In your counter claim, "I, john doe, one of the People, and in this court of
record..."
I believe you choose the law. It's your court.
Sent from ProtonMail mobile
-------- Original Message --------
On Dec 18, 2021, 11:41 PM, Shining Emperor wrote:
Veritas:
How?
"you can make it into an art 3/your court,"
On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 7:09 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
i have pointed out attack jurisdiction as they have none, dont even go in to
talk to them if you have the choice. you can make it into an art 3/your
court, all things i have said and pointed out over time
On Fri, Dec 17, 2021, 1:27 PM Shining Emperor <nrcwinner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
, know that such persons are acting by a Color-of-Authority. Always think
SUIT! SUIT! SUIT! Measure Judges, and all court officers by the limited
authority vested in them.
Measure and judge all Contracts by Constitutional principles, and analyze
them by the contract qualification laws that govern such instruments.
Always hold the corporate State parties (court officers) to the high moral
standards, as prescribed for them by the sworn or affirmed Oaths taken by
them. And in accordance with the Constitutional obligations taken by the
Oath Bound Officers of the Courts, consider that when any Administrative
officer, (claiming to be a Judge) imposes himself into jurisdictional
venues or matters wherein he possess no lawful judicial powers, and thus,
lacks Jurisdiction, then Demand a Dismissal of the Case.
There are no lawful pleas to be made before such a non-sanctioned and
unlawful court, nor are there any lawful pleas to be made before the
unlawful officers of that court! Such an act constitutes a waiver of
Jurisdiction, which cannot be lawfully done or claimed by either party.
On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 4:58 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
The doctrines thus delivered we call the revealed or devine law, and they
are to be found only in the holy scriptures. These precepts, when
revealed, are found upon comparison to be really a part of the original
law of nature, as they tend in all their consequences to man's
felicity...this law of nature, being coeval with man kind and dictated by
God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is
binding over all the globe and in all countries, and at all times: no
human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this.." blackstone's
commentaries on the laws of england (1765-1769), section 2, page 41.
The power to create presumptions is not a means of escape from
constitutional restrictions. And the state may not in this way interfere
with matters withdrawn from its authority by the federal Constitution, or
subject an accused to conviction for conduct which it is powerless to
proscribe. Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U.S. 219
all subjects over which the sovereign power of the state extends are
objects of taxation, but those over which it does not extend are exempt
from taxation. this is proposition may also be pronounced as self-evident.
the sovereignty of the state of the state extends to everything which
exists by it's authority or permission. McCullough v Maryland, 17 U.S. [4
Wheat] 316 (1819).
failure of any adverse party to deny under oath allegation that party is a
corporation dispenses with necessity of proof of that fact. Galleria Bank
v Southwest Properties, Inc. (Civ. app. [1973) 498](tel:1973498) S.W 2d 5
if Respondent is not a Corporation he cannot appear or plead. West Union
Tel. Co. v Eyser, 2 Colo. 141
merely being native born within the territorial boundaries of the United
States of America does not make such an inhabitant a Citizen of the United
States subject to the jurisdiction 14th amendment. Elk v Wilkins, neb
(1884), 5s.ct.41,112 U.S 99, 28 L. Ed 643.
The People of a State are entitled to all rights which formerly belonged
to the King by his prerogative." Lansing v. Smith.
State citizens are the only ones living under free government, whose
rights are incapable of impairment by legislation or judicial decision.
Twining v New Jersey, 211 U.S 97, 1908.
state citizenship is a vested substantial property right, and the State
has no power to divest or impair these rights. Favot v Kingsbury, (1929)
98 Cal. app. 284, 276 P. 1083
tax payers are not state citizens. Belmont v Town of Gulfport, 122 So. 10
there is a clear distinction between national citizenship and state
citizenship. 256 P. 545, affirmed 278 US 123. Tashiro v Jordan
the privileges and immunities clause of the 14th amendment protects very
few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor
protects all rights of individual citizens. instead this provision
protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal
government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state
citizenship. Jones v Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226
Justice CAMPBELL (Supreme Court of the United States) dissenting:
Individuals are not the creatures of the State, but constitute it. They
come into society with rights, which cannot be invaded without injustice.
DODGE v. WOOLSEY, 59 U.S. 331
In 1996, Congress passed a law to overcome this ruling which stated that
judicial immunity doesn't exist; citizens can sue judges for prospective
injunctive relief. "Our own experience is fully consistent with the common
law's rejection of a rule of judicial immunity. We never have had a rule
of absolute judicial immunity. At least seven circuits have indicated
affirmatively that there is no immunity... to prevent irreparable injury
to a citizen's constitutional rights..." "Subsequent interpretations of
the Civil Rights Act by this Court acknowledge Congress' intent to reach
unconstitutional actions by all state and federal actors, including
judges... The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits a state from denying any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection under the laws. Since
a State acts only by its legislative, executive or judicial authorities,
the constitutional provisions must be addressed to those authorities,
including state and federal judges..." "We conclude that judicial immunity
is not a bar to relief against a judicial officer acting in her judicial
capacity." Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984); 104 S. Ct. 1781, 1980,
1981, 1985
Justice O’Connor, raised without deciding the possibility that the
Guarantee Clause is justiciable and is a constraint upon Congress’s power
to regulate the activities of the states. New York v. United States, 505
U.S. 144, 183–85 (1992); Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 463 (1991) .
The opinions draw support from a powerful argument for using the Guarantee
Clause as a judicially enforceable limit on federal power. Merritt, The
Guarantee Clause and State Autonomy: Federalism for a Third Century, 88
Colum. L. Rev. 1 (1988).
All rights and safeguards contained in the first eight amendments to the
federal Constitution are equally applicable." Mallowy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021, 8:15 AM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
National? Call them what one wish but article 6 is clear that if one does
not claim their status as a living man, they are in the government's
fiction for sure.
Once in the fiction it is a battle to be resuscitated to life. Where the
simplest fiction matter can turn to a nightmare. A fight for life.
On Dec 10, 2021, 5:55 AM -0700, veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
ill slightly pull back here as some of my frustration in what i said was
from having to repeat myself to multiple people before responding. im
not sure where it points out we the people are nationals, but your
definitely not free of the constitution which binds government not the
people, by being born on the union you were crowned by the constitution
no way around it. what you rely on comes from the original constitution
and articles of confederation. a birth certificate is evidence of the
creation of a fiction, it has nothing to do with the living man except
that your title holder of it. we are all created equal, theres no if and
that is not left undefined or mystery, our laws are governed by the
bible and if their not in conformity with it its not law at all.
i agree keeping an open mind helps one expand, and i havent called you
any names so slightly confused by that comment, but i will say i havent
posted any opinions i have posted publically verifiable facts. not only
that i have posted the history of the sovereignty devolving from the
king onto the people that are now state citizens since the revolutionary
war up until 2019 where we are still called "the ultimate sovereign, the
fountain of all legitimate authority". i have also talked about blue
ribbon and grand juries, i have talked about making multiple different
claims and complaints against them, so im not really sure who that
question/comment is for.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021, 9:12 AM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I do not use court cases but find it intresting read to guide one to
truth. I see it more as milk then meat to eat. That requires debate on
what is lawful.
The goverment definition by codes makes it clear that I'm a national.
Definition of national is one with allegience to the state. It also
states a birth certificate is proof of that. The truth is the organic
law documents are my defense and it calls me a free citizen who may be
a fugitive from codes, or an inhabitant, so journer. Probably a rebel
or an even an enemy of the United States. Depending how one defines it.
What I do know is I'm not in there jurisdicton by constitution
contract. I know my agreement with the people that we are all free
citizens, inhabitants and most likely fugitives if we dealt with
governments. I've got a creator, and a creators conscience.
I know we are all created equal and that is meat to chew to grasp the
whole truth of what is equal? Seldom does a scale balance.
I do not care if Glenn, Veritas, a supreme court judge or charley: they
all are just opinions that need absorbed into one's life to use
beneficially. That is to make the concept into a workable solution. One
may say, knowledge to wisdom. Without it, one struggles.
Call me anything you want. Just make sure that when I file my paper
with the clerk that they knows I'm supreme in my common law court. That
jurisdicton allows me to make the rules. If you do not like them. File
a claim of injury or get a jury to disagree with me. If you do not know
how? You may get treated badly.
Thomas Jefferson: to expect liberty and be ignorant; is something that
never was or will be. (Paraphrased)
On Dec 9, 2021, 6:55 AM -0700, veritas ghost
<guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
speaking of quo warranto..
[https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Relator_(law](https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Relator_%28law))
Frankenhauser v. Rizzo, 59 F.R.D. 339 (E.D. Pa. 1973): Judge Reynolds
permitted the discovery. He found that the argument for
confidentiality was outweighed by two policies favoring disclosure.
First was ‘ the broad federal mandate for discovery in all civil
actions,’ that is, the federal policy of liberal pretrial discovery as
a basis principle of the modern federal procedural scheme. The second
reason inheres in the civil rights laws themselves:
[I]t is the manner of enforcement which gives § 1983 its unique
importance, for enforcement is placed in the hands of the people. Each
citizen ‘ acts as a private attorney general who ‘ takes on the mantel
of the sovereign,’ ' guarding for all of us the individual liberties
enunciated in the Constitution. Section 1983 represents a balancing
feature in our governmental structure whereby individual citizens are
encouraged to police those who are charged with policing us all. Thus,
it is of special import that suits brought under this statute be
resolved by a determination of the truth rather than by a
determination that the truth shall remain hidden.
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021, 7:52 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
theres a difference between a free state citizen and us citizen. if
you dont believe so i find it curious that youre here considering its
the main thing glenn teaches, and i have proven.
Justice CAMPBELL (Supreme Court of the United States) dissenting:
Individuals are not the creatures of the State, but constitute it.
They come into society with rights, which cannot be invaded without
injustice. DODGE v. WOOLSEY, 59 U.S. 331
gamble v u.s (2019) breif overview of objections, thomas, ginsburg:
When the original States declared their independence, they claimed
the powers inherent in sovereignty .... The Constitution limited but
did not abolish the sovereign powers of the States, which retained `a
residuary and inviolable sovereignty.' The Federalist No. 39, p. 245
(C. Rossiter ed. 1961). Thus, both the Federal Government and the
States wield sovereign powers, and that is why our system of
government is said to be one of `dual sovereignty.' Gregory v.
Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 457 [111 S.Ct. 2395, 115 L.Ed.2d 410]
(1991)." Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn., 584 U.S. ___,
___, 138 S.Ct. 1461, 1475, 200 L.Ed.2d 854 (2018). ...But there is a
difference between the whole and a single part, and that difference
underlies decisions as foundational to our legal system as McCulloch
v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 4 L.Ed. 579 (1819). There, in terms so
directly relevant as to seem presciently tailored to answer this very
objection, Chief Justice Marshall distinguished precisely between
"the people of a State" and "[t]he people of all the States," id., at
428, 435; between the "sovereignty which the people of a single state
possess"...Stare decisis has its pedigree in the unwritten common law
of England. As Blackstone explained, the common law included
"[e]stablished customs" and "[e]stablished rules and maxims" that
were discerned and articulated by judges. 1 W. Blackstone,
Commentaries on the Laws of England 68-69 (1765) (Blackstone). In the
common-law system, stare decisis played 1983*1983 an important role
because "judicial decisions [were] the principal and most
authoritative evidence, that [could] be given, of the existence of
such a custom as shall form a part of the common law." Id., at 69.
Accordingly, "precedents and rules must be followed, unless flatly
absurd or unjust," because a judge must issue judgments "according to
the known laws and customs of the land" and not "according to
hisprivate sentiments" or "own private judgment." Id., at 69-70. In
other words, judges were expected to adhere to precedents because
they embodied the very law the judges were bound to
apply...Importantly, however, the common law did not view precedent
as unyielding when it was "most evidently contrary to reason" or
"divine law." Blackstone 69-70. The founding generation recognized
that a "judge may mistake the law." Id., at 71; see also 1 Kent 444
("Even a series of decisions are not always conclusive evidence of
what is law"). And according to Blackstone, judges should disregard
precedent that articulates a rule incorrectly when necessary "to
vindicate the old [rule] from misrepresentation." Blackstone 70; see
also 1 Kent 443 ("If ... any solemnly adjudged case can be shown to
be founded in error, it is no doubt the right and the duty of the
judges who have a similar case before them, to correct the error").
He went further: When a "former decision is manifestly absurd or
unjust" or fails to conform to reason, it is not simply "bad law,"
but "not law" at all. Blackstone 70 (emphasis). This view—that
demonstrably erroneous "blunders" of prior courts should be
corrected—was accepted by state courts throughout the 19th century.
See, e.g., McDowell v. Oyer, 21 Pa. 417, 423 (1853); Guild v. Eager,
17 Mass. 615, 622 (1822).
Justice GINSBURG, dissenting: In the system established by the
Federal Constitution, however, "ultimate sovereignty" resides in the
governed. Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent
Redistricting Comm'n, 576 U.S. ___, ___, 135 S.Ct. 2652, 2675, 192
L.Ed.2d 704 (2015); Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, 324-325,
4 L.Ed. 97 (1816); Braun, supra, at 26-30. Insofar as a crime offends
the "peace and dignity" of a sovereign, Lanza, 260 U.S. at 382, 43
S.Ct. 141, that "sovereign" is the people, the "original fountain of
all legitimate authority," The Federalist No. 22, at 152 (A.
Hamilton); see Note, Double Prosecution by State and Federal
Governments: Another *1991 Exercise in Federalism, 80 Harv. L. Rev.
1538, 1542 (1967).
On Wed, Dec 8, 2021, 10:45 AM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
From veritas reading
BROWN, Circuit Judge: In our constitutional republic, Justice
Brandeis observed, the title of citizen is superior to the title of
President. Thus, the questions "[w]ho is the citizen[?]" and "what
is the meaning of the term?" Aristotle, Politics bk. 3, reprinted in
part in READINGS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 55, 61 (Francis W. Coker
ed., 1938), are no less than the questions of "who constitutes the
sovereign state?" and "what is the meaning of statehood as an
association?"
Who is the citizen? I view myself in the Republic more a free
citizen then a state citizen associated to a society and worst
called goverment who has its own desires and often contrary to mind.
I'm in society as a contributor of goods others want and I profit
and so do they. I'm not much for public schools, or creating a
public funded gym but rather let one citizen create as ones passion
and vision a need for others. Not a few leaders of a community
wanting my money to create it. I believe in home school, and not
public school. Because my children needed far more freedom then a
public school could offer. They needed more time to explore their
ambitions and curiosity. Travel with me today.
I do not like state citizenship on the local level at all. I support
citizenship to protect the country. I'll fight for it.
So yes, to protect myself I require a trial by jury and live my life
As friendly member of society. Not knowing when a trial by jury may
judge me. Not an attorney or a judge representing a corporation. I
try to use arbitration to settle affairs and encourage my business
associates to allow the panel make the final verdict then a court.
Many avoid this thinking an attorney will grant them something
magical.
In the Republic our forefathers gave us the choice to be more free
but it is riskier then living by regulations created by society
government that are written on tablet. I chose to be a free citizen
and not a state citizen. I chose a trial by jury and not jury trial.
Arbitration over a court when possible. It's an enlienable right to
do this. Most people prefer to be a state citizen.
Quo habeas corpus comes often as I require the court of a free
citizen. Quo warranto follows with the question, by what authority?
Your not taking my inelienable rights away or my friends rights.
Every state district court honors it when one is in jail. Other
states the appellate or state supreme court. The jailer is required
to answer; by what authority do you hold me. The jailer is required
to submit it to the court. The courts charging one has to answer to
the same and one could or can use it on a simple traffic ticket if
they want to.
Simple traffic ticket. I prefer as all know to send the prosecutors
court that he does not have jurisdiction in a simple statement. That
is telling the prosecutor your reply to arraignment and one is not
required to go as yippy answered. The Prosecutor either drops the
case or schedules an trial For you to appear. He should notify you
that he has stilled the trial and date. Some do not. When one misses
he again has a choice. To motion for your arrest or dismiss the
case. Your choice when you will call for prosecutor and his Corp to
appear. I prefer they arrest me but others may say I'll do it right
after given a ticket by officer.
Whenever one will eventually open and start their common law court.
Your paperOr document that I'll not discuss will establish your
court. So when filed with the court clerk you get an extra copy and
a court date thirty days or. Send to the prosecutor and he most
likely will not respond or show. Go to court on date allot and
deflate default judgement. Or pick your jury and convict. Your
choice.
I'll be a free citizen.
On Dec 8, 2021, 6:29 AM -0700, veritas ghost
<guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
COURT HALTS VACCINE REQUIREMENT FOR FED CONTRACTORS (peggy, if you
havent seen my last fires of freedom special edition, i think youll
enjoy 18 usc 245, and just in case us For A constitution art 4 sec
4 and 2.
BROWN, Circuit Judge: In our constitutional republic, Justice
Brandeis observed, the title of citizen is superior to the title of
President. Thus, the questions "[w]ho is the citizen[?]" and "what
is the meaning of the term?" Aristotle, Politics bk. 3, reprinted
in part in READINGS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 55, 61 (Francis W.
Coker ed., 1938), are no less than the questions of "who
constitutes the sovereign state?" and "what is the meaning of
statehood as an association?" tuaua v us (2015)
Justice CAMPBELL (Supreme Court of the United States) dissenting:
Individuals are not the creatures of the State, but constitute it.
They come into society with rights, which cannot be invaded without
injustice. DODGE v. WOOLSEY, 59 U.S. 331
Vattel Law of Nations, Book 2 Article 132: "God has created heaven
for himself and his saints, and has given the earth to mankind,
intending it for the advantage of the poor as well as of the rich.
The roads are for their use, and God has not subjected them to any
taxes." 39:13)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=u7FdLQ5H0e0
Radioactive Water From Pilgrim Nuclear Plant To Be Released Into
Cape Cod Bay (slosh more pigs. if youre reading this its to late.
2:09)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=jbsWAJhq36I
No Jab, No Food: Canadian Province Imposes New Regulations to Ban
Unvaccinated from Grocery Stores
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/no-jab-no-food-canadian-province-imposes-new-regulations-ban-unvaccinated-grocery-stores/
House Democrats + RINO Kinzinger Pass Bill That Would Allow Debt
Ceiling Hike with Simple Majority in the Senate
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/developing-house-democrats-rino-kinzinger-pass-bill-allow-debt-ceiling-hike-simple-majority-senate/
Pacific Eclipse – A tabletop exercise on smallpox pandemic response
(4:51)
https://odysee.com/@ChadChaddington:d/Pacific-Eclipse-A-Smallpox-Pandemic-Tabletop-Exercise-(Share-This!):d
Son Vaccinated in Exchange for Pizza without Parental Consent (2:55)
https://odysee.com/@Adverse:c/vaccinemandate:4
At Least 3 Children Die and 120 Hospitalized in Vietnam After
Receiving Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine – 4 Adults Die from Vero Cell
Covid Vaccine
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/least-3-children-die-120-hospitalized-vietnam-receiving-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-4-adults-die-vero-cell-covid-vaccine/
Rockwood School District Admits to Calling the FBI on Parents
…UPDATED: With Response from Rockwood School District
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/rockwood-school-district-admits-calling-fbi-parents/
Darpa [has for a long time been] Creating Super Humans [you people
thought captain america was just a game and fictional character?]:
Former Gov't Employee Predicts Cataclysmic Extinction Level Event
(8:39)
https://rumble.com/vqdjzo-darpa-creating-super-humans-former-govt-employee-predicts-cataclysmic-extin.html
It’s not up to us (41 sec)
https://odysee.com/@CarlVernon:7/it%E2%80%99s-not-up-to-us:c
CHECKPOINTS if you want to leave (58 sec)
https://odysee.com/@CarlVernon:7/checkpoints-if-you-want-to-leave:e
Dr Shillary Jones & Lorraine Shamelessly Lie About Unjabbed
Hospitalisation Figures (5:24)
https://odysee.com/@WEGOTAPROBLEM:f/dr-shillary-jones-lorraine-shamelessly:c
VAERS show HOT LOTS Within Lots (29:33)
https://odysee.com/@Welcometheeagle88:4/VAERS-show-HOT-LOTS-Within-Lots!:1
JAIL for sneezing (47 sec)
https://odysee.com/@CarlVernon:7/jail-for-sneezing:b
THE USA FOR THE FINAL CARD? OR JUST A REALLY DARK WINTER. (5:49)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/khYlbY5bXEqY/
WHY DID THEY CHANGE THE TORONTO CHRISTMAS MARKET TO THE DISTILLERY
WINTER VILLAGE? (12:37)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/3wCLKch7h1k/
Leaked Video Shows Boris Johnson’s Spox Laughing About Christmas
Party That Took Place Amid Covid Lockdown
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/watch-leaked-video-shows-boris-johnsons-spox-laughing-christmas-party-took-place-amid-covid-lockdown/
Office clean (24 sec)
https://odysee.com/@CarlVernon:7/office-clean-%F0%9F%87%A8%F0%9F%87%B3:9
Elon Musk Warns That ‘Civilization Is Going to Crumble (2:33)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=wN-IgeCx-AY
Elon Musk – Calls for Congress to Throw Out Biden’s ‘Build Back
Better Bill’
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/richest-man-world-elon-musk-calls-congress-throw-bidens-build-back-better-bill-dont-pass/
SATANIC CULT MEMBERS WHO ARE PLANNING THE SACRIFICE OF CHILDREN
(2:48)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Nqg5N6tUr2Xg/
BLOOD SACRIFICE AGENDA. BE THE RESISTANCE (6:52)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Bagz1AsUNEvf/
Comrade Down: Saule Omarova Withdraws Nomination for Comptroller of
the Currency
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/breaking-comrade-saule-omarova-withdraws-nomination-comptroller-currency/
Sam White won Appeal Case in UK High Court - video-statement (1:31)
https://odysee.com/@OzFlor:7/S67:2
RABBI IS NOT AFRAID ON THE EVIL PSYCHOPATHS IN GOVERNMENT HE IS
AFRAID OF STUPID PEOPLE (im not afraid of either but i feel his
sentiment. 59 sec)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/WXEsDyxmkUwB/
You Can’t Say That On Tv (3:44)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=nY2KiNQtCTM
CDC - Why Critical Thinking Is Dangerous (8:13)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=TNaT5A-1gHc
