Cody's Right to _____

[palani]

Even if you saw it, had it explained to you, physically had it handed to you on a platter, you would not be able to benefit from it, Codee. The reason is - you have to believe in something.

Governments derive their powers from the governed. The governed is the body politic. No mystery here.

Now you might consider where the body politic comes from. Individually they might be called electors and subdivided into two classes; qualified and non-qualified.

To be qualified all you have to do is register. The non-qualified consists of every elector who doesn't register.

Now you have an election and someone wins. He takes an oath. Who is the oath to?

Surprisingly, the oath is not given to the qualified electors who voted for or against him. It is given to the non-qualified electors who didn't vote. The other guys submitted their votes to a contest, some won, some lost, but they all agreed to go along with the outcome of the election. This is democracy. The only ones who didn't submit to this contest were the non-qualified electors and to this group the politician gave his oath that he will abide by certain rules.

This is for starters.

[palani]

According to Vattel in the Law of Nations a country might join an alliance with another country to gain some advantage. Essentially this is what the U.S. Constitution is. The (13) original countries signatory to it formed an agreement with a government comprising a domain of 100 square miles and stiling itself 'The United States'. It also calls itself 'the District of Columbia' or 'Columbia'.

A country entering such an alliance can do so for protection or unified trade or international treaties or hundreds of other reasons. However, when an independent country starts letting another control her body politic there is no more independent country.

In 1868 the 14th amendment was illegally ratified (the southern states governments were required to sign under conditions of durress) and the United States implemented their own body politic.

Now if you are a freed slave or were born in the District of Columbia you actually are a U.S. citizen. Also, you might be a Puerto Rican, Guamian, Somoan, Virgin Islander, etc and by law be a U.S. citizen. However, if you are not one of these and yet you proclaim yourself to be such you have accepted and been admitted into the de facto government established by the 14th amendment in your own country (California). You 'reside' there as a denizen, are permitted to vote and pay taxes all the time not realizing that you have committed a treason against your own de jure government. You are not under the constitution because your de jure state government is your only connection to the constitution and you just turned your back on it. You are an outlaw (outside the law) because you placed yourself there. You only have civil rights and before 1964 it is debatable whether you even had these.

[Codee]

NOT LEGAL ADVICE, HIRE AN ATTORNEY

So your legal pleading would like?????


Your argument is so crazy long it becomes lame. It cannot stand right on its own.

How about this.

If I, me, Cody, cannot make you (Who everyou are) go get a license to drive then how can I delegate such power to the state government? I cannot.

There was that hard. You have obviously been pumped up on some seerious pay-tree-rot steroids for a while but it is all garbage. Law is easy. It defines itself, and then states itself. It states right there in the California Vehicle Code that the parts pertaining to driving of vehicles applies to state employees.

All the argumetns that the car is not a vehicle when the California Code says it is... are simply not going to work. Driving is defined as physically controlling the vehicle... so the driving thing is out. Person is defined as a natural person... so the I am not a person thing is out.

Now you see this code stating that the parts which were to curtail an unalienable right of mine actually only applies to state employees. This means that the PARTS of the vehicle code relating to DRIVING are administratiive in nature.

Now I have some goddamn law! It is a code from the vehicle code. It states it right there. Now I go and find an attorney general's opinion opinion that says "The section making the code applicable to drivers, makes it generally applicable to state employees."

Then I realise what "generally applicable" means... Look to see if I am in the set defined. I deterine that I am not and I will try this in court.

So far cannot try it as I get dismissals for my friends with multiple things in addition that the court will dismiss on as well and to save face the cop never shows. And no I will not play or gamble with my friends just to get a ruling on one specific item because it was all that was tried.

Maybe some day if I feel like I will.

[palani]

Congress knew when they passed the 14th amendment that they were committing a major trespass on the states (countries). You might have heard that anytime there is a trespass there is a remedy.

The remedy that they came up with was the expatriation act passed into law the evening before ratifying the 14th amendment. The circumstances were made to look as if congress was telling the president to protect a Finian (free Ireland) patriot from the U.S. who was sitting in a British prison. Essentially in this act the U.S. recognizes the right of a U.S. citizen to expatriate whenever he/she wants. The significance to a man born in one of the (50) states is that you may turn down the 14th amendment. If you do this you are no longer a U.S. citizen, can not register to vote, can not obtain a drivers license, can not participate in social security or obtain any of a number of other benefits that would disturb your status.

In this status, while you can not be a member of the body politic and cannot participate in state government, the government that results (the de facto one) is comprised ONLY of denizens and is in insurrection to their constitution and to the U.S. constitution.

Now the funny thing is, the powers that set up this whole fiasco have to keep the de jure government alive. After all, all these politicians take oaths to the state constitution. Just as in court where the judge can put on an equity hat, an admiralty hat or a common law hat, the governor, secretary of state and anyone else who takes an oath to support their government wear both the hats of the de facto government and the de jure government. Quite funny, really, because here they had to be U.S. citizens in order to run for office and by the Expatriation Act when they swear an oath to a foreign government, they actually cease to be U.S. citizens. They seem to ignore the fine points of this quandry though.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by palani

According to Vattel in the Law of Nations a country might join an alliance with another country to gain some advantage.

Why does my constitutional state government care about the law of nations?

[palani]

Pardon me. I am not quite done yet.

There is no legal pleading. These guys all know this stuff. When faced with it in ANY legal setting they are going to offer you doughnuts to get you as far away from them as possible.

That is why knowing the history of the country and how events have shaped up over time are valuable. There is no pleading. You demand. There is no case record. There never will be. Once the first idiot tries to force you into a court of record the ball game is over.

As far as how you get to this stage I am going to have to leave it to your imagination. You need to mature a little and, frankly, this is not to be considered a get out of jail free card for anyone who drinks and drives.

U.S. citizens are treated like criminals in court because they are criminals. There are only three crimes in the constitution; counterfeiting, piracy and treason. Treason is pretty high on the list for punishment and yet through ignorance or apathy you do it daily without pausing to reflect. So just keep up with the administrative proceedure and see how it all turns out. I bet the judge has a little more history under his belt than you do.

[palani]

Why does my constitutional state government care about the law of nations?

Your country is foreign to the united states and to the other (49) states and to all the rest of the countries of the world. The Law of Nations applies.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by palani

Congress knew when they passed the 14th amendment that they were committing a major trespass on the states (countries). You might have heard that anytime there is a trespass there is a remedy.

Yes. Unlike you however I realise the need for a site. So here, I will hold your little hand for you and build your argument at least to the point where it is fun to argue against.
[California Civil Code (Code which codifies statues Generally applicable in a nonadministrative for to EVERY PERSON/man/woman)]
3523. For every wrong there is a remedy.

Now you need to show that the 14th created a wrong or a tresspass.

Originally Posted by palani

The remedy that they came up with was the expatriation act passed into law the evening before ratifying the 14th amendment.

Expatriation existed before that act.

The circumstances were made to look as if congress was telling the president to protect a Finian (free Ireland) patriot from the U.S. who was sitting in a British prison. Essentially in this act the U.S. recognizes (not created) the right (unalienable rights cannot be created by the state because the state must exist on delegated powers which means that I would have to have the right to create rights for myself first and that right cannot be allienated and even if it were it has not been delegated anyway! of a U.S. citizen to expatriate whenever he/she wants. The significance to a man born in one of the (50) states is that you may turn down the 14th amendment. Wrong. No one may just say that a law of hte US simply does not or applie. You can show it with proof that it does not apply to a situation. One cannot just "turn it down" assuming that means act as if it does not exist. Do you see how vague you are already becoming??? How does one "turn down" an amendment? If you do this you are no longer a U.S. citizen, can not register to vote, can not obtain a drivers license (Driver's licenses are issued by the states. This is by far the dummest thing yet. California is going to start giving licenses to non citezens soon. So how does that fit your little federalship picture over there. I cannot believe we are talking about being a US citizen or not in the middle of a traffic case that does not even apply to me no matter what. You can call my argument of "THis law does not applie do this statute saying so." a diveous arguement go slap your self in the face with a stick or some cold water. You are going off on a small book now because of it. I must have dozens and dozzens of quick examples in my other thread and you are going to say all this volumes of what a fictional person is, how the state created some trust when you were born, how the 14th make us slaves, that there is no money even though there is,,, and you expect everyone to fall in line and accept it because you and all your internet friends have. I have researched all of it more then you ever will and it is garbage. It is heaps upon heaps of garbage. Some of it is good research. Weis actually has some good stuff. Most of your stuff is irelevant.) a, can not participate in social security or obtain any of a number of other benefits that would disturb your status.

In this status, while you can not be a member of the body politic and cannot participate in state government, the government that results (the de facto one) is comprised ONLY of denizens and is in insurrection to their constitution and to the U.S. constitution.

Now the funny thing is, the powers that set up this whole fiasco have to keep the de jure government alive.

Why???

After all, all these politicians take oaths to the state constitution.

I thought you were talking about federal stuff. Are the "these politicians" state or feds? Your story sucks. Why would feds care about swearing to a state constituion if there was no more government created by such constitution (via the fact that they let it die... its dead) to puinish them for treason when the law of the land has been replaced. This just sounds stupid.

Just as in court where the judge can put on an equity hat, an admiralty hat or a common law hat,

Who told you this crap? Where in law is this ever said? What the hell does it mean? These are TYPES OF CASES which represent case jurisdiction and the cases are i ncourts of jurisdiction as well.

the governor, secretary of state and anyone else who takes an oath to support their government wear both the hats of the de facto government and the de jure government.

Where is your citation in law? What does a legal pleading using this look like?

Quite funny, really, because here they had to be U.S. citizens in order to run for office and by the Expatriation Act when they swear an oath to a foreign government, they actually cease to be U.S. citizens. They seem to ignore the fine points of this quandry though.
You do not cease to become a US citizen because you swear an oath to the US. This is the worst yet!

One also does not lose citizenship in the US if htey swear an alligence to a state governemtn as well DUE TO THE 14th itself. You're absolutly crazy drunk on mythology.

You have been told an elaborate tale. That is all it is. I would not be suprised if Judges themselves feed that crap into the system just to blind you.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by palani

Pardon me. I am not quite done yet.

There is no legal pleading. These guys all know this stuff. When faced with it in ANY legal setting they are going to offer you doughnuts to get you as far away from them as possible.

You have not shown anything!!!! NOTHING.

Do you actually think you have somehow shown how any of htat stuff you wrote should get you out of a ticket. My god I would find you guilty too if you talked to me that way.

Plkease just tell me how you implement this. You just start talking to the judge about it?

Let me tell you what. I have talked to more judges off duty then you will ever for the rest of your life. I talk to judges and teach them allot. Judges respect me in my home town. The arguements you make are going to get laghed at. I made them as a kid. They suck!

[Codee]

Originally Posted by palani

Your country is foreign to the united states and to the other (49) states and to all the rest of the countries of the world. The Law of Nations applies.

Says who?

Who gets to say what is a country? If not that country itself with a display of worthy military streagth. Tibet was a country,,, now it ain't.

Who says the law of nations applies to all countries?

Who says my state is treated like a nation?

Nations are peoples and not governments or states.