Comment: Your failure

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: TL:DR (see in situ)

Your failure

California penal code:
Section 7 "... the word "person" includes a corporation as
well as a natural person;..."

Section 4 "The rule of the common law, that penal statutes are to be
strictly construed, has no application to this Code."

So what do you claim is untrue? While I only site California penal code here the definition is all throughout US and State Codes and Statutes. In fact, legal definitions of a legal person being a specific legally defined entity that is the merger of the Natural and Artificial person into the legally defined umbrella term "person" is not only all over Code but is also in the California constitution, executive orders (see EO 13303) and is demonstrated in case law back hundreds of years into English Common Law. So if you think I am ill informed then why is it literally all throughout codes and statutes?? Why did the Citizens United case uphold this concept in the US Supreme Court?

Some may say "so what" a person is a duel entity or has two different entities under the same word. This does not fly for logically correct truth in Law and actually has gross violation of very simple logic and reason.
1. No status can be applied to someone without all elements of a valid contract which requires 2 parties, an offer, disclosure, mutual understanding, acceptance and consideration. One is either born into the world free of all obligations or not; free of obligations is the only lawful option here because otherwise it requires some form of fraud or extortion to force bondage/slavery upon a new born natural man or woman
2. Mens rea, guilty mind, is THE foundation in Common Law of what constitutes a crime by someone. Notice how under California Penal Code person is both a corporation and "natural person". Persons under code are what are subject to Penal Code criminal justice proceedings. This does not make any sense AT ALL! A Corporation is a legal fiction and has no mind because it is a fictional capacity created via contract, only a Man or Woman has a mind and therefore only a man or woman can commit a crime because of the absolute requirement of Mens rea to be demonstrated for guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. A corporation has no mind and therefor can never have mens rea thus it is not possible for a corporation to commit a crime under common law which is logically correct because a corporation has no intent; it is just a piece of paper. Men and women who contractually bind themselves to capacity under the corporations charter are the ones with intent.

Notice how section 4 of California penal code severs common law from having application to the penal code proceedings and therein completely overturns a 1000+ years of common law by making something with no mind an entity that can commit a crime. The implications of this pinpoint of failure in logic and reason was the primary key strategic usurpation that would require voluminous encyclopedias to describe the all out carnage and devolution of law since its full implementations. This concept is not just California Code it is in all of the State and Federal Code and is a direct result of America losing the Civil War of the 1860's with the prime result being the 14th amendment which makes a person born in the United States a citizen of the United States. Resulting case law interpretations demonstrate that this has been interpreted as natural persons as well as corporations.

Think about this concept for moment, a legal fiction explicitly established to limit liability can be a criminal under this utter failure in logic. What are we going to do with a corporation "guilty" of a crime?? Put the articles of incorporation documents in a jail cell? This is a completely ridiculous concept on its face. The mechanisms in common law justice were already present for a man or woman working under limited liability capacity of a legal fiction. The limited liability is ONLY accessible IF all contractually binding regulations that apply to the capacity are followed by the man or woman who has voluntarily contracted under the terms. Otherwise, if a man or woman with mens rea commits a crime under color of capacity then the corporate veil can be pierced with a valid cause of action from an accuser and the man or woman is the one brought to justice thus the man or woman always carries liability if they do not stay within the applicable regulatory code and are subject to criminal proceedings if a crime has been committed and a valid cause of action is submitted by the accuser who was injured from the crime. There was NEVER the need to merge the artificial and natural persons and in fact all logic and reason dictates that every attempt to apply a crime to a corporation makes NO sense AT ALL.

Further examination of someone else applying a limited liability entity status, subject to regulatory code, to me or anyone else requires all required elements of valid contract; an agreement based honest disclosure, acceptance and consideration. For some other men somewhere to write on a piece of paper somewhere that I am born into some contract does not fly; it is outright fraud, extortion and ultimately slavery. Do you consent to slavery? I don't.

Here we have a crime committed at the very source of this entire legal person (applied to the People) concept just to make the entire legal person concept and code regulation applicable. If the person born into this system is a crime at its source then everything else derived from the crime is color of law and still a crime.

When examining the details of the congressional records of what happened in the House and Senate chambers during the "ratification" of the 14th amendment it is clear that even the amendment itself was an outright criminal conspiracy where violent force and murder were conducted during this act of extortion. When one examines the reconstruction acts in conjunction with the establishment of the converting People to persons and the beginning of applying code to the people one can see the vast control grid implemented and Corporate State that lives on this day.

Originally Americas Organic Laws affirmed Just Powers (powers of Justice) to be derived from the consent of the governed. The reason for this was based on a simple fact that the only lawful path for the execution of real justice when examining real law is for the government/court to have no interest in the outcome of the case whatsoever. A real court of Law is an impartial forum for non-violent dispute resolution. The court must be an impartial body in order to NOT have a conflict of interest and to have the ability to conduct a fair trial. Hence, the court can have no interest whatsoever in the outcome of a case. The only real way to avoid "mock trials" is for the court to not be a party to the case. This is where the Common Law right to face your accuser comes in. American organic law acknowledges this self-evident truth and it is recognized in the Organic Law of US Code. This initiation of the powers of an impartial body of justice is the act of an accuser who is a member of the governed (NOT Government) identifying themselves and accepting liability for their accusation against another. This inherent liability for the accusation is acknowledgments from deeper and older foundational maxims of law which are all just self evident truth nature derived from the Divine Law concept of Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. The Golden Rule of Divine Law covers liability of each inherently through its logic. Maxims also back this up:

If one falsely accuses another of a crime, the punishment due to that crime should be inflicted upon the perjured informer.

Also when we examine the result of the code now initiating just powers from the Government and not the governed we see another Maxim violated:
No one can sue in the name of another

The government is a capacity created/ordained by We the People. Men and Women contract to fill the capacity and voluntarily bind themselves to the agreement of the Constitution. This means when they are on the clock of the capacity that time is our time not theirs. This also means that any action they make under that capacity must be upon consent of the governed. When it comes to initiating the process of Justice the maxim above is why the need an accuser who is a member of the governed accepting liability. Otherwise they are bringing a court action against someone in the name of another.

Also when you go into "court" and you ask who is the accuser they will say YOU are your own accuser. Now locally where I am at they are beginning to change this statement because it has been pointed out to them that this is perjury and if they state that is the fact of the case you can simply drop the "charges". Now there are beginning to say the State Attorney. This does not fly either because of the logic in the maxim above and because the Organic Law requirement of powers of justice derived from the consent of the governed. This was acknowledged by the founders because they knew each is responsible for their own actions. The state attorney's claim to be the accuser but when one asks them if the man/woman is accepting liability for the action they will not answer because the whole point of setting up code for the legal person was to have no liability for anyone because there are no men and women in a case only legal persons which are legal fictions of law. Of course we all know that the accused cannot limit liability because the person the "government" charges with a "crime" will ultimately punish the man in the capacity of the person. So here we have a situation where the accuser has no liability and the accused holds all liability. This is THE source of tyranny. It is sourced from men and women who have no liability for their actions. Just like no one wants to accept liability for their accusations against another the government employees too do not want to accept liability. In the end this entire concept was implemented because no one wants to accept liability for their own actions. When a nation chooses this path of not accepting liability for their own actions the grace of divine law is lost and doom is eminent. If we do not stay within divine law of equality and liability then we will see tribulation inflicted upon us by our own actions.

I could demonstrate much more here in fact but it is not my job to teach you why we are in this mess. Clearly you want to write it off as "BS" because you are just as intellectually bankrupt as the tyrants who implement this nightmare because it is clear that you do not want to accept liability of actually knowing what the law actually is. This fact is self-evident. While some may say I am full of sh*t that is fine it does not bother me. I am living within the grace of Divine Law and I am protected and will thrive in my transcendence beyond this gutter logic of the modern American insanity.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...