your born a man or woman and they cant take that away from you. mostly all
else falls to the side from fraud and/or coercion. plain and simple, just
like theres rights you cant give away if you wanted to.
On Fri, Nov 5, 2021, 2:08 PM surfboate <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There are men and there are fictions. What are you?
On Tuesday, November 2, 2021, 07:24:43 a.m. PDT, Charley Dan <
charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Veritas screenshot brings some good points out on usage of words.
Natural person but no such thing as artificial man. Artificial person is
possible. Especially in this day and age of robots.
Other supreme court cases use employee of goverment and that is more to
my liking and trying to make it a habit. Artificial person is none existent
unless one is referring to one who does as told with no spine or authority
or mind of their own. Welcome to 90% of Americans in the court room.
Quote to me the other day as inspiring. I'll be glad the day I walk the
street and hear people talking of morality, philosophy, and sustainability
instead of the latest Karishans (sp).
On Nov 2, 2021, 7:51 AM -0600, 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 <https://rumble.com/> — 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
Attachment:
Screenshot_20211024-074105_Messages.jpg
Description: JPEG image
