‘IRS DOCUMENTS’ must be signed by ‘IRS AGENTS’.

26 U.S. Code § 6065 – Verification of returns Except as otherwise provided by the Secretary, any return, declaration, statement, or other document required to be made under any provision of the internal revenue laws or regulations shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury.

I believe it is possible that through this appears that it is directed to you signing a 1040 tax form, or like form, but rather it is primarily directed to IRS agents that send you billing statements, or claims that you owe the IRS money.

Posted in IRS / Assessment / 6203 | Leave a comment

US v. USA, President of United States v. President of ‘The United States of America’.

I, Paul John Hansen, have examined this document below, I find that it is highly likely to be correct on all points. the Constitution ‘for’ the United States is a ‘tool‘ of the USA union.

The ‘Confederacy union’ has strong biblical premises, the US / ‘tool‘ is ripe with statism, statism is biblically defined as satanic.

>>

Donald John Trump became President of the United States of America on January 6, 2017 Without Any Ceremony

Senator Roy Blunt correctly stated that the inauguration ceremony was for a President of the United States of America. Donald John Trump became President of the United States of America on January 6, 2017, when he won the Electoral Vote count in Congress. Senator Blunt incorrectly identified Donald Trump as the forty-fifth President of the United States of America.   Counting Grover Cleveland twice Donald John Trump is the forty-fourth President of the United States of America…..

Donald John Trump Presidency Presents Unique Learning Opportunity

The inauguration of Donald John Trump presents the unprecedented opportunity to reveal this truth about the American Presidency to the rest of the world. Electors appointed according to laws enacted by the State legislatures of the United States of America Union elect a President and a Vice President of the United States of America for a term of four years.  If the Senate makes no objection, the President of the United States of America is allowed to take the oral oath of office of President of the United States and the Vice President of the United States of America is accepted as Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.

On Inauguration Day, Senator Roy Blunt publicly combined the Office of the President of the United States of America and the Office of President of the United States so skillfully only my Students fully understood what he had just said. The three branches of the federal government, the audience within earshot and everyone viewing or listening got a dose of the truth about the American Presidency.

The ‘United States‘ is a ‘Federal Republic‘    The United States of America Is a ‘Confederacy

The United States of America is not a republic it is a Confederacy of States which have delegated some, but not all their sovereignty to the United States in Congress assembled under the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777.  The name “United States” is used to describe territory ceded to and subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States of America. The name “United States” is derived from the name, “United States of America” for the proprietor of that territory.

The President of the United States of America Has Always Been Elected By Electors Representing the States of the Confederacy   

All the elected Presidents from George Washington to Donald John Trump have been elected according to Article II, Section 1, Clauses 1, 2 & 3 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787, and the Twelfth Amendment after June 15, 1804.  The fixedness politics until fix itself  Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons” for their election to the Offices of President and Vice President of the United States of America….Donald John Trump need not be your president.  Being free means presiding over your own life unfettered from the meddling of government employees. Keeping your freedom requires constant education in law and government.  For the first time in the history of America, men and women are truly free to separate themselves from government despite any prior entanglements which may have been made provided that person is willing to  learn the law and the true history of the government.”

Posted in US v. USA | Leave a comment

Protected: RV, Instructions, OUTTODAY.com

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Posted in RV Travel Plate | Enter your password to view comments.

Fire Arm v. Shotgun v. Free Zone

Fire Arm v. Shotgun v. Free Zone:

(((Are Hansen Comments)))

Facts of the case:

An Arkansas federal district court charged Jack Miller and Frank Layton with violating the National Firearms Act (“NFA”) (((Federal Law applies upon federal owned land, liken to a military base))) when they transported a sawed-off double-barrel 12-gauge shotgun (((US written law states that a shotgun/smooth bore barrel of less than 18 inches is prohibited))) in interstate commerce (((Interstate commerce is transportation from one federal zone to another federal zone.))). In part, Miller and Layton argued that the NFA violated their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The district court agreed and dismissed the case.

Question

Does the Second Amendment protect an individual’s right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun?

Conclusion

The purpose of the Second Amendment was to maintain effective state militias; Congress could require registration of a 12-gauge sawed-off shotgun if carried across state lines (((interstate commerce))).

  • No. The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double-barrel shotgun. With Justice James Clark McReynolds writing for the majority, the Court reasoned that because the possession of a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument.
  • (((I believe that a study of historical archives of the 2nd amendment would say little to nothing about the militia, and a lot about the ‘right‘ to possess any device you wish for defense. [Thus the bill of rights.] They should challenge if the location of the ‘firearm’ was in-fact evidence-able as being on a federal possession.))) Lawyer Hansen, freeinhabitant.info
Posted in Firearms Defined | Leave a comment

Protected: US Bank can not lend it’s credit! CASE /Opinion/Law

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Posted in Bank / Credit Cards, Bank / Promissory Note, Banking/Money Issues | Enter your password to view comments.

Restraining Orders Against US Officials

Restraining Orders Against US Officials:

EXAMPLE:

If you are a native born American,

if your travel is recreational,

if you travel activity is not associated with transportation of passengers or cargo for a fee (profit),

if your act is on US owned land or on non-US owned land (private property),

you have a ‘right’ to travel,

and

if a city, county, or state, officer has interfered, or threatens to interfere with you said right

you can motion for a restraining order from a US court

preempts further violation of rights on

land that that courts territorial jurisdiction extends.

Posted in Restraining Orders, Right To Travel, Automobil v. Motor-Vehicle, Travel / A Right / MSO | Leave a comment

Federal Reserve Note “IS” v. “IS NOT”.

Federal Reserve Note IS  v.  IS NOT:

Ballentines Law Dictionary, 3rd Edition: Dollar. The legal currency of the United States; State v Downs, 148 Ind 324, 327; the unit of money consisting of one hundred cents. The aggregate of specific coins which add up to one dollar. 36 Am J1st Money § 8. In the absence of qualifying words, it cannot mean promissory notes, bonds, or other evidence of debt. 36 AM J 1st Money § 8. “Taxes, lawfully assessed are collectible by agents in money and notes cannot be accepted in payment.” Town of Frankfort v. Waldo, 128 ME. 1]
HAGAR v. RECLAMATION DIST. NO. 108, 111 U.S. 701 1884).
“Acts of Congress making the notes (paper) of the United States a legal tender do not apply to EXACTIONs (taxes) made under state law”
“At common law there was no tax lien.” [Cassidy v. Aroostock, 134 ME. 34]
U.S. Supreme Court, Memphis Bank & Trust Co. v. Garner, 459 U.S. 392 (1983) “The Tennessee bank tax violates the immunity of obligations (federal reserve notes 31USC3124 & 18USC8) of the United States from state and local taxation.”
“Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars.” Russell L. Munk, Assistant General Counsel, Department of the Treasury, February 18, 1977. “The term ‘dollars’ likewise is incorrect, which, according to constitutional definition, are monetary units, used in exchange, backed by gold and silver. Our present-day fiat issues are supported by more printed paper of the same; therefore, they are correctly termed Federal Reserve Notes (FRN), not dollars. Robert P. Vichas, Handbook of Financial Mathematics, Formulas, and Tables (1979), p. 420.
“Federal Reserve Bank notes, and other notes constituting a part of common currency of the country, are recognized as good tender for money, unless specially objected to.” MacLeod v. Hoover (1925), 159 La. 244, 105 S. 305.
Gibbons v Ogden 1824 supreme court “Persons are not the subjects of commerce…”
“There is a distinction between a debt discharged and one paid. When discharged, the debt still exists, though divested of its character as a legal obligation during the operation of the discharge.” Stanek v. White (1927), 172 Minn. 390, 215 N.W. 781.
Posted in Federal Reserve #1 | Leave a comment

Luis Ewing, Parental Rights, Termination of

>> GOOOOOD Stuff >     https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#starred/16210d8e228a81eb?projector=1

ALL RCW 13.34.040 DEPENDENCY PETITIONS . . . AND . . . ALL RCW 13.34.180 (1) TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PETITIONS” . . . ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY VIOLATE . . . “THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE.”

THE WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTION AT ARTICLE IV, § 1 PROVIDES THAT . . . “JUDICIAL POWER OF THE STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN A SUPREME COURT, . . .”

The Washington State Supreme Court in Graham v. Washington State Bar Ass’n, 86 Wn.2d 624, 548 P.2d 310 (1976), citing to Sharood v. Hatfield, 296 Minn. 416, 210 N.W.2d 275 (1973), held that the:
“. . . regulation of the practice of law and “the power to make the necessary rules and regulations governing the bar was intended to be vested exclusively in the supreme court, free from the dangers of encroachment either by the legislative or executive branches.” Graham v. Washington State Bar Ass’n, 86 Wn.2d 624, 548 P.2d 310 (1976). See also In re Juvenile Director, 87 Wash. 2d 232, 552 P.2d 163 (1976) and State v. Osloond, 60 Wash. App. 584, 805 P(2d) 263 (1991). And;
The definition of the practice of law is the province of the courts, rather than the legislatures. Lowell Bar Assn. v. Loeb, 315 Mass. 176, 52 N.E. 27 (1943); People v. ex rel. Chicago Bar Assn. v. Goodman, 366 Ill. 346, 8 N.E.2d 941 (1937).

It is undisputed pursuant to CR 8 (d) that in Hagan v. Kassler Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982), that the Washington State Supreme Court reaffirmed its earlier ruling in Bar Association v. Great Western Federal, 91 Wn.2d 48, 586 P.2d 870 (1978), that:
“. . . the selection and completion of form legal documents [such as Dependency Petitions or Termination Petitions], or the drafting of such documents, including deeds, mortgages, deeds of trust, promissory notes and agreements modifying these documents constitutes the practice of law.” Hagan Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982). And;
In Ferris v. Snively, 172 Wash. 167, 174, 19 P.2d 942 (1933), it is said:
“The practice of law is defined in 2 R.C.L., p. 938, § 4, as follows:
“According to the generally understood definition of the practice of law in this country, it embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, and the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts, and, in addition, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all kinds, and, in general, all advice to clients, and all action taken for them in matters connected with the law. An attorney at law is one who engages in any of these branches of the practice of law.” Ferris v. Snively, 172 Wash. 167, 174, 19 P.2d 942 (1933) (citing Ruling Case Law at page 938, § 4). And;
As a matter of fact, long before the Great Western and Kassler decisions, it was already enjoinable conduct for a real estate broker to select and complete form deeds in closing real estate transactions. See Washington State Bar Association v. Washington Association of Realtors, et al., 41 Wn.2d 697, 251 P.2d 619 (1952) in which the Court barred a real estate broker from doing precisely that.
IF REAL ESTATE AGENTS CAN’T PRACTICE LAW, THEN NEITHER CAN THE BRAINLESS BIMBO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS!!!!
IF REAL ESTATE AGENTS CAN’T PRACTICE LAW, THEN NEITHER CAN THE JUST AS STUPID LYING GUARDIAN AD LITEMS!!!!
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THE COUNTY PROSECUTORS CHARGE . . . “ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS” . . . AND . . . “ALL GUARDIAN AD LITEMS” . . . WITH UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW ABSENT A RCW ____________STATUTE THAT SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTS THEM FROM BEING SO CHARGED????
IF THE PROSECUTORS REFUSES TO PROSECUTE THEM, WE CAN CHARGE THE PROSECUTORS WITH OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT, OR BETTER YET, MAYBE WE CAN CHARGE THE PROSECUTORS AS CO-CONSPIRATORS AND AIDERS AND ABETTERS OR ACCESSORIES AFTER THE FACT OF THE FELONY CRIMES OF KIDNAPING, CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE, CHILD STEALING, CHILD SELLING, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, MONEY LAUNDERING, ETC.
THE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AND FAMILY COURTS ARE USING THE CPS SOCIAL WORKERS TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK!!!!
THE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AND FAMILY COURTS ARE USING THE GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK!!!!
My Free Flyers proves that all Dependency Petitions and Termination of Parental Rights Petitions are forged and perjured documents at:

http://www.luisewing.com/flyers/index.html
THE LEGISLATURE HAD AND HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ENACT OR CREATE THE RCW 13.34.040 DEPENDENCY STATUTE!!!!

It is, of course, fundamental that no county or other municipal corporation, through action of its governing body, can make a law which is in conflict with general law as enacted by the legislature. See Article XI, § 11, of the Washington constitution; also, Miller v. Spokane, 35 Wn.2d 113, 211 P.2d 165 (1949), and Bellingham v. Schampera, 57 Wn.2d 106, 356 P.2d 292 (1960).

THE LEGISLATURE HAD AND HAS NO AUTHORITY TO ENACT OR CREATE THE RCW 13.34.180 (1) TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTE!!!!

It is, of course, fundamental that no county or other municipal corporation, through action of its governing body, can make a law which is in conflict with general law as enacted by the legislature. See Article XI, § 11, of the Washington constitution; also, Miller v. Spokane, 35 Wn.2d 113, 211 P.2d 165 (1949), and Bellingham v. Schampera, 57 Wn.2d 106, 356 P.2d 292 (1960).
IT IS UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT ALL . . . “RCW 13.34.040 DEPENDENCY PETITIONS” . . . VIOLATE ARTICLE IV, § 1 OF THE WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTION WHICH PROVIDES THAT THE . . . ““JUDICIAL POWER OF THE STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN A SUPREME COURT, . . .” AND NOT IN A MERE CORPORATION THAT EMPLOYS BRAINLESS BIMBO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO SIGN AND FILE FORGED AND PERJURED LEGAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMMITTING THE FELONY CRIMES OF KIDNAPING, CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE, CHILD STEALING, CHILD SELLING, LEADING ORGANIZED CRIME, EXTORTION, MONEY LAUNDERING, ETC.
IT IS UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT ALL . . . “RCW 13.34.180 (1) TERMINATION PETITIONS” . . . VIOLATE ARTICLE IV, § 1 OF THE WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTION WHICH PROVIDES THAT THE . . . “JUDICIAL POWER OF THE STATE SHALL BE VESTED IN A SUPREME COURT, . . .” AND NOT IN A MERE CORPORATION THAT EMPLOYS BRAINLESS BIMBO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO SIGN AND FILE FORGED AND PERJURED LEGAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMMITTING THE FELONY CRIMES OF KIDNAPING, CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE, CHILD STEALING, CHILD SELLING, LEADING ORGANIZED CRIME, EXTORTION, MONEY LAUNDERING, ETC.

“Legislatures may delegate power to executive or administrative officials to determine the details of, and to establish rules for the execution of a general legislative plan. U.S. v. Rock Royal Cooperative, 307 U.S. 533 (1939); Chas. Uhden, Inc. v. Greenough, 181 Wash. 412, 43 P.2d 983, 98 A.L.R. 1181 (1935); Senior Citizen’s League v. Department of Social Security, 38 Wn.2d 142, 153, 228 P.2d 478 (1951); Home Owner’s Loan Corp. v. Rawson, 196 Wash. 548, 559, 83 P.2d 765; State v. Gilroy, 37 Wn.2d 41, 45, 221 P.2d 549; State v. Miles, 5 Wn.2d 322, 325, 105 P.2d 51 (1940). But the legislature must state its purpose, and establish standards by which the purpose is to be achieved, so that the limits of the power delegated are clear.
“Legislatures my confer upon other bodies the power to determine the existence of facts upon which the application of facts upon which the application of the legislative acts is made to depend. Again it is essential that the legislature establish the standard by which the fact finding body is to be guided. Panama Ref. Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388, 55 S.Ct. 241, 79 L.Ed. 446; Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S., 295 U.S. 495, 55 S.Ct. 837, 79 L.Ed. 157; Kelleher v. Minshull, 11 Wn.2d 380, 297, 119 P.2d 302 (1941); Senior Citizen’s League v. Department of Social Security, 38 Wn.2d 142, 153, 228 P.2d 478 (1951); State ex rel. Washington Toll Bridge Authority v. Yelle, 195 Wash. 636, 643, 82 P.2d 120
“There is no authority to delegate acts discretionary or quasi-judicial in nature; an administrative board” such as the CPS Division of DSHS “cannot legally confer upon its Brainless Bimbo Employees “authority that under the law may be exercised only by the” . . . duly elected County Prosecutor. Schechter v. County of Los Angeles, 258 Cal. App.2d 391, 65 Cal. Rptr. 739 (1968). See also Bagley v. Manhatten Beach, 18 Cal.3d 22, 553 P.2d 1140, 1141, 132 Cal. Rptr. 668 (1976).

The Prosecutor’s Office is a state agency created by the Legislature.

“As such it enjoys only those powers expressly conferred by statute or necessarily implied in furtherance of its statutorily defined duties.” Human Right’s Comm’n v. Cheney Sch. Dist. 30, 97 Wn.2d 118, 125, 641 P.2d 163 (1982).

A specific application of this rule is the well settled principle that a public administrative body to which discretionary functions have been delegated cannot redelegate such functions, absent express authorization. Noe v. Edmonds Sch. Dist. 15, 83 Wn.2d 97, 515 P.2d 977 (1973); Ledgering v. State, 63 Wn.2d 94, 385 P.2d 522 (1963); Roehl v. Public Util. Dist. 1, 43 Wn.2d 214, 251 P.2d 92 (1953).

The Prosecutor has been Delegated Authority to Redelegate his Authority Only to Deputy Prosecutors and Special Prosecutors pursuant to RCW 36.27.010, RCW 36.27.020, RCW 36.27.030 and RCW 36.27.040 and the following CrR 1.1 Decisional laws of this state:
“The legislature has enacted RCW 36.27.010 and .040, which require that a prosecuting attorney and his deputies qualify and limit be regularly admitted attorneys at law, which provisions, in turn, the general authority to employ deputies extended to a prosecuting attorney, as a county elective official, by 36.16.07. …FINLEY, STAFFORD, WRIGHT, UTTER, and BRACHTENBACK, JJ., concur. HALE, C.J. (Concurring only in the result)–At the time this appeal was heard, the statute prescribed that no one not a member of the bar of this court could serve as prosecuting attorney: No person shall be eligible to the office of the office of prosecuting attorney in any county of this state, unless he is a qualified elector therein, and has been admitted as an attorney and counselor of the courts of this state. RCW 36.27.010 Deputy prosecuting attorneys were given the same power and authority as the prosecuting attorney and were required to be members of the bar in a statute declaring that “Each deputy thus appointed shall have the same qualifications required of the prosecuting attorney.” RCW 36.27.040. Because the prosecuting attorney and his deputies hold offices created by the constitution, they are in law public officials. Const. Art. 11, section 5. Since the prosecuting attorney and his deputies hold “public offices” and their qualifications are prescribed by statute under the constitution, it follows that the courts are and should be without power to either abrogate or enhance the power and authority of prosecuting attorneys and their deputies, or to establish other and different public offices with either the authority or power to fulfill the functions of prosecuting attorneys and deputy prosecuting attorneys. Accordingly, this court cannot, within the lawful exercise of its judicial power, create the office of prosecuting attorney, or one like it, nor can it authorize such office to be filled by persons who do NOT possess the qualifications prescribed by statute for that office. I would, therefore, reject the rationale of the majority opinion and hold that the statute requiring those prosecuting attorneys and their deputies must be members of the bar be upheld and that this court is without power to prescribe lesser qualifications or to otherwise amend such statutes.” STATE v. COOK, 84 Wn.2d 342, 348, 352, 525 P.2d 761 (August 1974). And;
“Appointment of the Special Prosecutor
RCW 36.27.030 enables a superior court to appoint a special prosecutor when the elected prosecutor is under a disability which prevents him from performing his responsibilities in a certain case. . . . [14] A court can only appoint a special prosecuting attorney in instances where a statute provides for such an appointment. Hoppe v. King Cy., 95 Wn.2d 332, 339, 622 P.2d 845 (1980); State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 62, 56 P. 843 (1899). RCW 36.27.030 provides: Disability of prosecuting attorney. When from illness or other cause the prosecuting attorney is temporarily unable to perform his [or her] duties, the court or judge may appoint some qualified person to discharge the duties of such officer in court until the disability is removed. Under Hoppe, a prosecutor must have both a duty to represent an official act and a disability that prevents the prosecutor from representing the official before the appointment of a special prosecutor is justified. The prosecutor’s duties are enumerated in RCW 36.27.020, which provides: The prosecuting attorney shall: . . . (4) Prosecute all criminal and civil actions in which the state or the county may be a party, defend all suits brought against the state or county, … Specifically RCW 36.27.030 provides: When any prosecuting attorney fails, from sickness or other cause, to attend a session of the superior court of his [or her] county, or is unable to perform his [or her] duties at such session, the court or judge may appoint some qualified person to discharge the duties of such session, and the appointee shall receive a compensation to be fixed by the court, to be deducted from the stated salary of the prosecuting attorney, not exceeding, however, one-fourth of the quarterly salary of the prosecuting attorney.” WESTERMAN v. CARY, 125 Wn.2d 277, 892 P.2d 1067 [No. 60383-9. En Banc. November 22, 1994.] And;

As you can see above RCW 36.27.010, RCW 36.27.020, RCW 36.27.030 and RCW 36.27.040 requires Deputy prosecuting attorneys shall have the same qualifications required of the prosecuting attorney, DUH, THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO BE DULY QUALIFIED LICENSED ATTORNEYS!!!!

THE BRAINLESS BIMBO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS ARE NOT LICENSED ATTORNEYS!!!!!

THE JUST AS STUPID LYING GUARDIAN AD LITEMS ARE NOT LICENSED ATTORNEYS!!!!

THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT FAMILY COURT JUDGES AND THE CRIMINALLY CORRUPT FAMILY COURT JUDGES ARE LEADING ORGANIZED CRIME BY ALLOWING THESE UNQUALIFIED AND UNLICENSED BRAINLESS BIMBO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND STUPID LYING BITCHES TO PLAY ATTORNEY AND PRACTICE LAW IN ALL THE FAMILY COURTS, ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?????
“The courts have consistently held that a public body may not redelegate its powers unless they are administrative or ministerial as opposed to discretionary.” Bunger v. Iowa High Sch. Athletic Ass’n, 197 N.W.2nd 555 (Iowa 1972).
This means the CPS Social Workers and Guardian Ad Litems can get a job as a Clerk or a Receptionist or Toilet Scrubber or any other administrative or ministerial duty, but they cannot engage in any “discretionary” functions such as Initiating Executive Process unless they want to be charged with Unauthorized Practice of Law.
“A statute authorizing the formation of corporations to carry on any lawful business does not include the work of the learned professions [such as practicing law]. Such an innovation with the evil results that might follow, would require the use of specific language clearly indicating the intention. The reasons lie deeper than lack of statutory sanction for it. Human personal qualifications for such professions cannot be possessed by a corporation [such as the CPS Division of DSHS]. They would inhere in the members as distinct from the corporation, and it could not have the power to do illegally an act requiring a license which only they could obtain.” Fletcher, Cyclopedia Corporations (Perm. Ed.) chapter 5, § 97, at page 339. And;
The CrR 1.1 Decisional laws of Washington has consistently held to the above reasoning in State ex rel. Lundin v. Merchants Protective Association, 105 Wash. 12, 177 Pac. 694 and State ex rel. Standard Optical Company v. Superior Court, 17 Wn.2d 323, 135 P.2d 839, which latter case quotes at p. 331 from Ezell v. Ritholz, 188 S.C. 39, 198 S.E. 419 as follows:
“If such a course were sanctioned the logical result would be that corporations and business partnerships might practice law, medicine, dentistry or any other profession by the simple expedient or be employing licensed agents. And if this were permitted professional standards would be practically destroyed, and professions requiring special training were commercialized, to the public detriment. The ethics of any profession is based on personal and individual responsibility. One who practices a profession is responsible directly to his patient or his client. Hence he cannot properly act in the practice of his vocation as an agent or a corporation or business partnership whose interests is in the very nature of the case are commercial in nature.” Ezell v. Ritholz, 188 S.C. 39, 198 S.E. 419. And;
“While the delegation of legislative power must be circumscribed by guiding standards, details and specifics may be determined by the body to which the power is delegated. “[T]he complexity of the subject matter of legislation, and its character as an exercise of police power or otherwise are to be taken into consideration in determining whether there has been an unlawful delegation of legislative power.” Senior Citizen’s League v. Department of Social Security, 38 Wn.2d 142, 153, 228 P.2d 478 (1951); Vail v. Seaborg, 120 Wash. 126, 207 Pac. 15 (1922); McMillan v. Sims, 132 Wash. 265, 231 Pac. 943 (1925); State v. Nelson, 146 Wash. 17, 261 Pac. 796 (1927); State v. Miles, 5 Wn.2d 142, 153, 228 P.2d 478 (1951). Cited as support for this rule of common sense and practicality is Kelleher v. Minshull, 11 Wn.2d 380, 397, 119 P.2d 302 (1941).
“It will be noticed that the Laws of 1925, Ex. Ses., p.187 (Rem. 1927 Sup., section 13-2), provides that, “Sec. 2. When and as the rules of courts herein authorized shall be promulgated all laws in conflict therewith shall be and become of no further force or effect.” STATE EX REL. FOSTERWYMAN LUM. CO. v. SUP’R CT., 148 Wash. 1, 13, [No. 21107. En Banc. May 29th, 1928.] And;
IT IS THEREFORE UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT ONLY THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT CAN PROMULGATE RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING THE PRACTICE OF LAW!!!!
“[1-3] There are several grounds which justify our rule. First, the legislature has authorized the Supreme court to adopt rules of procedure. RCW 2.04.190: “The supreme court shall have the power to prescribe … the forms of all writs and all other processes… Quite apart from the statutory authority, this court has the inherent power to govern court procedures. State ex rel. Foster-Wyman Lumber Co. v. Superior Court, 148 Wash. 1, 267 P. 770 (1928). This stems from the constitutional provision that all judicial power of the state is vested in the Supreme Court and various other courts designated in the constitution. Const. art. 4, section 1.” STATE v. FIELDS, 85 Wn.2d 126, 128, 129, 530 P.2d 284 [No. 43278. En Banc. January 10, 1975.1 And;
IT IS THEREFORE UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT ONLY . . . A DULY LICENSED ATTORNEY . . . OR . . . A TRIBAL LAWYER . . . OR . . . A DULY QUALIFIED APR RULE 9 LEGAL INTERN . . . OR . . . A REAL ESTATE AGENT . . . OR . . . A REAL ESTATE BROKER . . . OR . . . A ESCROW OFFICER . . . WHO IS . . . A DULY QUALIFIED RULE 12 LIMITED PRACTICE OFFICER . . . CAN ENGAGE IN THE LIMITED PRACTICE OF LAW IN ALL COURTS!!!!
APR RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS:

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/…
APR RULE 12 LIMITED PRACTICE OFFICERS:

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/…
IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT HAS PROMULGATED TWO (2) RULES THAT ALLOWS ANY PERSON WHO QUALIFIES TO ENGAGED IN LIMITED PRACTICE OF LAW UNDER APR RULE 9 FOR LEGAL INTERNS AND APR RULE 12 FOR LIMITED PRACTICE OFFICERS!!!!
IT IS UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT COURT RULES SUPERCEDE THE STATUTES!!!!

APR RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS . . . “SUPERCEDES” . . . THE DEPENDENCY STATUTES!!!!

APR RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS . . . “SUPERCEDES” . . . THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTES!!!!

APR RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS HAS STANDARDS!!!!

THE DEPENDENCY STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO STANDARDS!!!!

THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO STANDARDS!!!!

Everyone needs to start researching and pulling the case law that says that . . . “STATUTES THAT HAVE NO STANDARDS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL” . . . and please send me a list of any case cites you come up with to <rcwcodebuster@aol.com> or <rcwcodebuster@yahoo.com> or <rcwcodebuster@live.com or <rcwcodebuster@mail.com> or <rcwcodebuster@gmail.com>
I just discovered these new arguments to use against CPS and have not yet had time to fully research this out yet, but this is so important to all those fighting CPS, I just had to let it out!
THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO STANDARDS!!!!

IT IS UNDISPUTED PURSUANT TO CR 8 (d) THAT . . . ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS . . . AND . . . ALL GUARDIAN AD LITEMS . . . ARE THEREFORE COMMITTING . . . “UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.”
“It is essential to the administration of justice and the proper protection of society that unlicensed persons be not permitted to prey upon the public by engaging in the practice of law.” Clark v. Austin, 340 Mo. 467, 101 S.W.2d 977 (1937). See also Auerbacher v. Wood, 142 N.J. Eq. 484, 59 A.2d 863 (1947) and State ex rel. Hunter v. Kirk, 133 Neb. 625, 276 N.W. 380 (1937). And;
It is undisputed pursuant to CR 8 (d) that in Hagan v. Kassler Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982), that the Washington State Supreme Court reaffirmed its earlier ruling in Bar Association v. Great Western Federal, 91 Wn.2d 48, 586 P.2d 870 (1978), that:
“. . . the selection and completion of form legal documents [such as Dependency Petitions or Termination Petitions], or the drafting of such documents, including deeds, mortgages, deeds of trust, promissory notes and agreements modifying these documents constitutes the practice of law.” Hagan Escrow, Inc., 96 Wn.2d 443 (1982); 2 R.C.L., p. 938, § 4. See also APR 9 & APR 12. And;
It seems fair to say that something which can lawfully be done only by an attorney admitted to practice is in fact and in law the “Practice of Law.” State v. Chamberlain, 132 Wash. 520, 232 Pac. 337 (1925).

Moreover, on the basis of the Court’s decision in the Kassler Escrow case, that now must be deemed to be so even in the face of an act of the legislature creating RCW 13.34.040 Dependency Statute and RCW 13.34.180 (1) Termination of Parental Rights Statute purporting to authorize illegal conduct by unqualified, untrained & unlicensed Brainless Bimbos!

Everyone who is fighting CPS needs to look at your . . . STATE CONSTITUTION . . . and the . . . PROSECUTOR STATUTES!!!!

You have an absolute . . . CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT . . . to be prosecuted civilly or criminally by “A DULY ELECTED PROSECUTOR” . . . or . . . “DEPUTY PROSECUTOR” . . . or . . . “SPECIAL PROSECUTOR.”

ONLY THE ELECTED COUNTY PROSECUTOR CAN BRING A CRIMINAL OR CIVIL ACTION AGAINST ANYONE IN THIS STATE IS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED BY BOTH STATUTES, CASE LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION.

It is undisputed that the . . . “EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY” . . . is vested solely in the office of the elected . . . “PROSECUTING ATTORNEY” . . . or his . . . “DEPUTY PROSECUTOR” . . . or his . . . “SPECIAL PROSECUTOR” . . . by the Washington Constitution Article 11, section 5 and Article 12 and has been codified by the legislature at RCW 36.27.005 and RCW 36.27.020(3) and (4) only.

Both statutes, RCW 13.34.040 the dependency statute and RCW 13.34.180 (1) the termination of parental rights statute, are clearly unconstitutional as they violate the separation of powers doctrine and the Washington state constitution and the prosecutor statutes which provide that the executive authority is vested solely in the office of the prosecutor. Article III, Section 1, Article IV, Section 1, Article XI, Section 5, RCW 36.27.020(4), RCW 43.10.232, pursuant to the case of Lorraine Kirtley v. Diane Frost, Carol Rainey, Michael Stowell, and Does 1-100, Kitsap County District Court No. 980000004; People v. The Municipal Court for the Ventura Judicial District, 27 Cal. App. 3d 193, 103 Cal. Rptr. 645 (1972); In re Petition of Padget, 678 P.2d 870 (Wyo. 1984); Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 47 S.Ct. 21, 71 L.Ed. 160 (1926).

It is undisputed that RCW 36.27.020 (3)(4) and (6) clearly provides that the Prosecutor shall: . . . (3) Appear for and represent the state, county, . . . in all criminal and civil proceedings in which the state or the county . . . may be a party; . . . and (4) Prosecute all criminal and civil actions in which the state or the county may be a party, . . . and (6) Institute and prosecute proceedings before magistrates whereas RCW 13.34.040 & RCW 13.34.180 (1) provides [n]o such authority, without violating RCW 2.48.180 UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.

It is undisputed that it has long been the rule in this State that the court’s power to appoint a special prosecuting attorney is limited to cases where such an appointment is provided by statute. Bates v. School District No. 10, 45 Wash. 498, 88 Pac. 944 (1907); In re Lewis, 51 Wn.2d 193, 201, 202, 316 P.2d 907 (1957); State v. Heaton, 21 Wash. 59, 62, 56 Pac. 843 (1899); Ladenburg v. Cambell, 56 Wn.App. 701, 704, 784 P.2d 1306 (1990); Hoppe v. King County, 95 Wn.2d 332, 339, 622 P.2d 845 (1980); Westerman v. Cary, 125 Wn.2d 277, 298 (1994), RCW 36.27.030.

It is undisputed that . . . NO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS . . . or . . . “GUARDIAN AD LITEMS” . . . have been appointed to the position of either . . . “DEPUTY PROSECUTOR’S” . . . or . . . “SPECIAL PROSECUTOR’S” . . . by the Elected Kitsap County Prosecutor Russell Haige as required by RCW 36.27.040 which also requires that said appointment . . . “SHALL BE IN WRITING.”

CPS SOCIAL WORKERS & GUARDIAN AD LITEMS ARE NOT IN FACT AND LAW. . . “DEPUTY PROSECUTORS” . . . AND ARE THEREFORE PRACTICING LAW WITHOUT A LICENSE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF RCW 2.48.180.
RCW 13.34.1040 is illegal and unconstitutional because it violates the . . . “SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE” . . . and reads:
“RCW 13.34.040 Petition to court to deal with dependent child — Application of federal Indian child welfare act.

(1) ANY PERSON may file with the clerk of the superior court a petition showing that there is within the county, or residing within the county, a dependent child and requesting that the superior court deal with such child as provided in this chapter. There shall be no fee for filing such petitions. . . .” And;

ANY PERSON CANNOT BE A PROSECUTOR!!!!

ANY PERSON CANNOT PRACTICE LAW!!!

ONLY A LICENSED ATTORNEY OR TRIBAL COURT LAWYER CAN PRACTICE LAW!!!!

RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS SUPERCEDES RCW 13.34.040!!!

COURT RULES SUPERCEDE STATUTES!!!!
See also RCW 13.34.180 (1) which similarly reads:
“RCW 13.34.180 Order terminating parent and child relationship — Petition — Filing — Allegations (as amended by 2009 c 477).

*** CHANGE IN 2013 *** (SEE 1284-S.SL) ***

(1) A petition seeking termination of a parent and child relationship MAY BE FILED in juvenile court BY ANY PARTY to the dependency proceedings concerning that child. Such petition shall conform to the requirements of RCW 13.34.040, shall be served upon the parties as provided in RCW 13.34.070(8), and shall allege all of the following unless subsection (2) or (3) of this section applies: . . .” And;

ANY PERSON CANNOT PRACTICE LAW!!!!

ONLY A LICENSED ATTORNEY OR TRIBAL COURT LAWYER CAN PRACTICE LAW!!!!

ANY PERSON CANNOT BE A PROSECUTOR!!!!

RULE 9 LEGAL INTERNS SUPERCEDES RCW 13.34.040!!!

COURT RULES SUPERCEDE STATUTES!!!!
BOTH STATUTES . . . RCW 13.34.040 THE DEPENDENCY STATUTE . . . AND . . . RCW 13.34.180 (1) THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTE . . . ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY ALLOW ANY PERSON WHO IS . . . NOT A PROSECUTOR . . . NOT A DEPUTY PROSECUTOR . . . NOT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR . . . TO BRING A CIVIL ACTION IN VIOLATION OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE!!!!
I remember that they had to pass a special law (APR 12) here in Washington State to allow Real Estate Agents to be Exempt from being charged with Unauthorized Law for preparing and submitting or filing Legal Documents and Legal Forms that affected peoples legal rights over chattel property such as Real Estate!!!!
WOW, IT IS NOW OBVIOUS THAT THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT CARES MORE ABOUT THEIR GREEDY WSBA BAR ATTORNEY MAFIA GETTING TO STEAL REAL ESTATE AGENTS MONEY THAN THEY DO ABOUT UNQUALIFIED, UNTRAINED AND UNLICENSED BRAINLESS BIMBOS PLAYING ATTORNEY AND SIGNING AND FILING FORGED AND PERJURED DOCUMENTS IN FURTHERANCE OF THEIR OVERALL FAMILY COURT CHILD STEALING RING CALLED THE CPS DIVISION OF DSHS!!!!
See, ADMISSION TO PRACTICE RULES RULE 12. LIMITED PRACTICE RULE FOR LIMITED PRACTICE OFFICERS at:

http://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/…
Children are NOT Legal Forms and are NOT chattel property of the Corporate States!

If they can’t show us a special statute specifically authorizing or exempting the dumb bitches who work for CPS from practicing law charges, we can nail them with charges of Unauthorized Practice of Law!!!!

BOTH STATUTES . . . RCW 13.34.040 THE DEPENDENCY STATUTE . . . AND . . . RCW 13.34.180 (1) THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTE . . . ARE ILLEGAL BECAUSE THEY ALLOW ANY PERSON TO PRACTICE LAW AND INSTITUTE A CIVIL ACTION IN BOTH THE FAMILY COURTS AND THE SUPERIOR COURTS OF THIS STATE THUS ALLOWING NON-LAWYERS WHO HAVE NO LEGAL TRAINING AND NO BUSINESS LICENSES TO REPRESENT THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF OUR CHILDREN IN OPEN COURT IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF RCW 2.48.180 THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW STATUTE!!!!

BOTH STATUTES RCW 13.34.040 THE DEPENDENCY STATUTE AND RCW 13.34.180 (1) THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS STATUTE ARE ILLEGAL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO STANDARDS!!!!

Even . . . “THE STANDARDS” . . . for . . . “APR 9 LEGAL INTERNS” . . . clearly show that . . . A CPS SOCIAL WORKER . . . and . . . GUARDIAN AD LITEMS . . . cannot be admitted to Limited Practice unless that individual CPS SOCIAL WORKER . . . or individual . . .GUARDIAN AD LITEMS . . . is in fact and law a duly qualified . . . . “RULE 9 INTERN.”

RULE 9 LEGAL INTERN . . . . reads in part:
“APR 9 LEGAL INTERN
(a) Admission to Limited Practice. Qualified law students, enrolled law clerks, and graduates of approved law schools may be admitted to the status of legal intern and be granted a limited license to engage in the practice of law only as provided in this rule. To qualify, an applicant must:

(1) Be a student duly enrolled and in good academic standing at an approved law school with legal studies completed amounting to not less than two-thirds of a prescribed 3-year course of study or five-eighths of a prescribed 4-year course of study, and have the written approval of the applicants law school dean or a person designated by such dean; or

(2) Be an enrolled law clerk in compliance with the provisions of rule 6 with not less than five-eighths of the prescribed 4-year course of study completed, and have the written approval of the tutor; or

(3) Make the application before the expiration of 9 month following graduation from an approved law school, and submit satisfactory evidence thereof for the Bar Association; and

(4) Pay such fees as may be set by the Board of Governors with the approval of the Supreme Court; and

(5) Certify in writing under oath that the applicant has read, is familiar with, and will abide by, the Rules of Professional Conduct and this rule. . . .”
Even . . . “THE STANDARDS” . . . for . . . “APR 9 LEGAL INTERNS” . . . clearly show that neither . . . A CPS SOCIAL WORKER . . . or . . . A GUARDIAN AD LITEM . . . can be admitted to Limited Practice unless that individual . . . CPS SOCIAL WORKER . . . or individual . . . GUARDIAN AD LITEM . . . is in fact and law a duly . . . “QUALIFIED LAW STUDENT . . . ENROLLED LAW CLARK . . . AND . . . GRADUATE OF APPROVED LAW SCHOOLS . . . MAY BE ADMITTED A LIMITED LICENSE TO ENGAGE IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW ONLY AS PROVIDED IN THIS RULE!!!!

ALL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERALS IN WASHINGTON STATE ARE COMMITTING A FRAUD UPON THE COURT, SECOND DEGREE PERJURY, FIRST DEGREE FORGERY AND PRESENTING A FALSE INSTRUMENT FOR FILING IN A OFFICIAL COURT RECORD WHEN THEY PLACE THEIR ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE NEXT TO THE SIGNATURE ON ANY DEPENDENCY PETITION OR MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF YOUR PARENTAL RIGHTS SIGNED BY . . . A CPS SOCIAL WORKER . . . OR . . . GUARDIAN AD LITEM . . . WHO IS NOT A DULY QUALIFIED RULE 9 INTERN!!!!
“. . . (1) The supervising lawyer or another lawyer from the same office shall direct, supervise and review all of the work of the legal intern and both shall assume personal professional responsibility for any work undertaken by the legal intern while under the lawyer’s supervision. All pleadings, motions, briefs, and other documents prepared by the legal intern shall be reviewed by the supervising lawyer or a lawyer from the same office as the supervising lawyer. When a legal intern signs any correspondence or legal document, the interns signature shall be followed by the title “legal intern” and, if the document is prepared for presentation to a court or for filing with the clerk thereof, the document shall also be signed by the supervising lawyer or lawyer from the same office as the supervising lawyer. In any proceeding in which a legal intern appears before the court, the legal intern must advise the court of the interns status and the name of the interns supervising lawyer. . . .” And;
It is undisputed that Rule 9 the Rule for Legal Interns provides in part . . . “[W]hen a legal intern signs any correspondence or legal document, the interns signature shall be followed by the title “legal intern” and, if the document is prepared for presentation to a court or for filing with the clerk thereof, the document shall also be signed by the supervising lawyer or lawyer from the same office as the supervising lawyer.”

ALL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERALS IN WASHINGTON STATE WHO PUT THEIR ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE ON THE SAME DOCUMENT AS A CPS SOCIAL WORKER IS A CRIMINAL CO-CONSPIRATOR WHO IS COMMITTING A FRAUD UPON THE COURT LEADING ALL OF US CPS VICTIMS INTO BELIEVING THAT CPS SOCIAL WORKER IS A DULY QUALIFIED RULE 9 INTERN WHO HAS IN FACT BEEN GRANTED A LIMITED LICENSE TO PRACTICE LAW AND SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT AND MALFEASANCE OF OFFICE, MISFEASANCE OF OFFICE, PERJURY OF HIS OR HER OATH OF OFFICE AND UNETHICAL CONDUCT FOR RUNNING A LAW PRACTICE WITH A CPS SOCIAL WORKER WHO IS NOT AN ATTORNEY LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW!

ALL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERALS IN WASHINGTON STATE WHO PLACE THEIR ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE ON ANY DEPENDENCY PETITION OR MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS ARE VIOLATING RULE 5.4 & RULE 5.5 OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT!!!!
“RULE 5.4 PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENCE OF A LAWYER
. . .
(5)(b) A LAWYER SHALL NOT FORM A PARTNERSHIP WITH A NONLAWYER IF ANY OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE PARTNERSHIP CONSIST OF THE PRACTICE OF LAW.
. . .
(d) A lawyer shall not practice with or in the form of a professional corporation or association authorized to practice law for a profit, if:
. . .
(3) a nonlawyer has the right to direct or control the professional judgment of a lawyer.” And;
“RULE 5.5 UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW; MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE OF LAW
(a) A LAWYER SHALL NOT practice law in a jurisdiction in violation of the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction, or ASSIST ANOTHER IN DOING SO. . . .” And;
“RCW 18.130.180 Unprofessional conduct.

The following conduct, acts, or conditions constitute unprofessional conduct for any license holder under the jurisdiction of this chapter:

(1) The commission of any act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, or corruption relating to the practice of the person’s profession, whether the act constitutes a crime or not. If the act constitutes a crime, conviction in a criminal proceeding is not a condition precedent to disciplinary action. Upon such a conviction, however, the judgment and sentence is conclusive evidence at the ensuing disciplinary hearing of the guilt of the license holder of the crime described in the indictment or information, and of the person’s violation of the statute on which it is based. For the purposes of this section, conviction includes all instances in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere is the basis for the conviction and all proceedings in which the sentence has been deferred or suspended. Nothing in this section abrogates rights guaranteed under chapter 9.96A RCW;

(2) Misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact in obtaining a license or in reinstatement thereof;

(3) All advertising which is false, fraudulent, or misleading;
. . .
(10) AIDING OR ABETTING AN UNLICENSED PERSON TO PRACTICE WHEN A LICENSE IS REQUIRED;
. . .
(13) Misrepresentation or fraud in any aspect of the conduct of the business or profession; . . .” And;
ALL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERALS WHO PLACE THEIR ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE WITH ANY CPS SOCIAL WORKER OR GUARDIAN AD LITEM WHO IS NOT AN ATTORNEY OR DULY QUALIFIED RULE 9 INTERN CAN BE DISBARRED PURSUANT TO

“RCW 2.48.220 Grounds of disbarment or suspension.
An attorney or counselor may be disbarred or suspended for any of the following causes arising after his or her admission to practice:
. . .
(5) Lending his or her name to be used as attorney and counselor by another person who is not an attorney and counselor.
. . .
(9) PRACTICING LAW WITH OR IN COOPERATION with a disbarred or suspended attorney, or maintaining an office for the practice of law in a room or office occupied or used in whole or in part by a disbarred or suspended attorney, or permitting a disbarred or suspended attorney to use his or her name for the practice of law, or practicing law for or on behalf of a disbarred or suspended attorney, or practicing law under any arrangement or understanding for division of fees or compensation of any kind with a disbarred or suspended attorney or WITH ANY PERSON NOT A LICENSED ATTORNEY. . . .” And;
RCW 2.48.220 CLEARLY PROVIDES THAT . . . “AN ATTORNEY OR COUNSELOR MAY BE DISBARRED OR SUSPENDED FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CAUSES ARISING AFTER HIS OR HER ADMISSION TO PRACTICE . . . (9) PRACTICING LAW WITH OR IN COOPERATION . . . WITH ANY PERSON NOT A LICENSED ATTORNEY.”

ARE ANY OF THE CPS SOCIAL WORKERS . . . LICENSED ATTORNEY’S????

ARE ANY OF THE CPS GUARDIAN AD LITEMS . . . LICENSED ATTORNEYS????

IF NOT, WE CAN FILE A MOTION FOR ANY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL TO BE DISBARRED IF HE PLACED HIS ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE ON ANY DOCUMENT WITH ANY CPS SOCIAL WORKER OR GUARDIAN AD LITEM WHO IS NOT IN FACT AN ATTORNEY OR DULY QUALIFIED RULE 9 INTERN!!!!

DOES A . . . “CPS SOCIAL WORKER” . . . OR . . . “GUARDIAN AD LITEM” . . . EVEN HAVE . . . “A BUSINESS LICENSE” . . . TO BE WORKING IN THE COURT????

Neither 1 of the two statutes, RCW 13.34.040 or RCW 13.34.180 (1), provides any . . . “EXEMPTION” . . . to CPS Social Workers or Guardian Ad Litems from being charged with . . . “UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.”

CPS SOCIAL WORKERS . . . and . . . GUARDIAN AD LITEMS . . . have NO legal or statutory authority to . . . “REPRESENT ANY CHILDREN” . . . unless they are . . . “LICENSED ATTORNEYS.”

ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS ARE ALSO GUILTY OF VIOLATING RCW 9.62.020 AS THEY DO NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO INSTITUTE A SUIT ON BEHALF OF ME TO TAKE AWAY MY CHILDREN AND THEY CAN’T LEGALLY OBTAIN MY CHILDREN’S PERMISSION TO TAKE THEIR PARENTS AWAY BECAUSE THEY ARE MINORS AND NOT COMPETENT OR ABLE TO CONTRACT UNDER THE LAW!!!!

“RCW 9.62.020 Instituting suit in name of another.
Every person who shall institute or prosecute any action or other proceeding in the name of another, without his consent and contrary to law, shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
[1909 c 249 § 124; RRS § 2376.]” And;

THE STATE CANNOT CONSENT TO CPS SOCIAL WORKERS OR GUARDIAN AD LITEMS PRACTICING LAW WITHOUT VIOLATING THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW STATUTE RCW 2.48.180.

THEY BETTER SHOW US THE STATUTE OR THE STATUTES THAT SAYS THAT THE DIZZY BROADS WHO WORK FOR CPS ARE EXEMPT FROM BEING CHARGED WITH VIOLATING RCW 2.48.180 THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW STATUTE . . . OR . . . WE CAN CHARGE ALL OF YOU AS CRIMINAL CO-CONSPIRATORS . . . AND/OR . . . AS ACCESSORY’S AFTER THE FACT . . . OR . . . AIDERS AND ABETTERS . . . AND WITH . . . LEADING ORGANIZED CRIME.

I will be filing a formal complaint with the KITSAP COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, THE KITSAP COUNTY PROSECUTOR AND THE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION specifically requesting that they bring criminal charges against . . . ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS IN KITSAP COUNTY . . . for violating RCW 2.48.180, the UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW STATUTE.

And if the KITSAP COUNTY SHERIFF DOESN’T INVESTIGATE AS REQUIRED BY RCW 36.28.011, I can charge him with . . . OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT!

“RCW 36.28.011 Duty to make complaint. In addition to the duties contained in RCW 36.28.010, it shall be the duty of all sheriffs to make complaint of all violations of the criminal law, which shall come to their knowledge, within their respective jurisdictions.”

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.28.011
EVERYBODY NEEDS TO START FILING COMPLAINTS WITH THEIR LOCAL COUNTY SHERIFF AND DEMAND HE DO HIS DUTY AND MAKE COMPLAINTS AGAINST ALL CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS IN HIS COUNTY THAT ARE PRACTICING LAW IN VIOLATION OF RCW 2.48.180 THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW STATUTE!!!!

EVERYONE NEEDS TO BOYCOTT ALL THE STATE BAR ASSOCIATIONS!

EVERYONE NEEDS TO FIRE THEIR STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS!

IN MY OPINION, ALL STATE LICENSED BAR ATTORNEYS ARE ALL LAZY WORTHLESS PIECES OF SHIT WHO CHARGE WAY TOO MUCH MONEY FOR DOING WAY TOO LITTLE WORK!!!!

BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE ATTORNEYS ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS, THEY ARE NOT PROTECTING THE CHILDREN!!!!

IT IS MY OPINION THAT ALL FAMILY COURT ATTORNEYS WHETHER THEY ARE FOR HIRE ATTORNEYS OR PUBLIC DEFENDERS ARE WORKING IN COLLUSION AND CONSPIRACY WITH THE ILLEGAL FAMILY COURT SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS ALL THESE BRAINLESS BIMBOS THE CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS TO PLAY ATTORNEY AND PRACTICE LAW IN OUR COURTS THAT OUR TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR!!!!

HOW COME NOT 1 IN 30,000 PLUS MEMBERS OF THE WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION MEMBERS HAVE NOT COMPLAINED ABOUT CPS SOCIAL WORKERS AND GUARDIAN AD LITEMS PRACTICING LAW IN OUR COURT ROOMS????

HOW COME NOT 1 IN 30,000 PLUS MEMBERS OF THE WASHINGTON STATE BAR ASSOCIATION MEMBERS HAVE NOT COMPLAINED ABOUT ALL THE DEPENDENCY PETITIONS AND TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PETITIONS AS BEING A FORGED AND PERJURED DOCUMENT AND ARE THEREFORE LEGALLY DEFECTIVE AND GRANTING THE COURT NO JURISDICTION TO PROCEED????

EITHER ALL THE WSBA ATTORNEYS ARE ALL A BUNCH OF STUPIDs WHO ARE ALL IGNORANT OF THE LAW AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE DISBARRED AND PERMANENTLY PROHIBITED FROM EVER PRACTICING LAW EVER AGAIN????

OR:

ALL OF THE WSBA ATTORNEYS WHO PRACTICE LAW IN OUR FAMILY COURTS KNOW THAT ALL THE DEPENDENCY PETITIONS AND TERMINATION PETITIONS ARE FORGED AND PERJURED DOCUMENTS AND ARE THEREFORE CRIMINAL CO-CONSPIRATORS WHO ARE LEADING ORGANIZED CRIME OF COUNTLESS FELONY COUNTS OF KIDNAPING, CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE, CHILD STEALING, CHILD SELLING, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, EXTORTION, MONEY LAUNDERING, MAIL FRAUD AND VIOLATIONS OF THE HOBBS ACT????

IT’S TIME TO TAKE DOWN AND DESTROY ALL STATE BAR ASSOCIATIONS WITH A QUO WARRANTO!

FIRE YOUR ATTORNEYS AND HIRE ME TO WRITE YOUR LEGAL PLEADINGS FOR YOU!!!!

YOU HAVE AN ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO MANAGE AND PLEAD YOUR OWN CAUSES AND DEFEND YOUR SELF IN PERSON!!!!

WHEN YOU ARE DEFENDING YOUR SELF, YOU ARE ACTING AS YOUR OWN ATTORNEY!!!!

WHEN YOU ARE DEFENDING YOURSELF AND ACTING AS YOUR OWN ATTORNEY, YOU HAVE THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO HIRE ANYONE TO BE YOUR . . . “PARA-LEGAL.”

HIRE ME TO DO THE RESEARCH TO TAKE DOWN AND DESTROY THE CPS DIVISION OF DSHS!!!!

HIRE ME TO BE YOUR PARA-LEGAL!!!!

YOU DON’T NEED AN ATTORNEY!!!!

I HOPE THIS HELPS EVERYONE FIGHTING CPS IN WASHINGTON STATE AND EVERYWHERE ELSE!!!!

Sincerely

Luis Ewing

DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR RIGHTS IN A TRAFFIC STOP ARE?

Bigger text (+) | Smaller text (-)

From: Luis Ewing (253) 226-3741 or rcwcodebuster@comcast.net

Subject: Do you know someone who is always getting in trouble with the COPS???

Are you tired of getting pulled over and hassled by THE COPS???

Do you know what your rights are in a traffic stop???

IF NOT, YOU NEED MY FREE FLYERS!!!

How can you stand up and fight for your rights when you don’t even know what your rights are???

YOU NEED MY FREE FLYERS!!!

Do you know someone that is always getting pulled over and getting arrested and taken into custody for DRIVING WHILE LICENSE SUSPENDED or just simply DRIVING WITHOUT A CURRENT & VALID DRIVERS LICENSE???

YOUR FRIENDS NEEDS MY FREE FLYERS!!!


Did you know that you CANNOT BE ARRESTED AND TAKEN INTO CUSTODY for either DRIVING WHILE LICENSE SUSPENDED or just simply DRIVING WITHOUT A DRIVERS LICENSE???

Did you know that you can LAWFULLY POSSESS CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES if you are a ULTIMATE USER who possess the controlled substance for your own personal and recreational use and NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION???

Do you have a friend who is always going to jail for possession of a small amount of drugs that he or she was only using for their own personal and recreational use as THE ULTIMATE USER???

IF SO, THEY NEED MY FREE ULTIMATE USER FLYERS!!!

Wouldn’t you like to see your friends NOT go to jail for such frivolous and trivial things just to ENRICH THE BAR CARD CARRYING ATTORNEYS WHO ARE ALL MEMBERS OF THE VERY SAME BAR ASSOCIATION AS ALL THE PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES???

Did you know that an ATTORNEY’S 1st duty is to THE COURT and to the STATE and NOT to the client???

See the lawyers code of ethics, see 7 C.J.S. section 4. Nature and Duties of Office which reads:

An attorney is an officer of the court with an obligation to the courts and the public as well as to his clients, and his duty is to facilitate the administration of justice. An attorney does not hold an office or public trust, in the constitutional or statutory sense of that term, and strictly speaking, he is not an officer of the state or of a governmental subdivision thereof. Rather, as held in many decisions, he is an officer of the court, before which he has been admitted to practice. An attorney is not the court or one of its ministerial officers, or a law enforcement officer. He is, however, in a sense an officer of the state, with an obligation to the courts and to the public no less significant than his obligation to his clients. Thus, an attorney occupies a “dual position” which imposes “dual obligations.” His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and wherever the duties his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter. The office of attorney is indispensable to the administration of justice and is intimate and peculiar in its relation to, and vital to the well being of the court. An attorney has a duty to aid the court in seeing that actions and proceedings in which he is engaged as counsel are conducted in a dignified and orderly manner, free from passion and personal animosities, and that all causes brought to an issue are tried and decided on their merits only, to aid the court in seeing that justice is done, and to aid any effort under the court’s direction to root out corruption and fraud. An attorney has also the duty to devote his ability, skill, and diligence along ethical and professional lines to the interests of his client, and to refrain from entering into any alliance or incurring any obligation connected with the litigation in which he is engaged as counsel that would place him in a position where his personal interests would be adverse to those of his client.”

And now you can see the truth that this . . . “dual position and obligation,” further deprives all American Citizen’s of their substantive rights to the due process of law. When before their “tribunals” – the attorney’s . . . “first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client.”

Did any ATTORNEY ever ask you for a $________.00 for a RETAINER???

Did that ATTORNEY tell you that a RETAINER was and is only a GIFT and a DONATION???

Did that ATTORNEY tell you that he or she is NOT obligated to do any work for you on your case for the $5,000.00 to $10,000.00 RETAINER that you just gave them thinking that you just gave them a DOWN PAYMENT to WORK ON YOUR CASE???

A “retainer” is a sum of money paid by a client to secure an attorney’s availability to work for a client. The fee paid is considered earned at the time of payment because the attorney is entitled to the money regardless of whether he actually performs any services for the client, and the funds shall not be placed into the attorney’s trust account. Baranowski v. State Bar, 154 Cal.Rptr. 752, 593 P.2d 613 (1979); and the Washington State Bar News, Committee Reports, Formal Opinion No. 173.

The California Court in Baranowski v. State Bar, supra, clearly stated that: A “RETAINER IS A SUM OF MONEY PAID BY A CLIENT TO SECURE AN ATTORNEYS AVAILABILITY TO WORK FOR A CLIENT.”

A RETAINER only pays for the AVAILABILITY of the attorney.

The FACT is that when you make an appointment to talk to an attorney for a DUI, traffic ticket, domestic violence, driving without a license, driving while intoxicated, negligent driving or any other kind of case, they meet with you, they let you TALK for about 5 to 10 to 15 minutes and then they ask you for a $3,000.00 to $5,000.00 to a $10,000.00 or more as a RETAINER so that you can secure their availability only! The California Court in Baranowski v. State Bar, supra, clearly stated that . . . THE FEE PAID IS CONSIDERED EARNED AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT BECAUSE THE ATTORNEY IS ENTITLED TO THE MONEY REGARDLESS OF WHETHER HE ACTUALLY PERFORMS ANY SERVICES FOR THE CLIENT, . . . and the funds shall NOT be placed into the attorney’s trust account.”

Wow, the attorneys are so stuck up and think that they are so above us “peons” or “goy dogs”that you have to pay them for merely “gracing you with their presence” and that they consider the RETAINER earned at the time you are dumb enough to give it to them REGARDLESS OF WHETHER HE OR SHE ACTUALLY PERFORMS ANY SERVICES FOR THE CLIENT!!!

WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC SCAM?

ARE YOU TIRED OF BEING RIPPED OFF BY ATTORNEYS WHO ARE ALL MEMBERS IN GOOD STANDING OF THE VERY SAME BAR ASSOCIATION THAT ALL THE PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES ARE MEMBERS OF???

Did you know that THE COPS do NOT have any STATUTORY AUTHORITY to conduct or run a RANDOM ROVING LICENSE PLATE CHECK in their ELECTRONIC MOBILE DATA TERMINALS absent PROBABLE CAUSE???

Did you know that you are NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE OR SHOW PROOF OF INSURANCE unless you have first been in an ACCIDENT causing at least $750.00 to $1,000.00 or more worth of damage to another vehicle before you can be lawfully cited with a NO INSURANCE TICKET???

Did you know that THE COPS do NOT have any legal authority to SEARCH YOUR VEHICLE in a Civil Infractional Traffic Stop without a WARRANT.

Did you know that THE COPS can only SEARCH INCIDENT TO A LAWFUL CUSTODIAL ARREST or if they have a WARRANT???

Have you ever had a COP that pulled you over ASK your PASSENGERS for IDENTIFICATION and/or ARREST THE PASSENGER for an OUTSTANDING WARRANT???

Did you know that COPS do NOT have any right to demand any PASSENGER to have or to SHOW ANY IDENTIFICATION???

IF YOU ARE A PASSENGER, DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE TO SHOW THE COP ANY IDENTIFICATION???

DO YOU KNOW WHAT TO SAY TO THE COPS IN A TRAFFIC STOP???

DO YOU KNOW WHAT NOT TO SAY TO THE COPS IN A TRAFFIC STOP???

IF NOT, THEN YOU NEED MY FREE FLYERS!!!


These FREE FLYERS are so good that they have prevented many from going to jail, they have prevented many others from even getting a ticket in the first place and a few others even got their tickets dismissed in court when they filed my flyers into their court case and read them to the judge in open court.

1.) My ARREST ME OR FREE ME FLYER is the 1st flyer you hand to the cop and ask him am I under arrest or am I free to leave? This contains the case law that says you are under arrest when the cops turns the lights on and that no reasonable person would believe that he is free to leave. This flyer shows the cop that he can’t fool you by telling you that you are just being “detained” and are not yet under arrest. This flyer shows that the word arrest is used to define the word “detain”. This forces the dumb cop to realize that you know that by stopping you that he has invoked a seizure.

2.) My MIRANDA FLYER is the 2nd flyer you hand to the cop. This flyer contains the case law that says once you have invoked your right to remain silent, that all interrogation must cease. Now what is the cop going to use as “evidence” against you?

3.) My STOP ARREST NOTICE is the 3rd flyer you hand to the cop. This flyer informs the cop that under the arrest without warrant statute and the traffic arrest statute that he does NOT have the statutory authority to arrest “and take you into custody” for driving while license suspended or anything else that is not listed in subsection (2) of the arrest without warrant statute.(NOTE: NOT one (1) person in Washington State has been arrested and taken into custody for driving while license suspended when they presented this flyer to the cops!)

4.) My DOPE FLYER shows the cops that you have the right to lawfully possess and smoke marijuana if you are the ULTIMATE USER. (NOTE: NOT one (1) person in Washington State has been charged with possession or had their dope taken away from them when they presented this flyer to the cops!)

5.) My NO INSURANCE FLYER shows the cops that he cannot give you a NO INSURANCE TICKET for not having insurance unless you were first involved in an accident in which you caused at least $750.00 damage to another car or property. (NOTE: NOT one (1) person in Washington State has been issued a NO INSURANCE TICKET when they presented this flyer to the cops!)

6.) My NO SEAT BELT REQUIRED FLYER shows that there is NO three (3) digit federal motor vehicle safety standard in existence in the entire code of federal regulation.
(NOTE: My flyer is so good that one (1) person in the LEGS GROUP in Seattle, Washington received a dismissal of their seat belt in the mail after mailing my no seat belt flyer into the court!)

7.) My NO LICENSE REQUIRED IN WASHINGTON FLYER shows that the State of Washington only sells COMMERCIAL LICENSES! (NOTE: This flyer is so good, that it has prevented many from going to jail for driving with no license, when they presented it to the cops!)

8.) My NO LICENSE REQUIRED IN OREGON FLYER shows that the State of Oregon only sells COMMERCIAL LICENSES.

9.) My NO LICENSE REQUIRED IN IDAHO FLYER shows that the State of Idaho only sells COMMERCIAL LICENSES.

10.) My WASHINGTON RECREATIONAL VEHICLE FLYER shows that if you declare your motor vehicle to be a NON-COMMERCIAL VEHICLE and used exclusively for recreational, camping and TRAVEL USE, that the State Statute itself says you are specifically EXEMPT from being required to have a drivers license to drive your car! (NOTE: This flyers is so good, that NOT one (1) person in Washington State has been issued a ticket for driving without a license when they presented it to the cops!)

11.) My OREGON RECREATIONAL VEHICLE FLYER shows that if you declare your motor vehicle to be a NON-COMMERCIAL VEHICLE and used exclusively for recreational, camping and TRAVEL USE, that the State Statute itself says you are specifically EXEMPT from being required to have a drivers license to drive your car! (NOTE: This flyers is so good, that NOT one (1) person in Oregon State has been issued a ticket for driving without a license when they presented it to the cops!)

12.) My IDAHO RECREATIONAL VEHICLE FLYER shows that if you declare your motor vehicle to be a NON-COMMERCIAL VEHICLE and used exclusively for recreational, camping and TRAVEL USE, that the State Statute itself says you are specifically EXEMPT from being required to have a drivers license to drive your car! (NOTE: This flyers is so good, that NOT one (1) person in Idaho State has been issued a ticket for driving without a license when they presented it to the cops!)

13.) My DAYLITE FLYER shows that only a plainly marked vehicle during daylite hours can legally stop you and give you a ticket. UNMARKED COP CARS have NO statutory authority to stop you or give you a ticket for anything!

14.) My RIGHT TO PRACTICE LAW FLYER shows that I have the statutory authority under Washington law to practice law in all of the courts of this State WITHOUT ADMISSION to the Washington State Bar Association.

15.) My PERJURY FLYER shows that the INCOMPETENT Grant County Prosecutors have committed 1st Degree Perjury by their testimony in open court that they had “prior knowledge” that neither Kurt Riggin or Luis Ewing were NOT currently and had NEVER been authorized or admitted to practice law by the Washington State Bar Association and then armed with that “prior knowledge” they proceeded to charge us with unlawful practice of law as both a legal provider and as a non-lawyer, knowing that we did not qualify or fall within the definitions of legal provider or non-lawyer.

FREE FLYERS FOR UTAH:

1.) NO INSURANCE REQUIRED IN UTAH – This flyer has NO less than four (4) Utah statutes that make it crystal clear that a police officer has NO authority to ask you to provide proof of operator’s security aka INSURANCE unless you were first involved in an accident in which you caused injury, death or damage of at least $1,000.00 to another vehicle and is supported by several EN BANC Washington State Supreme Court Decisions. If you have not been in an accident and the cop still demands you provide proof of insurance after you hand him this flyer and he still gives you a no insurance ticket, you can file 1st Degree Felony charges against him for “trafficking in false insurance claims” in violation of your State Criminal Profiteering Act which is the State version of RICO.

2.) DOPE IS LEGAL UTAH – This flyer has the Utah Statutes that clearly provide that you may LAWFULLY POSSESS marijuana if you are the ULTIMATE USER who is using the marijuana for your own individual and personal use and NOT for distribution.

3.) UTAH RECREATIONAL VEHICLE – This flyer makes it clear that if you declare your car to be a recreational vehicle that is used exclusively and solely for family, camping, recreational or to travel that you are not required to have a license to drive it. This flyer contains statutes from Idaho, Oregon and Washington that further clarifies that you are EXEMPT from having to have a DRIVER’S LICENSE to drive your car for NON-COMMERCIAL purposes.

4.) UTAH STOP ARREST NOTICE – This flyer has the vehicle code section and supporting criminal statute that clearly gives you the right to demand that the police officer release you from custody if you sign the promise to appear in most cases except for drunk driving and further tells the cop that he is guilty of a gross misdemeanor if he violates this section and can be subject to removal from office for violating this section. This flyer also has two statutes, one from the vehicle code and one from the criminal code that makes it clear to all law enforcement that he is required to bring you to the magistrate forthwith and not to the jail.

FREE FLYERS FOR NORTH & SOUTH CAROLINA:

1.) NO INSURANCE REQUIRED IN NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA – These flyer’s have NO less than four (4) North & South Carolina statutes that make it crystal clear that a police officer has NO authority to ask you to provide proof of operator’s security aka INSURANCE unless you were first involved in an accident in which you caused injury, death or damage of at least $1,000.00 to another vehicle and is supported by five (5) North and South Carolina case cites and several EN BANC Washington State Supreme Court Decisions. If you have not been in an accident and the cop still demands you provide proof of insurance after you hand him this flyer and he still gives you a no insurance ticket, you can file 1st Degree Felony charges against him for “trafficking in false insurance claims” in violation of your State Criminal Profiteering Act which is the State version of RICO.

2.) DOPE IS LEGAL NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA – This flyer has the North and South Carolina Statutes and Federal Statutes that clearly provide that you may LAWFULLY POSSESS marijuana if you are the ULTIMATE USER who is using the marijuana for your own individual and personal use and NOT for distribution.

3.) NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA RECREATIONAL VEHICLE – This flyer makes it clear that if you declare your car to be a recreational vehicle that is used exclusively and solely for family, camping, recreational or to travel that you are not required to have a license to drive it. Although both North and South Carolina statutes attempt to make it look like this only applies to RV’s and Mobile Homes, the South Carolina recreational statute makes it clear that a recreational vehicle can be a self propelled vehicle that is to serve solely as a family car and personal conveyance for recreational, camping and travel use! This flyer contains statutes from Idaho, Oregon and Washington that further clarifies that you are EXEMPT from having to have a DRIVER’S LICENSE to drive your car for NON-COMMERCIAL purposes.

4.) NO LICENSE REQUIRED IN NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA shows that the State’s of North and South Carolina only sells COMMERCIAL LICENSES! If you look carefully at the North Carolina statutes GS 20-7, they try to fool you into thinking that Class A, Class B and Class C driver’s licenses are NOT Commercial, but go the next statute G.S. 20-37.16 and you will see that the same Class A, Class B and Class C driver’s licenses are COMMERCIAL!

5.) NORTH & SOUTH CAROLINA NO SEAT BELT REQUIRED ON NON-COMMERCIAL VEHICLES – This flyer has the Federal Statutes that make it clear that the State’s cannot create a different standard than the Federal Standard and shows you that the State adopted the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act which requires all COMMERCIAL VEHICLES to have Seat Belts.

NEW FREE FLYERS FOR WASHINGTON STATE:

1.) MY PASSENGERS DON’T NEED NO STINKING ID!!!
With this flyer, you will be able to successfully STOP THE COPS from requiring that your PASSENGERS show them any Identification whatsoever, and if they violate your PASSENGERS RIGHTS NOT TO BE SEARCHED, then I can write the briefs that will get all the evidence suppressed and then WE CAN SUE THEM!!!

2.) WASHINGTON LAW ONLY REQUIRES THAT I GIVE YOU MY NAME AND ADDRESS!!!
With this flyer, you can show the cops that Washington Law only requires that you Identify your self by telling the cop your “NAME & ADDRESS” and you can show the COPS that the Statutes do NOT require that you give your DATE OF BIRTH or your SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER and that the Statutes do NOT require you to show PICTURE ID of any kind!!!

I have beaten numerous cases of:
a.) RESISTING ARREST
b.) OBSTRUCTING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
c.) REFUSAL TO COOPERATE & GIVE INFORMATION
d.) REFUSAL TO SIGN A TICKET

If you have ever been charged with any of the above listed crimes, and you want to VACATE THE VOID JUDGMENTS and get your former convictions DISMISSED so that you can SUE THE COPS for FALSE ARREST & FALSE IMPRISONMENT then you need to hire me to write the briefs for you so that you can do that!!!

If you have any friends who engage in some recreational drug use who are pregnant, you need to WARN them that ALL the Hospitals in Washington have a secret & unpublished policy of DRUG TESTING all pregnant mothers because they want to STEAL YOUR BABIES!

3.) RELIGIOUS OBJECTION TO VACCINATIONS & BLOOD TEST’S FOR DRUGS FLYER FOR ALL PREGNANT MOTHERS!!!
With this flyer, every pregnant mother can stop the Hospitals from further engaging in their conspiracy with the CPS Division of DSHS from conducting a DRUG TEST of both you and your newborn babies BLOOD samples for the purpose of wanting to steal & kidnap NEWBORN BABIES from their Mothers so that they can PROFIT by SELLING YOUR BABIES to CANADIAN citiznes & parents who can’t have children for $100,000.00 to $150,000.00 from THE PIIC FACILITIES WHERE THEY PUMP MORPHINE TO PERFECTLY HEALTHY BABIES who show NO symptoms of drug addiction!!!


Do you want me to write FREE FLYERS for your STATE???

The price to have me do FREE FLYERS for any STATE is $1,000.00 per FREE FLYER!

You donate MONEY and I donate my TIME and together WE help “the next guy” who in turn hands out more copies of my FREE FLYERS to the next guy or he or she FORWARDS and RE-SENDS my FREE FLYERS by E-MAIL to “the next guy” and he or she helps “the next guy.”

Once the FREE FLYERS for your STATE are complete, you and I can FORWARD & RE-SEND them out to EVERYONE on all our E-MAIL LIST’S for FREE!!!

DONATIONS ARE BADLY NEEDED!!!


I sometimes drive to the Bars on the weekend and post my FREE FLYERS on the windshield of every car in the Bar’s parking lot. You can do this also.

However, gas and photocopies are getting more and more expensive all the time and I need some help, so please DONATE whatever you can for the cause!!!


Question:
How do I get Luis Ewing’s FREE FLYERS???
Answer:

Send me an E-MAIL requesting that I send you my FREE FLYERS and tell me what STATE you live in and I will add you to my list which I do STATE by STATE so that I can let you know when I might be teaching a LEGAL SEMINAR in your STATE.

Hey everyone do me a favor when you get my FREE FLYERS and please FORWARD & RE-SEND to ALL your friends and to EVERYONE on ALL your E-Mail list’s!!!

ALL OF MY FREE FLYERS are all 2 PAGES and you need to take them down to your local printer and have them converted to a 1 – PAGE DOUBLE SIDED FLYER!!!

Please feel FREE to copy all of my FREE FLYERS in original form and hand them out at all your local bars or just simply give them to all your friends and family members.

Legal Research takes many hours and here I am still giving away more good information than any other patriot leader or seminar teacher in the entire United States and doing it for FREE!!!

My FREE FLYERS have helped many people NOT go to jail and stopped many others from even getting a ticket in the first place!!!

SEND ME AN E-MAIL AND PLEASE TELL ME WHAT STATE YOU LIVE IN SO THAT I CAN INFORM YOU OF WHEN I MIGHT COME TO YOUR STATE TO TEACH A LEGAL SEMINAR!!!

>>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB9gGklTlqg

>>

https://famguardian.org/subjects/Freedom/Rights/Travel/DefYourRightToTravel-040920ch07s.pdf

>>

PS – YOU CAN HELP ME DESTROY CPS BY SUPPORTING MY RESEARCH AND SENDING ME CASH ONLY DONATIONS TO:

Luis Ewing
c/o 34218 S.E. 22nd Way,
(City of) Washougal,
The State of Washington [98671]

If you want more information and/or want to see my list of testimonials, please send me an e-mail requesting that I add you to my e-mail list and please don’t forget to tell me what STATE you live in to Luis Ewing at: <rcwcodebuster@aol.com> or <rcwcodebuster@live.com> or <rcwcodebuster@mail.com> or <rcwcodebuster@yahoo.com> or <rcwcodebuster@gmail.com> or SKYPE me at: <luisewing> or you can call me Monday through Saturday, from 12:00 NOON through 10:00 PM on PACIFIC STANDARD TIME at my home office phone at: 1 – (360) 335-1322 or my cellular phone: 1 – (253) 226-3741

http://www.luisewing.com/flyers/index.html

Posted in Parental Rights | Leave a comment

Taxes, State Income v. Federal

Nebraska Taxpayers Tax is Based on Federal Tax

Posted in State Income Tax | Leave a comment

Judgment Collection

Judgment Collection:

Kick Out Order.  (Force them to release an inmate.)

Body Attachment Order.  (Sheriff holds the man until he pays the civil judgment off.)

County/State/City Office of Risk Management.

Insurance Underwriters.

Posted in Judgment Collection | Leave a comment