Thursday, July 9, 2020

COVID-19 FACTS


Congress Created Virus Aid, Then Reaped the Benefits, Data Finds


https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/national-international/data-congress-created-virus-aid-then-reaped-the-benefits/2392459/?fbclid=IwAR3m7oWoQQPF-znxxRBNelgvMbmF6FNFcuZYRyq8jubnpxzIOtYbvKcsjx8 


Companies Tied to California Officials Get US Virus Loans


    Businesses tied to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis and two of the state’s legislative leaders were among those that received federal loans aimed at keeping small businesses afloat during the coronavirus pandemic, records released Monday showed. 
    A Northern California winery and hospitality company, PlumpJack, founded and partly owned by Newsom, received a loan worth $150,000 to $350,000 from the Paycheck Protection Program, according to data released by the U.S. Treasury Department. 

    Before taking office as CA. governor in 2019, Newsom announced he would step away from his businesses and put his assets in a blind trust managed by a family friend and attorney.

Saturday, May 23, 2020

YOU WANT THE TRUTH - HERE IT IS

 100% TRUTH 
RESEARCH EVERYTHING BELOW 

 "In politics nothing happens by accident and if it happens at all, you can be sure we planned it that way.”
 Taken from memoirs of President Franklin D. Roosevelt 


USC Title 50, ‘The Trading with the Enemy Act’ in which American citizens are defined as, “an enemy of their government” and this is the reason why Lincoln’s Declaration of War is renewed yearly by Congress and the President! In the same year President Roosevelt closed THE VIRGINIA COLONY CORPORATION and opened a new Government Corporation called THE UNITED STATES, INC.

On or about December 6, 1865, The Congress of The Virginia Colony (America’s Corporate Military Government) secretly rewrote the Organic Constitution of the United States of America (twice in the same year), which disposed of the original 13th amendment and then replaced the 13th by moving the 14th down to the thirteenth position. The original 13th amendment prohibited lawyers from ever holding a seat in government and now 98% of all government offices and 100 % of all Judges of the courts of record are held by lawyers. Makes you think, doesn’t it?

The 14th amendment followed on the heels of the Emancipation Proclamation, which was supposed to free the slaves and define all of our individual rights, which turned out to be another canard. The 14th amendment did just the opposite, which will be explained as you read on.

In the next rewrite of the Constitution, the 15th, 16th and 17th amendments were added without a Constitutional Convention or public vote and was actually rejected by every State Government of the Republic however, The Secretary of the Congress ignored the rejection letters and reported to Congress and the media that these amendments had been ratified by a sufficient number of States! These amendments were intended to give the Federal Government the authority to tax us into poverty and they use those amendments with great proficiency! Future arguments before the Supreme Court resulted in the High Court declaring that the legality of these amendments was a political issue and not a judicial one and they subsequently refused to rule on them!

Lincoln’s Declaration of War under the War Powers Clause of Article 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution has yearly and secretly been renewed by Congress and all past Presidents but for a different reason. Their renewed Declaration of War The Great American Adventure Page 32 of 94 specifies that the private corporate US Government is at War with America and its people and defines the American public as, “the enemy of the state!” Now you know why the President and Congress continue to screw us over and constantly lie to the American public!

The mention of the Constitution by the corporate government is only done to appease the ear of the American people. The Congress, Judges and BAR Lawyers laugh at Americans who claim protections under the Constitution and they label them ‘Constitutionalists’. Still the politicians and the media continue to pacify us by telling the American public that:
“We are a free Nation and a Nation of laws, protected by a Constitution.”  
 The Constitution does not provide any protections to the citizens. 

The residents of Washington, D.C. are actually ‘federal foreign citizens’ because Washington, D.C. is not a State and therefore is alien to the American Republic. Prior to this date, American’s residing within the States were referred to as “Sovereign citizens of the Republic”. The power of the word Sovereign comes from the “Declaration of Independence and God.”

The enactment of ‘The Trading with the Enemy Act’ under War and National Defense; the Confiscation Act, the Reconstruction Act and the Lieber Code were all tied together to create the secret fascist government of the United States.

"The word ‘license’ is defined in all modern law dictionaries as “A permit to do something unlawful.” Now think about that and consider all the Licenses you currently hold? Those licenses are civil contracts that have been issued to you by the government only so that you may do something unlawful but rather unlawful!"
Your right to travel is an unalienable right defined by the Declaration of Independence and not a privilege and yet the government demands that you apply for a driver’s license! Google: Right to travel and read the millions of old Court rulings that cite our right to travel without a license! PS/ The Courts now refuse to honor those old precedents of law since 1938 because of a Supreme Court case titled Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, 304 US 64 (1938). 

Mr. Tompkins attempted to walk along a set of Railroad Tracks when he was struck by an appendage fastened to a mail train and he subsequently sued claiming negligence and damages on the part of the Railroad. What Tompkins didn’t know was that the Railroads were in partnership with the Corporate United States The Great American Adventure Page 38 of 94 Government and so to protect the Government, the Supreme Court ruled that: 'Absent a ticket or license, Tompkins was trespassing on railroad property and therefore he was barred from any relief.'

This ruling wiped the slate clean by eliminating all previous Court precedents that occurred prior to the year 1938 concerning our unalienable right to travel and opened a floodgate for new State and Federal Government controls such as The State Vehicle Codes and the requirement for licensing of everything and anything!

Prior to 1933, we all were proud and peaceful Sovereign inhabitants of America. The Trading with the Enemy Act, the Confiscation Act and the Lieber Code obligated the military government to, ‘peacefully interact with American citizens’ and prohibited them from ‘provoking us or to act belligerently toward us’ or they forfeit their ability to profit and loot or to securitize our property, equity and credit being held in a Public Trust.

Washington DC is a military based, privately owned non-Constitutional French corporation, which is at the seat of an illegal government entity called the “United States” [US] and not the “United States of America” [USA]. The legal control system established in Washington operates under British Maritime Admiralty Law of Flags and the Queen of England is the Monarch of America.

The Federal Government; the B.A.R. and the Courts, rely upon the Maxim that: “Ignorance of the Law is no excuse,” which is capable of being thrown back in their deceptive faces through literacy, which is what this expose’ is attempting to provide to you!

When a person is arrested or sued for a Statutory Regulation, also known as a Criminal or Civil law, he is actually being accused of violating a corporate regulation or corporate breach of contract! A civil contract that only exists over human beings by deception and fraud!

There are NO CRIMINAL LAWS in America. Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Procedure [F.C.R.P.] use to specify this very fact. [e.g.] ‘All laws are civil,’ which was later modified by the Judiciary Act too conceal this fact by creating one set of Civil Rules [F.C.R.P.] and one set of Criminal Rules [F.Cr.R.P.] but this never changed the fact that there are NO CRIMINAL LAWS in America.

The Judiciary Act was necessary, once common people began to represent themselves in Court and uncovered this and other frauds. These Rules of Procedure and Rules of Court were originally designed and adopted to reduce confusion in the Courts and was intended only for lawyers however this is not to say that the Courts will not try to enforce them against non-lawyers!

The only Constitutional Court in America is the International Court of Trades, which was created because no Foreign Nation Government would Trade with the Corporate United States, until they provided a way for these Foreign Nations to enforce their Trade Agreements with America.

All of the other American Courts are pseudo courts or fictions and simply are Corporate Administrative Offices designed to resemble Courts and all of their Judges are simply Executive Administrators designed to resemble Judges.


NOTE: You can buy your freedom for a price of $600,000 dollars through the Department of State, which is the cost of procuring American diplomatic immunity pursuant to International Law. In all other countries this same immunity can be purchased for $95,000.00, which is honored in 90 of the 267 world countries with the exception of: The United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. [Isn’t that curious?] My point here is that everything is a game and for enough money, anyone can play and secure their freedom from criminal law, civil lawsuits, taxes and passports because everything in this world is about commerce.

SOUCES: The book; The Great American Adventure
Declaration of Independence
The Reconstruction Act
Judiciary Act

   

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

PLEASE CLICK ON VIDEO LINK.




https://www.facebook.com/goonegoall/videos/258910775153749/

Tuesday, May 5, 2020

2.6 Trillion Stimulis Bill created 01/2019 a full year earlier.


Can someone please explain why the stimulis package for Covid-19 was introduced to congress back in January 2019? A full year before any mention of the virus.




https://youtu.be/D-chBV7A0n8


SOURCES:
Associated Press
whitehouse.com
World Health Organization (WHO)
congress.gov
H.R. 748 Bill


Monday, April 27, 2020

START FROM THE BEGINNING; A STEP BY STEP LEGAL LAW ON "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" LEGAL? OR ILLEGAL?

When you see the words:  LEGAL / ILLEGAL The color GREEN  signifies 'up to this point', you are "legal" to drive private automobile without a driver license. RED signifies "illegal" you must have a driver license to drive commercial.

In 1876 it was called “the power of unrestrained locomotion.” Under "THE RIGHT OF PERSONAL LIBERTY"
A Treatise of the Right to Personal Liberty, Second Edition, Book 1, Chapter 1, Section 1. Rollin C. Hurd, 1876, W.C. Little Co., Albany, NY
PERSONAL LIBERTY — the most sacred of your liberties
The right to travel is so fundamental that it is not mentioned in the Constitution.  The U.S. Supreme Court commented in United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757 -758 (1966):
. . . [T]he right finds no explicit mention in the Constitution. The reason, it has been suggested, is [394 U.S. 618, 631]   that a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created. In any event, freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution.”
See also Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125 (1958); and Aptheker v. Secretary of State, 378 U.S. 500, 505 -506 (1964); and Zemel v. Rusk, 381 U.S. 1, 14 (1965), 

And here are the definitions of natural liberty and personal liberty existed in the received law-of-the-land:

Natural Liberty and Personal Liberty as defined in Black's Law Dictionary, Second Edition.

The lawyers then changed their definition in the 1933 edition of Black’s Law Dictionary — long after the thirteenth amendment — to a definition of liberty that is purportedly guaranteed by the thirteenth amendment. 
The Supreme Court in a 1875 case (Cruikshank, 92 US 542) said: “The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a State, but his rights of citizenship under one of these governments will be different from those he has under the other. … The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government.”
11 Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135
“Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion — to go where and when one pleases — only so far restrained as the Rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”3
  "legal" private

That’s right. Police must protect you in your safe conduct as you drive without a license. Don’t claim to live in a free country if you have never seen liberty.
YES, you had a right to unrestrained locomotion to drive down the highway without a license.  Until you waived your right by applying for a license.
State and Federal Governments have their respective Constitutional authorities to regulate commerce.  They were given that authority when “We The People” wrote their constitution to secure the blessings of liberty to their posterity. Governments also have the duty to secure the blessings of liberty.  These two functions of government are compatible with one another.  These two functions of government do not conflict. 
Those persons who are engaged in government authorized activities can be regulated by government. Therefore vehicles that are used in commerce can be required to have license plates. License plates are on vehicles that need government permission to be on the road — to profit from the use of public roads. Once they are regulated in commerce (have a license plate), they never have the right of way.  Pedestrians and bicyclists always have the right of way over licensed vehicles, because their right to travel is a protected liberty.  Whereas commercial uses of the roads are never a protected liberty, they are a government granted privilege.
The Supreme Court keeps saying over, and over again that the right to travel on the public roads cannot be regulated. Ever since Nevada tried to tax people in stage coaches in Crandall v. Nevada 73 US 35.
  • The right to travel meant travel by virtually any means available, or at least any ordinary or usual means. See City of Chicago v. Banker, 112 Ill. App. 94 (1904) (citing City of Chicago v. Collins, 51 N.E. 907, 909 (Ill. 1898)).
  • “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts,” stated the Minnesota Supreme Court in 1910, “[yet] they have no exclusive right.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 69-70 (Minnesota 1910).
  • Not a single license law excluded any non-merchant from traveling on the roads with wagons, horses, or buggies of any kind. Indeed, courts suggested that no such requirement could be upheld even if it were to exist. See, e.g., Shiver v. Tift, 85 S.E. 1031, 1033 (Georgia. 1915) (citing City of Rome v.Suddeth, 42 S.E. 1032 (Georgia. 1902)) (“[A] person has a right to travel on a highway, and there is no rule of law which prevents him from driving a nervous, high-strung horse.”); City of Covington v. Dalheim, 102 S.W. 829 (Kentucky. 1907).
  • When automobiles were first introduced around the turn of the twentieth century, drivers relied on common law traditions that protected the right of every person to travel upon public roadways without a license. Courts repeatedly wrote of an individual’s “right to travel” by automobile and struck down regulations aimed at limiting the liberties of automobile drivers on constitutional grounds. … Today, the public has accepted a degree of travel regulation which would have seemed almost tyrannical to nineteenth century Americans. … the change represents a substantial loss of liberty.
  • the right to travel without undue restriction was the very first right recognized as a fundamental liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. See Crandall v. Nevada, 73 U.S. (6 Wall.) 35 (1867).
  • This right to drive was “so well established and so universally recognized in this country,” wrote the court, “that it has become a part of the alphabet of fundamental rights of the citizen.” When the City of Chicago enacted an ordinance requiring car drivers to be examined and licensed by a board of examiners, the Illinois Court of Appeals struck down the ordinance as unconstitutional. The right of a car driver “to use the streets is undoubted,” wrote the court, “subject to [the limitation that he honor the rights of other users,] his right cannot be regulated by an ordinance.” “The fact that an automobile is a comparatively new vehicle is beside the question. The use of the streets must be extended to meet the modern means of locomotion.” The law of free travel was so well-settled that it was recognized in the “constitutional law” entry of American Jurisprudence as recently as 1931: Personal liberty largely consists of the right of locomotion – to go where and when one pleases – only so far restrained as the rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. City of Chicago v. Banker, 112 Ill. App. 94 (1904).
  • Barely a decade into the twentieth century, American automobile drivers had largely given up the battle for the right to drive without a license. One reason may have been class envy,…  Legal historian Lawrence Friedman pointed out that the automobile was initially a toy for the rich, and, early on, evoked envy and pride. [See Lawrence M. Friedman, American Law in the 20th Century, at 278.] The driver’s license was a status symbol every member of high society desired.

"legal" private
DEFINITION OF THE TERM "MOTOR VEHICLE "
This is a term that originated in statutory definitions 100 years ago but in wide usage has become known to mean something else.
Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20:
Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled”
The federal definition of Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 Section 31 definitions:
“(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…”
“(10) “Used for commercial purposes.” Means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit”.
Federal  government defines Motor vehicle as one engaged in commerce. Federal law supersedes or preempts State law. Codes or statutes are not law. Only has force of law. 

Your state will have a similar definition, but it will be hidden, vague or misleading. Government regulation is allowed for the commercial use of the roads.  Regulation is also allowed for “police powers of the State” to control grave and immediate threats to interests the State may lawfully protect. 

Look for the all-important element of “commercial purpose”. This might be hidden in state laws behind the definition of the word carriage, or transport, or traffic. 
If your legislature was relying upon prior court decisions, they might not have mentioned the element of commercial purpose, so you will not find it.  Any other misconstruing of a statute would be a government restriction of liberty, and contrary to the purpose of government.

Hendrick v. Maryland, U.S. Supreme Court 1915. Ever since automobiles used the roads, courts have used the term "vehicle" in terms of commerce regulation. 



BOUVIER’S 1856 LAW DICTIONARY:
LICENSE, contracts. A right given by some competent authority to do an act, which without such authority would be illegal. The instrument or writing which secures this right, is also called a license. Vide Ayl. Parerg, 353; 15 Vin. Ab. 92; Ang. Wat. Co. 61, 85.