Incorporation of the USA?

[David Merrill]

There is an actual update to what you mentioned:

State of National Emergency in effect since September 2001

http://vodpod.com/watch/3601275-obam...emergency-pt-1

The Emergency is that no State or Confederation of States may secede from the Union. [That is the Emergency (extraordinary occasion) that allows the President to perpetuate emergencies by Executive Order like you see in the Update Video you linked.] Some consider it a good thing, that States may form into the Union and not be granted the freedom to leave again. As evidenced by the due date for an Income Tax Return still being April 15th and a declaration on all the fiat of the United States IN GOD WE TRUST. I will show you through it:

A few days ago I noticed it was the 150th Anniversary.

Ninety days later President Abraham LINCOLN started the emergency on July 4th declaring the extraordinary occasion from the Constitution.

Notice the date he Notified Congress! April 15th, 2011 will be America's 150th Tax Year.

Maybe by watching graphically from the Congressional Record the readers will see that it is self-defeating to throw your hands up all:

If the land is under military siege, does it really matter whether the government who commands it is incorporated or not?

Rather, understand the trust structure - fiat commanded IN GOD WE TRUST. The only non-negotiable US currency is the US Note.

The amount of United States currency notes outstanding and in circulation—
... may not be held or used for a reserve.

You cannot fractionalize on the US Notes. That is called just balance. Whereas the FRN is fractionalized and as you see in the notes, Congress thinks they can fudge the face value of the US Note too, and the Creator of the Trust will overlook that; like little children in the Garden the Congress thinks they can change the name of US Notes to US Currency Notes and that is different somehow! That somehow resolves the false weights.

The local chief judge (of the district, c. 1789 like I showed you with the Judiciary Act) demonstrated the Trust nicely for me. I demanded lawful money and paid for the matter (rather than purchase or discharge) with the Secretary of State and published my $20M lien. Notice that within hours, chief district court judge Kirk Stewart SAMELSON entered into a new trust where there is no mention of the Creator - God.

This is the Oath I formed the Lien against.

Then very quickly that Oath of Office - fungible fidelity bond - was replaced to clarify the trust SAMELSON meant all along.

Oaths sworn without naming the punishing authority are nonsense.

Form of Oath. Form of Affirmation. You cannot swear by no name of authority like My Mother's Grave; or A Stack of Bibles etc. Notice though, that the other party charged on the lien avoided a proper entry into our national trust all along!

Therefore I move forward on the solid ground of the truth and true balances, just weights; by knowing the nature of the trust and accepting the Emergency is still in effect. If you want to try going pre-War like RAP/RuSA and those guys, well that just gets unrealistic.


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. Another great word for it is Priestcraft.

[Frederick Burrell]

There is an actual update to what you mentioned:

State of National Emergency in effect since September 2001

http://vodpod.com/watch/3601275-obam...emergency-pt-1

Amost always have been one and looking forward into the future, i think its safe to say there will always be one. They like having super powers. fb

[motla68]

Amost always have been one and looking forward into the future, i think its safe to say there will always be one. They like having super powers. fb

Boys and their toys, always after the next big thing [grin]

[shikamaru]

What was the District of Columbia 1871 if not a corp?

District of Columbia is a municipal corporation. A city-state if you will.

[shikamaru]

The United States is a corporation.

Respublica v. Sweers

From the moment of their association, the United States necessarily became a body corporate; for, there was no superior from whom that character could otherwise be derived. In England, the king, lords, and commons, are certainly a body corporate; and yet there never was any charter or statute, by which they were expressly so created.

BODY CORPORATE. Corporation

[Frederick Burrell]

The United States is a corporation.

Respublica v. Sweers

Thanks for posting this. fB

[David Merrill]

The United States is a corporation.

Respublica v. Sweers

The United States was questionably deemed to be like a corporation ten years before it became a body politic. In 1789 it became a body politic. Look at the date on the case. Listen to the sentence before your quote:

The first exception was, 'that, at the time of the offence charged, the United States were not a body corporate known in law.' But the Court are of a different opinion.

In that period the prosecution was grasping for something to compare the loosely associated state to, so they did - the Parliament of England. In that time frame the US was no longer Colonies but again they were not a constitutional republic either.

Thanks though, that period is very interesting and I enjoyed you challenging my premise with that case.

[shikamaru]

The United States was questionably deemed to be like a corporation ten years before it became a body politic. In 1789 it became a body politic. Look at the date on the case.

BODY POLITIC, government, corporations. When applied to the government this phrase signifies the state.
2. As to the persons who compose the body politic, they take collectively the name, of people, or nation; and individually they are citizens, when considered in relation to their political rights, and subjects as being submitted to the laws of the state.
3. When it refers to corporations, the term body politic means that the members of such corporations shall be considered as an artificial person.

I think what should be said is that whatever title is affixed to a given corpus (body), it all descends from the Law of Associations.
Now, I know most people don't know this for this is never spoken of or stated until now.

Any State or league is composed of two bodies: a body politic and a body corporate. Government is a political body corporate. The body politic is the society of people joined together in an association. Government IS NOT the State. The State is the people united into a society. A society is one type of association.

I will see what I can dig up to support all that I have stated above.

From most distinct to most broad:

Law of Corporations -> Law of Companies -> Law of Associations

[shikamaru]

From Blackstone's Commentaries:

And the king and these three estates, together, form the great corporation or body politic of the kingdom of which the king is said to be caput, principum et finis.

A body politic is a type of corporation.

[Frederick Burrell]

The first line would be what the defendant counsel was saying.

The first exception was, 'that, at the time of the offence charged, the United States were not
a body corporate known in law.'

The Second line is what the court was saying.

But the Court are of a different opinion. From the moment of their association, the United States necessarily became a body corporate; for, there was no superior from whom that character could otherwise be derived. In England, the king, lords, and commons, are certainly a body corporate; and yet there never was any charter or statute, by which they were expressly so created.

It would seem that the court is disagreeing with the lawyer, who is claiming they were not a body corp and the court is saying they disagree and that indeed from their first association, they were.

Am I reading this wrong? But the constitution was not ratified until 12 years later. So they were not talking about the US government but that of Pennsylvania.