If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. If you would like to post in these forums please send a PM directly to David Merrill.
All transactions on PayPal and elsewhere are demanded to be redeemed in lawful money as found in Section 16 of the Fed Act and at Title 12 USC 411.
Thank you so much for enjoying StSC! If you are getting popups please try clearing your browser cache.
I have spoken to a few people who use notary protest process. I do not have a lot of confidence in Wiki articles. It strikes me odd to try using that process as described in a negative averment to perfect a lien. Since 2007 there is the court securities statute that will likely end somebody trying it in federal prison.
Millions of gov't Employee's need to get paid bi-monthly
They cannot get paid without the $...they are not going without a Check
I anticipate the Gov't milking the chicken by printing Money, until Inflation is so rampant no one can earn enough to pay the bills
I also anticipate the Gov't grabbing Federal & State Pension Funds first, then onto the Private Sector
Oh, I don't see government checks stopping either. What might change however, is what the checks are payable in. That's something the bad guys never thought they'd live to see eh? As for milking chickens, well ... clearly you were raised on a farm. Grabbing retirements accounts would be a final move of desperation - unlikely - but I've got that possibility covered, already converted mine to gold, silver & bitcoin. Let's be frank Jessica, we're witnesses to financial warfare; the Bad Guys did have a plan for crashing the monetary system so they could bring in their NWO currency, but not this soon. The Good Guys have forced their hand and left the banksters unprepared, scrambling and desperate.
Interesting: Memorandum of judgment is a brief summary or outline of a judgment which specifies the name of the court that entered the judgment, date, amount, name of the party in whose favor and name of the party against whom entered. http://definitions.uslegal.com/m/mem...m-of-judgment/
Like the "man" said: Quo warranto (Latin for "by what warrant?") is one of the prerogative writs, the one that requires the person to whom it is directed to show what authority he has..............were available only to the Crown...
We all know there is "No American Law" in the courts in our counrty today..."yet". Represent yourself and your interests, proceed 'in propria persona' (or 'pro per'). This is what you must sign on every court document next to your name....because 'pro se' means that you are legally representing yourself as your own attorney, which the court can then pervert to mean that you can be told by the court how to proceed with your case....using the fact that they can't reveal their own fraudulent Admiralty jurisdiction....
So: County Recorders are an integral part of property ownership. The foundation of what was to become the Recorder's office was laid in 1215 A.D. with the signing of the Magna Carta which provided for state protection of land ownership.
The United States Constitution provides every individual the freedom and right to own property in their own name.
That freedom is protected in the Office of the Recorder by permanently recording all original documents pertaining to property ownership and real property transactions.
This makes the County Recorder an integral part of property ownership.
Instruments filed with the Recorder?s office include deeds, mortgages, releases and assignments, property liens, as well as assorted federal, state and local liens.
Other documents included are veteran?s discharge papers, corporation papers, and instruments pertaining to the Uniform Commercial Code.
'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).
'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...
'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
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 ...
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:
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.
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.
"And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"
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?
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.
Comment