Former DHS Officer Julia Davis shared concerns last year about 23 people crossing the border illegally and cites that the border director was accepting bribes.
She was promptly declared a ‘domestic terrorist’, with her home raided by dispatched a Blackhawk Helicopter SWAT raid on her home.
She was tracked by 8 officers at any time and was spied on through Onstar in her car.
Her story was censored from 60 minutes.
Domestic Terrorist = anyone speaking out against the government.
Welcome to the Land of The Free.
The Truth About Driver’s License
youtube.com
THIS IS INTENDED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a3_2_1s63.html DeLovio…
As we the lawful Americans are the Government over are Elected and Public servants our Paid employees to serve United States of America not the rest of the foreign agents the are illegal,,The government is a “public trust”, the people in the government are the trustee. Their duty is to protect the people as the beneficiaries. 63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247 “As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1]Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, [2]and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts… [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public… [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official who tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy. Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit-and this is one of the meanings that fraud bears [483 U. S. 372] in the statute. See United States v. Dial, 757 F.2d 163, 168 (7th Cir1985) includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary toward the public, … and if he deliberately conceals material information from them, he is guilty of fraud. McNally v United States 483 U.S. 350 (1987)
Make Viral ASP ..
Article 1, section 9 of 1776 Constitution : 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.
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.
Dont Talk to Police
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
http://www.youtube.com
The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act.
INCOME TAX FRAUD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eQZoXAU7X0
Remove Your Property From The Tax Roll Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFkULHuyl50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFkULHuyl50
Theft By Deception – Deciphering The Federal Income Tax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1nYbch4TQ
,It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation Called Elected and public employees and arrest commercial code breakers.” (Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of Justice 376 S. E. 2nd. 247.)http://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/WhyThiefOrPubOfficer.pdf
SUPREME COURT RULING: Police Have No Duty To Protect The General Public
http://gunssavelives.net/…/supreme-court-ruling-police…/
“Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or
dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property…and is regarded as UNALIENABLE.” 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.”16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177, late 2nd, Section 256,,,,,,,,Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property…and is regarded as UNALIENABLE.” 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.
Lawful,,Due proses is Constitutional the private American side 1866 civil rights act to protect lawful Americans from there Elected and public Employees,,Judicial proses Fraud and treasonous Fraud appone the Court, Constitutional lawfulness court proceeding of a jury of 12, jury nullification,,,, Judicial proses Democracy Courts is the defato of 1871,
By the great weight of authority it is acknowledged that generally “public officials” are not immune from suit when they allegedly violate the civil rights of citizens, and that a “public official’s” defense of immunity is to be sparingly applied in these kinds of cases. James v. Ogilvie, 1970, DC Ill., 310 F. Sup. 661, 663.
Title 18 241-242
ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES PROHIBITED ConspiracyWatch> ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES
Judicial proses Democracy Courts is the defato of 1871, NON–disclosure of a supposed contract stipulation makes its presumptions fraudulent, and fraud vitiates a contract, ab initio, per court ruling. All so-called “US citizens” should be aware that the 14th amendment is null and void, being never ratified by the states in 1868 (in spite of lies to the contrary). Case cites affirm the 14th amendment is a lie, and its lie is also presented in six copious pages in the Congressional Record, of July 13, 1967, and never rebutted. All so-called “US citizens” should withdraw their voter registrations, as their votes absolutely don’t count; the vote having been manipulated by those voting machines earlier supplied by Diebold, which were not designed to give an accurate vote count… in fact, far from it. Congressional Record — House June 13, 1967 H7161 http://www.constitutionalconcepts.org/rarick.pdf Congressional Record — House June 13, 1967 H7161 THE 14TH http://www.constitutionalconcepts.org/rarick.pdf
The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction, with the intention (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) of substantially limiting the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Marine Corps, Army, Navy, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.
The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act.
CORPUS DELICTI
“Without standing, there is no actual or justiciable controversy, and courts will not entertain such cases. (3 Witlen, Cal. Procedure (3rd ed. 1985) Actions § 44, pp 70-72.) “Typically, … the standing inquiry requires careful judicial examination of a complaint’s allegations to ascertain whether the particular plaintiff is entitled to an adjudication of the particular claims asserted. ” (Allen v. Wright, (1984) 468 U.S. 737, 752…Whether one has standing in a particular case generally revolved around the question whether that person has rights that may suffer some injury, actual or threatened. ” Clifford S. v. Superior Court, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 333, 335.
Public Notice. *The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this “Message,” including attachments. The originator intended this Message for the specified recipients only; it may contain the originator’s confidential and proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies unintended recipients that they have received this Message in error, and strictly proscribes their Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based actions. Recipients-in-error shall notify the originator immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Authorized carriers of this message shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients. See: Quon v. Arch. Anything stated in this email may be limited in the content and is not to be taken out of context.**Wireless Copyright Notice**. Federal and State laws govern copyrights to this Message. You must have the originator’s full written consent to alter, copy, or use this Message. Originator acknowledges others’ copyrighted content in this Message. Otherwise, Copyright © 2014 by originator**.
All Rights Reserved. Without Prejudice All Rights Reserved UCC1-308
All government officials and agencies, including all State legislatures, are bound by the Constitution and must NOT create any defacto laws which counter the Constitution:The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1895, ruled unconstitutional a federal law containing income taxes, Bills,statutes and codes with arguments concerning class warfare and the definition of a direct tax.”Herein…Ohio’s Doctrine of Governmental Immunity was held unconstitutional and others to numerous to mention.” (Civil Rights) (Krause vs Ohio, app 2d 1 L.N.W. 2d 321 1971.) Reich vs State Highway Dept. 336, Mich 617: 194 N.W. 2d 700 197″Employees of a city or state are not immune from suit under statute relating civil rights for deprivations of rights on ground that officials were acting within the scope of their ground that officials were acting within the Scope of their responsibilities of performing a discretionary act.” (Bunch vs Barnett 376 F.Sup. 23.)”Title 28 Section 1391, this section makes it possible to bring actions against government officials and agencies in district court outside D.C.” (Civil Rights) (Norton vs Mcshane 14 L.Ed. 2d 274.)A suit in detinue or replevin in personam should lie to gain possession of property seized by the state. (Civil Rights) Stephen, Pleading (3rd Am ed) p. 47, 52, 69, 74; Ames Lectures on legal history, p. 64, 71; Wilkins v. Despard, 5 Term Rep- 112; Roberts v. Withered, % Mod. 193, 12 Mod. 92.
As 2001 and 2011 -2013 As http://www.oregontrackers.com.. proved it on the state of Oregon Senate and House hearings for telling the truth you know the talk In the Building.. please learn the truth,, As the county is not broke Read souls and the as I Recalled the Lincoln county School Board in 2002 and 2004 I was forced too put my Family literately on the street for the After I Recalled the Lincoln County School Board Attacks on my life and my Family’s,, Rob I would like to Believe Is a good man. I Try too believe and good heart but the power whet too his head like so many Most of of you know me, I have been there for some of you and your family’s helping them threw problems without Going to What has turn out to be the devil’s concentrator’s will even kill there own children that a living for the Corps. The People are waking up in this county,, Please Make Amends ,, I Believe in you Jesus, After 12 Heart Attacks And The attempt on my life June 5 2013. I Still Demand the tapes Of My heart attack in Jail for 30hours to be public..I do thak thus for Saving my life But the physical pain is the roughs you all know my medical,,
Sheriff Dodson As we talk I do Believe in the good In life beings you make it very difficult for Folks to have truth in you Most of all your Oath.. To the constitutional law title 18 241-242 I believe you would turn on the lawful Americans In your Community Its possible to Believe you will be imprison for Your Elected and public servants them for increase there personal gain, This is commune wealth I take form you and keep for myself and new developed “CORPS DELICTI”Corporation of the Mafia All at the threat of your life liberty and the pursuit of Happiness at the expense of pocket and personal retirement ,
Ask yourself If I’m right what are you going to kill your own family for your pension.. Think About,,
We know what has been filed is this the future for your lawful Americans bloodline you children will not have your grandchildren… you will not bounce them on you knee.. As you won’t know the truth..
JUNE 5, 1933 – Executive Order of 1933 HJR 192
http://www.educationcenter2000.com/legal/HJR_192_73rdCongress.html Cached
House Joint Resolution 192 . JOINT RESOLUTION TO SUSPEND THE GOLD STANDARD AND ABROGATE THE GOLD CLAUSE. JUNE 5, 1933. H.J.R. 192 73rd Congress 1st Session
Debt Elimination Because of Our Exemption and Remedy: House …
http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/…elimination_and_HJR-192.htm Cached
Debt Elimination Because of Our Exemption and Remedy: House Joint Resolution-192: Debt Elimination Home. Debt Elimination Fundamentals. Accelerated Mortgage Pay-off
JUNE 5, 1933 – Executive Order of 1933 HJR 192
http://www.educationcenter2000.com/legal/HJR_192_73rdCongress.html Cached
House Joint Resolution 192 . JOINT RESOLUTION TO SUSPEND THE GOLD STANDARD AND ABROGATE THE GOLD CLAUSE. JUNE 5, 1933. H.J.R. 192 73rd Congress 1st Session
Debt Elimination Because of Our Exemption and Remedy: House …
http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/…elimination_and_HJR-192.htm Cached
Debt Elimination Because of Our Exemption and Remedy: House Joint Resolution-192: Debt Elimination Home. Debt Elimination Fundamentals. Accelerated Mortgage Pay-off
Please watch this is pretty good in my life of event’s as you know in this community the attacks on Ed and my family in 2000-2004. As Most in this building know I was forced to put my family on the street and the facts in this Building,, Some in this building added in the attempts on my life liberty and Happiness, Since 2004 There has been no happiness. You know how difficult it has been for me not too well you know,, I’m A Life being that looks for the Good in other life forms,, Ones Can not have I ask for Jesus too open thy eyes or god to come. I know Crazy I know Believe in the good in lawful Americans who believe that god gave The treaty of 1866 civil rights act that is called the citizen rule book in the years compared to the Fraud that thus may be commingling against your own Loving love one’s and family remember the love what happen too it in the family and community’s to be divide against one anther you don’t care for one anther then you hide behind the devil’s books of statues and codes the devil’s contractors destroy its one life form who can not even see the light ,,Our for father the ten commandments and Constitutional laws of oath title 5 USC 2906-3331-3333
Rule 5.1. Constitutional Challenge to a Statute http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_5.1 Rule 5.1. Constitutional Challenge to a Statute | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | LII / Legal… http://www.law.cornell.edu (a) Notice by a Party. A party that files a pleading, written motion, or other paper drawing into question the constitutionality of a federal or state statute must promptly: (1) file a notice of constitutional question stating the question and identifying the paper that raises it, if: Rule 5.1. Constitutional Challenge to a Statute | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | LII / Legal… http://www.law.cornell.edu
Rule 5.1. Constitutional Challenge to a Statute | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | LII / Legal…
http://www.law.cornell.edu
Article 1, section 9 of 1776 Constitution : 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.
Remove Your Property From The unlawful Tax Roll Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFkULHuyl50
Exhibit (1)
Understanding How Admiralty And Common Law Apply To You
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZjhM385kBs
The Truth About Driver’s License ,,,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1B45HPp06g
The Clearfield Doctrine,,,http://www.scribd.com/doc/96926258/The-Clearfield-Doctrine
“Without standing, there is no actual or justiciable controversy, and courts will not entertain such cases. (3 Witlen, Cal. Procedure (3rd ed. 1985) Actions § 44, pp 70-72.) “Typically, … the standing inquiry requires careful judicial examination of a complaint’s allegations to ascertain whether the particular plaintiff is entitled to an adjudication of the particular claims asserted. ” (Allen v. Wright, (1984) 468 U.S. 737, 752…Whether one has standing in a particular case generally revolved around the question whether that person has rights that may suffer some injury, actual or threatened. ” Clifford S. v. Superior Court, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 333, 335.
Public Notice. *The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this “Message,” including attachments. The originator intended this Message for the specified recipients only; it may contain the originator’s confidential and proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies unintended recipients that they have received this Message in error, and strictly proscribes their Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based actions. Recipients-in-error shall notify the originator immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Authorized carriers of this message shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients. See: Quon v. Arch. Anything stated in this email may be limited in the content and is not to be taken out of context.**Wireless Copyright Notice**. Federal and State laws govern copyrights to this Message. You must have the originator’s full written consent to alter, copy, or use this Message. Originator acknowledges others’ copyrighted content in this Message. Otherwise, Copyright © 2014 by originator**.
All Rights Reserved. Without Prejudice All Rights Reserved UCC1-308
The Spoonfed Truth – Right To Travel
spoonfedtruth.ucoz.com/index/right_to_travel/0-15 Cached
Whyte v. City of Sacramento, 65 Cal. App. 534, … Escobedo v. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 222 Pac.2d 1, 5, 35 Cal.2d 870 (1950).
state-citizen
http://www.state-citizen.org/page2.html Cached
Whyte v. City of Sacramento, 65 Cal. App. 534, … Escobedo v. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 222 Pac.2d 1, 5, 35 Cal.2d 870 (1950). 1.
CARQUESTIONS
section520.org/CARQUESTIONS.html Cached
Whyte v. City of Sacramento, 65 Cal. App. 534, 547, 224 Pac. 1008, 1013 (1924); Escobedo v. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 222 Pac.2d 1, 5, 35 Cal.2d 870 (1950) …
car
section520.org/car.html Cached
SMITH v. CITY OF HEMET, … City of Sacramento, 65 Cal. App. 534, 547, (1924) Escobedo v. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 35 Cal.2d 870 (1950)
How can the State convert RIGHTS to PRIVILEGES and attach LICENSE to…
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110730205555AAIFioI Cached
Whyte v. City of Sacramento, 65 Cal. App. 534, … Escobedo v. State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 222 Pac. 2d 1, 5, 35 Cal.2d 870 ( 1950)
Theft By Deception – Deciphering The Federal Income Tax – YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1nYbch4TQ Cached
The misrepresentation and misapplication of the United States federal income tax constitutes the largest acquisition of wealth by way of deception in …
.Play Video Outgoing IRS Chief Taxes are Voluntary – YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcpEQXFAxe4 Cached
IRS Chief says taxes are voluntary, but the government will throw you in prison if you don’t. Buy agorist! Get your metals from http://agoristmetals.com/ …
.Play Video
IRS Director Admits Taxes Are Voluntary 2013 – YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNICz9CZOgw Cached
Steve Miller, former Director of the Internal Revenue Service ( IRS), admitted at a Congressional hearing that the taxes collected by the IRS are not …
.Play Video
Irs Taxes Voluntary Video News Results
Swiss bank accounts are only the tip of tax-evasion iceberg (+video)
The Christian Science Monitor 7 hours ago
Billions of dollars in tax revenue is lost through Swiss bank accounts, a Senate panel charges. But hundreds of billions of..
All government officials and agencies, including all State legislatures, are bound by the Constitution and must NOT create any defacto laws which counter the Constitution:The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1895, ruled unconstitutional a federal law containing income taxes, Bills,statutes and codes with arguments concerning class warfare and the definition of a direct tax.”Herein…Ohio’s Doctrine of Governmental Immunity was held unconstitutional and others to numerous to mention.” (Civil Rights) (Krause vs Ohio, app 2d 1 L.N.W. 2d 321 1971.) Reich vs State Highway Dept. 336, Mich 617: 194 N.W. 2d 700 197″Employees of a city or state are not immune from suit under statute relating civil rights for deprivations of rights on ground that officials were acting within the scope of their ground that officials were acting within the Scope of their responsibilities of performing a discretionary act.” (Bunch vs Barnett 376 F.Sup. 23.)”Title 28 Section 1391, this section makes it possible to bring actions against government officials and agencies in district court outside D.C.” (Civil Rights) (Norton vs Mcshane 14 L.Ed. 2d 274.)A suit in detinue or replevin in personam should lie to gain possession of property seized by the state. (Civil Rights) Stephen, Pleading (3rd Am ed) p. 47, 52, 69, 74; Ames Lectures on legal history, p. 64, 71; Wilkins v. Despard, 5 Term Rep- 112; Roberts v. Withered, % Mod. 193, 12 Mod. 92.
“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof;… shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby… The Senators and Representatives and members of the State legislature, and all executive and judicial officers of the United States and the several States, shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” The Constitution of the united States of America, Article VI, Cl 2, 3.5 U.S.C. 2906, 3331,The oath of office taken by an individual under section 3331 of this title shall be delivered by him to, and preserved by, the House of Congress, agency, or court to ..Sec. 3331-3333. Oath of office – Subchapter II – Oath of Office – U.S. Code – Title 5: Government Organization and Employees – January 01, 2011 – Order: 2 – 19265805 …To protect the people from their elected and public employees,,Many of our people seem to believe that their state government has jurisdiction to stop the common law Grand Juries. However,the state government only has authority over statutory (ie. State) law, not common law. The common law of England was used to establish the U.S. Constitution, so it existed before it and, thus, it is superior to it. The common law is time immemorial.
The state government did not create the common law, so it has no authority to abolish it or control it, unless we allow ourselves to be tricked to putting common law under statutory law, where it’s “their house, their rules.” However, if we operate outside the statutory rules by invoking common law, no state government has the authority or jurisdiction to dictate, control or abolish what we do. They only have authority to enforce our decisions.
If the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged the authority of the common law Grand Jury (U.S. v. Williams), why would the state have authority to counter that opinion? The common law is superior to all statutory law, and we must only invoke it in the right way to have superior standing. We need to stop
putting the common law and the Grand Juries underneath their inferior statutory laws. The people (singular AND plural) have the ultimate authority!18 USC § 2381 – Treason | Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal … http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381
… is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; …
“The United States is entirely a creature of the Constitution. Its power and authority have no other source. It can only act in accordance with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” Reid v Covert 354 US l, 1957.
Any laws created by government which are repugnant to the Constitution carry NO force of law and are VOID:An unconstitutional law states and codes cannot operate to supersede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, (the Constitution JTM) it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” Bonnett v. Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908); NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425 (1886). See also Bonnett v Vallier, 136 Wis 193, 200; 116 NW 885, 887 (1908); State ex rel Ballard v Goodland, 159 Wis 393, 395; 150 NW 488, 489 (1915); State ex rel Kleist v Donald, 164 Wis 545, 552-553; 160 NW 1067, 1070 (1917); State ex rel Martin v Zimmerman, 233 Wis 16, 21; 288 NW 454, 457 (1939); State ex rel Commissioners of Public Lands v Anderson, 56 Wis 2d 666, 672; 203 NW2d 84, 87 (1973); and Butzlaffer v Van Der Geest & Sons, Inc, Wis, 115 Wis 2d 539; 340 NW2d 742, 744-745 (1983).
“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute and codes, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment… In legal contemplation, it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed… Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it… A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. 20.181-192United States Code: Title 28a,Rule 5.1. Constitutional … http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28a/usc_sec_28a... Cached42 USC 1986 provides: 42 USC 1986 provides: Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section (1985 of Title 42) are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful act, neglect, or refusal, may be joined as defendants in the action. (Civil Rights)Mandatory Reporting laws Applier’s Elected and public employees and commercial contractors
Defendants can be held in actions under 42 USC 1983, even,This includes Elected and public employees,Effective January 1, 2013, employees of Oregon higher education institutions are considered by law to be subject mandatory reporters of child abuse.http://www.oregon.gov/dhs/abuse/pages/mr_employees.aspx
though they did not act willfully. Even though they did not have a specific intent to deprive the plaintiff of a federal right, such defendants can be held to civil responsibility. Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.s. 167, 1961.24.215-219, the assaults on this man or reported again
An conspiracy is actionable under 42 USC 1985, when there has been an “actual of denial of due process.”(Civil Rights) Jennings v. Nester (1954, Ca. 7 Ill.) 217, F.2d 153, CERT DEN 349 U.S. 958, 99 L.Ed. 1281, 75 S.ct. 888.”Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void;” and the courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.” Marbury v Madison, 5 US 1803 (2 Cranch) 137, 170?180, and NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425.
“When an act of the legislature is repugnant or contrary to the constitution, it is, ipso facto, void.” 2 Pet. R. 522; 12 Wheat. 270; 3 Dall. 286; 4 Dall. 18.
“[p]owers not granted (to any government) are prohibited.” United States v. Butler, 297 U.S 1, 68 (1936).43.359-365
Purpose: Generally, this section further protects civil action for deprivation of rights protects constitutional rights from invasion by persons acting under state or federal authority. (Civil Rights) Weise v. Reisner, DC Wis. 1970, 318 F.Sup. 580, quoted from U.S.C.A. 1972 pocketpart, P. 40 Title 42, Sec. 1983, Note Paragraph 8,,,,,.
“Liability in damages for unconstitutional or otherwise illegal conduct has the very desirable effect of deterring such conduct. Indeed, this was precisely the proposition upon which 42 USC section 1983 was enacted.” ‘” “Judges may be punished criminally for willful deprivations of constitutional right on the strength of 18 USC Section 241- 242.” (Civil Rights) (Imbler vs Pachtman, U.S. 47 L.Ed. 2nd 128, 96 S.Ct.)
44.367-374
This section was passed to enforce U.S.C.A. Constitution Amendment 14 and to protect form interference the rights secured thereby, as well as other constitutional rights; it is directed against conspiracies of private persons; and there is no requirement that conspiracy be under color of law. (Civil Rights) U.S.C.A. 1972 Pocket P. 1675, Title 42, Sec. 1995, Note
28.242-248
The Seventh Circuit of Appeals has held that a public official does not have immunity simply because he operates in a discretionary situation. It indicated that public servants are to be held liable when they abused their discretion or acted in a way that is arbitrary, fanciful, or clearly unreasonable. (Civil Rights) Littleton v. Berbling (1972, Ca. 7 Ill.), 468 F.2d 389.36.304-308 Governmental immunity is not defense in suits brought under this section making liable every person who under color or state law deprives another person of his civil rights. Westberry v. Fisher, DC Me., 1970, 309 F.Sup. 95.18 USC § 2381 – Treason | Title 18 241-242- Crimes and Criminal …www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381 Cached
… is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; ..
Common-Law Grand-Juries”.Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition Attorney General… “He is the chief law officer of the federal and state governments with the duty of representing the sovereign, national or state. Johnson v. Commonwealth, ex rel. Meredith, 291 Ky. 829, 165 S.W.2d 820, 826.”
“Insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, (constitution) it is superseded thereby.” (16 Am Jur 2d 177, Late Am Jur 2d. 256)
“…all laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void’ (Marbury v Madison, 5 US 1803 (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 170).
“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” – Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.
“The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller v. U.S., 230 F 2d 486, 489.
“There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of Constitutional rights.”- Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 945.
To disregard Constitutional law, and to violate the same, creates a sure liability upon the one involved:
“State officers may be held personally liable for damages based upon actions taken in their official capacities.” Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991).
I have a right to question and challenge any Publicly owned taxing activities by Any Public court, their Elected and public employee government,,non-for profits and any affiliates agency as to their validity and legal standing:
“Anyone entering into an arrangement with the government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the government stays within the bounds of his authority, even though the agent himself may be unaware of limitations upon his authority.” The United States Supreme Court, Federal Crop Ins. Corp, v. Merrill, 332 US 380-388 L1947)
“The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to criminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. United States Supreme Court reminds us in Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906):
“The legal right of an individual to decrease or ALTOGETHER AVOID his/her taxes by means which the law permits cannot be doubted” –Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed on one because of this Constitutional right.” Sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 945:
Supreme courts ruled “Without Corpus delicti there can be no crime”“In every prosecution for crime it is necessary to establish the “corpus delecti”, i.e., the body or elements of the crime.” People v. Lopez, 62 Ca.Rptr. 47, 254 C.A.2d 185.
“In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delecti, or the body of the crime itself-i.e., the fact of injury, loss or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause. ” People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d 433, 467 (Cal. 2003) [quoting People v. Alvarez, (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 903, 46 P.3d 372.].
“As a general principal, standing to invoke the judicial process requires an actual justiciable controversy as to which the complainant has a real interest in the ultimate adjudication because he or she has either suffered or is about to suffer an injury. ” People v.CORPUS DELICTI
“For a crime to exist, there must be an injured party (Corpus Delicti) There can be no sanction or penalty imposed on one because of this Constitutional right.” Sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 945:
Supreme courts ruled “Without Corpus delicti there can be no crime”“In every prosecution for crime it is necessary to establish the “corpus delecti”, i.e., the body or elements of the crime.” People v. Lopez, 62 Ca.Rptr. 47, 254 C.A.2d 185.
“In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delecti, or the body of the crime itself-i.e., the fact of injury, loss or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause. ” People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d 433, 467 (Cal. 2003) [quoting People v. Alvarez, (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 903, 46 P.3d 372.].
“As a general principal, standing to invoke the judicial process requires an actual justiciable controversy as to which the complainant has a real interest in the ultimate adjudication because he or she has either suffered or is about to suffer an injury. ” People v. Superior Court, 126 Cal.Rptr.2d 793.
“Without standing, there is no actual or justiciable controversy, and courts will not entertain such cases. (3 Witlen, Cal. Procedure (3rd ed. 1985) Actions § 44, pp 70-72.) “Typically, … the standing inquiry requires careful judicial examination of a complaint’s allegations to ascertain whether the particular plaintiff is entitled to an adjudication of the particular claims asserted. ” (Allen v. Wright, (1984) 468 U.S. 737, 752…Whether one has standing in a particular case generally revolved around the question whether that person has rights that may suffer some injury, actual or threatened. ” Clifford S. v. Superior Court, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 333, 335. Superior Court, 126 Cal.Rptr.2d 793.
“Without standing, there is no actual or justiciable controversy, and courts will not entertain such cases. (3 Witlen, Cal. Procedure (3rd ed. 1985) Actions § 44, pp 70-72.) “Typically, … the standing inquiry requires careful judicial examination of a complaint’s allegations to ascertain whether the particular plaintiff is entitled to an adjudication of the particular claims asserted. ” (Allen v. Wright, (1984) 468 U.S. 737, 752…Whether one has standing in a particular case generally revolved around the question whether that person has rights that may suffer some injury, actual or threatened. ” Clifford S. v. Superior Court, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 333, 335.
“The fact is, property is a tree; income is the fruit; labour is a tree; income the fruit; capital, the tree; income the ‘fruit.’ The fruit, if not consumed (severed) as fast as it ripens, will germinate from the seed… and will produce other trees and grow into more property; but so long as it is fruit merely, and plucked (severed) to eat… it is no tree, and will produce itself no fruit.” Waring v. City of Savennah. 60 Ga. 93, 100 (1878.}
As we the lawful Americasns are the Goverment over are Elected and Public servants our Paid employees to serve Uinted States os America not the reast of the foreign agents the are illegal,,The government is a “public trust”, the people in the government are the trustee. Their duty is to protect the people as the beneficiaries. 63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247 “As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1]Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, [2]and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts… [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public… [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official who tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy. Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit-and this is one of the meanings that fraud bears [483 U. S. 372] in the statute. See United States v. Dial, 757 F.2d 163, 168 (7th Cir1985) includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary toward the public, … and if he deliberately conceals material information from them, he is guilty of fraud. McNally v United States 483 U.S. 350 (1987)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvALyQDFcQI
Cancel you signature on adhesion contracts with the Government “letter of rescission”
youtube.com
my new drop box with docs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwxkIkZ663A