If I were to use a withdrawal slip instead of a check to withdraw money from my account containing lawful money is it advisable to use the same stamps I endorse checks with to maintain the lawfulness of the cash? Or does the fact of it being lawful money due to it being deposited with the endorsement stamps make this unnecessary?
My credit union does require my signature on the withdrawal slip.
A withdrawal slip is a check for when you forgot to bring your checkbook, as I understand it. You are just asking the teller to fill in the account information.Originally Posted by Stephen
Interesting, while the suitor was cashing this withdrawal slip for an evidence repository in Denver, I was outside getting this video.
I suppose that you have to know that mountain in the background is Mount Herman (Same pronounciation as Mount Hermon) to fully appreciate the pun. It just gets better and better when you learn the keys to unlock the mysteries.
That map is quite a trip.
Interestingly I was pondering the issue of withrdrawal slips as being used as a kind of "currency selection" (*ahem* SDRs *ahem*) mechanism. Perhaps one can write the amount in words such as "one hundred U.S. dollars lawful money" on the slip?
All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.
The example I gave shows the suitor struck through the Pay to the Order of...
I imagine that the teller would have no trouble with minor adjustments in verbiage.
Can we again expound on "Pay to" vs "Pay to the order of"? I'm sure I read it in delirium sometime somewhere on this board but I cant remember
My explanation is rather simple. I found it very interesting to hear from a former bank teller. The Informer's treatise is good too.Can we again expound on "Pay to" vs "Pay to the order of"? I'm sure I read it in delirium sometime somewhere on this board but I cant remember
I recall the idea that no case could be truly closed only discharged or "dismissed". Sometimes I wonder if my case was the first to be truly closed on this Timeline:
Last edited by David Merrill; 01-18-13 at 12:36 AM.
What is your explanation?My explanation is rather simple. I found it very interesting to hear from a former bank teller. The Informer's treatise is good too.
I recall the idea that no case could be truly closed only discharged or "dismissed". Sometimes I wonder if my case was the first to be truly closed on this Timeline:
Treefarmer
There is power in the blood of Jesus
My explanation? It is a long time coming, that question! Amazing really. I have been posting that Timeline called Daniel's Calendar and never once has anybody asked me to explain it until now.
It deserves a thread but the facet that brought it up should be explained here.
My Libel of Review was filed the eve of The 31-Day Government Shutdown that was over New Year's of 1995. But they saw that coming because I had filed In Forma Pauperis about three weeks earlier. I was not filing In Forma Pauperis for being poor other than I did not want to use the currency provided by the Respondent - the International Monetary Fund Internal Revenue Service. I did not want that to bias the case.
In my journey I have had three or four men approach me who felt they were enlightened so to speak. As they befriended me, thinking back on it, they maneuvered into a position of mentor and when I would do things without their instruction they would become annoyed with me. I believe this is because I was viewing our relationship as a couple equals being friendly rather than what they wanted; a mentor and initiate relationship. James Harlan was an author of Are You Lost at C?
Jim was also a 32nd Degree Mason.
Jim's Libel of Review, exactly per the Book was already in process. I do not think that the book was even released by December - but maybe that is where I got it. Maybe Jim gave me a copy before it was released. He had filed his LoR, which was likely the only LoR out there at the time a few months prior to me filing mine. When I filed my LoR with the In Forma Pauperis a peculiar thing happened.
On the way back from Denver Jim paged me - yep, 1995 - pagers. I stopped at a truck stop and called him. He told me that he wanted to pay the $120 filing fee. I thanked him and explained there was a process about using the currency provided by the defendant. He wanted me to turn around and go back to Denver and the clerk would file the case for me on his credit card. All I had to do was go back to the USDC and sign consent for him to pay. What immediately struck me odd was, How did Jim get involved in my case? Apparently the clerk of court spotted the similarities and had given Jim a call. They thought I would go for the arrangement.
I was appreciative of Jim's offer but wanted to get the federal judge to testify so I told him he could pay me cash after the judge had decided about the In Forma Pauperis application. Jim told me that the offer was only good until 5:00 PM when the clerk of court closed, that day. Interesting! He started to become annoyed with me for declining his gracious offer.
A little over two weeks later as I recall it I filed the LoR paying the $120 cash and I remember how surreal it felt the next day driving through the mountains listening to the radio. The government had been shut down. All the non-essential personnel in the US government were ordered not to come in to work! At the time it sounded permanent according to the radio announcer but it turned out to be a 31-day shutdown as in corporate bankruptcy.
Jim never got his LoR remanded to state court according to the 'saving to suitors' clause. But his Notice of Federal Tax Lien was unfiled from the county clerk and recorder. It was never 'released'. It just went away. That is when I was first considering the clause in the template about abandoning claim I suppose. The first LoR's I wrote for others were custom, like Ronald Dean's.
After about a year and a half of me being unable to prompt an Article III hat on DANIEL I resorted to a writ of mandamus from a grand jury convening in Albuquerque. The jury ordered DANIEL to remand the case to state court or enter Default Judgment in my favor. DANIEL (the clerk) interpreted my demand for default as a motion and denied it, and CLOSED THE CASE.
That was really my point about the Timeline. I was familiar with the Informer's teaching about redeeming lawful money. A few years later I noticed that my LoR had been Closed, not Dismissed (discharged). Apparently the account had been settled. Ergo according to that teaching the entry on the Timeline about the national debt being resolved. Or in other words the US government was officially in receivership but in my mind this was more that the 501(c)(3) "church" was dragged into the fray (bankruptcy) and this filled the bill (of indictment) for cessation of the daily oblation on the upper timeline about Daniel's Cycle.
There is a lot more about this Timeline, now that you ask. I should start a thread soon on the Religious History category.
Excellent, thank you David.My explanation? It is a long time coming, that question! Amazing really. I have been posting that Timeline called Daniel's Calendar and never once has anybody asked me to explain it until now.
It deserves a thread but the facet that brought it up should be explained here.
My Libel of Review was filed the eve of The 31-Day Government Shutdown that was over New Year's of 1995. But they saw that coming because I had filed In Forma Pauperis about three weeks earlier. I was not filing In Forma Pauperis for being poor other than I did not want to use the currency provided by the Respondent - the International Monetary Fund Internal Revenue Service. I did not want that to bias the case.
In my journey I have had three or four men approach me who felt they were enlightened so to speak. As they befriended me, thinking back on it, they maneuvered into a position of mentor and when I would do things without their instruction they would become annoyed with me. I believe this is because I was viewing our relationship as a couple equals being friendly rather than what they wanted; a mentor and initiate relationship. James Harlan was an author of Are You Lost at C?
Jim was also a 32nd Degree Mason.
Jim's Libel of Review, exactly per the Book was already in process. I do not think that the book was even released by December - but maybe that is where I got it. Maybe Jim gave me a copy before it was released. He had filed his LoR, which was likely the only LoR out there at the time a few months prior to me filing mine. When I filed my LoR with the In Forma Pauperis a peculiar thing happened.
On the way back from Denver Jim paged me - yep, 1995 - pagers. I stopped at a truck stop and called him. He told me that he wanted to pay the $120 filing fee. I thanked him and explained there was a process about using the currency provided by the defendant. He wanted me to turn around and go back to Denver and the clerk would file the case for me on his credit card. All I had to do was go back to the USDC and sign consent for him to pay. What immediately struck me odd was, How did Jim get involved in my case? Apparently the clerk of court spotted the similarities and had given Jim a call. They thought I would go for the arrangement.
I was appreciative of Jim's offer but wanted to get the federal judge to testify so I told him he could pay me cash after the judge had decided about the In Forma Pauperis application. Jim told me that the offer was only good until 5:00 PM when the clerk of court closed, that day. Interesting! He started to become annoyed with me for declining his gracious offer.
A little over two weeks later as I recall it I filed the LoR paying the $120 cash and I remember how surreal it felt the next day driving through the mountains listening to the radio. The government had been shut down. All the non-essential personnel in the US government were ordered not to come in to work! At the time it sounded permanent according to the radio announcer but it turned out to be a 31-day shutdown as in corporate bankruptcy.
Jim never got his LoR remanded to state court according to the 'saving to suitors' clause. But his Notice of Federal Tax Lien was unfiled from the county clerk and recorder. It was never 'released'. It just went away. That is when I was first considering the clause in the template about abandoning claim I suppose. The first LoR's I wrote for others were custom, like Ronald Dean's.
After about a year and a half of me being unable to prompt an Article III hat on DANIEL I resorted to a writ of mandamus from a grand jury convening in Albuquerque. The jury ordered DANIEL to remand the case to state court or enter Default Judgment in my favor. DANIEL (the clerk) interpreted my demand for default as a motion and denied it, and CLOSED THE CASE.
That was really my point about the Timeline. I was familiar with the Informer's teaching about redeeming lawful money. A few years later I noticed that my LoR had been Closed, not Dismissed (discharged). Apparently the account had been settled. Ergo according to that teaching the entry on the Timeline about the national debt being resolved. Or in other words the US government was officially in receivership but in my mind this was more that the 501(c)(3) "church" was dragged into the fray (bankruptcy) and this filled the bill (of indictment) for cessation of the daily oblation on the upper timeline about Daniel's Cycle.
There is a lot more about this Timeline, now that you ask. I should start a thread soon on the Religious History category.
I'm looking forward to your further explanations and time line exploration.
I love studying prophetic time lines as well as timing in general.
Very early on in my life, with a bump on my head and two bloody knees, I realized that timing is nearly everything.
I've been having to repeat that lesson off and on ever since then.
In order not to delay, I just started a new thread for this purpose in the R.H. category.
Perhaps you would like to utilize it?
Shabbat Shalom
Treefarmer
There is power in the blood of Jesus
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
