The Original R4C in the modern civil era?

[george]

is this also part of The Voynich manuscript?

3. Both contract law and the UCC are about trust.

another interesting tidbit ive ran across.. when a contract requires a payment(s) and there is no money with which to immediately pay it with, that contract automatically becomes a trust.

4. Common law is nothing more than case law.

that really would have to depend on the definition of "Common" , and much like the term 'Common sense', it can have a different meaning to different people. my only common law is the so called golden rule and the people who live by that rule, i share something in common with.

5. It can be any innovation to the contract/trust. If one party notifies the other party of a change, then the other party has time to think it over and if he stays quite it cures into the new bylaw of the trust agreement. Law. The way to refuse is called Refusal for Cause.

dont you mean to write 'any novation'? and i dont think 'contract' and 'trust' are interchangeable and/or synonymous. seems to me, at this point in time, that contract is of law and trust is of equity. ive posted a new thread http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...3749#post23749 that if anyone is interested in and replys to, i will post more about my latest perspective on this.

it might be that contract and trusts are like oil and water? for instance, if you have no trust in another then a contract would be the right tool for a job but if there is a trust, a contract would not be needed.

[David Merrill]

another interesting tidbit ive ran across.. when a contract requires a payment(s) and there is no money with which to immediately pay it with, that contract automatically becomes a trust.

Yes. So suppose that somebody pretends to be a judge, by signing a deviant oath of office? There is no bond.

This breach of trust forms a constructive trust and the "judge" can no longer operate as the trustee. Certificate of Exigent Circumstances.

Rule B(1)(c) If the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney certifies that exigent circumstances make court review impracticable, the clerk must issue the summons and process of attachment and garnishment. The plaintiff has the burden in any post-attachment hearing under Rule E(4)(f) to show that exigent circumstances existed.

that really would have to depend on the definition of "Common" , and much like the term 'Common sense', it can have a different meaning to different people. my only common law is the so called golden rule and the people who live by that rule, i share something in common with.

I brought up the Common Law of England:




Here is what that looks like:



Selden Society Books.

American Common Law looks like this:

Attachment 4884

[Michael Joseph]

This breach of trust forms a constructive trust and the "judge" can no longer operate as the trustee. Certificate of Exigent Circumstances.

The Maker of the mis-deed usurps the dejure trustee and as such a constructive trust is formed to force the false trustee to pay for the charge against his own estate. Since said "constructive" trustee is one as a Tort Feasor, said trustee is Trustee de son Tort. Let his misdeed be upon his own head!

However, can a judge rule in his own matter? Answer is clearly no. Therefore what form of appeals are available should a the court lack a judge with an oath? There is the rub. The people are just as guilty as the priest for the people too have allowed the mess.

And yet the people are crying fraud - and with their pen endorse the central banking scheme. Talk about a vacillating mind [double minded]. For how shall one endorse the serpent in the garden and not be true to one's own husband? And furthermore, what affect in the present was not related to causes in the past. Today is the day to begin to exercise a will to rebuild the old waste places to return to The Way so that the house may be restored. Until then, the wedding bed remains defiled by a third party to the love feast. And who can argue?

By usurping the dejure trustee one thinks to take against the Will. One would do well to study that Constitution for one may come to realize one day it is a Legacy and the Preamble an expression of Trust. The Testators sowed their seed and created a new way of life - an expression of a virgin - thusly was she established in Mary[Land] - under the direction of Andrew WHITE.

Andrew in America - Peter in Rome and both are brothers! And still many sit idle waiting and watching too afraid to act and thusly do they support the status quo - even though they hate it.

To the reader: Clearly you value yourself as you are investing your time in education as evidenced in your participation in these forums. How much value do you suppose would be inherent in you if you learned how to opt out of the taxation scheme? What would that mean to your lifestyle and for your family? Can you possibly imagine that we have all been duped here? At www.lawfulmoneytrust.com we are teaching our students how to REALLY make America great again! America needs unity. When we make a demand for lawful money we are rebuilding the old waste places. America needs men and women like you who are willing to invest in themselves and the condition of future generations. To our success! Let's kick the Fed out of our Marriage Bed! How much more could you be increased in time and profit by coupling Lawful Money with a knowledgeable trustee! Privacy and Profit - not to mention a means too for protection of the Estate for there is security by obscurity as just about noone today has any clue what a trust is concerning its personage.

Should you marry me, I would carry you over the threshold. Let the wise discern. For the blood is upon my lintels and doors and I should not allow my wife to annul our contract. Do you have two legs to stand in the gap for another? For unfortunately for many, we are all in this together - I AM my brother's keeper.



Best regards,
Michael Joseph