Bing
Forum Replies Created
See, this is exactly why overzealous cops get shot at by angry citizens who feel as though they are under assault by rogue cops.
Really, these three guys are suspected of stealing bikes and that is reason enough for the cops to draw their side arms?? Looks like the cops need to be retrained ASAP. . . . . . .and also charged with SOME type of crime.
WTF is wrong with this picture???
I am not a BAR attorney. I never went to law school and my posts in this thread ARE NOT Legal advice.
My legal knowledge and expertise, to the extent that I even have any, was mostly gained by studying the materials available at FG and at SEDM. And working closely with certain FG Fellowship Member(s) whose identities are known only to God.
I want to apologize in advance for crafting this reply in the manner in which I did, so that it will likely not be understandable to FG readers who lack sufficient knowledge of a Rule 201 Motion.
So that said, it would behoove one to go and read the Fed R. of Civ Proc Rule 201 at
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_201
In a nutshell, a person can file a request to have facts judicially noticed. Once a Rule 201 Motion is filed, the judge is REQUIRED to incorporate all judicially noticed facts, into their rules of decision. And in the case of a jury trial, the trial court judge MUST incorporate into the jury instructions, all facts that are judicially noticed.
A Rule 201 Motion is a superb trial strategy and tactic and is the best technique to get facts into the Record, without having to submit to time consuming and very costly evidentiary hearings.
One other comment I wish to make regarding Trowbridge’s appeal to the US Supreme Court has to do with his request for judicial notice.
In particular, I think Trowbridge material, has to do with the manner in which Trowbridge requested judicial notice of certain facts. In this regard, I believe that Dr Trowbridge dropped the ball and missed an excellent opportunity to bolster his defense and limit the degree of freedom of the lower trial court, by his failure to specifically cite in sufficient detail, the precise facts that Trowbridge wanted the trial court to judicially notice.
moreover, it would have been best had Trowbridge requested the trial court judge to grant a hearing so that he could present and discuss his request to judicially notice certain facts. This would have bolstered the trial court record in favor of Trowbridge and would have been a superb opportunity to put the US Government lawyers and the corrupt federal judge, on the defensive.. And it would have made for great theater as we would have been able to enjoy watching the corrupted judge and government lawyers bob and weave and avoid having to discuss the request to judicially notice certain facts
I further felt the responsibility rested with Trowbridge to cite to specific US Supreme Court cases, and arguably even quote from said Supreme Court cases, and disclose these precise citations, rather than do what Trowbridge did, which was merely vaguely request that the Court judicially notice ALL US Supreme Court decisions.
I mean, lets face it, no US District Court judge is going to read every US Supreme Court case from years 1790 to 2014, and then synthesize those cases and integrate them into the decision making process in Trowbridge’s case. It would be impossible. Which is why, I imagine that Rule 201 of the Federal Rues of Civil Procedure require a litigant to be reasonably specific when requesting a trial court to judicially notice certain facts.
Similarly, Trowbridge’s request for the trial court judge to judicially notice all federal regulations published in the federal register and the code of federal regulations, likewise was far too broad of a request.
It was incumbent upon Trowbridge to disclose the specific regulations that he wanted the trial court to judicially notice, and in fact, I think it would have been best if Trowbridge attached photocopies of every regulation he wanted the judge to judicially notice.
In 26 CFR alone, the volume of words contained in the regulations amounts to more than 9 million words. So the notion that a lower district court judge is going to be able to read and understand the vast volume of treasury regulations, most of which had no controlling impact on Trowbridge’s case, was wholly unreasonable and certainly impossible.
But had Trowbridge cited to specific regulations that he wanted to have judicially noticed, it would have shifted the burden to the trial court judge to go back into her chambers and research and study the regulations herself.
In conclusion, by not being more specific when filing his Rule 201 Motion to Judicially Notice Certain Facts, Trowbridge missed his single best opportunity to effectively box in the corrupted lower court judge, and to get powerful exculpatory evidence into the trial court record. Judicially noticed facts made at the trial court level, would have served Trowbridge in good stead once the case reached the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Because by the time the case was appealed, it would have been too late for Trowbridge to introduce his Rule 201 Motion.
Furthermore, had Trowbridge .been more specific in his request to the trial court to judicially notice certain facts, Trowbridge could have more easily raised due process of law violations after it became clear that the corrupt federal judge DID NOT correctly judicially notice certain facts. And on that point alone, Trowbridge would have had a very strong case on appeal. Moreover, the blatant due process of law violation by the lower court judge, would have had the effect of voiding jurisdiction of the lower federal court.
Bing
I just completed reading Trowbridge’s 22 page Appeal to the US Supreme Court, and all of the supporting case materials, and I am pleased to report that every fact and statement made by Trowbridge is 100% accurate and true.
This document authored by Dr Trowbridge is non pareil and is genuinely a Tour de Force par excellence.
I want to suggest it be incorporated into the Path to Freedom Document and also given prominent placement on the main web page. This material is MUST required reading by anyone who is trying to understand the limits of the US Governments jurisdiction inside the 50 Union states
In a nutshell, Trowbridge asserts that he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US District Court in Texas, because he does not have a domicile in and does not reside in any territory where the US Government has exclusive legislative jurisdiction under Art 1., Sec 8, Cl. 17 and 4:3:2 of the USA Constitution.
There are only two aspects of Dr. Trowbridge’s materials where he is mistaken.
1. First, Dr. Trowbridge repeatedly denies he is a nonresident alien of the District of Columbia and the federal United States, as those terms are defined the IRC..
2. Second, Dr. Trowbridge said he is a “resident” of Texas; which, is better than if he had said he was a “Resident of the State of Texas”. Trowbridge would have been better of if he simply indicated that he was domiciled wiithout the federal United States, and withiin the union state of Texas
Trowbridge makes the same error in several places, but regardless of that fact, said mistakes are NOT fatal to Trowbridge’s argument.
The conspiracy of silence by the government attorneys and the district court judge, as well as the cowardly, corrupt Court of Appeals, amounts to a denial of due process of law of the highest magnitude. I would have preferred to see Dr Trowbridge devote more of his appeal by further developing his line of reasoning and thought on the denial of due process issue, and link up that denial and explain how it relates to the court’s loss of jurisdiction
I really hope, although I doubt that the US Supreme Court will grant cert. Because if the they do grant cert, there is no way they can not overturn both the 5th Cir Ct of Appeals rulings, and lower Article IV US District Court, both of which ignored stare decisis, the controlling law, and exculpatory evidence proffered by Dr. Trowbridge.
Dr Trowbridge is a jurisdictional scholar of the highest rank and his pleadings cited above are OUTSTANDING!!!
Bing
I disagree. And it is unhelpful to the unlearned masses, to read that President Nixon reorganized the 50 states into ten regions, as if to imply that any such reorganization was lawful and in compliance with the federal and state constitutions. When in fact, any such reorganization was neither lawful nor constitutional.
NO Executive Order is superior to the USA Constitution.
Further, there is no provision in the Constitution that grants to the President, the legal authority to combine two or more Union states, and then subject said combinations, to some alleged supra authority called the United Nations..
Under international law and the Law of Nations, each of the 5o compact states are separate countries, notwithstanding those powers ceded to the US Government under the Constitution.
Rut Roh!!! :huh:
When it came to taking on more debt, Puerto Rico should have learned to say, “No Mas. No Mas!!” 😀
Bing
There is a serious problem in Texas
It turns out that the Texas state government, does NOT actually have the physical capacity to store the state’s gold reserves.
In other words, Texas does not own and control a vault in which to store the state’s gold reserves.
Yep
And in the Texas law that was recently passed, requiring the gold to be kept inside Texas, no provision was made to allocate funds to construct a depository.
DOH!!
So now Texas legislators are considering moving their gold from a Federal Reserve Bank in New York, to one of the Fed’s subsidiary banks located in Texas. And I understand they are considering issuing Requests For Proposals to try and get banks to bid on storing Texas gold
Ohhhh man!!!
Trowbridge has really nailed it!!!
THANK YOU Admin!!!
Bing
GO TEXAS!!!!!!
One should also keep in mind that the US Govt lawyers employed by FDR, were every bit as crafty and dishonest as IRS and government lawyers are today.
For example, EO 6102, located at http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=14611
uses the terms “person” and “individual”, and DOES NOT use the term “American Citizen”, thus, based upon rulings of the US Supreme Court, I therefore conclude that FDR never actually ordered American Citizens to turn in their gold to the US Govt. FDR was referring to statutory US citizens and legal fictions.
But the American People were tricked by their so-called servant government, and they gave their wealth back to the US Govt., which in turn, shipped much of this gold to Germany, which Hitler then used to finance Germany’s rearmament during the build up to the start of WW II,
Bing
A free Citizen of the uSA who happens to own some gold
Hmmmm, I smell another Federal Reserve/Central bank instituted war, coming soon.
Recently China formed their version of a World Bank, and 47 countries, including NATO “allies” like Great Britain and France, signed up.
I wonder how long it will be before Israel bombs Iran???
Rut roh!! 😡
Hi CWU,
I see you are one with the Holy Spirit.
Good.
Just wanted to let you know that South Carolina is closed on Mondays and Tuesdays. As is Delaware, but no one has noticed that yet.
Check back here on Wednesday and perhaps you may find a fellow South Carolina citizen
God Bless
Signed,
Your new friend, Bing
Brad, welcome to Fam Guardian.
Your post above is, well, how shall I describe it?
Dense.
Yes, your post is dense.
I have no idea what you are seeking or trying to accomplish with your lead post.
My suggestion is that you pray to the Lord and ask him to send you some of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, mainly, Wisdom, Understanding, and Courage.
Good luck
P.S. Also, when you dial up the Lord, ask Him to also send you an English Comp 101 textbook……..general delivery, of course. 😀
As most here are aware, the Internal Revenue Code is NOT positive law, but only prima facie evidence of the law. Since Courts are supposed to remain impartial and uphold the law. To the extent that corrupt federal judges, like, for example, the federal Judge in Texas that presided in the Dick Simkanin case, refuse to admit exculpatory evidence favorable to a Tax Honesty Movement Defendant, or if the judge excludes a positive law such as the Federal Register Act or the Administrative Procedures Act; or when a Judge denies to judicially notice certain facts cited by a litigant in a Rule 201 Motion; all of these instances arguably result in fraud upon the court.
And when Fraud upon the court occurs in a civil case, one should refer to Rule 60 of the Fed R. of Civ Procedure and demand that the case be dismissed with prejudice.
When fraud upon the court is perpetrated by an officer of the court (including the presiding judge), it voids all jurisdiction in the Court. And a case can be reopened years or even decades after said fraud on the court has occurred. The case can than be vacated on Appeal/rehearing.
Here are some helpful web sites and articles that contain valuable information and facts about the subject, “fraud on the court”.
http://breachedjustice.com/societies-laws/fraud-upon-the-court/ – – IMHO,- this is a superb website worthy of being linked to FamGuardian
this is a superb source of materials especially for those FG Fellowship Members domiciled in California Republic, however, some of the html links are inoperable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations#Fraud_upon_the_court
http://definitions.uslegal.com/f/fraud-upon-the-court/
http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNJournal01.nsf/c0d731e03de9828d852574580042ae7a/7ee566f4f7305b2085256e24006a34b6!OpenDocument&Highlight=0,disability* – – – this web page is an excellent source of info for Fam Guardian Fellowship Members who are domiciled in Florida
http://thematrixhasyou.org/PDF/fraud-on-court.pdf
http://frauduponthecourt.blogspot.com/
http://www.examiner.com/article/judge-alleges-fraud-on-the-court-by-government-attorneys-dobyns-case
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29601708/State-Fraud-Upon-the-Court
https://www.recapthelaw.org/2010/04/30/recap-the-press-and-judicial-transparency/ — a great idea that may save FG Members money
Error 500 occurs when the html in the lead post is clicked on
Bing
Hmmm
Good point.
Also, the corruption embedded into the federal judicial system, is astounding. For example, the corrupt US Government, often will offer financial incentives to prosecution witnesses in the form of cash money, or making a favorable recommendation to a judge or a parole board for a lesser prison sentence, in return for the witness/criminal, taking the witness stand and offering testimony against someone that the US Government is prosecuting.
This, to me, is bribing a witness and is also witness tampering. See 18 USC 1512 at
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1512
But when the US Government and corrupted Dept of Justice attorneys tamper with and bribe a witness, it is standard operating procedure.And federal judges NEVER oppose said witness tampering, thereby making said federal judges accessories after the fact and through the Judge’s ongoing silence, also making the judge’s guilty of committing fraud upon the Court – and mark my words, nearly every day federal judges and the court workers under them, working in collusion lying and corrupted Assistant US Attorneys and IRS employees, to undermine and deceive unsuspecting defendants, and corrupting the judicial process
I believe that when a witness who is promised certain tangible benefits by the prosecuting Government, in return for their testimony on behalf of the US Government, it is both unlawful and immoral and rises to the level of “fraud upon the court”.
And when “fraud upon a court” is committed by an officer of the court, be they an attorney involved in the case, or an employee of the judge, such as a deputy courtroom clerk, it immediately voids said court’s jurisdiction. And the case should be dismissed with prejudice. But the problem there is that once “fraud upon the court” has been perpetrated by the Judge or one of the judge’s staff members, or by a prosecuting attorney with the tacit approval of the Judge, then that Judge hearing the case, lacks the legal authority and jurisdiction to dismiss the case because the court has already lost jurisdiction in the matter.
Does my logic make sense to you guys or am I completely off my rocker?
This issue, “fraud upon the court” is a powerful tool and a subject that has for far too long, been underutilized by the Tax Honesty Movement when THM Members have found themselves mired in federal court proceedings.
I remain hopeful that the Fam Guardian Community will in the coming year, devote the intellectual resources to the “fraud upon the court” issue, and perhaps develop a treatise that can aid FG Fellowship Members to recognize instances when fraud upon the court occurs, and how one can leverage and exploit the incident and better integrate it into a due process of law and unequal protection under the law legal brief, Motion, or affidavit, that can aid a THM litigant in securing TOTAL VICTORY in the courtroom.
Bing
