Results 1 to 10 of 290

Thread: Mans Court case may have cracked open Fraud of D.C. Federal Jurisdiction

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Iridium monty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    8,991
    Thanks
    7,954
    Thanked 8,389 Times in 5,139 Posts

    Re: Mans Court case may have cracked open Fraud of D.C. Federal Jurisdiction

    Edit: Because the oath of office for the federal officers contains a religious test and is repugnant to Article VI Sec. 3 the federal judges and justices cannot hold the judicial power of the Article III judicial branch of government.

    Also, all the agencies of the administrative branch are usurping jurisdiction under the municipal government of Washington DC as explained below.

    Exertped from the recent blog post:

    It is essential that the reader understand the actual meaning of the word “federal”; to wit:
    “federal . . . Of or pertaining to, or founded upon and organized by, a compact or act or union between separate sovereign states . . .” A Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Isaac K. Funk, Editor in Chief (New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1903), p. 667.

    In the case of the Republic, the compact is the Constitution and the “separate sovereign states” the members of the Union.[7] (Footnote 7 is posted below)

    As shown below, all official use of the term “federal judge” is specious and intended to deceive—because no such judge has ever existed.

    The three kinds of courts brought into existence by Congress, and their respective judges, are:

    1. Federal: courts of limited jurisdiction ordained and established by Congress under express authority Article III 1 of the Constitution, and federal judges authorized to exercise “The judicial Power of the United States,” id., in such courts throughout the Union for having taken an oath or affirmation that conforms to the provisions of Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution—of which there has never been any such judge in American history.


    1. Territorial: courts of general jurisdiction created by Congress under implied authority of the territorial clause of the Constitution, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, and territorial judges authorized to exercise general jurisdiction in “Territory or other Property belonging to the United States,” id., i.e. United States territories and enclaves; between the Judiciary Act (September 24, 1789) and sometime after incorporation of the District of Columbia, 16 Stat. 419 (February 21, 1871).


    1. Municipal: courts of general jurisdiction created by Congress under implied authority of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution following incorporation of the District of Columbia February 21, 1871, 16 Stat. 419, and municipal judges authorized to exercise general jurisdiction within the exterior limits of the District of Columbia; Congress on November 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4935, Congress in 28 U.S.C. Chapter 176, § 3002(15), in Chapter 176 of Title 28 U.S.C. (under which all civil or criminal proceedings are conducted), define “United States” to mean “a Federal corporation,” id., the object of which definition and meaning is the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation, and omit to define “United States” in a geographical sense—and today every United States district and magistrate judge in every district court of limited jurisdiction throughout the Union is a District of Columbia municipal judge usurping exercise of general jurisdiction and declaring municipal law of the District of Columbia Municipal Corporation throughout the Union with no authority to do so.



    Bereft of authority to exercise “The judicial Power of the United States,” Constitution, Art. III, § 1, every justice of the Supreme Court and every United States district judge and magistrate judge is under the exclusive control of the legislative power (Congress), who manages the activities of such justices and judges by way of the laws of the “United States” (District of Columbia Municipal Corporation),i.e., municipal law of the District of Columbia known as, among others, the United States Code and Code of Federal Regulations.)






    Footnote 7:
    [7]
    These facts are acknowledged by Congress in but a single obscure provision of Title 28 U.S.C., which admits of members of the Union as actual countries; to wit (Underline emphasis added.):

    “§ 297 Assignment of judges to courts of the freely associated compact states

    “(a) The Chief Justice or the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit may assign any circuit, district, magistrate, or territorial judge of a court of the Ninth Circuit, with the consent of the judge so assigned, to serve temporarily as a judge of any duly constituted court of the freely associated compact states whenever an official duly authorized by the laws of the respective compact state requests such assignment and such assignment is necessary for the proper dispatch of the business of the respective court.

    “(b) The Congress consents to the acceptance and retention by any judge so authorized of reimbursement from the countries referred to in subsection (a) of all necessary travel expenses, including transportation, and of subsistence, or of a reasonable per diem allowance in lieu of subsistence. The judge shall report to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts any amount received pursuant to this subsection.”
    The only thing declared necessary in the Constitution & Bill of Rights is the #2A Militia of the several States.
    “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a freeState”
    https://ConstitutionalMilitia.org


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to monty For This Useful Post:

    Ares (15th February 2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •