Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 48 of 48

Thread: The MENDOZA Order

  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by lorne View Post
    There is a Tax Protester Dossier entry for SCHLABACH over here http://tpgurus.wikidot.com that indicates he is an enrolled agent. I believe that site is maintained by the quatlosers. They have entries for all the big names ... but look who is noticeably absent!
    Thanks for putting that together. His behavior was telling me so.

    Funny feeling... being a glaring omission.

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    261
    Yes, another glaring omission to go along with the other GLARING OMISSION.

    You've been on the scene well over a decade now yet they do not classify you a Tax Protester, another patriot nutjob with a wacky theory. After all, who needs a tax protest when you can simply stop endorsing private credit and owe no tax. This is tacit acknowledgment by the quatloser that your interpretation of remedy found at Section 16 of the Federal Reserve act is correct.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by lorne View Post
    Yes, another glaring omission to go along with the other GLARING OMISSION.

    You've been on the scene well over a decade now yet they do not classify you a Tax Protester, another patriot nutjob with a wacky theory. After all, who needs a tax protest when you can simply stop endorsing private credit and owe no tax. This is tacit acknowledgment by the quatloser that your interpretation of remedy found at Section 16 of the Federal Reserve act is correct.
    There are so many lines of logic and reason all pointing to the same conclusion - remedy is sound. Ten Docs later we have made no progress with non-judge MENDOZA:

    Altering or amending a judgment under Rule 59(e) “is an ‘extraordinary remedy’ usually available only when (1) the court committed manifest errors of law or fact...
    I might reach out to John and try discerning what he is thinking. He finally drives the "judge" to say something quite revealing:

    The Court certifies that an appeal of this Order could not be taken in good faith.
    Is MENDOZA warning John that he cannot consider this in any other light but for central banking in public law? That his principal is and shall remain esoteric? See the Ninth Degree in the Rosicrucian Handbook.

    Attached Files Attached Files

  4. #44
    No wonder MENDOZA is discouraging John from making any appeal. I tell you, this is what happens when you have a "judge" who knows full well that his oath is bogus and that John has no Recourse in the law. No bond.

    Name:  Doc 24 Item 6 summary of falsities.jpg
Views: 122
Size:  177.5 KB

    The amusing part is that MENDOZA is actually giving the best advisement a non-judge in racketeering could give. Don't bother trying to find any honest judge in the federal judiciary. We might have been fooled a moment by Brett Michael KAVANAUGH simulating Justice REHNQUIST with valid wording on his oath.

    It makes me wonder if BERGER (REHNQUIST's Witness) has a valid oath? Could somebody make the request?

    FOIAONLINE.


    P.S. I believe the big promoter of Redeeming Lawful Money is Congress at Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act.

  5. #45
    I will have a warren earl burger, no onions.

    And where exactly can i sell my birthright? I don't see any for sale. It's almost like there's effort to paint this guy as a kook. And he's going along with it.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by marcel View Post
    I will have a warren earl burger, no onions.

    And where exactly can i sell my birthright? I don't see any for sale. It's almost like there's effort to paint this guy as a kook. And he's going along with it.
    I agree. He acquired the MENDOZA oath early at my suggestion. Yet he rode it out, with me learning all along the way - but to his detriment so far as refund of his withholdings and getting money instead of having to pay the IRS.

    Yet he is very intelligent.

    So something is up.

  7. #47
    A woman is emailing, wondering why not file a suit to challenge the MENDOZA Order? I told her she should be careful who she listens to. If MENDOZA is not a judge, then his opinion is simply a personal comment. And since he fraudulently pretends to be a judge, there is very little merit.

  8. #48

    Also - What Exactly Does the IRS Agent Think

    Hello everybody;

    I am posting my suspicion that John SCHLABACH is an agent provocateur. This is to say he is getting a break on past liabilities for generating case law against remedy, for the purpose of discouraging people searching the Internet about Redeeming Lawful Money.

    I came across his case in Eastern Washington on PACER by accident. I do not believe that the IRS agents' strategy had anticipated my finding it in progress. So I told John early about MENDOZA being a bogus judge and encouraged him to enlist me to disqualify him on having a vacant office. At that time I recall finding his history with the IRS and realizing, "This guy is in big trouble already." So I had a sinking feeling that he would be available for exactly what is going on.

    One suitor tells me,

    It looks to me like that is exactly what it was about redeem in lawful money, they ruled aginst him last year 2018 but this year it was dropped i guess because of his appeals he filed.
    I did find it on a google search of frivolous filing. Not sure what the besmirch remedy is.
    The remedy is not to believe what you read on the Internet. MENDOZA is not a federal judge. He can judge in equity by consent of the parties and that is where John took it. I told him to be genuine in his efforts and principles he would need to disqualify MENDOZA before he lost in trial court. But now in hindsight I am convinced my suspicions have been truthful. John is hurting a lot less from the "loss" in (vacant) court because he played his role in generating rumors that besmirch a perfect absolute right to be redeemed from central banking dishonors.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •