And has been for a very long time. What are you going to do about it now that you know? We need to do something, and we need to do something FAST before this foreign occupier destroys us.
And if you think that they have not tainted every de jure government agency, they have because all US persons have been “incorporated”. In other words they have been combined into one defacto fiction and can never exist “without” the UNITED STATES. Please share this video far and wide. It is very important for ALL OF US to learn about this information! The UNITED STATES is a Corporation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/te… And it is LOCATED in Washington DC: https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-307 [*]Visit http://freedomfromgovernment.org to learn more. [*]Get books, tools and equipment at http://shop.freedomfromgovernment.org
[*][Links in this post are provided by Freedom From Government.org and are republished for informational purposes only and do not constitute product endorsement or is it meant to give legal advise. TLB]
CASE LAW: U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873) “The term resident and citizen of the United States is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress.” “We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it’s own…” United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) “…he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State,…” “One may be a citizen of a State an yet not a citizen of the United States”. McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883) “That there is a citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state,…” Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927) “A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government …” Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383 “Taxpayers are not [de jure] State Citizens.” Belmont v. Town of Gulfport, 122 So. 10. State v. Manuel, 20 NC 122: “the term ‘citizen’ in the United States, is analogous to the term `subject’ in common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government.” Supreme Court: Jones v. Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226: “The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship.” Supreme Court: US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957: “The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States.” The Amendment (14th) recognized that “an individual can be a Citizen of one of the several states without being a citizen of the United States,” (U.S. v. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830), or, “a citizen of the United States without being a Citizen of a state.” (Slaughter-House Cases, supra; cf. U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 US 542, 549 (1875)). A more recent case is Crosse v. Bd. of Supervisors, 221 A.2d 431 (1966) which says: “Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state.” Citing U.S. v. Cruikshank, supra. The courts presume you to be a federal citizen, without even telling you that there are different classes of citizens. It is up to you dispute this. See… “Unless the defendant can prove he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS has the right to inquire and determine a tax liability.” U.S. v. Slater, 545 Fed. Supp. 179,182 (1982). “There are, then, under our republican form of government, two classes of citizens, one of the United States and one of the state”. Gardina v. Board of Registrars of Jefferson County, 160 Ala. 155; 48 So. 788 (1909) “The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other”. Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935) “…rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship”. Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940) ### Source ###
For News and Views from a European perspective, go to EuropeReloaded.com [A New TLB Project]
Leave a Reply