Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Feb 21, 2015

Posted on February 22nd, 2015 by Calvin

Show Notes:

  • “Without evidence of jurisdiction, everything else is irrelevant.”
  • Objecting to the cop giving testimony on something he is not competent or qualified on as per the Brady request.
  • Identifying conflict-of-interest red flags.
  • The burden-of-proof rests on the one making the claim.
  • IRS Drops Attack For Six Years – No Evidence of Jurisdiction.
  • “To have standing to complain there has to be a minimum number of facts.”
  • “Just because the prosecutor makes an argument that is commonly accepted, it doesn’t mean it’s exempt from challenge.”
  • Asking for the evidence that they’re claiming they have.
  • Simply destroying the notion that a centuries-old document actually gives another person power over you.
  • Marc’s bizarre calls with the junior psychopath Martin Jenkins.
  • Effectively countering reflexive responses from bureaucrats.

Caller’s Topics:

  • Trevor from OR: getting back to a stage of litigation to challenge the STATE’s garnishment of wages for failure-to-pay on a business account, not personal <> failed attempt to bring the case back into the courts for challenge in an administrative hearing <> exhausting time and financial resources with two hired attorneys at the rate of $750 per hour <> how can tax agencies legally attack an individual for a corporate tax violation? <> the judge ruled that the defendant “didn’t provide enough information to support the fact that correspondence was unavailable to respond appropriately” <> the STATE of Oregon advised on dispersing funds one way and then later legally attacked independent contractors for using their advice <> and tackling two other upcoming tax legal attacks that suffer from inconsistent assessments.
  • Tom from MI: FOIA request reveals a neighbor’s overzealous filing of complaints with the local police <> the judge gets right into testimony while the defendant is still left empty-handed without a written complaint <> the judge blindly and blanketly denies all the defendant’s motions to dismiss without stating any grounds for the decision <> successfully litigating, off-the-cuff, using the Marcratic method <> effectively challenging the logical fallacy of “jurisdiction because we say so” <> the prosecutor (unsuccessfully) tries to shift the burden-of-proof onto the defendant to prove how the code doesn’t apply to him <> the judge ultimately dismisses the case; the prosecutor failed to prove residency within a city <> and mounting a defense with all bases covered.
  • Chris from TX: finding Marc’s work through legal research <> pining down jurisdiction <> what are other good external resources for exercising effective damage control? <> getting caught up in warrentless mass-surveillance machine <> getting your property returned to you from the authoritarians <> where do you file your paperwork? <> using other people successes as a template to formulate your own plan of defense <> and how is the grand jury, which is supposed to be controlled by the people, such a tool for the ruling class?
              

27 Comments For This Post

  1. dan Says:

    Tom was awesome!

  2. i.n.rem Says:

    what file type is this ..??
    last weeks, and this weeks are not recognized by WMP

  3. Calvin Says:

    @i.n.rem: the file format is .mp3, which WMP should play. Sorry to hear you are using WMP, many would recommend distancing yourself from any and all Microsoft products as much as possible; don’t support the selling out of privacy and innovation to these IC yes-men.

    There is VLC player that is far superior and versatile, try that and see if it doesn’t work. 😉

  4. Angel Says:

    I think what happened when Tom brought up residency was that he gave the judge an out that didn’t involve ruling his meal ticket invalid.
    Perhaps it is advisable to leave the criminals a way to rule in your favor without losing face?

  5. desertspeaks Says:

    Tom in Michigan should have noticed to the court; https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/102/200/case.html
    The Clara
    102 U.S. 200 (1880)
    the maxim applies quod non apparet non est. The fact not appearing is presumed not to exist.

  6. Michael Scharen Says:

    Say, according to CNN, Islamic State ‘holds land’ and collects taxes, yet is still not considered a ‘state’. These cutthroats are in charge “because they say so.” So being a ‘state’ only requires recognition by fellow gangsters? See the original Star Trek episode — “A Piece of the Action” for a primer on ‘government’.

  7. NonEntity Says:

    “Tom in Michigan should have noticed to the court…”

    Didja evr notice that self righteous pompous ass sociopathes can’t use simple, clear, grammatical English like, “Tom should have given proper notice to the court that…”

    I bet Yom did notice the court. It was probably on his lrft ad hr drove up yhe street and was large, garish and pretencious looking. The kind of building one couldn’t help but notice!”

  8. NonEntity Says:

    All typoz are Marcz fault, Damnit! 😉

  9. Michael Scharen Says:

    Tom did do an awesome job! I believe the judge saw a way out to save face, and took it in order to avoid answering embarrassing questions.

  10. tony Says:

    Question.I completely agree with your view in regards to the system..I’ve looked on your website and watched a lot of your videos probaly more than once…my problem is ,where is the how.?your constantly saying you can do this and provide the case law for it but again ,how?what do I say when I’m standing in front of the judge.I have not used this tatic yet cause I don’t understand how to do so..is there anyway to make it clearer for us non law people..

  11. tony Says:

    Also where is your contact info..email or telephone…Id like to speak to someone on how to use the dismissal form..

  12. Michael Scharen Says:

    Benjamin Franklin wrote of his use of the Socratic method …

    I found this method safest for myself and very embarrassing to those against whom I used it; therefore I took a delight in it, practis’d it continually, and grew very artful and expert in drawing people, even of superior knowledge,into concessions, the consequences of which they did not foresee, entangling them in difficulties out of which they could not
    extricate themselves, and so obtaining victories that neither myself nor my
    cause always deserved.

  13. Michael Scharen Says:

    Marc,
    I ran across this gem today and thought I’d share it. Basically, the State claims ownership of us all from birth…
    ———————————————————-
    The Parens Patriae Powers

    Judicial discretion in custody cases was the first salvo in a barrage of poorly understood court rulings in which American courts made law rather than interpreted it. These rulings were formalized later by elected legislatures. Rubber-stamping the fait accompli, they marked a restructuring of the framework of the family ordered by a judicial body without any public debate or consent. No precedent for such aggressive court action existed in English law. The concept lived only in the dreams and speculations of utopian writers and philosophers.

    The 1840 case Mercein v. People produced a stunning opinion by Connecticut’s Justice Paige — a strain of radical strong-state faith straight out of Hegel:

    The moment a child is born it owes allegiance to the government of
    the country of its birth, and is entitled to the protection of
    the government.

    As the opinion unrolled, Paige further explained “with the coming of civil
    society the father’s sovereign power passed to the chief or government of the nation.” A part of this power was then transferred back to both parents for the convenience of the State. But their guardianship was limited to the legal duty of maintenance and education, while absolute sovereignty remained with the State.

    From ‘The Underground History of American Education’ — John Taylor Gatto — page 149
    http://mhkeehn.tripod.com/ughoae.pdf

  14. desertspeaks Says:

    NonEntity Says:
    February 23rd, 2015 at 6:15 pm
    “Tom in Michigan should have noticed to the court…”

    Didja evr notice that self righteous pompous ass sociopathes can’t use simple, clear, grammatical English like, “Tom should have given proper notice to the court that…”

    I bet Yom did notice the court. It was probably on his lrft ad hr drove up yhe street and was large, garish and pretencious looking. The kind of building one couldn’t help but notice!”
    ——————————————————

    Who pissed in your cheerios?? I was not aware that we were being graded by a grammar nazi!! If you’ll recall the judge IGNORED his motion.. it was NOT on the record!! AND stop blaming marc for your ERRORS!
    What is a Didja?? evr?? Yom?? lrft?? yhe?? and it’s PRETENTIOUS not pretencious and it’s SOCIOPATH not sociopathes.. If you are going to critique me, at least learn to bloody well spell!

    Throughout all of the above BS from Non, I see no convincing argument to not NOTICE THE COURT..
    Further, the only self righteous pompous ass here is you, Non.. I’ve been attempting learning this material for three months and you have temerity to post an incomprehensible obtuse critique of my post… seek therapy because you have some serious inner demons to attend to!

  15. Incubus Says:

    In his defense, he was using sociopath in a plural form but he did misspell it. In your defense, he does get a bit too nitpicky and condescending. I scared him the other day and now he thinks his job is at stake.

  16. NonEntity Says:

    Hey desert, thanks for the critique! Actually my post was not critical of you but rather of the entire legal/judicial profession which does it’s very best to torture the language into a form not recognizable nor understandable by those who can otherwise conduct their affairs quite serviceably in the standard text book english everyone else uses. If you mistook yourself for a garden variety snake-in-the-grass, my apologies. That was not my intent.

  17. Michael Scharen Says:

    Asking the question,”What facts or evidence do you have to prove that the constitution/charter/laws/ordinances apply to me because I am in the ‘state’ of California?” It is evident that bureaucrats will dance around plain English ad infinitum. The question is ‘hypothetical’, asks for ‘legal advice’, etc. Truly they cannot stay in business w/o being as vague and evasive as possible to wear you out. What has happened to the American BS detector?

  18. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Michael, quick correction, strip out the political words. The question is: What facts do you rely on to prove your argument that if I’m physically in California, then the constitution and laws of the state government apply to me?

  19. desertspeaks Says:

    @ Non,.. good enough

  20. NonEntity Says:

    Desert, and as for blaming my typoz on Marc, what else COULD I do? Accepting responsibilities for my own failures is downright unAmerikun. You wouldn’t want that would you?!?! No, I didn’t think so. (If your sarcasm meter’s not pegged, check the batteries. ) 😉

  21. Michael Scharen Says:

    Marc,

    Thanks for the input. All of this language is so loaded with ingrained meaning that we need to strip it down to easily understandable terms. We risk getting sucked into the trap of ‘legalese’ and end up gaslighting ourselves.

  22. NonEntity Says:

    Michael S. sed, “We risk getting sucked into the trap of ‘legalese’ and end up gaslighting ourselves.” — which is why it is SO important to only ask questions and let them define their own position. Any time you deviate from this you are giving them room to create their own definitions of otherwise clearly understood terms, and then hang you with them. Never take a position. Only ask questions.

  23. Damon Says:

    Hello and peace be with you,

    After listening to the Harry Read’s interview, I thought I might bring up a few points. The interviewer asks the question;

    “Can a taxpayer decide not to pay his taxes if he wants”?.

    Can anyone else see the problem here?

    “The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to non-taxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for non-taxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws…”

    [Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236 (1922)]

    So the correct answer is sure a taxpayer can decide not to pay his taxes but they are still owed for he is a “taxpayer”. Now what they might call a “non-taxpayer” simply owes no tax for he is not subject to their code. Tax forms are only for….taxpayers. Social security numbers are only for …taxpayers. Harry was telling the truth, it is a voluntary program. Socialism is 100% voluntary although they make it very difficult to function without their numbers/marks.

    If one takes from them, then they will pay them, most likely. One cannot take benefits and expect not to pay. Who carries a social security card? That is a club membership card so to speak. That shows that the cardholder has the status of a taxpayer that coupled with “citizenship”. That is the evidence. Then this evidence is compounded when one keeps filling out the wrongs forms on top of it. Then they have all the evidence they need by witness of the “taxpayers” own hand/mouth/actions under oath (penalty of perjury).

    Want your liberty from the bondage that your parents sold you into? How about we do what Jesus said to do. We learn to love one another out of a pure heart. Learn how to care for one another out of charity and “government” wont step in to make sure everyone is “obeying the law” (love your neighbor as you love your self by caring for the needy) and “forcing” everyone to do what they should be doing themselves and for one another.

    Instead one gets men electing other men to exercise authority over their neighbor to force them to provide them with welfare, “free education”, health care, retirement, food, section 8 (title 42 social security act), phones, and God knows what else. It is NOT ok to force ones neighbor to pay for one’s own welfare and then expect to be at liberty. It does not work like that. One can complain all day long about codes they do not understand, most of which their parents signed them up for and the which they keep using. But if it is used, it is owed. If you want your liberty, care for one another.

    Touching the Parens Patriae doctrine mentioned above or the “Father of the country” which is a title some Caesars held a while back. It is the parents giving their children up for “adoption” so to speak. That post sent by Michael above omits a lot about the doctrine. The parents will not take care of their children so the STATE does. From cradle to grave. Parents “enroll”/baptize their children into a system of social welfare offered at the expense of their neighbor starting with the birth certificate. This allows them access to the social security/Corban system of bondage which then allows them access to the plethora of other “benefits”. I brought it up before, take for example the education of ones child. To whom does this responsibility belong? To the parents or to the STATE? Whom do the parents give the responsibility too? Who is educating the child? Is daddy? Or did daddy give that job to another?

    Want to see things change for real? Stop blaming everyone else, take responsibility for “yourselves” and “your” families, and take responsibility for those in need and watch miracles happen. Quit giving them the weapons they use against “you”.

    2Pe_2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

    Damon Israel still a stranger and pilgrim in the earth.

  24. Michael Scharen Says:

    Damon,

    I believe I understand what you are saying, and I agree. We need to opt out completely. That is the power of tools like Bitcoin and all of the related transactions — stocks, deeds, insurance claims, judgements, etc. that could be transacted with the same fraud proof algorithms. However, we know that not participating will not be enough. We will be attacked for that reason as well. They don’t need any proof as Marc and others have shown. Men with guns will still show up to take our property and put us in cages. That’s why we need to band together as you point out, support each other as more people are doing.

  25. Michael Says:

    Hello Marc, thank you for what you are doing. You sure have opened my eyes to what a huge criminal organization the Justice system has become. IMHO, I believe there is an easier way to beat this cartel by not playing their game. If and when my time comes to confront these parasites. I will not stand when the bailiff says “All Rise”. I will remain seated because I do not recognize their authority and I will not give away my power to anyone. So what would happen to me if I refuse to stand when ordered to do so? It doesn’t matter what they charge me with because they have no jurisdiction. It’s an admiralty court enforcing non-laws on dry land. I’m not a corporation. I’m a spiritual being. The courts are for-profit corporations, they have a vested interest in my conviction. The state pays the police, prosecutor, judge and jury. So it is not fair or impartial. If threatened with arrest for refusal, I will threaten to file suite for assault under common law if they place their hands on my body. So sum things up, I believe it is easier to win by not playing their game. Filing motions for dismissal, babysitting the paperwork through the system is a waste of time. It is easier to win the game by not playing it. What about giving them a bill for our time wasted in their so called court?

    Penny for your thoughts…

  26. NonEntity Says:

    Michael, do you also believe in the tooth fairy?

  27. The Raw420 Says:

    I’ve been offline since last october, so stoked to be back and here I’am, man i missed you and all your shows. I have way to much to catch up on, lol

3 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Feb 21, 2015 | Freedom's Floodgates Says:

    […] By Calvin […]

  2. NSP - Feb 28, 2015- [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST+] - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] Tom from MI: update on the aftermath of his dismissed case <> resistance from the court clerk when requesting records from his own case <> how do you go about filing a claim with the city’s/judge’s insurer? <> relitigating a traffic complaint after a forced plea and conviction <> quasi civil infractions that side step basic legal standards and procedure <> how to file a petition to void judgement <> and what do you do if they ask YOU to prove jurisdiction when you file a complaint against them in court? […]

  3. NSP - Mar 7, 2015 - [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST] - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] are most successful when they are able to operate covertly without risk of accountability <> more objectively rephrasing our language by implying ownership: “the law(s)” versus “your law(s)” <> poking […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream broadcast via Ustream.tv. You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.





Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.






Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here