The FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE is essentially an indemnified promissory note. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT promises to pay the private lender based solely on its ability to collect what is deceptively called "taxes," which in reality is some sort of insurance scheme in which the citizens have become the surety for any loss, not to mention "premium payments" when everything is running smoothly.
I agree, under the Common Law, those four elements were present. And true, Mr Trotter is comparing apples to oranges, showing the clear distinction between lawful currency and legal tender, unfortunately, we are no longer under common law in this country, (since the 1930's) we're under maritime/admiralty "law of the sea"
Common law was law for the Republic, law of the sea is law for the democracy. The republic went bankrupt in the 1930's, and in came the democracy with its .....
@REVtalk1 Those elements are still present. Look at the elements in everyone ELSE's promissory notes. FedRsv tokens are the way they are so that they aren't enforceable in law. Additionally, common law hasn't gone anywhere. It has to be invoked. Maritime jurisdiction is a separate body of law. Just because the business community and municipalities doing business aren't utilizing it doesn't mean it's gone. Most are just unaware of the nuances of law to call the governing law of the transaction.
@LoonyVision frn's aren't enforceable in law-I get that-but since this is the case-we gotta change the jurisdiction of the courts then, right? We cant walk into equity courts with gold, and likewise, frn's are not enforceable in common law, right? Conclusion: it's all about establishing jurisdiction, right?
So we have 2 different jurisdictions operating at the same time, side by side, if we get hauled in under equity all we gotta do is invoke the common law and they give us remedy..Correct?
@REVtalk1 It's about the "transaction." The transaction dictates jurisdiction as it is part of the negotiating in bargaining for the object of the offer.. Well...as for walking into equity courts you can, but clean hands would require it to have been given 1st. (e.g. quid pro quo). FRNs aren't enforceable in ANY law. Causes of action in law (equity incl.) must have "elements" to be heard or recognized at law. So, if ONE element is missing the whole thing fails. Many juris opp'g., which is the ?
@REVtalk1 I sure do. I wish I'd known about it when I first got started over a decade ago.
Again think "PUBLIC FOOL SYSTEM" and that should answer why these tokens now substitute and circulate "AS" money. Even better still, John Adams nails it:
"All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." ~nuff said
ok, so if the transaction dictates jurisdiction, (the money of the court case, if you will)-when we transact in FRN's,we gotta use the equity courts since FRN's fall under the admiralty jurisdiction. And if we go to court as the defendant, we might be more likely to lose the case....but if we go to the judge in private chambers he may recognize our private process and the case can be discharged and the plaintiff will be none the wiser.
@REVtalk1 Well, you're dealing with public corps so nothing done is "pvt." If FRNs fall under admiralty jurisdiction, then equity has no application. They're two distinct. Separate. You go to court and lose when you don't know the issues involved or the law of the case, or how to control the judge by making and protecting the "public record." Making sure no fraud or deceit is allowed to stand on the "public" record. Keep studying jurisdictionary and it will start "clicking."
Speaking for myself, it's impossible for me to "be" a corporation, public or otherwise. Corporations exist only on paper. They're fictions. ALL corporations. Municipal, public, privates, etc.
Also, if it's "THE STATE" as plaintiff, then WHERE is EVIDENCE of the "plaintiff?" So that I may examine the claim of damages. If it's "THE STATE" as plaintiff, then where is EVIDENCE that it, as plaintiff, has suffered injury, loss, or harm resulting in its claim for damages? Injury, loss, or harm is REQUIRED for ANY case to be heard. Criminal, civil, admiralty/maritime, or law merchant. Without evidence of of either no court has power to hear it or recognize it. No FACTS (evidence), no case.
@LoonyVision I realise the best place for my "Jurisdictionary" course in NOT on my bookshelf, however, Im gonna hit it hard this Dec. when time allows.
Have you ever heard of the guys from "Creditors in Commerce?"
@REVtalk1 No, I don't think it'll do much on the shelf. And no I haven't heard of those guys. I don't really go to any other source than the primary or recognized secondary.
All you have to realize is that these are all "commercial" nations. It never was about citizens and subjects etc., its about profits & gains at the expense of everyone but self. People doing business as governments is the new religion.
I would do my own research if I were you. These "commerce" people are misleading.
When I say misleading, I mean this. Commerce is business to business (merchant to merchant), there is another aspect of trade; that being "consumer." If you proclaim you are in commerce then you can't whine about being hoodwinked because you accepted an alternative form AS payment. But as a consumer, there is no rigidity in the transaction; example, in Calif., the holder in due course rule is not applicable to a consumer transaction.
No one has been taught commerce, or consumer law, or ANY law
...public policy. Its against the democracy to PAY anything anymore! Thats the crazy thing...it's against the "law" to pay! Debts can only be discharged with FRN's, this is called a "novation"
So, yes, I agree, there is no lawful money anywhere that will be recognized anywhere, not even in the courts.
I call the FRN's indemnified promissory notes because we promise to pay with our labor/intellectual property, and we do pay every April 15th with our labor-backed tokens.
@REVtalk1 Payment CAN actually be made now due to the repeal of the applicable emergency act. Check out the mechanism in Cal.Civ.Code sec. 1501. It's not so much the inability as it is the induced ignorance of the public fool system as to why "payment" isn't being demanded although it could. Public policy doesn't mean it can subvert the bylaws (constitution). It can only operate in furtherance of the guidelines. If acts are done outside the bylaws it's ultra vires and therefore void.
ok, so what you are saying is that hjr 192 has been repealed-but in order for payment (and not discharge) wouldnt we need to be circulating silver/gold backed notes? We cant demand payment in gold can we?
Many people in this movement are still teaching that hjr 192 is still active, Ive heard a few times where people say it has been repealed-but few and far between. If in fact it has been repealed, then where is all the gold? Right now its like 1700 per ounce!
@REVtalk1 Yes, notes redeemable in lawful money. And yes you can demand payment in gold or silver. However, courts most likely uphold a defense that "it's not in the contract." Of course I would have a nice come back to that from the language of the promissory note itself.
I don't know about any movements, I study for my education, but I'm not saying it's repealed, United States Statutes at Large 91Stat. 1229(c) says it is. ;) The gold & silver are here, but a subj 2 lengthy for 500chars.
However, if there is a gold (or silver) clause in the contract, it IS enforceable. Google "gold clause enforceable." Read case law, NOT wikipedia or any secondary source.
Even though it was repealed, doesn't it still explain what "they" did back then during the bankruptcy of the republic? The "country" was switching over from lawful money to the new funny money of the democracy, the courts changed from common law to administrative, it became against "public policy" to demand payment in gold. I don't know everything I need to but I know this: something really strange happened back in the 1930's.
@REVtalk1 True, but I believe it started way before then. It's a money monopoly of monopoly money. The goal of anyone running a business is just that, to have a monopoly on a market then you'll never go out of business. Hence the reason for anti-trust laws. The bankers have always sought to have a monopoly on the money industry. That's probably why we use "their" paper. It's proprietary. The 30s were just the fruition of the plan.
Hopefully more people like you will wake-up and change things.
12 USC 411 - Sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption
Redeem your Federal Reserve Notes for lawful money. You do this by refusing to endorse your paycheck, deposit, etc. The way you do this is as follows: use the redeem for lawful money signature below
deposit for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable federal reserve notes of face value.
@LibertyFilms4You It is impossible to redeem ANY "notes" for lawful money, because there is none in circulation. All you can do is keep the record true, and correct by utilizing the statement you noted.
Lawful money of the United States means coins of silver or of gold which have been manufactured according to United States law in a United States Mint. Nothing else.
FYI: Check out "Money - Ye Shall Have Honest Weights and Measures" by James Ewart
@LibertyFilms4You - Also, why would you classify yourself as DBA? Being a consumer is the appropriate status. As a business entity you are expected to know all legalities, and business savvy needed for whatever transaction conduct.
Since none of us were taught law in the public fool system, and being that this particular system has been around for "at least" a millennium, I for one wouldn't want to be claiming to be an expert at business.
@inspirediam, Other awesome documentaries to check out on youtube are: 1. The Money Masters 2. The Creature From Jekyll Island 3. The Secret of Oz: Solutions For a Broken Economy 4. Money as Debt I and II, 5. Fall of the Republic 6. The Obama Deception 7. Invisisble Empire: A New World Order Defined and 8. Endgame: Blueprint For Global Enslavement.
The FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE is essentially an indemnified promissory note. The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT promises to pay the private lender based solely on its ability to collect what is deceptively called "taxes," which in reality is some sort of insurance scheme in which the citizens have become the surety for any loss, not to mention "premium payments" when everything is running smoothly.
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 I agree with all but these pieces of paper being "promissory notes."
Reason: A note has essentially (essential) four elements:
(i) Maker;
(ii) Payee;
(iii) Amount; and
(iv) Due Date
(there are actually 5, with the fifth being signature, but that's a no brainer right).
So, in circulation, there is neither money, nor genuine money substitutes (i.e. negotiable instruments redeemable in lawful money).
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision
I agree, under the Common Law, those four elements were present. And true, Mr Trotter is comparing apples to oranges, showing the clear distinction between lawful currency and legal tender, unfortunately, we are no longer under common law in this country, (since the 1930's) we're under maritime/admiralty "law of the sea"
Common law was law for the Republic, law of the sea is law for the democracy. The republic went bankrupt in the 1930's, and in came the democracy with its .....
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 Those elements are still present. Look at the elements in everyone ELSE's promissory notes. FedRsv tokens are the way they are so that they aren't enforceable in law. Additionally, common law hasn't gone anywhere. It has to be invoked. Maritime jurisdiction is a separate body of law. Just because the business community and municipalities doing business aren't utilizing it doesn't mean it's gone. Most are just unaware of the nuances of law to call the governing law of the transaction.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision frn's aren't enforceable in law-I get that-but since this is the case-we gotta change the jurisdiction of the courts then, right? We cant walk into equity courts with gold, and likewise, frn's are not enforceable in common law, right? Conclusion: it's all about establishing jurisdiction, right?
So we have 2 different jurisdictions operating at the same time, side by side, if we get hauled in under equity all we gotta do is invoke the common law and they give us remedy..Correct?
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 It's about the "transaction." The transaction dictates jurisdiction as it is part of the negotiating in bargaining for the object of the offer.. Well...as for walking into equity courts you can, but clean hands would require it to have been given 1st. (e.g. quid pro quo). FRNs aren't enforceable in ANY law. Causes of action in law (equity incl.) must have "elements" to be heard or recognized at law. So, if ONE element is missing the whole thing fails. Many juris opp'g., which is the ?
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision
I ordered a course called "Jurisdictionary"-ever heard of it? Im going to study more in Dec.
Why would frn's be circulating around if they're so flimsy and not enforceable?
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 I sure do. I wish I'd known about it when I first got started over a decade ago.
Again think "PUBLIC FOOL SYSTEM" and that should answer why these tokens now substitute and circulate "AS" money. Even better still, John Adams nails it:
"All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation." ~nuff said
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision
ok, so if the transaction dictates jurisdiction, (the money of the court case, if you will)-when we transact in FRN's,we gotta use the equity courts since FRN's fall under the admiralty jurisdiction. And if we go to court as the defendant, we might be more likely to lose the case....but if we go to the judge in private chambers he may recognize our private process and the case can be discharged and the plaintiff will be none the wiser.
we can win without even setting foot n court
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 Well, you're dealing with public corps so nothing done is "pvt." If FRNs fall under admiralty jurisdiction, then equity has no application. They're two distinct. Separate. You go to court and lose when you don't know the issues involved or the law of the case, or how to control the judge by making and protecting the "public record." Making sure no fraud or deceit is allowed to stand on the "public" record. Keep studying jurisdictionary and it will start "clicking."
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision Am I a public corporation?
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1
Are you?
Speaking for myself, it's impossible for me to "be" a corporation, public or otherwise. Corporations exist only on paper. They're fictions. ALL corporations. Municipal, public, privates, etc.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
Also, if it's "THE STATE" as plaintiff, then WHERE is EVIDENCE of the "plaintiff?" So that I may examine the claim of damages. If it's "THE STATE" as plaintiff, then where is EVIDENCE that it, as plaintiff, has suffered injury, loss, or harm resulting in its claim for damages? Injury, loss, or harm is REQUIRED for ANY case to be heard. Criminal, civil, admiralty/maritime, or law merchant. Without evidence of of either no court has power to hear it or recognize it. No FACTS (evidence), no case.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision I realise the best place for my "Jurisdictionary" course in NOT on my bookshelf, however, Im gonna hit it hard this Dec. when time allows.
Have you ever heard of the guys from "Creditors in Commerce?"
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 No, I don't think it'll do much on the shelf. And no I haven't heard of those guys. I don't really go to any other source than the primary or recognized secondary.
All you have to realize is that these are all "commercial" nations. It never was about citizens and subjects etc., its about profits & gains at the expense of everyone but self. People doing business as governments is the new religion.
I would do my own research if I were you. These "commerce" people are misleading.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
When I say misleading, I mean this. Commerce is business to business (merchant to merchant), there is another aspect of trade; that being "consumer." If you proclaim you are in commerce then you can't whine about being hoodwinked because you accepted an alternative form AS payment. But as a consumer, there is no rigidity in the transaction; example, in Calif., the holder in due course rule is not applicable to a consumer transaction.
No one has been taught commerce, or consumer law, or ANY law
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision
...public policy. Its against the democracy to PAY anything anymore! Thats the crazy thing...it's against the "law" to pay! Debts can only be discharged with FRN's, this is called a "novation"
So, yes, I agree, there is no lawful money anywhere that will be recognized anywhere, not even in the courts.
I call the FRN's indemnified promissory notes because we promise to pay with our labor/intellectual property, and we do pay every April 15th with our labor-backed tokens.
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 Payment CAN actually be made now due to the repeal of the applicable emergency act. Check out the mechanism in Cal.Civ.Code sec. 1501. It's not so much the inability as it is the induced ignorance of the public fool system as to why "payment" isn't being demanded although it could. Public policy doesn't mean it can subvert the bylaws (constitution). It can only operate in furtherance of the guidelines. If acts are done outside the bylaws it's ultra vires and therefore void.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LoonyVision
ok, so what you are saying is that hjr 192 has been repealed-but in order for payment (and not discharge) wouldnt we need to be circulating silver/gold backed notes? We cant demand payment in gold can we?
Many people in this movement are still teaching that hjr 192 is still active, Ive heard a few times where people say it has been repealed-but few and far between. If in fact it has been repealed, then where is all the gold? Right now its like 1700 per ounce!
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 Yes, notes redeemable in lawful money. And yes you can demand payment in gold or silver. However, courts most likely uphold a defense that "it's not in the contract." Of course I would have a nice come back to that from the language of the promissory note itself.
I don't know about any movements, I study for my education, but I'm not saying it's repealed, United States Statutes at Large 91Stat. 1229(c) says it is. ;) The gold & silver are here, but a subj 2 lengthy for 500chars.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
However, if there is a gold (or silver) clause in the contract, it IS enforceable. Google "gold clause enforceable." Read case law, NOT wikipedia or any secondary source.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
Comment removed
REVtalk1 3 months ago
Even though it was repealed, doesn't it still explain what "they" did back then during the bankruptcy of the republic? The "country" was switching over from lawful money to the new funny money of the democracy, the courts changed from common law to administrative, it became against "public policy" to demand payment in gold. I don't know everything I need to but I know this: something really strange happened back in the 1930's.
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 True, but I believe it started way before then. It's a money monopoly of monopoly money. The goal of anyone running a business is just that, to have a monopoly on a market then you'll never go out of business. Hence the reason for anti-trust laws. The bankers have always sought to have a monopoly on the money industry. That's probably why we use "their" paper. It's proprietary. The 30s were just the fruition of the plan.
Hopefully more people like you will wake-up and change things.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
You need to read HJR 192, this should clear things up for you.
REVtalk1 3 months ago
@REVtalk1 FYI: HJR 192 (1) was a "resolution," (2) it was repealed. (See 91Stat. 1229(c).)
LoonyVision 3 months ago
12 USC 411 - Sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption
Redeem your Federal Reserve Notes for lawful money. You do this by refusing to endorse your paycheck, deposit, etc. The way you do this is as follows: use the redeem for lawful money signature below
deposit for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable federal reserve notes of face value.
signature DBA name in caps
Example: Jon Doe DBA JON DOE
LibertyFilms4You 7 months ago
@LibertyFilms4You It is impossible to redeem ANY "notes" for lawful money, because there is none in circulation. All you can do is keep the record true, and correct by utilizing the statement you noted.
Lawful money of the United States means coins of silver or of gold which have been manufactured according to United States law in a United States Mint. Nothing else.
FYI: Check out "Money - Ye Shall Have Honest Weights and Measures" by James Ewart
LoonyVision 3 months ago
@LibertyFilms4You - Also, why would you classify yourself as DBA? Being a consumer is the appropriate status. As a business entity you are expected to know all legalities, and business savvy needed for whatever transaction conduct.
Since none of us were taught law in the public fool system, and being that this particular system has been around for "at least" a millennium, I for one wouldn't want to be claiming to be an expert at business.
LoonyVision 3 months ago
Excellent video!
SCLARK2112 1 year ago
Excellent video on the illusion of money.
inspirediam 1 year ago 2
@inspirediam, Other awesome documentaries to check out on youtube are: 1. The Money Masters 2. The Creature From Jekyll Island 3. The Secret of Oz: Solutions For a Broken Economy 4. Money as Debt I and II, 5. Fall of the Republic 6. The Obama Deception 7. Invisisble Empire: A New World Order Defined and 8. Endgame: Blueprint For Global Enslavement.
delyparker777 1 year ago