Time: Wed Nov 13 11:31:01 1996
To: libertylaw@www.ultimate.org
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: "the State" and th [redacted here]
Cc: 
Bcc: 

John Edward,

Excellent insights here.

In People v. United States et al.,
would you recommend that we add
these criteria as barriers to
any candidates which C.J. Rehnquist
might temporarily appoint to the
3-judge panel which we have
convened?  Putting those criteria
on the table is "only a brief away."
Do you want to take a stab at
drafting such a brief, publishing
it here, and allowing me to make my
usual edits?  This would be an 
excellent example for everyone else
on the list.  As we say down here
in the arid zone:  GOFER IT!
("fer" is "to carry" in Latin).

I am standing by.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

attachment:  "Karma and the Federal Courts"


At 09:38 AM 11/13/96 U, you wrote:
>=======================================================================
>LIBERTY LAW - CROSS THE BAR & MAKE YOUR PLEA - FIRST VIRTUAL COURT, USA
>Presiding JOP: Tom Clark, Constable: Robert Happy, Clerk: Kerry Rushing
>=======================================================================
>
>------------------------------
>From: libertylaw@www.ultimate.org
>
>=======================================================================
>LIBERTY LAW - CROSS THE BAR & MAKE YOUR PLEA - FIRST VIRTUAL COURT, USA
>Presiding JOP: Tom Clark, Constable: Robert Happy, Clerk: Kerry Rushing
>=======================================================================
>all federal judges are disqualified to
>      preside, since they all currently pay income taxes
>      on their compensation, in direct violation of 
>      Article III;  Chief Justice Rehnquist is struggling
>      with a massive legal conundrum..
>
>
>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>
>John replies:  Also to be noted that all judges, justices who are currently
>paid in FRNs are having their compensation deminished by the fact that
>inflation of the rehypothicated international debt-credit obligations reduce
>their effective value.  Only judges and justices who are compensated with the
>lawful money [coin of the realm] of the United States of America as specifed
>in the coinage act of 1793 and 31 USC Sec. 5112, meet the qualification of
>non-diminshed compensation.  Justices of Article III courts must also meet the
>following:
>
>Appointed by the Presidenet with the advise and consent of the Senate.  [I lot
>of federal commisioners and USDC judges meet this one qualification]
>
>For a life tenure.
>
>Office held in good behavior. [Most of the crminals in black bat suits fail
>this one!!]
>
>So diminishing of compensation through taxes is just one way their pay falls
>short of the art III criteria.
>
>John Edward
>
>At 01:00 AM 11/10/96 -0800, you wrote:
>>=======================================================================
>>LIBERTY LAW - CROSS THE BAR & MAKE YOUR PLEA - FIRST VIRTUAL COURT, USA
>>Presiding JOP: Tom Clark, Constable: Robert Happy, Clerk: Kerry Rushing
>>=======================================================================
>>I have had great difficulty in figuring out the fourteenth amendment and
>>how it fits in the the dual citizenship that is required to be "sovereign
>>people" as described in great detail in the Dred Scott case.  I think I
>>have finally got it thanks to a great book that unfortunately I do not
>>"own", but have the use of until I can find one at a old book store and
>>shall because of the my "greed" remain unnamed at present and shall be
>>named "Book".
>>
>>The Dred Scott case explains in great detail that you must first be a
>>"citizen of a State" and therefore if of the correct class of citizen, you
>>are a "citizen of the United States".  I could not figure out the how the
>>fourteenth amendment sidestepped this provision, as on the first glance, it
>>appears to be correct, which I absolutely knew was impossible.
>>
>>Its wording is as follows:
>>
>>
>>                                Amendment XIV
>>                                    [1868]
>>
>>"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
>>subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and
>>of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law
>>which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
>>States;nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
>>property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
>>jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
>>
>>In 1866 Statutes at Large chapter 31,
>>
>>"That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign
>>power, excluding Indians not; taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of
>>the United States;"
>>
>>1)  Al persons born ....in the United States - 14th amendment and declared
>>by Congress.
>>2)  All persons naturalized in the United States - 14th amendment and
>>declared by Congress
>>3)  are citizens of the United States - 14th amendment
>>4)  are citizens ...of the State wherein they reside - 14th amendment
>>5) Who is a citizen of "the State" wherein they reside?  In Dred Scott case
>>the wording is citizen of "a State".  Now comes the "Book" with a
>>definition of "the State".
>>
>>>From the "Book" - [under the heading of state] "Papal States.--the States.
>>1. [Gt. Brit. & Canada] The United States.  2. Formerly, the Netherlands;
>>the United Provinces."
>>
>>>From this I would be able to conclude that "the States" is the Papal
>>States.  Above this is the heading of state is the following:
>>"States of the Church, a part of Central Italy which, before the
>>unification of Italy in 1870, was under the sovereignty of the Pope.  It
>>included Rome, the Romagna, Umbria, the March of Ancona, and the towns of
>>Bologna, Perugia, and Vierbo;  capital, Rome.  Compare DONATION OF PEPIN."
>>
>>[Interesting time in that 1871, 1874, and 1878 are the formation of a
>>corporate government [corporation(s)]
>>
>>in the District of Columbia]
>>
>>>From the "Book"
>>"Donation of Pepin", the grant by Pepin, king of the Franks, father of
>>Charlemagne, of Ravenna, Emilia, and other territory captured from the
>>Lombards in 755."
>>
>>It just goes on and on.
>>
>>Treaties with Italy, 1869. s/l Volume 18 part 2 pg 439 -  One of the
>>Parties was the Grand Cordon of his Order of the Saints Maurice and
>>Lazarus.  Another complete story, but this is not the plain Jane
>>government.
>>>From the "Book"
>>
>>Cordon is a ornamental lace, cord or ribbon worn to secure something in
>>place, for adornment, as an indication of rank, or used as a heraldic
>>bearing.  The cord worn as a girdle by a Franciscan friar.
>>
>>Orders - from the "Book" - St. Maurice and St. Lazarus (10/6 1424) Amadeus
>>VI.; service to the state, especially charities; white enameled cross
>>botone against an S-pointed green cross.
>>
>>And again in Treaties with Italy, 1869 s/l Volume 18 part 2 page 439 we see
>>in Article I "There shall be between the territories of the high
>>contracting parties a reciprocal liberty of commerce and navigation."  What
>>happened to the words of Untied States of American and Italy here?????
>>
>>Article II
>>"The citizens of each of the high contracting parties shall have liberty to
>>travel in "the States" and territories of the other territories of the
>>other, to carry on trade, wholesale and retail, to hire and occupy houses
>>and warehouses, to employ agents of their choice, and generally to do
>>anything incident to or necessary for trade, upon the same terms as the
>>natives of the country, submitting themselves to the laws there
>>established."
>>
>>Article XII
>>"The high contracting parties agree that , in the unfortunate event of a
>>war between them, the private property of their respective citizens and
>>subjects, with the exception of contraband of war, shall be exempt from
>>capture or seizure, on the high seas or elsewhere, by the armed vessels or
>>by the military forces of either party;  it being understood that this
>>exemption shall not extend to vessels and their cargoes which may attempt
>>to tenter a port blockaded by the naval forces of either party.
>>
>>This sure reads to me as though the "high contracting parties" are
>>different than the "party".  This reads very different from the actual
>>citizens of each country or "State".  And "high Contracting parties" does
>>not seem to be used in contracts with other countries!  Why?
>>
>>The "high contracting parties" is the Pope and his folks.  So much more on
>>this in the treaties that points as more prima facie evident of same.
>>
>>Now we add the "Office of Governor" and the legatees, legate and walla, the
>>Roman Catholic Church again.  It is all fitting.
>>
>>Next we add a certificate of birth, that is changed from the form that
>>parents fill out on the "worksheet" in a previous post, to Birth
>>Certificate from Bouvier 1843 "and those given to aliens that they have
>>been naturalized"
>>
>>And for a little spice, again from the "Book"
>>Legal - a legal reversion See reversion
>>
>>Reversion - The right of redemption of an estate that is security for a
>>debt or judgment.  The residue of an estate left in the grantor [England?
>>or the sovereign - Pope?], to commence in possession at a determination of
>>a particular estate created by him.  The returning of lands to the
>>possession of the grantor or of his heirs, on the determination of a
>>particular estate created by him.
>>
>>We be in Deep do do folks,
>>
>>We now have "the State", "this state", "other state" and "another state".
>>This is getting difficult to tell who is on first.  "original States" and
>>"several States" are seemingly the only good ones out there!
>>
>>I would say a prayer tonight, but I don't think in any manner with the
>>"Vatican" in mind though.
>>
>>the best
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Ralph Kermit, Winterrowd
>>citizen of the United States nunc pro tunc
>>Citizen of the State of Kansas (equal footing with the original States)
>>domiciled in the Territory of Alaska
>>Born of natural born parents of the Posterity
>>Sovereign State in Fact
>>
>>If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better
>>than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not
>>your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May
>>your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget ye were our
>>countrymen.
>>                Samuel Adams
>>
>>Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains
>>and slavery?  Forbid it, Almighty God!  I know not what course others may
>>take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death.
>>        Patrick Henry:  Speech in the Virginia Convention, March 23,1775
>>
>>My Homepage is:  http://www.alaska.net/~winter/jefferson.html
>>
>>
>>
>
>===========================================================
>Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.:  pmitch@primenet.com                  
>
>ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state
>===========================================================
>
>
>
>
>
      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail