US Judges - wages to be paid in gold/silver court case won

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Bevan/20121015.html

"A very interesting court case has become public, but underreported, whereby US judges are looking to see their payment contracts upheld.

Basically, they have a contract of automatic pay increases which in turn keep them from feeling any effects of an economic downturn or inflationary episode.

Congress tried to stymie this contract but the judges took them to court and won.

Now what?s most interesting about this case is that these ?dollars? which they are paid in, or a measure of what a dollar is truly, was marked as 371 1/4 grains of silver or 1 15th as many grains of gold.

When the contract was struck they deemed gold and silver to be the only measure worthy of holding the contract to.

Basically US judges just won a court case which says 100% definitively that gold and silver ARE money, and more than that, they are what all currencies must be measured against.

Now this is nothing new to myself or anyone who?s read any of my work but to the majority who have been brainwashed by the media and school systems alike this may come as a shock.

Actually, it most likely won?t as this story will not be widely talked about or publicized.

Now if only the general public could enact such a contract for measuring minimum wage. That would be one hornets? nest of a problem!
"



http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/...rs/10-5012.pdf

now im a new-B here,i think im onto somthing, according to the case,judges are prevented from serving juris prudence if their pay is diminished,wich was/is FRNs and inflation is the problem they are trying to address with COLA but only nominally?
now leagle tender dispensed by the feds would seem like it would biased them in their decision of applying federal law to our constitutional rights,as stated in the thomkins v erie RR case.
so every order a federal judge hands down is merley somthing he shouldnt of and is indeed a colflict of intrest as stated in the link

"This court en banc now turns its attention to two pre-liminary issues before addressing the merits of the ap-peal. First, judicial review of laws affecting judicial compensation is not done lightly as these cases implicate a conflict of interest. Will, 449 U.S. at 211?17. After all, judges should disqualify themselves when their impartial-ity might reasonably be questioned or when they have a potential financial stake in the outcome of a decision. See 28 U.S.C. ? 455(a). In Will, the Supreme Court applied"

i beleive i learned of this link here im just referencing it as evidence thank you,http://www.ballew.com/bob/htm/fotc.htm#01

this is also a very intresting quote ,you think this applies to FRN's? lol.
a power over a mans subsistence amounts to a power over his will.? The Federalist No. 79, p. 472 (Alexander Hamil-ton)

well does this mean we are immune from federal prosicution? or have i missed somthing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommyf350

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Bevan/20121015.html

"A very interesting court case has become public, but underreported, whereby US judges are looking to see their payment contracts upheld.

Basically, they have a contract of automatic pay increases which in turn keep them from feeling any effects of an economic downturn or inflationary episode.

Congress tried to stymie this contract but the judges took them to court and won.

Now what?s most interesting about this case is that these ?dollars? which they are paid in, or a measure of what a dollar is truly, was marked as 371 1/4 grains of silver or 1 15th as many grains of gold.

When the contract was struck they deemed gold and silver to be the only measure worthy of holding the contract to.

Basically US judges just won a court case which says 100% definitively that gold and silver ARE money, and more than that, they are what all currencies must be measured against.

Now this is nothing new to myself or anyone who?s read any of my work but to the majority who have been brainwashed by the media and school systems alike this may come as a shock.

Actually, it most likely won?t as this story will not be widely talked about or publicized.

Now if only the general public could enact such a contract for measuring minimum wage. That would be one hornets? nest of a problem!
"



http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/...rs/10-5012.pdf

now im a new-B here,i think im onto somthing, according to the case,judges are prevented from serving juris prudence if their pay is diminished,wich was/is FRNs and inflation is the problem they are trying to address with COLA but only nominally?
now leagle tender dispensed by the feds would seem like it would biased them in their decision of applying federal law to our constitutional rights,as stated in the thomkins v erie RR case.
so every order a federal judge hands down is merley somthing he shouldnt of and is indeed a colflict of intrest as stated in the link

"This court en banc now turns its attention to two pre-liminary issues before addressing the merits of the ap-peal. First, judicial review of laws affecting judicial compensation is not done lightly as these cases implicate a conflict of interest. Will, 449 U.S. at 211?17. After all, judges should disqualify themselves when their impartial-ity might reasonably be questioned or when they have a potential financial stake in the outcome of a decision. See 28 U.S.C. ? 455(a). In Will, the Supreme Court applied"

i beleive i learned of this link here im just referencing it as evidence thank you,http://www.ballew.com/bob/htm/fotc.htm#01

this is also a very intresting quote ,you think this applies to FRN's? lol.
a power over a mans subsistence amounts to a power over his will.? The Federalist No. 79, p. 472 (Alexander Hamil-ton)

well does this mean we are immune from federal prosicution? or have i missed somthing?

---

Help me out here.

I read the pdf you posted. No where in those cases does it even mention silver or gold. In fact, it stated in the first case that compensation for Article III judges are not tied to any commodity.

i beleive they where trying to avoid it by not adding it to the scope of their judgments because it would reveil the conflict of intrest of a private bank paying judges to enforce federal law as our consitutional lawfull money is gold and silver, a commodity for now. it seems like they lied, i could be wrong you guys have been at this longer than i have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommyf350

i beleive they where trying to avoid it by not adding it to the scope of their judgments because it would reveil the conflict of intrest of a private bank paying judges to enforce federal law as our consitutional lawfull money is gold and silver, a commodity for now. it seems like they lied, i could be wrong you guys have been at this longer than i have.

---

I have not examined it carefully yet...

But I believe some very prophetic insights may be gleaned. In fact like Tommy says, PACER will not even find the Federal Circuit postings. That is the first thing I find fascinating - but that is just the start! Thank you TommyF!

I found the docket report and original complaint so as you look through post requests for anything else you see on the docket report. I like the way the complaint starts. It is quite the same flavor as Scott Gregory's (BEACH) complaint last year against the Fed. Scott could not see fit to describe the injury when ordered to Show Cause for Which Relief Can be Granted.

A helpful aid to grasp this is that the Federal Reserve is not an agency of the United States, it is an instrumentality though and only because its stock certificates are designed by Congress to depreciate over time. That is otherwise illegal.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Beer v. United States and Solicitor General Kagan

Thank you Chex;


I am not spending much reading time on this so I like to grab the essence in a few sentences:

Quote:

---

They have just won a ruling that prohibits Congress from suspending a system of automatic pay increases designed to protect their honors from inflation.

---

That is what I was after. This is to say that the value of the judges pay is tracking what the US note is supposed to be. This is the same injury expressed in the new Libel of Review and that Scott Greagory BEACH should have expressed when the judge demanded a cause of action for which the court could grant relief.

The judges feel their pay is diminished by the fractional lending of reserve and elastic currency.

The
Pandoras box of elastic currency and its ramifications is now open. Between all the various groups (sovereigns, the internet, lawful money redemption, Ron Paul, gold bugs, Federal Judges) the veil of deceit is being ripped apart, the illusion of control dissipating.

Everything is changing and rapidly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martin earl

The
Pandoras box of elastic currency and its ramifications is now open. Between all the various groups (sovereigns, the internet, lawful money redemption, Ron Paul, gold bugs, Federal Judges) the veil of deceit is being ripped apart, the illusion of control dissipating.

Everything is changing and rapidly.

---

One suitor just suggested that somebody revitalize McFADDEN's accusations from March/April of 1933 - still in the Congressional Record. Something about HJR-192 has preserved equitable title to all the gold?

Thank you to everyone who responded.I feel im getting the idea behind the libel of review, as i read it over. i looked over the two title 18 quotes in the LoR,and it seems there are certainly remifications for participating in fraud for the purpose's of collecting fee's or property for a foreign bank specificly the IMF.

18 USC ? 661 - Within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/661

18 USC ? 1201 - Kidnapping
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1201

Thanks again guys feel free to correct me if/when i foul up,ill edit my posts accordingly.

You are quite welcome Tommy!


The Libel of Review is fluff and gets dismissed. What remains is the evidence repository. Pay special attention to the example Clerk Instruction in the LoR. Read that carefully with the paragraph before it too.

Quote:

---

PPS: forgot to mention... along with that check I sent certified a copy of my Default Judgment published at county level.

Nickname

----- Original Message -----
From:
To: David Merrill <>
Sent: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:03:14 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: mortgage

you may recall, we're very behind in our mortgage payments.
So much so that mortgage co. was sending nasty letters, and even returning a check uncashed because it wasn't for the full amount due. I have been R4C'ing just about everything from them.

Well, today I discover they have cashed our latest check:!
(attached)

Seems we may not be in default after all.

---