0 votes

*shareholders And Investors* Of United States Inc. To Sue Chief Executive Officer (Obama) For Lack Of Eligibility:

I've been screaming this for months on end, and it keeps getting moved to "Off Topic".

Obama is the CEO of the corporation known as the UNITED STATES, he's NOT the President of the united States of America. We are not running under constitutional law, we are running off of corporate law.

This is the only way in my opinion that anyone is ever going to be successful at achieving "standing" when bringing a lawsuit against Obama for his lack of eligibility:

If you are an employee of the Federal Government aka foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES, and you are getting a bi-weekly paycheck from that corporation, you do not have standing to sue. This means military, police, elected officials and office holders, etc.

If you are NOT a government employee, as in you work at McDonald's or Best Buy, but the Federal Gov't aka foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES is taking money out of your check every week (taxes), then you are an shareholder/investor/beneficiary of the foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES.

As an employee, you have no standing to sue your boss (Obama the CEO)

As an investor/shareholder/beneficiary of the public trust/corporation, you have standing to sue. You are paying taxes (investing) in the corporation. You get no other benefits; you don't get a weekly check from them, you're just "donating" by way of a 1040 tax form, which is a gifting tax form, to the corporation. You vote, you invest, you're a shareholder/investor/beneficiary.

If you hire an attorney to represent you in court, you will not have standing because you are considered an incompetent Ward of the State; an imbecile as I've stated here:

http://www.dailypaul.com/242260/this-is-why-you-should-never...

As an individual or collectively as a group of shareholders/investors/beneficiaries of the corporation, you have standing. Your "Certificate of Live Birth" and your 1040 Tax Returns (investments) are your standing.

Look at this Google search page:

https://www.google.com/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=16&sourceid=...

If you are investing (paying taxes) in the foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES, and you are voting in public servants aka public trustees to occupy certain offices of that corporation, then you have STANDING to sue if there is a breach of trust.

How can you have standing if you're getting a government check bi-weekly?

How can you have standing if you're hiring an Attorney to represent you, when doing so makes you an incompetent idiot; imbecile; Ward of the State who has no business Administrating anything in the eyes of the court?

But if you're not a government aka UNITED STATES employee, and are not getting a bi-weekly check from them, but you ARE investing in that corporation (paying taxes) every week out of your paycheck, then wouldn't you agree, as investors/shareholder/beneficiaries, you have standing?

My personal opinion, take it as you will.

A group of Best Buy employees or car wash owners who are investing (paying taxes) in the corporation known as the UNITED STATES have more standing than anyone; you're an investor/shareholder of your own free will; you send in a 1040 gifting tax form every April 15th to prove you are an investor don't you?

If you're not a taxpayer (investor) you do not have standing either.

How many times do people have to get hit in the head with the "You don't have standing hammer" before they wake the H3LL UP?

Peace!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

There is a different constitution...

I'm different. I have a different constitution, I have a different brain, I have a different heart. I got tiger blood, man. Dying's for fools, dying's for amateurs. Charlie Sheen

For those that cannot comprehend the fact THEY created an

Estate; a DEAD Estate in your name, and that the Certificate of Live Birth is an Office of that Estate, and you are the actual Administrator/Beneficiary and could soon become the Director of that Estate if you know what they are doing to you, I present you with the following seminar:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2pMJyIikCk
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvKu2UNHQpA
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2GaxlGTyAE

NOTE: If you are too lazy to take the time and watch the above seminar and actually learn your true relationship with this foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES, then simply go away and don't even comment.

People have spent YEARS trying to uncover these things for us; many have went to prison; many are fighting right now, and as a collective effort, all their research and pain should be given just a bit of acknowledgment.

Dean Clifford has paid his dues; spent his time; did his research; paid his fines, and is finally Triumphant in his quest for what they've been doing to us. He presents it for you here, all you have to do is sit and watch .... Can you do that?

David Clarence has also given us a lot of information on the Estate, as I have posted before. This is not a patriot BS plot to get you to file paperwork and UCC garbage, or to suck any money out of your pocket. This is FREE knowledge, are you smart enough to take it?

It is sad that people jump in and comment silly smart A$$ remarks to make themselves feel special, when they won't even take the time to watch and learn what others have spent years uncovering. You don't have to do any research; you don't have to spend years trying it out in the courts, all you have to do is simply sit and watch the above seminar.

You can't "UN-SEE" what you're about to "SEE". Please take the time to watch this, you will all be better off and will finally come to understand how the corporation is presuming control over your lives, and how YOU are now the authority and can put this monster back in it's cage by assuming your proper role as the Administrator of the Estate they are trying to Administrate for you.

Knowledge is Power. What you don't know will cost you everything.

How are there two constitutions?

Did somebody sneak in and replace our constitution in the middle of the night? Who did that and how? By what authority did this person or group change or replace our constitution? If you reply, make sure you cite very specific references. Please do not send me to usvsus a.com or any other Tim turner websites... Just simply reply here.

Please also keep your reply short, I can only set aside a moment or two for this silliness...

Hey

Hey buddy, knew you'd turn up in this thread as well.

With both of us here, we can give a nice loud collective sigh. Down?

Eric Hoffer

Yes

Sigh.

~shaking my head~

Are we mean?

You really are a product of the Public "FOOL" System, aren't you

You really didn't know there were two Constitutions? One "FOR" and the one "OF"?

Okay McFly, since you can't read; and you can't seem to do any research of your own, lets sit down on the floor in front of the screen and watch a little film, shall we?

Now McFly, there will be no talking during the film and keep your legs crossed and your hands in your lap, okay! Also, no chewing gum, so please go to the trash receptacle and spit it out in a timely manner.

Okay, you're back, here we go:

Roll the projectors please: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsMUpPgdT0

Now McFly, please keep your reply short and to the point. Please rebut the following film point by point in the power presentation, so others who read your post will experience your level of higher education.

Ok, I will be the lifeguard at the gene pool

This was the biggest piece of crap I have ever seen. What is there to refute? Eh, whatever. Here we go. The organic act of 1871 created one single municipality for the city of Washington and Georgetown. It did not replace the constitution or change anything except for who cleaned the parks.

The idiot who made this video is implying that the US is actually a foreign corporation, as in, controlled and owned by people that do not live in this country. Which is false again. By the way, there is nothing in that piece of crap to support that claim... Just sayin

I do not need to prove anything back to you, it's quite simple. You proposed an idea, I found your evidence to be less than sufficient. I don't need to prove that fire is hot or that ice is cold, but if you want me to believe anything to the contrary, it is on you to provide the supporting information.

The united States of America has NOT been a Constitutional

Government since 1871. It is now a corporation; and corporations run off of CORPORATE LAWS.

http://dev.republicoftheunitedstates.org/what-is-the-republi...

Why do you think there are TWO constitutions?

One for the Republic (that's lying dormant) and one for the foreign corporation.

http://usavsus.info/

Why is this so hard to understand?

Sigh

1st: Quit self bumping your own useless thread.
2nd: Corporate laws? Administered and enforced by whom? Oh, you mean by the judicial branch of the government that is really a corporation... which is under it's own jurisdiction... which is... something about the Admiral and the Queen's English filed by vague references to the Knights of Malta?

Oh Captain my Captain?

I may have jumped ahead there a bit, but I'm pretty sure I'm a character on Groundhog Day. What implement would you like to beat the dead horse with? Baseball bat? Shovel? Flail?

Eric Hoffer

Courts are Corporations ? Apparently.

Quote - EricHoffer on Tue, 07/03/2012 -

> Oh, you mean by the judicial branch of the government that is really a corporation... <

Full Dun & Bradstreet - 12 pgs.

MISSOURI SUPREME COURT - SUBSIDIARY OF THE JUSTICE COURTS OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI

https://sites.google.com/site/geminiinvestmentresearchgroup/...

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Sigh

This is a credit report on the court. This does not imply the court is organized or controlled through corporate governance or that it is indeed a corporation.

You do understand that branches of government that issue payments do have credit worthiness checks right? Do you understand the function that DUNS provides?

Eric Hoffer

Key word :

"Subsidiary".

Yes it is a credit report, for a subsidiary, which is a word of art used in corporate law. Government entities generally have "Departments", "Agencies" and "Bureaus".

Doing a name search via MANTA - http://www.manta.com/c/mmf58mk/supreme-court-of-missouri

"Supreme Court Of Missouri in Jefferson City, MO is a private company categorized under Courts. Our records show it was established in 1820 and incorporated in Missouri. [ emphasis added ]

Products or Services: Court Services Unit, Court Services And Offender Supervision Agency, Family Court Legal Services, Court Social Services and Courts Services."

D&B no longer offers much in the way of free data searches, which used to be quite interesting.

http://creditreports.dnb.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Advan... - Jefferson County Superior Court

Headquarters JEFFERSON, COUNTY OF 729 MAPLE ST, HILLSBORO, MO
Also Traded as JEFFERSON COUNTY COURT
[ emphasis added ]

Branch JEFFERSON, COUNTY OF 1203 N 5TH ST, FESTUS, MO
Also Traded as JEFFERSON COUNTY COURT

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Sigh

You realize that Manta isn't a valid source right? I'm kind of hoping you're kidding here.

You're looking at stock phrasing for a website with a database that autofills unknown fields in many cases. I'm bewildered at the level of ignorance this shows.

ACTUAL VALID SOURCES PLEASE.

And stop confusing the term "municipal corporation" for "corporation." This isn't a C or S corp. I have this nagging feeling that you've never started a business before and don't know the process and that accounts for why you're totally and helpless confused and out of your league here.

Eric Hoffer

In Responce :

>You realize that Manta isn't a valid source right?<

“Valid source” in what way? It's merely an available source for example small business background data.

>You're looking at stock phrasing for a website with a database that autofills unknown fields in many cases.<

“Autofills”? So the compilers of this data have made no distinction between the local doughnut shop chain and the County Court system? That's interesting. They list the Court as a Private Corporation only because there is no specific designation for the supposed instrumentalities of a Body Politic? A huge identifiable and divisible section of the economy goes unrecognised for credit reporting purposes? Hummmm....

>I'm bewildered at the level of ignorance this shows.<

Thank You for your considered opinion.

>ACTUAL VALID SOURCES PLEASE.<

Such as? What do you consider an acceptable VALID SOURCE for what specific information?

>And stop confusing the term "municipal corporation" for "corporation." This isn't a C or S corp.<

Did I do that? And stop thinking Muni Corps are something extra special. They just have more rules to follow ( and most often don't ). The State Muni Codes I am familiar with specify that they must follow the rules, regulations and procedures within the State's General Corporation Code, as well as those outlined specifically for Muni Corporations.

Little things like having a minimum of three Officers. Example - An Executive, a Secretary and a Treasurer, two of which Offices may be held by one individual, usually a Secretary-Treasurer. Muni's additionally require these Officers to have an originally signed Oath of Office on file with the Sec of State and maintain private Surety/Performance Bonds on these Officers ( which have somehow been transformed into the general insurance account maintained by the Office of Loss Management. Premiums apparently paid for by Public Funds, not Private Backing out of the pocket of the Office holder and/or political supporters. The Sheriff beats you to a pulp. You prevail in Suit and are awarded compensatory damages, which you MAY be able to collect on. This collection comes from the Public Coffers. You, as a member of the Public must pay insurance premiums via taxes and fees for your own damages inflicted by a Public Official. Not what the law specifies or intended. )

Munis must also do the mundane things, like filing Articles of Incorporation and timely reports with the Secretary of State in order to maintain Certificates of Good Standing. Try to get one. Pay the few dollars to the Sec of State Corporate Division and request a Certificate Of Standing for your County or Town Muni. Receive the “No responsive Documents” form letter.

>I have this nagging feeling that you've never started a business before and don't know the process and that accounts for why you're totally and helpless confused and out of your league here.<

For my part I was a founding member of a little theatre company which grew to be instrumental in establishing the Gas Lamp Quarter in San Diego. Our Board of Directors built the first little theatre in the tenderloin. We went on to refurbish the Pussy Cat porno house back into the San Diego Lyceum Theatre. The eventual demolition of this 1913 Vaudeville house caused such an uproar the city planners had to promise to build a replacement performance space. Now the New Lyceum, home of SD Repertory Players.

We also founded and built the Gaslamp Quarter Theatre. Finally the only full fly house to be built in California with completely private funds in over 60 years, in association with the Grand Pacific Hotel project. Originally the Hahn Cosmopolitan and now the Horton Grand.

Our little Block party to celebrate the 1 year anniversary of our Gaslamp Theater grew to be the largest music and food festival on the west coast when we attained corporate sponsorship from Miller Brewing. This years lineup included 22 stages and 37 acts.

I may not be a corporate whiz kid, but I certainly spent plenty of quality elbow rubbing time with the big wheels in town, learning by example and doing what they so graciously taught us.

I was also part of an effort to re-establish an expired Community Charter for the benefit of those willing to do what it took to be a town again. There I learned about such things as Bonding Public Officials. That only one company remained in the entire country still maintaining such bonds and that they had not underwritten any new Officers for many years. The cost to start a State acceptable process, 1 Million CASH in Community coffers just to cover basic expenses and premium payments. The locals were willing and able to put in several hundred thousand in start-up and maintain a self tax base in the 6 figure range, but the initial million nut was to much to swallow.

Here's some fun. Ask your county Sheriff for his Bonding information. Get the “My Oath is my Bond” response. OK, so ask to view a Certified Copy of his Oath of Office and watch the angry conniptions. Try not to get arrested.

Do you understand some of our consternation yet?

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Response*

“Valid source” in what way? It's merely an available source for example small business background data.

It's being used as an arbiter of what is and is not a corporation. Manta is not a valid source for the point that's being inferred. The argument is the equivalent as saying, "Elephants paint their toenails red so that you cannot see them hiding in strawberry patches. You haven't seen an elephant in a strawberry patch, therefore it works!"

“Autofills”? So the compilers of this data have made no distinction between the local doughnut shop chain and the County Court system? That's interesting. They list the Court as a Private Corporation only because there is no specific designation for the supposed instrumentalities of a Body Politic? A huge identifiable and divisible section of the economy goes unrecognised for credit reporting purposes? Hummmm....

Compilers? Do you think Manta is done one at a time by people? Manta is a web database of crawled info and aggregated sources. It it quite often deals with a lacking of information and conflicting sources of information. When it runs into conflicting sources of data, it establishes priority of source and moves on. Most of the phrasing involved that I was point out is "stock" meaning it holds the place between variables in the system. It is placeholder text.

Thank You for your considered opinion.

That section actually was a statement regarding my mindset, and wasn't in fact opinion.

Did I do that? And stop thinking Muni Corps are something extra special. They just have more rules to follow ( and most often don't ). The State Muni Codes I am familiar with specify that they must follow the rules, regulations and procedures within the State's General Corporation Code, as well as those outlined specifically for Muni Corporations.

I'll claim this part as my mistake, that statement was more directed at the intent of the original poster. This part of your post is true.

Little things like having a minimum of three Officers. Example - An Executive, a Secretary and a Treasurer, two of which Offices may be held by one individual, usually a Secretary-Treasurer. Muni's additionally require these Officers to have an originally signed Oath of Office on file with the Sec of State and maintain private Surety/Performance Bonds on these Officers ( which have somehow been transformed into the general insurance account maintained by the Office of Loss Management. Premiums apparently paid for by Public Funds, not Private Backing out of the pocket of the Office holder and/or political supporters. The Sheriff beats you to a pulp. You prevail in Suit and are awarded compensatory damages, which you MAY be able to collect on. This collection comes from the Public Coffers. You, as a member of the Public must pay insurance premiums via taxes and fees for your own damages inflicted by a Public Official. Not what the law specifies or intended. )

We're still on the same page here.

Munis must also do the mundane things, like filing Articles of Incorporation and timely reports with the Secretary of State in order to maintain Certificates of Good Standing. Try to get one. Pay the few dollars to the Sec of State Corporate Division and request a Certificate Of Standing for your County or Town Muni. Receive the “No responsive Documents” form letter.

Still on the same page. I don't think either of us will disagree about inefficiency, lack of rules followed, or a complete disregard for following proper paperwork procedures involved in City/County government.

Everything about your awesome vaudeville act and party throwing abilities

While this is all awesome and sounds like great fun, it's not speaking towards the point of starting a corporation and dealing with the paperwork involved. You may have, but I can't tell from the post. "Quality Elbow Rubbing time" doesn't include running through reams of paperwork establishing corporate practices or bylaws. Quality elbow rubbing time involves where you learn the things that actually make it go, not the paperwork and weird legal intricacies.

There I learned about such things as Bonding Public Officials. That only one company remained in the entire country still maintaining such bonds and that they had not underwritten any new Officers for many years.

I'm really not surprised. I don't think anyone on this board would be surprised to hear about government officials failing to follow their own rules if they can get away with it.

Do you understand some of our consternation yet?

Sure do, I'm pretty sure we're all "consternated" as hell. That doesn't make your arguments correct. Obama is the CEO? Oh come on. Give me a break. If you want to make a metaphorical argument, sure, but you're trying to take the metaphor literally, and it just doesn't hold.

If you are an employee of the Federal Government aka foreign corporation known as the UNITED STATES

This is the garbage that loses the argument. You think this sort of gum flabbing works in the real world as opposed to fantasy land. You think there are really two Constitutions. I'm pretty sure eventually I'm going to hear, "Maritime Law" somewhere in this thread eventually, and that's the point where I sigh again and hold my head in shame that people get taken in by this crap.

Eric Hoffer

A little Background :

Let me start by stating I enter these threads when I have something of my own experience to offer on a given point. Not as a supporter of any general contention. Mayhap I should not be here at all.

The Constitution is a document of dual character. First and foremost a Trust. I just recently found this quote.

"It is only by considering the granted powers, in their true character of trust or delegated powers, that all the various parts of our complicated system of government can be harmonized and explained". ( spelling in original )

- John C. Calhoun, ( 7th Vice President of the United States ) A Discourse on the Constitution and Government of the United States - (1851 posthumous)

I invite any and all to review www.The-Legacy.Info or mirror at www.The-Legacy.t15.org for explanation far beyond Mr. Calhoun's direct statement. Please excuse the crude web coding.

Definitions from Webster's Dictionary of the American English Language, 1828. The recognised authority on the legal and ordinary use of language at the time of the Founding.

ESTA'TE,n. [L. status, from sto, to stand. The roots stb, std and stg, have nearly the same signification, to set, to fix. It is probable that the L. sto is contracted from stad, as it forms steti.

1. In a general sense, fixedness; a fixed condition; now generally written and pronounced state. [ emphasis added ]

Secondarily, the Bylaws for the Trust and governing function of a Body Politic and Corporate. I'll leave it to the interested individual to spend some time researching “Body Politic and Corporate”. Things should become clear. I don't have a problem with the corporate aspect. It has simply always been in America.
Again from Webster's. Please note : The order in which a definition is given denotes primacy of utility.

PRES'IDENT, n. [L. proesidens.]

1. An officer elected or appointed to preside over a corporation, company or assembly of men, to keep order, manage their concerns or govern their proceedings; as the president of a banking company; the president of a senate, &c.

2. An officer appointed or elected to govern a province or territory, or to administer the government of a nation. The president of the United States is the chief executive magistrate.

Your earlier reference to “S” & “C” Corporations is not germane to the subject at hand as these are mere classifications of function type by the IRS. Our difficulty may lie in the understanding of “Corporation” and “Incorporation” in the Political sense.

CORPORATE, a. [L., to be shaped into a body, body.]
1. United in a body, or community, as a number of individuals, who are empowered to transact business as an individual; formed into a body; as a corporate assembly, or society; a corporate town.
2. United; general; collectively one.

CORPORATION, n. A body politic or corporate, formed and authorized by law to act as a single person; a society having the capacity of transacting business as an individual. Corporations are aggregate or sole. Corporations aggregate consist of two or more persons united in a society, which is preserved by a succession of members, either forever, or till the corporation is dissolved by the power that formed it, by the death of all its members, by surrender of its charter or franchises, or by forfeiture. Such corporations are the mayor and aldermen of cities, the head and fellows of a college, the dean and chapter of a cathedral church, the stockholders of a bank or insurance company, &c. A corporation sole consists of one person only and his successors, as a king or a bishop.

INCORPORA'TION, n. The act of incorporating.
1. Union of different ingredients in one mass.

2. Association in the same political body; as the incorporation of conquered countries into the Roman republic.

3. Formation of a legal or political body by the union of individuals, constituting and artificial person.

Can we sue the President? In what venue? The House has made a mockery in abdicating their fiduciary responsibilities regarding impeachment. The Trust has been breached by the Trustees and converted to another Use for their own enrichment.

FIDU'CIARY, a. [L. fiduciarius, from fido, to trust.]

1. Confident; steady; undoubting; unwavering; firm.

2. Not to be doubted; as fiduciary obedience.

3. Held in trust. [ emphasis added ]

Unless the politicians at all levels can be shoved back into the Trust box, and resume their sworn Duties we may only be left with the Founder's sad recourse. The call to GOD and arms.

I'll return to your response later.

Be Well.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

A little More :

I think a little more historical background is in order concerning my statement " . . . the corporate aspect. It has simply always been in America."

The original Colonies were Chartered ( given separate corporate status ) by the Monarch of England ( King = a Corporation Sole ). They were Chartered as Plantation Estates / Agricultural Societies. The purpose was to put the lands and resources to good and profitable Use for the Owner. At top,the King ( A Title / Estate of the Monarch ). The East India Company was charged with the business of overall management and transportation of profitable materials and goods between America and England. East India and the Colonial governments were all essentially "Revenue Farmers".

A Revenue Farm is a franchise with a license to collect revenue for the State.

REV'ENUE, n. [L. revenio; re and venio, to come.]

1. In a general sense, the annual rents, profits, interest or issues of any species of property, real or personal, belonging to an individual or to the public. When used of individuals, it is equivalent to income. In modern usage, income is applied more generally to the rents and profits of individuals, and revenue to those of the state. In the latter case, revenue is

2. The annual produce of taxes, excise, customs, duties, rents, &c. which a nation or state collects and receives into the treasury for public use.

F'ARMER, n.

1. In Great Britain, a tenant; a lessee; one who hires and cultivates a farm; a cultivator of leased ground.

2. One who takes taxes, customs, excise or other duties, to collect for a certain rate per cent; as a farmer of the revenues.

FRAN'CHISE, n. fran'chiz. [See Frank.] Properly, liberty, freedom. Hence,

1. A particular privilege or right granted by a prince or sovereign to an individual or to a number of persons; as the right to be a body corporate with perpetual succession; the right to hold a court leet or other court; to have waifs, wrecks, treasure-treve, or forfeitures. So the right to vote for governor, senators and representatives, is a franchise belonging to citizens, and not enjoyed by aliens. The right to establish a bank, is a franchise.

LI'CENSE, n. [L. licentia, from liceo, to be permitted.]

1. Leave; permission; authority or liberty given to do or forbear any act. A license may be verbal or written; when written, the paper containing the authority is called a license. A man is not permitted to retail spirituous liquors till he has obtained a license.

LI'CENSE, v.t.

1. To permit by grant of authority; to remove legal restraint by a grant of permission; as, to license a man to keep an inn.

2. To authorize to act in a particular character; as, to license a physician or a lawyer.

One may look at the War for Independence as a hostile corporate takeover by disgruntled Management and Tenants.

TEN'ANT, n. [L. teneo; Gr. to strain, stretch, extend.]

1. A person holding land or other real estate under another, either by grant, lease or at will; one who has the occupation or temporary possession of lands or tenements whose title is in another; as a tenant in tail; tenant in common; tenant by the curtesy; tenant in parcenary; tenant for life; tenant at will; tenant in dower.

2. One who has possession of any place; a dweller.

Ever wonder why the buyer of real estate through a Bank is listed as "Tenant" rather than "Buyer" in the Trust Deed?

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Response Conclusion – Out of My League :

Mr. Hoffer may be correct. I definitely am out of my league here, which once included friendly debates with the likes of Superior Court Judges and the Dean of Constitutional Studies, Loyola Marymount University School of Law. I daresay I am not on the “hopelessly out of” side.

“It's being used as an arbiter of what is and is not a corporation. Manta is not a valid source for the point that's being inferred.”

Again, the MANTA reference is merely a readily accessible source. I did not mean it to be taken as an authority.

“Compilers? Do you think Manta is done one at a time by people?”
The coding certainly was done by a human, including every designation.

“ Manta is a web database of crawled info and aggregated sources. It it quite often deals with a lacking of information and conflicting sources of information. When it runs into conflicting sources of data, it establishes priority of source and moves on. Most of the phrasing involved that I was point out is "stock" meaning it holds the place between variables in the system. It is placeholder text.”

Isn't it curious County and City governments are at least not listed as something else? Regularly defaulting “Private Corporation” or "Company" as “placeholder text”.

Maybe that's what they are, but not in the currently understood context of the average individual's language.

Some random MANTA examples :

“Supreme Court Of Missouri in Jefferson City, MO is a private company categorized under Courts. Our records show it was established in 1820 and incorporated in Missouri.”

“County Of Madison in Wampsville, NY is a private company categorized under County Government-Courts. Our records show it was established in and incorporated in New York.”

Finally, a County Government categorization. But still private. This does not include those living there? Who are the principals?

This one is curious
“County Of Madison in Jackson, TN is a private company categorized under Public Junior High School. Our records show it was established in and incorporated in Tennessee.”

Guess this makes your point.

“'Thank You for your considered opinion.' That section actually was a statement regarding my mindset, and wasn't in fact opinion.”

Understood.

“Everything about your awesome vaudeville act and party throwing abilities
While this is all awesome and sounds like great fun, it's not speaking towards the point of starting a corporation and dealing with the paperwork involved. You may have, but I can't tell from the post.”

My mistake using the casual turn of phrase "Quality Elbow Rubbing time". Let me clarify. I sat on the Board of Directors which dealt with the “ reams of paperwork”, establishing the Company. From dealing with “weird legal intricacies” of the State Franchise Tax Board and IRS regs concerning Tax Exempt status, to getting the utility bills paid. Then there was dealing with an initially unresponsive and sometimes hostile city bureaucracy, and Zoning Commission, not to mention the drama and intrigue dealing with our local business community. Lot's of fun and educational at least.

It's amusing you characterise and belittle my enterprise experience as “awesome vaudeville act and party throwing abilities”, apparently because it's only Show Biz.

“If you are an employee of the Federal Government aka known as the UNITED STATES
This is the garbage that loses the argument. You think this sort of gum flabbing works in the real world as opposed to fantasy land. You think there are really two Constitutions. “

The UNITED STATES is classed as a “foreign corporation” with respect to the corporate States, as they are to each other. That's easy enough to research.

“ You think there are really two Constitutions.”

It appears maybe so. Unfortunately I can not recall specifics to cite and respondent notes are on my Windows computer. Perhaps I'll dig them out and find an appropriate location to post. There was an original publication of the document on eBay recently. I was hopelessly outbid.

All the Best. Don't let cognitive dissonance ring your chimes too much.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Thank You for adding something of substance to this thread.

I have tried; tried, and tried again to shed some light on this Estate topic; the Trust Law topic the courts are using against us; the Executors Office, etc, and it never fails:

I start a thread; it gets moved to Off Topic and a few people who have not taken the time to actually sit down and study; do their own homework, come in and clutter it up with nonsense.

This is going to catch some traction eventually, and when it does, it's going to go absolutely viral in a matter of days.

I guess it's a lot easier to move it to "Off Topic" than it is to do a little research and come to realize that, not only is it not Off Topic, but the topic of the Estates/Executors Office/Cestui Que Vie Act/Certificate of Live Birth, etc. are the NUMBER ONE TOPIC we should be focused on.

Thank You for the additional information and resources, and Thank You for bringing something of substance to the thread.

You are a very BIG help, and I do appreciate your time.

They didn't bring anything of

They didn't bring anything of substance to this conversation. Manta, DnB and hoovers are not reliable sources for this type of information.

“ You think there are really two Constitutions.” EH

"It appears maybe so. Unfortunately I can not recall specifics to cite" Heir

Hahahahahahahaha

And around we go...

I'll Be Back :

With some 2 constitution info.

What would be reliable sources in your mind concerning what in particular? Give me a hint and I'll see what I can do to shed some light on it for folks.

Edit : Come to think of it NOTHING on the internet is a reliable source. Try going to court with net page printouts for your Points and Authorities, even from a Gov. website, and you'll be laughed out of court without even an explanation of the Evidence Rules.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

Ok great

Find us the two constitutions that you claim exist, tell me who replaced the old one and how they did it and we can carry on. Please reply directly to me, as your brethren gets entirely too emotional with his lack of facts and frustration. I can't read his posts anymore because it hurts me inside that there are fully functioning people walking this earth that do not understand logic, reason or debate.

By the way, there are great resources on the Internet, and trust me, evidence from the Internet is used in court all the time. I accept sources on the Internet, it just depends on the content and who is writing it. Tim Turner is not a reliable source.

Also, if you truly believe the US is a foreign corporation, please let me know where this entity is domesticated and make sure you add a link to support your claim.

When you find your evidence, post it here. I will be waiting, just ask for the blue guy.

Very Well :

F-buzz,

I see this Constitutions subject has been discussed at length elsewhere.

http://www.dailypaul.com/121488/update-a-constitutional-flub...

A read could prove edifying.

On the Foreign Corporation status, I'll need to search my other computer for notes as well as address the matter of “domesticated”.

“ . . . and trust me, evidence from the Internet is used in court all the time.”

I have seen internet legal cite materials snickered out of evidential acceptance as not being a True Copy. Depends on the circumstance, and the presiding personage I suppose.

“ . . . just ask for the blue guy.'”

I'm sorry. Does this refer to specifying post background or some other thing of which I am not aware?

All the Best.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

...

I am holding my breath waiting for a real reply. That is why I am turning blue. It's not very funny when I have to type it out. Well, it kind of is, but just to me.

Oh, I will not ever read another post by juliasbragg on this subject. I think he is extremely well intentioned and a very smart person, but incredibly lost in this forest

Unincorporated Corporation & etc. :

Let me toss this in for a little more historic legal confusion. Corporation, Companies and Unincorporated Corporation.
-----------------------------
Canon 6494

The etymology of “corporation” is derived from the two (2) 16th Century Latin words: "corpus" which means "(dead) body"; and: "ater/atio" which means "funeral rights, dark, gloomy or dismal" ; Therefore "corporation" means literally “an association of one or more performing the funeral rights associated with the burial rituals of dead corpses”.
-------------------------------------------------------
Canon 6499

While the three types of companies (Society, Corporation and Trust) are all called companies, their rules of formation and function remain distinct:

(i) A Society as a Company requires historically a minimum of three men (or women) actively associated in accordance with some covenant or deed. If less than three active members exist, the Society Company ceases to exist; and

(ii) A Corporate Company or simply “Corporation” is a dead body, given life through the Holy Ghost and so does not require any members to be valid other than a valid “registered” constitution that connects it ultimately to the founding dead corporation of the Capuchins in 1529 and then the Company of Gesu (Jesus) in 1534; and

(iii) A Trust Company is given life through statute (law) and requires both registration of a valid deed, office holders and property to retain existence.
-----------------------------
Canon 6497

The first and highest unincorporated corporation in history since the 16th Century are the Capuchins representing Corpus Christi (Dead Body of Christ’s Faithful), also known as the Order Friars Minor (Capuchin). The first and highest incorporated corporation in history since the 16th Century is the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. All incorporated bodies in the world including countries, stock-companies, trusts, funds, associations are ultimately derived as subsidiary corporations “owned” by the Society of Jesus (Jesuits).
Canon 6498

The second highest incorporated [ I think this is a mis-transcription ] corporation in history is the Roman Curia, also known as the Office Apostolic See, or Holy Office, in the conversion of the Roman Cult to a subsidiary corporation controlled by the reconstituted families of Pisa and Venice by July 1542. All incorporated aggregate bodies of persons (individual corporations associated with men and women) are derived from the Apostolic See, or Roman Curia. Therefore, while the Society of Jesus is responsible for all corporations, the Roman Curia as a subsidiary corporation of the Jesuits is responsible for all Persons (individual corporations).
--------------------------------

This is all preliminary to understanding the terms under review.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

What?

Please don't copy and paste from other websites. This is a discussion forum. Stay within context

Honestly :

F-buzz,

>Please don't copy and paste from other websites. This is a discussion forum. Stay within context<

You're speaking to me?

If so what happened to “reliable sources”? My definitions are cited for background understanding on the nature of the language and Legal definitions involved. The Cannon quotes are from personal transcription from scans largely taken from the Los Angeles County Law Library, a Federal Depository.

>So somebody bothered to register the united states as a foreign corporation but you can't tell me where that corp is registered.<

You're not getting it or simply discounting the information thus-far provided without an unbiased read. The United States does not need to be incorporated by registration to be a Corporation. Becoming obvious this is something both you and your earlier post opponents don't know or care to consider in settling the matter.

> This is nuts. Why would they bother to register a ghost corp. why would they even register this evil world stealing corp when they already control the world and their intentions are bad? Why would they leave a paper trail?<

“ghost corp.? evil world stealing corp “ What are you on about?

>And if there is a paper trail, why can't you follow it.<

Why don't you have patience to allow me to flesh this out? Apparently even the beginning background is too much for you're comprehension.

>You keep implying there is an evil group that lawfully took over our country, but you can't tell me whodunit or how....<

What are you on about? "evil group that lawfully took over our country" ?!!? Honestly, never mind. My questions to you are rhetorical at best. You needn't waste your time or mine with this insincere dialogue. I'm certainly through addressing these matters for you.

Good Day.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

You are arguing with idiots my friend, as apparent in their

responses, especially with all you've brought forth. Any idiot can see this.

Trust me Heir, they know the truth; they know it's a foreign corporation; they know there is a constitution FOR, and a constitution OF, but they've got so much skin in the game with their ignorant comments, that they just can't let you win now; they absolutely MUST get in the last word to save some face.

Let it go my friend, any person with a single brain cell left in their head can read this post and the comments, and come to an educated decision on their own.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink :)

Thank You for your time and research. Others over the years will come to this thread and because of your posts, will have a new light of truth with references to prove their cases for the advancement of Liberty.

Such is Life :

I know some people are argumentative just for the sake of being so. Distant communication via internet makes it just that much easier. Easier to foment consternation also.

As stated elsewhere, I bother to write these replies to all readers who might find interest. Too many misconceptions and applications going around. Too many people getting in trouble picking up the wrong torch.

I may start a few threads of my own to see how fast I end up here in Off Topic World.

Now we wait for the down votes, eh Bud?

Persevere, Keep up your study. May discernment be your companion.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

A Touch More on 2 Constitutions :

Perhaps a little delve into the philosophy around the idea of two Constitutions would be helpful. Not addressing the Trust vs. Corporate discussion.

Following Are excerpts reportedly from the October 2004 issue of American Legion magazine. A short read.

Unfortunately an original source on-line version is not available as their Archive only goes back to 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Tale of Two Constitutions

http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=86

The subject of constitutional interpretation may seem like a topic best fitted for an ivory-tower debate, but it actually has a very real and dramatic impact on daily life (as will be demonstrated shortly). In recent years, two competing viewpoints have emerged.

Probably the first exposure most citizens had to the two views came during the 2000 presidential debates. When asked what type of judges should be placed on the bench, candidate Bush responded: “I believe that the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government . . . and that they ought to look at the Constitution as sacred. . . . I don't believe in liberal, activist judges; I believe in strict constructionists.” 1 Candidate Gore countered, “The Constitution ought to be interpreted as a document that grows.” 2 Gore later stated, “I believe the Constitution is a living and breathing document. . . . We have interpreted our founding charter over the years, and found deeper meanings in it in light of the subsequent experience in American life.” 3 So, the two choices are . . . follow original intent, or construct a living constitution.

Proponents of a living constitution believe that we should not be bound by what dead white guys wrote two centuries ago when slavery was legal, women could not vote, and horses were the fastest means of transportation. Instead, we should live under a constitution that is alive and vibrant, reflecting today's values and beliefs.

Such rhetoric makes a living constitution sound appealing, but it is actually a complete misportrayal of the difference between the two philosophies. In reality, both accommodate an evolving society; in fact, under the strict construction (or originalist) viewpoint, Article V of the Constitution requires that the Constitution be a living document. The real difference between the two approaches is not whether the Constitution should evolve, but rather how those changes should occur - and who should make them.
------------------------------------------------------

Please NOTE : When most in the Patriot / Liberty efforts say “Organic Constitution” they refer to the original and it's strict interpretation. This is backwards for purposes of debate. Organic = Living, not strict.

On the US Incorporated thing, Most don't get that the central government does not need registration with some higher issuing authority to act and be a Company. So I'll let that rest.

I'll also let rest the “for / of” debate as this can also not be comprehended effectively by those of a modern mind set. It's largely a red bait issue anyway. The fact that Fed Gov took the original Constitution “for” ( Against; in the place of; as a substitute or equivalent, ) the United States, which never had a title heading or titled cover page, and gave it a title heading Constitution “of” ( From or out of; proceeding from, ) the UNITED STATES, for purposes of establishing a new Municipal Corporation isn't the issue.

By the way, “States” means ”Nobility” in this document. The ONLY definition in Webster's 1828.

Proving the obvious appearance of the DC corporate structure overtaking all aspects of National Government and abrogating their Trust responsibilities is just fruitless here. It's a long story of evidence with short attention span audience.

I'll leave you all with one little story. Take it as you will.

A question has been, if the United States or UNITED STATES had ever been registered as a Corporation, where would it be registered ? Who is a higher authority among the Family of Nations? The Vatican maybe? Not the United States given the anti-papist sentiment of the time. Maybe the UNITED STATES, but wasn't that done in Congress ?

England maybe. ? That's a best choice.

Last year or so, a report went round my circle that an American Officer, Air Force Colonel if I recall, was in England and due to return home soon. Won't name him but that info might still be on the web. Anyway, man was interested in history. Had taken it upon himself to enjoy some research in The City of London. It was reported he had secured a certified filed copy of the Constitution and was excited to get this record back to the USA and in circulation among the people.

Serious stuff if true. And dangerous to many in power. Blow the lid off quite a few popular revered beliefs and institutions. Solidify the “still a British Colony” evidence in a single document. Plus the court evidence possibilities are staggering.

Time to come home arrived and not a peep. Not that I've heard. Couldn't even determine if he had returned.

True? Bull? I don't know. Heavy burden if so, announced to his friends or not.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info