association

Something snapped into place this morning, in relation to how the IN GOD WE TRUST trust, and the 508(c)(1)(A) Mandatory Exception for churches and associations of churches relate to the proper bonding of judicial officers:

Attachment 3095

What would be the importance of the "living" God?


I will elaborate on this after some sleep. But I definitely saw upon waking how this So help me God, is the God of the Districts as in Federal Reserve debt God. To prepare yourselves for my point understand that I perfected a great $20M lien against SAMELSON's oath in 2009. The AG's corporation was bankrupted to avoid settlement but hours after SAMELSON swore out oaths for everybody without God at all, like David Gilbert MARTINEZ's oath.

Attachment 3092

Marla PRUDEK swears - So help me God. - Without specifying the living God or ever-living God. Her witness is a vacant office:

Attachment 3093

Gilbert MARTINEZ' oath is witnessed by SAMELSON who was properly bonded when I cured my Lien in early 2009, but executed a criminal syndicalism of the courthouse just after that.

Attachment 3094

Attachment 3096

Superficially what we have is acceptance that the alleged judicial officer need not subscribe to or even read the constitutions and statutes. If I were to allow for Marla to rule in a case, I would accept that she is sloppy about the law.

The specific point that I am getting that arouses something we call conscience is how this collaterally draws us into a superficial realm called "DISTRICT" - that extraterritorial twilight zone where the Levite plays with priestcraft.

When officers are following ORDERS you and the person your deemed as . Unless a written agreement reached privately with said officers of courts police officers your public standing is the opinion of that official as fictional as that office is yours is just as your opinion is fictional as dead law is estate law .Knowing this a private living official yet runs a dead vacant office or state official is still dead until when Someone declares a living God as only the dead get to trespass on the dead. Paper is dead on dead stone upon stone the graveyard . Is all court paper deemed dead and who and what testimony not opinion can rule or pass judgement on the dead .A living God/Judge re presenting Gods representative needs a living Wo/Man for a prayer or a wish to be granted adjudicator is of the opinion the authority is living under God does a jurisdiction exist David or must a court be without it to render contracts between the living void.A judgement starts in the lowest Court why.Or do we know why.

Trusts are registered in probate.

Receipt of probate is the first step in the legal process of administering the estate of a deceased person, resolving all claims and distributing the deceased person's property under a will.A trustee and the executor The executor is named in a will.A trustee or a position of trust or responsibility for the benefit of another, also a trustee can be a person who is allowed to do certain tasks but not able to gain income.

A Trustee of a registered estate the living benefit the living only. dead cant benefit the dead only with probate can the dead benefit the living.

The church is alive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

A Trustee of a registered estate the living benefit the living only. dead cant benefit the dead only with probate can the dead benefit the living.

---

probate begs a Testator. And thus the act of probate would be the official proving of a Will.

Probate the law of the land, your estate will be divided in the way you, the testator requested intestacy probate means a court-appointed executor. my question is who gets to probate a trust and its trustee a court-appointed executor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

Probate the law of the land, your estate will be divided in the way you, the testator requested intestacy probate means a court-appointed executor. my question is who gets to probate a trust and its trustee a court-appointed executor.

---

Most times trusts escape probate. Unless, that is, the heir is a complete dolt and the trustee is equally as stupid. Norman F. DACEY was quick to show and many others afterwards.

Ergo Mandatory Exception church (living) is represented by a man or woman instead of the Board of Officers (dead PERSON).

This makes sense now that the dead cannot recognize standing for the living, but the Trust and Trustee live on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Ergo Mandatory Exception church (living) is represented by a man or woman instead of the Board of Officers (dead PERSON).

This makes sense now that the dead cannot recognize standing for the living, but the Trust and Trustee live on.

---

To reiterate, this is holographic throughout law and principle. If you curse your neighbor and children with national debt, then you accept your place among the dead - the separate from God. This is the distinction between those in the (Federal Reserve) Districts and the Redeemed, outside the realm of elastic currency; at least by approval and endorsement. The Demand for Lawful Money makes all the difference in the world, even though the bearer of the currency is tendering Federal Reserve notes.

This is also described in the distinction between worshiping Government through 501(c)(3) religious organizations, catering to Paul's last five years under Roman protective custody, or being in the citizenship of heaven of which this same Paul spoke to the churches. It is so easy to ignore how Paul ignored the Holy Spirit and went into Jerusalem. The church is completely outside the IRS Code - Mandatory Exception at 508(c)(1)(A):

Quote:

---

(1) Mandatory exceptions

Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—

(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches

---

I have been enduring an emotional flurry that amplifies the importance of this choice. But just the same it seems boggling why people would resist making the choice of Life.

hi David,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

To reiterate,

---

that really helped! I find myself wishing you would reiterate often. most of the time, after reading many of your posts, I think to myself "what are you talking about?" but to ask that question seems kinda rude.

this little guy said it well though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw9oX-kZ_9k

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

But just the same it seems boggling why people would resist making the choice of Life.

---

yes, but being able to see how this is, is not easy. we are boggled to the max these days and it takes lots of un-boggling to "get it"

please. more reiterations! thats what un-boggles!

thanks

I was suspecting that if a trust was registered it was deeded only in probate in case a death occurred to the beneficiary In any case a can a probate order void a judgement or opinion ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

It is so easy to ignore how Paul ignored the Holy Spirit and went into Jerusalem.

---

I suppose you are quoting Acts 21:4, but perhaps the scribes got a hold of that verse too and maybe just tweaked it a bit. I would that the reader judge for him/herself.

KJV: Translation:

Act 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

Attachment 3104

The attachment is from J.P. Green's Interlinear.

As you know this book is written in deep structure parable.

Hi Michael Joseph;


I am still not getting it. You seem to be saying there are two different interpretations of the verse. Mine is that Paul was being warned not to go to Jerusalem but felt compelled by guilt to do so anyway:

Quote:

---

Act_22:20 And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Hi Michael Joseph;


I am still not getting it. You seem to be saying there are two different interpretations of the verse. Mine is that Paul was being warned not to go to Jerusalem but felt compelled by guilt to do so anyway:

---

Yes, that is it. I am saying that the scribes mis-interpreted Acts 21:4 in English. But I leave it to the reader to decide.

Obadiah 1:21 And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD'S.

Judges 3:9 And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.

=====


Matthew 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

Heb 6:3 And this will we do, if God permit.


Who then is this rich man? Might he consider himself [mind] wise in his own regard? What should he buy or sell? And whereof should he buy? And this substance to sell or purchase is it corporeal? Should he not rid himself of his own vain understandings taught to him by "blind guides" - and seek the teachings of his Mother - Proverbs 31 - the Holy Spirit?


Rev_3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.


Why is everyone looking for a physical manifestation of buying and selling? When first the buying and selling happens in the Mind. Thus the consciousness of man is alive. Adam [the Mind] ate of the fruit given to him from Eve [Emotion] from the serpent [Central Nervous System] - and thought himself to be naked - the lesson of the Fig Tree.


How can one buy of God when one deems himself [mind] wise in his own estimation? In my opinion, the beginning of Wisdom is realizing that one knows very little of anything.

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that revered God, and eschewed evil.


Was not Job made pure thru tribulation?

Daniel 11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

Gal 4:1 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
Gal 4:2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
Gal 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Whereof is guilt to be found in New Jerusalem? Nevertheless once the mind is enlightened can it turn back? Apparently the answer is yes!

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit,

Heb 6:5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Comment: Notice "tasted the good word of God" - not just historical context.


For in ignorance [the unenlightened mind] or if you prefer, the Earth, receives rain [in-sight] from God and brings forth fruit and herbs [deeds, etc] but consider what if the enlightened mind which has tasted of the Kingdom of God - brings forth thorns? Is there any recourse unto such a being which "quenches the Holy Spirit?"

Are not these as "raging waves", "clouds absent rain", "worthless"?

Heb 6:9 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

I reckon that Paul's life is a symbol. Fractals.

I reckon that Paul's companions were symbols of the Elect children which come forth - the Zadok. These children shall be a benefit-profit to the current church - Onesimus [beneficial] sent by Paul across time to Philemon [modern church]. Begotten of Paul in understanding and knowledge [his bonds].

Speaking of eternity: and the Order of Melchizedok:

Ezekiel 44:23 And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean.

Ezekiel 44:24 And in controversy they shall stand in judgment; and they shall judge it according to my judgments: and they shall keep my laws and my statutes in all mine assemblies; and they shall hallow my sabbaths.

=====

Let us strive to comprehend the Light behind the symbols. For in reality:

Psalms 139:11 If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me.

Psalms 139:12 Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

=====

Does not the son or daughter have an interest in the father's estate? Consider now the prodigal son and the elder son with newness. Did the Higher Mind ever leave the Father? What now of the Lower Mind? Is it now time to TURN or RETURN back to Jerusalem? I speak not to some city, but to the true Jerusalem of the Creator.

Consider again Paul in regard to Jesus contemplating the following words of Jesus:

John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

Can a judge rule in his/her own cause? I think it was Heisenberg who found that at the quantum level that the quanta seemed to have consciousness which could react to our own consciousness. Thus what we expect to see is what we see.

=====

"The transition from the "possible" to the "actual" takes place during the act of observation. If we want to describe what happens in an atomic event, we have to realize that the word "happens" can apply only to the observation, and we may say that the transition from the "possible" to the "actual" takes place as soon as the interaction of the object with the measuring device, and thereby the rest of the world, has come into play; it is not connected with the act of registration by the mind of the observer. The discontinuous change in the probability function, however, takes place with the act of registration, because it is a discontinuous change of our knowledge in the instant of registration that has its image in the discontinuous change of the probability function." [1]

Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1962). p. 54- 55.

=====

Can the self witness self? Where is the observer? Who will bear witness to The Way? The Truth? The Light? absent the veil of desire?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Something snapped into place this morning, in relation to how the IN GOD WE TRUST trust, and the 508(c)(1)(A) Mandatory Exception for churches and associations of churches relate to the proper bonding of judicial officers:

Attachment 3095

What would be the importance of the "living" God?


I will elaborate on this after some sleep. But I definitely saw upon waking how this So help me God, is the God of the Districts as in Federal Reserve debt God. To prepare yourselves for my point understand that I perfected a great $20M lien against SAMELSON's oath in 2009. The AG's corporation was bankrupted to avoid settlement but hours after SAMELSON swore out oaths for everybody without God at all, like David Gilbert MARTINEZ's oath.

Attachment 3092

Marla PRUDEK swears - So help me God. - Without specifying the living God or ever-living God. Her witness is a vacant office:

Attachment 3093

Gilbert MARTINEZ' oath is witnessed by SAMELSON who was properly bonded when I cured my Lien in early 2009, but executed a criminal syndicalism of the courthouse just after that.

Attachment 3094

Attachment 3096

---

hello david!

in viewing some of the ada county, idaho oaths for alleged magistrate judges, elected officials, sheriffs, deputies and the like, there are some interesting aspects....

one oath for a specific 'judge' in a case involving my trust account has a witness signature - fully illegible both to me and two deputy clerks - on a line and no indication of the office that wo/man allegedly holds a de jure office on the county.

another aspect in the "God" part. the sheriff's and deputies' (that i've seen thus far) all have either "So help me God" or "SO HELP ME GOD" as the last sentence in the oath portion. the others (i've seen thus far) for county clerk, judges, county attorney, etcetera are absent the "God" reference. the online version of the alleged constitution of the state of idaho, in the section regarding oaths, does not mention the necessity for any "God" reference.

another curious aspect i noticed, especially in comparison with the oaths you've posted for colorado-based 'officials' is that all that i've seen thus far have had what would commonly be referred to as a 'decorative border' around them. does this effectively enclose (put into a box within said instrument) said substance, thus making the oath null and void?

love, peace and life to all...

Good questions.

In Colorado we have a certain history related to government fiat. So these things fit together nicely that there is a trust formed that God will make all balances right, maybe even with the intent that redemption as Jesus taught will be prevalent in that process of remembering.

From your post, I suggest that you get the Idaho constitution online so you can search out OFFICERS and find that oath process. You should be able to find the oath with a clerk who is not directly related to the officer (judge). Meaning that the clerk should not cover for the judge or be afraid of, or friendly with the judge. Then get on the Idaho Statutes and search around for "Form of Oath".

Please come back and post links!

It sounds as though Idaho has slipped into the same criminal syndicalism - protecting the government from the people instead of the other way around.

greetings and many thanks for the response, david - forgive me, i meant david merrill.

here are some of the 'oaths' i referred to in my original post...

Attachment 3163Attachment 3164Attachment 3165Attachment 3166

to give an idea of what transpired that prompted me to acquire said oaths... on day thirty-one, month seven in the year of yashua two-zero-one-five, two men - allegedly peace officers on boise, idaho but whose subsequent acts contradict that - pulled up behind the wheeled conveyance i was controlling and proceeded to unlawfully cause sirens and red and blue (emergency) lights to blare. i pulled over, kept all four windows rolled DOWN [... this is only a test :)], and went to turn on the video camera i had with me.

one costumed man (hereon also 'cop') came to the controller's side of the car, whereupon i asked for his name and badge number - which he provided. meanwhile, i'm still trying to remember how to turn this darn video camera on and the cop nearest me is being relatively patient...

meanwhile a man with large, professional-looking camera and an accomplice with a large, professional-looking microphone are taking all this in (on film, i suppose)..

nearest cop at one point early on says "i pulled you over for one reason and one reason only - you only have one license plate on the vehicle". all the while i'm requiring him to provide instruments such as bona fied, verified, authenticated oath of office, article vi oath of fidelity and the like and he repeatedly asks for driver's license, insurance and the like.

meanwhile, my camera is rolling and the other cop, with his hand on my private conveyance, refuses to provide identification (name, badge number, oath, etc.) and i command him three times to take his hand off of my private property, which he disobeys.

when nearest cop finally pulls my vessel from the car, after i expressly denied consent - before any contact is made - he says "stop resisting". i trust that most 'police stops' and 'arrests' involve this as it's easy for cops to claim that and place that extra 'charge' on the citation.

the plan originally was to express a trust in the nature of a claim, a la david clarence via registered mail, but for some reason i chose to not (yet) issue said claim.

i did, however, express trust a different way, more along the lines of what i comprehend of a process once taught by christian walters.

i sent the indenture via fax to both the judge (oths) and the clerk of the court (rich) [whose oath DOES contain "so help me God" in it - forgive my mistake] marked private, priority, special, in camera, then proceeded to follow up with faxed notices of fault and the last one, sent on day thirty of the current month, was a notice of special deposit (of trust res) and command for a private-side accounting and performance - return and revestment of all form, nature, substance and character of assets created (basically) using the "NAME" or "Name" to the named beneficiary.

interesting to note that the alleged trustee of the constructive trust was supposed to appear a 'hearing' that for on day twenty-three of the current month. i was there with a friend/witness, but about eight minutes past the time the 'hearing' was supposed to have taken place, no 'judge', no 'attorney' ... no other party was in the courtroom for that specific subject matter, so i got up an announced (to the spectators there) for and on the record that the 'judge' had abandoned the court and that the 'case' was dismissed with prejudice and with cause forevermore. then i proceeded with the faxed private notices/indentures and the like previously described (see 'case' info from idaho (REpository, not depository) (safe-keeping account?) attached hereon.

many thanks for 'lending an ear' so to speak!

again, any further information, suggestions and the like are welcome and appreciated!

peace, love and life to you all...

That sounds like you concluded business. For a while anyway.

The descriptors used tell me about Right to Travel Patriot mythology. - And that you are a known "troublemaker". Which is to say that the News reporters were there to catch you being a nutjob. The bottom line is that the state wants you to register the vehicle but still to put the liability of a constructive trust, the illusion you own it back on you by legislating that you have to insure the state's vehicle out of your own stipend. You object.

But now you are in a position where you cannot do business with the state, even if you want to. But worse, if you smack a child on a bicycle with your (whatever you call it) while you are (whatever you call it) you should by all right pay for that broken arm, not his parents. Since you do not contract with government then you do not have the competence testing for operating a motor vehicle and thus you cannot have the benefit of insurance.

This is really the breach of trust that is being exposed. This is the state's complaint. By being a private vehicle and outside regulation you endanger the public assets around you and the state will have to take responsibility for its property. Idaho is likely a No-Fault state though, and it is the insurance companies lobbying for enforcement of "equal laws for everybody" that encroaches on your freedom on the byways. It is lopsided, this equation, that you contain equal risk of breaking that chattel minor's arm but the parent's insurance company will have to foot the bill.

I have been there. That is how I recognize it.

I am not going to predict the eventual outcome for you. Me, I spent 120 days in jail and then about 20 years on electric bikes. Finally I just figured it out. I was already known as David Merrill, so I signed the Driver License "David Merrill." I keep comprehensive insurance on it and do not use it for identification purposes. I keep the card in the glove box. It is there to prove competence and that the insurance company is good for any reasonable claim. This keeps everybody happy.

There is even an advantage. I have two trusts. FULL LEGAL NAME and FIRST MIDDLE names. I get to pick and choose which trust to use. - Like two email addresses; I can categorize business by the trust name.

hello david merrill...

looks like the wording and thus requirement for the oaths of office for public officials on idaho is different than that/those on colorado. to wit:
Constitution of the state of Idaho approved 3 july 1890

SECTION 12. QUALIFICATIONS OF OFFICERS. All officers elected at
such election shall, within thirty days after they have been declared elected, take the
oath required by this Constitution and give the same bond required by the law of the
territory to be given in case of like officers of the territory, district or county, and
shall thereupon enter upon the duties of their respective offices; but the legislature
may require by law all such officers to give other or further bonds as a condition of
their continuance in office.

SECTION 17. SALARIES OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES. The salary of the
justices of the Supreme Court, the salary of judges of the court of appeals, the salary
of the judges of the district court and the salary of magistrate judges shall be as
provided by statute, and no justice of the Supreme Court, judge of the court of
appeals,judge of the district court or magistrate judge, shall be paid his salary, or any
part thereof, unless he shall have first taken and subscribed an oath that there is not
in his hands any matter in controversy not decided by him which had been finally
submitted for his consideration and determination, thirty days prior to the taking and
subscribing such oath.

SECTION 25. OATH OF OFFICE. The members of the legislature shall,
before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take or subscribe the
following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be)
that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the
state of Idaho, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of senator (or
representative, as the case may be) according to the best of my ability.” And such
oath may be administered by the governor, secretary of state, or judge of the
Supreme Court, or presiding officer of either house.

Oath that magistrates are required by statute to take satisfies provision of United States Constitution relating to oaths, although oath makes no reference to or invocation of God. I.C. § 59–401; U.S.C.A. Const. Arts. 6, cl. 1 et seq., 6, cl. 3.

many thanks for the hints as to what and where to search.

on another topic, i have gone back and forth on the concept of recording and/or registering any instrument with a county, state, on the federal level, etcetera (without a full indenture/arrangement declaration of the terms and conditions - in favor of the true owner/beneficiary), as it seems that even the simple act of recording an instrument on the county assigns an (implied/assumed, on the part of the 'state', 'county', etcetera) beneficial (or maybe other nature thereof, i'm not sure) interest in the substance of said instrument.

in thinking aloud here, however, it seems that if there's already an overriding, all-encompassing arrangement in place in whose indenture it's manifested that all form, nature, substance, character and the like of instrument recorded, registered, etcetera with any entity in the world and on this earth is made, ab initio, as a special deposit where lawful money is demanded, that may make that grant to the state, county, etcetera take on a whole different nature.

still learning.


love, peace and life to all of yahweh's servants...

explanation of difference between 501 (c) (3) exemption and 508 (c) (1) (A) exception

https://thetruthrestored.wordpress.c...church-of-god/

https://thetruthrestored.files.wordp...pg?w=600&h=729

Hello AP;


Does anybody else see it? The judges in Idaho are required to swear before God. Magistrates are municipal officers...

hello david merrill!

for some reason, i did not see your post from 11-01-2015 until today - forgive my having overlooked it.

many thanks for the information granted - i appreciate it very much.

yes, two separate and distinct trusts... i need to let that sink in.

peace, love and life to all...

hello again david merrill.

i missed this posting of yours (11-02-2015 as well; please forgive me.

i see that wording on some oaths (for sheriff and county recorder/auditor/court clerk), but the statutes regarding oaths have no "God" references.

please clarify where you see that magistrate judges also need to have "so help me God" in their oaths.

many thanks!

love, peace and life to all...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andrew patrick

hello david merrill...


SECTION 25. OATH OF OFFICE. The members of the legislature shall,
before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take or subscribe the
following oath or affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be)
that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the
state of Idaho, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of senator (or
representative, as the case may be) according to the best of my ability.” And such
oath may be administered by the governor, secretary of state, or judge of the
Supreme Court, or presiding officer of either house.

Oath that magistrates are required by statute to take satisfies provision of United States Constitution relating to oaths, although oath makes no reference to or invocation of God. I.C. § 59–401; U.S.C.A. Const. Arts. 6, cl. 1 et seq., 6, cl. 3.

---

That is why I posed it as a question. I like for others to see it. Magistrates are municipal officers of the DISTRICT, non-territorial. - Extraterritorial. Listen to THOMAS:

Quote:

---

THOMAS (USA v LUTHER THOMAS - 319 F.3d 640, 2003) makes it quite plain -

Paper currency, in the form of the Federal Reserve Note, is defined as an obligation of the United States that may be redeemed in lawful money on demand. 12 U.S.C.S. § 411. Those bills are not money per se but promissory notes supported by the monetary reserves of the United States.

---

Monetary reserves of the United States. A bill of such origin would obligate the user for getting the benefit of private credit. This is the 501(c)(3) "church" looking for a tax exemption so that they are less obligated.

BTW I got a thank you text. By presenting faulty oaths of office and the fact that the defense attorney wanted this suitor to sign a waiver of speedy trial AFTER the speedy trial clock expired the prosecutor backed off two felony charges and made a suitable offer. The suitor plead but the nightmare is over. Key to my point though, is that this lawful remedy would not be available inside the administration of debt. The suitor had to be outside the Districts to acquire the Law of the Land and get their attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

That is why I posed it as a question. I like for others to see it. Magistrates are municipal officers of the DISTRICT, non-territorial. - Extraterritorial. Listen to THOMAS:



Monetary reserves of the United States. A bill of such origin would obligate the user for getting the benefit of private credit. This is the 501(c)(3) "church" looking for a tax exemption so that they are less obligated.

BTW I got a thank you text. By presenting faulty oaths of office and the fact that the defense attorney wanted this suitor to sign a waiver of speedy trial AFTER the speedy trial clock expired the prosecutor backed off two felony charges and made a suitable offer. The suitor plead but the nightmare is over. Key to my point though, is that this lawful remedy would not be available inside the administration of debt. The suitor had to be outside the Districts to acquire the Law of the Land and get their attention.

---

greetings and many thanks for the input, David Merrill.

at this point I simply don't/can't see the link between the oaths of office of Idaho officials and the information you posted regarding federal reserve notes and the remedy needing to come from without the administration of debt.

it seems like you may be hinting at the need to 'register' and/or 'record' an instrument, much like the notice and demand for lawful money posited into a federal repository, which would serve to 'take one out of (any of the federal reserve) district(s)'.

I just can't link that with the topic of oaths of office.

what am I missing? tons, I trust, but specifically in this case...?

any further questions or links for clarification are greatly appreciated.

peace, love and life to all...

It is so much clearer with Colorado law. So I am projecting it to Idaho law. That may be why I see it. I am presuming it must be there.

I attribute a lot of actions to the law being a powerful metaphysic, not conscious thought.



P.S. I once programmed a computer to optimize resonance in the Table of Relative Weights for the naturally occurring isotopes. The computer spit out the Names of God and the Messiah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

It is so much clearer with Colorado law. So I am projecting it to Idaho law. That may be why I see it. I am presuming it must be there.

I attribute a lot of actions to the law being a powerful metaphysic, not conscious thought.




P.S. I once programmed a computer to optimize resonance in the Table of Relative Weights for the naturally occurring isotopes. The computer spit out the Names of God and the Messiah.

---

not sure exactly what that means or consists of, but i do remember reading about those isotope resonance optmization results on a different post. your mind boggles mine, my brother!

keep up the stellar work and many thanks for sharing.

peace, love and life to all...

Sometimes it looks like accidents, then I discover that law dictates.

bump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

I was suspecting that if a trust was registered it was deeded only in probate in case a death occurred to the beneficiary In any case a can a probate order void a judgement or opinion ?

---

thats a good question.. this is a good thread. Im gonna read it again!