Who gave us the authority to administrate the strawman account, can you prove it?

[Darkcrusade]

Thank you!


I have been explaining it in terms of classical thermodynamics for a while now. To impose that trusteeship upon the government trustee you have to describe the parameters of the trust. Usually this would require explaining trust law to an attorney. - Futile.

On the other hand, if you can get them to testify about the trust structure and you are adept at record-forming...

From > http://ecclesia.org/

Posted - 07 Apr 2011 : 19:49:52 by Robert-James
Lewis Hughes was incarcerated by the Fed. Beast government for near 16 months. He and Ed Whaler were concluded to be not guilty by a jury trial. Both Lewis and Ed stood up and were without attorney's. Ed is hear near Asheville. Lewis? Why do you care? They both suffered major loss while in solitary at a Carolina FED prison. But they won their freedom...by their Faithfullness.
Lewish could come by here and contact you, rest assured. He was one of those left coaster's, Washington state area. Plus he and we are growing older everyday now. They have a couple actions and one is for the supremes to decide if State Citizenship is still real. The other is for $$$'s for their abusive treatment by Fed. slugs.
Those who defeat the BEAST and it is possible, suffer in the process.


Lewis was a west coaster, Washington State.

Lewish, is a Beast-slayer!!! Sorry for this quick aside,Is their any more intel on his most interesting case?

[Anthony Joseph]

Thank you!


I have been explaining it in terms of classical thermodynamics for a while now. To impose that trusteeship upon the government trustee you have to describe the parameters of the trust. Usually this would require explaining trust law to an attorney. - Futile.

On the other hand, if you can get them to testify about the trust structure and you are adept at record-forming...

I find this exerpt from the walker case most telling regarding the inherent protectionism of the nexus to taxation/enslavement...

page 13

4 So what is the backing for these Federal Reserve
5 Notes, the legal tender paper? And the backing is the taxing
6 power of the United States. Federal Reserve Notes under the
7 Federal Reserve Act are defined as a full faith and credit
8 obligation of the United States. So that means that should
9 there be a default in payment of Federal Reserve Notes, the
10 government has the right to raise taxes to fully back the
11 notes and their -- I won't get into the technicality of how
12 that backing is done, but there is still a residual form of
13 backing of Federal Reserve Notes in the Fed's accounting

14 system today.


Signature endorsement, it seems, is a "technicality" not worthy of "getting into" on the record; I wonder why.

[Richard Earl]

I like that transcript. It tells alot. Thank you for the link, David!

[David Merrill]

I find this exerpt from the walker case most telling regarding the inherent protectionism of the nexus to taxation/enslavement...

page 13

4 So what is the backing for these Federal Reserve
5 Notes, the legal tender paper? And the backing is the taxing
6 power of the United States. Federal Reserve Notes under the
7 Federal Reserve Act are defined as a full faith and credit
8 obligation of the United States. So that means that should
9 there be a default in payment of Federal Reserve Notes, the
10 government has the right to raise taxes to fully back the
11 notes and their -- I won't get into the technicality of how
12 that backing is done, but there is still a residual form of
13 backing of Federal Reserve Notes in the Fed's accounting

14 system today.


Signature endorsement, it seems, is a "technicality" not worthy of "getting into" on the record; I wonder why.

Thank you for dissecting that with insight!

Lewish, is a Beast-slayer!!! Sorry for this quick aside,Is their any more intel on his most interesting case?

Yes, the case itself. A lot of the docs are pretty big though, from the looks of it so if you have a few bucks, grab it off PACER and put it in the Downloads area please.

I like that transcript. It tells alot. Thank you for the link, David!

You are welcome! Lewis Vincent is an early era Suitor. He is kind of a bulldog (tenacious) and we were talking just as I was considering putting together the brain trust. Well, Lewis caught wind of it and called me insisting I let him in; which did not set right at that moment on the phone with him and I suppose we could call it Personality Conflict but we parted ways... which is something I regret now that the brain trust is mature enough to handle forceful personalities with conflicting views. I think that Lewis might have destroyed it when it was fledgling, or steered it into a dangerous place without remedy written into the law.

Like Anthony Joseph points out in the Transcript, albeit acquitted that would seem to be where Lewis Vincent is at to this day; to get Walker Fowler so close to forming a complete Record of redemption and failing to seal the deal!

I am enjoying a lot of facets of what got on the record though; especially with the Quatlosers. They are totally bent out of shape about that transcript. Here is another facet worth considering. Think about the shock testing in Canada preparing the USA for fractional lending between 1863 and 1913. Look at the Footnotes. Then take in this passage:

[Chex]

[shikamaru]

A contract implied in law (or quasi-contract), unlike a true contract based upon the express or apparent intention of the parties, is not based on a promissory agreement or the apparent intention of the parties to undertake the performance in question.

Quasi-contracts or contracts implied in law are obligations imposed by law to prevent unjust enrichment. The essential elements for an action under this theory are a benefit conferred upon a defendant by the plaintiff, the defendant’s appreciation of the benefit, and the defendant’s acceptance and retention of the benefit under circumstances that make it inequitable for him to retain it without paying the value thereof.

Quasi-contracts, therefore, are obligations created by the law for reasons of justice, not by the express or apparent intent of the parties. Thus, it may be said that obligations of this type should not properly be considered contracts at all, but a form of the remedy of restitution.

SOURCE Rabon v. Inn of Lake City, Inc., 693 So.2d 1126, 1131-32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)

Given the information, my interpretation is that quasi-contracts are instruments and tools of equity.

Equity decides what is "just" or "fair" while keeping quiet on issues of law.

[Darkcrusade]

David,I think i found what you refer to as the 'silver bullet' and the rounds with lewish? here =

http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=306&whichpage=1&SearchTerms=saving,to,suitors,1789

[David Merrill]

That is mighty old relatively.

The "silver bullet"; true Article III judiciary is found today still in full force and effect:

“… saving to suitors, in all cases the right of a common law remedy where the common law is competent to give it, and [the district courts] shall also have exclusive original cognizance [and culpability of the United States to protect your property rights] of all seizures on land…” First Judiciary Act; chapter 20, page 77. September 24, 1789.

One can utilize government the way it was intended. Through process.

It is quite useful.


Regards,

David Merrill

_____________________________


The above posting is not a business offer. I am concerned about the paranoid condition of the Christian community, the ecclesia. Recently in the forum about the Credit River Money Decision, I found resistance to offering authenticated documents about a landmark common law case where the bank freely testified that credit is made from the “borrowers” signature. I came across people who wanted to convince me there is a huge Satanic orchestration of evil in the world and there is nothing that I or anyone else may do about that but wait for the return of the King. Futurism. I see this outlook as completely dysfunctional in today’s market.

Now the world to me, like the stock market is a reflection of conglomerated individual fear and greed. This is why Fibonacci Sequences are so prevalent in forecasting the market. Primarily the market is an amalgamation of individual decisions to buy and sell. There is a rush for profit out of the greed and with clever business suave a profit can be gained without malice. There is inherent stellionation (selling an item more than once; a/k/a fractional reserve banking) that strains the honesty of a profit margin. Over-capitalizing on a strict formal property system (sacrificing freedom for profit margin) stretches speculation into the ridiculous. In contract, thousands of buyers can own one ounce of gold for instance….

The IMF World Bank, Treasury or IRS (though the latter is assumed to be a Puerto Rican corporation of the United States, not the UN organ) mails out about $8 worth of presentments and brings in about $1000 revenue. This is process and can be learned easily by reading through the Uniform Commercial Code. Although I will explain why as we go; I never cite the UCC in any presentment, notice or judgment. But the UCC is a concise compendium of contract law, international law and summarily, the Code of Hammurabi Abram of Ur (Chaldea/Babylon) imported into Canaan.

I have been utilizing the ‘saving to suitors’ clause properly in the US district courts, invoking true Article III judiciary for years now. About 100 suitors, most of whom have gained control of the suits that once festered into nightmares, mostly from misconceptions about how to handle process (mail). Agents of a foreign principal are required to file in the district courts of the United States prior to exercising any claim against a man or woman on this land. Of course with Federal Reserve Notes as currency that means a bill collector has to take you to court? No. The same process is expedited through your (well, it’s not really yours) mailbox. By teaching people how to handle mail for the suits that it is, these people terminate nuisance law suits against their estates, nipping them in the bud.

The other day a suitor, an investment broker, took me to breakfast and showed me his year-end overall credit report he gets as some work standard by the SEC. The IRS lien was cleared from the report. He is having some problems with the State Department of Revenue telling someone managing his money that this means the State must follow suit. I advised this suitor to require the manager to acquire a formal written statement from the State and sure enough the State faxed a “PAYOFF” statement that instead of “AMOUNT DUE” at the amount line, said “Credit”. The State has paid this off but the paper looks sort of like a lien or something so the suitor is having troubles still because the manager called the State and the State said that it was still a bill. Now the manager is going to believe the telephone conversation over what the paper clearly says. So the suitor has published the release at the county clerk (see the same process?). [For now, the State is saying it assesses liabilities independent of the IRS which is not true. So as this moves forward, experience tells me the State will tell the manager to release all claim.] I have examples (sanitized a little for privacy of the suitor) of these releases from both the IRS and the State, plus a letter where the bank president ceased foreclosure upon common law process, “This is due to the opinion of the bank’s counsel that Mr. Xxxxx has followed appropriate steps objecting to the release of bank records to the IRS in this matter.”

While you may be able to extract the elements of process that you should have been using all along to prevent nuisance suits and judgments against you, I am not offering services to you readers. That is not my objective. I have never been running a business.

About 175 BC a curious doctrine came out of Israel. Just behind the mathematical/historical treatise we know as the Book of Daniel, but written over a period of about fifty years was the Book of Enoch. This book was just too inconsistent with itself (specially the names of angels over the fifty-year writing period) and with the fluidity of the other Israelite books to get canonized into the Bible. Enoch describes a compact between some angels who lust for human women and builds this mythology improperly on Genesis 6:1-8. The superstitious Jews back then, by the time of the writing of the Book of Jude, actually subscribed to this bizarre mythology; the idea that angels could even propagate with human women prior to Enoch is just abomination to Israelite theology. Longstanding commentary in both Jewish and Christian Bible interpretation holds it to be error to think the players in Genesis are anything but human - the sons of God are men of the line of Seth. The daughters of men are the women of the line of Cain. This intermarriage was forbidden and unwise - punishable by drowning.

Today when someone takes the Bible literally, they often buy into the superstitious mythology that a third of the angels rebelled against God and were cast out of heaven under Lucifer their leader. This doctrine is actually taking the Book of Enoch literally, as some of the writers of the epistles that were canonized did.

I think this has developed a dichotomy of mind found among most Christians. Many of you are say, an electrical engineer, pragmatic, methodical and systematic with principles of physics in the time/space continuum we call “reality”. But then in a compartmentalized portion of your belief sets, you subscribe to some of the most bizarre supernatural fantasies.

The Israelite concept of angels and demons is single-dimensional. That is to say, there were three messages God wanted to give to Abram, so therefore three angels. The angels have no personality. Satan is nothing more than an evil intent. A potential waiting to manifest (or not) in a human personality.

Now, why bother you with the above discourse? Because I feel that so many of you are bent on self-destruction by not using government the way it was built to be used. The Constitution is an admiralty document. The longstanding usage and customs of international law prevail. It seems that the most of you would rather just say, “The world has gone down the toilet. So I am just going to do what I need to survive until Jesus returns.”

Is that true?


Regards,

David Merrill

[David Merrill]

P.S. I think this thread's title is loaded with a misperception that a Strawman Account exists!

[shikamaru]

P.S. I think this thread's title is loaded with a misperception that a Strawman Account exists!

Hear, hear.

Palani, at a different forum, made the suggestion that each right (or duty) creates a person.

[Katrina]

David,
This may belong in a new thread, but the Title got my attention. Probably foolishly, I listened to a David-Clarence, who seems to have vanished, on the matter of the Executor Letter. Friends, with more knowledge than me, praised him. Sooo... I sent an exact (per instructions) EL to the State Courts Administrator. After 14 months nothing appears to have happened. The traffic case is sitting, as I missed court due to receiving no notice of date, and so have a FTA warrant out. That is about 15 months old. I am not lost from "them" but my big concern is, my "friends" (yep, I need new ones ) say I can NOT file anything more in the matter unless I want to go to jail. AND IF I get hauled into court better not mention the Executor business. Oh me. Is this true?

[shikamaru]

David,
This may belong in a new thread, but the Title got my attention. Probably foolishly, I listened to a David-Clarence, who seems to have vanished, on the matter of the Executor Letter. Friends, with more knowledge than me, praised him. Sooo... I sent an exact (per instructions) EL to the State Courts Administrator. After 14 months nothing appears to have happened. The traffic case is sitting, as I missed court due to receiving no notice of date, and so have a FTA warrant out. That is about 15 months old. I am not lost from "them" but my big concern is, my "friends" (yep, I need new ones ) say I can NOT file anything more in the matter unless I want to go to jail. AND IF I get hauled into court better not mention the Executor business. Oh me. Is this true?

You are better off learning legal procedure than these experimental methods cooked up by various people from time to time.

[allodial]

Are we overlooking the fact that papers concerning one or more entities were ABANDONED to you? C'mon. (Talking about BC/SS card, etc.)

[David Merrill]

David,
This may belong in a new thread, but the Title got my attention. Probably foolishly, I listened to a David-Clarence, who seems to have vanished, on the matter of the Executor Letter. Friends, with more knowledge than me, praised him. Sooo... I sent an exact (per instructions) EL to the State Courts Administrator. After 14 months nothing appears to have happened. The traffic case is sitting, as I missed court due to receiving no notice of date, and so have a FTA warrant out. That is about 15 months old. I am not lost from "them" but my big concern is, my "friends" (yep, I need new ones ) say I can NOT file anything more in the matter unless I want to go to jail. AND IF I get hauled into court better not mention the Executor business. Oh me. Is this true?

Sorry it took me a few days to get that...



With no knowledge about the Letter I say offhand to take control of the timing. Timing in Strategy and Page 2. Go in early with your copy of the Letter you filed and politely tell the clerk that you need to discuss this matter with the judge please. Have a friend make sure it is a day when the judge is hearing cases beforehand. If you are real polite about it the deputy who puts on the cuffs might arrange with the bailiff to take you directly to the judge in open court and you might arrange to settle up and wipe the slate clean?

Otherwise you might try the Libel of Review but all that would end up doing for you is setting up an evidence repository and you best just clean up this current mess, get set up with some knowledge about remedy in America and set up your evidence repository in a timely and proactive manner some time in the future.


P.S. Have a friend go get a Register of Action on the case. Then try approaching the judge directly in open court by telling the bailiff your legal name. The judge might call your case and hear you out before deciding to jail you on the warrant. I think a lot of judges enjoy new twists like that on the docket. You know; something new to talk about over lunch.

[Chex]

To avoid hearsay
Quasi-contractus
A term used in the civil law. A quasi-contract is the act of a person, permitted by law,
by which he obligates himself towards another, or by which another binds himself to
him, without any agreement between them.

2. By article 2272 of the Civil Code of Louisiana, which is translated from article 1371
of the Code Civil, quasi-contracts are defined to be "the lawful and purely voluntary acts of a man, from which there results any obligation whatever to a third person, and sometime a reciprocal obligation between the parties." In contracts, it is the consent of the contracting parties which produces the obligation; in quasi-contracts no consent is required, and the obligation arises from the law or natural equity, on the facts of the case. These acts are called quasi-contracts, because, without being contracts, they bind the parties as contracts do.

5.-2. Tutorship or guardianship, is the second kind of quasi- contracts, there being no
agreement between the tutor and minor.

Who gave us the authority to administrator act as trustee for the strawman/persona account, can you prove it beyond a reasonable doubt?