Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – May 27, 2017 – Guest: Bill from New Hampshire and Co-host: JT

Posted on May 31st, 2017 by Calvin

We get an update from Bill from New Hampshire, who runs Twin Mountain Country Store, on his recent bout in legal-land related to his long-outstanding bureaucratic legal-attack. This one is for those pseudo-critics that falsely assert we don’t report the courtroom train-wrecks along with the success stories. JT joins later in the podcast for a weekly recap and a walkabout down memory lane.

Show Notes:

  • Ray Persinger and Rudy Ogden‘s long history of legal-attacks on non-violent opinion-violators despite their failure to meet their burden-of-proof to produce evidence to prove their laws and codes apply.
  • Conflicting positions, opinions, and rulings from New Hampshire’s attorneys.
  • Judges that are so eager to sustain an objection that they don’t even care to hear the grounds for the basis of the objection from their prosecutor teammate in their outcome-based proceedings.
  • The judge backtracks from his prior affirmation that the defendant is innocent of all elements of the charges, including jurisdiction, after realizing how his determinations will conflict with the prosecution’s burden-of-proof.
  • The judge is allowing the prosecutor to argue without evidence to prove jurisdiction.
  • If jurisdiction is a ‘purely theoretical issue of law‘ and has nothing to do with facts, then why are they hung up on the fact of your physical location to determine jurisdiction in the first place if it is ‘purely a theoretical issue‘?
  • The nightmare of the involuntary compliance with licenses, permits, and other statist demands while they argue your voluntary consent is the license, permit, etc.
  • The judge stonewalling the defendant when asking about the prosecutions burden to produce the evidence in question.
  • Even some of the worst statists will admit that if a regular person did the same things government does then it would be considered criminal absent the sanction of the STATE.
  • The hearing officer denied cross-examination after realizing where the line-of-questioning was leading towards.
  • Recounting Rebecka’s success in getting the witness (the cop) declared incompetent to make legal determinations resulting in an acquittal from the jury.
  • “Never argue merit when there’s a flawed premise.” -Gary Capps
  • During Bill’s closing arguments, the judge ordered him not to raise the issue of the prosecution’s failure to provide evidence to prove jurisdiction.
  • The bureaucratic octopus of control and domination over their “subjects” through permits and licenses.
  • The castle-dweller’s growing list of executions of village-dwelling “tax protesters.”
  • Malcolm X – The House Negro and the Field Negro.
  • Self-emancipation via “No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority.”
  • How to discover the boundaries of your freedom and your oppressor’s tyranny.
  • Christopher Hitchen’s contradiction of Hitchen’s razor when he goes off supporting a war without justifiable evidence.
  • Truth is not determined by how many people agree with you.”
  • Marc’s television appearance on “The Hidden Truth” with Aagie Nost in Tuscon.
  • We are a morally dissonant society because of our conditioned culture of institutional violence and countering it with nonviolent noncooperation and operating as much of you life as you can outside of their system.
  • Zeroing-in on the agent’s assessment that the defendant actually believed they had an obligation to submit to extortion.
  • The straw-man and red herring diversions you get when you begin to make an effective defense against their bureaucratic legal-attacks.
  • Catching contradictions from the prosecution team (the prosecutor and judge [co-prosecutor {or sometimes lead prosecutor}]) in the courtroom when you use effective Socratic questioning.
  • Tait’s success story in Wisconsin: when the judge ordered the prosecutor to respond to the motion to dismiss and discovery request, and the prosecutor couldn’t respond with anything based in fact or law, the judge granted the motion to dismiss.
  • The similarity of legal realism to alternative facts.
  • The judge’s weapons of a psychological evaluation, fines, and contempt charges to avoid doing their job to hold the prosecution to their burden-of-proof.
  • Calling out the judge’s threats to force a plea.
  • Top 10 Places Where Bitcoin is Banned.
  • Lethal use of ‘non-lethal‘ weapons.
  • Cryptocurrencies are the last free-market exchanges around these days.
  • Building a new video editing rig thanks to the funding from Matthew from Australia.
  • Keeping your spirits up despite the overbearing pressure of the government’s lingering threats and violence.
  • Organized criminals, and their apologists, want to label people asking for evidence that their rules apply as “frauds.” Pot, meet kettle.
  • The blaming the victim coping mechanism of citizens.
  • Dan Evan’s BS excuses [see the “Debunking Dan Evans” series Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3] to not defend his assertions on radio claiming he “doesn’t do radio,” but jumps on NPR for a few softballs.
  • A little more backstory and analysis on Marc’s Maryland Comptroller hearing Call-of-Shame.
  • The lack of media attention when Kolby Granville admitted “we have jurisdiction because we said so.”
  • Watching out for those putting the cart before the horse when it comes to them demonstrating evidence to prove jurisdiction.
  • Low-level, go-nowhere, low-life attorneys.
  • Ralph unflinchingly calling-out fraud in the courtroom in the face of warnings and threats from the judge.
  • The failure of any of the critics to actually prove Marc is a fraud.
  • Coming back full-circle to the question of if jurisdiction is a ‘purely theoretical issue of law‘ and has nothing to do with facts, then why are they hung up on the fact of your physical location to determine jurisdiction in the first place if it is ‘purely a theoretical issue‘?
  • Running into an ole federal magistrate from way back in court.
              

21 Comments For This Post

  1. JOHN COKOS Says:

    Hitchen’s was a Zionist first, and libertarian (or whatever he was) second, hence he can support two contradictory positions. He was what’s know as a “poser”when it came to supporting the Bush Agenda.

  2. JOHN COKOS Says:

    Two observations: The review on Twin Mountain Country Store were not favorable at all. If your in business to make a profit, shit-can the Jurisdictional nonsense and Revolutionary Psycho-Bable. Bill, your not the Che Guevara of NH.
    Marc,you go into some serious Damage Control when your prized theory crashes and burns. You sit in the background and insulate yourself from the fight,and your groupies take the flack…

  3. Andy Says:

    When you’re getting flack you know you’re over the target and JOHN COKOS outed himself.

    Seriously John, please take your complaint(s)/criticism(s) to the forum where they can be given the attention and detail they deserve.

  4. JOHN COKOS Says:

    OK folks, gather round the campfire. What Marc is doing is a transformation of the financial theory called The Random Walk Down Wall Street to explain success in the Stock Market.
    It simply state’s that there is a given probability of success ( a sort of bell curve) that is independent of all the surrounding facts and evidence no matter how well fashioned your strategy is executed. You could throw a dart on all the probabilities (the dog eat my homework, etc) and still get an outcome that may or may not have ANY bearings on the external facts.
    Do some Court watching and you will see charges dismissed for any number of reasons. Do some Court watching and you will see all sorts of outcomes that contradict ALL the facts and evidence.
    It’s a crapshoot. On any given day, any outcome is possible. The Jurisdiction ploy and the dog ate my evidence are on equal footing….
    It’s the Politics of the situation and NOT the power (?) of the Jurisdiction Argument, Facts, Evidence.. ad nauseum

  5. NonEntity Says:

    “Morality begins with consent.” KUDOS! (And ends there as well.)

  6. Andy Says:

    “It’s the Politics of the situation and NOT the power (?) of the Jurisdiction Argument, Facts, Evidence.. ad nauseum”

    The power is the gun under the table (under a pile of paperwork) and that is the politics of it and the men and women who call themselves government who wield the gun.

    That said, lets take the discussion to the forum which is a much more robust forum/community for discussion.

  7. JOHN COKOS Says:

    Andy:Marc certainly has his retinue of defenders of the faith on duty. The forum is largely composed of Marc’s jurisdiction bots reading from Marc’s Little Red Book of Spoonerism. I said what I had to say, and that the extent of it.

  8. Andy Says:

    JOHN, If I did as government types do and forced people to give me money would you consider me a criminal? Do you think government is organized crime?

  9. Andy Says:

    JOHN, thanks for mentioning Lysander Spooner, especially because of his myth busing masterpiece, No Treason: The Constitutions of No Authority. http://marcstevens.net/interviews/notreason.html

  10. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    JOHN, If Andy did as government types do and forced people to give him money would you consider Him a criminal?

  11. JOHN COKOS Says:

    That’s tired a old rhetorical point. Now I suppose that I’m expected to counter-point. You will have to get up a lot earlier in the morning for that to happen.
    Have a nice day……

  12. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    Habenae Est Dominatus Says:
    June 2nd, 2017 at 11:21 am

    JOHN, If Andy did as government types do and forced people to give him money would you consider Him a criminal?

    ———————–

    JOHN COKOS Says:
    June 2nd, 2017 at 8:52 pm

    That’s tired a old rhetorical point. Now I suppose that I’m expected to counter-point.

    ———————–

    No. You’re expected to answer the question. A simple yes or no will suffice.

    If you want to provide a counter-point (read: espouse your opinion beyond a yes or no) that’s your choice.

  13. NonEntity Says:

    Ah, Habby’s defining how other people should behave once again. You must be a hugely frustrated man, Habby!

  14. Andy Says:

    NonEntity “look of death” defining how other people should behave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YthBn9sN92A

  15. dan Says:

    I think I’ve seen that “look of death”, it’s scarier than hell.

  16. dan Says:

    Marc I disagree. Some may come close but there is no one else saying the things you are.I have yet to hear someone else who has independently sited what you have. Bill is my hero.

  17. JOHN COKOS Says:

    Oh Danny Boy: Your somewhat delusional, but maybe your new to the site. There’s nothing “new” to Marc’s argument. It’s always been around in some form or other on the Net. It’s the bizzaro inversion of the Patriot Mythology that is prevalent on the Net
    Bill is just jeopardizing what’s left of his business with a rhetorical argument
    that won’t prevail in court. If your in business take care of business, if you want to get into a Zen frame of mind, sit on a mountain top and debate how many angels can sit on the head of a pin.

  18. NonEntity Says:

    Seven. (Angels on the head of a pin.) Say Dan,I didn’t know you had your own personal delusional. Cool! Was it expensive? Is there much maintenance involved?

  19. dan Says:

    NonE, My delusional is powered by a 454 big block. It breaths fire.

  20. NonEntity Says:

    Dan, my HEAD is a big block. It breathes garlic.

  21. JOHN COKOS Says:

    I can answer all your questions with one retort: just be careful of just what end of the pin your addressing: the wrong end can be a wake up call for the angels…:-)

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 now broadcast via youtube.com. 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