claimant. In attack mode, one might accuse the felonious criminal pirates of mail fraud to start, throw in a little impersonation and/or misrepresentation, and top it off with other felonious crimes like RICO racketeering/organized crime, and my favorite; 'sender attempts to engage in genocide'. Because it's true. Upon closer examination, you will find the above listed crimes occurring all day, every day, as a normal course of business. That's what the courts are, business. Their business is trafficking in human flesh, and they will do whatever it takes to extort your wealth (life force).
I've heard the urban legends that it is a race to the court to be first to bring suit and that the filth will weight the outcome (it's all fixed anyway) based on who was the first to file a complaint.
Right, I get it. I just write this stuff on the unopened envelope, and return to sender, without dishonor, using the mail fraud statutes of USC Title 18.
https://old.bitchute.com/video/IKkV7CYJmnmN/
I like the notion that they shot monkey syphilis into everyone and then called it something else. That is their foundational playbook.
Even worse than being injected with monkey syphilis; Canada's PM is a malignant narcissist:
https://rumble.com/v5b2ex1-justin-trudeau-dictator.html?
Good word: malignant. I'm picturing some really offensive cancer.
Does anyone else think that the thumbnail picture makes Tucker and Trudeau look like cousins?
Could be. Some say Tucker is CIA! Who knows; anyway, he pitched some real truths, here...
It is the rule of clandestine services to spread about 90% truth to rope people in but the 10% lies will get everyone off course. It was explained to me by someone who was taking to their ship's captain that just a few degrees off can insure you never make your destination.
By the way, I'm quite familiar with being canceled for political reasons:
https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/heresy
They can even tell '100%' Truth ( if it exist...) if it means the few degrees off that insure you never make your destination .
The Amish are the precedent so they can impose this conditional loan crap on everyone else.
"At some point I will have to take the time to write up how to deal with Hive insects."
Pretty Please ??
When I wrote that I had a feeling of you batting your eyelashes and asking nicely under the alternative of having my keys chewed off.
Lol, You know me too well ! :) ...
Never fear, The big beaked wonder has found herself in lockdown. Keyboards SAFE! ... For now.
Ordered thy Assaulted and Same Schwein Lipstick. You should have at least 4 books sold next 2 months if not the clans are hiding the numbers.
The A.I. monitors and reacts in real time.
Just check your feeds for ads after you say something in front of your electronics.
So... maybe it will give some relief from disappearing orders with this new information.
Thanks.
Same Schwein Schtick (not signalling through yiddish use).
Nothing but struggle and people actually believe that Hell is a FUTURE destination.
Disgusting. This community is less than an hour from me
Coming to a Theater Near You.
It might have been Glen Kealey who said that the Amish had an agreement with the Pope to be left alone. Within the Three Clans that would suggest that that power broker is no longer calling the shots
The best defence they can get is one challenging their claim of jurisdiction. Without that they have absolutely no case. Wouldn't matter what reason they say.
> SEVEN ELEMENTS OF JURISDICTION:
1. The accused must be properly identified, identified in such a fashion there is no room for mistaken identity. The individual must be singled out from all others; otherwise, anyone could be subject to arrest and trial without benefit of “wrong party” defense. Almost always, the means of identification is a person’s proper name, BUT ANY MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION IS EQUALLY VALID IF SAID MEANS DIFFERENTIATES THE ACCUSED WITHOUT DOUBT. (There is no constitutionally valid requirement you must identify yourself, see 4th Amendment; also see, Brown vs. Texas, 443 US 47 and Kolender v. Lawson 461 US 352.)
2. The statute of offense must be identified by its proper or common name. A number is insufficient. Today, a citizen may stand in jeopardy of criminal sanctions for alleged violation of statutes, regulations, or even low-level bureaucratic orders (example: colorado National Monument Superintendent’s Orders regarding an unleashed dog or a dog defecating on a trail). If a number were to be deemed sufficient, government could bring new and different charges at any time by alleging clerical error. For any act to be triable as an offense, it must be declared to be a crime. Charges must negate any exception forming part of the statutory definition of an offense, by affirmative non-applicability. In other words, any charge must affirmatively negate any exception found in the law.
3. The acts of alleged offense must be described in non-prejudicial language and detail so as to enable a person of average intelligence to understand nature of charge (to enable preparation of defense); the actual act or acts constituting the offense complained of. The charge must not be described by parroting the statute; not by the language of same. The naming of the acts of the offense describes a specific offense whereas the verbiage of a statute describes only a general class of offense. Facts must be stated. Conclusions cannot be considered in the determination of probable cause.
4. The accuser must be named. He/she may be an officer or a third party, but some positively identifiable person (human being) must accuse; some certain person must take responsibility for the making of the accusation, not an agency or an institution. This is the only valid means by which a citizen may begin to face his accuser. Also, the injured party (corpus delicti) must make the accusation. Hearsay evidence may not be provided. Anyone else testifying that they heard that another party was injured does not qualify as direct evidence.
5. The accusation must be made under penalty of perjury. If perjury cannot reach the accuser, there is no accusation. Otherwise, anyone may accuse another falsely without risk.
6. To comply with the five elements above, that is for the accusation to be valid, the accused must be accorded due process. Accuser must have complied with law, procedure and form in bringing the charge. This includes court-determined probable cause, summons and notice procedure. If lawful process may be abrogated in placing a citizen in jeopardy, then any means may be utilized to deprive a man of his freedom, and all dissent may be stifled by utilization of defective process.
“The essential elements of due process are notice and an opportunity to defend. “Simon v. Craft, 182 US 427.
“one is not entitled to protection unless he has reasonable cause to apprehend danger from a direct answer. The mere assertion of a privilege does not immunize him; the court must determine whether his refusal is justified, and may require that he is mistaken in his refusal. “Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479 (1951)
7. The court must be one of competent jurisdiction. To have valid process, the tribunal must be a creature of its constitution, in accord with the law of its creation, i.e., Article III judge.
Lacking any of the seven elements or portions thereof, (unless waived, intentionally or unintentionally) all designed to ensure against further prosecution (double jeopardy); it is the defendant’s duty to inform the court of facts alleged for determination of sufficiency to support conviction, should one be obtained. Otherwise, there is no lawful notice, and charge must be dismissed for failure to state an offense. Without lawful notice, there is no personal jurisdiction and all proceedings prior to filing of a proper trial document in compliance with the seven elements is void. A lawful act is always legal but many legal acts by government are often unlawful. Most bureaucrats lack elementary knowledge and incentive to comply with the mandates of constitutional due process. They will make mistakes. Numbers beyond count have been convicted without benefit of governmental adherence to these seven elements. Today, informations are being filed and prosecuted by “accepted practice” rather than due process of law.
Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. The court is only to rule on the sufficiency of the proof tendered. See, “McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp, 298 U.S. 178 (1936). The origins of this doctrine of law may be found in “MAXFIELD v. LEVY, 4 U.S. 330 (1797), 4 U.S. 330 (Dall.) 2 Dall. 381 2 U.S. 381 1 L.Ed. 424
The real fight is in court. And lawyers aren't cheap, and court costs aren't cheap either.
Winners don't pay.
www.HowToWinInCourt.com?refercode=AG0023
Don't be the sucker who paid for a lawyer and he only did the bare minimum work.
Would also advise you check out Marc Stevens No state project and get on his Skype group. His Skype is frankrizzo3
Thanks for posting this.
You bring out the most important aspects of this judicial fraud that has been afoot since the beginning. I'm pleased that you did the retrograde analysis that if proper Notice isn't given then the previous steps are inconsequential.
The Article 3 issue is the biggest yamulke wearing elephant in the room since congress committed tree son when they forced through the Administrative Procedures Act in 1947 thus getting rid of those courts and using the legerdemain of swapping them for administrative courts. They also turned the entire Executive Branch into AGENCIES so there has never been a President/commander in chief since 1947. The title now is the equivalent of the CEO of Walmart.
I never met or had the dealings with a lawyer reported to me that actually did any work.
Most people don't even know that their purpose is to seek Remedy & Relief; Care & Maintenance; and.... I forgot the third.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2EQXCntBU0&t
The link stated the account has been terminated this the video along with it.
Those 7 points I pulled from the internet but not without carefully analyzing it.
Again, research into marc Stevens, his method in fighting court in challenging jurisdiction is usually always a win.
Or more so, it's a proposition to the government that they can't win against nor dare lose. So expect lots of fear tactics and threats and many many many lies.
Listen to this 25min audio of a real court hearing. Pay close attention to how many times the judge tries to deceive, dodge questions, blatantly lie ñ, threat for asking legitimate questions, etc. They are pure manipulators. Yes this is one judge, and yes they are ALL that way when you challenge their authority.
So many people while I was locked up gave positive affirmations for their lawyer and judge for "going easy" on them when they committed no crime at all. It was sad to see how many people don't know or understand their own true power in sovereignty, otherwise they would at least emotionally understood that they were being conned.
Yeah Amish would be cool except for the passivity and religion and church domination. I would like to be a belligerent, well equipped, super violent Amish, like the avenging archangel Gabriel with Tesla force fields and decent array of laser cannons and even a bunch of industrial sized rail guns. Perhaps a bunker buster proof airtight dome with super efficient filtering system... And lots of low carb organics with a decent water supply. I would grow the proper facial hair and only ride my bike when necessary. Any internet activity would be done through a VPN...
Yeah Amish would be cool.
Dude.
Classic.
To assert rights, one must be a belligerent claimant. In attack mode, one might accuse the felonious criminal pirates of mail fraud to start, throw in a little impersonation and/or misrepresentation, and top it off with other felonious crimes like RICO racketeering/organized crime, and my favorite; 'sender attempts to engage in genocide'. Because it's true. Upon closer examination, you will find the above listed crimes occurring all day, every day, as a normal course of business. That's what the courts are, business. Their business is trafficking in human flesh, and they will do whatever it takes to extort your wealth (life force).
I've heard the urban legends that it is a race to the court to be first to bring suit and that the filth will weight the outcome (it's all fixed anyway) based on who was the first to file a complaint.
Innocent until proven broke.
Right, I get it. I just write this stuff on the unopened envelope, and return to sender, without dishonor, using the mail fraud statutes of USC Title 18.