- Thank you to all to the affiliates and pirate radio operators rebroadcasting the No STATE Project!
- Our continuing conversation with Clint Richardson will likely broadcast on June 20th.
- Someone had emailed a letter purporting to be evidence that the birth certificate creates a trust or corporation by way of an AT&T phone bill that was paid for using a “treasury account.”
- “One of the most ignored legal precedents in California is a tax case citation involving Deukmejian.”
- “I guess when you steal billions of dollars from people, they’ll name a million dollar building after you.”
- The only way for the prosecution to defeat the motion to dismiss is to at least show, on the record, where their evidence is to substantiate their claims. They either have the evidence or they don’t, there is no gray area; its quite Boolean.
- “Police authority cannot expand the limited jurisdiction of the court. Just because the can write a complaint, it doesn’t mean that they actually and factually have jurisdiction.”
- “Most people will agree that you should zealously attack the all of the prosecutor’s arguments and that there are no sacred cows.”
- A libertarian punk suggests using an attorney, who historically don’t challenge all of the prosecutions assertions, when fighting your activist battles.
- Where is the proof that government are deferring to a birth certificate before they initiate their legal attacks?
- Is there actually documentation showing that birth certificates are being held and/or processed by the county assessor?
- Cleverly debunking UUC con-men in the mid nineties.
- The protection racquet known as government.
- Why would an organization that solely relies on coercion need to give their victims an escape-clause”
- How far disconnected are we really?
- Its all about that bass.
- Justinian’s three precepts of the law: live honestly, injure no one, and give every man his due.
- Determining the type of civil proceeding: tort or contract.
- Using a city council meeting to see how well you can ask questions of evidence to bureaucrats if you were in a traffic hearing setting.
- Everything you are doing is calling the prosecutor’s bluff and asking for their evidence to back-up their claims/arguments.
- Double-jeopardy only applies when you’ve gone through trial.
- Submitting a number of petition for writ of habeas corpus for Ross Ulbricht and not holding our breath waiting for the media to report on it.
- Why to basic rules of non-aggression apply to us, but not to the ruling class? Statist double-standard much?
- Recent Call-of-Shame: a Canadian bureaucrat claims she doesn’t have to prove their laws apply.
- The intercontinental success that the effective questions of evidence has achieved.
- “The opinion that you violated the law is not evidence they apply in the first place.”
- High-level judges and attorneys have admitted that they can’t cite evidence to prove the laws apply.
- “You can’t show a legal injury without first showing the laws apply.”
- The burden-of-proof on appeal is much lower/easier with an issue of hard fact than it is with an issue of interpretive law.
- True adversarial proceedings maintain a proper presumption of innocence of all the assertions being levied against you.
- New Call-of-Shame with the Minnesota Department of Revenue.
- Anthony form CA: had some success in exercising effective damage control against a traffic legal-attack using the motion to demur/dismiss and discovery request package <> the motion was initially denied and the judge overreacted bitterly without stating the grounds for his denial <> the fear and intimidation tactics that are deployed against challenging litigants <> the judge genuinely and embarrassingly did not understand some legal terminology <> keeping the burden-of-proof on the prosecutor when the judge begins prosecuting the case for them <> calling out a seasoned, veteran officer on their lack of knowledge of an essential element of their job <> the judge will not grant you the latitude they grant the prosecution and their witnesses [the statist double-standard] <> the cop/witness defers to the law (a legal opinion) when answering a question of fact <> the bailiff reacts with legal threats when the defendant asks to use their recording device <> and businessman Steve Clark seeks initiative to overhaul and abolish ‘outdated’ California alimony law.
- Rick from NV: the process of expatriating and revoking the (assumed) authority of the birth certificate <> <theory>the ALL CAPS corporate/legal title of your name is the government’s property</theory> <> don’t act under their tricky contrapt system <> “the only jurisdiction they have is the gun” <> living without asking for permission <> and proving how an organization’s rules don’t apply to those who don’t voluntarily subscribe to them.
- Jameson from VA: 3 years wasted researching and trying to validate various popular legal theories such as sovereign citizens, UCC theories, birth certificate bonds, ect <> all roads lead to “the gun in the room” <> <anecdotal evidence>his birth certificate was being held by the county assessor’s office, not vital statistics</anecdotal evidence> <> UCC advocates never seem to want to show documentation of their specialized status and always want hundreds of dollars for their seminars <> Slaves By Law is very similar to Marc’s books <> “no duty to protect” is the key to disproving citizenship <> CUSIP numbers on the back of social security cards <> “your tax payments got to the IMF” <> expatriot hunting tax wranglers <> and “if a grandfather builds a house, he cannot compel his grandchildren to live in it.”
- Ty from UT: challenging a “valid cause for action” with a motion to dismiss in response to a civil legal-attack <> expecting the judge to deny the motion and planning a contingency in case of <> would they revert to attacking the registered owner of the car rather than the driver if they don’t feel like dealing with the pro per traveler <> and getting connected to the many NSP educational resources to better prepare for court.
- Paul from AK: won two cases in the local court system, but the courts responded by filing even more charges as a result <> properly objected when the judge attempted to enter a plea on the defendant’s behalf <> corresponding with the courts during the same time-frame as bringing a child into the world <> being hit with escalated “illegal” fishing charges <> the D.A. failed to show up for a hearing, how is the case not dismissed for failure to prosecute? <> using special signatures on paperwork filed with the court <> what’s the power of including “SEAL” with your documentation? <> offering a plea of guilt if they can offer evidence to prove jurisdiction (something they are supposed to have anyway) <> failure to respond fee statement included in the motions filed with the prosecutor <> staying outside the bar and using the birth certificate when they want to interact with your corporate person <> and making strong objections through practice and experience.
- Ted from WA: please elaborate on how important the issue of jurisdiction is and how you can raise the issue at any point of litigation <> and challenging a judgement that has expired the deadline for appeal.
- Imran from AZ: courtroom extortionists do not want to fully disclose the nature and cause of the charges and proceedings being brought against you <> American courts systems are run by a private British guild by way of a failure to fully emancipate from the crown <> getting harassed by the local police for providing transportation to drunk patrons on Super Bowl Sunday (so much for public safety…) <> how can the Chandler judge/attorney act for the State Attorney General? <> easily demonstrating the conflict-of-interest between the judge and prosecutor and how that is grounds to void a judgement <> and a potential Call-of-Shame audio of an interview with a cop asking tough questions about their statutes and definitions.
8 June 2015 update. I could not find the alleged evidence of the birth certificate being a bond and creating a prepaid treasury account during the live show, but I have it and it’s posted below. The actual file I was sent was pretty bad, I did find another one of higher quality and that is also posted, I’m posting both in case I’m accused of hiding something.
The higher quality one, I got from this website. It purports to be a letter from AT&T that a bill was paid with a prepaid treasury account. If we accept his is a valid document, then it still in no way proves there is a prepaid treasury account created with the birth certificate. That is a huge assumption being made from this document.
There are so many questions also. Why is this from the correspondence department and not the billing department? Exactly how does this prove there is a prepaid treasury account created when one is born and a birth certificate is done. Wouldn’t there be public regulations whereby hospital staff would know to somehow communicate with the treasury that another birth certificate was done, so they need to create another prepaid treasury account?
I just don’t see this as evidence. What immediately comes to mind are the treasury checks people get after doing a zero return. Yeah, you get a check, but you also get prosecuted as the IRS claims it was a mistake. Once, and if, it is authenticated, then one still needs to know if this is an AT&T mistake, if there is a real account, how did AT&T process the payment? Is it like a bank transfer, did it come directly from the treasury, the customer? Exactly how are the funds of this prepaid treasury account accessed by such third parties?
Maybe someone who claims to have one of these prepaid accounts can contact me for a copy of Government: Indicted, and use the account to pay for it?