Hello All,

If I may weigh in on the Lawful Money proviso. Lawful money implies UN-Lawful Money (anti-bacterial soap implies PRO-bacterial soap http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/image...s/confused.png). Try this perspective.

Foreign goods transported into the US by way of the various 5 ports of entry into the US (Ports, AirPorts, Post Office, Banks, Hospitals) carries with the importation of foreign goods Impost, Duty and Excise taxes. Goods arriving into a port is registered and ledgered as an asset and legal title provided to be traded. I always thought it odd that food is imported en masse when we are purportedly the 'bread basket of the world' until I look at the taxation resulting, although I am weighing in on Lawful Money.

When the govt abdicated their money authority entrusted to 'them' by the grantors granting 'coining money, treaties and maintaining a Navy' under the original Trust Indenture named the Constitution for the United States of America which was put in place to carry out the Treaty with the peoples embodied in the Declaration of Independence pledging to provide Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, we the beneficiary/posterity regained that authority to 'coin' money backed by the Treasury promising to pay all our debts under the New Deal. The original Trust was vacated under Lincoln who created a corporation to carry on the business of the vacant trust by incorporating the 10 sq miles of DC into municipal corporation (like Puerto Rico and Andora and Vatican city states) that used the original Constitution indenture as the Articles of Incorporation until Roosevelt, who nationalized all the assets of the US into a private trust off of which script receipts called FRNs have been drawn against the real assets belonging to the beneficiaries/posterity/you/me ledgered in Puerto Rico protectorate.

My election to convert the value of my private labor into public cash by endorsing an instrument (pay check) and depositing the instrument into the port/Bank provided by the Trustees over my/your/our beneficial birthright. The moving of private assets from the private venue into the public venue is re-venued and called revenue.

If the instrument is endorsed in blank, the default credit used to covert the value is the Federal Reserve foreign credit line, bringing foreign goods into the US resulting in impost, duty and excise taxes which require no special authorization by congress since congress has had the plenary right all along.
However, my the addition of the election to convert the value of private labor into public cash using the Domestic Line of credit under Title 12 §411, removes the unlawfulness by NOT putting the treasury into more debt by covering the cash conversion into Foreign Credit. The domestic credit is MY credit against MY birthright and any taxes collected would be paid to ME the source (imho).

By adding more restrictive endorsements I further protect the value of the asset (my labor) from confiscation like in Cyprus 'Bail-In' or any other interloper, or diminishment from bounced check fees when the maker is insolvent or whatever reason. Here's my restrictive endorsement:

Special Deposit for [cash|credit to account ####]
Redeem in Lawful Money i.a.w. Title 12§411
---Signature---
WITHOUT RECOURSE

As the Grantor endorsing the instrument and original owner of the asset deposited/registered, I and only I can correct any mistake or rebut any presumption on the nature and character of my intent behind any and EVERY deposits/registrations. I have written notices to the IRS collectors on the bankruptcy and the banks noticing them that the any and all deposits registered with the various banks or ports or registrars are Special in Nature that are to be ledgered to have been redeemed in lawful money in accordance with Title 12§411. This notice is notice from the originator of the value of the assets deposited specially or registered specially serves as rebuttal of any presumption contrary to the intent expressed herein.

Now that the value of my private labor asset is held in trust by whomever received delivery of that asset (delivery being one way to create a trust), I proceed to correct the character of the source of the asset that is presumed by the IRS (presumptions stands as fact until rebutted) to be Corporate Income Class 2 rather then Donor Income Class 5.

The IRS Transcripts showing income report the income/revenue as Class 2 on the transcript. Class 2 requires one of the 1040'ish returns. The Class 5 requires a Form 709 return that carries with it a fund to reimburse any (unlawful) taking of funds contrary to Class 5. If one looks at IRS Form 8822, boxes #1 & #2 mention both types of returns 1040 and 790.

Here is a link to the package. I make no claim that I am the brilliant person who brilliantly caught the presumption by the IRS.
https://drive.google.com/folderview?...usp=drive_web#


Kind discussion on this post welcomed.
BigBlueOcean