Fire the Judge

[Jerseee]

Kgod,

Great position. But like I said, it is a sound position you have. So let me ask you this....they took an oath, why not hold them to it? I mean why play this game with them? Why not just use their own words against them? Or do you want them gone altogether?

You know they took an oath and they don't want to honor it. Why not make them honor it? Isn't this being sui juris as well?

Just curious...

Originally Posted by kgod999

ok, ok. lets back up. stop. please, dont go looking for them to admit the power you have. dont go looking for them to tell you what to do. when the judge sealed my records, he didnt tell me i could charge him with federal crimes for concealing documents filed with a clerk. let me try to break it down again. We all know you can fire a attorney, correct? Ok, a judge is a ATTORNEY on the bench making legal determinations, whats so hard to overstand about that. He IS NOT A JUDGE unless you bring in the oath. He is a EMPLOYEE. Read his oath, he is a government emloyee AND a judge. Theres a difference. He will NOT act as a judge unless you bind him to the oath. Now, if you dont bind him to his oath, he is acting as a government administrator who has discretion to do what he wants. thats cool, because your whole card is, he can be fired like anyone who works for you the taxpayer. They are not gonna tell you in any legal book that you can fire him. Stop looking for the law within their system, its not there for you. I almost dont wanna type anymore because i thought we had this down when we defined the meaning of sui juris in the first place. If you are sui juris, noone can make determinations for you and thats exactly what the judge is doing on the bench, he is making determinations for you, not the court, but you, the one standing there in front of him, he is representing you, thats why he can enter a plea for you, folks, we got to wake up. That man in the gown is not a neutral judicial article 3 judge. A article 3 judge doesnt pay taxes. thats one of the reasons the irs keeps a eye on them, to make sure one of them doesnt get smart on them and stop paying like they suppose to. the moment you pay taxes, you are a employee. and guess who they work for? you and me. he is no different than a public defender. man this is so simple. Please, stop getting caught up in procedures. We have enough procedure. Its admitted that when you hire a lawyer to represent you, that you are incompetant. well, what do you think the "judge" is? thats exactly why they can practice law and be on the bench at the same time. a lot of them do that obvious conflict of interest. You would think a judge cannot practice law in his private firm at the same time he is a judge. I figured it out folks, they know they aint real judges, they are practicing law from the bench and in their offices at the same time, thats why they cant be charged with the seperations of power because they are not acting in judicial capacities on the bench. thats another reason they tell the jury to judge the facts and not the law, they are telling you what the law is. case law is legislation from the bench. they are strictly acting in the legislative branch at all times and pretending its judicial. you cannot fire a real judge because he isnt representing any fictions in court, but a lawyer can only represent fictions(strawmen, corporations),and thus, can be fired by his employers. Thats why the power of attorney over the strawman is so powerful. Man, in fact, they keep telling me the only document theywill file for me in the public record is A POWER OF ATTORNEY. Thats one of the most important documents to them. They are trained to tell you that once someone else represents you, you cannot do ANYTHING on behalf of the strawman unless YOU FIRE THE LAWYER REPRESENTING HIM. In closing, why do you think they appoint attornies all the time as temporary judges? i forgot what they call them, judge pro tem or something of that nature. on the contract issue. Blacktruth, in my copy of blacks law dictionary, (8th edition) they have listed apprxiomately 154 DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONTRACTS LISTED! An oath falls under just about all of them. Implied, unilateral, man i could go on. In fact, one of the documents they sealed in my case was the acceptance of their oath as a contract with me. they didnt say boo. they know its a binding contract with the people. They been telling us since kindergarden that the government is the servant so why even question your power to fire them. Im not saying they gonna go, oo we, he just cited legal code such and such, so i guess im fired. you have to move the court yourself. thats where i stand with my documents. This is the most important thing im gonna tell you. I sent a writ of error to them after they sealed my case. in the writ, i stated to them, thanx for agreeing with me that my judgment is void because they agreed by not rebutting a affidavit i sent them. The clerk filed it into my case (they afraid not to now.) in fact she said, file it, the judge will handle it. now, guess what the judge did this time. im sitting here with a filed copy of my writ explaining that my case is void, but when i checked the docket of the case a month later, there is no record of my filing the writ even though im sitting here with a filed stamped copy. they are hoping i just go away. now,what im gonna do is file the notice of void judgment into the public record. im not waiting on the minister (judge) to do it for me, he gonna have his hands full with the lawsuit im gonna file and inquire as to why ive got all these stamped documents concealed and removed from the records. thats why i love judicial review. stop bringing them controversies to decide on. settle the controversy in the private. Ive told folks numerous times about a incident down in atlanta back around 2000 where i witnessed the county nolle prosecute 12 inmates who had gotten a copy of a self executing contract and had it served on the chief judge and county district attorney. folks, you gotta realize your power and use it.

ok, the way i wrote this IS confusing. ok, what im saying is make a choice on how you wanna handle the situation. do you wanna bring in the real law (common law) and HOPE he obeys his oath, or, do you wanna play by the rules they set up and fire the attorney. I prefer firing the attorney (judge) in CONJUNCTION with telling them they have no jurisdiction and cannot make a legal determination on my behalf as a judge. i dont want the judge to decide he has jurisdiction, im telling him hes fired, not representing me AND he has no jurisdiction all at the same time. i made the legal determination they have no jurisdiction. if you go the common law route, you are bringing in controversy AND you are giving him jurisdiction to decide if he wants to use common law or not. what im saying is, if you cant resist the temptation to argue with them, at the very least bring in his oath and go common law. now, in my case, since i already messed up and argued with them, i have to correct my mess before i start firing them. i gotta get my documents into the public and then tell them they are fired and to stop making determinations for my strawman. what im telling YOU to do is to make the choice at the very beginning, and i believe the correct choice is to tell them they are fired (the judge, district attorney, sheriff, all of them), they work for you,the taxpayer. dont go looking for them to say ok, im fired. just do it. the main tool they use against us is quietness to see what your next move is. they will not acknowledge what you do.( being fired), but if you contract BACK with them, trust me, they gonna let you know real fast. My mind is opening so fast right now and thats why im confusing people. look at the words they use. a judge says " you are sentenced to such and such". well, whats the definition of sentence? a sentence is a group of words. thats all it is. thats why you can tell him that you dont consent to his group of words (sentence). look at the word jurisdiction, it means CORRECT DICTION. the court is saying their diction is better than yours. i got that off a tape i heard recently and that light bulb went off in my head. well, in order to not fall into their trap of legalise and diction, you just nip it by saying you dont consent to any of it and walk out the courtroom. what, you think they gonna shoot u in the back or something in front of people? no, the worse they can do is have the deputy tackle you and put you into jail and hope you come back and consent the next time you in front of him. i totally believe that if you stick to your guns, they gonna let you go and conceal the case. one thing i do know about attorneys and judges is when they can prove something wrong with your papers or come with some trickery with their words to say your petitions are wrong, THEY WILL. they concealed every document i sent and didnt address NOTHING i presented. the truth is too real. now, does this mean they are afraid of me? no, what it means is they are cautious of me. i busted them out about everything, stealing my car under color of law, kidnapping me BEFORE there was a judicial determination of guilt or innocent (bill of pains and penalties) bringing me to court in chains and handcuffs(duress,extortion) to get me to plea to a deal, sending a ranson note to my family to extort money (bail bond), see, its too much truth in that and they cant handle the truth.

[sadie]

kgod

So how would you fire the judge?

If I get a summons on a claim for a CC do I just return it to the court with a Judicial Notice stating what?

[Jerseee]

Kgod,

Thanks for clearing that up for me--now I see there is a choice to be made in the beginning. So let's say I choose to fire them--what happens to the case? If you fire them how does the case get closed or dismissed?

Originally Posted by kgod999

ok, the way i wrote this IS confusing. ok, what im saying is make a choice on how you wanna handle the situation. do you wanna bring in the real law (common law) and HOPE he obeys his oath, or, do you wanna play by the rules they set up and fire the attorney. I prefer firing the attorney (judge) in CONJUNCTION with telling them they have no jurisdiction and cannot make a legal determination on my behalf as a judge. i dont want the judge to decide he has jurisdiction, im telling him hes fired, not representing me AND he has no jurisdiction all at the same time. i made the legal determination they have no jurisdiction. if you go the common law route, you are bringing in controversy AND you are giving him jurisdiction to decide if he wants to use common law or not. what im saying is, if you cant resist the temptation to argue with them, at the very least bring in his oath and go common law. now, in my case, since i already messed up and argued with them, i have to correct my mess before i start firing them. i gotta get my documents into the public and then tell them they are fired and to stop making determinations for my strawman. what im telling YOU to do is to make the choice at the very beginning, and i believe the correct choice is to tell them they are fired (the judge, district attorney, sheriff, all of them), they work for you,the taxpayer. dont go looking for them to say ok, im fired. just do it. the main tool they use against us is quietness to see what your next move is. they will not acknowledge what you do.( being fired), but if you contract BACK with them, trust me, they gonna let you know real fast. My mind is opening so fast right now and thats why im confusing people. look at the words they use. a judge says " you are sentenced to such and such". well, whats the definition of sentence? a sentence is a group of words. thats all it is. thats why you can tell him that you dont consent to his group of words (sentence). look at the word jurisdiction, it means CORRECT DICTION. the court is saying their diction is better than yours. i got that off a tape i heard recently and that light bulb went off in my head. well, in order to not fall into their trap of legalise and diction, you just nip it by saying you dont consent to any of it and walk out the courtroom. what, you think they gonna shoot u in the back or something in front of people? no, the worse they can do is have the deputy tackle you and put you into jail and hope you come back and consent the next time you in front of him. i totally believe that if you stick to your guns, they gonna let you go and conceal the case. one thing i do know about attorneys and judges is when they can prove something wrong with your papers or come with some trickery with their words to say your petitions are wrong, THEY WILL. they concealed every document i sent and didnt address NOTHING i presented. the truth is too real. now, does this mean they are afraid of me? no, what it means is they are cautious of me. i busted them out about everything, stealing my car under color of law, kidnapping me BEFORE there was a judicial determination of guilt or innocent (bill of pains and penalties) bringing me to court in chains and handcuffs(duress,extortion) to get me to plea to a deal, sending a ranson note to my family to extort money (bail bond), see, its too much truth in that and they cant handle the truth.

you tell them they are fired and that you dont consent to none of the offers. then walk out. you can also file this statement into the case by special appearance. its that simple. Remember the information thats going around now about how statutes are actually pocket judgments. when a officer gives you a speeding ticket, the case was heard at that moment and the officer gave you a judgment and when you signed, it closed the deal. its that simple and the judge knows its a pocket judgment. so, that explains why u can come into court with a mountain of evidence explaining injured party, constitution,etc. contracts override EVERYTHING ELSE. they just listen to amuse you and yawn and secure the judgment. when the cop brings the judgment in (ticket)its a unsecured judgment. then the judge secures it by giving the order for you to pay. firing them works the same way. tell them they are fired and cannot make a legal determination for your strawman. This is how i would do it: lets say i get a offer from the court in the future, the first two documents im sending out are the power of attorney over my strawman ( i make all legal determinations on his behalf), and the letter firing everybody involved and their agents and principals. now, if its a court summons, i do the same thing and file these documents in by special appearance and repeat these things verbally in front of the judge. then WALK OUT THE COURTROOM. its not a COURT. get that thru your head first. its just a place of BUSINESS, its a BANK, thats all these buildings they are calling court are. cant you walk outta wachovia or suntrust if you dont wanna do business (on a side note, sun-trust, trust the sun, thats straight up masonic teaching), anyway, back on subject. its our fear thats enslaving us. Jerseee, you know this stuff, you know this. Redemption was correct, the problem was, they was trying to mix legalise into redemption by asking the system to acknowledge the adjustments. you are the king, what you say goes. dont banks have bailiffs? yes they do. the judge is just a bank administrator issuing currency, thats all he is doing. if you dont pay the debt, you go to debtors prison. dont ever, ever, ever, ever, ask a judge to make a legal determination for you because you lose.

I can use some of the material here, but not all of it.

If I fire the judge, I lose in my case, since I am the aggressor. (Not the defendant)

How do you do the Power of Attorney over STRAWMAN?

HB

there is a example in rice mcleods redemption manual on a power of attorney. you can make up one yourself. all you are doing is stating that the flesh and blood you with correct spelling of your name, will handle all the business and legal affairs of your all caps name. sign and date it for the strawman and the flesh and blood man with correct spelling. thats all there is to it.

[Jerseee]

Kgod,

Great explanation!!

There are a few reasons why I asked questions:

1. I try not to assume everyone knows what I know. This is why the majority of my posts are repetitive. I know it disables some folks from doing research but some folks are pressed for time in alot of situations. Therefore, I need to be flexible in teaching and vice versa.

2. I know this stuff but, I let it go for a couple of years now because of its morphic nature. UCC redemption is costly when it should be free and its erratic when it can be stablized somewhat.

3. You are a teacher and should explain what you know. As you can see, you answered Sadie's post and mine simultaneously. So I know you have the skills to teach--you just lack the patience sometimes and I have known this about you for quite a while so this is nothing new. You usually get frustrated and impatient so dispensing your knowledge upon request at times can be a little trying especially with all that you have gone through. (from property issues to child support--you have a wealth of experience, which is why I defer to you in this area and recommend you to others).

4. I remember what you told me that your mom told you----"Just do it". So I asked some juvenile questions and some actual questions that I needed to know so, you can expound on what you know. So "I Just did it".

Hope you dont' mind me pimpin' you for information for all of us--but alot of your posts seems to get overlooked because of your frustration with the system imbedded in your message. I still have most of your old e-mails. There is alot of info in your posts that are not in books. you post your experiences and as much as book knowledge is valuable--it cannot come close to experience. This area alone has my utmost respect for your posts.

Thanks Kgod--I know there is more that you need to add so continue teaching...I'm taking notes.

Originally Posted by kgod999

you tell them they are fired and that you dont consent to none of the offers. then walk out. you can also file this statement into the case by special appearance. its that simple. Remember the information thats going around now about how statutes are actually pocket judgments. when a officer gives you a speeding ticket, the case was heard at that moment and the officer gave you a judgment and when you signed, it closed the deal. its that simple and the judge knows its a pocket judgment. so, that explains why u can come into court with a mountain of evidence explaining injured party, constitution,etc. contracts override EVERYTHING ELSE. they just listen to amuse you and yawn and secure the judgment. when the cop brings the judgment in (ticket)its a unsecured judgment. then the judge secures it by giving the order for you to pay. firing them works the same way. tell them they are fired and cannot make a legal determination for your strawman. This is how i would do it: lets say i get a offer from the court in the future, the first two documents im sending out are the power of attorney over my strawman ( i make all legal determinations on his behalf), and the letter firing everybody involved and their agents and principals. now, if its a court summons, i do the same thing and file these documents in by special appearance and repeat these things verbally in front of the judge. then WALK OUT THE COURTROOM. its not a COURT. get that thru your head first. its just a place of BUSINESS, its a BANK, thats all these buildings they are calling court are. cant you walk outta wachovia or suntrust if you dont wanna do business (on a side note, sun-trust, trust the sun, thats straight up masonic teaching), anyway, back on subject. its our fear thats enslaving us. Jerseee, you know this stuff, you know this. Redemption was correct, the problem was, they was trying to mix legalise into redemption by asking the system to acknowledge the adjustments. you are the king, what you say goes. dont banks have bailiffs? yes they do. the judge is just a bank administrator issuing currency, thats all he is doing. if you dont pay the debt, you go to debtors prison. dont ever, ever, ever, ever, ask a judge to make a legal determination for you because you lose.

i know, i know, i wear my emotions on my sleave too much. my bad. anyway, i do need to work on that AND my patience. its never personal with me, may seem that way, just the frustration like you said. now, some things i may post may seem a little off like explaining the religious context of whats going on, the masonic, stuff, etc. but those things are IMPORTANT because people dont realize the IMPORTANCE of those things and how they play a MAJOR ROLE in shaping the idealism of attornies who run this show. i ask people all the time about why they dont question their preacher when they know their preacher is a mason. what secrets does the preacher have that i cant have when i thought his main goal was to save my soul. what are they learning in the lodge? does it affect me? you have to know where that judge is mentally. they think they are God. they have their stuff down pat. they are at the point where they have made themselves into privilaged citizens and we let them. Jerseee, you reminded me at all times that its the strawman they are addressing. Jack Smith even admitted that the strawman needed a representative in court to MOVE things and if you dont move things for the strawman, they WILL. Ive followed the happenings of Roger Elvick, and the problem they had with Elvick was he wasnt afraid. the man literally ran around and wrote promises on the closed accounts and they didnt say boo. where he got into trouble was for educating others to do the same. Remember when Roger said when a debt collector calls you, tell them your strawman is bankrupt and hangup. what he was saying is, HE made that legal determination (and its true), and theirs no need to go to THEM and file that declaration into the public record. its already been decided. if you owe me money, i dont ask the judge to tell me you do, i have judgment, its unsecured , i just tell the judge to secure it for me, thats all. makes it easier to collect, thats all. people lose judgment cases because they go in and ask the judge to determine if they have judgment. nope, you go in with judgment and tell the judge to back up what you are saying. if he refuse, cool, ill add him to my invoice for interfering with my contract. when you accept for value something, the deal is over. its been adjusted and they gotta come with the product of their offer. if they dont, THEN you use whatever tools you need to get remedy. you can use legalise at that point against them because corporations fall under statutes. yu can even use common law remedies against them. sell their house with a bill of sale. you gotta have guts. see, we keep trying to run to them because we afraid to use our own tools. we want them to stand on our side when the Bible already said they will not. Go read Matthew chapter 23 and it will explain to you that they will not and cannot be on your side. One more thing, we gotta start working in teams. if they kidnap someone, we need people to file mass writs of habeas corpus to get him out. we need people standing outside the jail hand delivering writs to the deputies as they report to work. a writ can be addressed to all of them. stop getting caught up in their legalise. See, our focus is on feeding tupes to the man's wife, our focus is on Barry bonds and Mark Mcquire, our focus is everywhere but on our brothers and sisters who have been kidnapped and dont even know they were kidnapped. thats the sad part about all this. 90 percent of people in jail didnt do anything and think they did. dont think they if you do these things they will not help because they will. they dont want the spotlight on these things. peace.

[Jerseee]

Kgod,

I know masonry plays a BIG role in this defacto government--some of the people I know are affiliated with masons--hell, I was offered numerous times to go online and be of the chosen few that they actively sought out.

You see, history plays a role in this also. Your boy George Washington was a mason and the masons were truely the first to start party politics. In the late 1800s it got to the point of corruption and the people of this nation were not going to stand for it anymore. That is one reason why you can bust them out if the judge is a mason. History--my man, history.

Also, folks should do research on the year 1913. This was a very monumental year for the thieves. Check it out. Additionally, one should do some research on the author of the book called, "The Pooring of America". He's an economics professor and he even admits (after his research) that the reason why we are living like this today was totally due to the sins of the fathers. he specifically points out the New Deal Era and the happenings of around 1900-1944.

ignore history and you're doomed to repeat it.