Categorized | Call of Shame

Bureaucrat Lawyer Unable to Provide Any Evidence Constitution/laws Applicable

Posted on November 16th, 2013 by Marc Stevens

Almost every call I make nowadays involves getting an admission there is no evidence proving the commonly held opinion, “the law applies to everyone physically in the state”.  This opinion is actually a delusion and I call it that in this call at 5:43.  This lawyer from the legal department of the Missouri department of revenue admittedly has no evidence, just the circular argument “the law applies because the law says so” backed by men with guns.

I did edit out the personal information and the first part of the call with the initial agent.  I do relate what had happened though, why we were supposed to talk with a lawyer.  It’s a dodge though, there is no evidence and no amount of advanced degrees and titles will change that.  As you’ll hear, another doctorate of law was unable to provide any evidence the constitution and laws apply.

All I did was stick to the evidence, I walked her through a logical progression and got her agreement on what her position is, she agrees she believes the laws apply to us just because we are physically located in Missouri.  When asked for the evidence to prove it, she gives the longest pause in Call of Shame history.  That’s because there is no evidence.  When all you rely on is violence and lies, then you don’t need to worry about petty things like evidence.

As always, if someone thinks there is evidence to prove the constitution and laws of a “state” apply just because you are physically in Missouri, Alberta, Melbourne etc., then you’re welcome to call into the No State Project with your evidence.  And by evidence I don’t mean opinions, circular arguments (“the law applies because the law says so”) and personal attacks.  Call into the show or we can go on another live broadcast, and you can do what all these lawyers have not been able to do: provide evidence proving the constitution and laws of a “state” apply.

I also cut out when she came back with the supervisor’s information.  His name is Mike and he never called me.  She refused to give me a last name and a phone number.  This is my reaction to this call.

YouTube Preview Image

YouTube Preview Image

              

24 Comments For This Post

  1. Randy Says:

    Kinda dense isn’t she? Does she understand the English language? I’d like to know what law school SHE went to. Just like a robber, she too, is breaking the law. The laws of the courts are the same laws that the Department of Revenue use? Conflict of interest anyone.

  2. bill Says:

    The constitutions and the laws and statutes promulgated thereby are emphatically applicable to absolutely everyone… You just need to know the rest of the story.

  3. noah kubbs Says:

    I think what you are doing is very admirable. I will play devil’s advocate now. If this argument hurts our common goal, please delete this post so that this information will not be used to justify violence.I will argue from a judge’s perspective.
    The laws of this court have jurisdiction over you because this court and its laws are consented to by a group of the population geographically near it. We have proven this by taking samples of this population for x years. 50+x percent of this population grants consent to these laws with this percent of error. Because of this, this court assumes that the laws it uses are applicable to all persons within this geographical location, which includes you.
    This argument is not valid according to deductive logic, but it could be used very effectively by psychopaths to justify caging and murdering people if they can convince those with guns that it is valid.

  4. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ noah, that has been put forth many times, the facts defeat it. Support is compulsory, so there is no consent.

  5. Jon Says:

    Very entertaining. You should post this on youtube and get some wider exposure. Might even wake up a few sheeple . . .

  6. noah kubbs Says:

    I think I understand your counter-argument. If these courts have forced people to accept laws that claim jurisdiction arbitrarily at gunpoint, it invalidates any claim that the laws are nearly universally supported. Courts ruin any sampling of the population that they do by threatening violence against people. Thanks for your time explaining this.

  7. phil Says:

    always , always, always remember the gun in the room. its the reason , you’re in the room in the first place.

  8. Corporate Entity Says:

    WOW…
    Again excellent dialog and great work staying on the facts.
    I’m drafting another letter now to the Oxygen Thieving Revenue Producers that stole my car back in 2012 and tried labeling it “Abandoned” with up to date tags, and different addresses on the harassing tickets. How do the codes apply?

  9. Paul Says:

    This is gold Jerry. Cutting Edge stuff. Great job.

  10. Nara King Says:

    I got citations for suspended and expired licence, no seatbelt, and no insurance. I had my child in the car, but the cop was so rude and aggressive, told me to not drive the car, he’ll be watching, as soon as I drive it he will arrest me. My child started crying, scared to no end. Cop had blocked me before hand, so when I started to park the car between the lines, which it was not when he stopped me, he returned to my window, had me roll it down and started screaming “did I not tell you you can’t drive this car or I will arrest you?!!!!” I had to explain, that I am just trying to park between the lines so I dont’ get another ticket for that. He dove off so angry I could hear the screeching of his tires… Psychopath! What do I do? Worse yet, I called the place I had fines at (Rusk Co Texas), they said fines were paid, but they did not “HARD CLEAR” me off the OMNI system… PLEASE HELP! How do I retain you? My phone is 469-464-7347.

  11. Nara King Says:

    I did not understand the comments, sorry. Please call or email, or let me know what to do. Thank you.

  12. glensch Says:

    Another brilliant call, Marc. How to you keep from laughing during these calls? I mean, I get that it’s a very serious crime that these people are committing when they arbitrarily decide to steal from honest people, and the stakes are very high for those trying avoid supporting organized crime with their rightfully obtained resources, but these responses (or lack thereof) are hysterical! What’s your strategy for avoiding uproarious laughter?

  13. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ glensch, sometimes I have to mute my mic on the mixing board. I have laughed before, there are a few calls where you can hear the clients laughing.

  14. NonE Says:

    Marc Stevens Sed:@ glensch, sometimes I have to mute my mic…
    ——
    Say Marc, it appears that for the last couple of weeks you’ve forgotten to “un-mute” your mic before doing your radio show! ;)

    - NonMute

  15. Dale Says:

    Well, there you have it… dumbed down lawyers who went through the present system of education. The silence was way too loud.

    Let’s see, she makes the statement the law applies but only because it does. Hmmm cant’ seem to get her out of my mind….I was wondering what the natural color of her hair is.

  16. Douglas Kinan Says:

    Marc:

    So what do you do when case law is 50/50 (Shepardizing A Case)and the judge comes down on the side of the attorney/prosecutor?

    dougkinan@yahoo.com
    Sworn & Commissioned Officer – Massachusetts Trial Court (Retired)

  17. RequiredReading Says:

    www stopthecrime net/docs/THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-ADVENTURE.pdf

    The truth from a former judge.

  18. NonE Says:

    Douglas Kinan Sed: So what do you do when case law is 50/50 (Shepardizing A Case)and the judge comes down on the side of the attorney/prosecutor?
    ——–
    So I take it they’ve already provided you with evidence and a witness with first-hand knowledge that the Constitution and the Codes apply to you. Damn, that’s tough. Could you post that evidence here? I’m sure we would all love to see it! ;)
    - NonEvidentiary

    P.S. If CASE law is 50/50, how about bringing up Massey Ferguson Law as it may have more traction?

  19. Douglas Kinan Says:

    I guess no one on this thread is understanding how it works.

    If you declare, under oath, that two plus two equals four and the lawyer/judge alliance articulates a legitimate reason(they don’t need proof, you do) that it’s not four, but on that day they believed is was five, it’s five. Why is that so difficult to understand?

    Now, if you have the time, the money and the know-how to appeal, chances are you’ll end up winning your case.

    Send me your email address and I’ll send you a real case.

    dougkinan@yahoo.com

  20. Randy Says:

    @RequiredReading: I call B.S. on that drivel you just posted a link to. Freemasons weren’t around 6000 years ago.

  21. NonE Says:

    Douglas Kinan Sed:I guess no one on this thread is understanding how it works.
    If you declare, under oath, that two plus two equals four…
    ——–
    I guess you’ve not been paying attention. This is Marc Steven’s site, so you might want to actually address his thinking, not some other totally unrelated website or whatever. Marc says, and I paraphrase, NEVER take a position, ONLY ask questions. I.e. “Does two plus two equal four?” When they say that it equals FIVE, you write that down. Now you have grounds for an appeal.

    - NonE

  22. Randy Says:

    @NonE: Bingo

  23. billy r. Says:

    Marc,marc,marc! brovo i have been watching you for about 8 months now,I am having a soul searching problem with men with guns coming up to me and asking, where is your fishing license?So i say the same evidence needed to prove the codes/regulation for fishing with a pole would also apply here.Please give me your opinion on this.I don’t understand how 17 other states don’t ask for a fishing license but Maryland doe’s.What do you think,Thanks, billy.

  24. sam schrenker Says:

    Listening to this conversation between Marc Stevens and the Missouri Dept of Revenue, I just want to scream. You will never get these bureaucrats to admit they have no jurisdiction, they will just give you circular reasoning. The solution as far as I can see it is once the bureaucrats refuse to provide any jurisdictional proof and they move against you by stealing your property, then get a copy of their bond certificate and place a lien against it. In fact this woman from Missouri dept of Revenue is BEGGING to be liened…

3 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. Bureaucrat Lawyer Unable to Provide Any Evidence Constitution/laws Applicable - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] post Bureaucrat Lawyer Unable to Provide Any Evidence Constitution/laws Applicable appeared first on […]

  2. Page not found | Earth Freedom News Says:

    […] Bureaucrat Lawyer Unable to Provide Any Evidence Constitution/laws Applicable […]

  3. NSP - Nov 16, 2013 | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] New CoS where the client had mentioned to a lawyer that they are “just writing things down and applying it to me; there is no evidence.” […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturdays, 4-7pm EST: NSP radio LIVE. Tune-in as we discuss the general topics of tickets, tyrants, assessments, and bringing about a voluntary society. The NSP is not live April 19, 2014, but is new recorded material so we will not be taking calls @ (218) 632-9399.



Click here to find out how to call-in with your questions and comments, join the Skype group-chat, tune-in to terrestrial and digital broadcasts, use the phone-in listen line, subscribe to the iTunes archive feed, and much more.

Bitcoin: 1NayJiRhb7gtVcSS4yNn6hxo6TJFPrQgb6













Bitcoin: 1NayJiRhb7gtVcSS4yNn6hxo6TJFPrQgb6




Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here