Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54

Thread: Notorial Protest

  1. #21
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    'smatter BY, cat got your tongue? Have you been instructed not to respond?

    BTW, I read your latest and found no typographical errors this time - congrats on that. I see the court is quoting from Black's Law which is comforting since many of us here use it too. And I couldn't help but notice your displeasure at the court finding for the little guy, the debtor, and not the creditors (banking cabal).

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    'smatter BY, cat got your tongue? Have you been instructed not to respond?

    BTW, I read your latest and found no typographical errors this time - congrats on that. I see the court is quoting from Black's Law which is comforting since many of us here use it too. And I couldn't help but notice your displeasure at the court finding for the little guy, the debtor, and not the creditors (banking cabal).

    Looking over Jay's profile on Forbes I suspect that if he were actually registered and posting here, he would reveal his identity. I believe you perceive cyberspace as much smaller than it actually is in reality. There are so many people out there all under alias identities (except for a few of us) that it is futile to consider you have made a match just because somebody's opinions are in alignment with somebody else's.

    However if you have matched up his IP and email address then I think you are onto something...

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    'smatter BY, cat got your tongue? Have you been instructed not to respond?

    BTW, I read your latest and found no typographical errors this time - congrats on that. I see the court is quoting from Black's Law which is comforting since many of us here use it too. And I couldn't help but notice your displeasure at the court finding for the little guy, the debtor, and not the creditors (banking cabal).


    Apparently ..You, JohnnyCash..
    have no cognitive thought Process, as to empirical evidence

    Simply this ...

    Before I personally commence an Action, or Process, I should have a good understanding of the Method, and the Rrebuttal

    I have nothing to do with any Quatloosian Venue, and am moste certainly not a QuatLoser

    My original supposition still begs a coherent Answer

  4. #24
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    Ah, there it is. A little taste of the Jay we've come to know & love. Your original question has received some helpful replies along with some questions that continue to beg answers of you, BY ...

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    BY; please send an inquiry about Notary Protest and share it with us here?
    no answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chex View Post
    no answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    BY; Can you find us an example of a Notary Protest Lien?
    no answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Maybe there is a notary protest in this process?
    no answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    Who (or what) were you hoping to lien, BY?
    no answer.
    Last edited by JohnnyCash; 07-25-12 at 09:43 PM.

  5. #25
    JohnnyCash
    Guest

    House passes Ron Paul?s audit-the-Fed bill

    I just read the House passes Ron Paul's audit-the-Fed bill. Here's a QUESTION for BY:

    If the fiat money system dies tomorrow, who wins?

  6. #26
    I took a look and confirmed that Notarial Protest is the same invention I have been calling Negative Averment. I found the Notary Protest Manual online. Quickly I discovered the process used on the Big Three Reporting Agencies circa 1999. I chose Equifax; Consent Decree, Complaint. Interestingly those links are from the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) website.

    I have found a productive method of dissecting a URL like that is to delete to the last forward/slash:

    http://www.ftc.gov/

    The full address above is:

    http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/01/equifaxcmp.htm

    So I tried:

    http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/01/

    And found the actions from January 13, 2000.

    Additionally I found the Press Release.

    Quoting from the next page of the Manual:

    DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME

    In order to perform the Honor-Dishonor process properly, you must have a notary willing and able to complete the process for you. 21 days after your CA/A (ConditionalAcceptance/Affidavit) is sent, depending on whether or not you wish them to produce an accounting, the Notary will mail the Notice of Dishonor. If the Notary does not receive a response to the Notice of Dishonor, 10 days later the Notary will mail the Second Notice of Dishonor. If there is no response, five days later the Notary will send the Certificate of Dishonor/Breach and Non-Response to you. The Notary will enter each notarial act in the notary?s journal. The Notary will also be creating a ?Notary?s File? which contains a duplicate original of each document. The Notary will send you a complete duplicate of the ?Notary File?at the completion of the process.

    You must provide the Notary with advance payment for services, written instructions, and signature-ready documents. When you determine this is a process you want to utilize, secure a knowledgeable notary?s services in advance of sending your first document. Have your safety net...
    In this Equifax case the USA never filed. I have seen the same thing from the OCC. The USA and OCC apparently feel they have the authority to execute negative averment. I have seen the OCC do this with banks when they catch them in an administrative "crime". They assess a fine of a few million dollars and include the Consent in the accusation/complaint. It is presumed that the bank paid up, appealed by specified process or was shut down because the OCC is in authority to do that. Note that with the Equifax Action there is no case number. But below that is a similar action with a case #. I think that is an indication the Federal Trade Commission is not so confident that Fidelity National Financial will simply settle up on presumed authority.

    I have a lot of files about negative averment and will now collect them into a file folder thanks to you BY.

    Most of them have to do with people on their way to prison for bogus liens. If you don't have the authority (facts on the record as judgment res judicata) to waiver of tort, then you best stay clear of it.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  7. #27
    Nice find David.

    Looking at the case above it In the Matter of THE KROGER CO. found of some interest to me. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/01/krogermeyercmp.htm

    15 U.S.C. ? 12 I had to look up: ?Commerce,? as used herein, means trade or commerce among the several States and with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia or any Territory of the United States and any State, Territory, or foreign nation, or between any insular possessions or other places under the jurisdiction of the United States, or between any such possession or place and any State or Territory of the United States or the District of Columbia or any foreign nation, or within the District of Columbia or any Territory or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States: Provided, That nothing in this Act contained shall apply to the Philippine Islands.

    The word ?person? or ?persons? wherever used in this Act shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Territories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/12

    Throws the light on the term Commerce.

  8. #28
    JohnnyCash
    Guest
    Ah, so Notorial Protest = Negative Averment. And no case number; very interesting. Thank you David!

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    I have a lot of files about negative averment and will now collect them into a file folder thanks to you BY.
    Love to watch BY's posts become another teachable moment for DM. I may be wrong on BY's identity but I'm fairly certain he's an attorney (atorner). And even if wrong I recognize the type.

    And where's he been lately? Do you suppose it's beginning to dawn on him? That he's now sailing in uncharted waters - The Sea of Unintended Consequences?

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyCash View Post
    Ah, so Notorial Protest = Negative Averment. And no case number; very interesting. Thank you David!


    Love to watch BY's posts become another teachable moment for DM. I may be wrong on BY's identity but I'm fairly certain he's an attorney (atorner). And even if wrong I recognize the type.

    And where's he been lately? Do you suppose it's beginning to dawn on him? That he's now sailing in uncharted waters - The Sea of Unintended Consequences?
    I have been convinced that BY is an attorney since about his third posting here. So long as he keeps his inquiries directed at percieved flaws in process that is most welcome here!


    This presentment was from years before I integrated redeeming lawful money into remedy.

    http://friends-n-family-research.inf...er_Stamp_1.jpg
    http://friends-n-family-research.inf...er_Stamp_2.jpg
    http://friends-n-family-research.inf...Judgment_1.jpg
    http://friends-n-family-research.inf...Judgment_2.jpg

  10. #30
    I am most certainly not an Attorner, and Yes, I wish to find all the Flaws in a Process before I file such Process

    seems like common sense

    I am acquainted with some posters here ...Mr. Cash

Posting Permissions

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