Here are my references: Dunn &'Bradstreet; Clearfield doctrine 1943;
Congressional record 1993 March Vol33; judges blue book around pp 145: which is
all in violation of the constitution.
On May 9, 2021, 18:34 -0500, Don Mashak <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Hello Charilie
Someplace along the line you posted a Court Case Cite where the court
specifically ruled
our current government is a FOR PROFIT CORPORATION.
Could you repost it again... I made a note of it and now can't find it.
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021, 12:26:04 AM CDT, 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
