And did you get the z plate
On Nov 3, 2021, at 5:12 AM, cfc ("chaditude2002")
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I concur from my travels and reading your recitation/version/story (mailbox
game whisper in ear to final version (context)), however, stumped by flag of
peace originating at dept of Commerce [traffic, intercourse, business].
License, insurance and registration legally coded as business offenses here.
What biz am I in, trade name dba? Given name/family name = man/ joinder first
last=legal name, all caps joinder=EXPRESS TRUST/ROMAN CIVIL LAW. Ink:
black/blue dead sole, red live birth bloodline, purple royalty. Times are
perfect, now, check Harry's abdication of crown (Corona 19). A cat and mouse
game...
A req Z plate (exempt) is one time fee I prefer lawfully coded [LEO word
play] private made. Jurisdiction and ur abilities of enforcement is key. The
more they deceive/swindle equitable tollings of stats limits.
If they have it they own it, i.e. fingerprints. Mine are on my hands those
on paper belong to you, custodian of documents (legal representation 2
dimensional cross tees dot eyes) (possession is 9/10 th of law) How can a
cert title be as valuable as the actual car, it's only a legal representation.
Any old cowboy movie shows: highwayman/police, mob rule/democracy, and the
noble lone sheriff.
On Tuesday, November 2, 2021, 04:45:46 PM CDT, Charley Dan
<charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
NRC winner
It's not my screen shot but another's I was commenting on
On Nov 2, 2021, 3:26 PM -0600, David Hawley <d.hawley.777@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Here is only some of the main headings in the document...
*BILL OF COMPLAINT IN EQUITY
PRESENTMENT TO VOID PROCEEDINGS AND JURISDICTION
*JURISDICTION AND VENUE
*RULE OF LAW
*JURISDICTION OF COURTS OVER THE ESTATES OF INFANTS
*JURISDICTION OF COURTS OVER ESTATES OF INFANTS/MINORS-JUDICIAL ALLOWANCE
FOR SUPPORT, MAINTENANCE, AND EDUCATION
*ELEMENTS OF A TRUST:
*A PRIVATE SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP EXPRESS TRUST
Exhibit A
Verified Memorandum of Law and points of Authorities on TRUST
The creation of the trust
Cases consistent with sections stated herein:
Ok, so that's about page 15 is where I've so far read to. Per David's
request "please do not share this video outside your immediate family. If
you know anyone interested in purchasing their own video, please have them
contact sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx .we will make sure they can receive an
official video as well"
When you purchase the official video you also receive an awful lot of
information and documents, which you will need to change and adjust to make
them yours. Seems like I printed off half a reem of paper and am reading
everything first ,and so far am liking everything, comprehending is a work
in progress.
Hope this helps someone.
David Hawley
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 1:53 PM ejartz <ejartz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks David, any chance we could see with the 40 page document looks like?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 4:42 PM David Hawley <d.hawley.777@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
@ ejartz
You asked who knows....
I am actually half way through the 40 page document "Express Trust",trying
to wrap my head around... age of majority/property/estate/securities of an
infant/minor. David-Lester;Straight is where I obtain this information.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 1:10 PM ejartz <ejartz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Okay, I've heard a lot of people talk about claiming your minor estate or
accounts. Who knows how to do this with certainty?
Otherwise it's just a concept that's as elusive as trying to recover a drop
of water that has fallen into the ocean.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021, 9:51 AM J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
think you folks are missing the bigger over all goal other than fixing ones
status
Claim the Minor estate. Yes folks you are all including I are Trust fund
babies. And when I mean it , I mean it most of you folks unless your young
have 100's of millions if not some have a billion + in their account.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:18 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
i share charleys surprise here. infants are wards of the court, theyre
(municipal courts) are pushing unconstitutional presumptions on people. this
is my opinion but i dont think they will take you seriously after stating
your an infant as you just admitted jurisdiction instead of challenging it.
with what you stated it seems more productive to go the path of simply
plaintiff in error, but as charley does i advocate for obliterating their
feigned presumption of jurisdiction.
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021, 8:39 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Really?
Another "element" that proves you are applicable to al cods, ordances, ules
and statutes is that you accepted or requested a "DRIVER LICENSE" and
through that nexus You are considered to be "Operating a State Agency" and
must follow all the same statutes etc. which are for "RESIDENTS" DEF.
"EMPLOYEES" or "OFFICERS"
Article 1, section,8, clause 17 defines jurisdiction of the United States an
I'm not in it.
I can habe a driver's license and it means nothing. Use it to rent a car.
Marriage license means nothing. Because United States does not have
jurisdicton. Read court cases and it is quite clear citizens is a fancy word
for employee oath taker.
On Nov 1, 2021, 7:12 PM -0600, Stephen Schwika
<dmarc-noreply-outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
IS HOW THEY CONTROL THE MASSES - Possible Cestua Que Vie Trust Acct. ACCESS
Brad,
I wish to TALK not TYPE too much. SEE TH BELOW LINKS
Listen to THIS SHIT regarding "No INFANT can be prosecuted" . Once
the/their GUARDIANSHIP is removed one then is FREE. It's [the infancy
status - that continues until "NONAGE" (correcttion of an error, nonage is
a proper legal term in FL, in another state: possibly called emancipation)
is achived] a parent child corporation - a self-powering municipal
corporation .
The solution is RULE 19 . I am still listinng to the first one. Kindly
discuss this with me upon listening to and understanding same.
The "PLEA OF INFANCY" stops all prosecution efforts, istruction how to
revert control back to "you" since you , "did not intend to give ypyour
"rights" by accepting the mere "privledge" involving The "INFANT" status
that was "without your knowledge or approval" through BAR Association
trickery and deception "legally" (but not lawfully) labeled upon you by
your mother accepting and "signing" the (infant "delivery" - into
"commerce" making you (One part of you - not the other "living" man or
woman portion, a owned corporation and "corporate" property undr a
concervancy or guadianship of your other contractual (by mother signing at
"delivery") fictitious corporate daddy - the State ) with the delivery
receipt "receipt" enabling same called the "birth certificate" where
afterwards (if father fails to claim the property before e years od - TITLE
goes up for "salvage" and is purchasd by The Roman Catholic Church, Mormon
Church, etc.) THEY (through a contract with the U.S. gov. - their "human
trafficing" business associates) unless properly corrected buy your or a
parent's proper and timely "administrative" NOTICE - and request for a
"NONAGE" Claim/petition for "correction" to be achieved using RULE 19 _ OR
"POSSIBLY" ANOTHER unknown to me METHOD) otherwise THEY have total control
(plus "legal" jurisdiction) of you and ALL your "spendthrift trust"
assets, and you are left as the bankrupt surety for ALL BILLS, EXPENCES,
LIABILITIS, MALACIOUS FO-PROFIT PROSECUTION ATTEMPTS, ETC. ...when
otherwise THEY should b paying everything due (monthly, etc.) out of the
Cestue que vie trust account's (your) availabl assets. Go figure...
Can listen to everything explained yourself - do NOT let your ens legis
HEAR this inportant info.... it OWES you tens of millions of dollars for
you serving as the "receiver of srvice and process" for IT since you were
about 2 weeks old. Must send the alleged Birth Certificate "owner" (of the
ens legis) a (notary Public "receiver" sent and "timely" 21 day response
received) Notice (by affidavit) to respond, and then (after their
non-response based "failure-to-respond") a bill for $50 per hour since
back then for unpaid "monthly" services and money due to you.
Another "element" that proves you are applicable to al cods, ordances, ules
and statutes is that you accepted or requested a "DRIVER LICENSE" and
through that nexus You are considered to be "Operating a State Agency" and
must follow all the same statutes etc. which are for "RESIDENTS" DEF.
"EMPLOYEES" or "OFFICERS" of the government... Threfore, must dump the
(if/when actually unneeded) proof of State Agency operation Driver License,
unless you actually are a (tuck, bus, ambulance,towtruck, limo, or other
"commercial" and "for-profit" employed as same "driver". Then things get
easier, otherwise simply claim (non-prosecutable) "infant" status for
everything, stopping everything in its tracks. Listen to brother boris
explain everything...
Rumble — IAMSOMEDUDE.COM "Boris" DOCS:
http://www.lawofboris.com/files/10212021.zip
Borris TalkShoe is "Surfing with the Alien"
Hosted by: Law of Boris
Phone Number: (724) 444-7444 Thurs ?time
Call ID: 82668
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=82668&cmd=tc
*** lawofborris.COM [sign up videos, files, private stash on Rumble-get
link from LOB FOR TELEGRAM chat AND rUMBLE
stephen
570-443-7892
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Some Dude <iamsomedude2@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Stephen Schwika <motiond@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2021, 01:15:35 PM EDT
Subject: Re: Assumed Name Certificate - strategic amendment (text desired)
this is more like a "fee schedule" and I do not think it will fit on a
Minnesota dba filing. but i could be mistaken;
i would just download a form and see for yourself ...
but, i think you should watch/listen to the 10-21 and 10-27 calls on the
private stash
https://rumble.com/vo269p-zoom-meeting-10.21.2021.html
https://rumble.com/vod8fb-zoom-meeting-10.28.2021.html
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 4:09 AM Stephen Schwika <motiond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Minn. A.N.C. Name Holder : for STEPHEN JOHN SCHWIKA
[[ I think the below is about ALL I AM ABLE TO do ]]
:Stephen-John: Schwika. – ATTENTION: Notice of Liability pursuant to
$250k "unauthorized" (private property) use fee for ”name use” of
Minnesota (Secretary of State) certified “ASSUMED NAME” (SEE ABOVE). For
(any evidenced written or corporate) use of Name Holder’s “Private
non-corporate Business/Trad” name, any derivative - variant names,
copyrighted name(s), the use of name holder, Assumed Name Certificate’s
registered “fictitious” business entity or “other variant ” as any
presumed surety, the Name Estate for U.S. certificated “PERSON” [Name
Estate] decedent (birth certificate) TITLE holder possessing valid
standing, Full Faith and Credit, plus highest “security” interest in and
FOR ALL PURPOSES OF THE OBLIGATION OF THE “PERSON” [Name Estate] wherein,
above shall not be held liable in ANY COURT in pursuance of and reliance on
12 USC 95a Sect. 2, wherein same “PERSON” [Name Estate] is entitled to
ACQUITTANCE and DISCHARGE FOR ALL PURPOSES OF THE OBLIGATION OF THE
“PERSON” [Name Estate]. Named “PERSON” [Name Estate] shall not be held
liable in ANY COURT for or in respect to ANYTHING done or omitted in good
faith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and in
reliance on, this section, or any rule, regulation[code, ordinance or
statute], instruction, or direction issued hereunder… under full and
complete INDEMNITY via. General Orders 100 section 38. The RECEIPT
[Birth Certificate] and the [Estate?] name/title on same is being used in
pursuance of and reliance on 12 USC95a Sect. 2 for discharge of any U.S.
associated debt, plus discharge of liability, in pursuance of and reliance
upon same section further evidenced by (recorded) Dual Secretary of State
(Federal and State) "authenticated" Birth Certificate with other "verified"
(sworn - true and correct) document evidence supporting the private
property $250,000 "NAME USE" fee – due within seven (7) days of verbal or
other notification of (each incidence of) unauthorized name [Name Estate -
TITLE] usage.
I am unsure if ALL THE ABOVE IS PERFECTLY ACCURATE or appropriate to be
used in (my) pursuance of and reliance on 12 USC95a Sect. 2. Possibly some
changes, additional points, or EDITING - may be required.
I would appreciate a little assistance hammering this NOTICE out a little
MORE in order to optimize / and for accuratizing same... Dean do you
think this WILL ALL FIT IN THE MINN. ASSUME NAM CERTIFICATE'S "NAME HOLDR"
field (form) space available...
Any helpful feedback on this TOPIC / objective (HOPEFULLY - to be
automatically "Printed-out" ON the Minn. A.N.C. FORM) will be greatly
appreciated -
Please advise,
stephen
570/ 443-7892 ...kindly call me
