Comment: I See My Post Under Attention is Back :

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: your post isnt gone (see in situ)

I See My Post Under Attention is Back :

RP glitch, maybe. My system glitch, maybe. Not sure how technically, but in ignorance presume it could happen. Mods caught out and recovering, also maybe. Just glad it's all back for now. I stand by my previous statements regarding it's disappearance from MY screen. Didn't care to make a screen capture and argue about it.

Thanks for the citation : Sesma v. Dept. of Rev., OTC-MD No 001078F, WL 958920. I'll grab it next time I'm in the Repository. I've corrected my relevant post and apologised to this community. Take it for what it's worth. I'll leave it to individual readers to form their own opinions regarding character and nature of the discussion.

I didn't come here to defend or proffer any “Sovereign” or “Straw-man” arguments, and indeed stayed out of your other thread for that very reason. Most of the “Individual Sovereign” boys and girls are half cocked at best and half asses at worst.

Now on to another point mentioned which you have thus far deigned to address in deference to pecking at the Trafficant mis quote.
============
To quote you - “Whether a government agent is excercising an office of trust, profit or honor." You know what, that is not any kind of legal concept I've ever heard of.”

That tells me something.

Constitution : Art. I, Sec. 3, Clause 7.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Art. I, Sec. 9, Clause 8.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Art. II, Sec. 1, Clause 3

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Art. VI, Sec. 1, Clause 3

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Now maybe you've heard of it. On to Trust.

"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".

- John C. Calhoun, ( 7th Vice President of the United States ) - A Discourse on the Constitution and Government of the United States - (1851 posthumous )
================== Multiple formats available HERE ===========
I understand that Constitutional studies is currently a specialised area for lawyers and probably out of your immediate realm. It is also my experience that the federal Bankruptcy and Trust obligations are areas where political candidates and current functionaries balk at discussion. Feel free to ask your Profs. or legal mentors about this. Could prove enlightening.

Safe Weekend to you also. One and All.

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