Orders to CEO/President Donald J. Trump

You ask what We THE People want, we are telling you.
Immediately deliver Ambassador Leo Wanta's money to him
Immediately end inland piracy and prosecution of victimless crimes
Immediately end direct apportioned tax against the people
Enforce the original 13th Amendment

Signed: We THE People 

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

US Troops Awakening to the DECEPTION

 US Troops are WAKING UP to the DECEPTION
Who is creating the wars and who they are serving
They are MAD AS HELL
Support and encourage these troops


Lest you think I don't have an opinion about this subject, I didn't think there was anything wrong with his response.  

One thing about blokes from Scotland is that their hearts and humor are always in the right place! 
Jimmy MacDonald, a City Counselor from Glasgow, was asked on a local live radio talk show, just what he thought about the allegations of torture of suspected terrorists.
His reply prompted his ejection from the studio, but to thunderous applause from the audience.
HIS STATEMENT:  'If hooking up one rag-head terrorist's testicles to a car battery gets the truth out of the lying little camel shagger to save just one Scottish soldier’s life, then I have only three things to say; Red is positive, Black is negative and make sure his nuts are wet."

Monday, March 27, 2017

ALERT! Dems writing Bill to go after Trump



Well, at least you have to give Democrats in Congress credit for creativity when it comes to naming proposed laws.

 Democrat senators troll Trump
 with Mar-a-Lago Act

Published on Mar 25, 2017
Democrats have introduced the creatively acronymized MAR-A-LAGO Act requiring the White House to publish the visitor log for Mar-a-Lago, President Donald Trump’s resort where he has spent nearly a quarter of his time in office.

Enter the MAR-A-LAGO Act – which stands for the “Making Access Records Available to Lead American Government Openness Act.”

From Allen B. West
If you remember, Barack Obama promised that his administration would be the most transparent in history — and ended up objectively being the least transparent.
During his last year in office, Obama spent over $36 million in legal costs to defend his administration against lawsuits related to his refusal to honor a number of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
The Associated Press noted the Obama administration “set records for outright denial of access to files, refusing to quickly consider requests described as especially newsworthy, and forcing people to pay for records who had asked the government to waive search and copy fees.”
None of that bothered Congressional Democrats then — but they’re back with the Mar-A-Lago Act, concerned about President Donald Trump’s transparency.
According to CNBC:
The legislation would require the publication of White House visitor logs, something that was done regularly by the Obama administration but has since ended since President Trump took office. It would also mandate the release of visitor logs at other locations where the president conducts business — for example, Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s Florida resort that he has recently called the Southern White House.
Introduced by Sens. Tom Udall of New Mexico, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Tom Carper of Delaware and Rep. Mike Quigley of Illinois, it comes after the president spent five weekends in Mar-a-Lago since his inauguration.
“By refusing to release the White House visitor logs, President Trump is only validating the rampant concerns about who may be pulling the levers in his administration,” Udall said in a statement. “The president should end his administration’s disturbing pattern of stonewalling information and immediately reinstate the previous administration’s policy of publishing White House visitor logs. And given President Trump’s unprecedented decision to conduct official business at his private business properties, the Trump administration has an obligation to make public the visitor lists at places like Mar-a-Lago and Trump Tower.”
To be honest, it would be to Trump’s benefit to release those visitor logs. They’re unlikely to reveal anything — and will undoubtedly lead to another Rachel Maddow segment we can all laugh at.
Of course, that bill would have to make it through both Republican dominated houses of Congress, and be signed by Trump himself. The goal of proposing this bill isn’t to actually get it passed, it’s to have Republicans shoot it down so that Congressional Democrats can speculate they have something to hide.

EMERGENCY!! Three ARMIES have JUST Formed Against Supporters


EMERGENCY: $15,000 To OUST President Trump! 
Three ARMIES have JUST Formed Against Supporters


AmeriTrust Groupe, Inc.
Office of the Chairman / Chief Executive Officer
Ambassador Lee Emil Wanta
S.D.R. Diplomatic Passport No. 04362, 12535
4001 North 9th Street, Suite No. 227
Arlington, Virginia, USA  22203-1954
Commonwealth of Virginia

White House INTEL Files Received and Acknowledged -

Anyone who claim to be a Continental Marshal better read this before you end up imprisoned or dead!

A Marshal is the highest ranking officer of military police! If you did not become a MP in the military service and have rank promoted to Marshal, then you are in violation of Lieber code and punishable in a military court. Please read the information at this link. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lieber.asp#sec1

All American DeFacto courts are military courts. This is why any military rank above Sargent (if I remember right) can arrest a judge.

Abraham Lincoln declared General Order 100 in 1863 that put America under Lieber Code Military Jurisdiction and Marshal Law and Lincoln was Assassinated before he could end General order 100 revoking Lieber Code laws applying to the 50 nation=states. The title "Marshal" is a military office! Stop using "Continental Marshals" title immediately before you are arrested for impersonating a military law enforcement officer!

You people trying to claim particular duties that belong to the state's militias by declaring yourselves as Continental Marshals are putting yourselves in serious danger!

You may look up the definitions for "marshal" and you will find what I found and read. You will find some entries under civilian areas and also those areas are under Lieber Code. It is still military. 

 F. Lieber
A. Lincoln

Laws and Treaties Protecting Cultural Property

The Lieber Code of 1863



Early in the 19th century, Chief Justice Marshall noted that sovereign nations had the right to confiscate property of an enemy during armed conflict, but the Lieber Code of 1863, formally known as General Order No. 100, reversed that notion by incorporating the principle that monuments, places of worship and works of art must be spared from destruction in times of war. The code, commissioned by President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, was published as a pamphlet that could be carried by Union soldiers. Written by Professor Francis Lieber of Columbia College (now Columbia University), it provided that “classical works of art, libraries, scientific collections, or precious instruments . . . must be secured against all avoidable injury” (Article 35).

The Lieber Code also identified military necessity for the first time as a general legal principle whose purpose was to limit violence. Article 14 of the Lieber Code states, “Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations, consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to the modern law and usages of war,” i.e., military necessity permits only that degree of force necessary to defeat the enemy. Although some have pointed to military necessity as justification for the destruction of an enemy’s property, e.g. defendants in the Nuremberg trials following WWII, it does not justify the willful or wanton destruction, not justified by imperative military necessity.

The Brussels Declaration of 1874, as well as the Hague Regulations on the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 1899 and 1907 (Link to the 1899 and 1907 page), are partially based on the Lieber Code and retain the principle that cultural property should be protected in times of armed conflict.

Full text of the Lieber Code »
See in particular, Article II Sections 34-36 where the protection of cultural property is mandated.

Do Your Ears Hang Low?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Anna von Reitz <avannavon@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 3:59 PM
Subject: Do Your Ears Hang Low?

How many of you remember the children's song, "Do Your Ears Hang Low?"  --- Remember this line--- "Do your ears hang low?  Do they wobble to and fro?  Can you throw them over your shoulder like a Continental Soldier?....."

This song dates from Revolutionary War times.  Although it sounds silly and children still delight in it, the "ears" the rowdy Colonists were talking about weren't attached to their heads, and the song was regularly sung by those same Continental Soldiers on the march--- similar to the Marines singing "Sound Off!" as they march.

As the song makes very clear, there were soldiers called "Continental Soldiers" -- and it is also clear that they were the American soldiers fighting in the Revolutionary War.  What other "Continental Soldiers" have you ever heard of? 

They were called "Continental Soldiers" and sometimes just "Continentals" because they were landsmen not sailors, and they were protecting their land from British invasion.

Continental Soldier equals "Land Soldier" and Continental United States equals "Land United States".  It was the militias of the land that defeated the British sea-borne attackers. 

Please note these same soldiers were called "Colonial Soldiers" or just "Colonials".  This in turn references the fact that the Revolutionary War was supported by the 13 Colonies.

What do you know--- or should you know--- about the 13 Colonies? 

First, they were all very different, not just in location, but in derivation.  Some of the colonies were established by England--- New England and Virginia, for example--- and were funded in the early days by British investment companies: New England Company, Virginia Company, etc. 

Others were founded by other European Monarchies and their investment companies--- New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, for example, were not founded or financed by England.  

Catholic Delaware and Maryland stood cheek and jowl with Protestant Virginia Colony. 

This should give everyone a clue that when the American Colonies stood up together and acted as one accord as Americans, it was not as the popular historians would have you believe a matter of a united America standing against the British.  It was a matter of colonies of various European nations breaking away from the domination of Europe, and in the case of Maryland and Delaware-- breaking away from the control of the Pope. 

Nothing like it had ever been seen in the history of the world.  No colony had ever broken free of the grip of the sponsoring nation.  And here you had thirteen of them, all going for broke, and repudiating the claims of the assorted European Monarchies and the Pope, together, at once. 

As such, the American Revolution was a revolution of thought, a new idea, and that idea was that men have the right of freewill and self-determination given them by their Creator, and no man--- no Monarch, no Pope -- has the right to dictate another's conscience, lay claim to his body or his land or his assets, or otherwise inflict taxes and "injuries" or require payments for services rendered without his consent. 

It wasn't just the King of England being given a send up.  It was the King of France, the King of the Netherlands, the King of Denmark, the King of Spain-----all the European Monarchs and the Pope----being given their walking papers.

So now you have some key information that has been missing, perhaps, from your education on these subjects.  I had Michael R. Hamilton send me an email and accuse me of just making up the name "Continental United States" and "Continental Marshals".

Well, if I made it up, then I would own the copyright to it, correct?  And there would be no need for the flap over who "owns" or doesn't own the Continental Marshals service.

But, regrettably, I didn't think of it.  The Founders did. 

The need for the Continental Marshals arose soon after the adoption of the actual Constitution, and it arose as a result of splitting the international jurisdiction owed to the united Colonies acting as the united "States of America" into delegated and undelegated powers. 

In 1790, George Washington organized the first United States Districts and the first US Marshals service as a part of the fall-out of the federal Judiciary Act.  They were assigned to protect the newly mandated federal maritime and admiralty courts.  They served in the delegated international jurisdiction created by The Constitution. 

In the same year, Benjamin Franklin organized the Continental Marshals to operate within the already established Postal Districts, to protect the Post Offices and Post Roads. Over time, the Continental (Land) Marshals became known as Federal Marshals.  They served the states and the people to maintain and enforce the Public Law governing the undelegated portion of international jurisdiction that was retained by the states and the people.  (Amendment X of the Bill of Rights).

Easily within my lifetime and most of yours, you have heard of both "Federal Marshals" and "US Marshals" but probably never knew the difference. 

Confusion reigns because from the foundations of this country there have always been two (or more) entities calling themselves the "United States". 

To shed more light on this circumstance, I am here reprinting all of one of the immortal Howard Freeman's articles.

Please note that since Howard wrote this some time back in the 1990's or 2000's, the Uniform Commercial Code has been renumbered and the actual Code Section that allows you to retain your constitutional guarantees is no longer UCC 1-207, but is now instead UCC 1-308.  

Also note the confusion that arises at the end of the article when even Howard Freeman used "Federal" as a catch-all term instead of distinguishing between "US" (delegated) and "Federal" (non-delegated) powers. 

It was to avoid this confusion that I suggested resurrecting the original name "Continental Marshals" and using that instead of "Federal Marshals" so that people would more readily grasp the fact that the Continental Marshals work for the land jurisdiction states and the people and be able to set them apart from "United States Marshals" who work for the incorporated UNITED STATES, INC.

Thanks to both ignorance and guile in some quarters, the re-use of the name "Continental Marshals" was used to spawn a new and different confusion--- at least in the minds of some less informed people--- who have attempted to call state militiamen "continental marshals". 

It boils down to this, folks--- the states of the union have the iron-clad guarantee that they can keep their "well-regulated militias" and they need to make use of that guarantee by retaining that name for their state-based armed forces.  There is a fundamental guarantee lost by calling militiamen "marshals".

When we knowingly operate in the international jurisdiction of the sea, we have historical precedent going back to Ben Franklin for using officers called "Continental Marshals" and later "Federal Marshals" to enforce the undelegated international jurisdiction owed to the states and people.

If we want to retain our freedom and restore our lawful government instead of going off the tracks and engaging in an insurrectionist folly, it only makes sense to cut the confusion to the bone and call offices and officers by their historically correct names. 

As you read this article, "The Two United States and the Law" also bear in mind that since Freeman wrote this---and although what he says remains fundamentally true---another sleight of hand has taken place and the original "United States" he correctly refers to as the "continental United States" has dropped completely off the board (unless we resurrect it) and the "Two United States" currently being employed by the rats in Congress are the Territorial United States (what Freeman calls the "Federal United States") and the Municipal United States, so that we are denied access to any of the constitutional guarantees as long as we submit to being counted either "United States Citizens" or "citizens of the United States":

The Two United States and the Law
by Howard Freeman

Our forefathers, weary of the oppressive measures that King George III’s government forced upon them, in common declared their independence from England in 1776. They were not expected to be successful in that resistance. The moneyed people had backed England for two major reasons. First, our forefathers wanted a rigid, written Constitution “set in concrete.” They were familiar with the so-called Constitution of England which consisted largely of customs, precedents, traditions, and understandings, often vague and always flexible. They wanted the principle of English common law, that an act done by any official person or law-making body beyond his or its legal competence was simply void. Second, the thirteen little colonies desired to base their union on substance (gold and silver) — real money. They well knew how the despotic governments of Europe were mortgaged to the hilt — lock, stock, and barrel, the land, the people, everything — to certain wealthy men who controlled the banks, the currency, and all credit, who lent credit but did not loan gold and silver!

The United States of America was made up of a union of what is now fifty sovereign States, a three-branch (legislative, executive, and judicial) Republic known as The United States of America, or as termed in this article, the Continental United States. Its citizenry live in one of the fifty States, and its laws are based on the Constitution, which is based on Common Law.

Less than one hundred years after we became a nation, a loophole was discovered in the Constitution by cunning lawyers in league with the international bankers. They realized that a separate nation existed, by the same name, that Congress had created in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17. This “United States” is a Legislative Democracy within the Constitutional Republic, and is known as the Federal United States. It has exclusive, unlimited rule over its citizenry, the residents of the District of Columbia, the territories and enclaves (Guam, Midway Islands, Wake Island, Puerto Rico, etc.), and anyone who is a citizen by way of the 14th Amendment (naturalized citizens).

Both United States have the same Congress that rules in both nations. One “United States,” the Republic of fifty States, has the “stars and stripes” as its flag, but without any fringe on it. The Federal United States’ flag is the stars and stripes with a yellow fringe, seen in all the courts. The abbreviations of the States of the Continental United States are, with or without the zip codes, Ala., Alas., Ariz., Ark., Cal., etc. The abbreviations of the States under the jurisdiction of the Federal United States, the Legislative Democracy, are AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, etc. (without any periods).

Under the Constitution, based on Common Law, the Republic of the Continental United States provides for legal cases (1) at Law, (2) in Equity, and (3) in Admiralty:

(1) Law is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense. It is the will of the majority, the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces, to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all. Since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. Law allows you to do anything you want to, as long as you don’t infringe upon the life, liberty or property of anyone else. Law does not compel performance. Today’s so-called laws (ordinances, statutes, acts, regulations, orders, precepts, etc.) are often erroneously perceived as law, but just because something is called a “law” does not necessarily make it a law. [There is a difference between “legal” and “lawful.” Anything the government does is legal, but it may not be lawful.] 

(2) Equity is the jurisdiction of compelled performance (for any contract you are a party to) and is based on what is fair in a particular situation. The term “equity” denotes the spirit and habit of fairness, justness, and right dealing which would regulate the intercourse of men with men. You have no rights other than what is specified in your contract. Equity has no criminal aspects to it.

(3) Admiralty is compelled performance plus a criminal penalty, a civil contract with a criminal penalty.

By 1938 the gradual merger procedurally between law and equity actions (i.e., the same court has jurisdiction over legal, equitable, and admiralty matters) was recognized. The nation was bankrupt and was owned by its creditors (the international bankers) who now owned everything — the Congress, the Executive, the courts, all the States and their legislatures and executives, all the land, and all the people. Everything was mortgaged in the national debt. We had gone from being sovereigns over government to subjects under government, through the use of negotiable instruments to discharge our debts with limited liability, instead of paying our debts at common law with gold or silver coin.

The remainder of this article explains how this happened, where we are today, and what remedy we have to protect ourselves from this system.

Our Present Commercial System of “Law”
and the REMEDY Provided for Our Protection
The present commercial system of “law” has replaced the old and familiar Common Law upon which our nation was founded. The following is the legal thread which brought us from sovereigns over government to subjects under government, through the use of negotiable instruments (Federal Reserve Notes) to discharge our debts with limited liability instead of paying our debts at common law with gold or silver coin.

The change in our system of law from public law to private commercial law was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Erie Railroad v. Thompkins case of 1938, after which case, in the same year, the procedures of Law were officially blended with the procedures of Equity. Prior to 1938, all U.S. Supreme Court decisions were based upon public law — or that system of law that was controlled by Constitutional limitation. Since 1938, all U.S. Supreme Court decisions are based upon what is termed public policy.

Public policy concerns commercial transactions made under the Negotiable Instrument’s Law, which is a branch of the international Law Merchant. This has been codified into what is now known as the Uniform Commercial Code, which system of law was made uniform throughout the fifty States through the cunning of the Congress of the United States (which “United States” has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, as distinguished from the “United States,” which is the Union of the fifty States).

In offering grants of negotiable paper (Federal Reserve Notes) which the Congress gave to the fifty States of the Union for education, highways, health, and other purposes, Congress bound all the States of the Union into a commercial agreement with the Federal United States (as distinguished from the Continental United States). The fifty States accepted the “benefits” offered by the Federal United States as the consideration of a commercial agreement between the Federal United States and each of the corporate States. The corporate States were then obligated to obey the Congress of the Federal United States and also to assume their portion of the equitable debts of the Federal United States to the international banking houses, for the credit loaned. The credit which each State received, in the form of federal grants, was predicated upon equitable paper.

This system of negotiable paper binds all corporate entities of government together in a vast system of commercial agreements and is what has altered our court system from one under the Common Law to a Legislative Article I Court, or Tribunal, system of commercial law. Those persons brought before this court are held to the letter of every statute of government on the federal, state, county, or municipal levels unless they have exercised the REMEDY provided for them within that system of Commercial Law whereby, when forced to use a so-called “benefit” offered, or available, to them, from government, they may reserve their former right, under the Common Law guarantee of same, not to be bound by any contract, or commercial agreement, that they did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.

This is exactly how the corporate entities of state, county, and municipal governments got entangled with the Legislative Democracy, created by Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, and called here The Federal United States, to distinguish it from the Continental United States, whose origin was in the Union of the Sovereign States.
The same national Congress rules the Continental United States pursuant to Constitutional limits upon its authority, while it enjoys exclusive rule, with no Constitutional limitations, as it legislates for the Federal United States.

With the above information, we may ask: “How did we, the free Preamble citizenry of the Sovereign States, lose our guaranteed unalienable rights and be forced into acceptance of the equitable debt obligations of the Federal United States, and also become subject to that entity of government, and divorced from our Sovereign States in the Republic, which we call here the Continental United States?” We do not reside, work, or have income from any territory subject to the direct jurisdiction of the Federal United States. These are questions that have troubled sincere, patriotic Americans for many years. Our lack of knowledge concerning the cunning of the legal profession is the cause of that divorce, but a knowledge of the truth concerning the legal thread, which caught us in its net, will restore our former status as a free Preamble citizen of the Republic. The answer follows:

Our national Congress works for two nations foreign to each other, and by legal cunning both are called The United States. One is the Union of Sovereign States, under the Constitution, termed in this article the Continental United States. The other is a Legislative Democracy which has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, here termed the Federal United States. Very few people, when they see some “law” passed by Congress, ask themselves, “Which nation was Congress working for when it passed this or that so-called law?” Or, few ask,
“Does this particular law apply to the Continental citizenry of the Republic, or does this particular law apply only to residents of the District of Columbia and other named enclaves, or territories, of the Democracy called the Federal United States?”

Since these questions are seldom asked by the uninformed citizenry of the Republic, it was an open invitation for “cunning” political leadership to seek more power and authority over the entire citizenry of the Republic through the medium of “legalese.” Congress deliberately failed in its duty to provide a medium of exchange for the citizenry of the Republic, in harmony with its Constitutional mandate. Instead, it created an abundance of commercial credit money for the Legislative Democracy, where it was not bound by Constitutional limitations. Then, after having created an emergency situation, and a tremendous depression in the Republic, Congress used its emergency authority to remove the remaining substance (gold and silver) from the medium of exchange belonging to the Republic, and made the negotiable instrument paper of the Legislative Democracy (Federal United States) a legal tender for Continental United States citizenry to use in the discharge of debts.

At the same time, Congress granted the entire citizenry of the two nations the “benefit” of limited liability in the discharge of all debts by telling the citizenry that the gold and silver coins of the Republic were out of date and cumbersome. The citizens were told that gold and silver (substance) was no longer needed to pay their debts, that they were now “privileged” to discharge debt with this more “convenient” currency, issued by the Federal United States. Consequently, everyone was forced to “go modern,” and to turn in their gold as a patriotic gesture. The entire news media complex went along with the scam and declared it to be a forward step for our democracy, no longer referring to America as a Republic.

From that time on, it was a falling light for the Republic of 1776, and a rising light for Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Democracy, which overcame the depression, which was caused by a created shortage of real money. There was created an abundance of debt paper money, so-called, in the form of interest-bearing negotiable instrument paper called Federal Reserve Notes, and other forms of paperwork credit instruments.

Since all contracts since Roosevelt’s time have the colorable consideration of Federal Reserve Notes, instead of a genuine consideration of silver and gold coin, all contracts are colorable contracts, and not genuine contracts. [According to Black’s Law Dictionary (1990), colorable means “That which is in appearance only, and not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the appearance of truth.”] 

Consequently, a new colorable jurisdiction, called a statutory jurisdiction, had to be created to enforce the contracts. Soon the term colorable contract was changed to the term commercial agreement to fit circumstances of the new statutory jurisdiction, which is legislative, rather than judicial, in nature. This jurisdiction enforces commercial agreements upon implied consent, rather than full knowledge, as it is with the enforcement of contracts under the Common Law.

All of our courts today sit as legislative Tribunals, and the so-called “statutes” of legislative bodies being enforced in these Legislative Tribunals are not “statutes” passed by the legislative branch of our three-branch Republic, but as “commercial obligations” to the Federal United States for anyone in the Federal United States or in the Continental United States who has used the equitable currency of the Federal United States and who has accepted the “benefit,” or “privilege,” of discharging his debts with the limited liability “benefit” offered to him by the Federal United States … EXCEPT those who availed themselves of the remedy within this commercial system of law, which remedy is today found in Book 1 of the Uniform Commercial Code at Section 207.

When used in conjunction with one’s signature, a stamp stating “Without Prejudice U.C.C. 1-207” is sufficient to indicate to the magistrate of any of our present Legislative Tribunals (called “courts”) that the signer of the document has reserved his Common Law right. He is not to be bound to the statute, or commercial obligation, of any commercial agreement that he did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally, as would be the case in any Common Law contract.
Furthermore, pursuant to U.C.C. 1-103, the statute, being enforced as a commercial obligation of a commercial agreement, must now be construed in harmony with the old Common Law of America, where the tribunal/court must rule that the statute does not apply to the individual who is wise enough and informed enough to exercise the remedy provided in this new system of law. He retains his former status in the Republic and fully enjoys his unalienable rights, guaranteed to him by the Constitution of the Republic, while those about him “curse the darkness” of Commercial Law government, lacking the truth needed to free themselves from a slave status under the Federal United States, even while inhabiting territory foreign to its territorial venue.

PS--- if you want to send this to you mailing lists, best convert all the hyperlinks in the Freeman article to plain text.  Some servers are rejecting articles with embedded hyperlinks.

We The People Have HAD IT! - emailed by a nesaranews reader

We The People Have HAD IT!

Dear Elected, Legislative and Judicial Branches in all 50 states and District of Columbia,

We have been yelling from the rooftops that there is on-going misconduct in our court rooms.  We informed you during Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Trials in September/October of 2016 and again in March of 2017.  We informed you during the first BundyRanch Trial of 2017, currently on break, in Nevada.

We have done our “due diligence” in requesting help, all to fall on deaf ears.  By ALL of our “supposed representatives”.  

Do you all think this is acceptable? WE ARE NOT SHUTTING UP, WE ARE NOT GOING AWAY.

We have notified you in writing.  You have failed to take action, you have failed to even acknowledge the problem, and that is UNACCEPTABLE!  You have the the government committing Brady Violations and Judge Gloria Navarro telling the courtroom “We don’t have to tell you everything”?  What is THAT?  

  • 1)  Under our system of Law, you are required to tell any information that helps the defendant!
  • 2)  Under our system of Law, you are allowed to face your accuser
  • 3)  Under our system of Law, you are allowed BAIL
  • 4)  Under our system of Law, you are allowed a speedy trial

NONE of these have occurred.  Our prisoners are being abused and We The People have had it.

If you all are so busy covering your own asses and corruption, that none of you is willing to take action on these matters, you will have earned what you deserve.

YOU, US Government have a legal agreement (called a Compact) that created you.  Yes, it’s been subverted and perverted, but in any court of law, CONTRACT LAW stands.  

We The People have been complaining about all this garbage for 20+ Years, yet .. no solutions, not one ounce of cooperation or capitulation.  Even the Hagees lost their appeal, and they didn’t deserve that either.

US Attorney General Sessions:  Where are the arrests?  For High Profile People committing Sedition? Subversion?  Treason?   It appears getting convictions for the Bundy Family are more important than any of it.

President Trump:  Where is ANY help for our P3 (Patriot Political Prisoners)?  The list is growing daily!  #FreeTheHammonds  #FreeSamGirod #FreeJoeRobertson WE Are done being polite and respectful.  Pony up and deliver.  That is not a request!

All we can gather by the silence is:  

  • We The People don’t matter
  • We The People are just cream for your RICO Operation
  • We The People do NOT need to follow the law, BECAUSE NONE OF YOU DO!

Anything that now happens as a result of your inaction, will be your own damn fault, and come what may….All I hear by your silence is, we need bigger BundyRanch and Bigger Occupations - don’t forget the guns.. they make QUITE THE STORY!  

Fix this:

We EXPECT ALL DEFENDANTS Released Immediately.  We EXPECT ALL CHARGES against all DEFENDANTS, DISMISSED for BundyRanch and there are **NO OTHER OPTIONS** to be had.   If you want to put me in jail, feel free.. but be warned, I will be asking YOU why you didn’t do your job, and I will be taking notes on your reasons to pass on to others.  You all deserve to be brought up on Civil RICO, and I hope someone does it.  Those of you convicted, deserve the punishment for Treason.



Everyone seems to be in such a hurry to scream 'prejudice' these days................

A customer asked, "In what aisle can I find the Polish sausage?"

The clerk asks, "Are you Polish?"

The guy, clearly offended, says, "Yes I am. But let me ask you something.
If I had asked for Italian sausage, would you ask me if I was Italian?
Or if I had asked for German Bratwurst, would you ask me if I was German?
Or if I asked for a kosher hot dog would you ask me if I was Jewish?
Or if I had asked for a Taco, would you ask if I was Mexican?
Or if I asked for some Whiskey, would you ask if I was Irish?"

The clerk says, "No, I probably wouldn't."

The guy says, "Well then, because I asked for Polish sausage, why did you ask me if I'm Polish?" 

The clerk replied, "Because you're in Ace Hardware."




Mike Pence is Arguably the 
Most Evil Politician in America   

 The Most Dangerous Man In President Trump's 
World Is VP Mike Pence 
The Last Word | MSNBC

Was Tory Smith Murdered 
for Exposing Mike Pence in Child Trafficking??


Pence Joins The Globalists

Is Pence Setting Up Trump for Impeachment?

Mike Pence and Paul Ryan
Reptilian Satanists in Washington DC

University of Lucifer graduate..
Indiana Governor MIKE PENCE... 
 at the beginning of the video
carefully watch his fingers on his right hand
at 1.07  and at 5.02

America:  How much more evidence do you need
to discern who is running our nation, and what
it is going to take to turn this fiasco around? 
There's lots more for the looking.
The American people turned away from the 
Lord God Almighty
and He has turned us over to our arch enemies