The Secrets of the Federal Reserve and other Jekyl Island research and doctrine must be considered hearsay by any competent judiciary.
http://www.suijuris.net/forum/banks-...ighlight=jekyl
Otherwise I logically conclude, being an optimist about remedy that somebody would have been able to use the facts about the deceipt to make some headway against the banking cartels in control of currency. Therefore I am going to take a different approach to debunk the resident scam. I will use the Congressional Record itself, of which by the way not one word of verbiage has been recorded from any events on Jekyl Island or elsewhere. I suggest that the Reader wants to take in both perspectives and carefully consider how to use the Congressional Record to establish the work of Eustace Mullins and others into a credible and practicable cause of action for any disputes you care to enter about lawful money.
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...t_in_House.zip
When the .zip file link is activated it will have a good portion of the Senate and House testimony summarized by attachments below. Remember that the House consists of 435 people and the Senate consists of 100 (2 from each State). Therefore of the two,
Congress would be a greater concern considered the House.
In a nutshell, while the Federal Reserve Act may have been voted on and passed in the Senate, the same required action before going to the President for signing never happened, according to the Record. I am going to ignore what happened on Jekyl Island or anywhere outside of Congress. Pages 1492 and 1493 say that Congress
never convened anywhere between December 23, 1913 and January 12, 1914.
It behooves us to examine
sine die first because according to the linked thread Congress failed to adjourn
sine die and that opened the door for extra-congressional meetings.
Sine die is the Latin term in
Robert's Rules of Order for when a body has no set date to reconvene. The term is used when a Congress comes to the end of a term, meaning that they adjourn
without day to reconvene (that same Congress anyway). For instance in 1861 the Congress adjourned
sine die on March 28 because of the Southern representation boycotting the assembly. In the alternative, if the body will be assembling at a known day in the future, the Rules simply stipulate that day be announced in the minutes (Record). See the examples of adjournment verbiage in the .zip file.
We find the representative from Alabama engaging the process in some rather extraordinary protocol. Firstly on the afternoon of the 22nd, Mr. Underwood moves that the House will not meet until 2:30 pm on the 23rd so as to make it easier to get ready for the holidays. [Wouldn't it make better sense to get out of DC early? - to move the convention from noon to say, 9:00 am?]
Now carefully read about the Senate reporting the passage of the FRA and instead of voting the House goes into another recess. Note also they opened at 2:30, said a prayer and recessed already until 3:00. They adjourned at 3:10 so there was no activity regarding a vote or signing off from the House. In ten minutes they listened to the report from the Senate and considered another matter. There may be some very significant sophistry in that attached image. The Senate is reported to have (maybe) approved the FRA and then there is a mention of the enrolled bill being approved by the Senate (or the House?). But that is followed by a presentation about the bill called THE CURRENCY. Why would they be debating about the bill if they had just voted on it? The House debates
prior to the vote. But this might juxtaposition the impression into the casual reader's mind that the House, like the Senate has now approved the FRA. [By the by, I find no indication in the verbiage that day that the Senate voted but I have not read the entire text. Some pages of the Senate (at the top of the page) debate is included in the .zip file but that is all I walked away from the copier with. For now I assume the report to the house is correct but remember the Senate is the
minor branch of the bicameral system.]
Mr. Underwood gets involved again and makes an opening that
anyone wishing to testify about the FRA can do so within the next five days, all under some confusing rhetoric about the indexing system. [Pages 1491-1492.] This may be the opening the bankers at Jekyl Island were awaiting. If so I propose it only worked
de facto. If this testimony were properly put into evidence, I also propose it might be quite effective. In other words, any activities of Congress outside the timeframes of convention and adjournment, recorded in the Congressional Record, are bogus events null and void in every sense.
Examine the .zip file carefully for yourself. I am convinced after a glance that:
1) the House in a total of 10 minutes of floor time did not pass the Federal Reserve Act but left the impression in the verbiage that it did.
2) and that there was some kind of extraordinary five-day
window of opportunity opened up under the obfuscation of
indexing.
I hope that this may be more effective in the hands of suijuris Readers than books about what happened
outside the scope of proper legislation.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. As this thread develops, by early on Page 2 I feel the Jekyl Island scenario of passing the Federal Reserve Act in secrecy and obfuscation has been properly debunked.
