Constitution- Always ask constituting what?

Below is why/how the USA agents got governance rights to property it owned, 
upon knowing this no such rights extend upon property the USA does not own. 
You want to keep all governance by the USA of your land as it is used as a
right?  DRRIVERA.COM

"this Constitution" is the US constitution, a corporation.
"the Constitution" is the USA constitution, a Confederacy. 
Jurisdiction is as constituted !

Students,
 
The failure or refusal of  Congress and the President to adopt "this
Constitution" limits that Constitution to an alteration of  the Articles of
Confederation of November 15, 1777.  As an alteration, the Constitution of
the United States cannot extend beyond the original subjects of the
Articles of Confederation. 
 
The third Organic Law, the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, is written
law enacted by the United States in Congress assembled using its proprietary
power over the Northwest Territory, which includes the first United States
of  Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.
These United States are the territorial limits of the power of  Congress to
legislate and tax. Congress let it be known in Article 3 of  the Northwest
Ordinance that it would not be neutral on matters of  religion.
 
Art. 3. "Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good
government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education
shall forever be encouraged. The utmost good faith shall always be observed
towards the Indians; their lands and property shall never be taken from them
without their consent; and, in their property, rights, and liberty, they
shall never be invaded or disturbed, unless in just and lawful wars
authorized by Congress; but laws founded in justice and humanity, shall from
time to time be made for preventing wrongs being done to them, and for
preserving peace and friendship with them."
 
The fourth Organic Law of  the United States of America is the Constitution
of September 17, 1787, which first becomes established between the first
nine States that ratify that Constitution and then  becomes an Article XIII
alteration to the second Organic Law, the Articles of Confederation of
November 15, 1777, when the thirteenth State, Rhode Island ratifies the
Constitution of September 17, 1787 on May 29, 1790.       
 
The failure or refusal of  Congress and the President of the United States
of America to subscribe the Article VI oath "to support this Constitution"
limits the Constitution of September 17, 1787 to an alteration of  the
Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777.   Without "Adoption," the
Constitution of September 17, 1787 cannot add anything new to the Articles
of Confederation it can only alter what is already there.  
 
Without "Adoption," the Constitution of the United States provides little or
no restraint on the government of  the United States of America in the
territory belonging to the United States of America.  
 
Ed, Juris doctorate, PHD

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in CONSTITUTIONAL, Jurisdiction | Leave a comment

Animal or Image of God, says US-CODE

USC TITLE 7 (AGRICULTURE), CHAPTER 6, SUBCHAPTER II, § 136 Definitions
(d) Animal  The term “animal” means all vertebrate and invertebrate species, including but not limited to
man and other mammals, birds, fish, and shellfish.

Now the US most often recognizes man kind as a disposable animal, is you are on the lower part of the food (disposable) chain your life is at risk more in the US that most places of the world.  Why because you are classed with the aimals.

One in three people in America are killed in the whom of there mothers these days.

No country in the history of man has done such godless acts and avoided God’s judgment.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Abortion Issues, USA the Tyrant? | Leave a comment

Map of all land owned by USA, “US Lands”

http://www.nationalatlas.gov/mapmaker?AppCmd=CUSTOM&LayerList=federallands&visCats=CAT-boundary

Great map, it shows each state, county, and what the land is used for.

Very strange that in Nebraska for example the USA does not own the Federal Court House Land, or the capital.

Now the State of Nebraska is a subdivision of the USA, so they are essentially the same government.

I have been told that most all government buildings like court houses are leased land.

>>>>

 

The above map shows the percent of each state owned by the USA.

  1. Nevada  84.5%   < 10 highest percent owned.
  2. Alaska  69.1%
  3. Utah  57.4%
  4. Oregon  53.1%
  5. Idaho  50.2%
  6. Arizona  48.1%
  7. California  45.3%
  8. Wyoming  42.3%
  9. New Mexico  41.8%
  10. Colorado  36.6%
  1. Connecticut  0.4%  < 10 lowest percent owned.
  2. Rhode Island   0.4%
  3. Iowa   0.8%
  4. New York  0.8%
  5. Maine  1.1%
  6. Kansas   1.2%
  7. Nebraska  1.4%
  8. Alabama  1.6%
  9. Ohio   1.7%
  10. Illinois  1.8%

SEE > https://gisgeography.com/federal-lands-united-states-map/

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

U.S. federal land is land owned by the government of the United States. The United States federal government owns between a quarter and a third of the total land in the United States, approximately six hundred forty million acres of it. The total land area of the United States is just over 2.4 billion acres.

>>

#StateFederal LandTotal Area
1Nevada80.1%110,572 mi²
2Utah63.1%84,897 mi²
3Idaho61.9%83,569 mi²
4Alaska60.9%665,384 mi²
5Oregon52.3%98,379 mi²
6Wyoming46.7%97,813 mi²
7California45.4%163,695 mi²
8Arizona38.6%113,990 mi²
9Colorado36.2%104,094 mi²
10New Mexico31.7%121,590 mi²
11Montana29%147,040 mi²
12Washington28.6%71,298 mi²
13District of Columbia24.7%68 mi²
14Hawaii20.2%10,932 mi²
15New Hampshire14%9,349 mi²
16Florida12.9%65,758 mi²
17Georgia12.9%59,425 mi²
18Michigan10%96,714 mi²
19Arkansas9.4%53,179 mi²
20Virginia9.3%42,775 mi²
21North Carolina7.8%53,819 mi²
22Vermont7.8%9,616 mi²
23West Virginia7.4%24,230 mi²
24Minnesota6.8%86,936 mi²
25South Dakota5.4%77,116 mi²
26Wisconsin5.3%65,496 mi²
27Mississippi5.1%48,432 mi²
28Tennessee4.8%42,144 mi²
29Louisiana4.7%52,378 mi²
30South Carolina4.5%32,020 mi²
31Kentucky4.3%40,408 mi²
32North Dakota3.9%70,698 mi²
33Missouri3.8%69,707 mi²
34New Jersey3.6%8,723 mi²
35Maryland3.2%12,406 mi²
36Alabama2.7%52,420 mi²
37Delaware2.4%2,489 mi²
38Pennsylvania2.2%46,054 mi²
39Texas1.9%268,596 mi²
40Indiana1.7%36,420 mi²
41Maine1.5%35,380 mi²
42Oklahoma1.5%69,899 mi²
43Illinois1.2%57,914 mi²
44Massachusetts1.2%10,554 mi²
45Ohio1.2%44,826 mi²
46Nebraska1.1%77,348 mi²
47New York0.8%54,555 mi²
48Rhode Island0.7%1,545 mi²
49Kansas0.5%82,278 mi²
50Connecticut0.3%5,543 mi²
>>
Posted in Map / Federal / USA / OWNED | Leave a comment

Allegiance, where should it be?

http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-pledge.html

The above link is a convincing site that shows how socialist groups encouraged elegance to the state and less and less elegance to the family, church, and fellow man, and most of all to God.

Few people know that the USA / US is “A” government, not the government.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Allegiance / Pledge | Leave a comment

USA not US Passport, there is a difference.

When one gets a passport or any type of Identification make sure it has the following:

USA or United States of America – NOT US or United States.

Nebraska – NOT STATE OF NEBRASKA.

Free Inhabitant – NOT citizen or national.

>>>>

This is what one person does, but be very careful in changing government forms, at times you can be prosecuted for it, not so much for adding, or drawing a line through, but for whiting something out and then passing it as an original gov. form.

  1. Add a simple “A” to make it ‘USA CITIZEN’. Or make it ‘USA PERSON’ even better as no citizen. You could put it all in quotes ha ha. [That one isn’t defined anywhere that I know of] If the teller gives you grief say, Look, the form has a penalty for non truth so I MUST tell the truth. You wouldn’t want me to lie would you? Any MORON knows a genuine US PASSPORT says it’s the United States of America and NOT the US. Look here is a picture of my [or a] passport. Someone didn’t know the stylized name is the United States of America.

2. Add a line next to the errant US PERSON,  Defined solely as a birth in California.

3. Add signature invalid without attachment next door to the POP. Put your corrections to the terms in an attachment.

4. Cross out US PERSON and correct above.

5. Sign the form as is. Then after you get the account, write the bank a letter correcting their form citing discrimination against national origin and ask it to be attached to the card.

6. THIS ONE IS FUN!!! Look up what the words mean. Rarely do people ANALYZE the signature itself. For a signature CURSIVELY use Decline In Toto. $500 says they accept it. [BTW: Do not worry that the signature is not the same as what you sign for checks. Any bank will accept Mickey Mouse as your signature on a check. Its only when YOU tell them fraud that they THEN look what your signature is.  It’s a comparison against other  checks. Remember the signature card is a RUSE to get an IRS declaration.]

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/79955.pdf  < passport form

MY experiences with banks has gotten better.

In the beginning of 911 Nazi Era I had some banks tell me, Either sign it as is or forget the account. Modifying will cause us to reject the account. This is changing as everyone is realizing our govt lies to us.

Many banks do the signature cards electronically which doesn’t allow one to add or subtract anything. In other words an on-line application and a signature pad taking the signature as a computer input.

One bank even has you sign all these blanks on an electronic signature pad for their bank application interestingly enough never allowing you to see what you signed till too late. They later print out portions of the application only portions. [I knew because I signed 6 times but got only 3 papers with signatures.]. Of course I told the bank rep., Someone needs to tell your attorneys that without disclosure before signing, the binding-nature of the signature is near worthless and becomes more worthless over time of non-disclosure.

VERY RECENTLY. Refreshingly I told one teller at this bank below that the definition of US PERSON was unclear on the card and since the card wanted the truth, I would modify the statement. She told me, go ahead it’s YOUR signature. https://www.53.com/wps/portal/personal

>>>>

((This man claims that if he filled a US Passport form out normally it would only have United States and Not U.S.A as place of birth and also STATE OF CALIFORNIA and not CALIFORNIA.))  NOTE US and STATE OF is a federal possession.))

>>>>

Another Success Story:

July 9, 2011 at 7:31 PM

I recently applied for a new U.S.A. Passport and sent in the form, which I modified to indicate a Citizenship status other than what was printed on the form. It was returned to me, along with a very terse and abrupt letter from the regional director saying it was improperly executed, and that if it was not corrected in a certain period of time, my passport would be denied, and I would not be getting a refund.

I called Houston and discussed the issue, and was told that ALL U.S. citizens owe their status to the 14th Amendment. I politely but firmly rebutted and explained my position that I, as a white American man, whose earliest European ancestors arrived here in 1658, and helped found the Republic, 4-5 generations later, do NOT owe my Citizenship status in any way to the 14th Amendment, which benefited only newly freed African slaves. I then mailed a new application and a notarized affidavit, stating as much, and included several citation, including Van Valkenburg v. Brown,43 California 43.

I received a USA Passport in short order, without having to provide a SSN.

Apparently, the Department of State now agrees, and has my sworn documentation on file that I am NOT a 14th Amendment person, U.S. person, or U.S. citizen.

This is the second time I have done this. The first time around, I had to slug it out with them for six months, but finally prevailed, not before having to be interviewed by two State Department investigators who hand delivered the passport, just so that they could get a good look at me. So I was pleasantly surprised when they gave in so easily this last time.

Now I have both a state ID card and a USA passport, and did not provide a SSN for either. It works, but you have to be brave and willing to struggle for it. Not for those who are timid or trying to stay under the radar.

Van Valkenburg v. Brown,43 California 43.has been a useful citation to me in making my case up against ignorant bureaucrats. I’m sure she was non-white and it galled here. But what could she say? It is history, and it is fact.

>>>>

Click HERE to view the list of foundation-al information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Passport | Leave a comment

6203 Method of assessment, they have a duty.

26 USC § 6203 Method of assessment

The assessment shall be made by recording the liability of the taxpayer in the office of the Secretary in accordance with rules or regulations prescribed by the Secretary. Upon request of the taxpayer, the Secretary shall furnish the taxpayer a copy of the record of the assessment;

…among the rules or regulations prescribed by the Secretary, per the directive reflected at 26 USC § 6203, we find:

26 CFR § 301.6203-1 Method of assessment

The district director and the director of the regional service center shall appoint one or more assessment officers. The district director shall also appoint assessment officers in a Service Center servicing his district. The assessment shall be made by an assessment officer signing the summary record of assessment. The summary record, through supporting records, shall provide identification of the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amount of the assessment. The amount of the assessment shall, in the case of tax shown on a return by the taxpayer, be the amount so shown, and in all other cases the amount of the assessment shall be the amount shown on the supporting list or record. The date of the assessment is the date the summary record is signed by an assessment officer. If the taxpayer requests a copy of the record of assessment, he shall be furnished a copy of the pertinent parts of the assessment which set forth the name of the taxpayer, the date of assessment, the character of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and the amounts assessed.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in IRS / Assessment / 6203 | Leave a comment

Jury Duty, is it your DUTY?

((I personally suspect that one letter to the jury foreman would be sufficient, or the party that is summoning you.))

>>

The below is an Example of a client noticing state that he did not ellect to become a US citize, and was taken of jury call.

3-22-2018 – Paul:  Brevard County, FL, sent me a Summons for Jury duty. I replied that I was not a United States citizen and was not registered to vote. They replied via email below and stated I was not qualified for this summons. Also these emails in Florida with the state or county are part of the public record according to their statutes. John Schiavone

>>>

 

Letter to Clerk of the United States District Court at

_________________________

Dear Court Clerk:

I have obtained the federal court research of Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, who received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1971 and has been a member of the Bar of California since June 2, 1972. In addition to his legal education and experience, he has a bachelor’s degree in government.

I want to verify certain facts about the status of the United States District Court,

I have been told that I can obtain a copy of the Jury Service and Selection Plan approved by the appeals court. I have been unable to obtain from the web site of this court: statements of the status of the court and a description of geographical boundaries of the judicial district. I was told that if I could not obtain these documents off the Internet was unable to obtain those documents from the Internet, they might be available from the Office of the Clerk of the Court.

I am making a request of the following documents because they were not available from the court’s web site:

1. Document identifying Article of Constitution under which court was established.
2. Document describing territory that comprises court’s judicial district.
3. Copy of the Jury Service and Selection Plan.

He has stated in the opinion letter that he prepared for me that the statute law that established that court does not refer to Article III of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court cannot be ordained and established under Article III. I must obtain a statement from you, the clerk of the court, as to what article of the United States Constitution was used to establish the court.

His conclusion, based on the statute law which was provided to me along with his opinion letter, is that the court was created pursuant to Article I or IV of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court is limited to territorial jurisdiction consisting of the lands and improvements over which the government of the United States has exclusive jurisdiction.

The purpose of this letter is to alert you to the fact that the United States District Court, ________________________________(or here insert the name of the court that has no Article III judicial power. If you disagree with his conclusion that the United States District Court, ______________________is a territorial court, I will be happy to send you, upon your request, the underlying material upon which he bases that conclusion and his analysis. All you have to do is disagree with Doctor Rivera’s conclusion that the United States District Court, _______________________is a territorial court and I will send you copies of the statute law upon which he relied to make his conclusion.

Very truly yours,

_______________

****************************

Letter To The
Foreman of the Grand Jury

I retained Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, who received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1971 and has been a member of the Bar of California since June 2, 1972, to prepare an opinion letter regarding the status of the United States District Court, District of____________. In addition to his legal education and experience, he has a bachelor’s degree in government.

He stated in the opinion letter that he prepared for me that statute law including Title 28 U.S.C. that established that court does not refer to Article III of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court cannot be ordained and established under Article III. I must obtain a statement from you, the clerk of the court, as to what article of the United States Constitution was used to establish the court.

Doctor Rivera told me, that to confirm his findings, I should obtain from the web site of the above court: statements of the status of the court and a description of geographical boundaries of the judicial district. He also told me to obtain a copy of the Jury Service and Selection Plan approved by the appeals court. He told me that if I was unable to obtain those documents from the Internet, they might be available from the Office of the Clerk of the Court.

I am making a request of the following documents from you as foreman of the grand jury of this court, because after repeated unsuccessful attempts to obtain the documents from the clerk of the court and they were not available from the court’s web site.

1. Document identifying the Article of the Constitution under which the court was established.
2. Document describing territory that comprises court’s judicial district.
3. Copy of the Jury Service and Selection Plan.

He has stated in the opinion letter that he prepared for me that the statute law that established that court does not refer to Article III of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court cannot possibly be ordained and established under Article III. I must obtain a statement from you, the clerk of the court, as to what article of the United States Constitution was used to establish the court.

His conclusion based on the statute law which was provided to me along with his opinion letter is that the court was created pursuant to Article I of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court is limited to territorial jurisdiction consisting of the lands and improvements over which the government of the United States has exclusive jurisdiction.

The purpose of this letter is to alert you to the fact that the United States District Court of Arizona (or here insert the name of the court that has no Article III judicial power. If you disagree with his conclusion that the United States District Court, _____________is a territorial court, I will be happy to send you the underlying material upon which he bases that conclusion and his analysis. All you have to do is disagree with Doctor Rivera’s conclusion that the United States District Court, _____________________________is a territorial court and I will send you copies of the statute law upon which he relied to make his conclusion.

*****************************

Letter to Congressman
The Honorable (full name)
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr.

The United States District Court, _____________________________is located within your congressional district. My attorney told me to obtain a written statement from your office as to the article of the United States Constitution that was used to create the court.

I retained Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, who received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1971 and has been a member of the Bar of California since June 2, 1972, to prepare an opinion letter regarding the status of the United States District Court, __________________________________________.

His conclusion, based on the statute law which was provided to me along with his opinion letter is that the court was created pursuant to Article I of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court is limited to territorial jurisdiction consisting of the lands and improvements over which the government of the United States has exclusive jurisdiction.

The purpose of this letter is to alert you to the fact that the United States District Court _____________________________has no Article III judicial power. If you disagree with his conclusion, that the United States District Court, __________________is a territorial court, I will be happy to send you the underlying material upon which he bases that conclusion and his analysis. All you have to do is disagree with Doctor Rivera’s conclusion that the United States District Court, ____________________________________is a territorial court and I will send you copies of the statute law upon which he relied to make his conclusion.

Very truly yours,

********************************

Letter to United States Senator

The Honorable (full name)
United States Senate
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr.

The United States District Court, __________________________ is located within the exterior boundaries of (State). My attorney told me to obtain a written statement from your office as to what article of the United States Constitution was used to create the court. Will you please respond in writing to my request?

I retained Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, who received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1971 and who has been a member of the Bar of California since June 2, 1972, to prepare an opinion letter regarding the status of the United States District Court, ___________________________________.

His conclusion, based on the statute law which was provided to me along with his opinion letter, is that the court was created pursuant to Article I of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court is limited to territorial jurisdiction consisting of the lands and improvements over which the government of the United States has exclusive jurisdiction.

The purpose of this letter is to alert you to the fact that the United States District Court, ________________________has no Article III judicial power. If you disagree with his conclusion that the United States District Court, _____________________is a territorial court, I will be happy to send you the underlying material upon which he bases that conclusion and his analysis. All you have to do is disagree with Doctor Rivera’s conclusion that the United States District Court, ___________________________is a territorial court and I will send you copies of the statute law upon which he relied to make his conclusion.

Very truly yours,

*******************************

Letter to United States Attorney

The Honorable (full name)

United States Attorney

The United States District Court,

Middle District of ___________

Dear Mr.

The United States District Court, Middle District of ____________is located within the exterior boundaries of Florida. My attorney told me to obtain a written statement from your office as to what article of the United States Constitution was used to create the court. Will you please respond in writing to my request?

I retained Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, who received a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1971 and who has been a member of the Bar of California since June 2, 1972, to prepare an opinion letter regarding the status of the United States District Court, Arizona.

His conclusion, based on the statute law which was provided to me along with his opinion letter, is that the court was created pursuant to Article I of the United States Constitution and, therefore, the court is limited to territorial jurisdiction consisting of the lands and improvements over which the government of the United States has exclusive jurisdiction.

The purpose of this letter is to alert you to the fact that the United States District Court, ____________________ has no Article III judicial power. If you disagree with his conclusion that the United States District Court, Middle District of ________________ Division is a territorial court, I will be happy to send you the underlying material upon which he bases that conclusion and his analysis. All you have to do is disagree with Doctor Rivera’s conclusion that the United States District Court, _________________ is a territorial court and I will send you copies of the statute law upon which he relied to make his conclusion.

Very truly yours,

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Jury Duty, Jury duty Objection, Jury Pool | Leave a comment

Hate marking off that you’re a US citizen?

Its easy on government forms.

Cross out United States Citizen and insert “birth in California”.

If they don’t allow you to do the cross out, simply put “US CITIZEN” all in quotes and add “defined solely as birth in California”.

90% of time they accept this one….because THEY think its obvious.

If govt. worker objects, tell the government worker, “Your form wants me to tell the truth. I gave you the truth which is I am born in XYZ. You don’t want me to lie do you?”

If they don’t allow you to do that [cross out or addition], notice the worker that you will write a clarification document because the worker handed you a form of limitation and not expansion, then simply write the agency and correct the record.

((Used on letters to compel jury pool, US Passports, etc. ))

drrivera.com
Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Address / Residence, Identification / Private, Jury Pool, Passport | Leave a comment

ARE YOU AN INDIVIDUAL that is subject to title 26, Income Tax US Code?

In your letter you state that you are concerned with the administration of Subtitle A—Income Taxes PART I—TAX ON INDIVIDUALS § 1 as it applies me and my private property, of a place called Missouri of the United States of America. I am an Indigenous American man who is not an “individual” defined under Legislation of Congress at 5 U.S.C. § 3331, unlike the President of the United States, under Oath of Office with a duty to pay “Taxes.”

A law is a command from a lawgiver to the entities subject to it. It means what it meant to the lawgivers. We might have trouble discovering the meaning of definitions of their terms and words, confusing ourselves with our being un-education on the language of law, but the duty of a person is to the meaning of the lawgivers for the territory owned by the United States of America, not to our own, even if all the one American people have is our English common language meaning that we strive to bring into congruence with what the lawgivers meant.

An “individual” is a person over which the Congress has legislative power. That individual is found in Article IV of the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 to be inhabitants and settlers of territory owned by the United States of America. The “individual” with a duty to pay “Income Taxes,” as an “employee” of territory and places used for military purposes, under the jurisdiction of the United States of America, is defined by Congress at 26 U.S.C. Chapter 68 §6671(b,):

(b) Person defined-    The term “person”, as used in this subchapter, includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.

Those officers and employees, with a duty to pay taxes are further defined pursuant to 5 U.S.C. PART III Subpart A CHAPTER 21 § 2105:

§ 2105. Employee-    (a) For the purpose of this title, “employee”, except as otherwise provided by this section or when specifically modified, means an officer and an individual who is—

(1) appointed in the civil service by one of the following acting in an official capacity—

(A) the President;

(B) a Member or Members of Congress, or the Congress;

(C) a member of a uniformed service;

(D) an individual who is an employee under this section;

(E) the head of a Government controlled corporation; or

(F) an adjutant general designated by the Secretary concerned under section 709 (c) of title 32;

That “person” who takes the 5 U.S.C. §3331 Oath of Office is defined by Congress under Historical and Revision Notes is the “individual,” under a duty to file the 1040 form U.S. Individual Income Tax Income Tax Return to pay “Income Taxes”:

All but the quoted language in R.S. Sec. 1757 is omitted as obsolete

since R.S. Sec. 1757 was originally an alternative oath to the oath

prescribed in R.S. Sec. 1756 which oath was repealed by the Act of May

13, 1884, ch. 46, Sec. 2, 23 Stat. 22. The words “An individual, except

the President, . . . in the civil service or uniformed services” are

substituted for “any person . . . either in the civil, military, or

naval service, except the President of the United States”. The second

sentence of former section 16 is changed to read, “This section does

not affect other oaths required by law.”

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable

and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

The appointed President of the United States of course takes the Oath of Office found at Article II Section 1 Clause 8 of the 1787 Constitution for the United States of America. That individual’s only duty is defined at Article I Section 7 Clauses 2 & 3 to approve or disapprove of Legislation created by the United States of America in Congress assembled of the Confederacy.

The federal income tax is a tax imposed on the “individual,” at Section G of the 913 Tariff Act, of a corporation as defined by Congress pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. §3002(A)(B)(C):

(15) “United States” means—

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

The only area that Congress has plenary legislative power over is the District of Columbia, the territories and possessions and needful buildings like Post Offices, forts, magazines and other corporate buildings it owns, the same place which the federal corporate named “The State of Missouri” or any of its equivalent chartered subdivision, created within district and division boundary lines by counties, have concurrent jurisdiction.

This is confirmed at Article I Section 4 of the 1945 Constitution of the United States State of Missouri revised August 28, 2010:

Section 4. That Missouri is a free and independent state, subject only to the Constitution of the United States; that all proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States qualifying or affecting the individual liberties of the people or which in any wise may impair the right of local self-government belonging to the people of this state, should be submitted to conventions of the people.

Which means the territorial component, Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the Constitution for the United States of America of 1787, of the “State of Missouri” is the federal land within the boundary line of a place called Missouri as defined by Congress pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Chapter 1 §5:

“The term “United States”, as used in this title in a territorial sense, includes all places and waters, continental or insular, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, except the Canal Zone.”

The “United States” federal corporation named “The State of Missouri” was incorporated, by Legislation of the United States of America in Congress assembled, into the this Union by a solemn public act signed by the appointed President of the United States, James Monroe, on the tenth day [L.S.] of August, 1821, and of the Independence of the United States of America.

Employees, whether elected or appointed to an office of honor and profit under the United States of America, are limited to performing work with no discretion in its execution. The President of the United States is such an individual. His only constitutional duty is to approve or object to Bills passed by Congress. The Secretary of the Treasury is appointed and confirmed as well as the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, but neither individual has ever been duty bound, appointed by a President of the United States of America and confirmed by the Senate, to assess or collect internal revenue.

The office of that assessor and the assistant assessor were abolished on December 24, 1872 and the duties of those officers were transferred to the Collector of Internal Revenue and his assistant, so you see, until 1952 the Collector of Internal Revenue was limited to the territory subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States of America.

The abolition of the Collector of Internal Revenue and his deputy in 1952 made it impossible to demand payment of any alleged tax debt. Since 1952 no Collector of Internal Revenue appointed by the President of the United States of America and confirmed by the Senate has demanded that federal taxes be paid, so federal taxes are voluntary. This is confirmed by the 24th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America Ratified 1/23/1965:

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

The President of the United States of America and the Senate has no authority or power of Legislation over human beings and their land except if of territory that is actually owned by the United States of America. Workers of “government” who are not appointed and confirmed do not take an Oath of Office they simply do what they are told. Employees, whether civil or military, can only tell a human what to do when that human is on the employees’ property.

ORGANIC LAW, FOUNDATIONAL LAW, LAW OF THE LAND (TERRITORY) AND THE OWNERS (PEOPLE OR ENTITIES),

A law means what it meant at the moment of enactment. That event is frozen in eternity. Nothing that happens in the Universe can change what happened or what it meant when it did. There can be rescissions or amendments to the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, but those are new laws. They might displace the old laws in territory owned by the United States of America but they don’t change their meaning within the confines of the four Organic Laws of America; the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 and the Articles of Confederation of November15, 1777 of the United States of America and the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 and the Constitution of September 17, 1787 which becomes the Constitution of the United States when nine States of the second Union of government, proprietary and territory owned by the United States of America, under a Military Order of the Confederacy to form a more perfect Union of “United States” for the United States of America.

Legal practice is what people actually do. All the court decisions and opinions are not the law. They are legal practice. They cannot change the law. People are supposed to conform their practice to the law of territory owned by, ceded and titled to the United States of America, but even if they strive diligently there will always be some departures from it. Those departures are legal practice, not the law.

Now a legal realist will claim that it is only legal practice that matters, and that the only value of the law is to help predict what judges are going to do. Sorry, but I have never, nor will I ever take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the opinions of legislatively created judges. If they get it right, great, if not their actions are unlawful, null, and void, no matter how many troops may try to enforce their decisions.

The purpose of George Washington being elected to the Office of President of the United States of America appointing himself to the appointed employee of the Office of President of the United States was to combine enforce legislation of the Congress with the military power of the United States of America. The Executive Office of President of the United States requires no Oath of Office as it amends the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 at Article II. Instead of being signatory to the Article IV Clause 3 oath to support “this Constitution,” He takes one to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States thereby combining the Commander in Chief of the Military with the Legislative duties of the President of the United States.

The qualification, “fourteen Years a Resident within the United States” pursuant to Article II Section 1 Clause 5, of Office of President is too early to fill by anyone elected to the first “government,” -1776 + July 4, 1776 = 13 years, and that Office remains vacant as of today. The Constitution of September 17, 1787 is therefore never adopted by any government and the United States of America in Congress assembled is the federal government under the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 except of territory and other property owned by and under the jurisdiction of the United States of America.

CONCLUSION

You must agree with me that because I have not filed a return for two consecutive years and paid the tax on the return as a gift to the United States of America, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Section 6631(h) Illegal Tax Protestor Designation, that I am not a person with a duty to file a 1040 Individual Income Tax Return, Internal to the United States located within the District of Columbia, and should be left alone. I can find no requirement, under legislation or the English common Law, of a human being with a duty to file a federal or “State of Missouri” Income Tax return after the late Treaty of Paris of 1783.

Human Beings were never supposed to have any relationship with “government”. Remember that the states created the Confederacy who in turn created the “United States” when nine States of the second Union of States ratify this Constitution of September 17, 1787. This Constitution is never adopted by any “person” or “individual” and it becomes the Constitution of, territory and places owned by the United States of America, the United States.

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in IRS | Leave a comment

Jurisdictionary® , INFO, strongly recomended.

Jurisdictionary®

The above legal information is one you should strongly consider.  If you are in, or like most all Americans, going to be in a legal battle you need to know the procedures of all US Courts, from County on up, they are almost identical.

One Lawyer said; “You can not win, we have the judges and we know the procedure.”

He was right, the judge gave them everything and I could not figure out how to stop it.

A Lawyers old saying; “Most every case could have  been won 15 minutes after the trial is over”, because that is when you figure out what went wrong, but now it is to late.

Never go to battle without first knowing the strengths and the weaknesses of your opponent, and the rules of the battle.

Compaired to lawyer fee Jurisdictionary® is almost free.

Buy it and share your new found knowledge with all your friends.  One can spend a hundred hours gathering what Jurisdictionary® teaches, and all the costly mestakes one is highly likely to make, or one could pay a one time fee and learn it in a few hours.

Purchasing the Jurisdictionary® package through this link also supports me, and my thousands of hours, in providing all the information that you find free on this site.

Sincerely – Paul John Hansen

Click HERE to view the list of foundational information created by Lawyer Paul John Hansen to aid in independence from the US System.

Posted in Court, Procedure / Rules of Court | Leave a comment