Cornell Law website omits 12 USC 95a

[David Merrill]

Somebody pointed out that I might use the direct-government website for the US Codes.

Of course the Trading with the Enemy Act was first to confirm... "Omitted" too. This is strange because Congress has not done that.


Click Here.

[Gavilan]

Somebody pointed out that I might use the direct-government website for the US Codes.

Of course the Trading with the Enemy Act was first to confirm... "Omitted" too. This is strange because Congress has not done that.


Click Here.

Is there some librarian at the congress/ library we could ask what's going on?

[David Merrill]

Please do:

Ask for a Reference Librarian.

(202) 707-5080 Library of Congress.

[Gavilan]

Please do:

Ask for a Reference Librarian.

(202) 707-5080 Library of Congress.

Spoke to them, and supposedly the omission is per editorial action of the Law Revision Council due to being redundant with another portion of the code.

[David Merrill]

I am not finding the GPO link functional, from the first post.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/US...bchapIV-sec95a

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionUScode.action?collectionCode=USCODE

That sounds worth keeping an eye on...

[Gavilan]

I am not finding the GPO link functional, from the first post.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/US...bchapIV-sec95a

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionUScode.action?collectionCode=USCODE

That sounds worth keeping an eye on...

Indeed.

Here is the website for the Law Revision Council http://uscode.house.gov/

[David Merrill]

Please poke around in the Congressional Records and see?

[allodial]

This is what I found about three days ago: link (pdf).

Spoke to them, and supposedly the omission is per editorial action of the Law Revision Council due to being redundant with another portion of the code.

You ask "Redundant with what portion of the code"?

***

Remember, one might have to be diligent to keep them from blurring the distinctions between United States territorial jurisdiction and that of the several states. Whether a state officer pretends to not know or doesn't know is irrelevant.

Things the U.S. Congress in its territorial mode might be able to legislate over Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, federal courthouses, U.S. military bases doesn't have any potency or weight among the several states of the American confederacy. The several states are not "the Land" (as pertains to the "law of the Land"). Something being "the law (lore) of the land" means for due process it is part of that body of documents or principles which judges have to take judicial notice in court cases. "the land" or estate of the United States is limited to its territories, districts and possessions. The several states are neither its territories, its districts nor its possessions.

[David Merrill]

Please do:

Ask for a Reference Librarian.

(202) 707-5080 Library of Congress.

This is what I found about three days ago: link (pdf).

Spoke to them, and supposedly the omission is per editorial action of the Law Revision Council due to being redundant with another portion of the code.

You ask "Redundant with what portion of the code"?

***

Remember, one might have to be diligent to keep them from blurring the distinctions between United States territorial jurisdiction and that of the several states. Whether a state officer pretends to not know or doesn't know is irrelevant.

Things the U.S. Congress in its territorial mode might be able to legislate over Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, federal courthouses, U.S. military bases doesn't have any potency or weight among the several states of the American confederacy. The several states are not "the Land" (as pertains to the "law of the Land"). Something being "the law (lore) of the land" means for due process it is part of that body of documents or principles which judges have to take judicial notice in court cases. "the land" or estate of the United States is limited to its territories, districts and possessions. The several states are neither its territories, its districts nor its possessions.

Therefore no reporting on the GPO. It is not an action by Congress. This is an internal policy change and there is no discussion on the Floor.

Lacking discussion on the Floor this smacks of the cover-up I described. After all, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and a case does not go cold just because the murderer(s) are deceased. There has been a lot of activity on YouTube lately and this is really time for me to authorize Jubilee:

https://youtu.be/DU6fxC5CXMg?t=1713

Major credit for what is coming up is due to readers and members here, and to a learning tool I developed two decades ago I call the "brain trust". Communication is creation and only beings of like order can truly communicate.

[David Merrill]

I enjoy how my true bill used the citation from Our Country - about how the Salem Witch Hunts came to an abrupt end:

[David Merrill]

P.S. A suitor requested some help reviving an evidence repository, that has been staving off rigorous and aggressive revenue agents now for years.

Here you go:


Simply explain to the clerk of court in the Clerk Instruction.

"Ms. PRETENDER is not a judge, as she has signed an oath that deviates in form from that prescribed by law. She has no judicial or sovereign immunity and is therefore culpable as an individual for any harm that may come to me or my estate due to interfering with my evidence repository. Please notice how her, So help me God, has been altered to all upper case letters. If she makes any further attempts to legally advise you about your job, request for me that she provide a written explanation why her oath of office is deviant from the plain English grammar and form prescribed by Congress."

You might wonder why I speak again of already having the Creative Ownership... Well at least I hope so. The Senior Judge assigned to the case is recused at the starting gate. His oath of office is deviant from prescribed law.

[David Merrill]

But this gets better! It looks as though he has recused himself? This marking was returned by the process server.





So I thought that I had a handle on which judge is on the case...






Also, it looks like I held up all filings for over a day, while they figured out I retain the authority - outside the sacrificial system of Levi, in the Order of Melchizedek; however they might perceive that knowledge.




I wish I had caught the time and date, but there were no posted filings; at all. And there are including bankruptcy cases in admiralty, over a hundred cases file per day.

Then they all showed up, but not mine; not for several more hours.




So you might enjoy how that box for specifying details got so screwed up, and why you can no longer read which judge is assigned my cause (JUBILEE), if any.

[David Merrill]

So the clerk has fudged the dating of the filing system! Look here; my case shows up as having been filed on the 22nd...






And this is always the opportunity of a lifetime should you know when to spot it. Trustee for the Resulting Trust.

[Christopher-T:Farley]

Man, why am I not able to draft things right? just when I feel I put it together, I am wrong. The one's i filed is now looking for an answer and I keep running through options to settle this. That was well put, David. well put bro. you motivate me to do more research.

[Gavilan]

Man, why am I not able to draft things right? just when I feel I put it together, I am wrong. The one's i filed is now looking for an answer and I keep running through options to settle this. That was well put, David. well put bro. you motivate me to do more research.

https://thelegaldictionary.org/dictionary/sinderesis/

Search your heart, ask for knowledge, wisdom, and guidance. The answer will come to you, if you are doing it because of the right motives. Be humble, being right and yet proud may take you down the wrong path. See the book of Job.