6 votes

Mountain Man Arrested in Court For Following Constitution

Mountain Man Found Guilty, Mr.Tertegte Hauled Away in Cuffs.


http://youtu.be/ZPAoEYHmQMc

Comment viewing options

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

Making Issue With The Wrong Party

I understand the space this guy is coming from. Been there. To be frank, as impressive as some of his stuff sounds, it simply doesn't stand up to logic.
IMHO, his first mistake is him making issue with the court, rather than the position of the prosecuting. There is a prevailing paradigm that perceives the court as being out to get you. And yes, I get that there are few successes in court, and I get that the Justices are often perceivable not educated to where you and I would like him/her to be, and may even be corrupt. However, how one perceives the court has much to with one's arguments.
I cannot recommend highly enough the course offered by Dr. Graves - jurisdictionary.com. I have reservations about his paradigm on law, but his education about court process is priceless!!!

true enough

Not only is there no legal basis for his beef over "proving oaths", but starting off with accusing the court of being corrupt, etc. is a sure way to lose all sympathy on the matter. Why lose that over what is actually a non-issue?

I'll go a step further, - the surest way to lose ANY court hearing is to act in any way like a sovereign citizen. Because anyone in the court system, judges, lawyers, etc., all know, those guys never win. I'm not saying that to ruffle anyone's feathers, it's just the way it is.

If you want to be taken seriously, say intelligent things about real issues, but don't refuse to identify yourself or try to invent a new way to plea or ask the court to prove it exists or explain its jurisdiction to you. (If you really want to know that stuff, look it up ahead of time, it's public record).

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

no, it isn't actually

it's an earlier court appearance of the same guy, before he finally and ultimately lost.

Some of his deep thoughts:

"I live in my own body" Really? Tell us more! Fascinating.

"I live in my home from time to time". No shit! You too?!! wow.

"you are trying to bilk the Federal Reserve by securitizing an all caps blah blah blah" No she isn't dumbass, she's a justice of the peace and she's process your freaking fishing license ticket along with all the other crap that you got charged with. She probably doesn't know what the federal reserve is.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

In a Way I was Surprised He Got Away

He has knowledge of the hostile corporate takeover of America that few have and he was using all the correct language even though his manner was that of a "country bumpkin". However, the courts are so corrupt today that what that man did almost never flies (and apparently from your follow-up didn't fly in this case either). See what I mean:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3uOyhFy4Lo

If you want to delve into this further go here:

http://www.itsnotthelaw.com/

-Bloatedtoad

In what sense

did he get away? After he left the courtroom that first time he was arrested and taken to jail. He was out on bail. At the next hearing he was taken out of the courtoom in handcuffs, convicted by the jury, and fined. If I'm keeping up with this, the trial scheduled for January is for resisting arrest, the one that happened a few days back was just about the fishing license, but I could be wrong.

http://www.kxlh.com/news/manhattan-man-found-guilty-by-jury-...

In the sense that it appeared to be the case in the first video

Obviously, in the link you provided he didn't. However, I reiterate that that man was obviously savvy correctly pointed out the corruption of the system from the hostile corporate takeover of America. However the "natural law" that he referred to almost never flies in today's courts. What Jordan Maxwell points out (in only the most general sense) in that video above that I gave you above is the actual state of affairs in this country. The way the courts work today is alien to what ought to be for a free people. Maxwell correctly points out that we are now wards of the state. If you've never heard of any of this then it's all going to sound like gobble-de-gook, however, you would do well to get that book "It's not the Law" from my link above and see just how corrupt it's all become. Today it doesn't matter what the law is nor does it matter what the Constitution says. The bankers control it all. You are traded on the stock exchange and have been since the U.S. bankruptcy of 1933 (caused by the Federal Reserve). YOU are collateral for the terms of that bankruptcy. It's been this way since before almost everyone living today was born. So today's corruption looks perfectly normal. You were born into it and never questioned it. I assure you it's not normal for a free people. Research this and then you'll see why Ron Paul is so important, more so than even most of his supporters could even know.

-Bloatedtoad

1933 bankruptcy

You are traded on the stock exchange and have been since the U.S. bankruptcy of 1933

Do you have a source for the claim about the 1933 bankruptcy?

Here's one

right here:

http://www.apfn.net/Doc-100_bankruptcy.htm

Here's more detail:

http://www.halexandria.org/dward282.htm

If you really want detail get yourself a copy of Wayne Barbuto's "It's Not the Law" from http://www.itsnotthelaw.com

-Bloatedtoad

Bogus transcript

The Traficant transcript you linked is bogus. Here's the version that's linked a few hundred thousand times on the web (it's been up since 2000):
http://www.afn.org/~govern/bankruptcy.html

Here's an image of the actual text in the Congressional Record:
http://www.afn.org/~govern/traficant.gif
The bogus one takes the actual first paragraph, and then the rest is fiction. Ironically, this image from the actual record is linked from the above bogus page, as if it were the source, when in fact debunks the bogus transcript. You can also verify the actual text from thomas.gov.

The second page you cite, if you click the link for "The American Bankruptcy," takes you to this page on the same site:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward283.htm
where they acknowledge that the Traficant transcript they just referenced "may be fiction," and link to the actual transcript! They say that it doesn't matter whether it's fiction or not and compare it to the Da Vinci code and the fact that there are books that take the Da Vinci code seriously enough to try to "debunk" it even though it's fiction. Almost as bizarre as the afn.org page linking to its own debunking.

They reference something by title, “The Demise of the American Constitutional Republic" with the comment that it is a "potentially equally accurate account" as the one they just finished saying "may be fiction." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

Apparently what this is referring to is a section out of "Cracking the Code."
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/12-16-03/discussion.cgi.75....
It asserts that "Roosevelt proclaimed the bankruptcy of the United States" in 1933, but cites no evidence for the claim.

I am thinking that is correct

Doggy, I think you're right on that. Victory!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

The video has been deleted.

The associated account has been terminated.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Video

Here's one that works:
http://www.kbzk.com/news/tertelgte-found-guilty-by-jury/

Also some details about what happened in the courtroom after he was removed:
http://www.belgrade-news.com/news/article_8926881a-5654-11e3...

The Stupid!

It Buuuurrrrnnnns!!! Ahhhh!

Have at it!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I love this story

My husband told me this story the other day, and it's so bad to the bone. I don't know all the specifics, but the concept here is that "they" want to keep everyone on the grid through licensure.

Bingo!

Agenda 21

glorifying an idiot

having to have a fishing license is ridiculous, agreed. But that is what this is about. It is an inconvenience that probably all of us suffer at one point or another.

Can someone explain how a guy ranting in court about nonsense legal theories, and then losing big, is a great thing? I don't see that it is. I think it makes people who protest ridiculous licensing schemes look like nuts.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Really, You don't get it

This guy has a complete grasp on the Constitution and we have become slaves to CORPORATION of United States. He knows this. Unfortunately, the courts are so freaking corrupt and along with the stupid lawyer, he's got no recourse because of the corporate takeover. He's gonna have to spend time in the corporate jails. Damn, if the judge understood the common law, she would've of dropped the whole thing.

you forgot to rub your tummy clockwise

and therefore didnt' invoke admiralty jurisdiction. Really the guy messed up...he should have interpleaded the fish...

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

this is what sheeple say...

.

this is what alterna-sheep say

.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

He only looks "nuts" to you

because you simply don't understand. And when someone tried to explain to you that you don't understand (and you really don't), you didn't like it.

The man spoke perfect Consitution. I'm just ashamed the judge can't recognize it's tune.

We tried to help you, but you didn't want to hear it.

The ball is in your court.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

perfect consitution?

Which part of what he said had to do with the Constitution?

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

LoL! You just proved

that you didn't watch the video.

Watch the part where the man is being cuffed. Go ahead and fast forward to that part, because I know you're not going to watch the whole thing if you haven't by now.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

No, I proved I did watch, and that I've read the Constitution

I asked you what part YOU thought referenced the Constitution. None did.

The strawman/ split personality crap is a myth, never proven or proveable, probably doesn't exist and isn't in the Constitution.

Not standing when asked, is not a valid legal concept and is not reference in the Constitution.

The UCC doesn't mean what he says it does (duh) and didn't exist at the time of the Constitution.

The Constitution does not say it is correct procedure that at an infraction hearing in Montana everyone in the courtroom (including the clerk) must "prove their oath".

Need I go on? There was no Constitutional argument, or even commentary, offered by this guy, at any point. Ever.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

hahaha terrible argument.

"The Constitution does not say it is correct procedure that at an infraction hearing in Montana everyone in the courtroom (including the clerk) must "prove their oath"."

The Constitution doesn't say the man needs a license to fish, either. Yet, he was summoned to Court.

Your rebuttal?

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

terrible argument

The Constitution doesn't say the man needs a license to fish, either.

I don't know how you think it's supposed to work, but since the Constitution doesn't say anything about that, it's a power reserved to the states, and the state of Montana exercised that power by requiring fishing licenses.

deacon's picture

what you said is true

about the power of the states....but
If all gov's are ran by the people,and are for the people..and if that said power is derived from the people
and cannot survive without the people And seeing "the people" did not vote into existence the requirement for a fishing license,then who voted it all in?
It must have been the king..as he doesn't like the commoners catching what he owns

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

How do you think representative government works?

And seeing "the people" did not vote into existence the requirement for a fishing license,then who voted it all in? It must have been the king..as he doesn't like the commoners catching what he owns

Actually, Montana voters elected the governor and the state legislators who enacted the legislation regulating fishing and hunting, consistent with the Montana state constitution and the powers reserved to the states under the US Constitution.

deacon's picture

that might be how it works now

but the people did not vote someone over them
they thought they were voting in others to uphold their rights
it is the same with the fed gov,the people did not vote in overlords(well they did,but not willingly)
the fed gov has no more authority than the people have,but this,again is not it all panned out
what we have now,is not a representative form of gov,what we have is
a progressive form,where the const seems to grow with time,but this,does not make the words weak,the ones elected have done a great job with that
and i will submit,it is not what the people wanted nor asked for

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence