Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: DIY Law & Community Rights Movement  (Read 28851 times)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2336
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #15 on: October 21, 2012, 02:52:03 pm »

(Cont.)
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

14. … A “Withholding Exemption Certificate” is an alternative to Form W 4, authorized by IRC section 3402(n) and executed in lieu of Form W 4. … In the absence of an official IRS form, workers can use the language of section 3402(n) to create their own Certificates. … Many public and private institutions have created their own form for the Withholding Exemption Certificate, e.g. California Franchise Tax Board, and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland….

15. … For purposes of the IRC, the term “employer” refers only to federal government agencies, and an “employee” is a person who works for such an “employer”.

17. ... The term "United States" may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends [the federal zone, not the states], or [3] it may be the collective name of the States which are united by and under the Constitution. … The second of these three meanings refers to the federal zone and to Congress only when it is legislating in its municipal capacity. For example, Congress is legislating in its municipal capacity whenever it creates a federal corporation, like the United States Postal Service….

18. … The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled that … “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code.” U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404 (8th Circuit, 1976). Moreover, in Mark Eisner v. Myrtle H. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), the high Court told Congress it could not legislate any definition of “income”…. In Merchant's Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509 (1921), the high Court defined “income” to mean the profit or gain derived from corporate activities….

19. ... The IRC’s income tax provisions are municipal law. Municipal law is law that is enacted to govern the internal affairs of a sovereign State…. In fact, American legal encyclopedias define “municipal” to mean “internal”, and for this reason alone, the Internal Revenue Code is really a Municipal Revenue Code [internal to] the Federal Zone….

20. … If a power is not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, then Congress does not have any authority to exercise that power. … If [a state] is not mentioned in any of the federal income tax statutes, then those statutes have no force or effect within that State. … The many different definitions of the term “State” that are found in federal laws are intentionally written to appear as if they include the 50 States PLUS the other places mentioned. As the legal experts in Congress have now confirmed, this is NOT the correct way to interpret, or to construct, these statutes….

21. … There are numerous other ways in which the IRC is deliberately vague. … Whether the vagueness is deliberate or not, any statute is unconstitutionally void if it is vague. If a statute is void for vagueness, the situation is the same as if it had never been enacted at all, and for this reason it can be ignored entirely.

22. … Title 26 of the United States Code (“U.S.C.”) … has never been enacted into positive law, as such. … Accordingly, the provisions of subtitle F have never taken effect. … This subtitle contains all of the enforcement statutes of the IRC…. In other words, the IRC … can impose no legal obligations upon anyone….

23. … [T]he federal criminal Code at Title 18, U.S.C., does grant general authority to the District Courts of the United States (“DCUS”) to prosecute violations of the statutes found in that Code. See 18 U.S.C. 3231. It is very important to appreciate the fact that these courts are not the same as the United States District Courts (“USDC”). The DCUS are constitutional courts that originate in Article III of the U.S. Constitution. The USDC are territorial tribunals, or legislative courts, that originate in Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the Territory Clause. … The USDC, as such, appear to lack any lawful authorities to prosecute income tax crimes….

25. … Federal grand juries cannot issue valid indictments against illegal tax protesters. … [T]he term “illegal” cannot modify the noun “protesters” because to do so would constitute a violation of the First Amendment…. [T]he term “illegal” must modify the noun “tax”.

26. … IRS agents routinely tamper with federal grand juries, most often by misrepresenting themselves, under oath, as lawful employees and “Special Agents” of the federal government, and by misrepresenting the provisions of subtitle F as having any legal force or effect. … They tamper with grand juries by acting as if “income” is everything that “comes in”, … by presenting documentary evidence which they had no authority to acquire, in the first instance, such as bank records, … by creating and maintaining the false and fraudulent pretenses that the IRC is not vague, or that the income tax provisions have any legal force or effect inside the 50 States of the Union, … [and by bribing] U.S. Attorneys, federal judges, and even the Office of the President with huge kickbacks, every time a criminal indictment is issued by a federal grand jury against an “illegal tax” protester, [which] range from $25,000 to $35,000 in CASH! … As a trust domiciled in Puerto Rico, the IRS is, without a doubt, a federal government subcontractor [which cannot lawfully pay such kickbacks]….

28. … [T]he IRS [cannot] levy bank accounts without a valid court order…. The Fifth Amendment prohibits all deprivations of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…, [which] requires Notice and Hearing before any property can be seized by any federal government employees, agents, departments or agencies.

29. … The final report of the Grace Commission, convened under President Ronald Reagan, quietly admitted that none of the funds [IRS agents] collect from federal income taxes goes to pay for any federal government services, [but] were being used to pay for interest on the federal debt, and income transfer payments to beneficiaries of entitlement programs like federal pension plans.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2012, 03:08:53 pm by Luck »
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #16 on: October 21, 2012, 09:30:12 pm »

The Bureau of Internal Revenue (IRS) is a bureau within the Department of Treasury.
And there is no such thing as a State citizen.

Not to mention ignoring 3401, is simply either willful ignorance.
Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2012, 10:15:02 am »

     Luck, you proved your point almost completely. Thanks for the info, I was wondering where you were. John, tell about 3401, so we can be enlightened. If irs is under bureau of the dept. of treasury, then why is Geithner in charge of the irs, and Secretary of the treasury? The Treasurer of the United States has its own dept head. Why is their 2 TWO treasury depts in the United States????????? Its right on all your dollar bills, and they are different depts..                                        The other thing to look at here is Congresses, Paper Reduction Act. they passed this years ago. The act identifies all ALL federal govt forms and paper work with bar codes and 16 digit numerals within bar code. So now lets look at irs forms and letters to see where the bar code with the 16 digits are. Especially irs letters and bills, or demands??     Domiliced Trust in PR, very interesting. Maybe like federal reserve incorporated in Delaware?
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2012, 01:30:23 pm »

3401 has the definitions for wages... and I've already posted a link to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasurer_of_the_United_States
Is that what your asking about?

They aren't in different Departments.
We could look to see the 16 digit bar code, but I don't get all the forms.
And is every regional bank incorporated in Delaware? Or just one/some?
 
Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #19 on: October 23, 2012, 05:14:36 pm »

3401 has the definitions for wages... and I've already posted a link to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasurer_of_the_United_States
Is that what your asking about?

They aren't in different Departments.
We could look to see the 16 digit bar code, but I don't get all the forms.
And is every regional bank incorporated in Delaware? Or just one/some?
 
  Treasury Dept and Secy of the Treasury are 2 different departments right on the treasury dept web site you gave me..  I don,t know what banks are incorporated in Delaware, the state tries to be secret about it. But, the Federal Reserve admitted they are Incorporated out of Delaware. IRS letters are missing the proper numerical Bar Codes. Only US Govt agencies can use those codes.
Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #20 on: October 23, 2012, 06:05:29 pm »

(Cont.)
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

14. … A “Withholding Exemption Certificate” is an alternative to Form W 4, authorized by IRC section 3402(n) and executed in lieu of Form W 4. … In the absence of an official IRS form, workers can use the language of section 3402(n) to create their own Certificates. … Many public and private institutions have created their own form for the Withholding Exemption Certificate, e.g. California Franchise Tax Board, and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland….

15. … For purposes of the IRC, the term “employer” refers only to federal government agencies, and an “employee” is a person who works for such an “employer”.

17. ... The term "United States" may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends [the federal zone, not the states], or [3] it may be the collective name of the States which are united by and under the Constitution. … The second of these three meanings refers to the federal zone and to Congress only when it is legislating in its municipal capacity. For example, Congress is legislating in its municipal capacity whenever it creates a federal corporation, like the United States Postal Service….

18. … The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled that … “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code.” U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404 (8th Circuit, 1976). Moreover, in Mark Eisner v. Myrtle H. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), the high Court told Congress it could not legislate any definition of “income”…. In Merchant's Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509 (1921), the high Court defined “income” to mean the profit or gain derived from corporate activities….

19. ... The IRC’s income tax provisions are municipal law. Municipal law is law that is enacted to govern the internal affairs of a sovereign State…. In fact, American legal encyclopedias define “municipal” to mean “internal”, and for this reason alone, the Internal Revenue Code is really a Municipal Revenue Code [internal to] the Federal Zone….





  Number 18 tells us Income, is a corporate profit or gain., and Congress and codes can,t define Income. Duality also doesn,t change the english langage," Congress  can only delegate authorty overs its 10 square miles, or terrirtories.  W4 forms of Exemptions are available for citizens who earn wages vs income. Next above we have federal zones, number 17. maybe this is why the States have their own Legislature because Congress have no Authority in the 50 except where expressly written.
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2012, 06:59:03 pm »

18. … The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled that … “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code.” U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404 (8th Circuit, 1976).

Could you complete that quotation for us?  Maybe you could tell us a bit about the facts of the case?  You've read it, right?  I mean, you're not just telling us, "this is a fact," without having actually examined the evidence, yourself, right?

Moreover, in Mark Eisner v. Myrtle H. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), the high Court told Congress it could not legislate any definition of “income”

No, it said that Congress could not legislate a definition that was contrary to the Constitution, and that the meaning given to "income" should be "the ordinary sense of the word."  Far from supporting your position, Esiner v. Macomber actually contradicts your hypothesis.

In Merchant's Loan & Trust Co. v. Smietanka, 255 U.S. 509 (1921), the high Court defined “income” to mean the profit or gain derived from corporate activities….

No, it does not say that.  It says that corporate income is defined in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, and that they will be using that definition in their ruling, since it was a case relating to corporate profits.  Just prior to that, the Court says that, "Income may be defined as a gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined..." [emphasis added].

You keep bringing up cases that disprove your point.  I'm really thinking that you've never actually read these cases that you keep citing, and I think that, in the spirit of honest discourse, you should probably refrain from posting things which you have not examined for yourself.  We're all capable of using the Internet to find various citations of varying quality, so it adds nothing to this discussion if you are not presenting something that you, yourself, have examined and believe to be true based upon your own personal knowledge of the subject.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

KBCraig

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2012, 10:59:04 pm »

3401 has the definitions for wages... and I've already posted a link to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasurer_of_the_United_States
Is that what your asking about?

They aren't in different Departments.
We could look to see the 16 digit bar code, but I don't get all the forms.
And is every regional bank incorporated in Delaware? Or just one/some?
 
  Treasury Dept and Secy of the Treasury are 2 different departments right on the treasury dept web site you gave me.. 

No, they are not. Read it again.

It's the wiki page for the Treasurer of the United States, "Not to be confused with United States Secretary of the Treasury."

And who is the Secretary of the Treasury? Why, the head of the Department of the Treasury. And also, by the way, the boss of the Treasurer of the United States.

Who else works for the Secretary of the Treasury? The Internal Revenue Service.

You're welcome.








Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #23 on: October 24, 2012, 10:15:08 am »






 
Treasury Dept and Secy of the Treasury are 2 different departments right on the treasury dept web site you gave me..  


 No, they are not. Read it again.

It's the wiki page for the Treasurer of the United States, "Not to be confused with United States Secretary of the Treasury."

And who is the Secretary of the Treasury? Why, the head of the Department of the Treasury. And also, by the way, the boss of the Treasurer of the United States.

Who else works for the Secretary of the Treasury? The Internal Revenue Service.

You're welcome.[/quote]


                     Look at the signatures on your dollars, Two different signatures from 2 different departments. I,m not trying to start an arguement here.






« Last Edit: October 24, 2012, 10:44:20 am by Jerry »
Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #24 on: October 24, 2012, 10:45:41 am »

18. … The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled that … “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code.” U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404 (8th Circuit, 1976).



Moreover, in Mark Eisner v. Myrtle H. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), the high Court told Congress it could not legislate any definition of “income”



                                 QQQQQ, This is really getting dragged out. Luck has already given you everything along with a website to click on for further study.

No, it does not say that.  It says that corporate income is defined in the Corporation Excise Tax Act of 1909, and that they will be using that definition in their ruling, since it was a case relating to corporate profits.  Just prior to that, the Court says that, "Income may be defined as a gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined..." [emphasis added].

You keep bringing up cases that disprove your point.  I'm really thinking that you've never actually read these cases that you keep citing, and I think that, in the spirit of honest discourse, you should probably refrain from posting things which you have not examined for yourself.  We're all capable of using the Internet to find various citations of varying quality, so it adds nothing to this discussion if you are not presenting something that you, yourself, have examined and believe to be true based upon your own personal knowledge of the subject.
                         Hopely we don,t rely on judicial rulings to make laws of the land. A student of Blackstone has a case download from Colorado that the govt refused to hear or rule on. It explains in full detail individuals liability to their govt. It will take a portion of your weekend to read it. Google may not open it, I had to use yahoo. Towards the end of brief they incuded the 1040 form from 1944 Victory Tax for WW2, explaining war tax on citizens compensation for the 2 years to pay war debt. They never ended the tax on peoples Family Living, reimbursement for labor/ compensation. Jeffrey Maehr v US district Colorado [you won,t find it under this]   thematrixhasyou.org/PDF/CO-Motion-for-denial-complete.pdf         
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #25 on: October 24, 2012, 02:13:53 pm »

Your quoting judicial rulings to make your case... just not within context.

And its two different signatures from the same department. The Treasurer reports to the Secretary.

And I can't find any regional federal reserve bank incorporated in Delaware.
Someone did around 2001 incorporate a non-profit named the 'Federal Reserve Association', but it seems inactive.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2012, 02:21:35 pm by John Edward Mercier »
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #26 on: October 24, 2012, 03:26:55 pm »

Hopely we don,t rely on judicial rulings to make laws of the land.

As John noted, you're relying on such rulings.

And yes, I would rely upon government courts to rule on what government laws say.

Taxation isn't unacceptable because someone mis-interpreted the law.  The law could specifically state, "each individual must pay $1000 to the government, each year," with no ambiguity at all, and taxation would still be unacceptable, because robbing others is immoral, no matter what the law says.

Federal law says that individuals owe taxes upon their income, which yes, does include wages.  That's what it says.  The mafia says, "if you live in this town, you owe us protection money."  Neither one has any more legitimacy than the other; not because they don't say the things that they say, or because it's somehow being mis-interpreted, but because robbery and extortion are wrong.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

KBCraig

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #27 on: October 24, 2012, 03:37:04 pm »

Look at the signatures on your dollars, Two different signatures from 2 different departments. I,m not trying to start an arguement here.

Two different people with two different job titles, in the same department.

From that wikipedia article, the first line: "The Treasurer of the United States is an official in the United States Department of the Treasury..."

Who else signs the notes? The Secretary of the Treasury: "The Secretary of the Treasury of the United States is the head of the United States Department of the Treasury..."

I believe you're not trying to start an argument. You're also not trying very hard to grasp some basic facts. Either that, or you're trying very hard to ignore them.

Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: The Tax Issue]
« Reply #28 on: October 24, 2012, 08:08:56 pm »

                                                                   www.thematrixhasyou.org
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2336
Re: Court Action against Corruption [Update: Tips]
« Reply #29 on: November 01, 2012, 03:55:43 pm »

Lawsuit Self-Help ... Step-by-Step Tips & Tactics
From "How to Win in Court" Self-Help Course
WARNING! These are Just Tips! ... You Need to Know Much More to Win in Court!
www.Jurisdictionary.com - Call Toll Free: 866-LAW-EASY ... ( 866-529-3279 )

Ignorance of the Law is NO EXCUSE!
 
If "ignorance of the law is no excuse" then knowing how to find official law that will decide the outcome of your case is critical to winning! Fortunately, the "law of your case" is much simpler than you might imagine and easy to find! Most cases are won or lost on very few "laws", perhaps a single statute and 3-4 appellate court decisions interpreting how that statute applies to the facts.

If you had to go to court 30 years ago, before personal computers and the internet, you'd have to dig through the dismally dry and boring stacks of thousands of look-alike books in a law library (if you could find one nearby). Back then, winning a lawsuit required litigants to spend hour-upon-hour turning dusty pages, pulling down piles of books to spread on the library table next to their yellow pad in what was often a fruitless search for the legal support their arguments needed. All that has changed, thanks to the internet and competition between legal research sites that is driving the price down to a reasonable level where pretty much anyone who needs to do on-line legal research can afford it.

But, will you know how? My course materials on legal research include videos showing actual screen-shots of on-line searches so an average 8th grader with reasonable computer skills will be able to find constitutional provisions, statutes, code, and appellate court opinions to support pretty much any legal argument you can think of. These days it's sooo easy to do legal research on-line ... an average 8th grader can do it!

Instead of digging through thousands of books differing only by the numbers printed on their impressively formidable spines, you can log-on any of the growing number of competent legal databases and, with the flick of a few keyboard fingers find thousands of cases that deal with the issues of your case in seconds!Learn from Jurisdictionary step-by-step. Google® can get you started ... for free! But, don't rely on Google® as the final authority. Google® will provide a good start in most cases, but before you go to court to argue how the appellate opinion you found is the final say-so, you need to dig deeper.

My affordable, official, 24-hour step-by-step Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" self-help course explains legal research with examples you can try out for yourself. Once you finish the course you'll know how to find appellate decisions that favor your cause ... and you'll know how to cite them to the court in proper format. You’ll know how to tell the judge why you should win by citing authorities the judge is required by law to obey: court rules, cases, constitutional provisions, statutes and codes.
Clever argument is not enough. You cannot win without finding and citing the legal authorities that control judges. Those who don’t know how to find and cite legal authority cannot control judges nor win on appeal so they lose -- needlessly! In the heat of your lawsuit battles, you can be certain the other side will cite legal authorities favoring his case. It’s essential to winning! You must do the same thing -- if you want to win.

Win with Jurisdictionary! When "The Law" Breaks the Law!
How to Control those who Control YOU!


The Wild Wild West was won by a very small number of folks clever enough to bring the following essential with them to establish "Law & Order" in the unsettled plains and mountains west of the Mississippi:
    Thoroughly-read Bible,
    Loaded Colt revolver and Winchester rifle,
    Good horse and well-provisioned wagon, and
    A sturdy copy of Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England

England, did you say?
Yup! In that single book (you can get a Kindle or Nook version for free) written before our Declaration of Independence, they found enough common-sense law to settle towns, bring railroads, jail bandits, and hang rustlers.

Contrary to what you've seen on TV and in the movies, it wasn't faster guns and bigger fists that settled lawless cowtowns like Tombstone and Dodge City. It was the support of local townsfolk who wanted law and believed in the principles of Justice found in those two books: the Bible and Blackstone.

We each face the threat of similar lawlessness. Yes, today! Perhaps especially today! It may be a bank using fraud to foreclose. It may be a corrupt business partner, ex-spouse, or next-door neighbor out-of-control. For many it's the threat of government officials refusing to follow the law - tax collectors, police officers, and corrupt judges who break the law to allow fraud a free rein in their courts as lawyers rape the people who do not know what my affordable, official, 24-hour step-by-step Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" self-help course makes so easy to understand.

When "the law" is an outlaw, there's only one remedy. The Rules! Did you know the Rules of Evidence that control all civil and criminal proceedings in our state and federal courts comprise less than 30 pages in the official rule books? Did you know the Rules of Procedure that control all civil and criminal proceedings in our state and federal courts comprise not many more than 60 pages in the official rule books? Learn from Jurisdictionary step-by-step. These are the rules YOU can use to control every judge, every lawyer, every bank, every giant corporation, or even your next-door neighbor or business partner, and every state and federal agency trying to pull the wool over your eyes.

Why be needlessly robbed of your rights by not knowing this handful of rules or how to use them to stop the rich and powerful from running your world? Your legal problems today can be solved the same way western settlers brought lawlessness to its knees in the prairies and remote Rocky Mountain regions more than a century ago, as did those who settled our Eastern cities and towns more than two centuries ago.

The Rules control lawlessness! Once YOU know the rules and how to use them to control corrupt judges and crooked lawyers, Justice is Yours! The Rules of Evidence and Rules of Procedure protect you and your children from lawless legal officials, crooked lawyers, corrupt judges, scheming bankers, incompetent doctors, rival siblings, and everyone else who does you harm or seeks to do so. The Rules and how to use them are easy to learn with my popular, affordable, 24-hour Jurisdictionary step-by-step self-help course!

You have a remedy at law ... once you know … the rules. If a fraudulent lender, bill collector, tax man, corrupt judge, crooked lawyer, or anyone else uses unlawful force to deprive you or your family of your rights, you have a powerful remedy! THE RULES OF COURT! The Rules of Evidence and Procedure RULE the courts! This is true only for those who know how to use them!

The Rules of Court are the People's power to control our government and command our leaders to protect us and address our grievances with court orders that can command even those in the highest offices, the richest of the rich, the biggest of the big. The Rules are what the 4th of July is all about! The Rules don't just give us "rights". The Rules give "power to enforce our rights"! That's how the West was won! Knowing how to use the Rules is how you win!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6   Go Up
 

anything