Good evening folks. I want to thank you for inviting me into your home tonight to talk to you about an extremely important issue to you. I basically am here to talk about the United States Constitution and our government and some of the principles that you need to understand most thoroughly so that you can have an effective opportunity to exercise your constitutional rights. The whole purpose of this is that you understand that these rights come from God, that they are God inspired. God is the one who endowed us with these rights and that this Constitution merely offers a legitimate program to protect those rights or to secure those rights and the blessings of those rights on ourselves and on our children for all time. It's important that you understand that the Constitution is God inspired. It's important that you understand that a lot of the principles that are in the Constitution actually come out of the Holy Bible. And it's very important that you understand that this Constitution allows each of you each to be a king or queen in your own right as long as you recognize one principle that you don't ever create a situation where you take away the rights of another. So the whole point of having the Constitution is so that all of us can have the rights equally and as long as we respect our neighbor and allow them also to have the rights equally, the protections are going to last forever. And the reality is that we are going to get thoroughly into your Constitution. We want you to find a Constitution wherever you can and we are going to basically take you step by step through some of the most important parts of this Constitution so that you can better exercise your rights in a timely fashion. Now the facts are simple. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any rights. And that's just the way it is. And if you certainly couldn't exercise those rights timely if you don't know what they are. So what's going to happen is they're going to tell you what your rights are. And do you think they're going to tell you in your favor? Certainly not. Now, we've come a long way to put this program on to help you. By the way, my name is Carl Miller. I want to thank you again for inviting me into your home. We're going to proceed with vigor. I should tell you a few things about me that I'm a prior service soldier. I served three combat tours of the Republic of Vietnam. I should tell you that I was a participant in the top secret project called Blue Book, where the officers in the jungle smelled a rat in the woodpile and they decided to pull their top soldiers aside. And they said, come on over here. Let's come on over here. We want to talk to you. And they took their top soldiers in the corner and they started teaching them things like duty, honor, country, pride in the Corps. They taught us history. They taught us all kind of programming as far as what's going on in our government. They taught us the Constitution. We had to be able to rattle the Constitution off just like we would any manual of arms. And this all took place totally top secret so that we wouldn't offend any chains of command or any presidential problems similar to what happened between General MacArthur. The bottom line is this was taken totally upon their own, shall we say, careers to pull this thing off. And this happened all throughout a lot of the military services in Vietnam. Marine Corps, Air Force, Army, they all pulled aside their best people and they started putting everything on and teaching us our Constitution. So I'm going to try and instill in you that flame that was instilled in me over 25 years ago in which I have been transferring ever since. I have been fighting tooth and nail to defend the Constitution. I have helped thousands and thousands and thousands of other people do the same. I teach people how to be their own counsel, to stand up in courts of law, and be able to exercise their constitutional rights in a timely and effective manner. And the good Lord willing, I'll be able to keep doing that. So why don't we right now try and get into some parts of the Constitution. The most important thing that I can teach you about this Constitution is the importance of reading it. You must read the Constitution and understand what physically is involved. You must know your rights and timely assert them. That is your burden. If you do not, then a legal term called latches incurs. Latches is a legal term which is defined as latches is a specie of action wherein a party of reasonable intelligence and integrity having a right to take an action as is prescribed by law and having failed to timely do so loses all right to proceed. So what is actually happening out there, folks, is that latches is incurring because most people don't read their Constitution and know what's involved. So then you are left to being told, well, that's what it means. Okay, so you just got to do what you got to do and you're told and they're going to tell you in favor of them. They're not going to tell you in favor of you. So it's better for you to read the book and understand what's in it. It's not a very big book. I highly recommend the book. You can get several versions. A lot of times you contact your congressman. My congressman, Dominic Vincentini, state senator supplied this one for me. John Kuhn, a libertarian candidate, has supplied several also. Some of these folks, just check with your local congressman or state rep. A lot of times you can, they'll just give you one. If you cannot find one, go down to your United States government building here in the Detroit vicinity. It's called the McNamara building on the first floor. And what we do then is we go into the government printing office. I'm usually there about a buck. But I highly recommend you go get one. I don't leave home without mine. I usually have three or four of them someplace. And I hand them out also myself. I give them out to whoever. I think one of the most kindest things I can do to a person is give them this book and show them how it works. This book is kind of like a genie in a bottle. If you know how to stroke this book, I'm telling you the genie comes out. And it usually with a force that that you will be clearly recognized in any court in the land. Now that doesn't mean it'll be easy. You might have to work a little bit. But basically there's an argument. And it comes like this. If I violate your rights, you may or may not know about it. If you know about it, you may or may not be able to do something about it. If you do have an ability to do something about it, you may or may not have the financial wherewithal to go to a finished program. If you do have the financial wherewithal, you may not have the intestinal fortitude to go to a finished program. So most of the time, your governments and your abusive personalities in government or your corporations pretty much have carte blanche to injure you. Because in 99.9% of the cases, most people will not proceed. But every now and then, you run into that one hard nut and he doesn't quit or she doesn't quit till the cows come home. And what happens is that person will prevail. And those are the people that are actually generating better protections and better constitutional rights for you. Those are the ones that are going to the Supreme Courts and the Courts of Appeals and what have you that are pushing, that are spending their live funds to allow you to have the benefit. But if you aren't there to catch the benefit, then you, the benefit is lost. So we're going to get right into the Constitution. We're going to teach you some things about it. Pay attention because we're really doing this out of an act of love for you. And we're hoping to God you're going to pick up on it and pay attention. Okay? Now, I'm going to put one Constitution down here so the folks can see it. I will open this up from time to time to demonstrate things to you. I will basically try and read out of another Constitution so that we can better show you some of the things that are involved. Now, it's important that you understand that this Constitution is in writing. It's important that you understand that it is a legal document. Okay? That it was ratified by all of the members in a Congress together. Right? And that that document can be, you can get all the signatures on the document. Okay? And it's important that you understand that there was an offer. Government offered to govern. There was a consideration. The citizens considered how they were going to be governed. And government promised that they would govern by Constitution. And there was an agreement. The citizens agreed that if government promised there would be a government by Constitution that they would agree to allow the Constitution into force. Now, there's a unique situation here. It's very rare when you find the party of the first part, which is the congressman, officers of the government, who are also parties of the second part, as representatives of we the people, the republic. And when they signed the document, they signed the document as officers of government, agreeing to the Constitution, and simultaneously as officers of representatives of the people, in the republican form of government. And when they signed that document, that constituted a ironclad contract in writing, enforceable in a court of law, pursuant to the statute of frauds. Here in the state of Michigan, that's 566.132 Michigan Compiled Laws Act, which basically states anything in writing is enforceable in a court of law, pursuant to the statute of frauds. Now, all we're asking is that they enforce the contract. We want them to enforce the contract. In other words, if we read something in here, and we got a good reason for why we believe it's the way it is, then they should honor that. And they should honor it in favor of you, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary. But I'll get into that a little later. Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Constitution. This is called the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. It's located at Article 6. Everybody see that? Paragraph 2, which is going to start right here, and I'm going to read it to you. Okay? And basically what it says is, this Constitution and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and the treaties made are which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby. Anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary are notwithstanding. When they say notwithstanding, that means notwithstanding in law. That means that's a legal definition. Notwithstanding means notwithstanding in law. Now, a very important case, Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137. It's recorded at Volume 5, right here. It's an 1803 case, Marbury v. Madison. It's recorded in Volume 5, page 137. Now, basically what this case states, and I'm telling you right now, if you want to use a case to cite for any purpose in court, you have to read the case. If you haven't read the case, you haven't read the case and formed a basis upon which a logical determination in your mind could have been reached to form an opinion as to why you should do what you're going to do, then the judge will throw your case out. So read your cases. Don't just quote cases because you won't win. If the judge ever pins you down and starts asking you some merits of the case, and you can't even understand what the case is about, nine times out of ten, he's just going to throw your case in the can. So make sure you read the case. This is one of the leading cases in the history of the United States of America. The opinion of the court was given by the Honorable Judge John Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. His opinion was anything that is in conflict is null and void of law. Clearly, he said that for a secondary law to come in conflict with the Supreme Law was illogical, for certainly the Supreme Law would prevail over all other law, and certainly our forefathers had intended that the Supreme Law would be the basis of all law, and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law. It would bear no power to enforce. It would bear no obligation to obey. It would report to settle as if it never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law. No courts are bound to uphold it, and no citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a mere nullity, or a fiction of law, which means it doesn't exist in law. Now let me give you an example in today's timing as to how effective this is. This argument is so effective that it literally nullifies the Brady Bill. It nullifies the Crime Bill. It takes away the right of the people to keep and bear arms on these 19 weapons that turned into 159 weapons. It stops this 666 bill that just went through that they're trying to take away the Fourth Amendment. You see, because they have no power to pass a law that's in conflict with the United States Constitution, and it's automatically null and void of law from its inception, not from the date you go to court and brand it as unconstitutional. Now I want to get that real clear. A lot of people think that they've got to go to court and brand it unconstitutional. So I'm here to tell you, if you know your arguments and you can show your arguments, most of the time you will win. Every now and then you run into a hardnose, but I'll show you how to deal with him too. Okay? But for now, I want everybody that's got a chance to go out to learn your Constitution, your Article 6, Paragraph 2 of your Constitution, I want you to pay attention to what's going on here, learn to read about this Marbury v. Madison case. This right here is an example of what is called Shepard Citations. Shepard Citations is a group of reporters that go through and keep track of all the court cases that have come before the courts, especially the Supreme Court. And they clarify before the court all of the cases. Each one of these little numbers here represents somebody hiring a lawyer and going to the Supreme Court. Every one of these. There's nine pages of these, folks. Almost 200 years worth that goes against this case, Marbury v. Madison. And I want to tell you, this case is still supreme law of the land. If it wasn't, you would see O's in here where it was overturned, okay? You don't see any O's. There aren't any O's. That means the case is standing. There'd be an O in this column right next to here. You don't see any O's because there's no case that could come up against this case. That's how strong this case is, folks. Now, this is nine pages. This is two pages each. There's nine pages of this. This represents, if I was to try and teach you what this represents, if I was building a wall from here to the moon out of bricks, that's what that would mean in legal terms. Because that's how solid this case is. So it's very important that you understand your Constitution is an ironclad contract in writing enforceable in the Court of Law. It's very important that you understand Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the Supremacy Clause, which says, Now that is one of the most important lessons that I can teach you in the Constitution, so that you can understand how strong this document is. Now that is one of the most important lessons that I can teach you in the Constitution, so that you can understand how strong this document is. And when I go to the law library and I hit some of these law libraries, it's wall-to-wall books, folks. I mean, it's like I take people down there and their chins on the ground. And then I tell them, There's three floors of this place just like this, filled to the brim with books and books. And did you know that in every one of those cases, this little book right here, this one right here, folks, controls every single book in that law library. Every single one. Every single book in that law library is controlled by this little book. So can you understand how important it is for you to know what's in this little book, so that you can effectively call on that kind of a commanding knowledge? Okay? It is absolutely vital that you get a hold of one of these books and start learning it, and don't let anybody take away your constitutional rights. You can't even give your constitutional rights away. You have to voluntarily acquiesce by signing a document on a Miranda release form. That's how hard it is to give away your constitutional rights. We don't want you to give away any of your rights. We want you to know these rights backward, forward, upside down, or another. We want you to be able to rattle them off. Our soldiers could do it. And they did it with the great love in their heart, and the pride, and the duty that they hold in their heart. And they swore on a sacred oath that they defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And then they perform their duties to the best of their ability, so help them God. And by God they do. Both in the service and out of the service. Okay? We defend the Constitution to the death. We never surrender. We are soldiers above all. And we love our country, and our flag, and our Constitution. We are, the term is under the military code of conduct. I am an American fighting soldier. I serve the forces which guard my country in its constitutional way of government. I am prepared to give my life if necessary in defense of that Constitution. And that's exactly what we're going to do. So I want you to pay attention. A lot of brave soldiers have died to pay for this book, so that you could have the right. And the least you could do for your own self's sake is to learn what's in this book and be able to argue effectively what's in this book. You would be amazed how many times you can win if you just have this book and know what's in it. We're going to go into some other arguments here. We're going to try and show you how to really effectively use this book. Okay? Now that everybody's got that in hand. The next thing we're going to start teaching you is things like about the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is one of the biggies that everybody talks about today and the one that gets railroaded probably the most. The next is the Fourth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. Okay? But the Second Amendment is one of the most vital amendments here because our forefathers had such an important understanding of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That was the First Amendment. That they turned around and realized that without the right to protect that first right, they didn't have that right. So the Second Amendment, they instituted the right of the people to keep and carry arms, and that right shall not be infringed. Now they started out by saying a well-regulated militia being necessary for the maintenance of a free state. Okay? Isn't that a true statement, folks? A well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state. That's just a true statement. So is oranges are orange. That's why they call them oranges. Okay? But that doesn't have any legal precedence in theory. The most important part about that Second Amendment is it says the right of the people. And the Supreme Court has ruled in hundreds of cases that whenever it says the right of the people, it means the right each of every single citizen to possess the right equally. Now a lot of guys like to hand out this manola that, well, that's a collective right. You've got to be a member of the militia. That's all whodun. You don't have to be a member of the militia. All you have to do is be an American. You have the right. The right to keep and carry arms, and that right shall not be infringed. Now you will note after infringed, there is no subparagraph A, B, C, D, E, F, G, which would stipulate as to what would be an acceptable infringement. So all infringement is forbidden. Now who says so? You say so. Do you see that? Does everybody see that? You say so. Who are you? I'm an American. And I'm telling you, you're infringing my rights. You're stealing my rights. I claim infringement. I claim encroachment. I claim impingement. I claim usurpation. I claim you're stealing my right. Because that's what they're doing. And I ask them, what is it you don't understand about the word infringement? Because that's exactly what it says when you look in Black's Law Dictionary. That's another thing I want to bring up. When you want to talk to these people in court, you want to get a hold of one of these books. Right here. It's called Black's Law Dictionary. You would be absolutely amazed what's in Black's Law Dictionary. This is the exact words that you need to be able to definitively define the word game problem that we are having with these people today. They like to keep changing the words. But guess what? The words in this book are the words that were written when we were in the Constitution, when it was signed. And the definitions that are in this book are enforceable in a court of law. You can bring this book into court and pull it open and say, this is the one, judge. And they gots to listen. And that's the way it is. So for sure, if you're going to be in this, go down to one of your bookstores, whichever you may have in your area, Barnes & Noble or any one of the dozens of decent bookstores, and get a copy of Black's Law Dictionary. You need that to be in this because this is kind of like defining the map of how to get from A to B. You have to have this book to be able to pull it out so that you can turn around and tell them, hey, don't trample my rights. I take a real damn view of that. Another good book you can pick up on the Constitution is this American Constitution put out by West Publishing Company. This goes into a whole lot of widened arguments as to your Constitution. Now, after I'm finished talking to you, you're going to have a new concept of Constitution and how it works. You're going to understand that it's what you say it is. If you've got an honest right, and I'll give you a perfect example. Now, the First Amendment basically talks about the right of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, right? But isn't the right to work part of the right of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? You've got a right to work, right? Contract your labor, your skill, and your time of life as you see fit, right? Does that make sense to you? That's a First Amendment right. Another First Amendment right would be the right to travel freely unencumbered. See, no state can require you to have a license to travel freely unencumbered, and we'll go into that and show you how that is taken care of, okay? The bottom line is you need to learn as much as you absolutely possibly can in the shortest possible time about your Constitution, because I'm telling you right now as we speak, they are trying to curtail that Constitution and take away rights that you have that have been given to you from your forefathers. There's only one thing that's going to stop that. Well, maybe two. There's two things. The first thing that's going to stop that, if all of us get together, get a hold of one of these books and start shaking it, and say, whoa, horsey, we're not letting you take away that Constitution. This is America. We've got an American flag on our poll out front. Last time I checked, this is the United States of America. We've got a Constitution here, and you ain't touching that Constitution. So you call up that Bill McCollum in Washington, and you tell him, he's the guy that sponsored that 666 bill to take away the Fourth Amendment right to have a search warrant. You get a hold of him, and I'll give you his number later on in the speech here. And you call that joker up, and you say, sir, what is it you don't understand about your oath of office? We'd kind of like you to leave the Constitution alone. As a matter of fact, we'd like you to make it stronger than it is, not take nothing away from it. Period. And we resent the hell out of you taking an oath of office to protect the Constitution, and we put you in office, and the first thing you do when you get in there is try and scuttle the Constitution and flush it down the toilet. We're not going to put up with that stuff. We want you to understand that real clearly. The second way we can do it is if necessary and proper, our militias can come together and decide to tell these people that are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of our country by breaking down our laws that you have broken the law of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2381, which says that in the presence of two witnesses to the same overt act or in an open court of law, if you fail to timely move to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and honor your oath of office, you are subject to the charge of capital felony treason, and upon conviction, you will be taken by the posse to the nearest and busiest intersection and at the high noon hung by the neck and tail dead, the body to remain in state until dusk as an example to anyone who would take their oath of office lightly. You see, without that oath of office, this Constitution is worthless. That's why we have you take that oath of office, so that we know you will honor this oath of office and that you will keep our Constitution. We don't want anybody taking our Constitution away, and we're here to tell you right now, don't do it. We'll take a damn view of it. We probably will charge you. And we're not fooling around. Okay? Now, let's get into some other things in the Constitution. The bottom line here is you have to know to be able to exercise your Constitution. The most important parts about your Constitution are in your first ten amendments, okay? Obviously, the right of the people to keep and carry arms shall not be infringed, and that right shall not be infringed. You must claim your right if you want to have it. You have to be willing to do that. And if they are going to take your right, then you have to be willing to challenge them, whatever it costs. Now, the bottom line is any law that comes in conflict with that, what do we talk about in Article 6, Paragraph 2? If any law shall come in conflict with this, the supreme law, what happens? It's null and void of law. It bears no power to enforce, no obligation to obey, purports to settle as if it never existed, unconstitutionality dates from the enactment of such a law, not from any date so brand in an open court of law. So what happened to the Brady Bill, folks? Cancelled? Due to lack of interest? Okay? What happened to the crime bill with the gun infringements? If any portion of the bill be unconstitutional, the whole bill is unconstitutional. Because why? Repugnancy. Okay? It's repugnant to the United States Constitution. It's null and void of law. It bears no power to enforce, no obligation to obey, purports to settle as if it never existed. Which case said so? Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1803. That's how important that case is. That's why you've got to go down to your law library and read. Okay? So Marbury v. Madison is extremely important. It's important that you should be able to read the case, understand what they're talking about. Now, other cases that are involved are your rights to due process, like under your 4th and 5th and 6th Amendments. Right? The right of the people to be secure in their houses. The right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the person or things to be seized. And obviously that would imply, that would imply, that would imply that he'd gone before a judge and said, this is the guy, he did it, this is the crime that was done, and this is the evidence we're looking for, judge, and we'd like to get a warrant, and we're swearing out everything we told you is the God's truth, and then they can come over and they can search till hell freezes over. Okay? Does that sound logical to you? No, that's what Bill 666 is trying to throw out. They don't want you to have that right anymore. Now it's important for you to immediately jump to the Ninth Amendment. What does the Ninth Amendment say? Enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Now basically what that means in simplest of terms, Congress has no authority to add on to the Constitution in such a way that would take away rights previously guaranteed. What seems to be Mr. McCollum's problem? Does he not read the King's English? Excuse me. Simply spoken, he has no authority to pass this 666 Bill. The Congress had no authority to pass this Brady Bill. They had no authority to pass this crime bill because it clearly infringed on the United States Constitution. I don't care how noble the issue it was. I don't care how learned the people claimed to be. They weren't learned enough. Because if they were learned, they would have understood the Ninth Amendment forbids adding on to the Constitution by any laws whatsoever that takes away rights that are previously guaranteed. Let's go on. Let's hit the Tenth Amendment. The powers not delegated to the United States What are they talking about here? The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectfully or to the people. See, this is a limited contract. This contract is designed to limit government. And when you get into your police powers, you start understanding your police powers. Almost you'll hear this all the time. Well, we have police powers. Broad and sweeping police powers. You look up Black's Law Dictionary of Police Powers. It says, The law of eminent domain of a state or political subdivision to enact laws for the common good and welfare and to curb crime. And in great big black letters, it says, Within constitutional limitations. See the Tenth Amendment. Well, when they're talking about see the Tenth Amendment, this is the Tenth Amendment they're talking about. Now, do they have powers to take away previous rights guaranteed under the Constitution? The answer is obviously no, they don't. Obviously, the Tenth Amendment sets a clear limit on that. What is it these guys don't understand about their Constitution? They pass these Brady Bills. They pass these Crime Bills. They pass these 666 Bills to take away your Tenth Amendment right requiring a search warrant. What is it that they don't understand about the locks on the Constitution? Now, do you see how wise our forefathers were? They knew. They knew history. And they knew that history repeats itself if people forget. So what they did is they set a standard very importantly toward the end of the contract that clearly stipulated exactly what limits would be there. You see. And it clearly stipulated that no power has existed to take away rights that were previously guaranteed. So how, therefore, is this being done? I'll tell you how it's being done. Kose wants to. And they're not doing it by law. Now, why are they getting away with it? Because most of the people don't know any better. And if you don't know your rights and you don't timely assert them, latches and curse, latches being a specie of action we're in a party of reasonable intelligence and integrity having a right to take an action as is prescribed by law and having failed to timely do so loses our right to proceed. So by you acquiescing, by not jumping up and saying, hey, hold the line, Chester. You ain't touching that Fourth Amendment. You aren't touching that Second Amendment. We're not putting up with that stuff. You took an oath of office, we're going to hold you to it. You violate that oath of office, we're going to charge you with capital felony treason under Title 18 United States Code, Section 2381. What difference does it make if they're in open rebellion against the United States or if they're breaking down the laws creating a rebellion? Isn't that giving aid and comfort to the enemies of our country? It most certainly is. And it's called sedition. Treason by sedition. Okay? Now we've got to start collaring these guys and telling them, hey, what is it you don't understand about the Constitution and your oath of office? We're going to clearly correct that in the short interim. And if you don't want to fix it, we will remove you. And that's our duty and our responsibility. Now when Benjamin Franklin walked out of all of the hearings to set up this Constitution, a lady reporter walked up to him and asked him, what is it we have now? And he turned to her and told her, we have a republic if we can keep it. Obviously the burden is on us to make sure we keep it. So I'm asking you to get a hold of one of these constitutions and let's plan on keeping it. All right. Now let's get into some more of the arguments on the Constitution. Your Fifth Amendment. Let's pull up your Fifth Amendment. No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on the presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger. Nor shall any person be subject to the same offense be twice put in jeopardy. That's the double jeopardy statue. Of life or limb. Nor shall be compelled in any crime, criminal case, to be a witness against himself. That's a self-incrimination defense. Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. That's your equal protection clause. You have an equal right to all of your rights under the law. And you have a right to due process of law. As a matter of fact, if they don't give you due process, the law of Title V, United States Code, Section 556D, is clear and specific and it says if they deny you due process of the law, all jurisdiction ceases automatically. That's Title V, United States Code, Section 556D, also 557, and Section 706 of that code. In other words, if they deny you due process at any time and you can prove it, you can force a showdown and you can turn around and say, well, they might have had jurisdiction at one time, judge, but they lost it when they denied me due process. All right? Now, the other parts are you cannot deny life, liberty, property without due process of law nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. You know, how many times did you hear about that today? I mean, it's incredible. The Sixth Amendment is another important one. All of them are important, but there are more important ones. All right? In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed. Which district shall have been previously ascertained by law and to be informed of the nature and the cause of the action and accusation to be confronted with the witnesses against him. That's the right to confront your accusers. To have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in your favor. That's the subpoena rights. And to have the assistance of counsel for your defense or you can stand as your own counsel. And I know they tell you that it's a fool that stands as his own counsel, but it's my argument that it's a fool that doesn't. Because I'll tell you why. You know your case better than anybody. How many times do you hear about gripes between attorneys and the citizens? The biggest gripe they had was, well, he never said nothing about that or she never said nothing about that. Well, she didn't do this or she didn't do that. Well, why? Because they don't know the case as good as you do. You're the one that knows your best case. The only thing they know is how to apply the law. So all I've been telling you is learn how to apply the law on your constitutional rights and then you don't need to do that. The only time you get into trouble is if you run your mouth too much and you get into self-incrimination. So obviously, you have to keep your wits about you and watch your mouth. But the bottom line is, actually, I personally believe you are the best person to present the facts of your case because you're the best person that knows all the facts. The only thing you know how to do is how to actually do it in a legal and lawful manner that is recognized by the legal community. And that's really not hard to learn. I can teach you. Believe me. Alright, the Seventh Amendment. In suits of the common law where the value in controversy shall exceed $20, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved. And no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States because the jury is the ultimate trial of fact. Then according to the rules of the common law. Now, we'll get into that common law argument. There's a lot of heavy arguments around that common law. Basically, I don't want to overwhelm you on the first time out of the chute because that's not hard to do. Okay? Now, the bottom line of this Constitution is it's all in writing. It clearly represents a contract. I'm asking you to learn your contract. I'm asking you to learn the book. Learn your contract. I mean, when you go to some place to do some work on your car, you read the document that comes with it for the warranty, don't you? Why? Because just in case something goes wrong, you want to be able to bring it back, right? Well, I'm asking you to read the warranty on your Constitution so that you can understand the rights that you have under that Constitution so that if you don't get it right, we can bring it back. Does that make sense to you? All right. Now, it's also important that you understand that this Constitution is a very unique document and that this Constitution is supposed to be enforced and I'm going to teach you some things here right now. This right here is representation. I know it's kind of hard to see here, but basically what we're talking about here is this comes from the books that tell the judge how, right here and over here, this comes and tells the judge how the Constitution is to be interpreted. This is from the Amjuris Prudence volumes and this is volume 16. You want the Constitutional Law section right here, Constitutional Law and you want section 97. And when you start reading it, the most important part about it and I'll read it is that a Constitution should receive a liberal interpretation in favor of the citizen is especially true with respect to those provisions which were designed to safeguard the liberty and security of the citizen in regard to both person and property. Can you see that? Can you all see that? Is that coming up? Right here. Over more. Okay. Alright. To safeguard the liberty and security of the citizen in regard to both person and property. See Note 31. Brides first to United States 273, U.S. 28 and all of these 40 Supreme Court cases hold that axiom. In other words, it's supposed to be liberally enforced in favor of the citizen for the protection rights and property. And a constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary. 32. Put on 32. Dejammer v. Hospital Authority of Albany in all of these cases. Let's do that over again. And a constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary. Similarly, a provision intended to afford a remedy to those who have just claims should receive a beneficial construction for the purpose of extending the remedy to all who might fairly come within the meaning of the terms. And that's Ryder v. Fitchey of Ohio in a Supreme Court case. Okay? That's Note 33. Okay? Now, this comes out of 16th Amp Jurisprudence. In other words, I have this Constitution. This Constitution is a contract in writing enforceable in the court of law pursuant to the statute of frauds. I'm asking for specific performance, Your Honor, in favor of me. I am the beneficiary of the contract. There's also a basic premise in contract law, Basic Contract Law 101 of any first-year law student that says, the contract shall be enforced most favorably in favor of the non-preparer. And that's you. You didn't prepare it. Now, if you believe, honestly, that you have a right, and you can timely bring that right before a proper adjudicated authority, and you can clearly stipulate as to what your right was, guess what? They gots to listen. That's the way it is. That's the way it's supposed to be. And I'm telling you, if you know your rights and you timely assert those rights, you have those rights. But if you sit on your haunches and you cry foul, that's terrible. Somebody ought to do something about that. Hey, be a somebody. Do something about it. Don't sit there telling somebody ought to do something about that. Be a somebody. You do something about it. You honestly got an honest bitch. You go out there and you take care of it. Because that's what it takes to be an American. That's what it's all about. That's what being an American is all about. That's what separates you from the rest of the whole world. Because Americans, you don't trample on their rights because they're going to come get you. You do not trample on their rights. They won't put up with it. So be an American and don't put up with it. Stand up there and be counted. Now I want to read the next argument there which is argument number 98 which basically deals with the effect of an emergency. While an emergency cannot create power and no emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution or state constitutions, public emergencies such as economic depression for especially liberal construction of constitutional powers and it has been declared that because of national exigency it is the policy of the courts in times of national peril so liberally to construe the special powers vested in the chief executive as to sustain and effectuate the purpose thereof and to that end also more liberally to construe the constituted division and classification of the powers of the co-ordinate branches of the government and insofar as may not be clearly inconsistent with the Constitution right? In other words they can't be in conflict with the Constitution to vest extraordinary powers in the chief executive but I'm telling you on the other hand a contention that a grave emergency such as the depression should permit construction of the constitutional provisions which would meet the emergency was rejected in one case the court holding that neither the legislature nor any executive or judicial officer may disregard the provisions of the Constitution in cases of an emergency where the plain and unequivocal terms of the Constitution present to question of construction as to departures in emergencies so not even an emergency justifies the taking away of constitutional provisions and I know you've heard differently I know you think well they've got an emergency they just declared an emergency and then the president issues an executive order but let me ask you if it's the repugnant of the Constitution of the United States is it law? No who says so? We do we're the people it's our country it's our Constitution we're the ones that say you can't do that and we mean it we've got a little better listen alright now let's get into the next argument here now I hope I'm not boring you to tears here but it's kind of important that we cover these basic things so that you can understand as to the construction with reference to the common law an important canon of construction is that that constitutions must be construed with reference to the common law that means the law of the little people out there not the corporations okay since in most respects the federal and state constitutions did not repudiate but cherish the established common law this fact has been taken into consideration by the courts in construing certain clauses in a state constitution such as the provision securing the right to a jury trial also provisions in regard to crime have been interpreted with reference to the common law rule that one that one charged with a crime may be convicted of a lesser offense necessarily included in the crime charge in such cases the courts of the state always regard the language in the common law sense so the common law prevails don't let anybody tell you this admiralty law prevails because it only prevails if you get sucked into it we're not going to let you do that we're going to teach you how to beat it the common law also permitted destruction of the abatement of nuisances by summary proceedings traffic tickets folks that's what a traffic ticket does it is a writ of assistance a bill of attainder it's unlawful in the United States of America and it was never supposed that a constitutional provision was intended to interfere with this established principle and although there is no common law of the United States in the sense who said so Erie Railroad versus Tompkins okay alright of a national customary law as distinguished from the common law of England adopted in the several states in interpreting the federal constitution recourse may still be had to the aid of the common law of England it has been said that without reference to the common law to this common law the language of the federal constitution could not be understood so the common law applies folks and we're going to get into that common law heavily in the advanced section alright okay now let's get back into this in interpreting the federal constitution adopted by the several states alright the recourse may still be had to the aid of the common law of England it has been said that without reference to the common law the language of the United States Constitution would not be understood this is due to the fact that this instrument and the plan of government of the United States were founded on the common law as established in England at the time of the revolution okay therefore it is the general rule that the phrases in the Bill of Rights taken from the common law must be construed in reference to the latter specifically the United States Supreme Court has taken the common law into consideration in construing the fourth amendment the fifth amendment provisions relating alright so the common law is extremely important that we get and we will cover that thoroughly it's important to understand that most of you out there are citizens at the common law that only only those that understand the differences in admiralty and maritime law those that are corporations officers of corporations or officers of government residing in the District of Columbia the fourteenth amendment duality of citizenship which is talked about in the case of Erie Railroad versus Tompkins which is a rather heavy argument and I will cover that thoroughly with you so that you understand where the traps and the differences are but for right now I'm trying to demonstrate to you construction and programming so that you can understand that this constitution right here is the supreme law of the land it is a contract in writing it is enforceable in favor of you in an open court of law you are the beneficiary I want to give you some basic more points on this am jurisprudence argument this is section 114 of the sixteenth volume of am jurisprudence second I'm going to give you a couple more of these sites so that you can understand how powerful a document this is by the way I highly recommend you go down to the law library grab that sixteenth volume am jurisprudence start at section 1 and start paging through to section 300 you will absolutely be astounded we are now on sixteenth am jurisprudence second section 117 and I will read it to you basically various facts and circumstances extrinsic to the constitution are often resorted to by the courts to aid them in determining its meaning as previously noted however such extrinsic aids may not be resorted to where the provision in the question is clear and unambiguous in such a case the courts must apply the terms of the constitution as written and they are not at liberty to search for meanings beyond the instrument which that militia argument and that collective law theory of the second amendment is they're reaching they're reaching far alright clearly it says in the plain english the right of the people to keep and carry arms shall not be infringed now what is it you don't understand about the word infringed they're infringing the bradyville it's infringement 1968 gun control act it's infringing all of these the ccw acts of these states they're infringing who says so you do how shall a document be enforced in favor of who you when are you going to enforce it you're the one that is the the citizen all power is inherent to people you're the one with the power enforce your power alright does everybody understand that argument that's the magnificence I'm bringing the genie out we're stroking the bottle here and I'm going to bring the genie out here in a second you're going to understand the magnificence of the power of this book you see once you understand this is an ironclad contract once you understand that this is enforceable in the court of law pursuant to the statute of frauds once you understand you have a right to claim specific performance on the contract your honor I'm demanding my right to keep and carry arms and that right shall not be infringed I want specific performance I am the holder of the contract it's supposed to be enforced in favor of me I am the clearly intended and especially designated beneficiary the citizen I want the thing protected in favor of my right does that make logical sense to you? now do you start to understand the power of this document? okay see before you just thought it was a bunch of writing in some textbook that you had to take when you took a civics class in high school in the 11th grade see I want you to understand that you don't leave home without this this is more important than your credit card okay next let's get into the next section I'm going to cover some more of these Amjur's Prudent sections so that you can understand I want to get into section 155 16th Amjur's Prudent 2nd section 155 since the constitution is intended for the observance of the judiciary as well as other departments of government and the judges are sworn to to support its provisions got me? sworn? has an oath of office sworn? the courts are not at liberty to overlook or disregard its commands or countenance evasions thereof it is their duty in authorized proceedings to give full effect to the existing constitution and to obey all constitutional provisions irrespective of their opinion as to the wisdom or the desirability of such provisions and irrespective of the consequences thus it is said that the courts should be and are alert to enforce the provisions of the United States Constitution and guard against their infringement by legislative fiat or otherwise in accordance with these basic principles the rule is fixed that the duty in the proper case to declare a law unconstitutional cannot be declined and must be performed in accordance with the deliberate judgment of the tribunal before which the validity of the enactment is directly drawn into question if the constitution prescribes one rule and the statute another and a different rule it is the duty of the courts to declare that the constitution and not the statute governs in cases before them for a judgment does everybody understand that? they're telling the judge you've got to rule in favor of the constitution and if you know your constitution whose favor are they going to rule in? yours but you have to have enough hair on your tail feather to walk in there and say hey I'm an American and I have a constitutional right that right shall not be infringed and you're infringing and I'm asking you not to do that because it's not nice I'm asking the judge to do his duty under his sworn oath of office and uphold the United States Constitution as he swore he would under Article 11 Paragraph 1 in this state which says that he shall swear to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic and he will perform his duties to the best of his ability so help him God now let's get closer to so help him God now let's get into another one of these we've got a load of them folks so let's bear with me here 16th Am jurisprudence section 177 declaratory judgments declaratory judgment actions have often been utilized to test the constitutionality of a statute and government practices the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act makes specific provisions of the determination of construction or validity of statutes in municipal ordinance by declaratory judgment and is considered to furnish a particularly appropriate method for the determination of controversies relative to the construction and validity of the statutes and of ordinances the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act although it does not mention declarations as to the construction or validity of the statutes has been invoked frequently as a means of assaying the constitutionality of congressional legislation a plaintiff can have a declaratory judgment action on the constitutionality of either the federal or state statute by a single federal judge so long as he does not ask to have the operation of the statute enjoined you can't enjoin a constitutional right a court may grant declaratory relief unless there is a case of controversy before the court that is the dispute must consist of specific adverse claims based upon present rather than future or speculative facts on which to base the adjudication alright I'm trying to tell you folks here you have a right to demand a declaratory judgment which we are going to do in several of our cases here and they got to declare is it constitutional or isn't it constitutional if it's constitutional it has to be judged in favor of who? you the citizen why? because you're the beneficiary it's supposed to be enforced in favor of you the beneficiary the citizen for the protection of rights and property Byars v. United States 273 U.S. 28 and the 40 Supreme Court cases that support that mandate okay now let's get there's just a couple more here bear with me I know you're probably bored of tears right now but I don't want you to do that I want you to pay attention okay we're at section 255 16th Amp Jurisprudence section 255 in all instances where the court exercises its power to invalidate legislation on constitutional grounds the conflict of the statute with the Constitution must be irreconcilable the Brady Bill irreconcilable huh? in other words the court is without authority to declare a statute unconstitutional unless it is in positive or direct conflict with the statute or with the Constitution thus a statute is not to be declared unconstitutional unless so inconsistent with the Constitution that it cannot be enforced without a violation thereof because that would be violating the Constitution we can't have that what happened in Marbury vs. Madison 5S 137 same thing a clear incompatibility between law and the Constitution must exist before the judiciary is justified in holding the law unconstitutional this principle is of course in line with the rule that doubts as to constitutionality should be resolved in favor of the constitutionality and the beneficiary you the citizen for the protection of your rights and property okay does everybody pick up on that? now let's let's shift to 256 256 right here the general rule is that an unconstitutional statute whether federal or state though having the form and name of law is in reality no law but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutional dates from the time of the enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it wouldn't it be interesting if 34 34 where's 34 there's 35 right here's 34 state Xrel versus Nguyen v. Greer but I'll tell you what Marbury vs. Madison comes higher than that okay alright 34 let's cover that again and ineffective for any purpose since the unconstitutional dates from the time of the enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it an unconstitutional law in legal contemplation is as inoperative as if it never had been passed the Brady Bill the Crime Bill the 1968 Gun Control Bill all these bills such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not ever been enacted no repeal of an enactment is necessary since an unconstitutional law is void the general principles follows that it imposes no duties confers no rights creates no office bestows no power or authority on anyone affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it a contract did everybody pick up on that key word contract a contract which rests on an unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation no one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law no courts are bound to enforce it persons convicted and fined under a statute subsequently held unconstitutional may recover the fines paid a void act cannot be legally inconsistent with a valid one and an unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede an existing valid law indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land the constitution it is superseded thereby since an unconstitutional statute cannot repeal or in any way affect an existing one if a repealing statute is unconstitutional the statute which it attempts to repeal remains in full force in effect and where a well what did I say there remains in full force in effect is the second amendment a full force in effect you better believe it okay now what is it they don't understand about infringed and where statute which it attempts to repeal remains in full force in effect and where a clause repealing a prior law is inserted in the act which act is unconstitutional and void the provision of the repeal of the prior law will usually fall with it and will not be permitted to operate as repealing such prior law in other words the law stands always the real law the constitution the general principles stated above apply to the constitutions as well as to the laws of several states insofar as they are repugnant to the constitution and the laws of the United States and let's see if 54 will confer Kuhn versus Berry but I can tell you Marbury versus Madison is higher than that but I'd be willing to bet you they cited Marbury in that moreover a constitution of a statute a construction of a statute which brings in conflict with a constitution will nullify it as effectively as if it had it in its express terms been enacted in conflict therewith so anything passed in conflict with the United States constitution is clearly unconstitutional it doesn't take a college professor graduating magnum cum laude from Harvard to figure these things out all you have to do is read that's why God gave you eyes now the actual existence well let's go to 257 257 same book 16th Amp Jurisprudence the actual existence of a statute prior to determination that it is unconstitutional is an operative fact and may have consequences which cannot justify being ignored when a statute which has been in effect for some time is declared unconstitutional questions of rights claimed to have become vested of status of prior determinations deemed to have finality and acted upon accordingly of prior determinations deemed to have finality and acted upon accordingly and of public policy in the light of the nature both of the statute and of its previous application demand examination alright it has been said that an all-inclusive statement of the principle of absolute retroactive and validity cannot be justified obviously it would be ex post facto an unconstitutional statute is not necessarily a nullity it may have indeterminate consequences binding upon the people alright so you have to pay attention to what's going on now let's get a few more and we're out of here section 258 I'm just going to read the important section here on the other hand it is clear that congress cannot by authorization or ratification give the slightest effect to a state law or constitution which is in conflict with the constitution of the United States it would be what? a nullity why? because it's in conflict or repugnancy it'd be in violation of Marbury vs. Madison alright now are you starting to see the gist of what's going on here there's just one more I think and we're out of here alright section 260 of the same 16th ham jurisprudence now folks head down to the law library the books are usually green or red in color they're kind of thick ask the librarian where am jurisprudence 2nd is stored go on over there grab the 16th volume start at section 1 and just start paging through to section 300 I'm telling you you won't believe it we're going to look at section 260 although it is manifest that an unconstitutional provision in the statute is not cured because included in the same act with valid provisions and that there are no degrees of constitutionality in other words it's either constitutional or it's unconstitutional there's nothing it's kind of like half pregnant there's no such thing alright so that an act is either constitutional or it is unconstitutional okay so if you got statute here and most of it's constitutional and a part of it's unconstitutional guess what it's all unconstitutional so what we got here is a crime bill and we got part of it is constitutional and part of it's unconstitutional obviously they had no authority under the second amendment to fool around with the right of the people to keep and bear arms they couldn't demand that the people not possess certain firearms so this directly applies to this crime bill obviously part of the bill is constitutional and the other part is not constitutional so what is the end result the whole bill is unconstitutional does everybody see that now I want you to start looking at these things and I want you to start hammering these guys and don't let these guys pull this kind of stuff hook them over there in column and say hey Charlie why don't you step over here for a minute I want to check out something here I mean you would if they had your wallet wouldn't you does that make sense to you now we're going to get into a unique argument here for the last half hour I've been trying to hammer home the power of this book this book right here okay I'm trying to hammer home the power of this book to teach you that this is the most valuable book in your whole life if you know what's in this book I am telling you you are in full possession of your American citizenship if you don't know what's in this book I am telling you you're going to be a slave subject to the whim of extrajudicial people who want to tell you what to do when to do it how to do it and how high to pack it now my honest philosophy to you is as a kindness and a Christian to you I tell you learn this book I love it when these guys tell me I don't have any rights I say well if you believe that let's go to court and on the end of the day we'll see who owns who but I'm going to tell you right now if you violate any of my constitutional rights I will sue your socks off and I will attach everything you own bank, business and home and I'm telling you I'm the one your mama warned you about so you damn well better listen do not violate my rights because I will come after you and I will take care of business and I will do what is necessary and proper and I will pull every stop out and I will go dig up every nut, bolt, screw and when it's done you will find out you messed with the wrong American because this American is not going to back down okay now we're going to get into a real special argument now this argument has taken almost eighteen and a half years to develop so I want you to pay attention this argument is a unique concept that has been honed like a razor to a very meticulous edge so that you can understand what's going on obviously we have established clearly that you have a constitutional right and obviously we have established that you are the beneficiary of the contract and we have established that the Constitution is a contract in writing enforceable in the court of law and we have established that you have a right to claim specific performance on the contract and we have established that it's supposed to be interpreted in your favor so if you've got an honest constitutional belief they have to listen now let's take that to the next step the next step is can a state arbitrarily and erroneously convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it let's start start with here we're going to start walking down this sheet okay Murdoch versus Pennsylvania US Supreme Court now when you want to go into the law library and you want to look up something what you want to do is understand that Supreme Court is Trump okay that's the clearest way I can explain it to you if you've got a Supreme Court case that trumps a district court that trumps a Court of Appeals that trumps a state court that trumps everything so you want to deal with Supreme Court cases as best you can Murdoch versus Pennsylvania is a unique case it's recorded at 319 US 105 that's the 319th volume of United States Supreme Court reports on page 105 so when you go to the law library go into US reports ask the little gal there the little guy that's behind the counter where is the United States Supreme Court reports they'll tell you right where it is you grab volume 319 you turn to page 105 and it'll give you the case of Murdoch versus Pennsylvania Murdoch versus Pennsylvania is a real unique case and I'm telling you to read the case you get the case the judge always likes to see that you're ready and I'm going to summate basically the case briefly basically it is a religious test case wherein Jehovah's Witness in the year of 1943 wanted their right to be able to go and preach among the public because that is their right to evangelize Pennsylvania in Pennsylvania they wanted them to have a license to solicit okay this is basically the crux of the case now what happened was the Jehovah's Witness claimed their First Amendment right of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness the right to worship and exercise their religion unencumbered right and of course that's one of the mainstays that founded this country was the religious freedom okay and basically the points on the case that are established are a state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution and that a flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the constitutional liberties of press and religion and inevitably tends to suppress their existence alright let's pull that over there everybody see that okay alright I'll start again a state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution and that a flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the constitutional liberties of the press and religion and inevitably tends to suppress the exercise thereof that the ordinance is non-discriminatory and that it applies also to peddlers of wares and merchandise as immaterial the liberties granted by the First Amendment are and in a preferred position since the privilege in question is guaranteed by the federal constitution and exists independently of a state's authority the inquiry as to whether the state has given something for which it cannot ask a return is irrelevant alright no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it now a lot of people come back to me and say well I'm not a Jehovah's Witness so that case doesn't apply to me I want you to reach I want you to understand we're not talking about whether you're a Jehovah's Witness here what we're talking about here is are you an American and do you have rights what they are talking about here is that these Jehovah's Witness people exercised their rights timely that they had a right to worship and exercise and worship their God and evangelize as they chose and that the state came in and arbitrarily converted that right into a privilege and issued a license and a fee for it that is totally unconstitutional now we took that case it's a pioneering case and we argue that case for all of your constitutional rights all you need to do is keep in mind that you are an American and you have constitutional rights number one number two you have to keep in mind what right can you pull the right out of the constitution if you can pull the right out of the constitution and I'll give you an example how about the right to travel freely and encumbered pursuant to Shreveau versus Thompson and we'll get into that how about the right to keep and bear arms right does a state have a right to require a license and a fee for the exercise of the right and if they do can you ignore the license and a fee we'll get into that now obviously in this case it's clearly established and this is the premise of this case no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege issue a license and a fee for it and require you to have that otherwise you committed a crime that's totally 100% unconstitutional I want that to get across real clear now let's jump to the next case by the way Murdoch is recorded at 319 that's the 319 volume US reports page 105 we'll start the case alright go read the case though make sure you read the case I don't want anybody to come up and tell me they didn't read the case because I'm going to get on you you're not following that's failure to follow instructions ok now we're going to walk down the next step of this case we took care of Murdoch here let's go to Shuttlesworth vs. Birmingham Alabama which is recorded at volume 373 the same US reports you go to volume 373 turn to page 262 when we go to Shuttlesworth vs. Birmingham Alabama this is another unique religious case ok in this case six ministers were accused of inciting to riot and otherwise create a disturbance and disturb the peace ok they had a sit down this case came down in 1962 and what happened was they said they needed to have a license to to have a public gathering ok and what happened was it went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court says no no you don't need to have a license for the exercise of a First Amendment right to freely assemble ok right basically the gist of the case is the Negro ministers were convicted in Alabama State Court of aiding and abetting in violation of criminal trespass ordinance in Birmingham Alabama the only evidence against them was to the effect that they had incited 10 Negro students to engage in a sit down demonstration at a white lunch counter actually there were six ministers but only two got charged as a protest against the racial segregation and they cite other cases a lot of times you can find other cases in these cases in Gover v. City of Birmingham Alabama this court today holds on the authority of Peterson v. City of Greenville that the convictions of those 10 students for criminal trespass were constitutionally invalid since those convictions have been set aside it follows that these petitioners did not incite or aid and abet any crime and that therefore the convictions of these petitioners must be set aside now basically what they were claiming is their constitutional right to freely assemble the city's was claiming that they had to have a license to put on a demonstration which they didn't have and they were charging them with a criminal trespass for not having a valid license to freely assemble and or protest okay now the gist of this case I want you to see the significance of this case in view of the second of the case we gave you before that Murdoch v. Pennsylvania clearly established that no state could convert a secured liberty and a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it because everybody got that Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Alabama said that if the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it you can ignore the license and a fee and engage in the right with impunity that means they can't punish you they gotta let you go alright does everybody see that it's very important that you understand first your constitution is the supreme law of the land and that you have that right and that that right shall not be infringed and it's supposed to be enforced in favor of you the query intended and expressly designated beneficiary it's very important that you understand that no state may convert that right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it and if they do Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Alabama says you can ignore the license and engage in the right with impunity that means they can't punish you now the next case is very important and it's very important that you see the argument okay that's United States v. Bishop that's 412 volume 412 United States Reports this is page 346 come down here United States v. Bishop is a very unique case basically what Bishop does is it sets a standard for what constitutes a criminal violation in terms of willful intent okay willfulness is one of the major elements that is required to be proven in any criminal element you have to prove one that you're the party two that you had a method or an opportunity to do the thing and third that you did so with a willful intent now when we get to willful intent willful is defined as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty obviously in the previous two cases you have decided that you have relied on the United States Constitution and you have relied on decisions of the United States Supreme Court so could you have willfully done any deed or crime obviously not so guess what this case stipulates that you have a perfect defense to the element of willfulness alright since the burden on the prosecution is to prove that you did willfully and knowingly avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty he cannot perform that task can he because it's obviously you have a constitutional immunity to that the previous case Shuttlesford versus Birmingham Alabama so they couldn't even punish you the case before that said you didn't need a license for the exercise of a right and the case before that said your constitutional right is supreme over any state law so if they pass the law in violation of your constitution the constitution overwhelms the state law so the law doesn't even exist in law does everybody see that now since the prosecutor does not have a cause of action for which relief can be granted your honor may it please the court counsel is specifically precluded from performing his major task therefore your honor may please the court at this time I would motion most graciously for a dismissal with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted by this honorable court and I'd kind of like to collect my costs and fees for having to defend this patently frivolous and spurious complaint sir may it please the court laughter will usually break out thereafter at which point the judge will usually turn to the prosecutor and say well Mr. Proce what do you think we ought to do about this young fella and he'll say I'd go for the motion to dismiss your honor and the judge will turn to him and say that's a good answer because I don't think you're ready for this kid today and 40 attorneys will break out laughing okay that's actually happened to me folks I'm telling you this argument is a killer argument it's good for every single constitutional right you've got all you have to do is fill in the blanks what constitutional right prove that you have the constitutional right tell them the state doesn't have a right to convert that right into a privilege tell them that they can't even punish you if they do and then claim that the prosecutor can't prove willfulness so you obviously didn't do no crime and then flip around and demand for your dismissal which is your right and get your costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case may it please the court and I promise you you will be amazed 40 attorneys will jump up and say yeah they'll come up and shake your hand and tell you that's one of the most magnificent arguments they've ever heard they'll tell you you got something like King Kong for taking on the bar association or whatever now I'm telling you these things that personally happened to me I can relate the exact cases that goes for practicing law without a license obviously you got a right to work you got a right to contract your right to work as you see fit not as some arbitrary and capricious bar association sees fit right doesn't that make sense to you you don't want to belong to the union that's your right this is a right to work state right the bottom line is this they cannot compel you to have a license or pay a fee for the exercise of your right and if they do you can ignore the license and a fee engage in the right with impunity that means they can't punish you and since you got a perfect defense to the element of woefulness they cannot punish you they have to dismiss they do not have a cause of action now this argument I'm telling you has taken us over 18 years to develop in courts and in law libraries over the years and just kind of compiling and arguing cases and doing this this argument is a killer argument they have yet have they ever won against us on this argument nor could they in the United States of America as long as the Constitution stands I'm asking that you pay attention to this argument and start utilizing it we'll show you some of the techniques later in the second half now the word willfully has the same meaning in controlling the voluntary intentional violation of a known legal duty and the distinction between the statute is found in the additional misconduct that is essential to the violation of the felony provision if they can't prove willfulness they can't prove nada because everybody got that now let's go to the next one now that you've won and your rights have been violated the next thing they will claim well we acted in good faith or well we acted in good faith we had good faith reliance that you broke the law okay and that means you can't sue us that's a lie you see since these two cases Owen versus City of Independence which is recorded at 100 volume and you want to look at Supreme Court reports now that's a different reporter Supreme Court reports will actually say on the back of the reporter Supreme Court reports it won't say US it'll say Supreme Court reports so that's a different volume it's a newer reporter so you want the 100th volume and you want to look up Supreme Court reports and you want to turn to page 1398 there is also a counterpart case to this Owen case which is Maine v. Thiboutot I'll give you the site for those okay I gave you Owen versus City of Independence so I'll give you Maine v. Thiboutot Maine v. Thiboutot is recorded at 100th Supreme Court that's 100th volume Supreme Court reports page 2502 now basically the summation of what these basic arguments say where plain language of a statute supported by consistent judicial interpretation is strong it is not necessary to look beyond the words of the statute right now these are both civil rights cases the right of action created by statute relating to deprivation under color of law of state law of a right secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United States encompasses claims which are based solely on statutory violations of federal law and apply to the claim that claimants had been deprived of their rights in some capacity to which they were entitled now whenever this happens folks you must understand something and that goes for both Maine v. Thiboutot and Owen versus City of Independence and I'll tell you the brief synopsis on both these cases Owen was a police chief in the town of Independence Missouri and he got in a gripe with the city council and they indiscriminately fired him without just cause Owen turned around and sued they claimed that they acted in good faith the Supreme Court said sir you are deemed to be officers of the law you are to advise us to the law you can hardly claim that you acted in good faith for a willful deprivation of the law and you certainly can't claim ignorance of the law because a citizen out here on the street can't claim ignorance of the law and it makes the law look stupid if an officer of the court or some officer of government doesn't know the law and then they go ahead and abuse somebody's constitutional right so in matters of constitutional rights both these cases uphold one point and the point they uphold is that whenever they violate your constitutional rights they do so at their own peril and it even says that in title 18 United States Code section 241 and 242 it says that upon conviction you are subject to a $10,000 fine 10 years in jail or both and if death results life in prison they're telling you don't violate somebody's rights please don't do that title 42 United States Code sections 1983 1985 and 1986 clearly establish your right to sue anybody that does that now they're going to claim you can't sue them because they have judicial immunity well guess what these two cases remove judicial immunity there is no judicial immunity for violating somebody's constitutional rights judge you are deemed to know the law and sworn to uphold it you can hardly claim that you act in good faith for willful deprivation of the law and you certainly can't plead ignorance of the law for that it'd make the law look stupid for a knowledgeable judicial immunity I want to get that across I don't know how many attorneys come up to me all the time tell me well they're immune because they acted in good faith they're just not reading their court they're not reading their court reports because if they were reading their court reports they would have known this case has been on the book since 1982 both both these cases came down in 1982 so I want you to pay attention to these cases when somebody tells you they can violate your rights with impunity you just kind of smile and say make my day okay now the next case we want to talk about is Breyers versus United States we mentioned it previously earlier Breyers is recorded at 273 volume 273 US reports page 28 okay now Breyers versus United States is a unique case it's a search and seizure case but basically it sets constitutional standards which we had talked about in the Amjurus Prudence sections in the Amjurus Prudence sections okay I especially want to pay attention to note number three here constitutional provisions for the security of a person and property are to be liberally construed and it is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen and against any stealthy encroachment therein alright when a federal officer participates officially with a state official in a search so that in substance and effect it is their joint operation the legality of the search and the use and evidence of the thing seized is to be tested in federal prosecutions as it would be if the undertaking were exclusively the federal agent alright the reality here is what they are setting is the standards must be liberally construed in favor of the citizen it's the duty of the court to make sure that happens so now you have a right to be wrong you have a right to enter your viable defenses that you honestly think no state can convert that right in their privilege and issue a license and a fee if they do you can ignore the license and the fee they must prove the burden of proof of willfulness which they cannot do if they do violate your rights you do have a right to sue them they have to give every consideration to you alright and that's the way it is 1900 yesterday alright the next case we want to talk about is Boyd Boyd versus United States 116 US page 616 the court is to protect against encroachment of constitutionality or secured liberty alright now it is equivalent to a compulsory production of papers to make the non-production of them a confession of the allegations which is is pretended they will prove and a lot of times that happens in federal cases they'll claim something they won't prove it this happened to me believe me and then the fact that they've claimed it makes it true and then of course you have to prove a negative which is impossible alright now the seizure or compulsory production of a man's private papers to be used in evidence against him is equivalent to compelling him to be a witness against himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment and in a prosecution for a crime penalty or forfeiture is equally within the prohibition of the Fifth Amendment see that now the bottom line here is Boyd protects against encroachment of constitutionally secured liberties it's arguing the Fifth Amendment here but it's basically arguing against encroachment alright so that's one you want to pay attention to when you're coming especially to things on search and seizure natures another good case that you should know is Miranda v Arizona and folks I'm going to tell you something and even I can learn something not that I'm that much above you I want to come to you humbly in humility I'm telling you I've read and I know and there's a lot of things about the law and I've been my own attorney for over 25 years and I kick the tail decision it's recorded at 384 volume 384 US that's US reports page 436 now this is a heavy duty case every American should know this case backward and forward upside down another all right Miranda versus Arizona this is the one that says you got a right to remain silent you got a right to an attorney you got a right to have your attorney present in question anything you say can and any statement on your behalf and you understand the rights that I have spoken to you as soon as they stop you talk to you as soon as they start talking to you they are required to say that if they don't say that they screwed up if they haul you into jail and they don't tell you this read it to you and then they want to make you sign a statement you know your rights and you knowingly waived them please folks don't sign that statement use your head for something other than a hat rack do not sign that statement ever you are knowingly waiving your constitutional rights don't ever do that I mean they don't make it that hard as soon as you hear those people start talking that you tell them right effectively I want to talk to an attorney and I am not saying nothing until I talk to an attorney especially if you are talking to federal people BATF these people will lie cheat steal they will do anything they can to hammer you their whole purpose in life is to hammer you I don't want you to think well what nice guys so maybe we can just work this out why don't we just talk and maybe we can get things worked out you don't talk to these people folks you talk to somebody you learned the hard way you do not talk to these people ever I don't care if you think you're a nice guy and you want to be courteous I don't think you think you're smarter in the air and you can beat them I'm telling you you don't talk to them period you button that hatch an you said what's the third rule keep your big mouth shut after you follow them three rules the rest is easy it's when you open your big mouth that you get in trouble not that you would do anything wrong anyway but they'll twist lie cheat and steal and make it into something you didn't do and before you know it you won't even recognize what's happened I'm telling you it's happened to me so I'm telling you as a friend I'm not telling you as a smart ass or anything else I'm telling you as a friend do not talk to these people they do not have your best interest at heart and you may think well they're responsible and they mean well well they don't they don't mean well they don't mean you're well and they will jam you believe me and if you're not real good at getting out of it you can you can be in a lot of trouble all right now let's look at this Miranda decision in the absence of other effective measures the following procedures to safeguard the fifth amendment privileges must be observed the person in custody must prior to interrogation be clearly informed that he has a right to remain silent and that anything he says will be used against him in a court of law he must be clearly informed that he has a right to consult with a lawyer and to have a lawyer with him during interrogation do that please and that if he is indigent a lawyer will be appointed to represent him if the individual indicates prior to and during questioning that he wishes to remain silent the interrogation must cease if he attorney is present where an interrogation is conducted without the presence of an attorney and a statement is taken a heavy burden rests on the government to demonstrate that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional counsel right don't test that theory but I'm telling you it works I did it where the individual answers some questions during interrogation or custody interrogation he has not waived his privilege and may invoke his right to remain silent thereafter the warnings required that the waiver needed are in the absence of a fully effective equivalent prerequisite to the admission or admissibility of any statement inculpability or exculpability made by the defendant the limitations on the interrogation process required for the protection of the individual's constitutional right should not cause an undue interference with the proper system of law enforcement as demonstrated by the procedures of in each of these cases the statements were obtained under circumstances that did not meet constitutional standards for protection of the privilege against self incrimination now this is the big one folks this is the one they're talking about did you properly mirandize him was he mirandized was she mirandized if they don't mirandize you they gotta throw the case out almost always it's very hard to go forward with the case if their witnesses are excludable from the presentation of the case now I personally got lucky on this one folks and I thought I was really really good and I am really really good but you want to know something I have a different standard of equity and law and I treat everybody kindly and I basically give them courtesy and I basically try and be a regular Joe and I basically just find out what the heck was going on with this case I promise you I would never do that again I would dummy up like there's no tomorrow I wouldn't say nothing not that I do anything wrong but here's the thing these people lied so bad they put so much trash in the record I was in shock I couldn't believe that anybody would deliberately do such a thing but they will so I'm telling you as a friend do not talk to these people especially BATF people they are not honorable people they do not recognize the honor you serve they are not honorable people their whole purpose is to hammer you into a position of ridiculousness so I'm telling you if they come in to talk to you for whatever reason I don't care what you dummy up you don't say nothing you got me you hire an attorney you get an attorney there and you don't talk to the attorney tells you to that's what I'm telling you as a friend okay that's Miranda versus Arizona now there's four Miranda cases this is the leading case there which locks out the standards for in custody jail interrogations okay now a word to the wise should be sufficient and I shouldn't have to ever say nothing about that again believe me I learned a valuable lesson you cannot assume that everybody is a good guy there are some bad ones out there and I found them now the next case we're going to talk about is Norton versus Shelby County recorded at 118 volume United States Reports page 425 basically that says an unconstitutional act is not law it confers no rights it imposes no duties affords no protections it creates no office it is in legal contemplation as in inoperative as though it had never been passed okay and that's what this case holds alright now I'm telling you you go read the case let's screw around the judge asks you questions about the case you better because if he thinks you didn't read it he's going to throw your case out the court follows the decision of the highest court of the state in construing the constitution and the laws of the state unless they conflict with or impair the efficacy of some principle of the federal constitution or of the federal statutes or a rule of the commercial or general law the decision of the state courts on questions relating to the existence of its subordinate tribunals and the eligibility and election or appointment of their officers and the passage of its laws are conclusive upon federal courts alright now the most important some of the most important thing is while acts of de facto incumbent of an office lawfully created by law and existing are often held to be binding from reasons of public policy that's a very important point public policy you want to watch out for the terms public policy it's often confused with the state's right of eminent domain of police powers police powers and public policy are almost the same thing except one's done without law because we want to and the other is done because they're claiming a police authority to do so alright but when they're talking about public policy the acts of the person assuming to fill and perform the duties of an office which does not exist can have no validity whatever in law okay an unconstitutional act is not a law it confers no rights it imposes no duties it affords no protection it creates no office it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed okay has everybody got that now this basic first portion of this program is designed clearly to help you and if you take these basic cases on this one page you will have gone a long way in getting your constitutional rights back okay now we're asking you pay attention learn your constitution we're going to go into some heavier stuff through the second portion of this but we want you to learn your constitution this book here is a citizen's rule book it also has jury instructions in it it also has a lot of important arguments in it some of the important arguments in it go along with what we've been talking about right all laws which are repugnant constitution are null and void marbury versus madison 5 yes 137 we already argued that when we're rights secured by the constitution are involved there can be no rule or lawmaking or legislation which would abrogate or abolish them that's again miranda versus arizona an unconstitutional act is not law it confers no rights it imposes no duties affords no protection it creates no office alright that's norton versus shelby county which we just talked about the general rule is an unconstitutional statute though having the form and name of law is in reality no law but is wholly void alright 16th dam jurisprudence second section 177 and also 256 officers of the court have no immunity when violating constitutional right from liability that's owned versus city of independence and Maine v. Thiboutot no state shall convert secured liberties into privileges and issue licenses and fees for murdoch versus pennsylvania if the state does convert liberty or privilege into a privileged citizen can engage in a right with impunity that's shuttlesworth versus birmingham alabama the court is to protect against any encroachment of constitutionally secured liberties that's boyd versus united states constitutional rights must be interpreted in favor of a citizen that's Byars v. United States we have covered all of these cases thoroughly so that you can see clearly alright we're trying to teach you how to better effectively use your constitution okay we're trying to get it down to a serious program and this this book here also brings out all of these court cases right notice it's got norton versus shelby county here it's got miranda versus arizona it's got marbury versus madison it's got the jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact john jay first chief justice u.s. supreme court the jury has the right to determine both the law and the fact samuel chase u.s. supreme court justice 1796 singer united the jury has the power to bring a verdict in the teeth of both law and fact oliver wendell holmes u.s. supreme court the law itself is on harlan f stone 12th chief justice u.s. supreme court the pages of history shine on instances of the jury's exercise of its prerogative to disregard instructions of the judge that's united states versus doherty 473 fed second 113 all right now we're going to wrap up this first part here basically we want we want you folks to hopefully not be overwhelmed take your time play the tape several times it'll come to you it's really not that hard we want you to have a new reverence for your constitution we want you to know that a lot of brave soldiers paid for it with their life we want you to know that they died miserably some of them and we want you to know that this is a serious very serious thing here we want you to know that we love you America we want you to know we need your help to learn your constitution so you can better and effectively come forward pick that book up walk out there and shake that book and say shaking it boss alright now that we've gone over the constitution and we talked about some of the ways that you can use it now we're going to go into some of the ways that you can apply it okay the things to do first of all is when you pull over try not to demonstrate any rapid movements or any like you're reaching under the seat or you're reaching in the glove box keep your hands where you can be seen do not overreact try and be calm talk to the officer and a mellow voice don't yell or holler use profanity whatsoever basically it's yes sir you know what can I do for you sir they'll usually ask you to produce your documentation you have license proof of insurance and the registration of the vehicle okay now we're going to go into a lot of issues on those programming to cover that to show you some of the things that you can do and what you can opt to do also I recommend that you treat the officer as I told the other gentleman there very courteously because that is going to get you a lot farther ahead than giving them a lot of negative hype or trying to shout out shout them or give them a lot of static so my honest counsel is let me show you how we proceed most of the time you will be able to leave the scene without any serious injury you might have a ticket or this or that but we'll show you how to deal with that but you need to be understanding that this party is an armed party and you don't want to do any movements that's going to cause him to overreact to an injury of you and you'll find that a lot of times this is the most dangerous thing a police officer does to stop people all day because he never knows when somebody might do some really serious traumatic thing so they're very nervous about this and the quicker you can relieve their nervousness and just be a regular person and let them realize you're just going to talk in a plain and common voice the sooner you're going to be in a communicative situation now obviously you're going to find out real quick if you've got a cooperative officer or not and if you don't have a cooperative officer then you're going to be in court anyway so the best thing I can tell you is be patient just let us follow along with our program and we'll be happy to demonstrate again we would like to let you know that your best defenses are in your constitution that constitution is a viable contract that it is enforceable in the court of law under the statute of frauds that you have a right to claim those rights that the burden is on you to claim them timely and a key word here is timely or you lose the right so you want to be cognizant of your rights and be able to timely speak up okay now let's go on to a couple of things here we're going to we're going to concentrate as we did before on our main basic cases we also want to give you some further advanced programming the book the federalist papers by madison hamilton and jade those are the gentlemen that wrote the united states constitution okay and you want the mentor edition because it is the unabridged edition now the supreme court has ruled in the case of Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 right now wheat is an old report and this was done in 1821 so you may have to go to your leading law library around like we go to michigan university of michigan or we go to detroit college of law but you want to vary these pages will be so old you'll have to worry how you turn them without trying to screw them up but the supreme court ruled in the matter of Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264 that this of the constitution madison hamilton and jade those are the guys that wrote the constitution so obviously being able to read their published thoughts as they were doing this constitution is very very forceful in terms of constitutional interpretation and the intent of the lawmaker is the law and it shall be liberally enforced in favor of you you are the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary got me so everything you can do to enhance your position in terms of how your lawmakers thought when they framed this constitution clearly makes your case even more stronger for the constitution to be interpreted in favor of you so we recommend you get a copy of this federalist papers you read it cover to cover you want the mentor edition because that's the unabridged edition you'll find some of the other editions got some of the pages pulled out now we want to get into some of the cases basically the second program that we have here is the advanced section we are going to be covering procedures we're going to be teaching you how to be your own counsel we're going to be telling you some facts and issues on what to do what happens when you get pulled over how do you exercise your rights in a timely fashion we're going to be talking about some of the problems that are going on in America today we're going to be talking about some of the studies that have been done we just had a law review study put out by this lady here her name is Joyce Lee Malcolm she started out working for the anti-gun people she is a Harvard legal scholar she is very very knowledgeable she researched the right to keep and bear arms of the people back to the 1700s in England and she came to the honest belief after all of her research and of course she would be following her research because she is a person of very acclaim in terms of her study she researched it back to the 1700s and found out that yep our right to keep and bear arms is a positive right it has come from serious law all the way back to the Magna Carta she published a book and the book here is to keep and bear arms it's a rather extensive book okay you might it's not hard to get a hold of it it did take us about 10 days of ordering it to get a hold of it but it's a definitive study on the right to keep and bear arms that verifies the holdings that your average person who's NRA oriented or who basically is constitutionally oriented is going to be happy to have which is basically the right to keep and bear arms is a protected right that goes back with great legal scholarly study okay so these are a couple things that you can use to help you defend okay we need to understand that at the beginning of every one of these laws there is an enabling clause that basically says how the law shall be brought into being and there is an argument that the law that is presently here today is based on some law in the past okay and almost on every one of these constitutions all the way up through our history through the articles of confederation through the u.s. constitution through various state constitutions they'll have an enabling law in the beginning and of course the enabling law just allows them to bring their version of the constitution of what rights are there today that the rights that were had before are carried on plus are further delineated by this constitution but at no time do they have a right to abridge the previous document now going all the way back to the magna carta you can see the decisions where it comes down the magna carta the declaration of independence the articles of confederation the united states constitution the virginia acts of concession the northwest ordinance the northwest territorial government the northwest territorial division indiana the indiana michigan territorial division the enabling acts and that's what i'm trying to explain to you today the michigan organization and submitting alternatives and the michigan assent to a condition of admission and then the state of michigan became a state in 1837 now this is just from my area so i'm trying to give you an example there is then we have a constitution of 1835 we have a constitution of 1850 we have a constitution of 1908 we have a constitution of 1963 every time one of these constitutions comes by the enabling acts in the beginning of it state that everything that was before guaranteed is brought forward okay so everything that is before is brought forward and carried forward and if anything it's supposed to be made stronger okay it's never made weaker it's made stronger or it's equal to so all of the rights brought forward are carried all the way back from the magna carta as a line of succession so this is how you historically review trends and where what and how it comes from and how authorities are established in law okay the important thing to understand we have our court cases here we're going to start giving you examples of court cases as we go and we're going to show you how you can exercise rights now one of the first cases that we are going to bring is basically the right to travel all right now there's a lot of people that are interested in this particular issue and license plates and driver's licenses and all this and you have a lot of programming that's problematic from this and you have a lot of people that are looking to argue so we want to share some basic arguments with you we're going to claim a first amendment right to travel and we're going to claim also a fifth amendment it's guaranteed under the fifth amendment of due process and equal protection under the law all right now we come down we looked up in our state constitution and this is our constitution and basically we have protected a right to travel okay the freedom to travel is a fundamental right that should be unlimited by statutes rules or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict movement okay now then a law which substantially affects or penalizes the exercise of the right to travel may be justified only by a compelling state interest and must be tailored carefully to avoid unnecessary infringement on the right okay now when we come down here we start reading some of these arguments you'll notice these little letters here that say freedom to travel throughout the united states has long been recognized as a basic right under the federal constitution see note 54 everybody see this little note 54 here again we're going to take this note 54 we're going to come down here the very first case that we have is shapiro versus thompson this is recorded at 394 that's volume 394 u.s. page 618 i just happen to have a copy of the case here they're talking about the purpose of inhibiting migration by needy persons into a state is constitutionally impermissible all right all citizens must be free to travel throughout the united states uninhibited by statutes rules or regulations which unreasonably burden or restrict this movement all right if a law has no other purpose than to chill assertions of constitutional rights by penalizing those who choose to exercise them it is patently unconstitutional all right does everybody pick up on the gist of the argument here equal protection clause prohibits apportionment of state services according to part tax contributions of its citizens any classification which serves to penalize the exercise of a right of interstate travel unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling government interest is unconstitutional okay now that's clearly established now we go into the case and we come to find out it says that the right the right finds no explicit mention in the constitution this is what I was trying to tell you you got to use a little bit of wisdom you read between the lines in other words what is your right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness what does it mean to you think about it you know you can look at the exact words the right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness ducky what's that mean I have no idea well I'm telling you to start having an idea because when you have an idea they gotta listen so you have an idea and you say I have a right to travel freely and uncovered right now that a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning they're talking about the right to travel that a right was so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be necessary concomitant of the stronger union the constitution created in any event freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the constitution we've established that the right is clearly there so you were right you had a feeling that you had a right to travel and you were right there is such a right there one of the ways you could find arguments on that would be to go into the federal digest at the local library go down by your supreme court cases there will be a set of red books called the federal digest right next to the shepherd citations you look up the book called words and phrases and in the book words and phrases you ask for the right to travel it will give you every supreme court case that has anything to do with the right to travel one of the leading cases is this case Shapiro vs. Thompson that it's such a basic rate it doesn't even need to be mentioned it is important that you be able to back your arguments up in other words it's one thing to pick the argument up now here we go in moving from jurisdiction to jurisdiction they were exercising their constitutional right and any classification which penalizes the exercise of the right unless shown to be necessary to promote a compelling government interest is unconstitutional now the reality was they exercised their right to timely travel and the state didn't want to allow that now let's flip back here first of all the constitution is the supreme law of the land we established that who said so Marbury vs. Madison 5GS 137 1803 the constitution of these united states is the supreme law of the land any law and conflicts and all avoid a law now we know that the constitution is supreme we know that the right is clearly established in Shapiro vs. Thompson can a state arbitrarily and erroneously convert a secured liberty in this case the right to travel freely and encumbered into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it obviously we have decided that in Murdoch vs. Pennsylvania clearly no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege now does everybody see how we plug that in just like on your computer you fill in the blanks okay you have the court case it says no state can convert the liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it what right are we talking about the right to travel freely and encumbered so you plug that in so does the state have a right to require you to have a license for the exercise of their right no does everybody see that now what happens if the state requires you to have the license Shuttlesworth vs. Birmingham, Alabama you can ignore the license and engage in the right with impunity that means they can't punish you now what happens if they pull you over they give you the ticket well you're going to go to court and you're going to file it you're going to file a brief we're going to show you how to do that at a later time we'll show you exactly what to put down there but these are the cases you're going to be putting down on your memorandum of law as to why you have a reason to feel that you're right first that your constitutional right is superior to any law that they would put down you have that right and they can't pass if they do it's unconstitutional thirdly no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it and if they do you can ignore the license and the fee and engage in the right with impunity Shuttlesworth vs. Birmingham, Alabama and since you have not willfully done anything evil you have relied on your constitution and on the supreme court decisions you have a perfect defense to the charge of willfulness so you could not have been charged with willfully not going and getting the license does everybody see that okay you have a perfect defense United States vs. Bishop 412 vs. 346 defines willfulness as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty obviously you didn't do that did you because you have a perfect defense you relied on previous decisions of the supreme court Shuttlesworth and Murdoch and Marbury you relied on your constitutional right to travel freely unencumbered pursuant to Shapiro vs. Thompson so you have a perfect defense so now where are we at your honor may please the court I motion for dismissal with prejudice failure state of cause of action for which relief can be granted and I would like to motion to dismiss and I like my costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case that you have a right to collect your time for going to court alright you submit your bill you submit your proposed order you fill out your own proposed order that makes the case go faster and the judges kind of like that it intimidates the hell out of the prosecutor when you do your own order now let's say well that's how you interpret that sir that's right sir that is how I interpret it and 16th Amjuris Prudence 2nd section 97 says that it shall be interpreted in my favor because I am the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary the citizens for the protection of rights and property see Byars v. United States 273 U.S. 28 that deals with an unlawful search and seizure but it also deals that it's supposed to be interpreted in favor of you declaring tenet and expressly designated beneficiary for the protection of your rights and property so they gotta enforce it in favor of you right now Boyd vs. United States comes next the court is to protect against any encroachment of constitutionally secured liberty it's their duty they have no choice they have to do it okay alright in Norton vs. Shelby County an unconstitutional act is not law it confers no rights it imposes no duties affords no protections it creates no office it is in legal contemplation as in operative though it had never been passed now after you write all of this stuff down you casually say wherefore your honor I pray before this honorable court for your just and lawful relief I ask that you dismiss this case with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action for which relief can be granted and I pray the court for my just relief for having to defend this patently frivolous and spurious case and my costs are whatever they are you submit that on your order I have an order I have a proposed order your honor it's in my brief at that point they will turn to the prosecutor and say well Mr. prosecutor what do you think you'd like to do about this and most of the time they're so overwhelmed at this point they just go I'll go for the dismissal your honor and the judge will give them some slack well never before as a young man not attorney so literally overwhelmed when accounts for the prosecution he licensed to attorney now it's not my goal to make attorneys look bad my goal is to make you look good my goal is to make you understand your constitution now if you happen to do it and you do it better than have no sympathy for him because he shouldn't have done what he was doing anyway if he had any brains he pulled you aside and he done what other attorneys have done to me and said you know I hate going against the prosay litigant attorney almost always they're really really good and you know I never get to find out if they're really really really good or they're really really really bad until I show up and then it's too late so I'm already on the diving board and either the pool has water in it or it doesn't and usually it doesn't and it hurts when you hit the bottom so they don't like going against you people they will not like going against you if you halfway know what the hell you're talking about they're going to be intimidated and I can tell you many many tales I had this one gentleman he didn't have any plates on his car and he called him into the court and he was standing in the hallway and the prosecution said would you come over here sir I'd like to talk to you he came in the office and he sat down and this party said to the prosecutor what can I do for you the prosecutor said sir he said what can I do for you he said it's not what you can do for me I'm the prosecutor what do you want to do in this case well I assumed there was something I could do for you you called me in here well what do you want to do how do you want plead on your case well I don't intend to plead sir I intend to answer in the form of the mirror such that I do not acquiesce I had the same gentleman later he was working as a bricklayer and he did the same thing told the prosecutor he was a bricklayer and the guy's jaw was on the ground see they don't anticipate that people that are in other jobs other than theirs have any brains and it blows their doors off when all of a sudden this bricklayer or this truck driver can come in and argue law and all of a sudden it's like shoot this guy is good I have to treat him like he's an attorney so what did this guy do the first thing he does out of the shoot he walks up to the judge and he tells the judge he says judge I'm going to dismiss this case because he realized he was going to get hammered and my guy says he can't do that I took day off work to come over here and battle I told him I said shut up sit down relax you won don't say nothing you won and the judge broke out laughing because this guy didn't want to quit the judge turned to him and he said well evidently the prosecutor doesn't want to proceed sir I'm going to have to dismiss the case he is the complainant can he do that judge he can't do that I'm here to battle I want to go let's do it and the judge laughed again he says well apparently sir I cannot sustain a complaint that is not properly before the court counsel for prosecution has entered a motion to dismiss and I have no other option but to dismiss now if you want to countersue him that's another case well I'll tell him will you be quiet and submit your bill submit your bill you won submit your bill for your damages so he did he said well I'll submit my bill and your honor for my costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case and the judge smiled because people don't usually do that but if you win they are required to pay you that's the rules if you lose you pay so the bottom line is this when you file your papers and they turn around and you you get a win make sure you got your little time from work or any copies that you had to make or any visits to the law library or any what is called real and personal damages and don't pad the account put down exactly what you got because if they force you to prove it you can get busted for perjury so I don't I don't recommend you you shall we say stretch the pad I recommend you put down exactly what your costs are believe me the fact that they got beats plenty enough of a sting and the fact they got to pay a couple hundred dollars for your last day at work will be more of a sting and you will not you will get your license bag and tell you think about slowing down and have a nice day because they don't like people like you because you're an American and Americans don't give up they never surrender and they fight one judge told me one time he said you got any kind of idea how much money you've cost this court today and I said I hope it was a bunch your honor because I hope you got to go write a whole bunch more tickets to break even the way I figure the more tickets you got to write the sooner the public is going to wake up to this theft and maybe they'll start doing something positive to stop this kind of stuff because it's my belief they should be having masks on out there because I mean if they was an honest prick they'd be having a mask on there when they robbed of people okay well he didn't he didn't like that answer too good but the bottom line is he knew I was right and after a while they realize what your goals are and they know hey this is more fun than Edgewater Park and I want to go on all the rides twice you know what I mean I want to hit the wild mouse and a whole bunch of them other rides let's do it see when they see that they realize there's no point you're not going to learn anything you're going to cost some time money materials now the system is not profitable okay so they back off they put a code on your license they won't bother you anymore and everybody see we take that line down we take the line from the constitution we take the line from the right now let's think up another right how about the right to work contract your labor and your skill and your time of life as you see fit now your right to work is protected by the constitution under the first amendment again you have a right to work and contract your labor and your skill and your time of life as you see fit I get hauled into court before the chief judge of this big court here in Oakland County I won't give you the judge's name because he was a fair judge and a good judge and I'm going to let him slide but the bottom line is this he looked just like Abe Lincoln I mean exactly he was the spitting image and he leans over the chair and he says well he says it's been reported to me son that you don't have a license to practice law is that correct and I looked up at him and I said judge I'm not practicing I know what the hell I'm doing and the whole court broke out laughing he said that's pretty good that's pretty good I like somebody with a sense of humor he said but that doesn't change anything son you have to have a license to practice law and I said your honor I'm an unenfranchised common law free man I live at the common law I am not a participant in any tontine schemes of limited liability on a joint venture for profit with an insurable interest requiring me to participate in these illegal corporate Ponzi schemes I am just Joe Blow from Kokomo down on the street I just live at the common law and I have a right to work and contract my labor my skill and my time of life as I see fit not as some third party arbitrary and capricious bar association sees fit and they had loaded the court with all these attorneys and they were whoa you hear that guy I said your honor the state of Michigan arbitrarily and erroneously converted my right to work into a privilege and issued a license and a fee for it that's unconstitutional your honor Marbury versus Madison 5 US 137 1803 anything in conflict or repugnancies null and void of law okay can you see that Marbury versus Madison and since the state converted my right into a privilege and issued a license and a fee for it no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it and if they do Shuttlesworth versus Birmingham Alabama says I may ignore the license and the fee and engage in the right with impunity that means you can't punish me and US versus Bishop 412 US 346 defines woefulness as an evil motive or intent to avoid a known duty or task under the law with a moral certainty I submit your honor I couldn't have done an evil task because I was totally following the Constitution and the US Supreme Court I would submit that prosecution counsel's burden is to prove that I did woefully and knowingly avoid a known duty or task under the law namely to get the license and I would submit he specifically precluded he cannot perform his task and therefore I motion for dismissal with prejudice fair state of cause of action for which relief can be granted and I'd kind of like to collect my costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous spurious complaint the judge rolls back in his chair with a great big smile and he turns to counsel for the prosecution he says whoa Mr. Rose what do you think we ought to do about this young gentleman the prosecution bounced back how about we honor the motion to dismiss your honor the judge says good answer because I don't think you're ready for this kid today and the whole court broke out laughing an old gentleman walked up to me and he said son I just want to shake your hand and tell you you gotta have like king kong cause you just slammed the bar association right into the ground on top of that I've been an attorney for 57 years and I just want to shake your hand sir and tell you that was one of the most magnificent arguments that I've ever had the privilege to hear in a court of law now he was an honest attorney and he realized what kind of a chain was around his ankle with this bar association and these lawyers they resent that they really do they're people just like you they don't like to have any chains on them but they hadn't had anybody quite show them how to get those chains off and when they saw somebody do it in their own skill with their own cards on their own playing field it actually impressed the hell out of them I had several gentlemen come up and shake my hand that day needless to say the case was dismissed and I've been helping little people getting jammed for years every time I see some little person get jammed I'm out there flipping that wrench zingy zingy zingy and I flipped that wrench on them so good that usually they just back off Dr. Kavorkin was a perfect example the poor man was just trying to help these poor people they were jamming him every which way but loose so what we did is we taught him a thing called quo waranto I got a hold of his attorney and submitted all of the arguments all right now we're going to bring up several arguments right here we're going to bring up police powers we're going to bring up quo waranto quo waranto is a basic right that goes back to English law ancient English law okay here it is right here all right quo waranto let's read it quo waranto in old English practice a writ in a nature of a writ of right for the king against him who claimed or usurped any office franchise or liberty to inquire by what authority he supported his claim in order to determine the right it lay also in the case of a non-user or long neglected no long neglect of a franchise franchises corporation or misuser or abuser of a franchise being a writ commanding the defendant to show by what warrant he exercises such a corporate franchise having never had any grant of it or having forfeited it by neglect or abuse a common law writ designed to test whether a person exercising power is legally entitled to do so an extraordinary proceeding prerogative in nature addressed to preventing a continued exercise of authority unlawfully asserted Johnson versus Manhattan Railroad Company New York recorded at volume 289 United States page 479 now it is intended to prevent exercise of powers that are not conferred by law and is not ordinarily available to regulate the manner of exercising such power now what we did see police powers are defined as the right of eminent domain of a state or political subdivision to enact laws for the common good and welfare let's pull that out police power this is out of Black's Law Dictionary folks an authority conferred by the American constitutional system in the 10th amendment U.S. constitution upon the individual states and in turn delegated to the local governments through which they are enabled to establish a special department of police such laws and regulations as tend to prevent the commission of fraud and or crime and secure generally the comfort safety morals health and prosperity of its citizens by preserving the public order and preventing a conflict of rights in the common intercourse of the citizens and ensuring to each an uninterrupted enjoyment of all the privileges conferred upon him or her by the general laws the constitution the power of the state to place restraints on personal freedoms and property rights of persons for the protection of the public safety health and morals or to promotion of the public convenience and general propriety the police power is subject to limitations of the federal and state constitutions and everybody catch that and especially to the requirements of due process police power is the exercise of the sovereign right of the government to promote order safety security health morals and general welfare within constitutional limitations limitations right is an essential attribute marshall versus kansas city missouri recorded at 35 volume southwest second that's another reporter southwest second page 877 now police powers are the right of eminent domain of a state or political subdivision to enact laws for the common good and welfare and to curb crime within constitutional limitations and the key words in that whole thing are within constitutional limitation and then it tells you to see the 10th amendment and when you see the 10th amendment and believe it or not you can go look up the books and it divides the 10th amendment real here pull over there alright the burdens placed on the national result of states regulation okay regulation of their internal affairs save as congress may act to remove them constitute normal incidents of operation within the same territory of a dual system of government and no immunity of national government from such burden is to be implied from the constitution alright alright Penn Diaries versus Milk Control Commission alright the Pennsylvania case recorded at United volume 318 US 261 the people of the United States residing within any state are subject to two governments one state and the other national but there need be no conflict between the two because the powers which one possesses the other does not that's United States versus Cruickshank a very famous Supreme Court case within the area of delegated powers expressed or implied this amendment does not reduce the powers of the United States that's US versus Manning recorded at 215 federal supplement that's another reporter page 272 the federal union has only those powers expressly conferred on it and those reasonably implied from powers granted while each state has all governmental powers except such as the people by the constitution have conferred on the United States denied to the state or reserved to the people themselves Anderson versus Gladden recorded at volume 188 federal supplement 666 that's a bad number alright it is when federal legislation attempts to confer power upon the national government that it is not within the express or implied powers given by the constitution that the legislation becomes vulnerable to this amendment okay now what are we talking about here Brady Bill huh they're not within their powers they have no tenth amendment powers to take away the second amendment does that make sense to everybody they don't have any powers to go and take away the second amendment or any other amendment the fourth amendment the fifth amendment nothing and the ninth amendment precluded them from adding on to the constitution in such a way they would take away the powers so by the ninth amendment and the tenth amendment they're totally locked out from doing a lot of the things that they do but see you got to know that and be able to timely exercise it so it's very important to understand your tenth amendment powers now when in the course of human events it becomes necessary and proper and this is what we did to help out Dr. Kevorkian we made sure that his lawyer got this knowledge we went in there and we dug up a writ of quo of quo anto a writ of quo anto all right now this doesn't look like much but let me tell you something what we're talking about doing here see most cities at least in the state of Michigan are by public act 230 public acts or public act 287 of public acts and in every one of them there is a rights and powers section usually it's recorded at 2.2 or 3.1 and it basically says subject to the constitution of the United States and the general laws of the state of Michigan the city of or the township of has rights and powers too and then it starts listing the rights and powers right to have a police department right to have a fire department right to have a city hall right and it starts listing all these powers now the antithesis to the argument is that if they're not within the constitution of the United States and the general laws of the state of Michigan they don't have any rights and powers does that make sense to everybody in other words they're in violation of their corporate charter their franchise they promised they would be within the constitution of the United States and the general laws of the state of Michigan now a lot of people they don't understand the power of this argument so I want to really push this one home I you ask them a point question and ask them are you violating my constitutionally secured civil rights by however you claim they are because if you are you have just waived your right to be the city of and they'll laugh at you for a little bit okay then you explain to the public act 230 of public acts which states the rights and powers section subject to the constitution of the United States and the laws of you're going to violate my constitutional rights and trample my rights what we're going to do here is we're going to go for a writ of mandamus in quo war on toe that's a legal term fancy legal term but it is an ancient law that goes way back to England in the ancient times and basically here is a judgment and a capius action for it right you put down here the case the case came on regularly for trial before the honorable and you put the judge's name in there whatever it is on a jury trial or non-jury trial dated such and such the name appeared as for your counsel and the name appeared for opposing counsel right the court heard the testimony and examined the proofs offered by the parties the court considered itself fully advised in the premise filed in its findings of fact and conclusions of which means they figured out that they violated your constitutional rights they didn't have a right to violate your constitutional rights and in the hearing you showed they violated your constitutional rights and the judge figured out they violated your constitutional rights so now for your prayer for relief we're going to get this quo oranto and this is exactly what happened to the honorable doctor Kevorkian you'll notice that he was in jail and they were hammering the tail at him the next thing you know everything got real quiet nobody said nothing and then the next thing you know they were letting him go and they were minding their business now this is how it happened it is therefore ordered and adjudged and decreed one defendant corporation the city of you put down what name has violated provisions of the act under which it was created and also has violated provisions of public act 230 of public act section 2.2 rights and power section in other words it didn't uphold the constitution of the united states or the general laws of the state of Michigan defendant corporation the city of whatever Pontiac whatever accordingly has forfeited its charter and become liable to be dissolved by the abuse of its power how much money am I talking about here folks we'd be in about nine decimal places plus wouldn't you what you think now do you think they're going to bother some little doctor when they're looking at shutting down a major city what do you think's going to happen everything's going to get quiet and they're going to let the good doctor go same thing for you now defendant corporation you name them therefore is dissolved and the corporate rights privileges and franchise of defendants are declared forfeited to the people defendant corporation you name them as trustees directors managers and other official officers attorneys and agents are forever restrained and enjoined from exercising any of the corporate franchise powers rights and or privileges previously exercised by defendants at city and from collecting or receiving any debts and or demands belonging to or held by defendant city whatever and from paying out or in any manner interfering with transferring or delivering to any person any of the deposits money securities property and effects of the defendant city or held by it you name a trustee which the state would do probably the attorney general after your complaint is filed is appointed receiver of all of the property real and personal things in action and effects of defendant city corporation held by and vested in defendants or in or to which defendant may be in any wise interested or entitled thereto plaintiff the people of the state of whatever that's us state of Michigan shall recover of defendant corporation whatever city of the sum of damages real and personal got me they don't like that when you start talking that because they can go 100 million three times that amount of punitive damages they get a little upset as costs and disbursements of this action and the receivers is directed to pay this sum out of their pocket to whoever the attorney general but you can have a person stipulated on there as an injured party now you put down there the honorable judge so and so presiding the date entered and you he signs that and that city is no longer a city you see when they violate your constitution this is one of the most powerful tools that you can use and when you jam this on you better wear a bulletproof vest to court because you're probably going to get shot at by the time you get home but it's nice to threaten you know you just threaten just drop one of them in the mail and say if I don't get reasonable cause for my action in the near future you're going to get one of these in the mail for real here is a summons for Quo Warranto this is for the start of the thing right here summons form 41 by the way you can get this in 21 Amjur's forms forms and practice your practical and practical forms and practice alright you name the party you put down there who you are the people of the state of Michigan versus you are summoned to appear before which and which court on such and such a date to show by what authority you claim to have use and or enjoy the rights and liberties and franchise namely the corporation city of set out and complained of in such such a time summons and further to do and receive all things which the court shall then order concerning you this is kind of like pulling their driver's license for drunk driving now that's an oversimplification but sometimes these city halls operate like a drunken sailor and they just think they can abuse citizens rights and trash them you know who I am no I don't care you know who I am I'm your boss I'm the people you're elected to work for me and I'm trying to be nice so I'd appreciate it if you just we can sit down and work this out but if we can't work this out I'm going to sock it to you baby you got me and that's basically how I feel about it now we can get into some of these other things right here this is a very important point I'm trying to get this across to people and you try and tell them and they kind of look at you with this blank starey-eyed look but in the Constitution of the State of Michigan the latest and greatest the very first thing they talk about notice it says section one all political power is inherent in the people government is instituted for their equal benefit security and protection now let me ask you a question do you feel equal benefit I don't you know equal protection and discrimination no person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws right nor shall any person be denied the enjoyment of the civil or political rights or be discriminated against in the exercise thereof because of religion race color or national origin the legislature shall implement this section by appropriate legislation you know and they start going down through all freedom of worship you know I mean this is what we're talking about here folks you know your rights you got them you don't know them you don't got them we get back in here to police powers generally this is something you got to understand generally the police power is the exercise of the sovereign right of the government to promote order safety and health and morals and the general welfare of the society within constitutional limits within constitutional limits did everybody hear that within constitutional limits generally the police power is the exercise of the sovereign right of the government to promote order safety health and moral and general welfare of the society within the constitutional limits as otherwise stated the police power of the state is a power or organization of a system of regulations to foster the health order and comfort of the people and to prevent and or punish injuries and offenses to the public right but it has to be within constitutional limitations and it embraces all rules for the protection of life liberty and property I mean that's a contradiction of logic today folks that doesn't happen you and I both know it I mean who are they kidding they ain't kidding me okay so it's up to you and it's up to me and we got to get a hold of this book right here you get a hold of this constitution and you start learning that constitution and you quote a chapter and verse and guess what you'll notice a unique different change one after a while they start to listen and you actually affect what is called positive chain and every time they see you and that goofy hat you wear they go oh for god's sake don't give that guy no ticket I have actually been pulled over listening to the program didn't have no plates on my car policeman called he says you got positive ID on the guy and a friend of mine was taping it off his police radio he said yeah it's him he said well for god's sake don't give that guy no ticket and the guy says Sarge he ain't got no plates on his car he said I don't give a damn what he ain't got on his car don't give that guy no ticket he said but Sarge he told me he's just been waiting to fight it and beat it all the way to the supreme court and I wrote that on the ticket he says you give that guy a ticket I said I just told you not to give that guy a ticket what are you deaf you got some problem with your hearing he said I told you not to give that guy a ticket now why did you give that guy a ticket he said Sarge he ain't got no plates on the car I said I told you I don't care what he ain't got on the car this is all recorded on a radio broadcast so everybody was laughing the police were laughing everybody was laughing his buddies were laughing they were ribbing him over the radio the sergeant told him alright knock it off clear the net this is serious he said fine he said you give him a ticket he says fine he says tomorrow morning 9 o'clock I want you to be in here when the city attorney comes in here and he says you're going to personally deliver the ticket to him and he ain't going to be real happy with you because he hates that guy every time he goes to court that guy blows his doors off he looks like a fool you give the guy a ticket now he's got to go to court so sure enough we go to court come up before the court judge starts operating like a prosecutor he starts asking me all kinds of discovery questions as soon as they call the case now this is something important you've got to understand you're going to be your own attorney then you've got to know all of the programming when you hear him call your case you get off your tail feather and you run right up there as quick and as speedily as possible without knocking anybody down and you say ready your honor you state your appearance I'm so and so here and before this honorable court I'm standing as my own counsel in my state it's under article 1 section 13 I've appointed myself my own attorney and I'm ready to proceed with my administrative and procedural matters and at this time your honor may it please the court I motion for dismissal of prejudice failure state of cause of action virtually be granted bingo now I apologize if I'm talking too fast I'm going to try and slow down a little bit but when you're in court as much as I am you just learn you talk fast you lose so I apologize if I'm going a little too fast I'm going to slow down I'm trying to make it easier for you folks okay but the judge bips off right away well you got a ticket on such and such I said oh your honor I said are you the judge the disinterested third party that's trying this case the trier of fact he said yes I said okay I said is this the prosecutor over here to my right he said yeah that's him I said okay I said are you going to prosecute this case your honor he said no no I'm the judge I said and why are you asking discovery questions well I just want to find out what's going on I says isn't that his job over there that's what he's supposed to do he's supposed to present his case as the prosecutor trier of the case you're the trier of fact he's the trier of the case I said if you're going to operate as the judge and the prosecutor I'm going to object on the record as a mistrial he said okay I'll let you enter that on the record go ahead I said okay let it be entered on the record as an appealable issue he said okay he said now it's on the record he said let me ask you this did you get a ticket on September the 30th I said yes sir he said well let me ask you this do you have any plates on your car I said no sir and I don't intend to get any and of course all the people on the court oh this guy's going to jail watch this this is going to be good he says to me he says I assume you have a very good reason for that and I said yes sir and I shut up I waited he said can I hear it I said well your honor I said I'm an unfranchised common law free man I'm not a participant in any tontine schemes and limited liability and a joint venture for profit with an insurable interest requiring me to participate in these corporate Ponzi schemes I'm just a little Joe from Kokomo I live on the block I travel at the common law and I have a right to travel freely on-comer pursuant to Shapiro vs. Thompson and that right is so basic it doesn't even need to be mentioned the state of Michigan arbitrarily and erroneously converted my right into a privilege and issued a license plate and a fee for it Murdoch vs. Pennsylvania says no state may convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it and if they do Shuttlesworth vs. Birmingham Alabama says I can ignore the license and engage in the right with impunity that means you can't punish me since I have relied on previous decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and on constitutional defenses I have a perfect defense for willfulness I am immune to the prosecution therefore prosecution counsel does not have a cause of action for which relief can be granted I'd motion for dismissal of prejudice for fairer state a cause of action for which relief can be granted and I'd kind of like to collect my costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case the judge starts reading the ticket told officer he'd just been waiting to get this ticket so he could fight it and beat it all the way to the Supreme Court he laughed he says motion granted and he ran off the bench before I could get my damages so I went out in the hall he went to the can I waited for him he came out of the can I served him with my papers he says you didn't have to do that I said well I didn't want you to be inconvenienced judge he said okay he signed I went back in the court as a casual thing just to see what kind of reaction would happen and I sat down about two cases later this elderly gentleman gets up and he stands up there and he says your honor I'm not quite as knowledgeable as that young gentleman that was here just two cases ago and I don't presume to understand all of the issues that he raised but it really sounded good to me and I'd kind of like to ditto everything he said on top of my case everybody broke out laughing the judge says alright how many guys here didn't have no plates on their carry about five guys raised their hand he says okay everybody dismiss get the hell out of here and everybody broke out laughing it was like you know at the carnival on Christmas or something you know it was a carnival atmosphere so I'm telling you you can affect change and see they had all figured they said watch this this guy's going to jail and then all of a sudden boom out jumped and I'm telling you it's this little book right here this book you know what's in this book you have power knowledge is power you know what's in this book and you know how to exercise your rights in a timely fashion you have constitutional rights and if you exercise them and you utilize good judgment and be courteous and just treat people the way you like to be treated with a little dignity most of the time 99% of the time I win now I will tell you I've been to jail I mean I'm not going to lie to you I've been but when I go to jail they really hate it because I usually get oh the last time I got five guys cases retried and I got another four guys out like within 24 hours and then I got 11 guys off of their case because they signed up for drug rehab and one bank robber come up to me and said to me I think you know I'm a hard case I said yeah I kind of gathered that he says I want you to know you changed my life he said I really appreciate you helping me with my paperwork he says they're going to give me a new chance you're going to let me out on probation I'm going to marry my girlfriend and he started crying and he basically said I'll never forget you pops he says you're some kind of guy he says God bless you and he says I want you to know I really appreciate what you did and I found God too and between you and Crazy Charlie he said Crazy Charlie is a minister that goes around to all the jails he used to ride for the outlaw motorcycle gang Crazy Charlie is clearly crazy the last time I saw Crazy Charlie he was riding down 8 mile road at 85 miles an hour standing on his seat against another guy standing on his seat to see who was going to wimp out first Crazy Charlie did about 5 years in the slam because he got charged with murdering some guy Crazy Charlie went to jail and he found God and God spared Crazy Charlie from a life sentence in jail and Crazy Charlie owes it to God and he goes through all of the jails and he preaches the gospel and he basically is quite a gentleman and he's nobody to screw with and when we went to chapel the kids were all joking around pops you going to chapel I said oh hell yeah he says pops you're a badass what you want to go to chapel for I said let me tell you something my man you can always learn something and I'll tell you one of the best places to learn is at chapel so why don't you come on down and we might learn something we go down there and who do I see Crazy Charlie I hadn't seen Crazy Charlie for years he looked at me I looked at him he said what the hell are you doing here I said I don't want to talk about it Crazy Charlie the guy turns around to me he says pops is there anybody in this joint you don't know I said I'll tell you what this guy is a guy I would listen to because he's serious the man is serious and he found God and he's going to try and help you find God and in the end you will have peace well this gentleman this one bank robber found this gentleman between myself and Crazy Charlie he found God and I wish you could see the peace on his face he was in a lot of trouble and we did his paperwork for him we helped him and basically they redid his whole program and because he found God they decided to put him out on lifetime parole he made restitution he gave the money back he changed his whole life his whole life was changed just from that instance so I'm telling you when I go into jail it's hilarious because it's like the jailers don't even know how to act and it's like the one jailer told me when I left he shook my hand he says I'm going to miss you pops he says they call me pops because I'm older I was a little teed off when they called me pops the first time so I told this kid he said I said what's with the pops I said I'll bet you can't even do 25 push ups he said you're probably right pops can you boom down I went 25 out and here's I'll raise your 25 and here's another 25 he said pops you're in good shape I said I'm going to show you how good a shape I'm in you keep calling me pops he says no no no no you don't understand pops he said if you're an older gentleman in the joint they treat you with courtesy they call you pops and it's just out of courtesy I said oh I guess you can call me pops and that's cool I said don't you ever think that I'm getting old because I'll fool you so they laughed when I left they lined up to shake my hand and even the jailer said he was going to be sorry to see me go because I was helping so many people and people were getting their lives together so when I go to jail it's kind of unique I actually get a vacation I got the top bunk and I laid on the window and let God's sun shine in my face and I got a suntan and guys would say pops why do you climb up on the top bunk I says man I'm out on the beach getting sun and rays what are you doing he says you know pops you something else you're going to make you in jail and you're going to make I said I'm laying out here on the beach what you talking about I'm laying on my bed right next to the window and the sun comes right through and I'm on the beach what you talking about getting a suntan so you got to make the best of where you're at no matter what it keeps your spirits up and the bottom line is this I wouldn't have been in jail if I could have more effectively argued my constitution I ended up having to do a brief from the jail 28 pages I sharpened the pencil on the wall here it is this is a 28 page motion to disillow this is more than that this right here this right here I mean this is all from hand long hand and when we got to court the judge looked at it he goes sir are you an attorney I says no he says he says you ever been to law school I says no sir he says you did this from jail I says yes sir he says you did this from jail from memory I says yes sir it's rather extensive it's huge meanwhile the prosecutor kicks in she says judge do I got to answer this he goes oh hell yeah this guy is kind of like this guy on night court on TV in channel 2 kind of flip it and he says oh hell yeah counselor he says what's this a new hobby you just took up he says this guy even did his own proposed order I don't even have to fill out an order he says not only that I want it done by 8 o'clock Monday morning so all weekend she had to go to law library and answer all this stuff she was not a happy camper so then she proposed that I have to have a shrink check my bolts out to see if my batteries are charged because if you defend your constitution you've got to be a crazy turkey and she found out I'm pretty well squared away I just argue my constitution I asked the judge I said has it gotten this bad yet judge where they got tossed you in a nut house because you defend your constitution he says not in my court and I've heard of judges speaking up and saying well the constitution has no place in my court how can they even think about that boy that is a that is a very serious statement because what that judge just did in an open court of law under title 18 United States Code section 2381 is he just committed an act of treason see the judge has sworn under article 11 in this state paragraph 1 that he will uphold the constitution of the United States and move as most immediately as is practicable to offend the constitution and a violation of that act would be capital felony treason under the people and government of the United States of America and he would be subject upon conviction to be hung by the neck that's how serious if the defendant had a driver's license and they were trying to argue a traffic matter and they were kind of in the system already and raised the constitutional objection that the judge might say it doesn't apply well here's here's how we start a lot of these traffic cases and I'll get right into that the issue when you first walk before a traffic court you see when they merged these courts together in 1963 they screwed up they wanted to lay off half the judges see and they only wanted to have one building so what they did is they merged the traffic court per se or that docket into the criminal court docket and when they did that they didn't check the rules you see and when they didn't check the rules they didn't allow for jurisdictional challenges between the two courts courts so what happens now is you come before the court and there's several ways you can come before the court now this gentleman here is correct when he's talking about you have a driver's license you have entered into a contractual relationship with the state in other words it's not a lawful contract because you cannot enter into an unlawful contract you understand it is a contract though because it's recognized as a contract because you have voluntarily entered into this contract you agreed to all of the rules in their law book for that contract now this is what we call admiralty and maritime jurisdiction or artificial jurisdiction and it's a rather heavy argument going into Erie Railroad versus Tompkins and McCulloch versus Maryland and we'll go into that in depth at the end of this program but I wanted to share with you briefly when you sign your driver's license and especially today in your voter's registration card you will notice a little note right under your signature where you agree to the acceptance of the duality of citizenship of not only at the common law but you accept the national jurisdiction under admiralty and maritime jurisdiction which allows you to be sucked into all of these uniform commercial code requirements and this is a very serious thing you're signing here you don't understand it but you just sold all your constitutional rights down the sewer when you sign that document so when you sign it my honest advice and this is from experience you sign the thing and right at the end of your name you write UD U period D period at the end of your name and underneath your name you write 1-207 without prejudice now what that does it says I'll be glad to accept your ridiculous privilege I don't really need to but I will just to keep myself from being in trouble with the cops and I'll tell you what we'll do we'll exercise our uniform commercial code caveat that allows us to keep all of our constitutional rights in other words my signature is not really a signature of contract it's a signature of convenience that allows me to get a piece of paper to put in my pocket for identification purposes that allows me to sign my checks and do whatever I gotta do but it doesn't in any way make any admissions or confessions or require me to participate in any of your rule book schemes under your Admiralty and Maritime Taunting scheme now to tell you how crazy it was I just got asked by an attorney how he would defend how he would defend a program where a gentleman that he was defending was accused of hijacking a car and that they were claiming that because the car is made all over the world and all over the United States that the parts even though they're assembled at one point they are in what is called the interstate jurisdiction and that because of that this crime was now a federal crime you understand this is how far reaching this thing has gotten and when this gentleman signed his driver's license he had no idea that he was entering into this thing and waiving all of his God-given constitutional rights and that he was no longer a common law citizen that he was actually under Admiralty and Maritime jurisdiction now when we pull up some of these statutory requirements it's an interesting thing that you brought up but what they do is these regulations are never enacted into law we'll show you something on that just a little bit later but they're not enacted into law they just make a regulation and because you voluntarily enter into this contract all of these regulations just come up as enforceable to you even though you don't know any better now we have a fair credit reporting act that says if you make any loan or you get involved in any kind of a credit relationship they've got to tell you everything about how much the interest rate is what the payments are how long the payments are I mean they've got to tell you every single thing about the contract and in theory all contracts you're supposed you're supposed to know all of the facts in regard to the contract they just make the contract one sided and they figure well these people are not that well informed they're not real bright we'll just get them to sign this on the driver's license and they'll voluntarily acquiesce into the situation and then we can throw all of these regulations at them and they'll never know how we hit them so it's very important that you understand when you sign something read it for sure if you don't understand everything that's down there take it to somebody and ask some questions before you sign it because once you sign it it's harder to get out of but I highly recommend everybody lose their wallet and go down and redo their driver's license and sign a thing UD when you sign it and put 1-207 without prejudice because right then and there you cut off all of this Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction and you return back to your contract law of what? you're a common law citizen living at the common law and they can have their contract but it's not enforceable why is it not enforceable? because you can state that you signed it under duress well how do I know that? look I put UD right after my name U period D period what do you think that means? under development? under the deck? that means that means under duress when I signed this I was under duress I didn't voluntarily sign this I had to sign this or the cops were going to cuff me about the head you see I was under threat intimidation coercion I still believe that I have a right to travel freely unencumbered notice you're not driving you have a right to travel the customary usage of the right to travel today is you get in a car you don't go down to 7-11 on your bicycle you get in a car you want to go down and pick up a car in the milk you get in your car another unique argument along these lines is well judge I asked this judge I said let me ask you a question judge if I get in my car the constitution was still in effect in full force before I got in my car right? oh yeah now when I got in my car and I had my gun it was still in effect right? but when I closed the door the constitution was suspended and everybody broke out laughing how could that be? the act of getting in the car and closing the door made the second amendment unconstitutional I said that's totally ludicrous how could that possibly be? you see they have passed these laws and they have gotten away with it for so long that they just it's kind of like a bank robber that's robbed 25 banks in a row and on the 26th is a little miff that you're getting excited man I've done this 25 times what's the big deal? now you're going to bust me on the 26th time and you're going to get all upset see they've been getting away with it so long nobody's ever taken them to the task they feel like well I should be able to get away with it on the 26th time an unconstitutional act wrongfully done it doesn't matter how many times in a row you did it it's still unconstitutional and the reality is a person that's properly motivated properly trained and properly willing to do whatever is necessary and proper to defend the Constitution will almost always prevail on the merits and that's what we're doing right now and they're sweating on that right now but the reality of this is and you've got to understand the burden is on you you want your Constitution and you damn well better grab a hold of it and you better hold on tight and you don't let go for nothing you read your Constitution you learn your Constitution you quote your Constitution chapter and verse frontwards, backwards upside down when people come up to you well we want you to take a drug test as part of your job huh go fish how are you taking a drug test? I'm not required to prove a negative you're required to prove a positive if you think I'm doing something negligent fine then you go file papers and you take necessary precautions and what have you and we'll go to court I says but I'm not I'm not going to be convicted before the fact and then I got to provide evidence that I'm not guilty that's the cart before the horse that's back ass words we're not going to do that not only that the Fifth Amendment says I got a right not to be a participant in a compulsory process that's going to make an incriminating situation to be now I'm not nothing to hide and I'm not even arguing from what I got to hide I'm arguing from the fact that the right stands and I'm exercising it and then I usually ask some simple questions well if they find anything when I get fired hell yeah you're going to be penalized so there are penalties and if they find anything would I be criminally prosecuted could be huh so why would you want to do some damn stupid thing like that give them a piss test this guy comes up to me at the last convention we had and they want to take a test as to whether or not he's got any drugs in his system I said first of all what's in my system is between me and my doctor none of your damn business I said I don't take drugs but I got nothing to hide but I'm not going to voluntarily enter into anything what if your guy screws up and now you say I got drugs now I can't get a job ever what are you kidding me there's some new hobby you just took up I'm not going to play that game it is not my burden to prove a negative it is your burden to prove a positive if you have a just claim which relief can be granted you go file your papers and we'll sit down and talk but until such time you go fish because I'm not going to play I'm not required to play and I'm not going to play and if you fire me for the exercise of my constitutional right I'm going to tell you about Miller vs. United States which says the claim and exercise of a constitutional right shall not be converted into a crime and you're doing that and you're punishing me and if you fire me for it I will sue your socks off and attach everything you own bank, business, and home now make my day that's how I feel about it so you find another turkey to jerk with because I'm not going to play okay now we want to get into some serious things I want to get into this this argument about traffic cases this is the most practical way to deal with traffic cases when you are pulled over what is happening now you got a policeman he's conducting discovery anything you say can and will be held against you and if you don't think so just keep rattling and it'll all get written down on the ticket I found that out told the officer he'd just been waiting to get this ticket so he can fight it and beat it all the way to be in court wrote that word for word right on the ticket so when these people are with you you keep your hatch button and I mean I'm guilty I admit it sometimes I rattle on it's been known to happen so I'm telling you not to do it you button your hatch if you say anything it's yes sir and no sir what can I do for you and they always like to say going a little fast weren't you I say I need to admit or deny and I leave you to your proofs oh a lawyer nah I'm not a lawyer but I'm smart enough to keep my mouth shut because I realize anything I say is going to be putting down on your paper and say you got a charge you make it and I'll see you in court oh you want to go to court oh yeah I always go to court I fight everything murder one it's kind of like a hobby of mine you know well let's see what we get and they walk back to the car and they start writing or they usually come back and they say well you're going a little fast think about slowing down we're going to let you go with the warning you got to have a good day thank you officer you have a good day too God bless you and keep you safe okay courtesy I can blow their doors off anytime I want still yes sir no sir courtesy courtesy pays you treat people the way you like to be treated nine times out of ten you will benefit you treat people like a yahoo and you're going to get treated like a yahoo yourself so I highly recommend courtesy as an effective way I had a policeman one time tell me you have a rate a flashlight the hard way and I looked at him and I said quite frankly officer most of the officers I have run into are extremely professional and I treat them with a great deal of courtesy and professionalism because I respect what they're doing and that they risk their life every day and at no time would I give an officer enough static that he would want to make me a flashlight I mean I treat them very cordially and I respect what they're trying to do I don't agree with everything they're trying to do because some of the stuff is kind of unlawful I said but I will give them the courtesy they have coming he turned to me and he said I'm sorry I got a pig mouth I didn't mean it you're right I was out of line see you treat people with courtesy and nine times out of ten you can even back down some guy that's talking a lot of manure but the louder you talk and the more belligerent you talk the more louder and the more belligerent he has to talk it's kind of like Newton's third law of physics every action has an opposite and opposing reaction you talk crap then he's got to talk crap so my advice to people is don't do that let's unmotivate it who's doing this you or him remember the best weapon you have is the one right between your ears so use it and watch your mouth don't be talking a lot of trash to these policemen they don't need to hear it they got a bad day you might have a bad day best thing to do is say yes sir no sir and if you got an honest pitch go ahead make my day now we've gone past that you got the ticket what are you going to do well look on the ticket see if he signed it a lot of times they don't sign it guess what if he didn't sign it there ain't no sworn complaint how can you defend against a non-sworn complaint a lot of times the cop doesn't sign the ticket look open your eyes God gave you a set of eyes look yeah this guy didn't sign it today it says under penalty of perjury I attest and certify that this is a true and fact complaint well what happens if you don't sign that it ain't a complaint do you have to sign the ticket when the police officer pulls you over in that situation don't they make you sign the ticket sometimes they do if you sign it put UD 1-207 without prejudice that's saying that's saying that you you received the complaint that's all that's saying alright so it's okay to do that yeah but put UD 1-207 it's not an admission of guilt it just means that you received the complaint okay if you don't sign it he's going to take you to jail that's I mean I realize that it's unconstitutional unless you like jail food you know I wouldn't do it I'd sign the thing UD 1-207 without prejudice the signature doesn't do anything besides you want to copy the complaint anyway because you want to file a brief are you going to file a brief if you don't know what the complaint is right now the next thing you know you have to notify the court within the time period and it's usually 10 days one of their dirtiest tricks is you call in and you think you got it noticed and guess what they claim you didn't call in and they go ahead and say you didn't show up then they find you guilty and bingo you're out of there so I recommend you call them tell them that you want a formal hearing ask the name of the party you are speaking to and whom I speaking to so that you've got a name of somebody that works there to verify that you called then immediately or sooner type up a little notice that says I state your full name do hereby request a formal hearing put that in the mail sent certified mail to them or run down there and walk right in and get them to set up a hearing now you want a formal hearing okay now five days before that hearing you are required to serve your papers on opposing counsel if you don't do it in a timely fashion Michigan general court rule will sock it to you and you will not be able to enter your briefs now sometimes you can get away with it the last minute handing it to them and they won't say nothing but if they want to hammer you they can use the five day court rule I have used it effectively several times now you got to you look at what it says on the complaint whatever it says MCLA whatever you violated and you go down and you go to the law library you look up Michigan Miles Laws Act you look up exactly what they say and then you enter a defense I neither admit nor deny and I leave you to your strictest proofs in a confident court of original jurisdiction but before we go to that depending on how you want to play and there's several ways you can go if you want to be the hardest nosed that you can be you walk into court and don't send no paper and as soon as they call a case you as expediently as possible you move to the forum to the forum up there in the front and you say in a loud and clear voice ready your honor you state your full name I'm giving my appearance before the court in propria persona which means in your own proper person in this state it's pursuant to article 1 section 13 I've appointed myself my own attorney and I'm ready to proceed with my administrative and procedural matters and at this time your honor may I please the court I'd motion for dismissal with prejudice fair state of cause of action for which relief can be granted and all of a sudden the cop will go especially if you wear an army jacket and you look like you're three sheets in the wind the cop will lean back and go oh crap we're going to get sued I didn't know the guy was a lawyer and then he'll start talking to the prosecutor and the prosecutor will go that's tricky you brought me you brought me one of them kind I'm going to get killed and you're going to sit here and pay for it I promise you and then what happens is out of your mouth you tell the judge in the most clearest and expedient language your honor may it please the court is this a court of law or is this a court of equity he will immediately sound off with there's no equity here just like he got hit in the knee with a hammer and his leg jump and just that fast it'll happen that fast because he thinks there's no lawsuit here therefore there's no equity see the judges don't even understand what happened with this shift from 1963 where they moved these courts together so you got to find out what hat the judge is wearing is he wearing a criminal hat or is he wearing the civil hat so you have a right to ask say judge this court of law is this court of equity he goes there's no equity here now we just did this in a beautiful case this little gal she couldn't have been 80 pounds soaking wet and this cop was about 6 foot 2 about 320 big heavy duty state trooper she walks in your honor I am representing myself as my own counsel I would like to proceed with my administrative and procedural matters but before we go I have a declaratory ruling sir could I ask you a question she goes oh sure honey go ahead he says but you understand only a fool stands as his own attorney she says that may be sir but I'm the best person that knows the facts of my case and I think I have a chance I'd like to try is that okay no problem you have a right is this a court of law or is this a court of equity the judge immediately there's no equity here she said thank you sir she rolled up her hand in the hand was a ticket that said civil infraction right across the top and she said how may we hear this civil infraction sir the judge did a Homer Simpson he goes so that's where you're going with this huh the whole court broke out laughing this little gal I'm telling you she is this tiny little thing she's just a sweetheart the whole court realized the judge did a Homer Simpson and then the judge realized he did a Homer Simpson and then he must have left he goes oh honey you're not going to pull that here today are you and she got a little flushed she wasn't sure this was her first time she was a little scared she looked over at an associate of mine she said looked at him and he gave her the knot and she turned she said yes I am sir and everybody broke out laughing again the cop goes well if they're going to play around I'm going to put 15 over on the ticket judge and the judge goes no no no no no you got what's on the ticket that's what's on the complaint you're not changing the complaint after the fact that's perjury you want me to put you in the cooie you can't change the complaint the complaint is the complaint you signed it it's true got me if it was 15 over you should have wrote 15 over he said well I just don't want to screw around this is just getting out of hand I mean she was guilty da da da da da and see she goes your honor right we haven't even gotten to that yet your honor there's no jurisdiction this is where we're at we're at no jurisdiction it's just right he said are we going to go through with this now come on tell me truth she says yes I am sir I'm going through all the way all the way to the supreme court she says and the judge goes okay now we're going to have to set a hearing she says and I'd like a formal hearing too sir he said okay and I'd like a trial by jury sir because the value and controversy is in excess of twenty dollars pursuant to the seventh amendment I have a right to trial by jury he says yeah okay okay we'll send you a notice it's been three and a half weeks we got no notice we call them every day they don't even want to talk about this case the only reason they said that was so all of the poor little people in the back of the room didn't get the idea that they could get up there and do the same thing this little gal did they're not going to call her back because they got no jurisdiction they're not going to try that case because she's going to blow their doors up okay now that's one of the most beautiful texts and the fastest and one the last time I did it it was before a particularly obnoxious judge and he basically said to me how many times have you pulled this and I said you know your honor this will be I think this is the twelfth time he said ah going for lucky 13 eh he said this is very clever he says but I'm going to give you some advice young man don't ever get caught doing nothing in my town got me I said sir I never do anything I'm trying to be a regular gentleman he said well you better not get caught doing nothing because I will hammer your tail and I said does that mean the case is dismissed your honor he says it's dismissed you're out of here now I'm telling you this works and it works real good now the next effective step that you can do is you can turn around and ask the judge if he's a licensed attorney to practice law because none of the judges are licensed take my word for it Michigan Constitution says under the Judicatio Act that they are required by law to have a license that they are required to be licensed by the state of Michigan the state of Michigan does not license attorneys the bar association licenses them they give them a P number and a card that says yeah you're a member of the bar association but if you call up the bar association they will tell you they don't give nobody a license the state of Michigan doesn't give them a license the bar association didn't give them a license so what license could they be talking about Mickey Mouse license because that's the only one that's left the state doesn't issue one the bar doesn't issue one and the one they got hanging on the wall does not a license from the state of Michigan and the Constitution of the state of Michigan says all judges will be licensed to practice law before the state and you ask them where's the guy's license he doesn't have one and your honor may it please the court if since you don't have a license I'm asking you to recuse yourself until we can get a judge that has a license now a little lady named Virginia Crofts he's the one that perfected this argument she's a genius at it she's a little spitfire if you ever watch her in court you're actually going to see a treat because she is something else she's got character she graduated a full attorney from Wayne State University and then she refused to join the bar because she didn't want to compromise her rights with their political chicanery and she she is a full fledged serious business legal person and to hear her work in court is absolutely like listening to Stradivari work the violin she walks in and blows her doors off well she's on about three judges now for the same thing she blew the first judge out so then they sent in another judge they moved her over to the other side of town over and over in Berkeley Michigan and then she walked in and she blew that judge out of the door so then they sent her to another judge and then she turned around and went before the state licensing commission and now they've handed it up to the to the judicial people of the state to try and resolve the problem they're going to end up dropping it the judge doesn't have a license now let's suppose the judge could prove he has a license which he doesn't judge let me ask you a question under your retirement fund isn't it a fact that you get a certain percentage of the rake-off of all the tickets that come before your bench well yeah and isn't out of a forty dollars that comes across your bench you get eighteen dollars and seventy five cents well yeah so you have a financial interest in this matter isn't that correct well yeah well isn't that a violation of judicial canon number seven you're not supposed to have any financial interest in any matter that comes before your court i'm going to ask you to recuse yourself for bias your honor may it please the court and every single judge has got it now does everybody understand how many ways you can hammer them just out of the chute without even getting nasty the judge don't have a license the judge has got a personal interest in the case for financial reasons there is no jurisdiction here the matter and i'll tell you a secret once you challenge jurisdiction the burden falls on the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction see and he can't do it it cannot be done there isn't any there is no jurisdiction here a traffic ticket in the united states of america i know you're sitting back oh come on they've been getting this for years a traffic ticket is a writ of assistance or a bill of attainder you look in your constitution you'll find out bills of attainder are against the constitution and it's stated at least twice that i know all right i'm telling you you read your constitution there is no place for a traffic ticket you cannot have a writ of assistance that has civil equity arguments that transmit into law penalties they can't throw you in jail for a debt because that's a debtor's prison we have a constitutional argument against that also so how do they do it cause they wants to and cause you don't know any better that's how they do it what if they have a court they say it's a court of equity all right that's a good question very i'm glad you're paying attention here if they say they have a court of equity and there is equity then you turn to them and say thank you your honor i appreciate your time i would like to know who is the injured party and where the contract is can you show me the contract there is no contract unless you didn't sign your license on ud1-207 without prejudice where is the contract it's when you sign for that license so don't sign for that license unless you put ud1-207 without prejudice ucc1-207 now they can't produce the contract and if they could produce the contract you've exercised your waiver under the contract not to give up your constitutional rights to travel freely and encumbered right and let me ask you this can you enter into an unconstitutional contract not lawfully the contract is voidable for not lawful performance it has to be a lawful contract for you to enter into it all right now the next thing who's the injured party who got injured show me judge the parking meter out there another neat trick that i like to do especially in speeding tickets as i like to confront my accuser i always like to call a black box that accused me of speeding to the stand the judge always gets upset and i tell them well your honor i said i've been asking this policeman here for three hours how this the black box that he's been playing with works and he can't tell me and we've been through the whole stationary mobile radar manual from macomb county community college law enforcement academy and i've asked him every question and i don't know how he passed his second-class radio operator's license because he doesn't know how the damn thing works period he doesn't even know how to set up the test to properly test the thing in all environments i said on top of that i said he is not the witness he is nothing but a hearsay witness and his testimony is inadmissible in any court in the land because you can't have here say he says what the hell are you talking about i said he did not actually accuse me that black box with flashing lights on a little beepers accused me i said now if i had a black box in here with little lights on and making noises and accusing and saying i didn't speed he didn't speedy didn't speed we know how far that go right through that window judge you throw it right out through that window but you let this guy bring his idiot box in with flashing lights and beepers on and his thing is exactly by the book and admissible in court he can't tell me how the thing works we've been trying for three-and-a-half hours to test him to see if he knows how it works he couldn't pass that test to save his life and the bottom line is i still don't think the damn thing works and personally i want to call it to the stand to confront my accuser in erotic one section 13 paragraph five i got a right to confront my accuser and i'd like to confront my accuser and i'm serving a subpoena a subpoena deuces take them which means bring your books and records do he goes that's pretty clever i says not only that your honor he's arguing apples and oranges see i got a speedometer in my car and it might be plus or minus 12 miles an hour on a factory made one a handmade one is plus or minus six miles an hour i said mine's got a little needle on it it works off a little cable that goes into transmission it runs off a little gear i says it doesn't have four decimal places and it doesn't do space logic and all this other stuff and shoot out a mile ahead and tell me how fast the telephone poles are flying by i said he's got this handy-dandy gadget in his car that's measuring speed one way and i got this one that's measuring speed my way so how could i be guilty to the extent that his is talking about because i don't have one of them in my car you see the apples and the oranges here judge it's not really a fair test is it he goes that's a pretty good argument you got there he says i'll tell you what we're going to do you've cost my court enough for the day i'm going to dismiss the case what do you think of that fine by me your honor but before we do i have one more bitch your honor he says bitch what's that i said you see that police officer there i have a great deal respect for that police officer and i don't like to see that police officer get injured in any capacity i personally feel that police officer sitting in that vehicle all day for eight hours a day getting bombarded by high energy microwave energy is an insult to that police officers life to his family i personally feel for that police officer i wonder why these guys are so irritable and why they don't want to eat no food and they don't want to jump the old lady when they go home nice as i understand why it's because they're being bombarded by this high energy microwave and i said some of them are getting cancer i says i think that this is an atrocity and i said i don't think that that officer should be required to sit in that car all day and be bombarded by that high energy microwave energy which could cause him to get testicular cancer and all kind of other problems with his life and and just so that the city can make bucks off of these tickets i says this is an atrocity he's you don't worry about that please that's my job i worry about that place that sir i said i worry about him he works for me i worry about him i says now i've personally run tests on this thing where we took a microwave leak detector right from radio shack which used to detect the microwave leaks on your radar range at home and i said we went over by the radar car he flipped the switch on and that thing went in the red so i know them guys are being bombarded by high energy microwave energy and i know that if i had a microwave energy uh oven at home that was leaking that bad it'd go in the trash you understand because of the dangers hazardous energy that is being given off by the thing i says now you ask my police officer here my my friend in in in the in the community that's going to protect me to put a risk of cancer or something like that on his body i says i think that's absolutely un-american and i'm protesting he said well i'll take it under consideration i said and i thank you for your concern for our police officers i said that's all right here on there i'm trying to be a good system so we walked out of the courtroom that cop came alongside of me and he says i ain't never turning that damn thing on again and what do you bet that didn't go everywhere now that's psychological warfare folks that's how it works and i was right and i was honestly trying to help him but he told me he ain't never turning that damn thing on again now this happened about 1985 now they've been publishing in the news just in the last year you're hearing about all these cops that are coming up with cancer from all kind of various things well this is why folks because they're being bombarded by these high-energy radar guns if i was a policeman i wouldn't turn that thing on for nothing i'd cut the wire and the thing i'm not turning it on what do you think of that i'll write a ticket i'll look in the speedometer and i'll see how fast the guy is going if he's going fast i'll get him a ticket but i'm not turning that thing just so i can have my hair fall out yeah get a chemotherapy treatment i don't need that kind of stuff you understand i told the judges is you got any kind of idea what kind of power is coming off the end of the antenna on that gun i said for every inch that it goes past the windshield the power curve is squaring itself now it's reaching out a quarter of a mile you got any kind of idea how much power is coming off the end of that antenna i said that poor guy is being bombarded with high energy microwave energy i don't think it's right so anyway it got dismissed and psychological warfare worked and most of the cops in my area don't even have that thing on anymore because i notice when you go by on my radar detector doesn't even go off so i know that it's effective now that's psychological warfare it's a combination of honesty and basically i do care about the police officers i don't want them to be in danger there are good police officers out there they have a right to work and have a safe job just like anybody else anymore and i was upset with them when they dumped agent orange on us we're in vietnam i mean it's illogical okay now the bottom line is a lot of things are going on out here and you have to be cognizant of what's going on and you have to be cognizant of your rights and you have to be willing to take the necessary and appropriate action then you can have some fun at it i like uh uh... an elder gentleman who's one of my mentors used to small and he says uh... if you're not having fun you're not doing it right he says i'll submit a brief and then he'll send it back to me and he'll tell me all the things that are wrong with it now fix it and i'll send it right back to him and i'll add a few more things in there and he'll get all mad that i fixed it and then he'll send me back a thing telling me he doesn't agree with it and i'll send him back an answer telling me that's too bad because that's the law now you can have a lot of fun doing this another neat thing you can do is go down and sit in courts i highly recommend ladies or gentlemen that don't have anything to do for an afternoon retirees especially get your best gallery your best uh... uh... girlfriend or boyfriend whatever it is take two you to safety in numbers take two you dress in your best suit and what have you tire best uh... skirt and what have you go down and sit in the court and take a legal pad just to you and sit there for the day and the left you want to sit in the left rear side the last few in the left rear side and just sit there and do not smile don't think you're from the judicial tenure commission you ought to see what happens it's great everybody gets read their rights everybody gets treated like a human creature it's absolutely uplifting the judge will stop what he's doing and ask you we're not here for anything serious today are we and i say no sir your honor i'm just casually observing you're going no no no no no no no no no no no no why are we here today honest sir we were just in the area we heard that you were a real good judge and we wanted to see you in action my associate was driving in the area and we stopped by to see you and he says that fish smells awful loosely wrapped to me now you tell me why you're here right now honest to god sir we're just casually observing okay all lawyers in my chambers shuts the court down goes in his chambers now look they start trying cases in the chambers and they started trying them in the hallway and they were on the other side of the clerk's office at the other end of the hallway then they come back and then the little gal from the prosecutor goes on she says what's with the nerd patrol the judge give her a look that would kill don't you do it today honey you keep that mouth zipped these guys are from the tenure commission we don't want no problems with the state you button that hatch i mean you can have a lot of fun my associate was just absolutely almost in tears you could keep your state face no longer so i said all right we're leaving hey we got out he laughed all the way down to the car laughed all the way down rochester road to the expressway so that's the most fun i had in my life just sitting there in that day and everybody was getting off guys were getting sentences canceled guys were getting out of jail one guy had twenty five hundred dollars worth of fines and they got reduced to one hundred twenty twenty four dollars and five days served it was 240 and it was going to be 10 days in jail but the judge turned to me and wink he says you can't throw him in jail for a civil interaction i knew that so this is the last offer i'm going to give young man it's going to be 124 and five days served that sound good to you the lawyer turns to me says you better take this this is the best deal you're ever going to get so i'm telling you you can be effective as citizens and you hear him bring up the right constitutional issues you pop off you sound off tell him hey this is america last time i heard we got american flag on a pole out there last time i heard we got a constitution and by god we're going to keep it forever forever anybody got a problem with that okay all right when i go to court i always take all my lucky charms with me and i was one of the fellows that served with the infamous apache troop first squad or ninth air cavalry uh we were the fellas that were in the movie apocalypse now where they told you i love the smell of napalm in the morning and that gentleman was exactly was exactly like that uh this book is done about the apache headhunters uh by a cobra gunship pilot by the name of jerome boyle who we used to call uh dirty harry because he looked just like uh dirty harry make my day he used to have that painted on the side of his aircraft along with pinball wizard and a few other things uh this is a phenomenal book about a story of uh serious americans this is a cobra pilot jerry boyle's own story a former policeman arrived in vietnam in march of 70 he went from being a fng which i can't tell you what that is in a church but it's bad to a combat vet in just two months where they're rescuing down crews flying fiery combat missions during the invasion of cambodia are being shot down himself well saw war quickly turned from a scary game of bullets rockets and grenades to a terrifying race against death where just split seconds could turn a scene of breathtaking beauty into one of stark absolute terror he witnessed men risked their lives daily to save others and he heard the dreaded call taking fire taking fire there were too often a fellow pilot's very last words before his chopper became an inferno boyle learned real fast that there weren't a lot of going home parties for apache troops pilots and when you listen to some of this stuff this is a cobra pilot's life and death experiences in vietnam's legendary apache troop first of the ninth air cavalry this pilot was the recipient of uh he was a california native and former policeman of ventura california among the medals and decorations awarded him for his service and this was kind of typical of most of the people in this outfit silver star three distinguished flying crosses five bronze stars two army commendation metal surveiller he now works as a pilot who flies in sport of offshore operations he lives in andrea he lives in uh oha california with his wife andrea of 20 years and to read some of the stuff about this is absolutely phenomenal some of the things that get involved i'll just read you a closing part of this thing to give you an idea the apache troop i served in wasn't part of the army the army was part of apache troop we were mavericks but the kind of team that any commander with hair on his tailpipe would want his unit to be like if you couldn't get what you needed to accomplish the mission through normal channels we begged borrowed or stole it usually the latter with few exceptions i'd follow the men of apache troop into hell known full well sooner or later someone from the blues the whites the reds to lift the tuna the mess section would emerge from a smoking hole dragging the dead smoldering ass of the devil now he kind of exaggerates a little bit but i can tell you that these men were phenomenal phenomenal fighters and it was my great privilege to serve with them and when i go to court i take all of my battle stuff my my ranger stuff my first air cab this is from the apache troop logo there's my flight wings the actual ones i wore this is the first of the ninth logo that was put on the nose of all the aircraft there's the first there's first 75th infantry rangers i have my duty honor country coin from the macarthur group of people it's a special group of people that defend the constitution it's a silver coin that's given as a serious defender group memento this is macarthur and it's solid silver then i got all my ranger jump stuff i put that on there i take my strike like lightning sound like thunder all my ranger stuff that when i was in the rangers and i take my first air cavalry when i was in cambodia because i was with these boys in cambodia and locked in my apache troop that's right off of our shoulder patches from the apache troop the original one i was with the take my detroit judo club this is a patch they give you for running 50 miles to save your life you got a certain time to do it in they give you a boot lace and a pocket knife and if you get caught they put you in a pow camp and treat you like a prisoner so it's like you got 12 hours to run 50 miles or or you go to the pow compound and they treat you like a a pow they hung my buddy up in a pit full of poisonous snakes upside down for about a day or two and then this is my other patches that i wear from from vietnam and special operations group i flew in support of bog rights in cambodia we used to deliver their supplies i got my my ranger belt buckle all these are mementos of a program my bronze star metal my i have 33 of these air medals i got five of these bronze stars i got a distinguished flying cross vietnamese cross again three 33 air medals shot down four times left for dead twice walked out of cambodia with two regiments on my tail feathers this is the sog special operations group mag v that we flew in support of uh uh bog rights in cambodia and the cambodian operation i was one of the special air crews that was selected personally to fly the infamous marine sniper and allow us to shoot that general at 800 yards i was one of the guys that flew him in and we wear the wings of eagles we support the national rifle association totally you know we ain't fooling around we want our constitution we want our second amendment i am a member of vietnam veterans and basically when i go to court i put all my lucky charms in my pocket it kind of drives them nuts down at the courthouse i also have my flag flag i always take my flag with me and i have my vietnam veterans belt buckles and my the oppresso libra which means a liberator of an oppression from the special forces that was given to me by the boys over there for helping them you know so all this goes in my my pockets when i go to court my lucky charm i call them and it does it's a little heavy but i you know it's like when i go i go for memory of those fine soldiers and some of the things they i'd rather be killing communists that's one of the models of the paratroopers from the charlie company ranger company charlie company rangers was the boys that supported that paratrooper that uh that marine sniper that shot him we shot that general at 800 yards so i'm a soldier soldier i've been a soldier soldier i believe in the things that the soldiers have done i've seen a lot of good soldiers pay the maximum price i personally killed them in my arms and i've listened to their last words tell my mother tell my wife tell my family i love them and to me the constitution is a very serious document and we defend it to the death we do not fool around when it comes to the constitution i've been doing it for 25 years i am a graduate of project blue book the special project blue book is where they pulled their soldiers aside and taught you the constitution and i always take my harmonica and i give them hell and we give it to them tell your southern health your transport story yeah well we uh we were flying interdiction along the cambodian border and we come up on the door of these uh b model huey it was a smaller huey and it was uh painted blue and silver and uh all along the side of the tail boom was white powder and i informed the aircraft commander and he told me he was hailing them on the hailing frequency and he called them up and told them to land we wanted to inspect their cargo and they told us basically to blank off and die you know who we are my pilot told him he didn't care if he was a man from glad he was going to land that aircraft and we were going to inspect his cargo basically he told us uh we're not landing my pilot ordered me to roll my guns up and he shot him down and we uh went down there and we blew his landing gear off shot up below his fuel cell and he got the idea we weren't fooling around he went down and landed in the in the rice paddy and we inspected his cargo and sure enough he was carrying heroin so the pilot gave him a choice he could go to long been jail with us for contraband trafficking or he could uh hitchhike home baby so he chose to hitchhike home figured he had a chance of course we knew that was going to be rather difficult in cambodia him being three foot taller than anything they're walking and a white man on top of that but uh we gave him a chance and the bottom line is he didn't want to go to jail so we uh torched his aircraft and uh we got back in the seal uh uh are you crazy those people are cia they're gonna kill you i told them make my day i said uh they were trafficking that dope to rgi's and uh god knows who else and as far as i'm concerned we stuck it to them for about 15 million and i'm just tickled and if i could do it again tomorrow i'd do it again and that's the true story we actually did it so anyway to make a long story short i'm a serious soldier i love my country and its constitution and i do not compromise when it comes to constitution i defend to the death that's what we do anybody who knows bog writes he's the most decorated soldier in the history of the united states he's a very congenial gentleman he uh when we worked with him in cambodia he was all business all business and uh we flew his fifth special forces people all over for whatever recon missions they had and um they they got to work with us and they know we were pretty serious folks and uh i personally think uh bog writes is going to be painted as some desperado no matter what he does only because he is uh is uh associated with the avant-garde type of constitutional defense he was the guy that got the ruby uh rich uh matter resolved peacefully um clearly he went in to to save randy weaver because randy weaver used to be one of his boys on the team and uh it took i mean he was risking his own life they could have just as easily dispatched him too so he's a man of great courage i respect uh what he's doing i appreciate that uh he's trying to make things happen but i also know that he's going to be held in some type of villainous to no matter what he does people are going to not understand and they're going to be afraid and of course the newspapers will continue to paint him as uh whatever boogeyman in the closet they can all right we're going to go on with our programming here we just got a little off the track there just a little bit just kind of let you give an idea where we're coming from we uh we take a pretty serious attack on the constitution and we want to get into some other issues we want to get into uh things like things like money money money money money money money and one of the best tapes you can get is from a gentleman uh we call him ernie uh he uh basically is known throughout the movement around here he delivers all the tapes and what have you and he has a tape called wake up america and basically it starts telling you how money works and why it works and what they're doing with our money and when you're done you really understand what's going on but we want to share some things with you about the money and we got a good story to tell you too but basically we want to share with you right now in michigan the michigan compile laws 21.153 michigan compile laws act obligations due state or municipality and date operative when paid by check or legal tender whenever any check or bank draft shall be tendered for the payment of any debt taxes or other obligation due the state or to any municipality therein such check draft shall operate as a payment made on the date the check or draft was received and accepted by the receiving officer if it shall be paid on the presentation without deduction for exchange or cost of collection all agencies of the state of michigan shall request that checks tendered in payment of an obligation due the state shall be made payable to the state of michigan no receiving officer shall be required to receive in payment of any debt taxes or other obligation collectible or receivable by him any tender other than gold or silver coin of the united states the united states treasury notes which you can't get today gold certificates which you can't get today silver certificates which you can't get today or other federal reserve bank notes and there's no bank notes in circulation there's federal reserve notes but there's no federal reserve bank notes now the reality is by this fact you are specifically precluded from tendering lawfully without being a party to a felony that of the basement of the coin of the realm against the 1792 coinage act the sherman coinage act so roger sherman wrote a book about this and it tells you all about coinage and the debasement of the coin of the realm and that's why he is affiliated with the 1792 coinage act now the reality to this is the fact that he is going to be a part of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank I walked up to the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank of the bank they couldn't give me my gold because they ain't got any gold but there is a contract on here that says pay to the bearer on demand now in this one it's a dollar of silver in theory the contract is there and you could in theory go collect it but upon trying to collect it there is no gold there is no silver they don't have any now over a period a long period of time in barter we have slowly been pushed into a position of of impossibility to perform now can the hat check be the hat can you walk in and check your hat and get a hat check and then when you come back to get your hat back they hand you another hat check can you wear the hat check obviously not so obviously the note is not the dollar all it is is the promise to pay a dollar does everybody understand that and what has happened over a long period of time and custom uses is the people have been hoodwinked into thinking that they have money dollars there are no dollars dollar is a unit of measurement which brings up a very famous case the case of montgomery wards versus eugene glacier for those of you who want to order the case we'll be happy to give you the court case numbers let me take this off so it doesn't reflect too much this is a very famous case okay the docket number is 82-002087 this is before the honorable district court of 52nd third district court the judge of the record was the honorable james p sheehy okay now i'll give you a little synopsis of this case what happened in this case did everybody get the court number first though 82 dash 002087 all right now what happened in this case to make a long story short this gentleman's wife got a little mad at him decided to take his credit card and go out and charge to montgomery wards from the front door to the back door and he ran up quite a large sum of debt the matter got of course montgomery wards wasn't going to take you back you bought it it's yours you got it now they went to court and uh came up before the the the famous judge james p sheehy of 52nd third district court who by the way is a very excellent judge very knowledgeable very very a decent man a kindly man he's pretty serious business though if you're screwing around he's going to hammer you but most of the time he's uh quite congenial and kind of a lot of fun too but it came up before his court and up jumped the devil in the deep blue sea and they're starting to argue and the judge saying well let me ask you a question he said you get a credit card he said yeah so you signed for the credit card he said yeah so you give the credit card to your wife he said yeah he said here's the bill you pay he says okay judge now let me explain something to you you told me that the judgment is for this amount is that right and i'm asking you and you told me it's this many dollars and i'm asking you for a determination of the dollars what what dollars he said sir you can interpret it any way you want you can make it frankincense or myrrh i don't care i don't care if you don't even pay his judgment i'll tell you what don't pay it there's a lot of documents in the basement they never pay them he says don't pay it we'll just take judgment against you and we'll attach you you know whatever we need for bits of attachment and we're going to collect on this debt he said sir you misunderstand my point now you you have told me uh this amount of dollars and and i'm i'm confused here i need to know something about these dollars he says well he said let me clarify it for you i've entered a judgment against you for the amount due all right he said yes sir but if i ask you for a pound of something you're going to say a pound of what if i ask you for a gallon of something you're going to say again on the one if i ask you for a foot or a yard of something you're going to say a foot or a yard of what now you're coming to me and telling me dollars and i'm asking you dollars of what because dollar is the unit of measurement he said you can make it anything you want tell you what make it coffee beans now at that instant the montgomery wards attorney came to a half rise and he went your honor your honor there was 40 of us plus in the court we sat there and all we could do was go because we realized instantly what this judge had just did he had made a determination of the substance of the money of account of the united states government pursuant to coffee beans with great courage the honorable judge james p shee had made a determination of the the substance of the money of account of the united states government was coffee beans that's what we told the wall street journal and all the newspapers and television stations that would listen he was most upset about that instantly the judge looked across the room we're all sitting with our jaw on the ground and he leaned back in his chair flipped his pencil in the air and he said ah ass with a hit on the record he realized that a landmark michigan court decision had occurred he realized that montgomery wards wasn't going to say nothing because they won they they ain't going to appeal they won they what are they going to appeal you won you won you won you won you won it's not new appeal we weren't going to appeal because we won too we got the judge to make a determination that the substance of the money of account of the united states government was coffee beans you can see in the back of this book here mr glacier took the judgment right here and this was for 1098.97 he did it in 100 bean bags certified one bean to the dollar and 97 100 so we cut the tip of the bean off painted a white line on it he sent it to montgomery wards we got it on there please find enclosed in this package 1100 and 48 coffee beans which is payment in full pursuant to judge of the 52nd district court october 8 1982 before his honorable judge james p shee i thank you sir for your time trouble concerning this matter most graciously yours truly eugene glacier and a certified mail sent to him they never said nothing nor would they nor could they he honored the stipulation of the judge okay now to this date this gentleman comes to court with a big red bag marble bag full of coffee beans that he's got stenciled on the side james beans i'll read you the last statement this is kind of hilarious therefore really out of his own testimony it seems to me that judgment really is unavoidable in that amount thank you your honor the court anything else sir you have the right to a closing argument mr glacier only that i don't think i received a fair and equitable trial here today the court this is a closing argument regarding this trial okay as to the subject matter mr glacier subject matter i have nothing to add to the subject matter here the court the court makes the following finding of facts that the court finds a pursuant to plan to exhibit number one that mr glacier eugene glacier entered into a contract with montgomery wards and the company which it is a monthly account to pursuant to plans exhibit number two that the account was used by probably 95 99 of the time of the purchases by his wife while they were married number three that for testimony of mr davison's under but a testimony mr davison the balance owing on the account is 1098.97 and the court also finds that mr grossman mr grossman's excuse me from mr glacier's testimony that he just recently got divorced approximately august 24 1981 in that divorce proceeding he accepted the liability to on this account as between he and his wife based upon the information the court makes a conclusion of law that mr eugene glacier the defendant this matter owes montgomery award 1 988.97 court finds a judgment in favor of plaintiff in the amount of plus costs mr glacier you have a right to appeal this and that appeal i think is in 15 or 20 days mr grossman mr grossman 20 you're under 21 actually out of county 23. i think it's 20 all over now your honor the court i think it is it used to be 15 in some cases and 20 on others and i could never keep it straight but i think it's 20. you have a right to appeal in 20 days if you appeal let me explain to you how you do that you have the file with the court with the circuit claim of appeal are those the ones that are marked by the way those exhibits mr grossman oh yes sir your honor that's right the court we better keep those you can give him a copy of the other ones by the by the way you you can file a claim of appeal with a certain court in this court you also make a request to the court stenographer for a copy of the record a copy of the record must file within a certain amount of time that you can tell you you must file as i say a claim of appeal and then you have a certain number of days after that to file your appeal okay claim of appeal is nothing more than a little form i hear by claim appeal okay so but some but the court clerks can give you more information but if you don't file an appeal within 20 days you've lost your right for an appeal any other questions before the court recess i'd still like to have a motion for a more definite statement dollars of what am i do i owe the court dollars of what the court the court has made it now this is this is after he had already told them dollars of what before and the judge told them frankincense and myrrh and then he kept hammering away at this dollars of what and the court lost its cool the court has made a judgment of 1098.97 and however you interpret that sir if you want that and coffee beans that's okay with me really okay thank you much and at that point we all went oh and he went oh s with a hit he realized he threw his pencil up in the air now this is a magnificent case in an example and to this day this gentleman still pays court judgments with coffee beans and if it's a viable case you can use the case as a reference uh it's a landmark michigan court decision we use it thoroughly okay now to make a long story short article one section 10 of the constitution is clear and specific it says nothing but gold and silver coin shall be made a tender and payment of debt we got article one section 10 right here for those of you who are looking for no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed that's traffic tickets folks a bill of attainder is a traffic ticket can you see that right here no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed no capitation or other direct tax shall be laid unless by the rule of apportionment or census to we'll we'll talk about that later that's another heavy one all right but article one section 10 is basically no state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender and payment of debt all right here we go here we go right here no state shall enter into any treaty alliance or confederation grant letters of mark and reprisal the letter of mark or reprisal is like your brothers messed with the king so the king is going to attack your family and put a letter of mark out on them coin money emit bills of credit what is a federal reserve note make anything but gold and silver coin a tender and payment of debts why because it creates inflation you got to understand that paper money if you can't redeem every piece of paper in a society the amount that you can't redeem is inflation or credit credit is inflation right pass any bill of attainder huh what is the bill of attainder again a traffic ticket ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts or grant any title of nobility when they give these guys these gun permits because they got three thousand dollars in their pocket and they're a rich businessman isn't that a title of nobility because they get more rights they're more politically correct than you they have rights you see i mean they violate so many things it's not funny it's never funny but i'm just saying i i mean you start reading this book folks i mean i read it all the time and i always find something new this is kind of a book like the bible it's one of these books you can read and find something out of it all the time the bottom line is you read the constitution and you you holler you don't let these people jam your constitution you keep going all right all right now let's let's talk about let's talk about treason here let's put this down here what is treason title 18 this is this is the penal code and we're talking about treason whoever owing allegiance to the united states levies war against them or adheres to their enemies giving them aid and comfort with in the united states or elsewhere is guilty of treason and shall suffer death or shall be in prison not less than five years and or fine not less than a ten thousand dollars and shall be impeachable of holding any office under the united states all right after this section it gives you all the reasons of how you can be charged with treason but the basic issues come under adheres to their enemies giving them aid and comfort now breaking down the laws of our country has also been construed as giving the enemies aid and comfort so if they're violating their oath of office and they're not upholding the constitution that is treason because in so doing they create anarchy in the land and then that they aid the enemies of our country does that make legal sense to you all right here we go we want to talk about title 22 united states code section 20 286a basically the part that we want to talk about is the the governor's and executive director's term of office but basically when we get over here we really want to talk about the compensation for services and this is title 22 united states code section 286a all right okay okay compensation for services no person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other compensation from the united states did everybody get that from the united states for services as a governor executive director counselor or alternate or associate the united states executive director of the fund what are we talking about here the international monetary fund shall not be compensated by the fund at a rate in excess of the rate provided for an individual occupying positions at level four of the executive schedule under section 53 15 of title 5 united states code all right the united states alternative executive director of the fund to the fund to the fund what fund international monetary fund shall not be compensated by the fund at a rate in excess of the rate provided for an individual occupying a position of level five of the executive schedule under section 53 16 of title 5 united states code the secretary of the treasurer shall instruct the united states executive director of the fund to present to the fund's executive board a comprehensive set of proposals consistent with the maintaining high levels of competence of the fund personnel and consistent with the articles of agreement with the objective of assuring that the salaries and or other compensations accorded fund employees who who fund international monetary fund do not exceed those received by persons filling similar levels of responsibility within the national government got me service or private industry the secretary shall report these proposals right together with any measures adopted by the funds executive board to the congress prior to february 1 1979 now folks when they're talking about the fund they're talking about the international monetary fund and when they're talking about being paid people like janet reno who is a governor of the fund is paid by the imf and who are they talking about the secretary of treasury shall instruct who now these people are paid by another government to our people that is a violation of our laws you understand i mean if they catch a congressman on the take what happens he's out of there why because it's considered to be unethical activity yet this foreign operating operating operating program this international monetary fund is paying our officers as executive officers whose interest youth do they serve do they serve the united states or do they serve the funds does that make sense to you okay to me this is an act of sedition or treason the bottom line is they are not operating in the best interest of the united states of america they are operating in their interest and they are paid by a foreign power and how can they sit in a office of government in the united states of america paid by foreign power it's inconceivable that this is going on now you want to find out now here we go folks this is the brentwood's agreement act and this is the agreement act that that created this problem with this title 22 united states code section 286 okay this is heavy duty folks so remember i showed you about treason okay no person shall be entitled to receive any salary or other compensation from the united states for services as a government executive director counselor alternator or associate right congress by law authorizes such action neither the president nor any person or agency shall on behalf of the united states request or consent to any change in the quota of the united states under article 3 section 2 the articles of agreement of the fund the fund the international monetary fund all right let's pull it up here all right they're talking about dollar under paragraph six okay that's not what i want i want let's see make any loan to the fund or bank approve the establishment of any additional trust fund for the special benefit of the single member or of a particular segment of membership of the fund all right let's see in order to carry out the purposes of the decisions of january 1962 of the executive directors of the international monetary fund the secretary of the treasury is authorized to make loans not to exceed two looks like billion yeah outstanding at any one time to the fund if it sounds like i'm hammering on that fund that's because i am under article 7 section 1 sub paragraph i of the articles of agreement of the fund i mean they set this thing up the secretary of the treasury with the approval of the president directly or through such agencies as he may designate the contract that the government is authorized for the account of the fund established in this section to deal in gold and foreign exchange and such other instruments of credit and or securities as he may be necessary to the consistent constituent no consistent and consistent with the united states obligations in the international monetary fund the secretary of the treasury shall annually make a report on the operation of the fund to the president and to the congress that makes the secretary of treasury what an officer of the fund okay the secretary of treasury yeah he is guilty the secretary of treasury is authorized to issue gold certificates in such form and in such denomination as he may determine against any gold held by the united states treasury the amount of gold certificates issued and or outstanding shall at no time exceed the value at the legal standard provided in section two of power value modification act 31 united states code 449 on the date of enactment of this amendment of the gold so held against gold certificates there are no gold certificates all right the amendment made by sections 2 3 4 5 6 and 7 of this act shall become effective upon entry into the force of the amendments approved approved in the resolution number 31-4 of the board of governors of the fund now this is called the brentwood's agreement act folks and this is what set up title 22 united states code section 286a which says that these officers are paid out of the fund they're not paid as united states employees is there any doubt in your mind now who gets paid where they don't we don't pay them they're paid by somebody else the fund who is the fund all those rich guys that are sitting over in europe they're trying to control our country all right now also we want to show them this these concurrent resolutions here expressing the sense of the congress regarding the need for the president to seek the senator's advice and consent to ratification of the united nations convention on the rights of the child john conyers is in on this he's one of our guys too okay now the bottom line is they're setting standards all right and on these standards whereas it is estimated that every night in the united states at least 100 000 children go to sleep homeless whereas i mean they make all these allegations we're in the united states has the world's largest gross national product yet american children rank below the top 15 nations in regard to the health and well-being whereas 1989 infant mortality rate for the united states ranked 19th in the world being singapore or spain i mean they make all these allegations about the united states the national commission on children has declared that every child in america needs an excellent education yet approximately 40 percent of the nation's children are at risk of school failure i mean they go on and on whereas the united states 2 million 600 000 children were reported to be abused and neglected in 91 i mean this is ridiculous whereas it's estimated that 1 million and 800 000 teenagers were victims of violent crime whereas the supreme court has never fully articulated the range of rights to be accorded to be accorded to children under the united states constitution or fully articulated the manner in the constitution is applicable to minors it is whereas the positive futures of our families communities nations are dependent now that you keep reading all these whereas's whereas 29 others nations have signed convention indicating their intention to ratify the convention in the future and then you get down whereas it is essential that the united states sign and ratify the convention and rights of the child and begin implementing convention legal standards in order to improve and protect the lives of children believe me they're not trying to protect the lives of children they're trying to create a new federal bureaucracy whereas at the world summit of children in september such and such to sign the world declaration of survival protection development of children which would include commitment to work and promote earliest possible ratification implementation under the united nations and conventions of the right of the child whereas the house of representatives passed the resolution during 101st congress urging president to seek consent of the senate to ratification of the convention of the rights of the child but such action having not occurred is necessary to the congress implore the president should take action on the convention now and now they want to push it all right now you gotta understand folks they're not doing this for the children believe me they're doing it because they want to create some new kind of problem children tomorrow i apologize to you on behalf of those in my time for the things we didn't do we didn't stop the tyrants so your fate could be prevented we watched them steal our freedom but our silence we consented we didn't choose to circumvent the doom you've not escaped while the bill of rights was murdered in the constitution raped some of us were lazy and too busy others too afraid to think about our children the ones we have betrayed we say we were too busy to be concerned or care to try to ease the burden of the chains we've made you wear a debt of 17 trillion more money than exists because we fail to heed god's call of usury resists we could have been good shepherds when the wolf got in the fold yet watch the flame of freedom die which leaves you in the cold we changed our great republic which was forged in blood for liberty to a socialist welfare state which we call democracy i'm sorry we were so timid betrayed by a selfish generation we left yet a remnant of a free and prosperous nation i'm sorry for our action like sheep we have behaved we could have left you freedom instead you are enslaved children of tomorrow descendants of our land i'm sorry we allowed this fate you now must understand children of tomorrow educate yourself if by reading the bible of the bible two break the chains we left you with maintain god's ten commandments use reason logic and common sense suffer the little children to come to me for such is the kingdom of god dennis byron let's come off of the amateur radio free men's bulletin board august september 1992 end of transmission so i think you can see here at one time they pretend to do all this and yet on the other they do all that so i thought this was very poignant uh thing to put out on the air and try and hammer across okay we want to cover about the 1-207 remember i told you sign your name 1-207 ucc 1-207 without prejudice this is it right here folks this is uh the 1-207 uniform commercial code this section provides machinery for the continuation of performance along the lines contemplated by the contract what contract the bankruptcy contract despite that's in 1933 depending or a pending dispute by the 1-207 uniform commercial code and the 2-207 uniform commercial code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform code and the 2-207 uniform can you see that any expression indicating an intention to preserve rights is sufficient such as without prejudice under protest under reservation with reservation of all our rights under duress is another one the code states an explicit reservation must be made explicit undoubtedly is used in place of express to indicate that the reservation must not only be express but it must also be clear under duress that such a reservation was intended in advance right the term explicit as used in UCC 1-207 means that which is so clearly stated or distinctly set forth that there is no doubt as to its meaning okay now that is the reservation I want you to claim I want you to screw around I want you to use your head for something other than a hat rack because I'm telling you just do it yeah you don't tell them nothing you sign it and you walk out when they ask you what that is just say that's something I put down on my signature every time so I know it's me okay okay you're not you didn't learn all this stuff overnight and you're not going to give somebody these classes overnight believe me if you think you're going to teach somebody this stuff all night you're dreaming it takes a long time of serious study to get to the level of where you're at and you're not going to deliver that to anybody overnight so my sincere advice is don't try and do it because it ain't going to happen in your lifetime just sign it do what you're supposed to do if people want to listen then you let them listen if they don't want to listen then you say oh well we want to show off some of these things under executive order of the president all persons required to deliver on or before may 1st 1933 try and blow that up that's a good one that's all your gold and silver want to make sure we get into all kind of arguments here real quickly should we have some gold and silver yes I think you should set aside some serious money to put in I think people shouldn't have everything in gold and silver though I think you should have I think you should buy toilet paper and I think you should buy food and I think you should buy and I think you should buy cough medicine and I think you should buy laundry soap and I think you should buy you know have some stuff around like you would keep your normal business and put a little bit in gold and silver I think you should have a pump shotgun in your closet to defend your house something yeah something to defend your house not that you may need it but if you do you got it ok let's move on here we got things to do I want to show you something else too let's look at the very first book of title of the United States Codes Annotated and I don't care which section you grab either lawyer's edition this title has been acted as positive law ok notice the little asterisk and you come down here and all these titles they're all part of the law title 11 bankruptcy title 13 census title 14 coast card you know copyrights you got crimes and criminal procedure title 18 right now I want you to notice something as we come over to title 26 here title 26 is the internal revenue code it's never been enacted into law it's a regulation look closely title 26 and title 27 do you see an asterisk there? you don't see one do you? no sir that's cause there ain't one now let's look at the other version the other version is exactly the same this is the one out of the official US reports for titles this title has been enacted as law look at all the titles that got an asterisk you'll notice again title 26 and title 27 zippo no asterisk everybody see that? real clear? pull it over no asterisk obviously it's never been enacted as law how could it be? I'll tell you how I got a case over here called Erie Railroad vs. Tompkins and I'm going to bring it to your attention Erie Railroad vs. Tompkins is a magnificent court case basically what this court case did this court case is recorded at volume 304 United States reports section or page 64 this is the start of the case that's 304 volume 304 United States reports section 604 now what this case does is it sets up a duality of citizenship there are the citizens that live at the common law and there are the citizens that live at the national law or what is called Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction now the way they get away with putting this title 26 and this title 27 out the way they do it is they create this Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction and if you volunteer into it you are in it if you step in it it's on you ok? so I'm telling you don't do that you know what the doctor says every time you go to the doctor and you say doc every time I do this it hurts you know what the doctor tells you don't do that no more you don't do that no more it won't hurt right? I'm telling you the same thing applies with this don't volunteer how do you volunteer? you enter and you watch what you sign number one any evidences of contracts where you are an Admiralty in Maritime Jurisdiction says that you are a party to the contract so you avoid that when you sign that bank draft you get into that bank in that section 9 form you fill out guess what? look at the bottom you sign to get into an Admiralty Maritime Jurisdiction what the hell would you want to do that for? it's illogical when you signed up for that social security check so how are we going to remedy this situation? 1-207 without prejudice you sign anything that has to do anything with those guys? take the rights if they'll give them to you take the benefits but make sure when you sign it you sign it UD 1-207 without prejudice that makes you a common law citizen and when they pull you into these courts and they claim they have jurisdiction over you you say the first thing out of your mouth is your honor may it please the court before this matter goes forward I wish to state that I am here on a special appearance as distinguished from a general appearance and I am answering in the form of a demur a demur is an old way of pleading it's an old fashioned old country barrister English way of pleading without granting jurisdiction in other words I'll answer out of courtesy and I'll give you an answer out of courtesy but at no time am I granting jurisdiction now I put on my briefs I state my name I state the defendant in propria persona on a special appearance as distinguished from a general appearance for jurisdictional challenges now I've raised the issue of jurisdictional challenges I'm putting on the record it's clearly cognizant once jurisdiction is raised the burden is on the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction pursuant to McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation, 298 U.S. 178, 56 S. Ct. 780 it says jurisdiction may never be assumed but must be substantively proven by the plaintiff claimant they don't prove it in a timely fashion latches and occurs latches is a specie of action or in a party of reasonable intelligence and integrity having a right to take an action as is prescribed by law and having failed to timely do so loses all right to proceed so if they don't prove it timely motion to dismiss your honor favor state of cause of action for which relief can be granted and I'd kind of like to collect my costs and fees for having to defend this frivolous case does that make sense to you? all right now let's get into this Erie Railroad case this is a railroad case what it's about the guy's walking down the track and the board was hanging off the end of the train and whacked him upside the head he tried to sue in the state courts the state courts uh hammered him so what happened was Erie Railroad had flipped around and they tried to sue him in the federal courts to get back at him and they thought they were pulling a fast one and what happened was the case bounced back on him and guess what when it bounced back it created a very very dangerous thing now before this I want you to understand that for a hundred years of law this case was the one that was the leading case before this and this was called McCulloch versus Maryland the state of Maryland this is a very leading case this is the most heavy case it comes in two sections that's the Tejiao Thicatus you're going to be reading for a while this case upheld for 100 plus years practically almost 100 years this case is recorded at it's a 1819 case it is an old case and it upheld for years the single citizenship relationship and it deals with the corporations the power of establishing a corporation is not a distinct sovereign power or end of government but only the means of carrying into effect other powers which are sovereign whenever it becomes an appropriate means of exercising any of the powers given by the Constitution to the government of the United Union it may be exercised by that government now basically it sets up relationships the Bank of the United States has constitutionally a right to establish its branches or other offices in discount and deposit within any state the state within which such branch may be established cannot without violating the Constitution tax that branch alright now it goes into some heavy arguments on taxes and some other arguments on programming but I'm telling you here this was the law of the land that's probably see these reporters in the early this is 1819 folks that's when this case came down so this was going to be you know shortly after the Constitution was signed 1791 is when the Constitution was signed so it's going to be an early case alright William McCulloch defendant blow the new branch normally they state the case one place and they state it but anyway to make a long story short McCulloch vs Maryland is a very heavy case it was the law of the land and it was replaced by Erie Railroad vs Tompkins there is no federal can you see that? there is no federal general common law Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a state whether they be local in their nature or general whether they be commercial law or in part of the law of torts no clause in the Constitution purports to confer such a power upon the federal courts except in the matters governed by the federal Constitution or by acts of Congress the law to be applied in any case is the law of the state got me? and whether the law of the state shall be declared by its legislature in a statute or by its highest court in a decision not a matter of federal concern now in disapproving the doctrine of the Swift vs Tyson the court does not hold unconstitutional section 34 of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789 or any other act of Congress it mere title 26 it merely declares that by applying the doctrine of that case rights which are reserved by the Constitution to the several states have been invaded invaded invaded that's why they can get away with having title 26 without having no asterisk they don't have to have it in law they're claiming that's an act of Congress and if you voluntarily enter into it guess what? you bought the whole firm a federal court exercising jurisdiction over such a case on the ground of diversity of citizenship what am I talking about? diversity of citizenship I'm talking about dual citizenship right? is not free to treat this question as one of so-called general law but must apply the state law as declared by the highest state court Swift vs Tennyson overruled the liability of the railroad company for the injury caused by negligent operation of its train to its pedestrian on a much used beaten path on its right of way interstate right? along and near the rails depends in the absence of a federal or state statute upon the unwritten law of the state where the accident occurred now what they're trying to do here is they're trying to justify the existence of this duality of citizenship between common law citizen which you are most of you and this natural national citizen which would fall under title 26 United States Code but I'm telling you to look up section 6331A of title 26 and you will see that the treasurer the secretary of treasurer has jurisdiction only over corporations, officers of corporations, and officers of government residing in the District of Columbia and artificial corporations who are contractors of the fund capisce? alright now this is an important case if you guys are going to be in this seriously battling and want to argue jurisdiction which is a very good defense on almost anything they can pull on you you're going to have to read these cases Erie Railroad vs Tompkins recorded at 304 that's volume 304 US page 64 is where it starts it's vital that you understand these arguments I just finished battling a United States Attorney and we were arguing and he's talking about this is all gibberish and I told him I said sir I don't think you're well read on the law all you got to do is read several of these cases and they'll tell you one there is a duality of citizenship two it has to be clearly defined and three I have defined it and now I'm asking you to prove that I'm not a party or prove that I am a party you tell me it's your burden you're the one making the complaint you make the complaint you get the burden to prove who says so? McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation, 298 U.S. 178, 56 S. Ct. 780 you made it you prove it okay you don't prove it timely I motion to dismiss fair state of cause of action for which you're leaving me granted and I will beat your little tail so I would highly recommend you get busy to prove it and if you think the stuff don't work let me tell you something here right here right today government came told me motion to dismiss right? United States of America hereby moves pursuant to federal rules of criminal procedure for leave to dismiss the indictment in the case for the statutes okay? now they can't argue they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they they