Cutting directly to the chase this is a quick summary of my understanding of the matter.

Transcription

1 As you review the material provided by Mr. Ed Johnston, keep in mind, he is simply providing what has been created as part of the body of existing law. The following are some opinions as to what this all means. Your comments, ideas and suggestions are warmly solicited for publishing on the Cutting directly to the chase this is a quick summary of my understanding of the matter. 1. All government agencies are created by the People. 2. All government agencies are also created for the exclusive benefit of the People. 3. Our public agencies and agents serve at the pleasure of We the People. We the People can dissolve any agency at any time for any reason. We need ask no one s permission. Sovereignty is singled out and most respected as one of the strongest features recognized in all of these items presented. May I just suggest to you, that unless each American sovereign recognizes their duty to lead by example and conduct themselves in such an assertive, yet respectful manner in dealing with our public servants, we do a disservice to all. Our employees who are well compensated in exchange for their commitment and pledge to honor their word, in exchange for honest services, must be 1

2 delivered a powerful impression that constantly reminds them of by whom they are employed and to whom they have a duty to respect. And while these facts are not something about which we should have to remind them, due to our own lax and passive nature of taking the path of least resistance, some of us have sent our public servants the wrong message. We allowed them to believe they were in charge. We allowed them liberties and they abused the trust and lattitude and interpreted our kindness as a weakness to exploit. Any reasonable honest and honorable person, recognizes the responsibility to behave in a logical and rational manner. Raising one s own pay rate without proper approval of the people is a no-brainer. Creating laws which exclude the public servants is a no-brainer. Lying and cheating those who pay for the services is a no-brainer. And the basic lists go on. The most disappointing reality we must face, is that given the recognition as being members of our society who were elevated with the deeper responsibility of managing our public trust we all hold in common and of all such highly honored and trusted people, who should best understand their need to know better than anyone else most of our public servants, legislators, judges, law enforcement and public administrators have failed to honor their word and the public trust. Instead in return have dishonored all of those by whom they were entrusted in the first place. Nice going folks. Real nice people you selected. Tell you anything? So it appears we as the people must accept our own failures and recognize it is we the people, as it has always been, who are the only lawful and legitimate authority on this planet. So it is with grave responsibility we must confront these distasteful matters and in all fairness explain and demand the proper respectful relationship be restored. 2

3 Is that a job you are ready, willing and able to responsibly conduct? On Jun 29, 2017, at 12:02 AM, ed johnston <edjohnston2003@yahoo.com> wrote: "People occasionally stumble on the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." "People who shut their eyes to truth, simply invite their own destruction." It's the same the world over, folks... it's all about status/ standing... subject, or sovereign! You are "presumed" to be a subject... Subject=citizen=person=debtor=slave! So how does one go about "correcting" ones "presumed" subject status? By affidavit of truth wherein is included a revocation of all powers of Attorney, signed, notarized, (certified copies made) and entered into the public record, (county recorder and/or by publication =proper service of notice procedures) certified copies sent first class mail to any/all interested parties, ie; 3

4 government officials, public servants, courts, judges, Prostitutors, ect. 1. Truth is sovereign in commerce, 2. all law is commercial law, 3. Unrebutted affidavit stands as fact in law! No one can or will ever be able to rebut your truth, (your sworn affidavit). any questions? PM me on fb! If you are in U.K. contact me, I'm sure we can adjust/ apply this process to you as well! American Law and Procedure, Vol 13, page 137, 1910: This word `person and its scope and bearing in the law, involving, as it does, legal fictions and also apparently natural beings, it is difficult to understand; but it is absolutely necessary to grasp, at whatever cost, a true and proper understanding to the word in all the phases of its proper use... A person is here not a physical or individual person, but the status or condition with which he is invested... not an individual or physical person, but the status, condition or character borne by physical persons... The law of persons is the law of status or condition. People are not persons. 4

5 Read the following legal definitions of the word `person As you will see, persons are defined as non-sovereigns. A sovereign is someone who is not subject to statutes. A person is someone who voluntarily submits himself to statutes. In the United States the people are sovereign over their civil servants: Romans 6:16 (NIV): Don t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey... Spooner v. McConnell, 22 F 939@ 943: The sovereignty of a state does not reside in the persons who fill the different departments of its government, but in the People, from whom the government emanated; and they may change it at their discretion. Sovereignty, then in this country, abides with the constituency, and not with the agent; and this remark is true, both in reference to the federal and state government US Supreme Court case Glass v. Sloop Betsey:... Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people 1829 US Supreme Court case 5

6 Lansing v. Smith: People of a state are entitled to all rights which formerly belong to the King, by his prerogative. US Supreme Court in 4 Wheat 402: The United States, as a whole, emanates from the people... The people, in their capacity as sovereigns, 6

7 made and adopted the Constitution... US Supreme Court in Luther v. Borden, 48 US 1, 12 Led 581:... The governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them. But the people, as the original fountain might take away what they have delegated and intrust to whom they please.... The sovereignty in every state resides in the people of the state and they may alter and change their form of government at their own pleasure. US Supreme Court. in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, page 370: While sovereign powers are delegated to the government, sovereignty itself remains with the people. Yick Wo is a powerful anti-discrimination case. You might get the impression that the legislature can write perfectly legal laws, yet the laws cannot be enforced 7

8 contrary to the intent of the people. A. It s as if servants do not make rules for their masters. B. It s as if the Citizens who created government were their masters. C. It s as if civil servants were to obey the higher authority. You are the higher authority of Romans 13:1. You as ruler are not a terror to good works per Romans 13:3. Imagine that! Isn t it a shame that your government was surrendered to those who are a terror to good works? Isn t it a shame that you enlisted to obey them? US Supreme Court in Julliard v. Greenman, 110 US 421: There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the United States... In this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld. 8

9 US Supreme Court in Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 US 653, 667 (1979): In common usage, the term person does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are ordinarily construed to exclude it. US Supreme Court in U.S. v. Cooper, 312 US 600,604, 61 S.Ct 742 (1941): Since in common usage the term `person does not include the sovereign, statutes employing that term are ordinarily construed to exclude it. US Supreme Court in U.S. v. United Mine Workers of America, 330 U.S Sct677 (1947): In common usage, the term `person does not include the sovereign and statutes employing it will ordinarily not be construed to do so. US Supreme Court in US v. Fox, 94 US 315: Since in common usage, the term `person does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it. 9

10 U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530: In common usage the word `person does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are generally construed to exclude the sovereign. Church of Scientology v. US Department of Justice, 612 F.2d (1979): the word `person in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings., see e.g. 1, U.S.C. para 1. In the 1935 Supreme Court case of Perry v. US (294 US 330) the Supreme Court found that: In United States, sovereignty resides in people... the Congress cannot invoke the sovereign power of the People to override their will as thus declared. Since in common usage, the term `person does not include the sovereign, statutes employing the phrase are ordinarily construed to exclude it. 10

11 U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530: In common usage the word `person does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are generally construed to exclude the sovereign. Church of Scientology v. US Department of Justice, 612 F.2d (1979): the word `person in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings., see e.g. 1, U.S.C. para 1. In the 1935 Supreme Court case of Perry v. US (294 US 330) the Supreme Court found that: In United States, sovereignty resides in people... the Congress cannot invoke the sovereign power of the People to override their will as thus declared., 11