Federal Reserve agents

[David Merrill]

Yep. Thanks for clarifying.

I have a pic in my computer somewhere with some "deep state" (probably Masonic) saying TRUMP is not one of us. - I came across it when I did not need it and now must search out the key words to find it again. Maybe you have it handy?

[marcel]

That's an excerpt from audio recording that took place in July 2021 at Trump's Bedminster, N.J., golf course with two people working on former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows' autobiography.

Seems clear to me the deep state wanted more war and foreign intervention; Trump didn't.

[David Merrill]

Can you paint in some context?

[marcel]

Well... TRUMP said it was Gen. Mark MILLEY that wanted the U.S. to attack Iran.

clien.net/service/board/park/18126158

[David Merrill]

Freed - you lay it out nicely. This sounds to me like those who have both Names can decide how they want to conduct their business with the two entities (private vs public) as long as it's declared correctly. It's amazing to me that there once existed only one Name and our fore-fathers made it so complicated. I appreciate your insight!

The clerk of court knows.

The clerk of court redacted the Date of Birth off this Claim.

The redeemed are private from the endorsers, and vice versa.

[lorne]

And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking,
people hearing without listening,
people writing songs that voices never share
And no one dare
Disturb the sound of silence.
Fools said I, you do not know
Silence like a cancer grows.

Father Coughlin told them, back in the day http://libertyfight.com/Coughlin.html

[marcel]

So. Who will tell them they are agents, using debt currency of a private corporation?

[dave2014]

By making your demand for lawful money, you are changing the terms of the contract with the Federal Reserve. When FDR committed the resources of the US government, and the assets and future labor of the debt serfs who use debt money, he was acting as the CEO of the corporate US government, which only has jurisdiction over DC and 14th Amendment citizens. If you include in your demand to redeem your assets in the trust, you are removing the lien established by the use of debt money. Since the trust only has validity when it has assets in it, and the trust can only exist on the presumption that you are dead, by making the claim you collapse the trust and take title to your estate. See the amendments to the Cestui que Vie Act by Charles the II in 1666. Then by registering your legal name as a dba with any Secretary of any state, you remove your assets from 'within the US.' Now you have rebutted the assumption that you want to deal in private money, the presumption that you are acting as a bank and are thus incurring the obligation to file a tax return and pay taxes on the use of this private money, and the presumption that you are in contract with the Federal Reserve, and thus an employee (read as tax slave) of the US government. You now have legal title to your name, and to the assets in your estate, and to the fruits of your labor, and you have no trust in the US government. And by now being legally domiciled in a state, you are 'without the US' and thus not a 14th Amendment citizen with privileges instead of rights. The issue of trustee de son tort does not arise when you own your legal name, as there is no trust, there are only contracts, and these you can refuse. And there is no tort, as the US government does not control the territory of the 50 states, so the usufructuary does not extend to the physical world of America.

The distinction here is important: the United States of America is a constitutional republic; the US government is a corporation under Roman law. In the republic you have unalienable rights; in the US you have privileges. It is better for you to get out of the US and into America.

PS to MJ: the use of notes confers a benefit, but the benefit is not conferred by the government. All free societies have found money to confer a benefit, and they have agreed on what can be/should be money, all without benefit of government control. Governments have proven repeatedly that they cannot be trusted to manage money, and should not be allowed anywhere near it. Government issued money, especially debt used as money, is inconsistent with liberty and prosperity. What do you mean by this statement: "Let me know when you decide to settle your own estate in Trust - declaring the money for that state." No one has the right to declare money, it is a market decision, made collectively by honest men willingly engaging in transactions with each other for their mutual benefit.
Edit: see this link for a discussion about money and the failure of debt money systems:

http://www.plata.com.mx/mplata/documentos/images/The_silver_dirham_HSP_2012.pdf

PS to Chex: It is unclear to me that the president can declare war (although at the present time he says he can and no one has corrected him yet), or that we are in a state of war at this time. You cannot, for example, have a 'War on Terror,' which is a tactic. Further, whenever the US declares war on something, we get more of it. While every president since FDR has re-upped the 'state of emergency' for one year on some pretext (this year it is Iran), these 'war powers' are not constitutional and only apply to agents and employees of the US.

Freed

Freed - you lay it out nicely. This sounds to me like those who have both Names can decide how they want to conduct their business with the two entities (private vs public) as long as it's declared correctly. It's amazing to me that there once existed only one Name and our fore-fathers made it so complicated. I appreciate your insight!

[David Merrill]

This brings up a question. I hope you don't mind, but the statute says, for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents...

How do the advances get to you, without first going through an agent? Holders must be banks, having received them from agents, right?

You become a federal reserve agent by endorsement.

Another way to describe that is to accept the ability to lend your money out. Or look at the automobile salesman who is willing to extend you credit... Is he a bank? Of course he is! Are you able to lend out money? Yes, you are. Can you charge interest? Sure! You are a bank.

Can you lend out more money than you actually have? Probably not. However if you have a lot of money to qualify for FDIC.... ??

I don't know. I have never studied into it. I suppose you might find an insurance agent (bottomry/admiralty) who would regulate your risk management, license you and tell you when you are getting dangerous by raising your premiums etc.

[Keith Alan]

Why are they in your pocket in you're not a federal reserve agent?

This brings up a question. I hope you don't mind, but the statute says, for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents...

How do the advances get to you, without first going through an agent? Holders must be banks, having received them from agents, right?

[ag maniac]

You were off by a "page" in cyberspace.....here's what you seek

[TMI]

In my opinion, an assignment (acknowledgement of what is already true) of ALL

[Freed Gerdes]

By making your demand for lawful money, you are changing the terms of the contract with the Federal Reserve. When FDR committed the resources of the US government, and the assets and future labor of the debt serfs who use debt money, he was acting as the CEO of the corporate US government, which only has jurisdiction over DC and 14th Amendment citizens. If you include in your demand to redeem your assets in the trust, you are removing the lien established by the use of debt money. Since the trust only has validity when it has assets in it, and the trust can only exist on the presumption that you are dead, by making the claim you collapse the trust and take title to your estate. See the amendments to the Cestui que Vie Act by Charles the II in 1666. Then by registering your legal name as a dba with any Secretary of any state, you remove your assets from 'within the US.' Now you have rebutted the assumption that you want to deal in private money, the presumption that you are acting as a bank and are thus incurring the obligation to file a tax return and pay taxes on the use of this private money, and the presumption that you are in contract with the Federal Reserve, and thus an employee (read as tax slave) of the US government. You now have legal title to your name, and to the assets in your estate, and to the fruits of your labor, and you have no trust in the US government. And by now being legally domiciled in a state, you are 'without the US' and thus not a 14th Amendment citizen with privileges instead of rights. The issue of trustee de son tort does not arise when you own your legal name, as there is no trust, there are only contracts, and these you can refuse. And there is no tort, as the US government does not control the territory of the 50 states, so the usufructuary does not extend to the physical world of America.

The distinction here is important: the United States of America is a constitutional republic; the US government is a corporation under Roman law. In the republic you have unalienable rights; in the US you have privileges. It is better for you to get out of the US and into America.

PS to MJ: the use of notes confers a benefit, but the benefit is not conferred by the government. All free societies have found money to confer a benefit, and they have agreed on what can be/should be money, all without benefit of government control. Governments have proven repeatedly that they cannot be trusted to manage money, and should not be allowed anywhere near it. Government issued money, especially debt used as money, is inconsistent with liberty and prosperity. What do you mean by this statement: "Let me know when you decide to settle your own estate in Trust - declaring the money for that state." No one has the right to declare money, it is a market decision, made collectively by honest men willingly engaging in transactions with each other for their mutual benefit.
Edit: see this link for a discussion about money and the failure of debt money systems:

http://www.plata.com.mx/mplata/documentos/images/The_silver_dirham_HSP_2012.pdf

PS to Chex: It is unclear to me that the president can declare war (although at the present time he says he can and no one has corrected him yet), or that we are in a state of war at this time. You cannot, for example, have a 'War on Terror,' which is a tactic. Further, whenever the US declares war on something, we get more of it. While every president since FDR has re-upped the 'state of emergency' for one year on some pretext (this year it is Iran), these 'war powers' are not constitutional and only apply to agents and employees of the US.

Freed

[Michael Joseph]

mj: - I comprehend the nature of Trust - Obligation - Liability - and Benefit. It is really simple. If you promise me something, I am going to hold you to it. You agree to be trustee and I have an equitable right to receive the blessing of your promise to me. I may not have asked for your promise- you might have given it to me in ignorance or in good faith, it does not matter - if you promise, then you have a duty to keep your word to me.

AJ: The contract regarding FRNs has been opened to the general public and they have been distributed among the populace since 1933. The evidence of that is 99.99% of the people are trading and "profiting" by the use of FRNs. trading with the paper baring the seal of the Federal Reserve...... However, there is another seal on the right side of the note (1789) which signifies the dual capacity of that paper; This conventional act of "voluntary compliance" places a first lien on ALL the assets of the United States public trust by the FED. This "assignment" means the United States not only profits and gains from each instance of use, but also incurs ALL liability as well.

DM: If you want to promote other doctrines I believe it to be failures. Congress has already established the law and the courts support that law.

Jesus: John 18:20

While Yehoshuah spoke so that everyone might hear, He, Yehoshuah spoke in Parables so that those who were Pure of Heart might hear and those who were wise in the world would not hear. So then, while Yehoshuah spoke in Public he spoke too in Parables or a hidden language. So did Paul, so did Jude, so did Peter and so did Enoch and so did Matthew, Mark, Luke and John...etc.

He spoke in Parables so that carnal men only looking to fulfill the lusts of their flesh might not hear but that the Royal Spiritual meaning might be known to those that are not mired down in the ways of this world.

The higher law is simple do unto others as you would have done to yourself. Therefore lie not and keep your word. The Law is not made for a righteous man the law is made for one who will not keep his word. I don't need a Congress of other men to inform me how to live but, if I choose to live UNDER the shadow of that ASSEMBLY then I must abide by its laws. Pretty simple. The choice is Voluntary - it always has been.

Mar_4:2 And he taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his doctrine,

Mar_4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Luk_8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

The comprehension is not for the carnal mind. Therefore shall I bow my knee in Trust to Yehoshuah and submit to making Him my King. Who is this King of Glory? Yehovah Sabbatoth. I speak NOT to the flesh as I am not interested in making Jesus my King, I am interested in making Christ my King.

Understand the huge difference between these seemingly insignificant terms "within" and "without". Do you suppose a China man to make a use of 12USC411? Why would he? He is without the trust? Are you a China man? The adjective China is a chain around your "temples" head [mind] - or are you simply a "living soul"? You did quote the Scripture did you not?

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed [as a potter] man [Adam] of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath that is life; and man became a living soul.



Are you a man - who sees only Jesus - the flesh. Or are you a living soul that sees both the carnal [Jesus-the man] and the Spiritual Royal [Christ of God]? A man is a flesh being - but Christ is of God. A man cannot see or understand the Parables but the Living Soul can because the Living Soul is alive in Christ. You did quote the Scriptures didn't you.

My trust in Yehoshuah sets me free. A choice. Until my brothers and sisters [spiritually speaking] awaken from their deep slumber and we leave from competition and move into cooperation, Notes are a necessity - and seeing I cannot break the Royal Law - I must provide for my family - I claim the Law of Necessity. However, I do not wish to trespass my neighbor or my brother/sister; as such, if I am made a Constructive Trustee, by my action in necessity, it is because I am fulfilling a higher law. As such, I will return the issue to Ceasar in accord with 12USC95a(2) - which is in accord with 12USC411. But the carnal mind says - its all mine and nobody is gonna take anything from me - this is an ignorant position - please let me know when you find your name on the Notes. Let me know when you decide to settle your own estate in Trust - declaring the money for that state.

The mere USE of Notes confers a benefit to the Bearer.

Shalom,
MJ

[Chex]

ROTS: How about you tell me what they are doing in your pocket.

mj: - I comprehend the nature of Trust - Obligation - Liability - and Benefit. It is really simple. If you promise me something, I am going to hold you to it. You agree to be trustee and I have an equitable right to receive the blessing of your promise to me. I may not have asked for your promise- you might have given it to me in ignorance or in good faith, it does not matter - if you promise, then you have a duty to keep your word to me.

AJ: The contract regarding FRNs has been opened to the general public and they have been distributed among the populace since 1933. The evidence of that is 99.99% of the people are trading and "profiting" by the use of FRNs. trading with the paper baring the seal of the Federal Reserve...... However, there is another seal on the right side of the note (1789) which signifies the dual capacity of that paper; This conventional act of "voluntary compliance" places a first lien on ALL the assets of the United States public trust by the FED. This "assignment" means the United States not only profits and gains from each instance of use, but also incurs ALL liability as well.

DM: If you want to promote other doctrines I believe it to be failures. Congress has already established the law and the courts support that law.

Jesus: John 18:20