Howard Griswold Conference Call

Bigger text (+) | Smaller text (-)

Griswold Conference Call—Thursday, November 3, 2011

Partial

 

Howard Griswold Conference calls:

conf call (talkshoe) 724-444-7444  95099# 1#

(non-talkshoe members must use the 1# after the pin number)

Thursday´s at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.

Talkshoe mutes the phone lines

Conference Call is simulcast on:
www.TheREALPublicRadio.Net

Starting in the first hour at 8 p.m.

 

Note: there is a hydrate water call 8 pm, Eastern Monday´s, 218-844-3388  966771#

Howard´s home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)

 

Check out: www.escapeharrassment.com

www.escape-tickets-IRS-court.org

 

All correspondence to:

Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, ,

(do not address mail to ‘Howard Griswold´ since Howard has not taken up residence in that mailbox and since he´s on good terms with his wife he isn´t likely to in the foreseeable future.)

 

"All" Howard's and GEMINI RESEARCH's information through the years, has
been gathered, combined and collated into 3 "Home-Study Courses" and
"Information packages" listed at
www.peoples-rights.com    "Mail Order" DONATIONS
and/or Toll-Free 1-877-544-4718 (24 Hours F.A.Q. line)

Dave DiReamer can be reached at: notaxman@dmv.com

 

Peoples-rights has a new book available from The Informer:

Just Who Really Owns the United States, the International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve, World Bank, Your House, Your Car, Everything—the Myth and the Reality.

He´ll take $45 for the book to help with ads, but $40 would be ok which includes shipping

($35 barebones minimum)

www.peoples-rights.com c/o , ,

 

********************

Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, Eastern Time. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesday´s number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in on Wednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=41875&cmd=tc

 

Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the week´s call at the following website:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth

Howard approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting to Howard.

 

 

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to Gemini Research rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs.

 

*********************

Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

 

 

*******************************************************************

****************************************

A recording of each Howard Griswold Thursday conference call is available from Dezert Owl upon request for any sized donation. Go to the following link: www.TheRealPublicRadio.Net/Archives.html .

 

For donations to desert, send them to Free America Radio Network, , Suite B, , Georgia 31548. Phone number: 912-882-2142. Cell: 304-629-7169.      

 

 

For reference:

Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd )

**********

Project for all:

Howard needs information on how to write a complaint for breach of the trust.

Hit the libraries!

 

*****************************************************

Start

*****************************************************

 

{ Griswold Conference Call—Thursday, November 3, 2011

Partial

 

Howard Griswold Conference calls:

conf call (talkshoe) 724-444-7444  95099# 1#

(non-talkshoe members must use the 1# after the pin number)

Thursday´s at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.

Talkshoe mutes the phone lines

Conference Call is simulcast on:
www.TheREALPublicRadio.Net

Starting in the first hour at 8 p.m.

 

Note: there is a hydrate water call 8 pm, Eastern Monday´s, 218-844-3388  966771#

Howard´s home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)

 

Check out: www.escapeharrassment.com

www.escape-tickets-IRS-court.org

 

All correspondence to:

Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, ,

(do not address mail to ‘Howard Griswold´ since Howard has not taken up residence in that mailbox and since he´s on good terms with his wife he isn´t likely to in the foreseeable future.)

 

"All" Howard's and GEMINI RESEARCH's information through the years, has
been gathered, combined and collated into 3 "Home-Study Courses" and
"Information packages" listed at
www.peoples-rights.com    "Mail Order" DONATIONS
and/or Toll-Free 1-877-544-4718 (24 Hours F.A.Q. line)

Dave DiReamer can be reached at: notaxman@dmv.com

 

Peoples-rights has a new book available from The Informer:

Just Who Really Owns the United States, the International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve, World Bank, Your House, Your Car, Everything—the Myth and the Reality.

He´ll take $45 for the book to help with ads, but $40 would be ok which includes shipping

($35 barebones minimum)

www.peoples-rights.com c/o , ,

 

********************

Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, Eastern Time. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesday´s number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in on Wednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=41875&cmd=tc

 

Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the week´s call at the following website:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth

Howard approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting to Howard.

 

 

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to Gemini Research rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs.

 

*********************

Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

 

 

*******************************************************************

****************************************

A recording of each Howard Griswold Thursday conference call is available from Dezert Owl upon request for any sized donation. Go to the following link: www.TheRealPublicRadio.Net/Archives.html .

 

For donations to desert, send them to Free America Radio Network, , Suite B, , Georgia 31548. Phone number: 912-882-2142. Cell: 304-629-7169.      

 

 

For reference:

Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd )

**********

Project for all:

Howard needs information on how to write a complaint for breach of the trust.

Hit the libraries!

 

*****************************************************

Start

*****************************************************

 

{ 01:28:58.731}

[Howard]       The only thing that is important about these kinds of things happening, bringing the attorney general in before Congress to testify, Leslie Stahl being pushed out of the way and several other news commentators that have made decent and sensible comments have been pushed out of the way. It just shows you that the inside of the system is beginning to fight among themselves quite a bit. They´re dividing and remember this country was founded on the principles that united we stand and divided we fall, this country called the United States was created on that principle. Unite the different state governments and stand together and we will stand forever and if we´re divided in any way we´ll fall. Well, the internal system is dividing quite a bit, the kind of things you see doing on with criminal indictments and people bringing up claims that should be criminal indictments just shows how divided it´s getting. Non only is the system divided internally but it´s dividing itself from the masses of the people. That young fellow in the military that sent the e-mail to his mother saying to prepare, it could have been a little bit less creative of fear in the way he did it. But he should have told her to prepare for some very rough times in this country and across the world in the coming months. I think that´s what the military is preparing for because they know that there´s going to be upheavals of all kinds and it´s going to be interesting to see which side of the upheaval they take. I´ve warned them before they´re outnumbered and out gunned. They better be on the people´s side, not the people of government either—the private people´s side. If they aren´t both military and police being as small a number as they are in comparison to the mass of population of angry people their life expectancy will be about one half an hour. And that´s a serious warning and I mean it wholeheartedly. It will be about one half an hour because if you get enough angry people together that they overpower them they wouldn´t live long. So, hopefully they´ll be on the people´s side, common folks´ side so that they don´t get killed. And the few idiots that stick with government, well, they were a waste anyway, they´re the ones that are causing all the trouble, let them get killed.

Anyway, one of the things that has been bothering me about this fiduciary duty thing is that I think most people are afraid of retaliation by the government because you did something like this. And I´m sure that that´s a major thought in a lot of people´s minds and that´s why we´re not getting very much activity along these lines. I think we talked about this case before. Over the years several different times we´ve brought it up. It´s called Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Morrell. It´s at 332 US Reports, page 380. The case was all about Federal Crop Insurance Corporation´s agent had written insurance up or I guess this farmer named Morrell for a good deal of acreage of re-planted wheat—and you plant wheat in the fall of the year. It gets going a little bit. It lays dormant through the winter. In the nice spring rains it grows real good and you harvest it right around the end of spring and you usually have a pretty good harvest. Of course, that depends upon floods, the bigger snows and floods from the melt or drought conditions and sometimes we have drought conditions that go on not just through the summer but also through the winter months and the spring months. So the insurance insures against the loss of a crop and the federal government set this corporation up to operate through the federal government actually in competition with other insurance companies. But the reason was because there is so much loss in things like this that other insurance companies were phasing out writing crop insurance so the federal government stepped in and created this corporation to insure crops and in their rules and regulations they state that they do not cover re-seeded wheat which means re-seeding in the spring after you harvest the winter wheat because the likelihood that you´ll get enough rain and cool enough temperatures during the summer for summer wheat to grow well in most rains is slim to none so they´re not going to cover it. There would be a lot of losses if they did and it´s not covered. Now, this agent told Mr. Morrell that he was covered and here´s what the court said about this: For purposes of charging the government with liability whenever the government takes over a business theretofore conducted by private enterprise or engages in competition with private ventures government is not partly public and partly private, it´s always public so it´s not partly private at all which blows away a lot of this patriot foolishness about the private side and the public side. You can´t deal in government on any private side. You could be a private corporation but when you´re a private corporation and you contract to do work for government you´re in a public situation—you´re working for the public government—that´s what they´re trying to tell you. But it depends upon the governmental pedigree of the type of particular activity or the manner in which the government conducts. The government may carry on its operations in which through conventional executive agencies who are supposed to be out here enforcing laws and rules. That´s what police, local police, FBI, the Justice Department, the courts, they´re all executive agencies—they´re not supposed to be. The courts aren´t anyway—the other ones are. The courts are all operated today under executive agency status or in many cases the courts are being operated through corporate forms especially created for defined ends and so are many other agencies like Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. It is a corporation formed by legislative enactment and especially created for defined ends—defined purposes, in other words. The court went on to say, ‘whatever the form in which government functions, anyone entering into an agreement with the government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports stays within the bounds of his authority. That case said that when you do business with the government it is your duty to make sure that the government agencies that you´re dealing with, whether they´re corporate or actual executive agencies stay within the bounds of their authority. Now, the bounds of their authority are established by statute which is codified and regulations which are codified and can be looked up. And every one of those statutes are based on the constitutional authority of the legislature whether it be state or federal—it´s the constitutional authority. So, a statute that appears to have the authority to regulate someone´s private property does not have the authority to regulate someone´s private property. It only has the authority to regulate the government´s property. Any extension of that statute beyond governmental use and on to you in your private capacity is a breach of their fiduciary duty. You have a duty as an American private citizen to know and ascertain accurately the limits and bounds of their authority. Now, the next interesting little blurp in a case that was Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Morrell . This one is a case that we talked about a couple of weeks ago, Twining v. the state of . It´s a US Supreme Court decision at 211 US Reports and that´s page 78 and it started on page 78. Page 97 of the case—and believe me this case will drive you crazy reading the first several pages of it. It´s a bunch of hogwash about the 5th Amendment right not to incriminate yourself and it´s a lot of hogwash. We´ve talked before about the way you don´t incriminate yourself. Your answer is, ‘I don´t know what the hell you´re talking about.´ No matter what somebody says to you, you don´t know what the hell they´re talking about. You don´t take the 5th Amendment. You don´t use their way of doing it. You just avoid them entirely because you don´t know what the hell they´re talking about. But in this case the Supreme Court discussed the fact that not being required to testify against yourself was not really a fundamental due process right. It is not an inherent right in citizenship. It is a privilege or immunity of citizenship but not a right—a privilege or an immunity, not a right. Did you get that? Basically, that´s what the case said. But then they got into discussing what was inherent fundamental rights and what fell under due process. And one of the cases stated is the right to inform the United States authorities of violations of its laws. That is an absolute right which is a duty of the American people to inform the government of violations of its laws whether it be a private person out here in society that´s breaking the law or a government flunky that´s breaking the law. You have a right to inform the United States authorities and they cannot retaliate against you for doing it. If they do all you have to do is report that and perhaps file a second suit for the damages caused by their retaliation. It´s not likely that they will, not if you show things like this within your case that you´re doing this because under Federal Crop Insurance you have a duty to ascertain whether they operate within the bounds of their authority and under Twining v. State you have a right to report to the United States and inform the United States authorities of any violation of its laws. In the case that they quote here backing that up is in re Quarles and that´s at 158 US Reports, page 532 and it says that you have a right to inform the United States authorities of any violation of its laws by anyone whether it be a judge, a cop, a politician like an elected official, a state legislator, or a Congressional or House representative in the things that they do, a Department of Justice moron. No matter who it is you have a right to report these things.  Well, with those two cases backing you up you should not have any fear of filing a breach of fiduciary duty suit.  Now, if you think they´re fighting among themselves today wait until you see, if a few of you will get active and do this, wait until you see how they start fighting among themselves over the cases of breach of fiduciary duty against some of their little money grubbing cohorts that are involved in all this activity like these corrupt traffic courts that are stealing money, the corruption of police departments that are assisting in stealing money from the private sector against privately owned automobiles, not motor vehicles, the corruption of the Department of Motor Vehicles for classifying your private automobile as a motor vehicle which is a commercial term implying that it´s used in commerce for gain and profit and most people do not use their private automobile in commerce for gain and profit. Automobiles that are purchased with what is called a tax cab package in them have heavy duty brakes, they have a heavier clutch in them. They´re especially made for taxi cabs and when they are registered and put on the road as a taxi cab they are a motor vehicle. They look almost the same as your car as far as the design of the car goes with a bunch of writing and a couple of extra lights on it which is the only thing that makes a little bit of difference in the appearance but the fact is it is the use, not the appearance. It has nothing to do with the engine that propels it because automobiles up until they just came out with some electric cars that do have an electric motor in them, didn´t have motors, they had gasoline engines. They weren´t motorized but they are used as taxi cabs to motor passengers {a commercial term too} from one place to another. Trucks are used to motor goods from one place to another. Buses are used to motor passengers from one place to another. If you´re not doing that and charging for it you´re not in commerce. Your private automobile is outside the realm of authority of government. They are acting beyond the bounds of their authority when they attack your car or when they force you to register it and they´re in breach of their fiduciary duty. Anybody that´s fighting about the registration of an automobile should look seriously into this breach of fiduciary duty and go after whoever it is that´s pestering them whether it´s the police or the Department of Motor Vehicles or some moron lawyer or name them all if they´re all involved. Now, probate court is nothing more than extortion from stupid people. You wouldn´t go to probate court if you had any intelligence. You wouldn´t allow such a thing. Your people in the family that wrote a will and gave it to a lawyer to take to probate court if they had any intelligence would have never done such a thing. Under the laws of intestate the surviving spouse gets everything and if there is no surviving spouse the children get it divided equally among them. What else do you need? You don´t need a will unless you hate one of your kids and you don´t want him to get anything. Then maybe you´d want a will but there´s better ways to do it than that. If you have the security agreement that we talk about you can assign certain of the collateral goods that are named in the security agreement to certain people, give them the assignment and tell them upon your death to file the assignment with the Secretary of State´s office and it assigns their security agreement interest over to you in whatever property is listed on your assignment out of that security interest. There is no probate court involved, there´s nothing in the way of you getting whatever great grandma or whoever wrote this up and left it to you. There´s no contest of any kind. It can´t be rebutted. It can´t be taken into probate court because it´s already set in stone in the secured interest and in the assignment of the secured interest so you don´t need to fool with probate court. Of course, there´s not much we can do to stop old situations where grandma got a lawyer and wrote a will and doesn´t understand the security interest and thinks a lawyer knows what he´s doing and that his honesty wouldn´t do her wrong. Actually, he´s not going to do her wrong. The wrong has already been done by writing the will and he will continue on to do the wrong against her heirs, not against her. Once she´s dead and gone and the will is being executed the injury is done to the heirs and the same thing goes with divorce court. If you got any common sense you´ll file a complaint in the divorce court for an uncontested divorce. When the complaint is delivered to the other party whether it be the male or the female side of the marriage depending on who´s filing for the divorce if the agreement is made between the two of them that the one being filed against will not respond and create any argument within three to six weeks the divorce will be granted. The court doesn´t get to get their dirty little grimy hands on controlling the children. Controlling the property if you´ve got any to distribute you work it out yourselves—agree to things. Don´t make it a nasty battle and hire lawyers because by the time you´re done the lawyers will have 90% of everything you´ve got and you´ll probably end up losing your children because the courts will take them away and sell them if they´re young enough. That´s something that´s been going on in this country for a quite a long time, stealing the youth through divorces. Any one of these flunky government people that get involve in any of the kinds of things that we just talked about and there are numerous other things that they can be involved in. As a matter of fact going back to that Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Morrell, Mr. Morrell had a great case against whatever agent it was that told him that he was covered by the insurance, a great case of breach of fiduciary duty because person had a fiduciary duty to act honestly within the bounds of his authority and to tell the truth and not to be negligent in his duty but I´m sure that no lawyer would have told him that because it appears from what we´re finding out in talking to lawyers about some of this that they don´t want any of these cases of either constructive trust or breach of fiduciary duty and breach of trust cases brought because if enough of them are brought it´ll start exposing what a scumbag system all these lawyers are running and they will be run out of business—yeah, let´s do it. You need a lawyer to do this. You just need to be able to explain the activity, the dishonest activity, in relation to either what the law says, what the rules say, the rules and regulations, the lack of rules and regulations in many cases as Mr. Winterowd has so adequately pointed out to us, that they´re not writing the rules and regulations and filing them the way they´re supposed to because they haven´t. All their little regulations that they have written in their own office apply only within their own office {interpretive regulations} and cannot be applied to us and that doesn´t give them the authority to apply whatever the code section is {for it to apply it to us it would have to be a substantive regulation and properly entered into the Federal Register} to anybody except people in their own office or agency. If they apply it outside of their office {an interpretive regulation} or agency that is dishonesty, it´s a breach of fiduciary duty and it is negligence on their part to stay within the bounds of their authority.

Now, somebody´s put an interesting little dossier together here on breach of fiduciary duty and I think it deserves a little bit of paying attention to. The person didn´t say what the negligence would be so this is not a well-explained form but it does give you a basic idea of what breach of fiduciary duty is all about. It is a part of a negligence lawsuit and the most important aspect is proving such in the issue. If no duty was ever breached then no negligence damages could be owed by someone. In a negligence lawsuit there are four elements to consider, the duty that the person has, the breach of the duty that they have, the causation—now, the causation might be something that would frustrate some people in trying to write it—but the causation would be that they did a particular act which you can prove by the documents that they´ve sent you and papers they´ve written and given you telling you, you got to do something like a traffic ticket and the law that does not say with any regulation at all behind it that it applies to you. As a matter of fact, if you get the gist of what we´ve been talking about with the word, resident, down pat and understand that that is a legal term meaning an agent of a corporation. It doesn´t mean somebody who lives here which is what the lawyers will try to tell you it means. But you know that lawyers are just as good liars as preachers are. They lie to you, they try to get you to believe what they want you to believe. They´re very dishonest too, then, aren´t they? But the state law—go look it up in your state—and everyone of them reads pretty much the same way about the driver´s license. All persons—the word, person, by itself without the word, natural, in front it means corporations so it´s really not talking to you unless we presume that you are a corporation sole which is what the government is doing so they´re trying to apply it to you, but it says, ‘all persons who operate a motor vehicle in this state and are resident in this state must have a driver´s license. In some way or another every state code on motor vehicles is worded that way. Now, whether it says it exactly the way I just said it or there´s a slight deviation in it, it still says, within this state, which means the government and it still says something to the effect that if you´re a resident of the state operating a motor vehicle in this state you must have a license. The word, resident, means agent. In this state means within the government. It does not apply to you and the attempts of these people like Department of Motor Vehicle scumbag lawyers, courts, judges and cops are all breaching their fiduciary duty when in fact you really are not resident in the state because you don´t work there. Now, if you do work there, this does apply to you, these laws. That´s what it´s written for—it´s written to control and regulate government. If you´re in government it´s written to control and regulate you. You´ve accepted being regulated by asking for a government position whether it be an elected appointment or an appointment itself or an employee position working in government. Then you fall under all their laws and you have to abide by and cooperate with all their laws because you have accepted that position by joining government. He and she who have never joined government do not fall in that category and you are not resident within the government, you are not in the state. You may live in a territory by some name that the same name is applied to the state but that´s the territory that you live in. You don´t live in the state—the state is the government. It is often referred to as the state of the forum. The state of the forum means the form of government. It is a negligence upon the part of any one of these people who try to impose these internal government rules and regulations upon you in your private capacity under a presumption—makes it even worse. If they presumed it and executed on the presumption without any facts to prove their presumption and guess what, there is no application by you for registration as a corporate sole. They cannot prove that you´re a corporate sole. They treat you as one. They try to get you to cooperate with them and agree that you´re a resident of the state which means that you have a privilege from the state of operating as a corporate sole—very dirty underhanded trickery that is used to trick you into the courts and into their jurisdictions when, in fact, they don´t have jurisdiction over you unless they can trick you into it. If you agree then they got you. If you disagree then they threaten you and that´s when you need to go back after them for breach of fiduciary duty as soon as they threaten you because threat and fear is the food that they feed on, that keeps them going, them being government flunkies, these money-making scum that was talked about in a couple of the different e-mails that Dave was reading tonight. It´s all for money and profit. Dave said that one or two times out of some of the things he was reading. A couple of times he read a few things that were related to the same money and profiteering that he didn´t comment on it that its all for money but a few of them he did. Every bit of their shenanigans is for gain and profit for those particular people that are doing it and not for the good of the population which was what the government was established to do to maintain the good of the population, to protect them in their property, in their rights to acquire property and to acquire wealth, to live healthy and strong lives. This healthcare system is totally adverse to healthy and strong lives. Most of the food supply is adverse to healthy and strong lives. {it seems that Pfizer owns Monsanto. Can you spell conflict of interest? What kind of food do you think you´re going to get out of that arrangement? Could it go something like this: give them bad food, get them sick, get them buying pharma products from Pfizer, keep them on a string with no money?} If the politicians in Congress are voting this kind of crap in or your local legislative politicians are voting this kind of crap in through supposed law they´re in breach of their fiduciary duty because they´re not doing what the purpose of the Constitution that established that government is and that is to protect the people in their private capacity and you have a duty as an American to know this. Of course, so did our fathers and our grandfathers and our great grandfathers and they haven´t done it and this is why we´re in the situation we´re in today. As a matter of fact there is a little verse in the Bible somewhere—I think it´s in Revelation—that says the children of the last generation will suffer for the sins of their parents. Now if you trace the word, sin, back into Hebrew it means lack of knowledge, the lack of knowledge of our previous generations, the last five generations or so. To understand any of this stuff take the time to learn it and to do something about it has resulted in the mess that we have today because if these scumbags get away with this stuff they´re going to get a way with it and they´re going to do it until you do something about it. I´d prefer to avoid the violence that I think you can see coming. It´s developed in other countries. It´s developing here with some protests right now and these protests have become a little bit violent. That little article about the military man mentioning the fact that an awful lot of troops are being brought back here into America and kept in service indicates that they know that something is about to happen, that the military forces will be needed in some way or another. Now, hopefully, they´ll be for the good of the people which is what their duty is but who knows? Anyway, the concept that this fellow is trying to spell out is that when they are dishonest, when they are not diligently following the laws and rules of their position then they are negligent and you have to show the negligence by showing the causation of their inability to abide by the bounds and stay within the bounds of their authority.

And the last, but not least of the four things, is to list the damages. Now, if you listen to some of these morons, especially lawyers, and they will put a figure for damages that is exorbitant, outrageous but you listen to some of these patriots and the figure that they want to put goes far beyond outrageous. It is downright asinine and ridiculous. A hundred billion dollars or some ridiculous number like that is not anything you´re ever going to get but you might get laughed out of court by a judge when he reads what you want for damages. He´ll know you´re an idiot. He knows he´s an idiot or at least he should know he´s an idiot and he´ll know you´re an even bigger idiot. You have to fall within the reason of the damages that have been done. If it caused you to lose one day´s work and you make $100 a day the suit is for $100. You can put penalty clauses on that called puniary damages and multiply that by something reasonable like $10,000, 10,000 to 100. You cannot go after $100billion and don´t try it. You have to be reasonable but be reasonable for your own benefit as to what your injuries really are. If they´re injuring you with a traffic ticket and interfering with the use and enjoyment of your private automobile that could be a couple of hundred dollars worth of lawsuit. You can multiply the injury by three of what they actually caused you under the law. RICO law allows that and commercial law, particularly related to loans and money—allows the multiplication by three of the amount of the injury and then something like 10 to 100 times that amount—be reasonable with that figure—for the punitive damages.

So there´s four things—I´ll go over them again. Establishing the individual´s duty. Well, we´ve discussed this at many different meetings that we´ve had. There are case upon case upon case that established the fact that government is always in a trust position. Employees of government and agencies and officers of government are trustees because they´re in a trust position and as such they have a fiduciary duty to act with the highest level of honesty, integrity and good faith. That is established by quite a few court cases that we´ve established the duty. The breach of the duty is an explanation of what they did that wasn´t in the line of authority and the causation is right in line with that that they have gone beyond their authority and in doing so they´ve caused me a damage. So it´s duty, breach of duty, causation and damage. For a breach of duty it must be decided whether or not the defendant, the one being accused of negligence, behaved in a way that a reasonable person would have under similar circumstances. I made a comment earlier and it was a nasty dig on what they call humanity, people. Maybe you didn´t pick up on it. But I´d rather if there really are aliens out there on this planet that´s supposed to be coming toward us that are going to take over, I´d sure rather they took over then any of these morons with a education that we have in this world today to take over and try to run government. I don´t think there´s anybody competent, anybody, especially not these morons that run for office as president of these different countries. Look at what they´re doing to the presidents of a couple of the countries over in Europe right now. Greece and Italy have just thrown out their head man, the chief, president. France may be next. There´s a money uproar going on in France and a lack of confidence in their leadership. They may throw him out and it won´t be long before lack of confidence in the leadership in America comes about but we don´t have any legislative legal on the books laws that allow us to take a vote as to whether or not we have any confidence and the person can be removed. That´s not part of our system. So here, the only thing you have is to prevent violence the courts and bringing a complaint for breach of fiduciary duty against something as high as the president of the United States because he hasn´t done what he´s supposed to do. The one I´m talking about is Mr. Obamanation. ObamaNation, he is an abomination. The things he´s done are way beyond the limitations of government—nobody´s acted. But he´s very negligent in sticking to the authorities that he has. As a matter of fact he´s come right out and said the Constitution doesn´t mean anything. He´s definitely not faithful to the document that established the government that he´s the president of—he´s in breach of his fiduciary duty. This guy writes on: If no duty is owed then there is no negligence lawsuit. Now, that relates to private people. If you didn´t ask me to do something for you, you didn´t establish any duty upon me. Now, you can´t sue me for negligence because I didn´t do whatever duty it was that you thought I might have had because you didn´t ask me in the first place. But as far as government goes, the duty is established by the laws of this land and the concept that government is a trust corporation holding this country and its people in trust, acting as the trustee for us, the beneficiary. He goes on to say, to determine that a breach of duty exists a determination is made as to the standard of care and the evaluation of the defendant´s conduct in reflection of that determined standard. Now, that goes right back to what I was saying about duty, breach of duty and causation. You have to show the facts. You have to show what the standard is which is either the statutory codified laws, regulations or the constitutional mandate that allowed them to create these statutory laws and what the limits were on it which comes out of the Constitution. The limits are spelled out mostly in the Bill of Rights but they´re also in the body of the Constitution. He goes on to say, if duty of care by the defendant can be proven using the reasonable care standard then negligence can be an issue and then the dishonesty becomes the major issue because it proves the negligence. The defendant needs to have recognized the risk created by his or her own actions and to understand what could happen from these risks that he´s taken. The general standard of care is then applied to the specific circumstances of the situation and the jury must establish whether the defendant´s conduct was negligent, the jury or a judge, depending on whether you take it to a jury or not. But the whole point of that discussion is just exactly what I told you that the actions of he or she have to meet a standard of care, honesty, integrity and good faith as fiduciaries in the government. If they didn´t by threatening you, by sending you a bill that doesn´t apply to you like a traffic ticket, a property tax bill on your private home, any one of these things that they do to get money out of the American people that they have no right to do if it relates to private property. Now, they have every right in the world to impose a property tax on government property. Anything created by government, government can tax and they can regulate. Their own constitutions, their own establishment of their existence of government prohibits them from taking private property for their benefit, public use and doing that without just compensation. If they don´t pay you for it they can´t take it and use it or in anyway interfere with your use and enjoyment of it. They don´t have to take it necessarily. All they have to do is interfere with the use and enjoyment of it and according to Title 5, United States Code, Sections 601 through 620 something, I believe it is in that set of statutes. It is very well spelled out that any interference with the use and enjoyment of the property constitutes a taking under the taking clause in the 5th Amendment. That is an important clause in the 5th Amendment. That clause also exists in some way in every state´s constitution. That limits the authority of government agents in the exercise of statutory and codified laws. Those codes only apply in government to government property and not to private property. They are negligent in their duty as a fiduciary because of their dishonesty, because of their bad faith in the application of their laws. Anyway, he goes on to say, when the courts decide if a duty was owed they consider the objective and the subjective standard. The objective standard considers the defendant´s actions against a hypothetical reasonable person. I´m not sure where in the hell you find a reasonable person in the educated moron world that we live in today but perhaps somebody could identify what was reasonable. But he goes on to say, with the objective standard the court considers whether the wrongdoer—they say court feasor here—that means wrongdoer—the person who is allegedly negligent believes that his or her actions were reasonable. Well, they´re going to say that it´s the law. You ever heard that said? Any idiot cop, lawyer, judge will tell you, it´s the law, everybody comes under the law. There´s a bad faith breach of fiduciary duty right there. You can turn that right around and use that right in the courtroom as evidence. There you are, judge, he just admitted that he´s negligent in his conduct. He thinks he´s reasonable in executing the law because he thinks the law applies to everybody when in fact the law only applies to the government. Now, that doesn´t include robbery, rape, murder, assault and battery. Those laws are meant purposely for government to protect each and every one of us from each and every one of us. They have a duty to impose those laws upon us. If you do harm to someone else or I do harm to someone else in any one of those categories, robbery, rape, murder, assault and battery they have a duty to prosecute. You´re not going to get out of that by accusing them of breach of their duty because that is their duty. A failure to do that when a complaint is made by you about someone else´s conduct along those lines is a breach of their duty for failure to follow it through and do anything about it. That comes under misprision of a felony not reporting and acting on prosecuting a criminal act when it´s been reported to law enforcement. It´s a breach of their duty as well as a misprision of felony. Most states do not have a misprision of felony statute—the federal does in Title 18. A few of the states we found it but most of the states don´t have that. They leave it to the breach of fiduciary duty to be brought up and they hope that you people out here remain stupid, don´t know anything about it and won´t do anything about. Well, I´m hoping that we won´t remain stupid. I´m hoping that I´ll find enough, get enough together and make it available to enough people that they can, in fact, go after these government flunkies for not acting as a reasonable person within the reasonable person standards by doing things that are dishonest, by being negligent in knowing and understanding the bounds of their authorities. Did I put all that together and bring in some of what these cases that I read tonight say? I think I did. I think I´ve shown you that you had the duty and responsibility to go after these people for the wrongs they´re doing and put a stop to it not only for your own safety and your own sake of your property but for your fellow man´s. They have to be stopped because if they don´t bother you anymore they´re going to bother somebody down the street who doesn´t know enough. We need to make it know that the people are learning. Beware of who you fool with because you don´t know who knows this stuff and who´s going to come after you for what you´ve done wrong. You need to make them aware of that. Anyway, he goes on to say: the wrong doer, the person who´s allegedly negligent believes that he or she acted reasonably. For example, if someone attempt to rob an elderly woman in a parking lot and she happens to have a gun and shoots her attacker the objective standard would ask if a reasonable person would have acted in the same way. In the subjective standard the courts would ask the elderly woman if she thought she was acting in a reasonable fashion. Would the attacker be considered to be acting as a reasonable person when he attacked her and tried to rob her—of course not. Would she be acting as a reasonable person when she defended and protected herself and her property? Of course she was. So she was acting in a reasonable fashion and the attacker was not acting as a reasonable person. Well, apply that thought to government people who are trying to impose fear upon you that if you don´t cooperate with our laws you´re going to jail. I don´t come under your laws. Why would I worry about going to jail? I think you could pad your pockets quite nicely with a few of these lawsuits against some of these people because you could take whatever property they have in life away from them. Today you´d be lucky to sell it for a very great price but take it and sell it for whatever you can get for it or take it and give it to your kids. Maybe your kids need a nice home—they´re living in an apartment paying an outrageous amount of money. Sue this character that works for government, take his home away from him and give it to your kids. They get a house for free. Anyway, he goes on to say—now, listen to this: professionals are held to a higher standard of care than the ordinary reasonable person would be. Police officers, for example, must behave as a reasonable officer would do so rather than a reasonable person. In other words, a higher standard of being reasonable. The prospective of an officer would be different than the ordinary person and that difference matters in the court. Yeah—now, he didn´t explain why but it´s because the officer may be a corporate function of government or an executive agency of government. It matters not, he is held to a standard of reasonable care of staying within the bounds of his authority and if he steps outside of them negligent he´s guilty of dishonesty and breach of his duty as a public trustee. They picked on the police officer here. I think some police officers need to be picked on too. Some of them are very fine decent people and they don´t really harass or bother anybody. There´s a lot of good people that are police officers. A couple of little imbeciles that think they´re hotshots because they´re police officers, they need to be stomped on. They go on to say that occasionally statutes or laws will decide the reasonable standard of care rather than the courts interpreting the behavior. When the statutes determine the standard of care owed violations would be called negligence per se. You probably could get into your state statutes and Google reasonable standard of care and see if anything comes up as a state statute on that. I doubt if very many states have passes statutes on it. A few may have. He goes on to say: if a plaintiff, the person alleging the negligence, is unable to prove the defendant´s negligence because pertinent information is inaccessible then the plaintiff can rely on—now, listen to this—on res ipsa loquitor. What this means is that the act speaks for itself and needs no other information to determine the negligence. So it is important that you be able to explain what the law says, what the act was that he did that was not within the confines of his statutory limitations of law and his authority. So the act speaks for itself and you don´t necessarily need any other information or documentation to prove that he was negligent. But under this standard the plaintiff must prove two things, the event which injured themselves only happens when negligence has occurred but you have to show the negligence. You have to show that they didn´t follow the standard of their bounds of authority. They didn´t stay within the bounds. And the other thing is the item or instrument which caused the injury was under exclusive control of the defendant and the plaintiff´s injury were not due to their own actions. A traffic ticket was under the control of the cop, the defendant, and was not something that you created by your own action. He might say you caused it but he had no right to use it on you in the first place. The key factor to remember in considering negligence is whether the duty of care was ever owed to the plaintiff by the defendant and whether or not the duty was breached. Government owes a duty at all times to act with honesty and integrity, to treat us as beneficiaries, not as their providers. We live in an entitlement world. The government thinks they´re entitled to get anything and everything they need from us so that they can have a nice life and the hell with us. They don´t care what happens. That´s an entitlement world. They are not entitled to your money, your wealth, your property, your children or anything else that they´re trying to take from you unless, of course, you´re part of government or operating under some government privilege that you asked for but it has to be one that you applied or asked for, not some pretend privilege. ‘Well, we built the roads and you use them so you´re getting a privilege from government.´ Hogwash. The government could have never built those roads without the money they got from us for taxes. They´re our roads, not theirs and they didn´t build them for us as a privilege. They built them for us because the law requires that they provide a means of commerce flowing freely to benefit us, not to benefit them. They´ll twist it around on you. They´ll try to tell you that you use our schools and you use our hospitals and you use our roads and you use our libraries and these are privileges—hogwash—they are not privileges from government. They might be there, they might have a lot of government connection but so what? It´s not a privilege. It was a duty of government to provide all these things. It´s not a privilege to us. It´s a privilege from us to them to let them keep on doing it. If we had any sense we would shut down things like their scummy hospitals. It´s got to be a very dangerous place to go with all this drug promotion that they do in these hospitals. They kill more people in hospitals than what gets killed in wars and traffic accidents put together. We ought to make them shut them down. I´m sure there´s some good doctors around that have a little bit of sense and would continue to help people and would look up things to do without the drugs if it wasn´t available to them. We´d still have some medical help. We just wouldn´t have this racket that they´re running today called the medical profession with their drug pushing ways that are hurting so many people. Things like that should have been shut down a long time ago but nobody knew. Well, now, you people are learning. I dug some of this up. Other people have dug some of this up. This is not all my work by any means. It´s come from several different sources but we put it together. We put it together in such a way that you should be grasping and understanding of it. You should be feeling more confident about doing it because as I´ve shown you tonight it is your duty to ascertain what their boundaries are and whether they´re acting within their boundaries when they purport to act for government. It´s your duty to report a violation of their government laws to the government. It´s not something that they can retaliate against you for doing. As a matter of fact, that´s what all those whistleblower´s laws was all about. That doesn´t mean that they wouldn´t retaliate against you in some way but if they do you now know how to retaliate back against them for their retaliation. They´re in breach of their duty for doing the things that they´re doing wrong and if they retaliate they´re even in a greater breach of their duty and you sue them over again—go for everything they got. Go for their job, whatever their job is in government. You can garnish their wages and garnish them 100%. They won´t go back to work when they´re not getting paid. You may not get much money out of it. They´ll quit. There´s nothing left there for you to garnish. But that takes their job away from them in case you were wondering how to get them fired. The other way, I sure like this idea. This was written in a local newspaper here in Salisbury, Maryland that this fellow recommend that we send these government people a pink slip and tell them they´re fired. Stop being such nice people and let´s get down to brass tacks and be honest and forceful about things like we should be. Send them a pink slip that says they´re fired. Don´t worry about the language, they´re fired. They´re no more good as politicians, as cops, as lawyers, as judges. Send them a letter and tell them they´re fired. They get enough letters they´ll get little bit upset about it. If only one person does it they´ll ignore it. If lots of people did it would have an overwhelming effect on them. Try to remember that. Plan to look for these violations of government laws that these different people do, violation of the Constitution that they do and lay out a case for breach of fiduciary and trust duty and scratch up the money. Now, I know that´s going to be the hard part, scratching up the money in this terrible economy that we´re in and go file the complaint and don´t try to file it in forma pauper and not pay for it. You´re not going to get very good results out of the court if you do that. We found over the years anybody that did that the court did not look highly upon them because the court didn´t want to work for nothing. Ok, so there´s a way out of these problems that we have. All we have to do is pay the court to get us out of the problems. So, scratch up the money, pay the court, file the case and go after these scum, especially lawyers and judges and politicians that it´s very evident what they´re doing wrong. The news media is telling you the story. Just write it down and put it into the case. They´re telling us what´s going on. A lot of stuff is being exposed and it´s time that something was done about it. And I prefer to do it this way and avoid the violence if at all possible. I´d rather protect the lives of the police and the military if we possibly can and the innocent Americans that might get hurt in the process of a battle like what I see coming if we don´t straighten this out in the courts.


NOTICE: Howard Griswold, Dave DiReamer and others presented here are not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
       Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.
Share

More & Other Information - Resource Pages
Admiralty related items Belligerent Claimant
Bonds Attention Signing the Constitution Away
Citizenship / nationality related items Education
Graphics History
Jerry Kirk Aware
Jurisdiction Law related items
Lewis Mohr Luis Ewing
Money Oath related items
Reading Material Reading Room
Stuff Tax matters
Travel related Truth
  Video
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!

Freedom-School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
This enterprise collectively is known and generally presented as "Freedom-School.com" - "we," "us" or "our" are other expressions of Freedom-School.com used throughout. "You" is in reference to the user / visitor.

This is the fine print that so important. Freedom School and other information served is so for educational purposes only, no liability expressed or assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to or condone unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and
defend all Law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for [those] men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance. Support is not offered.

Freedom School is a free speech site, non-commercial enterprise and operation as
there is no charge for things presented.
Freedom-School.com site relies on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.

The noteworthy failure of [the] government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and any and all [third] parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or anyone else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements appearing on this website are not factual or otherwise in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.

Freedom-School.com is not responsible for content of any linked website or material.
In addition, users may not use Freedom-School.com to engage in, facilitate or further unlawful conduct;
use the service in any way, or manner, that harms us or anyone connected with us or whose work is presented;
damage, disable, overburden, or impair the service (or the network(s) connected to the site)
or interfere with anyone´s use and enjoyment of the website.

All claims to be settled on the land - Austin, Travis county Texas, united States of America, using Texas Common Law.
All parts of this contract apply to the maximum extent permitted by law. A court may hold that we cannot enforce a part of this contract as written. If this happens, then you and we will replace that part with terms that most closely match the intent of the part that we cannot enforce. The rest of this contract will not change. This is the entire contract between you and us regarding your use of the service. It supersedes any prior contract or statements regarding your use of the Freedom-School.com site. If there exists some manner of thing missing we do not forfeit our right to that thing as
we reserve all rights.
We may assign, or modify, alter, change this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the Freedom-School.com site or material contained within.

GOOGLE ANALYTICS: While we do not automatically collect personally identifiable information about you when you visit the Freedom-School.com site, we do collect non-identifying and aggregate information that we use to improve our Web site design and our online presence.
Visitors to this site who have Javascript enabled are tracked using Google Analytics. The type of information that Google Analytics collects about you includes data like: the type of Web browser you are using; the type of operating system you are using; your screen resolution; the version of Flash you may be using; your network location and IP address (this can include geographic data like the country, city and state you are in); your Internet connection speed; the time of your visit to the Freedom-School.com site; the pages you visit on the Freedom-School.com site; the amount of time you spend on each page of the Freedom-School.com site and referring site information. In addition to the reports we receive using Google Analytics data, the data is shared with Google. For more information on Google´s privacy policies, visit: http://www.google.com/privacy/ads/
Here is Google´s description of how Google Analytics works and how you can disable it: "Google Analytics collects information anonymously, and much like examining footprints in sand, it reports website trends without identifying individual visitors. Analytics uses its own cookie to track visitor interactions. The cookie is used to store information, such as what time the current visit occurred, whether the visitor has been to the site before, and what site referred the visitor to the web page. Google Analytics customers can view a variety of reports about how visitors interact with their website so they can improve their website and how people find it. A different cookie is used for each website, and visitors are not tracked across multiple sites. Analytics requires that all websites that use it must update their privacy policy to include a notice that fully discloses the use of Analytics. To disable this type of cookie, some browsers will indicate when a cookie is being sent and allow you to decline cookies on a case-by-case basis."

Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, or work computers´ DMCA Policy

the Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, and/or work computers, make effort to be in compliance with 17 U.S.C. § 512 and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). It is our policy to respond to any infringement notices and take appropriate actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") and other applicable intellectual property laws.

If your copyrighted material has been posted on the Freedom-School.com site, the DVD, or work computers, in other than fair use capacity or if links to your copyrighted material are returned through our search engine and you want the material removed, you must provide a written communication that details the information listed in the following section. Please be aware that you will be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys´ fees) if you misrepresent information listed on the site that is allegedly infringing on your alleged copyrights. We suggest that you may want to first contact competent legal assistance on this matter.

The following elements must be included in your copyright infringement claim:

* Provide evidence of the authorized person to act on behalf of the fully disclosed alleged owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. Please notice that we generally do not deal with third parties.
* Provide sufficient contact information so that we may contact you. You must also include a valid email address.
* You must identify in sufficient detail the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed and including at least one search term under which the material appears in Freedom-School.com search results.
* A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
* A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
* Must be signed by the authorized person to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly being infringed. (Proper ratification of commencement.)


Send the infringement notice via email to the postmaster at Freedom-School.com

Please allow 1-3 business days for an email response. Note that emailing your complaint to other parties such as our Internet Service Provider (ISP) or server host(s) will not expedite your request and may result in a delayed response due the complaint not being properly being filed.


Presentation Copyright© 2003, 2014
All Rights Reserved

H O M E

Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional        Valid CSS!