Dear Scott;
I believe that you are already entrenched in administrative process. Like Bob Shultz proved through the Circuit Court (attached) there is no real power there because you have a right to judicial review of that process. However it can convince employers, bankers and brokers to simply hand over your funds and assets to the IRS agent demanding that adminstrative process has the power of law.
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...uLostAtSea.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_Diagram1.jpg
In theory, this is how it is supposed to function; you have a choice. However my experience along with many suitors (
saving to suitors clause of 1789) has been that through clerk malfeasance (character assassination - false branding
pro se) sanctioned by the
judges (actually magistrates), there is no true judicial review.
http://goldismoney.info/forums/archi...php/t-714.html
The above Libel of Review stopped functioning in around 1996. Maybe due to restructuring the IMF and dissociating the Secretary from being the US Governor. I do not know. Just that the federal judge goes silent until the petitioner moves for default judgment and is denied; then the case gets dismissed. Procedurally the petitioner is supposed to take up the cause in state court but that is bankrupt too since 1933 and the 'saving to suitors' clause is only for competent common law:
Quote:
|
"...the United States, ... within their respective districts, as well as upon the high seas; (a) saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land,..." The First Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789; Chapter 20, page 77. The Constitution of the United States of America, Revised and Annotated - Analysis and Interpretation - 1982; Article III, §2, Cl. 1 Diversity of Citizenship, U.S. Government Printing Office document 99-16, p. 741.
|
So we just file the counterclaim (Libel of Review) and simply continue in competent common law by filing the default judgment at the county clerk and recorder before filing it in the US courthouse. There is no competence in the US courthouses (except maybe Manhattan Island) so we don't regard the dismissal valid. However, like I said, once entrenched in administrative process very few employers, bankers and brokers will respect your right to judicial review of the administrative process. Especially when they see you signed and sealed the judgment yourself (albeit out of necessity).
At this point in the reclamation process (of the original estate) I think you need to file in Manhattan at the
Court of International Trade. We (about 150 suitors so far) have not tried that yet.
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/informational/directory.htm
The best thing is if they have made an admission they are moving in admiralty; that they already are
entrenched in judicial process. That is Article III jurisdiction and the
Verified Statement of Right (
in rem; Rule C) comes into play. They back off and in the case attached
even notify the man by true name so. That is a victory. Unfortunately the wiley agent may pick up administrative process and still convince some sheeple down the road with inferior process to hand over funds. It is sad.
But if you have chosen to fight in Article III, by filing on the Patroonship of Manhattan Island, then please keep us informed.
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter1.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter2.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ROchapter3.pdf
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. The banker's response attached: Do not bother calling Ted. He never supported the letter by signature. The
Libel of Review process convinced the lawyer team retained by 1st Bank. So he sent the letter. The lawyer team actually hired the local IRS agent (who appearantly got fired over the matter) a little later and will no longer honor the judicial process.