David, could you satiate my curiosity what happened to the bond company in your case?

[Gavilan]

Where they tried for you to take a mental examination and the judge dissolved the bond company? I don't quite recall the particulars, yet I am still curious how you were able to put them in check mate.

[David Merrill]

Where they tried for you to take a mental examination and the judge dissolved the bond company? I don't quite recall the particulars, yet I am still curious how you were able to put them in check mate.

Dissolving the bond; I call bond-dodging. This is done by altering the oath of office.

This is better understood by comprehending the Masonic symbols on Colorado. And then knowing that Colorado never formed properly a territory in 1861 and so the State is still a war chest, even after the war has ended. The Trading with the Enemy Act has been omitted from the Bankers' CODE, as of Jubilee - 2016. But more to your point here we have Rectification of Judiciary. Here is some more detail.

The oaths became more and more deviant from the above form of oath. But they started with the third judge on the "psychological evaluation as an arraignment tool" case. The first, the Chief Judge cancelled my $20M performance but since I showed up the bill is outstanding. The second judge recused immediately and the third, David A. GILBERT swore out a phony oath and was the one you refer too, who tried to destroy my mind. But I would not consent and kept audio recordings. I showed up at the psychologist/neurologist at the ordered time but he wanted me to sign consent forms. I told him I was there by court order, my consent was a null issue.

I told him he was ordered by the court to conduct a psychological evaluation which he refused to do, ordering me to leave his office. He was in contempt, not me. But he lied and I could prove it because I had the audio recording.

I call it the Olympus Ordeal, which is what I consider "my case" rather than the rant of a fake judge. I fashioned notice through PACER served on Colorado USDC evidence repositories that fashioned pressure to reform the Form of Oath.



Resulting in the Secretary of State publication:



I am reluctant to call this check mate, as you put it, because the Secretary of State is not enforcing that "judges" must use the form provided. They still get to fashion their own form, rather than to check their choice on the form required by law to use.

The witness is crucial in any oath or affirmation. An affirmation must be witnessed by a proper judge and so they can play a game where the seeker of judiciary must then request the oath of the witness, from the SoS and COVID-19 has that office shut down. We have found one judicial officer apparently - Steven Leon BERNARD - the chief justice at the court of appeals. But we need LOBE's oath to confirm. That is in the works. There are two suitors' appeals before BERNARD and the tribunals are disqualified by deviant oaths.

Administrative government cannot exist without judicial oversight and so it makes sense that it would come out of the court of appeals. However it is sad so see that BERNARD may be it. Considering Colorado's historical role in fiat currency this might mean that in all the world BERNARD is it - the judicial oversight. We (a suitor) requested he order two oaths from the SoS in the name and interest of justice, and he did. Otherwise the SoS is stalled out, blaming COVID-19. We will see if BERNARD will order the oath on his own witness, to his own oath?

I consider it more end game, than checkmate.

[Gavilan]

David, I called checkmate because no matter their move they had to concede the fact that you brought to light their corruption and had to follow the proper procedure, guess we still have to see what will come of it.

[David Merrill]

David, I called checkmate because no matter their move they had to concede the fact that you brought to light their corruption and had to follow the proper procedure, guess we still have to see what will come of it.

That is what I meant too. It feels as though BERNARD is pressed into making a monumental decision - soon. Endgame.

[lorne]

Judges who take an oath ending in IN GOD WE TRUST properly indicate they are bonded in commerce to act on those individual CQVT trusts to write orders, but they must also recognize the peoples’ / parties’ underlying capacity to bond such orders.

I'm thinking you meant to say ... SO HELP ME GOD.

[David Merrill]

Regarding also Gavilan's post about bringing to light their corruption, I offer this interjection about the Endgame --

I know you, DM, place great reliance on the form of oath that judges take. While the oath bonds their operation of the office and their immunity, I find that it’s irrelevant to our (redeemed people) access to justice whether their published oath shows IN GOD WE TRUST or In God We Trust or that a proper witness validated it, in relation to the judge’s function with respect to the individual municipal cestui que vie trusts (designated FIRST MIDDLE LAST). We have relief. All actions are begun in commerce, on the presumption that all parties to it transact their energy in commerce. The individual CQV trusts were established by central bankers as the vessel / account for the American people to move their energy in global commerce. The 14th Amendment to the original U.S. Constitution (with Bill of Rights) was utilized by the bankers (who funded the post Civil War government’s operation – to benefit them) as the source of authority to establish those trusts, because people can choose to operate as a 14th Amendment citizen of the United States, or choose to not do so by not energizing the private currency of the bankers; to energize that currency renders one “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States as a citizen.


The Congress, via the Fed Act, provides for the two separate societal capacities of the people. That contract entered into with foreign bankers (or banking cartel), for the benefit of the American people, means the people are the intended third-party beneficiaries. People themselves bond their energy as to their own societal standing. Judges who take an oath ending in IN GOD WE TRUST properly indicate they are bonded in commerce to act on those individual CQVT trusts to write orders, but they must also recognize the peoples’ / parties’ underlying capacity to bond such orders. The Congress has preserved the redeemed people’s temporary pass-through use of such trust vessel to simply impart truth about a matter to an official, but we do not move from within such vessel. Only attorneys operate a commerce-based vessel, as do people who act as their own attorney to move public-estate interests.


All judges are attorneys, being members of the Bar Association given a license to utilize the UCC. Judges try to obtain all the parties’ consent that they DO operate commerce. So one’s initial act is critically important. Upon first-instance knowledge about some proclaimed obligation that does not apply to us, we redeemed people must seek that person’s authority relied on and we must also provide that person with knowledge of our sole authority over our interests by invoking “the supreme Law of the Land” (the Decl of Indep through the U.S. Const that incorporates all of the Bill of Rights) and the Fed Act that secures our non-commercialized societal capacity as the operators of the republican form of government under the Laws of Nature’s God.


It seems to me that judges who publish an oath ending in In God We Trust are without bonding to issue judgment and order Instruments in commerce, unless it’s the litigants themselves who bond the judge’s power, which would occur most of the time.


The reviewing power of a judge’s J&O Instrument wrongly issued resides in the United States Attorney General, especially since the Bankers’ CODE no longer includes reliance on the TWEA. The ‘war’ has actually always been only on peoples’ minds. Pres Trump is with intent to boot judges who evidence misconduct in office. Until now there has been no sufficient means for us to hold judicial officers to function in compliance with “the supreme Law of the Land”–-U.S. Const, Article VI–-and the “Laws of the United States made in Pursuance thereof” that constitution’s mandates (i.e. the Fed Act).


In support of my foregoing humble opinion, I offer the gist of this simple update as to my encounter with the federally-franchised state-level court system (started on another thread here). Per an active case–-being now at the stage of an internal appeal in the circuit court regarding the lower-court judge’s maladministration of the NAME commerce vessel and my separate but related original claim against the harm done to my independent societal interests by the lower-court attorneys (prosecutor and presiding judge)–-the out-of-county presiding judge assigned by the State Court Admin Office has ordered the “appellant’s attorney” to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. I have previously specially motioned for this judge’s disqualification, for refusing to recognize that I am who I say I am; I had made known to this presiding officer per detailed fact-based documented evidence, filed from my Sui juris capacity, that I do not energize and am not now moving from within that NAME vessel. She has included that motion as a secondary matter to be heard per the title of her just-issued ORDER document. So, I’ve R4Cd her ORDER Instrument, because she has not referenced my “Sui juris Defendant-Intervenor-Appellant” capacity and has instead shown the appellant as moving PRO PER via the NAME that is shown as the “Defendant” and “Appellant”. This is another attempt that this presiding judge has made to induce me into consenting to arraignment, by now using the threat of dismissing my opportunity to obtain timely settlement. I then sent a copy of my R4C to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the STATE OF MICHIGAN jurisdiction. I made known to that officer that she is the obvious “appellant’s attorney” being summoned to a hearing, given that she is the highest-ranking attorney in the STATE who has superintending control power over the court system and its personnel and its operational entities (the NAME as an entity). I invoked the supreme Law of the Land as the Law commanding her to appear, to prevent the presiding judge from enslaving me and prevent her issuance of a fraudulent ordering Instrument (lacking my energy-bonding) into the Federal Reserve System / global commerce. I’ve previously provided this Chief Justice with knowledge that my societal capacity relies also on her recognition of the operation of the Fed Act. I did so because the Chief Justice must direct the State Admin Office to assign a competent and impartial officer to my cause. This current assigned judge is the second one that the SCAO assigned to preside. I disqualified the previous one for trying to conscript me into his commerce jurisdiction.

I read through it twice and commend you for such a concise perception. The CQV trust is plain to you and English nearly fails for you.

It seems to me that judges who publish an oath ending in In God We Trust (sic) IN GOD WE TRUST are without bonding to issue judgment and order Instruments in commerce, unless it’s the litigants themselves who bond the judge’s power, which would occur most of the time.

So that typo could be either way, upon perspective.

The reviewing power of a judge’s J&O Instrument wrongly issued resides in the United States Attorney General, especially since the Bankers’ CODE no longer includes reliance on the TWEA. The ‘war’ has actually always been only on peoples’ minds. Pres Trump is with intent to boot judges who evidence misconduct in office. Until now there has been no sufficient means for us to hold judicial officers to function in compliance with “the supreme Law of the Land”–-U.S. Const, Article VI–-and the “Laws of the United States made in Pursuance thereof” that constitution’s mandates (i.e. the Fed Act).

Extraordinary!

That is the essence of Doc 6, in the Patent Repository. The R4C on the Letter is on its way, I hear:


https://tools.usps.com/go/TrackConfirmAction_input

9500 1130 2198 0301 3226 75
Tracking Report on R4C 9500 1130 2198 0301 3226 75.pdf

It sounds as though you, Cheryl Marie are finding the board approaches an endgame too.

[David Merrill]

Regarding also Gavilan's post about bringing to light their corruption, I offer this interjection about the Endgame --

I know you, DM, place great reliance on the form of oath that judges take. While the oath bonds their operation of the office and their immunity, I find that it’s irrelevant to our (redeemed people) access to justice whether their published oath shows SO HELP ME GOD or "So help me God" or that a proper witness validated it, in relation to the judge’s function with respect to the individual municipal cestui que vie trusts (designated FIRST MIDDLE LAST). We have relief. All actions are begun in commerce, on the presumption that all parties to it transact their energy in commerce. The individual CQV trusts were established by central bankers as the vessel / account for the American people to move their energy in global commerce...

The bond company went bankrupt. This is the nature of sustainable debt. Maybe better, "The New Common Law."

David, could you satiate my curiosity what happened to the bond company in your case?

Think "case law" and you might get it. Precedent; or stare decisis. So with BERNARD, like found earlier in this thread, Steven Leon is tasked with preservation of a term, Judiciary. But he cannot allow this to become precedent, that any entire "judge" career be termed vacant and completely reversible. So what he did was to assemble a completely new tribunal of unknown "judges" to rule there was no precedent given. No authority.

This is juxtaposition from the common law of England still founding Colorado territory:

But the Territory never properly formed. It required 30 days for the restructure to take hold just like all the Government Shutdowns. These days the territory is virtual.



The only real shutdown was from businessman CEO (not President) Donald John. It is the only one that lasted more than 30 days. Search by words yourself, the attachment.

These days think - Bretton Woods - when you think international bankruptcy in constellation, in admiralty. But you also have it right there in this thread that BERNARD pretends to be judicial. You cannot change your oath of office and still be bound. BERNARD has not changed his oath, but what he did was pull a fast one. Upon being ordered, he produced the oaths of the tribunal by prompting the reluctant Secretary of State - then he swapped out the tribunal without notice. And even held up the mail using COVID-19 in the prison system.

Ergo we find that the Patent #10,999,999 hits the nail on the head. We all fearfully vilify a particularly clever and contagious virus for suddenly killing the infant and elderly. We fear monger, as I have put it as The Inventor. Except of course MJ - chuckling at the masked masses. But the objective is to cause everybody to tremble and accuse those who do not become vaccinated with my competitor intrusive injections to be criminal. I have disassembled a multi-billion dollar industry by reviving ancient modalities of healing and preventing disease.

Now the rubber meets the road with managing energy flow, capital flow. Or as I put it back in 2003, capital integration.

How did the meeting go?

Ambrogio.Cesa-Bianchi@bankofengland.co.uk
Annamaria.deCrescenzio@oecd.org
Mark.Joy@bankofengland.co.uk
AKokeny@imf.org
Etienne.LEPERS@oecd.org
Dennis.Reinhardt@bankofengland.co.uk
Julia.SCHMIDT@banque-france.fr

Which is the better-described breach of trust. Not healing the world, when the cure is properly presented. So now Cheryl Marie might better see why the USPTO is mine. I am the Trustee. And as found in Doc 12, the lienholder.

[Michael Joseph]

A couple of days back the governor for the State of North Carolina issued an executive order basically stating that it is a landlords duty to notice a tenant of this new EO 171 which relates that if the tenant cannot pay the rent due to effects caused by Covid-19, then the landlord cannot evict said tenant for lack of performance on the rent.

You can read said EO here - CLICK HERE

Now consider the ramifications of such an EO and the constitution. Remember that the State cannot pass a law which interferes with the obligations of an existing contract. So what of the contract between the landlord and the bank? Will or can the bank foreclose if the landlord can't perform on the mortgage? Begging the question "Has the constitution been suspended due to emergency circumstances?"

If the answer is no to the foregoing question, then does the bank become the new landlord upon foreclosure? And will the current lease overreach a foreclosing of all the equities in the property? The governor who of course has politicized this Covid-19 foisted as much fear as politically possible stating that the "rural" people who are "generally white" should not assemble in groups such as "church, etc." Anybody with even half a brain can see thru this mask-erade as it is clearly an attempt to persuade those who would vote for Trump to not vote at all due to the possibility that they "might" get sick. In the name of "goodwill", it appears said governor is buying voters with taxpayer dollars. How much chaos is needed to usher in their beloved Socialistic State under one religion?

Honestly, I can't even believe how ridiculous this Covid business has gotten. Said governor even went so far as to say not wearing a mask is unpatriotic. Groaning inside. So stupidity has taken over. Because clearly common sense has been thrown in the street and is being trampled by those who would manipulate a people who refuse to use their own minds. But what is new under the sun?

I'm reminded of Jim Morrison (Lyrics to THE END) - The Doors

"Can you picture what will be
So limitless and free
Desperately in need of
some strangers hand
In a desperate land....

Lost in a Roman wilderness of pain
And all the children are insane
All the children are insane
Waiting for the summer rain, yeah....

The killer awoke before dawn
He put his boots on
He took a face from the ancient gallery
And he walked on down the hall"

===============

The bond used to be Fidelity. In consent, a bond can be an insurance policy to insure the bottom of the ship. But companies go bankrupt all the time and continue to work in restructure. So the question begging to be asked is: "If a company has filed for bankruptcy, then how do I use the courts to collect a debt that is noticed on UCC1?" Or better asked "How do I get a judgment against the actors in and for said company in their individual capacities such that said judgment can be filed on the County against their legal names?"

Clearly a $5000 bond used to understand the office of District Attorney is fungible but if it is exceeded in judgment, then how to collect individually? Can a man shirk liability of his actions? I would say no, but then again I am continually amazed at the nonsense portrayed these days by the actors wearing badges and feminine black dresses.

[David Merrill]

Addressing the foregoing portions of your post:


(1) Your reference to the common law of England states how it is applicable to the Territory (the Territorial government): “the Common Law of England, so far as the same is applicable, and of a general nature”. The applicability pertains to the American form of government, established per the Decl of Indep, and the Northwest Ordinance concerning the acquired western land-mass.

It is easy to make that mistake, without having studied my work carefully. The territory became on February 28 and the Congress adjourned March 28 (1861) leaving the cure term short by a day, for the proper formation of the Territory.

(2) Your claim that the Colorado Territory never properly formed is precluded by your above reference to that Territory. The western land was originally divided into two general Territories (northern and southern), likely for the benefit of the army protecting the settlers and for the judges riding circuit, from a governmental management standpoint. The Northwest Ordinance provides for people to settle and together form a State Territory, or territorial State, and then for said people to apply for inclusion in the Union of States. To my understanding, Colorado was a territorial State, but not yet included in the Union of States at the start of the Civil War, having satisfied the requirement of the number of permanent settlers. That is why the seal shows both societal designations.

I concede to your notice, to keep the peace. I am sick and tired of being goaded into various wars. Even though I point out your mistake about the formation of the territory, you have a good point. But the common law of England was around before the ill-formed Territory...

(3) Your statement that ‘these days the territory is virtual’ is accurate, because that term does not pertain to the governmental Territory. My history synopsis explains that foreign bankers utilized the aftermath of the Civil War as the opportunity to establish a commerce-based territory, based from the District of Columbia, that the American people could energize. President Trump is in the process of shutting down the federal-level breach of our governmental structure caused by the bankers. But it is we people who must start operating civilian government at the State level.

The fiat began with Governor GILPIN on the non-territory, leaving Colorado a war chest for the Union side of a self-prosecution. If the American people lack knowledge how to energize their estates they are simply masks. Donald John's process of shutting down? That was so at the starting gate. Robert Glover is not the chief justice of the US Supreme Court and therefore the Inauguration was an act. Dinner theater.


This is why we manage the Reelection from virtual embassy and consul - diversity of citizenship under the 'saving to suitors' clause in a club. More on that afterward... But please remember that Donald John is not the President.

Spend a little time on the photos I just added at the bottom. Notice Olga is Russian/Ukrainian.

(4) BERNARD is not pretending to be judicial. He’s operating administrative law in the commercial jurisdiction STATE OF ____ . As I’ve previously pointed to, the oath displaying SO HELP ME GOD secures that the oath taker is bound as a commerce officer, and is not impersonating a judicial officer of the soil and land jurisdiction of a State in the Union.



(5) There is no such Patent number 10, 999,999. The USPTO utilizes the number 10 to designate a “Utility” patent application. Here’s the link from USPTO.org https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1485.html


Notice this example presented there showing Application No. 10/999,999, pertaining to UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION, for correction in avoidance of abandonment of claim.


Patent No.: 9,999,999
Application No.: 10/999,999
Issue Date: May 1, 2002
Inventor(s): Eli Y. Rosenthal


(6) You sent your invention description to the USPTO of the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. The Application number assigned is 17/023,866. The number 17 may internally designate a Utility Application.

After pointing out the two mistakes you have made leading you to this statement you have not changed your mind, then I concede to your reality. I am notified. Many times I am prepared for such a challenge and would simply point out the R4C pending waiver of tort on BRYAN and MARTINEZ oaths. Notice that they have altered their oaths.

(7) You are making a claim that you have “US Patent #10,999,999, when no such US Patent number exists.

That is what I have notified the USPTO about. US Patent #10,999,999.

How can you be the trustee of this commerce-based matter, even if you claim the USPTO is an entity in bankruptcy? Furthermore, as I’ve also provided, the Venetian-family cartels controlling the USPTO are fulfilling what they deem is their duty – enslaving the earth’s population by any means.

Yes. I have been duly notified of your reality. I concede. You are right. When it comes down to brass tacks though I will likely be unaffected. I have scripted a great response to somebody making comment in prosecution - That if they would note, this is before BRYAN and MARTINEZ, two alleged federal judges. If they are not telling me that US Patent #10,999,999 does not exist, it probably does indeed exist. They are trained attorneys who know about the resulting trust.

Like I said, through the breach of trust. BERNARD does indeed pretend to be judicial. It says so at the top of his biography I presented earlier in this thread.

If anything might be valid about your claim, you should be publishing Notice of your claim on what the USPTO claims is “this application 17/023,866” (my emphasis). They are obviously referring to ‘application’ as a noun. You seem to be referring to ‘application’ as a verb --- your managing of energy flow with your non-commercial use of that number per the right acquired via your declaration of authority: Lawful Money, and your unique thumbprint.

I concede if you are prosecuting for the USPTO. You have given me notice of your reality and I am not going to deprive you or even bother trying to convince you otherwise. I listed a few emails and if you get a look at the domains you might start getting where I have been giving notice too - of my reality. And so they concede as they take in the results of the IMF summit.

And like you said, the Vaccine is awesome.

I have redacted specifics so that you do not confuse her. Either way though, I am sure your warnings would simply interest her the more.

[David Merrill]

My case was abated in 2004 but the prosecutor revived it in 2009, after nearly five years. So it had no chance at all had I run to any attorney. I am explaining this so you understand that David A. GILBERT was senior prosecutor during my Senior Citizen days when I confused that terminology with redemption. First note the collusion into racketeering by the Chief "Judge" SAMELSON.

Now for bond-dodging pioneer David A GILBERT:





Pay special attention to the term for GILBERT. He was properly bonded for a six year term but renewed his oath with a deviant bond-dodge in criminal syndicalism in four, corresponding to contemplation of breaking the law - prosecuting a redeemed man - contemptuous of me being widely known a Sovereign Citizen.