They have more than one oath. Oath to the state. And oath to the bar. The bar
is higher which is an oath to the crown
On Apr 21, 2021, at 12:17 PM, NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charley,
if the Court is FAKE, then how can the Oath of a Judge, Magistrate, Police
Officer, or Court Administrator be REAL or have teeth?
Please explain what the Oath to "support" the Constitution of the United
States and to this State means.
What exactly does the Oath that is signed cover, govern, impact, or have any
validity towards or to whom?
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 6:16 AM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: ok to remove or cover VIN
of personal property?
Forest
what is significant about bills of attainder is everything goverment does is
a bill of attainder. They create rules and regulations against you. They
create a fake court so you never have a trial. The trial is free citizen's
deciding if you caused injury. Not their legislative court. Another
constutional issue that government violates.
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:14 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Don
Article 1, section 8, clause 17 states; jurisdiction of the United States is
land it purchases. Then goes on and gives specific things they can own. If
they buy other things they own it but do not have jurisdicton. That clause
like many in the constitution is an enumerated right. Meaning it am applies
to everyone. Not your, hands of.
Article 1, section 10, clause 1 a bit more difficult to understand. When they
stole our gold government became a private for-profit Corp. Congressional
record March 1993 vol. 33 and Clearfield Doctrine 1943 back it up. The
problem is pretending to be government and a private business contacting is
fraud. Some would say mafia characteristics
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 10:00 PM Don Mashak <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hey Charley....
Can you give everyone the nuts and bolts of government have no Constitutional
Authority....
Just like 2 paragraphs, outlining the logical proof...?
I am just trying to grasp this and make it part of my perspective of reality.
And is this related to being a "free person", "State National"
Thanks in advance.
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
Rt 1 Box 231
Albertville MN 55301
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended
only for the use of the person or entity named above and is privileged and
confidential. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication other than to the person or entity named above is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
immediately notify the sender by phone and by replying to this message and
then delete the message and any attachments from your system.
On Tuesday, April 20, 2021, 9:33:02 AM CDT, Charley Dan
<charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No oath makes them a regular free citizen. Therefore, no government
authority. The authority government has is pure tyranny. They claim it is
contract but they have no constitutional authority for that and their
contracts are not with knowledge, understanding, and willing. So it is not a
contract.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:11 PM Russell Lee <russell.lee.2012@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I'm just curious but if none of those officials have article 6 oaths, how can
they be held accountable for violating a constitution that no citizen is
party to — as I understand it.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:43 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm filing claim of financial injury caused by certain people in
goverment......Judge, prosecuting attorney, director of elderly care, and
conservator assigned by the judge. All violating the constitution of a free
citizen.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 6:40 PM Rick Miller <ricky520057@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What exactly are you filing w/the AG Charley?
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 3:40 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let me try and explain this a bit. I've heard many issues here and it does
not match up with my business dealings with bonds, insurance, and liability.
Does not match up with what I've learnt of late either in the government
process.
The public official has a obligation to the people to perform to a judicial
standard/contract. Wither it is the constitution or legislative law contract
the insurance company is there to settle. Just like many business contracts
that have obligations. To make sure the party full fills there obligation the
other party requires a performance bond. The performance bond guarantees the
obligation is full filled or damage caused by failure of performance the bond
company pays and collects from the individual who took bond out. Now the
obligated is smart he buys an general or balloon insurance policy to pay if
something goes wrong.
Last I heard the state supplies a million dollar insurance for each officer;
and if they want more. They buy it. So when you sue officer it is the
insurance policy to pay. Except instead of suing officer you file with the
AG. When you file with the AG he gives the claim to the insurance company.
Just like a car accident. The insurance company settles the matter. If you
and insurance company can not come to agreement. It's court time. Now if the
policy pays but the damage was greater. The bond company pays and goes after
the person who bought the bond. Usual arrangements are made to settle over
time. Bond agent will sell assets if needed.
That is why I've said; if their is damage we should not go to court but to AG
with our claim. Then to court to settle why or why not the claim is valid.
Like two insurance companies battling it out. I think this will be much
easier but depends on how one states their claim. Mine is constitutional;
supreme law of the land is my claim.
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:04 PM brian <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You search the Public Records Office, under the heading of “Oaths”!
There will be lots of different topics, in the public records, so search for
“Oaths & Affirmations”,
or just “Oaths”, and try “Bonds” too, so you can get their Bond Insurance
info on any public official!
3 Affidavits from 3 different people, on One public official is enough to get
them removed from public duties! Never go alone! Try to go in with at least
2 other witnesses when dealing with ANY public official, in case you all need
to file an Affidavit into their Public Records Office, then get some
Certified Copies of your published Affidavits of wrong-doings by the Public
Official, and send those Certified Copies of ‘Affidavits of Harm/Damage’ to
their Bond Insurance Company with a ‘Notice of Intent to Sue’ (make up your
own Notice) Joe Q. Public Official for $50,000 for
trespass/harm/damages/making legal determinations absent authority, or you
would settle for the amount of their Bond and forego any court action”!!
It would be much cheaper and easier for the Bond Insurance Company to send
you the $10,000 than to have to go to court and possibly have to pay out
$50,000, plus other court costs, attorney fees, Punitive Damages,
Compensatory Damages, etc, eh?!?
I haven’t tried that, but I have read that on the net, years ago!
Peace, all!
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 16, 2021, at 5:30 PM, J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
question is how to get it if the court clerk wont hand it over
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 7:35 PM Russell Lee <russell.lee.2012@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
This might seem off-point but has anyone been checking these public officers
for their oath of office? If they have no oath of office, they're
impersonating a public officer and are liable in their personal capacity.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 3:44 PM jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
if you auto was titled it still is and ever registered . even though not
currently.. it belongs to the state and it is not household goods.
the 1817 may be about the man/woman jurisdiction. claim; but i do not
think it includes ones Auto. so i say NO its not your household goods;
you are not safe.. .
if you cover the vin. and you are not in the database.. they may assume its
stolen. or you may have to prove it isn't..
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 9:58 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
That the king of England, as sovereign of the nation, is said to be
independent of all, and subject to no one but God: and his crown is stiled
imperial, on purpose to assert that he owes no kind of subjection to any
potentate on earth. No compulsory action can be brought against him, even in
his own courts. That a sovereign, when in a foreign country, is always
considered by civilized nations, as exempt from its jurisdiction, privileged
from arrests, and not subject to its laws. Hence this inference was drawn,
that the court having no jurisdiction over Virginia, all its process against
that state, must be coram non judice, and consequently void. 1 Vatt.P. 2.
133. 2. Vatt. 158. 1 Blackft. 141. 5 Bac. 450. It was then observed, that
there being no instance in our law books, of any process against a
sovereign, it was proper to consider the rules of law relative to process
against their representatives. [* * *]
That the true reason of the minister's exemption from process is the
independence and sovereignty of the person he represents. And although by
engaging in trade, he may so far divest himself of his public character, as
to subject these goods to attachment, yet in every case where he represents
his master, his property is sacred. But a sovereign cannot subject himself
by implication: he must do it expressly. M'Carty v. Nixon et al, 1 U.S. 77
(1784)
JOHNSON, J. (the supreme Court of the United States):The right of
jurisdiction is essentially connected to, or rather identified with, the
national sovereignty [We the People! ]. To part with it is to commit a
species of political suicide. In fact, a power to produce its own
annihilation is an absurdity in terms. It is a power as utterly
incommunicable to a political as to a natural person. FLETCHER v. PECK, 10
U.S. 87 (1810)
BARTLEY, C. J. (Supreme Court of Ohio) dissented: There is no tribunal
before which the sovereign can be arraigned, his conduct examined, his
errors and delinquencies detected, those errors corrected, and he punished.
PIQUA STATE BANK OF OHIO v. KNOUP, 6 Ohio St. 342 (1856).
Justice BREWER (Supreme Court of the United States) dissenting: The
government of the United States is one of limited and delegated powers. It
takes nothing from the usages or the former action of European governments,
nor does it take any power by any supposed inherent sovereignty. There is a
great deal of confusion in the use of the word 'sovereignty' by law writers.
Sovereignty or supreme power is in this country vested in the people, and
only in the people. [***] When, therefore, power is exercised by congress,
authority for it must be found in express terms in the constitution, or in
the means necessary or proper for the execution of the power expressed. If
it cannot be thus found, it does not exist. FONG YUE TING v. UNITED STATES,
149 U.S. 698 (1893)
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." [a license is a tax and a
automobile is household goods.]
25 AM JUR (1st) Highways, Sec. 163. "No State government entity has the
power to allow or deny passageon the highways, byways, nor waterways
transporting his vehicles andpersonal property for either recreation or
business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety,
caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege
requiring, licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances."
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 12:47 AM ejartz <ejartz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Are you a person, is the vin on a motor vehicle or a household good or
consumer good?
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 8:23 PM J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
? go for it all
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:31 PM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am thinking only cover the ViN if no plates on car and no registration
Get Outlook for Android
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Jb
<tf4624@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 12:39:49 PM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: ok to remove or cover VIN
of personal property?
It’s legal to cover it
On Apr 15, 2021, at 12:26 PM, NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2019/title-2c/section-2c-17-6/
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
--
Life in one word--LOVE
