Dominus Litis
Region: US
Saturday 30 August 2025 04:29:56 GMT
1644
70
20
13
Music
Download
Comments
Alchemist-Suzanna :
Great find!!!
2025-08-30 13:32:02
1
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
. U.S. vs. Throckmorton... Fraud vitiates the most sollemn contract is my impression...
2025-09-01 04:24:03
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
• Maxim of Equity: “Where there is a wrong, there must be a remedy.”
2025-09-01 04:25:02
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
Fact: A US citizen is a business entity and includes the Minor Estate entity (31 CFR 363.6) (e) DEFINITIONS.-As used in this section- (1) the term "United States business" means- (A) a United States citizen; (B) a corporation, partnership, or other association created under the laws of the United States or of any State (including the District of Columbia or any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States); or (C) a foreign corporation, partnership, or other association, more than 95 percent of which is owned by persons described in subparagraphs (A) and (B); 102 Stat. 1344 Public Law 100-418 Aug 23, 1988
2025-09-01 04:23:44
3
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
"For a crime to exist, there must be an injured party (Corpus delicti) there cannot be no sanction or penalty imposed on one because of this constitutional right" sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 945: "with no injured party, a complaint is invalid on its face." Gibson v. Boyle, 139 Arizona 512
2025-09-01 04:22:25
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
Fact: A US citizen is a business entity and includes the Minor Estate entity (31 CFR 363.6) (e) DEFINITIONS.-As used in this section- (1) the term "United States business" means- (A) a United States citizen; (B) a corporation, partnership, or other association created under the laws of the United States or of any State (including the District of Columbia or any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States); or (C) a foreign corporation, partnership, or other association, more than 95 percent of which is owned by persons described in subparagraphs (A) and (B); 102 Stat. 1344 Public Law 100-418 Aug 23, 1988
2025-09-01 04:21:10
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
all govern-mental actors are pirates, because in 1871 Organic Act UNITED STATES 'ens legis' 'incorporated' 28 USC 3002 15a) means a federal corporation and became a corporation under merchant law on 'high seas' AKA Maritime jurisdiction and has committed inland piracy upon We the people... via 'personage, gang pressing and Barratry' who trespass upon 'We the people' by 'tort of trespass by tacit procuration', AKA birth certificate, traffic tickets or citation summons to court, building permits, property tax, license plates or any licensing of Liberty are 'receipts of pirate property' 18 USC 1660 and are pirates because, Pirates do whatever pirates can do to make their money and confiscate their property... And the flag that you see here is exhibit (a), because it is in every court and in every Congress proving that the jurisdiction is on high seas, in Maritime jurisdiction within their piratical vessels aka the police cruiser, the police department, sheriff's office, the county jail, all court buildings, all govern-mental actor buildings, hospitals, fire departments are all piratical vessels including each govern-mental actor is a piratical vessel... A piratis aut latronibus capti liberi permanent .(DIG. 49. 15. 19.2.) —Things do not change their ownership when captured by pirates and robbers. Law Maxim 18 U.S. Code § 1661. Robbery ashore Whoever, being engaged in any piratical cruise or enterprise, or being of the crew of any piratical vessel, lands from such vessel and commits robbery on shore, is a pirate, and SHALL BE IMPRISONED FOR LIFE. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 775.) 18 U.S. Code § 1660. Receipt of pirate property Whoever, without lawful authority, receives or takes into custody any vessel, goods, or other property, feloniously taken by any robber or pirate against the laws of the United States, knowing the same to have been feloniously taken, shall be imprisoned not more than ten years. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 775.) 18 U.S. Code § 1659 - Attack to plunder vessel Whoever, upon the high seas or other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, by surprise or open force, maliciously attacks
2025-09-01 04:21:20
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
"Statutes apply only to created creatures known as corporations no matter whether[creatures of statute and offices of] state, local, or federal [government]." (Colonial Pipeline Co. v. Triangle, 421 US 100. (1975)." The common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policy, and statutes are "not the law." Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261. As well article 1 section 8 clause 1, 14 and 17 says clearly the Congress shall have the power makes the rules for the government within the 10 square miles of Washington DC... not the people. In our country, the people, not the government, are the "sovereigns" and the government exercises "sovereign powers" explicitly delegated to it by the people through a written Constitution: - Julliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421 (1884): "There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States...In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it. All else is withheld." Perry v. U.S., 294 U.S. 330 (1935): "In the United States, sovereignty resides in the people...the Congress cannot invoke sovereign power of the People to override their will as thus declared." • In America, "We the People" and not the government that SERVES them, are the "state". THEY are the people owed allegiance, not the government or public servants. "The common law is the real law, the supreme law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policies and statutes are not the law." Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261 "All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authority only. Not human/creator in accordance with God's law. all codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process." Rodriguez versus Ray Donavan 1985. Beware of the tort of trespass by tacit procuration...nunc pro tunc, ab initio, sua sponte, suo moto, e pluribus unum... “All codes, rules and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking in due process …” Rodriques v Ray Donavan (U.S. Department of Labor), 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985) The People are not subject to the codes, rules, and regulations created by
2025-09-01 04:21:39
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
KOLENDER V LAWSON 461 US 352, 1983 A POLICE OFFICER CAN NOT ARREST A CITIZEN FOR REFUSING TO PRESENT IDENTIFICATION, THERE IS NO SUCH THING CALLED FAILURE TO IDENTIFY... OWEN V. INDEPENDENCE , 100 S.C.T. 398, 445 US 622 OFFICERS OF THE COURT HAVE NO IMMUNITY WHEN VIOLATING A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT FROM LIABILITY, FOR YOU ARE DEEMED TO KNOW THE LAW... title 18 usc subsection 4.....also title 18 usc 2381 cannan # 7........................................... Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886) “ An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it has never been passed .” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 137 137 (1803) “No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 (1980) The right of action created by statute relating to deprivation under color of law, of a right secured by the constitution and the laws of the United States and comes claims which are based solely on statutory violations of Federal Law and applied to the claim that claimants had been deprived of their rights, in some capacity, to which they were entitled.” “ Officers of the court have no immunity when violating constitutional right, from liability ” 16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 256: “ The general rule is that a unconstitutional statute, whether Federal or State, though having the form and
2025-09-01 04:24:50
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
OWEN V. INDEPENDENCE , 100 S.C.T. 398, 445 US 622 OFFICERS OF THE COURT HAVE NO IMMUNITY WHEN VIOLATING A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT FROM LIABILITY, FOR YOU ARE DEEMED TO KNOW THE LAW... title 18 usc subsection 4.....also title 18 usc 2381 Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886) “ An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it has never been passed .” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 137 137 (1803) “No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.” Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 (1980) The right of action created by statute relating to deprivation under color of law, of a right secured by the constitution and the laws of the United States and comes claims which are based solely on statutory violations of Federal Law and applied to the claim that claimants had been deprived of their rights, in some capacity, to which they were entitled.” “ Officers of the court have no immunity when violating constitutional right, from liability ” 16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 256: “ The general rule is that a unconstitutional statute, whether Federal or State, though having the form and name of law as in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the enactment and not merrily from the date of the decision so braining it. An unconstitutional law i
2025-09-01 04:24:30
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
"inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, and abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible,the legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. Can't concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them." S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L. Ed. 57 3 Dall. 54)behold We the people: The said territory, and the States which may be formed therein, shall forever remain a part of this Confederacy of the United States of America. subject to the Articles of Confederation, and to such alterations therein as shall be constitutionally made; ... The inhabitants and settlers in the said territory shall be subject to pay a part of the federal debts contracted or to be contracted, and a proportional part of the expenses of government.... Ordinance Article IV (underscore added), Everything exists in the Organic Laws and all legitimacy extends from acts of law at the beginning." Proprietary power-the exercise of proprietary rights" is the right of a property owner, and that is the sole basis of all written law as upon the subjects and employees of that territorial government which claims proprietary interest. Lands granted or sold in "Tee simple" within these initial Northwest territorial States' exterior boundaries become, and remain, part and parcel of the States named Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, when the remaining lands join the second Union of States of United States as "State of Ohio," "State of Indiana," "State of Illinois," "State of Michigan," "State of Wisconsin," and "State of Minnesota," respectively, for which proprietary written laws still apply. Later in A.D. 1819 "[hlis Catholic Majesty [of Spain] cedes to the United States... all the [Florida] territories... which are not private property... (underscore added). That already private property, and parcels of those ceded "places and waters, continental or ins
2025-09-01 04:23:30
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
Foreign agents aka infiltrators USC 8 §1481 along with the other parasites, court, lawyer attorney agents, etc..
2025-09-01 04:23:13
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
Res judicata "The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. the rights he has under one are different from those which he has under the other. Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935) The Amendment (14th) recognized that "an individual can be a Citizen of one of the several states without being a citizen of the United States," (U.S. v. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830), or, "a citizen of the United States without being a Citizen of a state." (Slaughter-House Cases, supra; cf. U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 US 542, 549 (1875)). , , A more recent case is Crosse v. Bd. of Supervisors, 221 A.2d 431 (1966) which says: "Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state." Citing U.S. v. Cruikshank, supra. 14th amendment US citizens have privileges called "civil rights" and are not protected by the "bill of rights" like a North Carolinian would be ... Supreme Court: Jones v. Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226: "The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship." "...the first eight amendments have uniformly been held not to be protected from state action by the privilege and immunities clause [of the 14th Amendment]." Hague v. CIO, 307 US 496, 520 "The right to trial by jury in civil cases, guaranteed by the 7th Amendment…and the right to bear arms guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment…have been distinctly held not to be privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States guaranteed by the 14th Amendment…and in effect the same decision was made in respect of the guarantee against prosecution, except by indictment of a grand jury, contained in the 5th Amendment…and in respect of the right to be confronted with witnesses, contained in the 6th Amendment…it was held that the in
2025-09-01 04:23:00
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
Every president, Governor or govern-mental actor that restricted liberty during any event did so in their private capacity and they are criminal and liable and are making war against the Constitution. 18 USC 241, 242, 2381-2385 Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) Note: By law, a judge is a state officer. The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person). When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the Judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges' orders are not voidable, but VOID, and of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States."
2025-09-01 04:22:50
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
"Where an individual is detained, without a warrant and without having committed a crime (traffic infractions arenot crimes), the detention is a false arrest and false imprisonment." Damages Awarded: Trezevant v. City of Tampa, 241 F2d. 336 (11th CIR 1984)Motorist illegally held for 23 minutes in a traffic charge was awarded $25,000 in damagesThe above case sets the foundation for $75,000 dollars per hour, or $1,800,000 dollars per day. PERSONAL LIBERTY – The right or power of locomotion, of changing situation, of removing one's person to whatsoever place one's own inclination may direct, without imprisonment or restraint unless by due course of law [Black's Law Dictionary, 4th ed.] "Complete freedom of the highways is so old and well established a blessing that we have forgotten the days of the Robber Barons and toll roads, and yet, under an act like this, arbitrarily administered, the highways may be completely monopolized, if, through lack of interest, the people submit, then they may look to see the most sacred of their liberties taken from them one by one, more or less by rapid encroachment." [Robertson v. Department of Public Works, 180 Wash 133, 147 (1934)] "The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the Right to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees..." -Berberian v. Lussier 139 A2d 869, 872 (1958) MOTORCYCLE. A bicycle propelled by a gasoline engine located in the frame between the wheels. Ellett v. Klein, C.C.A.Pa., 252 F. 805, 806, certio rari denied Harley-Davidson Motor Co. v. Ellett, 39 S.Ct. 8, 248 U.S. 563, 63 L.Ed. 423; Bonds v. State, 16 Ga.App. 401, 85 S.E. 629, 630. Apparently, some judge got through the years of school indoctrination while retaining an "interest in realism". 49 usc 31301 proof DOT not Dmv has so called authority on traffic violations Police and Sheriff's are not agencies of the State...All traffic infractions must go through the department of transportation (federal)...these cops are debt collectors 15 USC 1692 (E)(1)
2025-09-01 04:22:37
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
The Constitution guarantees a republican form of government to every state in this Union article 4 section 4 of the treaty/contract which has nothing to do with the Republican party in the federal corporation of the United States 28 USC 3002 15a).... The definition of Republican: one in which the powers of the sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercise by the people, either directly... re Duncan, 139 us 449, Supreme Court 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627, Black's Law fifth, page 626; Bundy versus U.S. SCOTUS recognizes personal sovereignty 6/16/2011... Bond vs. UNITED STATES 529 US 334 (2000) [APPENDIX B] In 2000 the Supreme Court held that the American people are in fact sovereign and not the STATES or the government. The court went on to define that local state and federal law enforcement officers were committing unlawful action against the sovereign people by the enforcement of the laws and are personally liable for their actions. Levenworth R. Co. V Lowe,... In a Democracy form of government the powers of the sovereignty are vested in the legislator, why on Earth would We the people give authority and sovereignty to our legislators is beyond me.
2025-09-01 04:22:12
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
B.A.R. ATTORNEYS ARE SELF APPOINTED AND HAVE NO LICENSES Connecticut Attorney, Simeon E. Baldwin, invited a group of 100 Attorneys from 21 states and the District of Columbia to meet on the 21st day of August of 1878, at Saratoga Springs, New York, to organize the American B.A.R. Association. Most of the men were elite corporate lawyers. Author Jethro K. Lieberman described early ABA membership: “You could become an invitee to membership if you were white, Protestant and native born, preferably with a British surname, and attended the elite law schools such as Harvard, Yale and Columbia; only then did you have a chance of prospering. Catholics, Jews, women and blacks were automatically excluded from membership. This exclusion was necessary to the elite bar’s sense of identity. Any fraternity is defined not only by whom it accepts but also by whom it excludes. The Association also pinned the stigma of immorality on the lower class of lawyers as shysters who talked, dressed and acted differently.” In 1902 the ABA quit meeting regularly at Saratoga Springs; from that point to 1936 it met in different cities as a means to attract new members. Thus ABA membership grew to 29,008 in 1936. Other statistics demonstrated the same story. The bar went from just two sections, each with two officers, to 14 sections with 960 officers in 1935. The number of committees rose from 18 in 1902 to 27 in 1935. Membership revenues in those years increased from $8,255 to $197,877.66. The ABA’s fight against the New Deal led more liberal attorneys to start their own society called the National Lawyers Guild. A mixture of populists, Marxists, and progressive attorneys, mostly on the East Coast, formed the guild in 1937. This move was also motivated by the fact that the ABA represented a largely elite base of lawyers associated with big business while ignoring the legal needs of the lower classes and minorities. In 1950, the 81st Congress investigated the Lawyers Guild and determined that the B.A.R. Association is founded and run by communists under definition. Thus, any elected official that is a member of the B.A.R. will only be loyal to the B.A.R. and not the people. Black’
2025-09-01 04:21:30
2
Constitutionally Protected Rep :
The B.A.R. Association and its monopolistic control over the judiciary is not only Treason and Conspiracy to Commit Treason as an overthrow of the Constitution for the United States of America, Article III, but also in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act (Sherman Act,[1] July 2, 1890, ch. 647, 26 Stat. 209, 15 U.S.C. § 1–7) and since this act requires the United States Federal government to investigate and pursue trusts, companies and organizations suspected of violating the Act why is it not prosecuting the BAR Associations and its Attorney members? It is a Federal statute to limit cartels and monopolies, not encourage them wherein the alleged judiciary itself is a monopoly. A corporation can neither practice law nor hire lawyers to carry on the business of practicing law for it. (People v. California Protective Corp'n, 76 Cal. App. 354, 244 Pac. 1089). This is the original 13th amendment before the bar members during the Civil War switched it out with the current 13th amendment 'War amendment' along with the 14th War amendment that has never been properly ratified with the several States and has a record of it in early school books prior to the Civil War where the bar members had slowly eradicated the original 13th amendment because they are esquires ARTICLE XIII. If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honor, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept or retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them or either of them. Attorneys and lawyers or prosecuting attorneys are B.A.R. members, BRITISH ACCREDITATION REGENCY these are the British foreign agents, these foreign agents are ESQUIRES with titles of nobility who answered to the KNIGHTS at the INN OF COURT who answered directly to the Queen of England to subvert our Supreme laws of titles of Nobility which are outlawed in the United States Article 1 section 9 and 10, No Titles Of Nobility are allowed in the United States or in
2025-09-01 04:20:58
2
To see more videos from user @dominusmlitis, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
