This site’s informational fact-based content presents how one can move one’s secured God-endowed rights when it is necessary to access natural-law-based justice from the present court system in the State of Michigan body-corporate governmental association, which is likely very similar to the courts in other such States. Our “History Section B” found on the sidebar of this site presents the difference between the State of Michigan and Michigan (the State in the Union), both established as a public Trust but that function under a different form of law. People in the States of the Union interact together under the Public Law, meaning the unwritten natural law of conscience. All State bodies corporate are franchises of the commerce-based federal Trust that functions under the laws of commerce that we term Private Law, meaning written rules of conduct established by a body of persons to which all people who associate in that Trust are subject. Our focus is on state-level courts, but the content applies to federal-level courts too. “Remedeemer” (pronounced: rem e deem' er) is the combination of “rem”, a legal term that means a court action about or against 'the thing' within the commerce-based Trust, and “redeemer” as one who lawfully establishes one's own right to be free from subjugation to a court process that was begun from someone's presumption that one acts via a legal persona pertaining to the thing. As the host of this site, I especially welcome you Readers who are beginning to explore how to protect your God-endowed rights now that you’re realizing what you thought were your fundamental rights are instead being treated as mere social privileges by governors and per rulings made by court officers. All Readers are encouraged to view the new file found on the sidebar, titled: Timeline of the two governmental Trust associations. It provides the date-specific historic events that established our original and still-functioning governmental Trust (beginning with the 1776 Declaration of Independence) merged with our exposure of the events that gave rise to our form of government and what has caused foreign persons and entities since then to establish the separate commerce-based federal Trust structure. Along with others, the host of this website operates Michigan's updated original (c.1835) republican form of civilian government, based from New Buffalo township, Michigan. That informational website is ministryofnewbuffalotownship.org

Saturday, October 24, 2020

The current court system is established to serve a specific status of people, but court officials must also serve those of us who do not operate that status - Part Three, Section B: The key facts about the Federal Reserve Act pertaining to constitutionality and its operation

In the previous parts of this post, we have presented that the 1776 Declaration of Independence and other three sequential Organic Laws have established the American peoples’ right and duty to self-govern, meaning, to act side-by-side to operate the government at all levels; this is termed the “republican form of government”. We have presented that The Constitution of the United States (which prescribes the duties of the Congress in service to us people) includes ten Amendments, called the Bill of Rights, that secures our sole authority over our own God-endowed rights, and, secures our societal governing power, which rights and power cannot be usurped by government office-holders. The Bill of Rights, when operable in the entirety, grounds the presumption of the non-authority of government office-holders as a starting point when we communicate with them. The “supreme Law of the Land” (U. S. Constitution, Art. VI) pertains to the entirety of the Bill of Rights. This section of our Part Three presents that the Federal Reserve Act contains our access to the protection of the entire Bill of Rights. Being qualified to be protected by the entire Bill of Rights protects us from being subject to the post Civil War (1868) 14th Amendment to that constitution. The separate 14th Amendment pertains to persons who operate a public status, and links to only some of the Bill of Rights; in other words, it grounds a government officer’s presumption of the non-authority of those persons to be the sole governor of their societal rights and obligations.

The hidden Venetian-family governors of current-day bureaucrats rely on the 14th Amendment because it authorizes their secular Birth registration scheme (performed by hospital staff-members after a 9-month old baby separates from its mother’s womb) as the means of being able to place a commerce-based Lien on peoples’ exercise of societal rights if people bond their energy with the Venetians’ currency–-being currency within the Federal Reserve System that they established. The Federal Reserve is not an agency of our federal government. People themselves consent to activate that Lien by not utilizing the remedy from it, accessed within the Federal Reserve Act (“Fed Act”). The Lien is performance-based, the basis being that a social conduct obligation exists to do or to not do something, or to pay something. The current court system’s officers and municipal government officers act on that Lien, or their presumption that such Lien is operable or pertains to every human who they physically view. The point being, no one can view that such Lien exists simply because a human exists.

We now focus on the Fed Act in terms of its constitutionality, and why the American people’s remedy from entering into the international jurisdiction of law, where the Federal Reserve System operates, was included in the Act.

As the Declaration of Independence memorializes, our republican form of government secures our private rights, on the premise that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed”. The key word here is consent. We move our private interests with our energy. We energize the act of observing, of learning or reasoning, and then of choosing to do or not do something. To choose is to consent. We express the energetic-substance of our Being through our direct actions, or in the representative-medium of money. The Fed Act provides us access to national money, currently in the form of United States Notes as silver-backed money of exchange. People can also choose to utilize the more familiar form of ‘money’, Federal Reserve Notes, which is circulating global currency of account, like an IOU circulating amongst the persons who use it, backed only by those people who pledge their energy to the use of Federal Reserve bankers to fund the operation of the form of government within the Federal Reserve System. Such pledge of energy causes people to become subject to the transacting rules of commerce, such as statutes and ordinances legislated within the coordinated territorial and commerce-based government jurisdictions that we’ve referenced in Part Two of this post.

The remedy provision of the Fed Act is found as its Section 16, codified as 12 United States Code, Section 411, which states: “Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.” The key portions of this description are: (1) the notes are issued only for making advances to Federal reserve banks through agents and for no other purpose, and (2) the notes are obligations of the United States … receivable for taxes and other public dues, and (3) Federal reserve notes must be redeemed in lawful money on demand … at any Federal Reserve bank. So what that means is, one’s use of Federal reserve notes (FRNs) causes one to be an individual member bank and its sole operational agent, and, one is advanced such foreign currency and must pay a user-fee for it–-usury–and the court system and other internal governmental entities must receive FRNs to satisfy one’s public dues (obligations existing within the Federal Reserve System), and, one can redeem FRNs for “lawful money” upon one’s demand made at any Federal Reserve Bank (which all American banks and banking institutions are).

Many people believe that the Congress’s passage of the Fed Act was unconstitutional. The truth is, everything the Congress has done since the Civil War has been in breach of the trust that the American people repose in that body. But that aside–-since our immediate and private remedy from the Venetian’s attempted conquer of America’s nationality via the bureaucracy of their monetarist empire is secured to us per the Congress’s passage of the Fed Act–-court rulings prior to the Civil War addressed the underlying matter of the constitutionality of the federal government’s power to incorporate, even pertaining to a central bank. Prior to that matter being taken up, importantly, in the 1803 Marbury v Madison case the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Marshall (a Federalist) established the principle of ‘judicial review’ of the actions of the legislative and executive components of the federal government. The constitution does not explicitly provide such power, but provides that un-elected body with only the power to compel an official of the other two components to perform a duty.

That assumed judicial power was exercised in 1819 when Chief Justice Marshall wrote the opinion in McColloch v Maryland, holding that the Congress had implied power to incorporate and establish a central bank charter. The court characterized the power of Congress as being a broad, comprehensive and rational authority over the subjects of finance and currency derived from the aggregate powers in Article I pertaining to fiscal controls, providing that laws were “necessary and proper” for the execution of its powers. Because this ruling would open the door to the Congress’s later delegation of its fiscal responsibility over to foreign bankers, we add that Chief Justice Marshall expressed what was proper and what was improper. Beginning with proper, the ruling stated: “Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and spirit of the Constitution”. Addressing what was improper, which he directed to the States’ potential interference with the means employed by the central government–-and here we can interject Federal Reserve bankers in place of the States–-the ruling stated: “To impose on it [Congress] the necessity of resorting to means which it cannot control, which another Government may furnish or withhold, would render its course precarious, the result of its measure uncertain, and create a dependence on other Governments which might disappoint its most important designs, and is incompatible with the language of the Constitution”. The U. S. Supreme Court repeated its approval of such power of the Congress in 1935, related to the holding in Norman v Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co [case subject: that ‘gold clauses’ in private contracts only secure payment in money, not in gold as a commodity]. In pertinent part, the court held that Congress is authorized to provide a sound and uniform paper currency for the country and secure the benefit of it to the people by appropriate legislation, quoting Veazie Bank v Fenno (1869). What that U.S. Supreme Court in effect secured is that a “sound and uniform paper currency” is sound only by being trusted as sound by the American people as the benefit secured to them by the Congress per the delegated power given to the Congress. In other words, it is the people themselves who secure / bond the soundness of paper currency. Importantly, the Veazie case, also a U.S. Supreme Court case, additionally provides to us that there can be no taxation of lawful money of the United States, but that lawful money issued by a private bank was taxable. Such private bank would be the future Federal Reserve, functioning via its state member banks.

Another important case, not specific to the Fed Act but pertaining to the processing of the resulting Lien on peoples’ energy, is the 1842 Swift v Tyson case. The holding in that case initiated the blending of law and equity as to instruments of a general commercial nature being properly the purview of the federal courts, not the state courts [pre-Civil War state courts], under the general principles and doctrines of commercial jurisprudence. Equity essentially means fairness, and pertains to contracts or agreements. In 1938, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure established one system for processing both law and equity cases. Soon after, most states abolished the procedural distinctions between (statutory) law and equity cases. In federal courts and state courts all civil cases now proceed in the same fashion, regardless of whether they involve legal or equitable redress. That is because the courts are administering the rights and obligations of those people who trans-act together within the Federal Reserve System. Officers of the current court system, who operate commercial jurisprudence, do so from the presumption that all people consent to transact energy exchanges in commerce. There are some additional historic events that support this premise of presumption. 

In 1863, during the banker-instigated so-called Civil War, President Lincoln ordered issuance of the Lieber Code (written by the historian and legal scholar Francis Lieber) as instruction for the Union army to execute warfare in a moral manner. The military was the authority that would protect property in accordance with the laws and usages of war (an international doctrine); the word ‘usages’ relates to title to property. The effect was that the military held the title to all property in abeyance, meaning in temporary suspension, until such time that the people would resume civilian self-governmental power over private and public property. In 1864 the acting Congress amended the terms “state”, “States” and “United States” to mean the territories and District of Columbia (13 Stat. 223, 306, ch.173, sec. 182), per the Congress’s plenary power; this describes the current-day base of the Federal Reserve. In 1861, when the war began, under condition of the emergency President Lincoln ordered specie-backed treasury notes, commonly known as Greenbacks, to be printed. Such lawful money of the United States satisfied government spending and the buying power of consumers. Five days after the war ended in 1865, Lincoln was assassinated. Also relevant is that, at that same time silver was discovered in the West. The prospect of national specie-backed paper money as the medium of exchange threatened the (Venetian) bankers’ planned oligarchical-control of our post-war government, because such control was based on gold internally backing their ability to manipulate an international currency to their benefit. So, in 1866, they caused the Congress to pass the Contraction Act, which retired some of the silver-backed Greenbacks from circulation. They could not eliminate the national money, however, and what we know today as United States Notes are actually Greenbacks that still circulate, but only within bank vaults. We’ll present more about that in our Section C of this Part Three. The bankers even caused the Congress to pass the Coinage Act in 1873, as the means of demonizing the peoples’ use of silver. Gold coins were pronounced as the only form of coin money.

In furtherance of the bankers’ establishment of oligarchical control over the American people, in 1878 (in the continuing absence of functional civilian governments) our federal Municipal Government was incorporated by the bankers as the District of Columbia municipal corporation. The U.S. constitution was adopted as the charter, by operation of the 1868 14th Amendment; the due process clause in that Amendment links to the Bill of Rights but the rules of commerce control which rights apply. In the same year (1878), the American Bar Association was founded in Saratoga Springs, New York; associations existed in all federally-franchised States by 1925. In our Section A of this Part Three we present that attorneys are licensed (by the Venetian families who own the Bar Associations) to attack American vessels in international jurisdictions of law (individual vessels / accounts named after singular people, established for the purpose of people moving their energy pledged to the use of central bankers). In our Part Two we reference the congressional passage of the 1851 Limited Liability Act that bought the rules of Admiralty Law onto land as Maritime Law, revised by Congress in 1884 in relation to the 14th Amendment, revised in 1886 to extend to all debts and liabilities applicable to the 1887 Interstate Commerce Act. We now add that it was revised again in 1936 to include the central bankers’ debt-based currency. The Federal Reserve is a private Maritime Limited Liability corporation. After the Federal Reserve System was established, the Congress allowed state banks to close, which gave the Fed bankers a monopoly position. The individualized vessels the bankers established for the American people, in conjunction with a municipal cestui que vie trust (which means a Trust of a Trust), are the maritime vessels that attorneys are licensed to attack in international jurisdictions of law. 

In 1887 the Congress also created the Interstate Commerce Commission, which initiated Administrative Law (statutory codes made Public Policy by federally-franchised State “lawmakers”) enforced in the courts as administrative courts. When the Federal Reserve System was re-chartered by President Roosevelt in 1933, the National Conference of Governors was established. The governors pledged the good faith and credit of the citizenry of their federally-franchised States (States on paper) to stand as sureties for the debt of the municipal US corporation (incorporated in1878). That is from where current-day governors derive the authority to issue executive orders that compel residents’ conduct; residents’ conduct is usually compelled by the legislatures’ passage of bills that the governors sign into administrative law that the courts enforce in conjunction with the States’ law-enforcement departments. In 1934, per passage of the Foreign Trade Zones Act, FDR signed over all governmental service contracts to the bankers’ control. The 1944 Bretton Woods Agreement established the International Monetary Fund, a system of monetary management of the rules for commercial and financial relations among the United States, Canada, Western European countries, and others. The IMF chartered a new Trust Management Organization in France doing business as UNITED STATES, INC., and also took over control of State of State franchises and opened coordinating STATE OF STATE franchises (such as the “STATE OF MICHIGAN”). The latter form of human-energy control, activated when people energize the bankers’ currency, produces funding for the State of State military-style governing of human conduct per statutes passed as corporate public policy by ‘lawmakers’ (Legislatures). In 1952 the Uniform Commercial Code was developed, to which all statutes of the US franchised States must comply; the Attorneys General of the States review all legislative bills for compliance prior to their inclusion into the States’ Public Policy. By 1971, all States had revised their constitutions per which the residents authorized the utilization of Maritime Law codes in the administrative courts.

In our Part Three’s final Section C, we focus on the operation of the Fed Act remedy from being subjected to the bankers’ scheme. By exercising the remedy, we defeat the Venetian families’ empiricist structure designed to capture our energy by capturing our minds. We defeat it with our exercise of never-extinguished nationalism derived from our original structuring of our state and federal level government. That original structure is concisely explained in the "History Section B" accessed from the sidebar of this site.

No comments:

Post a Comment