Hi anons, Just so you know, you're entering dangerous ground.

https://qntmpkts.keybase.pub//?q=choice#749

> Now comes the 'conspiracy' label.

> Deeper we go, the more unrealistic it all becomes.

> The end won't be for everyone.

> That choice, to know, will be yours.

> Q

If you guys need a better understanding of Color of Law, visualize a prism taking the white light of truth, and separating them into a spectrum. each color, while completely true in of itself, does not paint the full spectrum of the white light of truth, and is therefore a "color" of the truth. When lawyers speak colorably, they're speaking truth from a perspective that benefits them most. A government agent acting under Color of Law (such as depriving you of rights) is likely abusing their authority.

some musings about personhood:

• The youtube vid "Meet Your Strawman" is correct, in a colorable way.

• You can legally birth a new "person", either by incorporating, or by paying sufficient money in another jurisdiction (Dominica is popular for this).

• As Jay Z once said: "everythings for sale, I got 5 passports I'm never going to jail". That means Jay Z has 5 identities, separate in law from each other. If you break the law with one, identify with another.

• It is entirely possible to kill your strawman person, and keep living/working, so long as you create a new strawman in another jurisdiction.

>>2256265

So, Birth Certificates…

We'll start with a definition:

• Trust - Shared title to property. Grantor creates the trust, Trustee administers trust, Beneficiary gets benefits from trust. One person can wear 2 of the 3 roles simultaneously.

Let's ignore most of the Sovereign Citizen/Freeman-on-the-Land beliefs (though they know a lot of neat tricks!), and focus on how the New World Order thinks they own you:

Under international law, you are "berthed" from your mother's water. Your birth certificate is a document evidencing your beneficial interest in a private trust. This trust is what underwrites the operation of your government, as public/private entities loan money into existence based on your collective assets. You are expected to be able to manage your share in this Public Trust (remember Trump mentioning that word in the SoTU?) by being able to keep your individual private trust (which the US is a beneficiary) in order. Oh, and you're supposed to be able to manage the trust by the age of SEVEN. If you do not claim your right as grantor to your public trust, you are assumed "lost at sea", and your assets are seized by the state under Maritime Salvage law.

Your birth certificate is your evidence that you both Granted (your mother was your agent) that private trust, and that you are the Beneficiary of that trust. However, most people (that want to actually underwrite the Public Trust) name the United States as the beneficiary of the private trust, then claim benefits on the other side as a beneficiary of the public trust. Pic Related explains all the parts of both trusts, and how the authority flows.

This is waaaaay off the topic of JFK Jr, but I'm happy to answer any questions that the legalanons are trying to decipher. Been on this path since 2009, and it's good to see others starting to wake up to this.

>>2256449

This is probably the wrong way to be looking at it. Here's a better way: The government never takes something away from you, without giving you something of equal or greater value in return.

They've placed your entire estate in trust, given it a trustee (that you can change), and allowed the country to benefit off your labor. Sure, you initially agree to make (in your lifetime) about 5% of the value of that trust, but the rest is yours as soon as you claim ownership of it. Sounds like a fair deal to me: A republic for those that want it, and slavery for those that demand it.

Remember that, in your case as a british subject, the Crown is your property. You can direct it as you would control any of your property. :)

TL;DR - Control the Contract.

About Public/Private:

Everything has a public and a private side. This is often discussed as Black/White, Front/Back, etc. A good accountant's business card will have him listed as "principal" as the job title on the back of it. In Canada, French is usually considered the "private" side, including french courts.

The UNITED STATES is no different in this regard. I invite you to pay attention to Pic Related: notice the big line in the middle, delineating the private trust from the public side. The ALL CAPS dead entity is the public side. The Grantor is the Federal Reserve. The trustees are 4 10 20 and everyone below him. The birth certificates create the strawman/beneficiaries. This public trust was created/underwritten by Britain/France/Vatican in the wake of congress dissolving in 1868, and was fully enacted with the ratification of the fourteenth amendment.

Some things that exist ONLY in the public:

• The (non-darknet/tor/i2p) Internet

• Every News Broadcast You Have Ever Seen Ever.

• Social Security and Welfare

• Affirmative Action/Socialism

• Taxation

• War/Democracy (Did you know they're the same thing?)

• Maritime Law

• (((Merchant))) Law

• FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES

• @realDonaldTrump

Expect anything in the public to express its message colorably.

>>2256722

Filtered for Clown faggotry. This will be your only (You). I hope my posts terrify you.

—-

Another thing that exists ONLY on the public side: DEBT.

The private side of the United States is where the Republic exists. You know, the republic that came around in 1776-1781? It's only a private entity since we reincorporated in 1868. It became a "hush-hush" sort of construct post-1933, when House Joint Resolution 192 wreaked havoc on the public. In a nutshell, the republic was dissolved in 1933, except as a collective of sovereign US nationals acting as underwriters to the public trust. In order to enjoy the rights of the republic, you had to become an underwriter to the public trust.

The private space is also where any real value exists, as Gold/Silver have been outlawed as a form of money (though that might change real soon now). Part of the "Government gives you something of equal or greater value in return" is the opportunity for the government to discharge your debts/crimes/accounts, because there is no legal way to pay a debt. You certainly can't pay a debt with Federal Reserve notes; Paying a debt with debt is called a "Novation".

Things that exist ONLY in the private:

• Your unalienable/inalienable rights.

• Assets

• Common Law

• Natural Law

• Allodial Title to land

• Your right to smoke cannabis in most states

• Your right to own guns in CA/UK/AU/NZ.

• Donald Trump's Loan with Deutchebank

• James Clapper's letter to Congress, telling them that what he testified was the "least untruthful" thing he could said, therefore not lying to congress under oath.

• Your private settlement of civil charges.

• Your private settlement of criminal charges (seriously).

• 90% of securities transactions.

• Half of the IRS.

Basically, the private side is where all the fun can happen.

>>2257004

> 1913

> Federal Reserve Act

> Federal Reserve Inc.

> A Private Company?

The third time a National Bank was created. Since Reconstruction, all federal

entities were being replaced by "zombie" corporations underwritten by the

Crown/Vatican, therefore Jekyll Island thought it would be a neat idea to make

a new tumor to control the money supply, and they got their bought/corrupt

congress to approve it.

> Shareholders = ?

No shareholders need to be disclosed, if you aren't a party to it. You aren't a

party to the Federal Reserve.

> IS THIS Constitutional?

Doesn't matter. You're not a party to the constitution. Your signature ain't on

that piece of paper.

> IS THIS LEGAL

It follows the letter of the law real good, don't it?

> Are You A DEBT SLAVE?

I'm not, but most of you sure fucking are. Learn to sail the seas of commerce.

> What is your recourse?

You still have gold and silver to pay your debts, if you want to avoid FRN's.

> What is a Federal Reserve Note?

a Debt Instrument.

> Define NOTE

From Black's 1st:

1. A written statement by an individual to pay a sum of money to another

individual, or the bearer of the note at a specified period in time. It is a

compromise between two individuals. 2. A bond that matures in five years or

less. 3. A bill of exchange issued by the notary public that is addressed to the

payer in the event of nonpayment or nonacceptance. If the event occurs again,

the notary public reserves the right to take legal action on the payer. 4. A

small notification that will come of assistance at a later time.

It ain't real money, folks. it's an IOU.

> COLORABLE MONEY > COLORABLE COURTS

There is an upside to this, but the fact remains, You can't have a common law

court, or any de jure court, without real money.

>>2257104

I'll comment on this later. Might be next bread. back in 2 hours.

collecting on remedy is either through lien right or through court. The bar of entry for a lien right (using a private international process) is much much lower than the court rules for your jurisdiction of choice.

It sounds like your issues are largely getting your instruments into a form the court can recognize. i.e. stick to motions/briefs/affidavits. So long as you play the basic game, you'll be fine. Don't try to submit a writ of habeus corpus unless it's in motion form, for instance.

Your example is best handled by controlling their confession/avoidance and putting it on the record. "For and on the record, the court has agreed that this is a court of record" should've been your answer to the Judge. Better yet, tell the court that it's a court of record, and you'll give the judge 10 minutes to recess in order to return in his Melchizedek capacity.

You should also probably know that, should common law and equity conflict, equity will prevail in most de facto courts. Equity is a fun game if you learn how to play it (Hint: God Mode is possible if you know the code).

>>2257226

Allodial Title post-1933 exists solely in the land of individual private trust. The equivalent to allodial title (which is full lawful/legal title to a piece of land - all the way down to the core, rather than 6 inches below the foundation) can be achieved by paying for ~10 years of your land/property tax in one lump sum. Include this with a private process to the county recorder/land titles registry, getting their agreement that you have acquired full legal/lawful title to the land.

If you're gonna be playing in the private side, it might be good to learn how to send/record a 3-part private process. We can get to that later, i think.

>>2257314

For one, I built a vessel worth sailing. Your broken-down debt machine is not a sea-worthy vessel.

Oh, since this is as good a place as any to explain this, the Vatican's position is that you are not the body; merely, you are the spark/spirit piloting the vessel made of meat. So you aren't a person. You aren't a body. You are the living soul/spark/spirit in the captain's seat.

In commerce, your vessel is your all caps name. The easiest way to get this in order is to do a process or eleven to settle your outstanding debts (depending on how deep in the hole you are), then incorporate your JOHN DOE all caps name. Lastly, lien that corporation up for about $500mil or more. If your PERSON owes anyone $1, they have to get in line, and wait until the $500mil you owe YOURSELF gets paid before they get that buck from you.

>>2144318

1933

> United States Declares BANKRUPTCY

> United States Inc.

> A Private Company?

United States Inc., also known as SOCIAL SECURITY, incorporated at this time.

It entered bankruptcy on December 21, 1999 with the assistance of Newt

Gingrich. The bankruptcy ended December 22, 2012. It was literally the "End Of

The World". In it's place, the HOMELAND SECURITY (Registered in Puerto Rico)

corporation now stands. Our POTUS is President of that new corporation.

> Shareholders =?

In theory, the public trust's shareholders are the beneficiaries. Seeing as we

are the beneficiaries, that would make us the holders of the shares. However,

we wouldn't know, because beneficiaries aren't party to the terms of a trust.

> CREDITORS=?

By default, the public trust's creditor is the Federal Reserve, who is acting

on behalf of our combined private trusts. Should you take control of your own

assets, you can become a Secured Party of your own, and act as a Special

Banking Franchise once you're out of dry dock. At this point, You're a creditor

yourself.

> US BANKRUPTCY Still In Receivership?

Well, a US Bankruptcy is still in receivership. HOMELAND SECURITY went into

bankruptcy about a year and a half after it was formed. This company wasn't

expected to last 20 years anyway. UNITED STATES, INC died in 1999, sadly.

> Emergency Banking Act March 9 1933

Title I Expanded presidential authority, allowing regulation of all banking

functions.

Title II gave the comptroller of the currency power over the bank, and seize

assets.

Title IV gave the Federal Reserve the authority to issue "emergency" currency

in the form of Federal Reserve Notes.

> House Joint Resolution 192 73rd Congress June 5 1933

This is the big motherfucker. You know it's big when Hollywood decides to

rewrite a commentary on capitalism (Wizard of Oz) into a full disclosure of how

to gain remedy in Equity in order to duly inform the public. The Gold Standard

was abolished, and with it, the ability to pay debts. In exchange for taking

your ability to, you know, pay bills n' shit, the Government said "hey, we're

in bankruptcy already. Just lest us know what you owe, and we'll discharge

that shit for you. We're good for it." And you know what? they were.

> 1938 Supreme Court - Erie Railroad v Tompkins

Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in

a state whether they be local in their nature or "general," be they commercial

law or a part of the law of torts. And no clause in the Constitution purports

to confer such a power upon the federal courts.

> Why is this relevant?

There is no Federal common law.

States trying to use common law to prosecute federally (like, say HUBER) will

be using the law of the state in which the court is sitting.

One that R didn't include, but should have:

> Amendment to the Trading With The Enemy Act - March 6, 1933

The American People are added to the definition of "enemy".

Look at this CIAnigger create a containment board for us, so he can ban conversations.

No thanks.

>>2144318

> Constitution

See Pic Related. You are not a party to the document memorializing the debt

being passed.

> Common Law

You are innocent until declared guilty by 12 of your peers. Turns out, this

only exists when Gold/Silver back our money supply. With no real way to pay

debts without novation, Common Law disappears. The only way Common Law still

exists is when you create assets and private securities, and use them to settle

debts.

> Equity Law

Equity is the default body of law that exists post-1933. Post-Coke and

Post-Blackstone. If you are charged as a defendant/accused/respondent, you are

presumed guilty/liable until proven to not be. All United Nations covenant and

model law uses Equity as a base.

Admiralty Law

Equity law, with military backing/enforcement. Normally international in scope,

but intra-state commerce can be considered international if the jurisdiction is

invoked in arbitration.

> AND / OR

indeed. Admiralty and Equity are interchangeable. Equity Prevails over Common

Law in an Equity court. Want that to change? Start a De Jure Court.

> Statutory Jurisdiction?

The jurisdiction of the laws legislated by Congress. You're given the choice of

living under the laws of God, or the laws of Man.

> Statutory Jurisdiction Definition in Blacks Law Dictionary?

Not in Black's 9th Edition.

> Why Not?

Because it's listed under "legislative jurisdiction": a Legislature's general

sphere of authority to enact laws and conduct all business related to that

authority, such as holding hearings.

>>2259538

You are 100% correct. DTCC and Cede and Co (one of their brokers) is an asset registry. Basically, they're key to the creation of money.

How money is created (short version)

1) Asset is created

2) Asset is registered with DTCC for $value.

3) Account is now sitting at $value.

4) Asset allows for Federal Reserve Notes in the amount of $value to be created to balance the account to Zero again.

The best way to handle this is to learn securities law, and then send a valid security to the Criminal Investigation Division of IRS (I know, it sounds scary) so they can package it up correctly for submission to DTCC. FRN's are printed and deposited in a bank account of your choosing, should you opt to route the FRN's back to you.

>>2259807

Yeah. the DTCC is just an asset registry. I'm not sure what you'd be investigating; just the process, or the individual accounts? I'm not sure you're a party to the accounts, but you'd probably have a better chance of oversight into DTCC itself (which is also pretty low).

Your future labor is valued at approximately $650,000 USD. That's what Probate and Social Security average the value for American Livestock at. However, by the time you're dead, that BC has been backing hundreds of loans, and is worth literally millions. R's hint about CUSIP numbers is handy here, because I know sites like fidelity.com allow you to insert CUSIP numbers to find your value.

You as a Grantor/Trustee of your private trust are not supposed to deal with DTCC directly (though you can) when it comes to your BC's assets. IRS is supposed to handle that for you. They're your accountants.

>>2259959

The assets keep getting registered when a national emergency exists.

The reason it's not considered market fixing is for the same reason having the Fed print our money isn't considered market fixing; because when you own the legislators, you can make anything legal.

I know this isn't the best explanation, but considering everything was flipped on its head post-1933, it's really all we got. Registries for asset accounts, balanced by FRB's budget for printing liabilities, all managed by the IRS. Middle men for debt creation in bankruptcy. You could try suing for price fixing, but I'm not sure the case would survive an appeal after it was thrown out of a lower court.

When it comes to trading with the enemy, your assets/accounts are flagged and monitored. If you're deemed to be affected by the December 2017 executive orders, your accounts are probably frozen. I would imagine that the DTCC can be investigated by the Department of Justice or FBI, and they could seize/freeze accounts they find.

>>2144318

> YOUR NAME

> Birth Certificate = ALL CAPs

> Social Security Card = ALL CAPs

> Drivers License = ALL CAPs

All of these are trusts. Different trusts. All tied to the ALL CAPS name.

You are the beneficiary of all of these trusts. Control these contracts.

> Are YOU a Living Soul or a Person>CORPORATION?

I'm a living soul. I control a Person>CORPORATION. It's real fun.

>Blacks Law Dictionary 6th edition

Fuck that. we'll use 10th edition.

person. (Be) 1. A human being. Also termed natural

person.

"Human Being" is not defined in Black's.

neither is "Natural Person". Oops.

> Birth Certificate Applications Started WHEN?

About 1900, or 1945, depending on what kind of application you're looking for.

> Social Security Registration Started WHEN?

August of 1935.

> Birth Certificate # = CUSIP

> SS# = CUSIP

What happens when you put a CUSIP number into fidelity.com or other stock

tracker? :)

> Cestui Que Vie Trust

cestui que trust (set-ee [or ses-twee] kee [or ka] tr;)st). [Law French] (lSc)

Archaic. One who possesses equitable rights in property, usu. receiving the

rents, issues, and profits from it; BENEFICIARY. Also termed

fide-commissary;fidei-commissarius. PI. cestuis que trust or (erroneously)

cestuis que trustent. [Cases: Trusts C=,139.]

"[AJn alternative name for the beneficiary is 'cestui que trust,' an elliptical

phrase meaning 'he [for]- whose [benefit the] trust [was created].' In this

phrase cestui is pronounced 'settee' (with the accent on the first syllable),

que is pronounced 'kee,' and trust as in English. Grammatically the plural

should be cestuis que trust(pronounced like the singular); but by an

understandable mistake it is sometimes written cestuis que trustent, as if

trust were a verb." Glanville Williams, Learning the Law 10 (11th ed. 1982).

> Cannon [sic] Law

1. A body of western ecclesiastical law that was first compiled from the 12th

to 14th centuries.• It has grown steadily since that time, and is now codified

in the Codex Juris Canonici of 1983, replacing that of 1918. - Also termed

corpus juris canonici; papal law; jus canonicum. 2. A body oflaw developed

within a particular religious tradition. - Also termed church law; canonical

law. Cf. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. [Cases: Religious Societies C:=>5.]

> Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Edition

Dunno why you have a fetish for 6th edition. One would assume 2nd or 3rd

edition (releasted in 1933) would be more relevant. Unless you need the case

law to back up the definitions, just use 9th edition.

Are YOU the Trustee or the Beneficiary?

In the public trust, we're the beneficiary ONLY.

In our private trust/Republic, we the Grantor AND the Trustee.

> Who Created The Debt? The Bond?

> The CREDITORS?

Yup. Crown of England and the Holy See created the debt and the bond. And we

agreed to be liable for the debt. England and Vatican are our creditors in this

bankruptcy. However, as Anna Von Reitz and Karen Hudes have shown time and

again, you can undo this contract, or control the contract. Controlling it is

far more fun.

>>2260366

Some ramifications of the fact that you are the public beneficiary:

• Only public TRUSTEES are charged with crimes in court. The "mistake" is that they're charging you as a trustee breaking their laws

• Only public TRUSTEES are able to pay a debt.

• If you inform a court that you are entering as a beneficiary only (and you do this pro se), the Judge now has a duty to you, and can assist in settling the case.

• When a lawyer (TRUSTEE) is charged, he goes in front of the judge ASAP and says "I wish to plead guilty to the facts, and I wish to affect payment immediately" while holding up a pen and a chequebook. The judge will then allow him to cut a cheque to the clerk of the court, and it will be considered a PRIVATE SETTLEMENT to his charges, thus allowing the lawyer a public discharge to accompany the private settlement.

>>2260173

Honestly, I'm just glad someone (Even if R is a larp) is trying to get autists to dig into international law. Honestly, as much as Q is going to wake everyone up, Mastery of the current legal/bankruptcy system will allow americans to seize control of the rest of the world without needing to wait for our elected officials to do it for us.

As Q says, he's our trustee. We benefit greatly from that fact. Homeboy can administer my public trust any day.

>>2144318

> Uniform Commercial Code

A private code of laws that has been (largely) adopted into most states' laws.

> UCC = Private International Law?

Yes. It's very clear to anyone who reads UNIDROIT Principles of Private International Contracts.

> If UCC Private WHO OWNS?

National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) and the American Law Institute (ALI). You are not a party to that contract.

> 1938 Supreme Court - Erie Railroad v Tompkins

Common Law only exists at the state level. No federal Common Law. Federal can only exist in Admiralty.

> Common Law > No Compelled Performance

> Equity Law > Compels Performance

> Admiralty > Compelled Performance > AND Criminal Penalties > AND Requires International Contract?

At the risk of an appeal to authority, Robert Bork would disagree with your opinion on Admiralty. Admiralty and Equity are really just civil jurisdiction with a higher level of dishonor attached, because the issue wasn't settled when it was still private. Cure the dishonor, and you're back to a dressed-up civil court with no real teeth.

However, the rest is correct. in Common Law, only God can compel performance.

Equity and Admiralty have only the backing of "those with the guns make/enforce

the laws" behind their actions.

This is why many of us in the know are waiting for POTUS to re-engage Gold/Silver as currency, so we can start trying these criminals in a de jure court. If I can settle criminal charges in court using two notaries (in case

one breaks down), I'm positive HRC can do the same. Alas, the best we have is military tribunals, because Common Law doesn't apply when everything's underwater (ever wonder why elevation is based on "sea level"?).

> Statutory Jurisdiction = ?

It exists if all parties agree it exists. Just like everything in private international law.

>>2144318

> Are You A United States Citizen?

No, but I control one. I'm a United States National.

> Federal United States?

Got one of these. Thanks Fourteenth Amendment!

> OR

> Continental United States?

From Black's 9th:

citizen, n. (l4c) I. A person who, by either birth or naturalization, is a member of a political community, owing allegiance to the community and being entitled to enjoy all its civil rights and protections; a member of the civil state, entitled to all its privileges. Cf. RESIDENT; DOMICILIARY. [Cases: Aliens, Immigration, and Citizenship]

I'm gonna take the Taj Tariq Bey approach and say I'm from America. Both continents. Should someone call me anything else, such as citizen, I'll need to see the proof of that claim, or it's discarded for cause.

> United States = Federal CORPORATION

> Congressional Act 1871

Created Washington D.C.'s government. 3 Years after Congress was dissolved (and

never restarted) during the Civil War.This also created United States, Inc., fully owned by foreign interests.

> 28 USC 3002 - Part VI - Chapter 176 -Sub-Chapter 176 - Subsection A, (15)

"United States" means - (A) a Federal corporation.

> Did 14th Amendment Create A Lower Class of CITIZEN?

Yes. Under the cover of "freeing the slaves" it made anyone that identified as a Citizen of the United States both a citizen of their State, and of the District of Columbia, and both are subject to congress, bypassing the 10th Amendment completely. Slaves are subjects. Subjects are slaves. Courts have filtered every amendment (other than the 3rd) through the 14th to see if any still apply. The only amendment to escape unscathed from the filter is the 2nd amendment. I think SCOTUS was too afraid to change it, myself.

> 15 U.S. Statute At Large July 27 1868

> “Expatriation Clause”

You have the right to expatriate, and no government action can restrict, deny, impair, or question that right.

> WHY Is This Relevant?

Usually, it's relevant because most public officials have expatriated from the United States in order to legally admister the Public Trust under international law. To do so as a non-expatriate would be Treason. Because they're acting on behalf of a foreign government.

But in this case, Section 3 of the statute at large states that if a foreign government (Even one called UNITED STATES) deprives you of rights under their color of law, you can petition the President of the Republic to remedy that

situation for you.

> 14th passed when?

July 9, 1868, AFTER congress dissolved, and a new fake one was put in its place.

> What Is The District Of Columbia?

A foreign corporation wearing a corpse as camoflage.

> Why Is This Relevant?

Because It isn't the country you belong to. Stop agreeing to contracts that state you belong to that country.

>>2144318

> Your Name as Signature

Your indorsement/endorsement on an instrument, whether it says your name, an X written in blood, or "EAT A BOWL OF COCKS", is considered a valid endorsement, underwriting the instrument you just marked.

> ‘’Without Prejudice’’ UCC 1-308

This limits the negotiability of the instrument in question. You are being forced to perform (usually at gunpoint or other threat), so you perform in a fashion that does not prejudice your substantial private rights.

You can endorse an instrument with your normal signature, and add "All Rights Reserved - UCC 1-308" next to it (less good if a cop snatches it out of your hand before you write anything after your signature), OR, you can just sign "Without Prejudice" as your name. Preferably in cursive.

Basically, you're being forced to put a signature on paper. UCC 1-308 makes that paper worthless as a negotiable instrument (all they care about) because it's evidenced to be a compelled contract. But the government agent is just trying to do their job (Police, DMV, etc), so they'll accept the worthless signature.

That being said, you ARE expected to honor the worthless instrument, but your reservation of rights allows you to be compensated for injuries/damages/orders.

Then you get to decide on the price tag for your compelled performance.

> What is a ‘’compelled benefit’’?

A benefit you are forced to take, lest you experience hardship:

• Marriage Licence

• Driver's Licence

• a prison jumpsuit after you've been stripped naked.

• the name of a beneficary to the public trust.

• a speeding ticket.

> ‘’Argument and Recourse’’ UCC 1-103

Recourse was more public in old UCC 103.6. Common Law was fully recognized. Current UCC 1-103(b) does not exclude Common Law, but it does not specifically mention it. Your recourse is now that all remedies available at law are available through 1-103(b).

> COLORABLE MONEY > COLORABLE COURTS

This is more fun than it sounds. You can CREATE colorable money out of thin air within a colorable court, and you can get the court's agreement that the colorable money settled the colorable court's outstanding account. Color is neat.

> Are YOU a TAX / FEE / FINE SLAVE?

Nope, but I certainly control one! :)

> What is YOUR recourse?

UCC 1-308, 3-206, 9-110, 9-316, 9-402, 9-601...

Oh, and USC Title 18, Part I, Chapter 13, Subsection 242 - Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law.

> UCC 1 - ‘’Secured Party Creditor”?

Establish a lien right against a debtor, and you are a debtor. Monetize that lien right, and you are a Secured Party.

JonJon, I know you've been in hiding for 20 years, but Come on, man. How do you

not know that UCC changed over 10 years ago. Aren't you a lawyer?

>>2260854

damnit.

Establish a lien right against a debtor, and you are a creditor. Monetize that lien right, and you are a Secured Party.

THAT's what I meant.

Pic related is self-portrait.

>>2256400

How to un-do the birth certificate trust (you probably don't want to do this):

1) use the legal concept of "nunc pro tunc" to inform the Vital Stats office of the mistaken filing of an application of Live Birth. Date the document 3 days or so after your birth, so it's within the 10-day window to renegotiate. Inform them that they need to void the certificate and issue you a statement reflecting that certificate's new status.

2) Notify the County Recorder/Division Registrar of a Nativity that occured on the day you were born.

Suddenly, you're a National of the United States of America.

Why don't you want to do this? because there is literally millions of dollars worth of FRN's tied to your birth certificate account. Lots of BIG loans have just defaulted because your money was pulled out of collateral. And now you don't have the ability to register UCC-1 Financing Statements on all those accounts. :(

This:

>>2259021

was in response to:

>>2257104

>>2259021

In addition, you would do well to learn how to negotiate a contract quickly when dealing with judges.

So, the best example of a rapid contract negotiation is crossing the bar in a special capacity. Understand that the bar in court is considered in Admiralty law as the side of a ship. You are asking the captain for permission to come aboard. By default, if you cross that bar, it is under the presumption that you are crossing in a debtor capacity. You have to ride a bull for 8 seconds in order to enter the bar in a capacity that can settle debts as a trustee.

Here's a script that takes less than 10 seconds to complete when done right, in order to cross the bar in your private capacity:

YOU: "Judge, I'm here as the Authorized Representative of the surety above $DEFENDANT'S_NAME. Is it okay if I cross the bar while reserving my substantive rights?"

JUDGE: "What are you talking about?/Who are you?/Come again?/(anything but STOP)"

YOU: "Since there is no objection, I am crossing the bar with my substantive private rights. I am entering… I have entered. Thank you."

At this point, the judge has an issue: there are now two people in the court with the rights of a Judge. And just like Thunderdome, two men enter, one man leaves. The rodeo has begun. He has to get you the fuck out of his court asap, because the longer you're there, the longer he's not capable of running his courtroom.

An even shorter method of crossing the bar: Come early (before the judge comes in), and shout "IS THIS A COURT?" loudly as you cross the bar (the clerk will take notice). When the judge comes in, do not stand, as you have already forced the court into a private setting. The judge will happily (and quietly) handle whatever business you bring to his attention, and convene the public court once you're the fuck out of his vessel (a courtroom inside the bar is a vessel).

I'll explain why this works in the next post.

>>2261018

(previous pic related came from a decrypted image embedded in one of the podesta attachments).

So, let's explain the foundations of a contract, as it pertains to our current conversation (Go buy Brian Blum's book if you need a 500-page explanation of the elements of a contract):

• A contract is not a piece of paper. it is the agreement of the parties. The piece of paper is the memorialization of that contract.

• A contract can be written, expressed, or implied.

This has huge ramifications. If a cop gestures that you walk a direction, and you walk the direction he has gestured, you are now in a contract with that police officer. The contract is "I direct/order, you comply." Same if that officer tells you to do something. Upon your performance, you have agreed that he has the authority to order you. And obviously, if you sign a piece of paper saying "I'm mister piggy's bitch, and he can order me about," that'll likely stand up in an arbitral tribunal.

Oh, and there are lots of things you don't think are contract offers, but are really contract offers. "You're Under Arrest" is my favorite contract offer, but even "Could you grab me a beer?" is a good example here.

Basically, be mindful of the fact that nearly fucking everything is a contract.

Now, Here's how a offer works. When someone gives you a contract offer, you have four doors you can go down in response:

The honorable two:

• Acceptance - perform exactly to the offer.

• Conditional Acceptance - Perform, with a condition - usually that they perform back.

The DISHONORABLE two: (DO NOT USE):

• Argument/Refusal (literally saying "no", making any argument at all, apologizing(!), Justification)

• Silence

Short-hand: Second pair of doors lead to the first two doors, but now you're in dishonor.

Honor matters, because when you're in commercial dishonor, the party that isn't in dishonor gets to dictate the terms of the contract.

Again, stick to the first two doors in everything you do. The dishonorable doors are basically just acceptance through dishonor. I could probably expand on this, but the four doors above can probably unravel in your head when given deep enough thought.

So I explained all this so I could explain this part to you:

Confession and Avoidance

This is a form of dishonor through silence. Your topic is silently acknowledged, but they move on to another, more pressing, matter. Lawyers and Judges love this tactic like a fat kid likes cake. So do the smart cops. Here's how to see right through it: If they don't explicitly note what you just affirmed/averred in a courtroom, consider it Door 4 - Silence, and note it on the record, while treating it as Door 1 - Acceptance.

Now, go back to the Judge/Entering the bar example, and see how I control the contract after the judge goes into Door 4.

>>2261117

Fun bit of trivia: The World Bank doesn't allow their interns to be Law students. It's too dangerous.

Now, Door number two (Conditional Acceptance) is important when people give you contract offers. It's also the most tricky, and requires the most practice (unless you love to argue). A creditor only uses the first two doors, but usually the second one.

Your goal is to accept everything, but put a condition on it. If the person at McDonald's asks you if you want fries with that, tell them sure, if they include ketchup packets (easy contract to perform). If someone asks you to help them move, do it for pizza, beer, and a backrub from their hot sister. Learn to make your acceptances difficult (but not impossible) and easy, so you can be calibrated to it. It's seriously that important to be able to do on the fly. Conditional Acceptance is the difference between being arrested, and walking away, because the cop couldn't pay you $50k first (remember, his dishonor means you dictate the terms of the contract). Conditional Acceptance saved me from getting into a bar fight with a Hell's Angel at a strip club, because I was able to keep my "come-from" in a good place (I ended up buying him a beer). Shit's magical, yo.

if you internalize offer/acceptance, and put it to use in your day to day life, you'll seriously change your life. And you get remedy so much faster.

>>2254627

This is honestly sad, because your failures clouded your judgment with confirmation bias.

You're correct about UCC being copyrighted, so don't specifically cite sections from it. Assert the rights and language, as you aren't committing copyright infringement. For instance, signing "without prejudice" instead of citing UCC 1-308 on your signature.

You also misunderstand what UCC 1-308's purpose is. It is not to prevent performance when put at gunpoint. that's stupid and will get a nigga killed. If someone's forcing you to do something, don't argue. Protest is a form of argument. What kind of retard argues when there's a gun at his head? 1-308 is for complying. You are going to do whatever they say, but you can sue them for the liability after the fact. The more aggravated the tort, the more you collect.

TL;DR - stop playing Equity as if it were common law. Equity prevails cos there's no money.