Being a former citizen, it makes sense why you would say all that.
Yet, have you not proven in Our courts, that what you say about the People being sovereign, is the fact of the matter? (regardless of a few ignorant judges)
Could David and Others have any success with the LOR if the People were not the sovereigns?
Seems that when one appears as a Citizen/citizen (the Office of Citizen), one is treated as a subordinate... subject to the jurisdiction...
Have you considered the statement "I am
in the United States of America", or "I am
in the republic state of California", that perhaps, rather then a geographical location (because that would be a form of psychosis - living in the bubble), it is more akin to declaring/stating "I am
in the Band" or like saying "I am
in the Army"?
The more I look, the less I have any doubt there is NO requirement to be a Citizen/National of anything, unless one is going to seek to hold an Office (or other government employment)... and We remain the sovereigns.
This Office of Citizen is at the bottom of the pecking order of Offices.
The People who are Citizens are simply the 'hopefuls', hoping to perhaps, one day, become President or hold some other Office or a position in government that even provides pay. Yet, if one has no desire to do such a thing, there is no reason to remain a Citizen.
If the People didn't default to being born Citizens, they they would fail to meet the requirement to hold the Office of President.
While a Citizen is one of the People, One of the People isn't necessarily a Citizen.
Do you think those People in your example are Citizens? Do you think they have "resigned" or more accurately "expatriated"?
Do you think they are still agents for the implied constructive trust created for their use via the New Deal? and being agents, are an employee of the United States of America which are a corporation:
Quote:
Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856):
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The name of this country. ...
5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181.
|
Perhaps they should quit trying to destroy things they do not understand, and quit trying to change the world, and change themselves... First.
Sincerely,
Christopher Theodore: Rhodes
P.S.
Quote:
CHAP. IV.
OF THE SOVEREIGN, HIS OBLIGATIONS, AND HIS RIGHTS.
§ 44. He ought to know the nation.
We have observed above, that every nation ought to know itself. This obligation devolves on the sovereign, since it is he who is to watch over the preservation and perfection of the nation. The duty which the law of nature here imposes on the conductors of nations is of extreme importance, and of considerable extent. They ought exactly to know the whole country subject to their authority; its qualities, defects, advantages, and situation with regard to the neighbouring states; and they ought to acquire a perfect knowledge of the manners and general inclinations of their people, their virtues, vices, talents, &c. All these branches of knowledge are necessary to enable them to govern properly.
|
P.P.S.
I have yet to see any Court decisions say that sovereignty resides in Citizens, and the Constitution uses the word People in Article II section 2 "all Political power is inherent in the People".
No mention of Citizens... being anything other then subject to the juris diction.