Teknosis: Private Attorney General Comments Again Re: Mountain Man Arrested In Courtroom, Gets the Last Word Again

« "We now have authority to shoot Obama" - Christian American Patriots Militia Leader aka Another Blatantly Obvious False Flag | Main | "JFK's Embrace of Third World Nationalists" by Jim DiEugenio »

Private Attorney General Comments Again Re: Mountain Man Arrested In Courtroom, Gets the Last Word Again

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:28 PM, "Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S." wrote:

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/mountain-man-arrested-in-courtroom-gets.html

Greetings Heather Callaghan:

Thank you for covering this case.

I am writing this time to address 2 issues that you have reported:

(1) the widespread usage of names in ALL CAPS
does not automatically imply a corporation, or a trust:

if you make a habit of challenging advocates of that claim,

I predict that they will be unable to produce any real proof

that such a corporation or trust ever existed, in point of fact.

You will be on much better factual grounds to understand
the true history of what is known as a "nom de guerre"
or "war name" in French. The following excerpt was taken

from a pleading filed in the Superior Court of Alabama
not too long ago:

http://supremelaw.org/cc/barber/nom.de.guerre.defined.htm
http://supremelaw.org/cc/barber/2-A-MEMORANDUM%20OF%20LAW.htm

Therefore, if the STATE OF MONTANA [sic] attempted to charge
ERNIE WAYNE TERTELGTE [sic] in the "complaint" filed by that
"Plaintiff", the human being named Ernie Wayne Tertelgte

made exactly the correct move to challenge the jurisdiction

of that "Court".

Whenever original jurisdiction is specifically denied,
it must be proven by the party(s) alleging jurisdiction.

In Federal Courts, if original jurisdiction is not identified
clearly in the initial pleadings, those Courts are presumed
to lack jurisdiction.

More accurately, State administrative tribunals are
actually being convened IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [X]

where the latter COUNTY is actually a corporation, or "body corporate".

In California, for example, there is an Act of the California

Legislature which establishes all County governments
in that State as "bodies corporate": Government Code sec. 23003:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=22001-23000&file=23000-23027

23003.  A county is a body corporate and politic, has the powers
specified in this title and such others necessarily implied from
those expressed.

Therefore, Montana's tribunal must be expressly proceeding
IN AND FOR a corporation; and, the officers and employees of that
corporation have openly admitted, by using a nom de guerre in pleadings,
that they are in a state of mixed war with the Citizens of Montana.

You can also confirm this by inquiring with the Montana
Department of Revenue -- by asking whether or not they do
transmit U.S. Mail which routinely displays the addressees
with "noms de guerre" (war names). If they won't answer you,
I'll show you one instance that crossed my desk recently:

it displays ALL CAPS in the names of the two intended recipients.

Mail Fraud is a FELONY Federal offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1341

(2) the correct legal meanings of "Title of Nobility"
and "Esquire" are matters that can be confirmed
in Bouvier's Law Dictionary:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/dict/

(a) because the phrase "Title of Nobility" occurs
twice in the organic U.S. Constitution, and because those

Clauses have never been amended, they retain today
the original meanings they first had when the
organic Constitution was first ratified on June 21, 1788 A.D.

(also my birthday in 1948, at Worcester, Massachusetts):

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1:9:8
http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#1:10:1

http://supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/usdc/counpa.htm

(b) the term "Esquire" is defined in Bouvier's Law Dictionary

with a variety of meanings which necessarily imply an origin,

and direct relationship, with the Crown of England:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/dict/blde1.htm#esquire

e.g.:

"any office of trust under the crown"

(c) the organic Constitution omitted any specific
penalties for accepting a Title of Nobility; and,
that omission was later cured by the original
Thirteenth Amendment ratified circa 1812.

Here is the Congressional Resolution proposing
that Constitutional Amendment, 2 Stat. 613 (May 1, 1810):

http://supremelaw.org/stat/2/2stat613.GIF

As you can see, the 2 penalties for accepting, claiming,
receiving or retaining any Title of Nobility were the permanent
loss of citizenship and a permanent bar from ever occupying
any government office in America ever again.

Because attorneys are "officers of the court", as
already decided by standing decisions of the
U.S. Supreme Court, displaying "Esquire" after
their name constitutes probable cause calling
for the conclusion that they are not, and cannot be,

"officers of the court" i.e. judicial officers of a State
as the latter term occurs at 4 U.S.C. 101:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/101

(creates a legal obligation to honor the two (2)
constitutional prohibitions against Titles of Nobility)

(d) when that Proposal was only one State

away from reaching the required three-fourths
of the Union Members, the "Crown" launched
the War of 1812, which saw British troops
burn the Library of Congress in the mistaken
belief that all the voting records of the State
Legislatures were archived there.

Little did those military troops understand

that the official records were deposited
in the respective archives of those State
Governments, and NOT in the District of Columbia:

http://supremelaw.org/authors/trumane/esquires.htm

For supreme authority in this context, see the Full Faith and Credit Clause:

http://supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#4:1

Section 1.  Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to
the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other
State.  And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner
in which such Acts, Records, and Proceedings shall be proved, and
the Effect thereof.