Deviant Oath? - Not a judge!

[David Merrill]

Thank you all for the wonderful contributions!

Xparte; I think a lot of Paul Andrew, especially all the work that he does accumulating federal oaths of office. I am sorry if my grandeur is a turn-off. I am confident that it is not founded in delusion.

[xparte]

I am sorry if my grandeur is a turn-off. I am confident that it is not founded in delusion. Have my comments chastised delusions of grandeur or the necessary resources to have been misleading been provided. David explain Xparte; I think a lot of Paul Andrew,

[David Merrill]

Maybe I cross-threaded. My plate is prettyful; which is like beautiful but prettier.

[allodial]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

[David Merrill]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

Resulting trust.

The Olympus Ordeal has Authored I AM THAT I AM in authority. Without DISTRESS. Lynn Hartford authored Silent Weapons and sadly enough simply paid out the nose for many years. He even goes unnamed at his Release Hearing - THE WITNESS.

I think this is Hartford Senior.

Let's be clear and honest. This is just my perspective, mostly watching how ACIM students fall into the Wapnicult of Nihilism, thinking that somehow when we all grasp the sustainable Holy Instant together the "universe will disappear". The Disappearance of the Universe is rather absurd, if you ask me! What is actually said by Jesus behind Helen's Voice is that we will find the "Real World". One of Heaven; where fear and death are recognized as illusion.

Which is the Gospel of Pragmatism's model too.

Jesus was seen by multiple "Witness" after the Cross because he never died there.

But what I am getting at is a similar and related point. Because of the guilt stirred within Abraham's incest with Sarah, enough that he nearly killed the issue and blamed God's insecurity for that near genocide, it is deeply ingrained to accept RUACH as the nature of the Breath of Life breathed into Adam (rather than MIND - NESHEMAH) so deeply ingrained into our transformation of information into truth that we deny ourselves the basic right of Biblical Prophecy. We make the attempt to distress. - Rather than to authorize Creation in the Name I AM.

My invention biocosmetric sonoluminescence led to the first biocosmescient sonoluminescent laser - wonderful! I would not throw that away for the world. I have a future by being here now.

[David Merrill]

P.S. Get a look. Distress. Bonded by a Criminal Complaint.




Thank you Allodial. Settlement might be as close as the Court Administration you have mentioned. I have been thinking to Compile the thirteen Docs of the Olympus Ordeal into one book. The Book of Biocosmetric Sonoluminescence. 345 Pages (perfect right angle?) and I might go back to "Olympus Ordeal" but ordeal implies distress... - A lengthy read but they might enjoy it at the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.




P.S. This might be promising.

Who will consider my complaint?

In most instances, the chief judge of the circuit where you filed your complaint (or the chief judge of the Court of International Trade or the Court of Federal Claims, if applicable) will consider your complaint (if you filed your complaint in the appropriate court office).

The Attachments near the beginning of the Gospel of Biocosmetric Sonoluminescence reveal how I have already been in both of the courts mentioned. But I might serve the Gospel on the chief judge of the Tenth Circuit in Denver.

[Michael Joseph]

I suspect that taking it further, the action to oust the person from office to end their 'defacto easement' is an important next step. Interesting, I considered how swearing falsely fails to express love for God, oneself or one's neighbor. Very much related.

Also, perhaps a mandamus should be issued so that when the DoJ's OLP or the Administrative Office of the United States Courts fails to receive required materials they automatically subpoena for them and if they cannot obtain them, the AG or SG has to initiate an ouster.

Otherwise, a lawsuit could be initiated {Plaintiff} vs. {name of man or woman alleging to hold office without any reference to titles or the like}. Otherwise, one can put it to the person holding office (in a case) that if they continue to hold office beyond thirty days from the notice they shall be held and bound under and by the oath without any reservation whatsoever. Then one can file the certificate of service, notice of default/nonresponse in a case jacket and send copies from the case jacket with the default notice, original communication and the certificate of service to the OLP, court administrators and from that point treat it as an oath taken.

Key thing seems to be in avoiding any allowing them to hold office without them being bound to the oath of office. Without that one holding the office is defrauding the sovereign people by collecting a paycheck without obligation.

IMHO, the only way someone can hold office without oath is if they have a claim based on inherent prerogative. But that claim must made express (i.e. some form of letters patent) or some official would have to vouch or attest to the right to that office. And even still, they would have to stay within the confines of the office and also post bond for injury or loss they cause. Imagine converting the office of janitor into a full-blown monarchy. Be wise folks. I mentioned it years ago the notion of the supreme court as if a 9-seat legislature running inferior United States.

Yes. I think MOTU PROPRIO declared by Pope Francis relates that when an officer of a Ministerial Trust is in breach of said Trust, then said officer does not enjoy protection of the State. Therefore said officer would be subject to action upon his personal estate. The lines get blurred due to presumption that the entire world is operating in the Central Banking Scheme.

[allodial]

Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

[David Merrill]

Yes. I think MOTU PROPRIO declared by Pope Francis relates that when an officer of a Ministerial Trust is in breach of said Trust, then said officer does not enjoy protection of the State. Therefore said officer would be subject to action upon his personal estate. The lines get blurred due to presumption that the entire world is operating in the Central Banking Scheme.

Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

Thank you both.

That last sentence, it sounds like an agreeable mental model. But it does not set right with me. The wrestling match began with, By what right to you make this claim? To know MY NAME? Some times it would seem I am the only man who can understand what it is to form MY IDENTITY. You are both brilliant but neither of you FEEL like I AM ME.

My claim is formed legally from 1629 and August 13, 1630 formed Patent upon the Albany/NYSE properties as Estate.






It is not boasting so much as my explaining and reassuring myself that regardless of the outcome, my bond is Life, Estate and Sacred Honor and that this is what I was born to be doing.



P.S. It is there in the Complaint:

Title (Christian or given name) - David Merrill.
Office (family or surname) - VAN PELT

[David Merrill]

P.P.S. This feels like Original Jurisdiction, in disguise. I look around for the number of copies required and it refers to local rules for the Tenth Circuit but there are only rules regarding Appeals and forever, even in phone conversations the Tenth Circuit will not reveal anything about having that Original Jurisdiction. However, not having Government-issued ID the guards would not let me enter the building:

Yet the clerk came to the doors and we handled this transaction, infuriating the security guards:

I recall so many amazing things about that day. The timing, immaculate! I was walking on the clouds as everything went so perfectly all the way through publishing it at the county clerk and recorder and all the way home with God's speed.

[allodial]

A claim of right to access the building comes to mind--could sue for access in the court. Not sure how they could restrict a building to franchisees only--maybe for insurance purposes they don't want living souls around. For government ID, require the Secretary of State to affix his seal your ID. Strange for a county court to require state ID to enter the court building, but yet someone wearing a 'special outfit' believes himself to have authority to abduct you and force you to enter? Seems far imbalanced.

TBH, I suspect they figure by capturing a clown they 'must' own the circus, the building the tent, all the elephants and cotton candy in the world too, not so. Perhaps they take themselves too seriously? Territorial jurisdiction and big, huge lies gone way too far.

That last sentence, it sounds like an agreeable mental model. But it does not set right with me. The wrestling match began with, By what right to you make this claim? To know MY NAME?

Was not so much about the beginning but moreso about where it lead to.

Title (Christian or given name) - David Merrill.
Office (family or surname) - VAN PELT

I'd tend to suggest that the office or estate is DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT. The NAME of the surety after induction (i.e. becomes surety or speaker for the dead; in layman's terms -> 'director of the corporation') into the collective is VAN PELT. All because...

Disparata Non Debent Jungi -- Dissimilar things ought not to be joined.

[David Merrill]

A claim of right to access the building comes to mind--could sue for access in the court. Not sure how they could restrict a building to franchisees only--maybe for insurance purposes they don't want living souls around. For government ID, require the Secretary of State to affix his seal your ID. Strange for a county court to require state ID to enter the court building, but yet someone wearing a 'special outfit' believes himself to have authority to abduct you and force you to enter? Seems far imbalanced.

TBH, I suspect they figure by capturing a clown they 'must' own the circus, the building the tent, all the elephants and cotton candy in the world too, not so. Perhaps they take themselves too seriously? Territorial jurisdiction and big, huge lies gone way too far.

It has been a long time since I gave access thought. They do it by "Judge's Order" - usually the chief judge. Funny how that particular attorney holds so much sway with the security guards at the door.

It reminds me though; I would call the clerk of court and he would come to the door and get me in. One day he said; "I will let you in today if you quit filing papers in MY COURT." I was a little dumbfounded; "YOUR Court?"

Then we both broke out laughing like he was joking. I don't think he was until I asked him to stand by his claim.

[allodial]

Is it just me or has there been a trend as of late for county or municipal seals to no longer be affixed to birth certificates?



Consider the above scan, typically there would be a City or County or State seal where there is now a RED CONTROL NUMBER. Notice how awfully inappropriate that looks. Same here...



Not so here...



To quote The Donald: "There's something going on."

[allodial]

Here... this is a better example of how it used to be done...



Another...



Interesting, perhaps they are changing jurisdiction of BIRTH while hoping people won't notice. Or, maybe it really doesn't matter.

[Michael Joseph]

Well, its just simple trust law, breech of trust results in reversion to the settlor or successors or beneficiaries or any of their respective successors (as applicable) or to remaindermen. The pseudo-trustee is a thief beyond a certain point. Glitzy media freak show to make a lie seem true, well the lie is still a lie. Those who are not legitimate trustees though they claim to be trustees are lying. Again, when a state fails the power reverts to the sovereign people (not to be confused with residents or public citizens) rather than to 'trust outsiders'. The claims of alleged corporate creditors who have more than triple-dipped and who have been paid thrice more are inequitable and moot in a lawful court setting.

The territorial jurisdiction masquerading as de jure: that is what you have been wrestling with (mind games, spiritual warfare de jure).

Yes, I agree. You know in Hebrews chapter 7 it states that "Levi tithed to Melchizedok in the loins of Abraham." Since Levi is an heir of Abraham, we can see that Levi benefits from the DEED of his Father. Therefore, a question begging to be answered is was Levi subject to the obligations of that benefit? I think under Trust Law the answer is yes.

It seems logical then, that an heir is also subject to the debts of his Father. Funny how those who would steal run and hide when that light is shown upon them. For how much more would one be determined to remain without debt if his heirs were burdened with his lack of responsibility.

It is damn hard to control a general public if they are all frugal and responsible. Hmmmm.

And yet consider the ants or the bees - their civilization goes on and on and on - each working everyday in support of the whole - not taking too much but enough for the good of all.


Regarding pseudo-trustee being thief - I am reminded again of psalms 50:

Psa 50:14 Offer unto God thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the most High:
Psa 50:15 And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me.
Psa 50:16 But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth?
Psa 50:17 Seeing thou hatest instruction, and castest my words behind thee.
Psa 50:18 When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers.


allodial you make a very valid point in terms of escheatment upon the Grantors/Creators - that would be White Men - and this is not in any way to mean the Causasian race of men. Hey, I did not build it, I just comprehend how it was built.






Many do gravely err thinking themselves to be "We the People of the United States." Also, in terms of the Federal Reserve districts those trustees while de-facto to the United States districts may very well be de-jure to the Federal Reserve districts.