Fire the Judge

i saw a post at another forum bearing this title and gave it some thought. im aware of the fact you can fire a district attorney or any other attorney who interlopes on your contract, or, fire a district attorney who refuses to protect your rights. this applies to a judge also. he has a contract with you (his oath of office). accept his contract with another contract and inform him that he is to work for you, and tell him his oath is his bond from you (the people), then, he is indemnified and has to obey you. now, you set up and tell him what he is gonna do for you and fire him the moment he steps outside those boundaries. On a side note, if they ever accuse you of threatening a judge, tell them to produce one, they are all government employees. peeace.

kgod999,

I can't tell you how timely your post is. Thank you.


Do you have any "sample" paperwork showing more detail?

HB

[Freedomless]

We definitely need to fire our judge and the attorneys. When the judge and the attorneys ignore testimony and put whatever they want into the judgment, someone needs to be fired. We are looking into pro se in the higher courts.

[TheBlackTruth]

Originally Posted by kgod999

i saw a post at another forum bearing this title and gave it some thought. im aware of the fact you can fire a district attorney or any other attorney who interlopes on your contract, or, fire a district attorney who refuses to protect your rights. this applies to a judge also. he has a contract with you (his oath of office). accept his contract with another contract and inform him that he is to work for you, and tell him his oath is his bond from you (the people), then, he is indemnified and has to obey you. now, you set up and tell him what he is gonna do for you and fire him the moment he steps outside those boundaries. On a side note, if they ever accuse you of threatening a judge, tell them to produce one, they are all government employees. peeace.

I must chime in here and be the devil's advocate.

I am challenging this view of "contracts" between the defendant and judicial actors. An oath is not a contract. Contracts have particular qualities that makes them such. Please support your statement that an oath is a contract.

Also, please elaborate on this notion of "firing" a judicial actor. Is this idea dependent on the idea that there is a contract betwix the two of you?

-BT

any oath is a contract, whether it be a oath to support your masonic brothers in the lodge, your oath to anything is your contract to it, thats self explanatory. the judge's contract with you to protect your rights from the government THRU their oath. thats why you have to place it in the record, to turn the actor BACK into a judge, that way he has to rule on the law and not their fictional codes, etc. the problem is, when people go to court, its easy to keep contracting back into their jurisdiction because ANY thing you do to recognize the judge gives him jurisdiction over you. Ive had soo much experience with this stuff that i know its all true. they have NOTHING until you contract. ask ANY prisoner who makes a plea deal, the first thing out the judges mouth is he asks you if anyone offered you anything to plea guilty. and you are sitting there looking dumbfounded because you KNOW the judge KNOWS you were offered a plea deal by the district attorney BECAUSE ITS SITTING THERE ON HIS BENCH AND HE HAS READ THE DEAL. They gotta get you to consent to their contract (plea deal) with the appearance that you did it of your own free will and not under duress. folks, this all comes down to are you willing to let them beat the crap out of you when you tell the "judge" that you refuse to consent to any of their crap and start walking out the courtroom. If they dont jump you and beat the crap out of you, you have won. go home and DONOT contract back with any of their summons to court. they have NOTHING, i repeat, NOTHING until you start signing their documents. this have been proven to me over and over and over. I can tell by their reactions they have nothing until you sign over your rights. Now, addressing this firing issue. Are you a taxpayer? (Yes). are you a sovereign (depends on how you are conducting your business). the bottom line is, if you read their oaths, they are wearing two hats at the same time, a minister (administrator of codes, statutes), and they can only be a neutral referee when you tell them to. If you dont, they are employees that work FOR YOU, thats why you can fire them. stop making this stuff hard and complicated. it took me 8 years to realize this stuff is simple. we just dont believe. i read something this morning where God said that the reason we are being punished is because we dont trust his guidance. He WILL PROVIDE for you if you let him. Im not a religious person by no means but the Bible WILL guide you. We dont wanna be like Jesus (sacrifice) but say we do. Tell that judge to go back down the hole he crawled out of and walk out the court room after telling them they have no jurisdiction and you dont consent to anything they are doing and watch how quite it will get. You are to move the court, they WILL NOT do it for you. I was in court one time on a civil case and the other party didnt show up. This other party was the one bringing the case, i was the defendant. The other party's attorney was there waiting and i wasnt amused. So, i got up out my seat and ordered the judge to dismiss the case. The attorney for the plaintiff broke speed records running to the bench and pleading for more time for the plaintiff to show up. the judge started grinning because he knew i was acting the way you suppose to act in court. Be the King you are and stop being afraid of them. Im not saying be careless, but, be the King you say you are and fire tha fool and if he doenst remove himself from the case, tell them you dont consent , you are fired and walk out tha courthouse and make them kidnap you. Why cant some of you see this yet? What has Marc Stevens been telling you? This is ALL a scam. there is no such thing as "court", whether it be a american or british court. this concept has been a scam from the beginning. a court is a ANYPLACE where games are played, whether it be basketball, tennis, jesters and clowns in front of a king, etc. thats why they fear militia groups,etc. because any group of people can form their own court, a place where they can play their OWN games. they have only one tool against truth and that is their guns. thats why they have to dumb you down from birth thru college with this patriotic, go die for the bankers crap. cant yall see this is about the devil vs God, illusion vs truth. its not about how much law you learn from any books, its about being the extension of God that he says you are. Once you stop being God, the system will destroy you. Go back and read John 10:34, they were stoning Jesus because he said when you see ANY man, you see God, and they couldnt handle that.Jesus wasnt saying that HE was God, they distorted what he was really saying. Its about the blood, the bloodlines. We are all God until we stop being God.They wanted God to be outside themselves, which is exactly why they teach seperation of God and the state because they are the same people who dont want you to know that YOU ARE GOD. Mel Gibson didnt touch on the truth in his movie, if he did, there wouldnt have been a movie. them devils control all major media and you guys know it. Thats what this whole game is about, them disobeying God (you) and you letting them. I didnt mean to me so long with my reply, but it strikes a nerve sometimes when i realize how hard we are still making this out to be. Their goal is to disobey God (you) thru their rules and regulations. Everything they do is to appease the reptilian devils thats in their bloodlines. This stuff is real, this aint no movie stuff. they dont want you to know that the devil is walking the earth as men and women with reptilian bloodlines, forget the red devil on the hotsauce bottle crap. the devil is wearing black ropes, police uniforms, sheriffs uniforms, suits and ties, etc. They are after your soul people. And you let them do it with their game of passing laws that dont apply to you unless you let it. if you dont educate your brother, you have failed him and yourself. the reason people dont wanna know the truth is because they wanna plead innocent in front of God in the afterlife. it aint gonna happen. when the truth comes your way, its too late. They are tempting you on the mountain like Jesus ANYTIME they charge you. They are testing to see if you know who you are. Its on a subconscious level, its in their blood. they know THEY arent God, so you MUST be God, remember, Jesus was always being ACCUSED, CHARGED WITH CRIMES. I remember my daughter's mother telling me one time that i didnt have the money to get visitation rights to see my daughter from the court. I told her if i had to go to court to see my daughter, then i guess i wouldnt be seeing her. See, she didnt know what i was saying. She didnt know that i was really saying that im God and for me to ask any man for permission to see my daughter would make me less than God. I am, i do, i dont ask. When you ask, you lose, you must tell them what you want to happen. Thats why redemption has failed people. you dont ask them to adjust the account, you tell them its been adjusted with you acceptance or tender and move on. If they keep pursuing you, charge them with the crimes for using the mail and telephone to extort something thats already been discharged. I telling you what Rice Mecleod, winston strout and the others been trying to tell you but you wanna get caught up in the procedure and not the settlment of your problems. Ive been guilty myself. Folks im sitting here with 5 documents a judge had sealed because the truth is so powerful. i told them devils they kidnapped me and the judge sealed the case. they dont wanna hear the truth, they could never be in the order of Melchelzidek, thats why they started the new world order people. in closing, fire tha fool.

[TheBlackTruth]

Yikes!

. . ask a couple of questions and kgodd comes back with an essay! haha

Well, in all of that, I still didn't get a clear answer to my questions.

I'll say this: An oath is NOT a contract. If it were, it would likely be called a "contract" and not an "oath". An oath is its own animal altogether at law. This is likely why it was deemed necessary to give it its own name. Oaths generally only have one party. THIS is the reason why oaths are usually required to be filed - else nobody would know the oath was taken because only one party is involved! This is invariably why such normally must be witnessed and certified in order to be deemed valid. None of the above is necessary for a contract, since, by virtue of being a contract, there is more than one party involved, a consideration, a meeting of the minds, etc. etc.

I suppose for the purposes of casual conversation, you can say an oath is a type of contract, but the similarities end there.

The next issue that I've been seeing floating around is this notion of "firing" the judge. What is the meaning of this term? Is it just a phrase of art to describe some meaningful legal maneuver?

Let's see some case law to support these claims. Pro se (and/or pro per) litigants have been getting burned in the courts too long supported by knowledge gained solely by anecdotal information. This is an attempt to flesh out the facts from the mere suppositions and get to the truth of the matter.

-BT

[Jerseee]

Hhhmm,

As sound as Kgod's position is, I'd have to side with BT on this one. I don't think another contract is necessary. I think holding them to their oath is enough to make them squirm.

Besides, the contract seems to be unilateral and without the consent of both parties. If they contract with us, it is through written trickery and verbal swordplay. They don't have to admit to tricking you when they have your consent. Let me give you an example:

To get a lawyer and for them to call you a client is the kind of trickery I speak of. If you are a client and a client is of unsound mind, how are you sane enough to seek their guidance in the first place? Were you of unsound mind when you went to them? Or were you of unsound mind after they've finished with you?

(When I say "You", that is a general term. It is directed at no one in particular)

[TheBlackTruth]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Hhhmm,

As sound as Kgod's position is, I'd have to side with BT on this one. I don't think another contract is necessary. I think holding them to their oath is enough to make them squirm.

Besides, the contract seems to be unilateral and without the consent of both parties. If they contract with us, it is through written trickery and verbal swordplay. They don't have to admit to tricking you when they have your consent. Let me give you an example:

To get a lawyer and for them to call you a client is the kind of trickery I speak of. If you are a client and a client is of unsound mind, how are you sane enough to seek their guidance in the first place? Were you of unsound mind when you went to them? Or were you of unsound mind after they've finished with you?

(When I say "You", that is a general term. It is directed at no one in particular)

Good point Jerseee.

The "client" of an attorney is presumed incompetent. That's why he will be told to be quiet if he speaks up in court.

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.

[sadie]

kgod

You are really on a roll. Sounds great. opening my eyes wider. Much I don't understand. I need the ABC version. Much continued study.

One thing I'm not getting is

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.

This sounds like you don't want the judge to acknowledge his oath so then he is only an employee and you can fire him. (how do you fire him?)

Then you say

judge's contract with you to protect your rights from the government THRU their oath. thats why you have to place it in the record, to turn the actor BACK into a judge, that way he has to rule on the law and not their fictional codes, etc. the problem is, when people go to court, its easy to keep contracting back into their jurisdiction because ANY thing you do to recognize the judge gives him jurisdiction over you.

This sounds like you want him to be the judge for you.
How do you contract back into their jurisdiction by anything you do?
Do you mean like filing a petition or motion and asking for a ruling on it?

So what is the procedure?

You walk into court and tell the judge he has no jurisdiction over you and walk out?

You contract with the judge to uphold your rights by him acknowledging his oath?

I put on the record the judges oath and my sovereign status and the judge railroaded me. Ignored all my evidence which was already stamped and filed into the record. Found for the CC Bank with no admissible evidence.

I filed a motion to vacate and named all the things the judge did wrong that should void the judgment and the judge claimed she didn't like what I said about her in the petition so denied it and ordered a sanction against me for filing it.

Your judge didn't like what you filed so he sealed the record. They still do what they please. And when you catch them with missing papers that you have stamped copies of they blame it on the clerks.

If they are going to continue in their evil ways I believe we will be seeing more news like we had last week as people are feeling it is the only way they can possibly win against the devils.