Authority

[ziero0]

I am a proponent of people acting on their own authority if only to discover the boundary conditions on that authority.

I once informed an associate district court judge that I was appointing him fiduciary of the trust he was pretending to represent. This was one of the only lucid responses I received from his quasi-court. His response .... You don't have the authority to appoint me fiduciary.

The other lucid response I received from the same court was that he didn't like me giving the court notice that my court was being convened in the same place and time as his court. His court being inferior his response was lucid but irrational.

Experience has proven that irrational guys wearing black dresses likely are experiencing PMS. Men, if you attempt to assert authority over your wife (or guys who wear robes and practice EQUITY for that matter), I implore you to nod frequently and correct the misconceptions when out of knife, toaster or bailiff range

[ziero0]

Hobbes Leviathan Ch XVI

Actor, Author; Authority
Of Persons Artificiall, some have their words and actions Owned by those whom they represent. And then the Person is the Actor; and he that owneth his words and actions, is the AUTHOR: In which case the Actor acteth by Authority. For that which in speaking of goods and possessions, is called an Owner, and in latine Dominus, in Greeke Kurios; speaking of Actions, is called Author. And as the Right of possession, is called Dominion; so the Right of doing any Action, is called AUTHORITY. So that by Authority, is alwayes understood a Right of doing any act: and Done By Authority, done by Commission, or Licence from him whose right it is.

[ziero0]

In case you might be wondering where this is going I suggest you read the following Leviathan passage carefully and see what applies to quasi-president Biden

The Authority Is To Be Shewne
And he that maketh a Covenant with the Author, by mediation of the Actor, not knowing what Authority he hath, but onely takes his word; in case such Authority be not made manifest unto him upon demand, is no longer obliged: For the Covenant made with the Author, is not valid, without his Counter-assurance. But if he that so Covenanteth, knew before hand he was to expect no other assurance, than the Actors word; then is the Covenant valid; because the Actor in this case maketh himselfe the Author. And therefore, as when the Authority is evident, the Covenant obligeth the Author, not the Actor; so when the Authority is feigned, it obligeth the Actor onely; there being no Author but himselfe.

[osoab]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKjRMMU9HI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKjRMMU9HI

[ziero0]

Due process is necessary to the establishment of any court. When due process is done then the issue is taken to the court that is established to hear that due process.

If your court is a foreign court (all private courts are) and you desire to present your judgment in hopes that the the foreign jurisdiction will support your action then you really need to have your clerk present THE DOCKET. This is so the foreign court can see that due process has been afforded. THIS established your court as well as their court.

DUE PROCESS is the ONLY authority you will encounter in any court (His Honors jaw flapping and black priest robes, staff and symbology are illusions of authority). The DOCKET is a summary of the path by which DUE PROCESS is created and proven.

Issues and facts are irrelevant when due process is incomplete.

[ziero0]

Appearance cures any possible defect in due process. *You shouldn't be arguing jurisdiction when the issue is due process.

Arguing jurisdiction is a traverse of due process. The argument is the appearance.

Which begs the question:

HOW DO I NOT APPEAR WHEN I AM HAULED INTO COURT IN HANDCUFFS?

This is not an appearance. The appearance is you opening your mouth. Viva voce' .Or acknowledging your name. Or your obeying a command to take off a hat, sit down, stand up or take out a toothpick, or remove a flag. These are all actions that traverse lack of due process.

You want to know where a courts authority comes from? The ONLY authority they have is what you grant them.

[ziero0]

Acts and Offices with lack of authority <===> de facto

DE FACTO, i. e. in deed. A term used to denote a thing actually done; a president of the United States de facto is one in the exercise of the executive power, and is distinguished from one, who being legally entitled to such power is ejected from it; the latter would be a president de jure. An officer de facto is frequently considered as an officer de jure, and his official acts are of equal validity. 10 S. & R. 250; 4 Binn. R. 371; 11 S. & R. 411, 414; Coxe, 318; 9 Mass. 231; 10 Mass. 290; 15 Mass. 180; 5 Pick.
487.

I find it interesting that this definition of de facto from Bouviers Law Dictionary (1856) uses the office of president to define de facto.

Biden seems to currently occupy the office of de facto president.