James Hardin

2169 Riverwalk Pkwy.

Colorado Springs, Colorado U.S.A.
[NEW STATES POSTAL CODE: 80951)
CELL: (303) 359-9679
Email: iam.number8@yahoo.com

January 22, 2019

Counsel of Record for the Named Defendant’s

Office of the Attorney General

Colorado Department of Law
Ralph L. Carr Judicial Building
1300 Broadway, 10th Floor
Denver, CO 80203
P: 720-508-6000
F: 720-508-6030); and

Douglas County Attorney

Lance Ingalls
100 Third Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
P: 303-660-7414
Email: attorney@douglas.co.us
See: https://www.douglas.co.us/government/departments/attorney/ ); and/or

Town Attorney
Bob Slentz
Town of Castle Rock
100 N. Wilcox St.
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: 303-660-1388
Email: Bslentz@crgov.com
See: https://www.crgov.com/1941/Town-Attorney )

NOTICE

1
and…

The Registered Agent for the Incorporated State, County, City, Town, Township, or
otherwise qualify as governmental entities named herein:
Municipal Code Corporation (Municode)
Physical Address
1700 Capital Circle SW
Tallahassee, FL 32310

Mailing Address
P.O. Box 2235
Tallahassee, FL 32316
Phone: 1-800-262-2633
Fax: 1- 850 564-7492

ATTN: GOVERNMENTAL PARTIES COUNSEL/REPRESENTATIVE(S) OF RECORD

IN RE: NOTICE PURSUANT TO THE COLORADO GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY

ACT

OPENING
I often feel that everyday we are engaged in trying to protect ourselves, but are forced to
do so very carefully, from ECONOMIC and PSYOPS warfare
(http://www.psywarrior.com/psyhist.html) and the part that usually disheartens me the
most is who we find ourselves defending against? ! ? (James Hardin – Jan. 2019)

2
LADIES and GENTLEMEN,

This is an Official/Special Notice pursuant to the Colorado Governmental Immunity

Act. The Notice is being presented by The People of the State of Colorado, EX REL.,
Citizen and Relator, James D. Hardin.

The Notice & Complaint as herein presented, are made pursuant to the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act
regarding a public entity, as defined in the Colorado
Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) 24-10-101 et seq. A public entity includes city, county or
political subdivision. (See: C.R.S. § 24-10-103). (Also See: Colorado Revised Statutes
Title 24 Government State § 24-10-109 Notice required--contents--to whom given--
limitations); and

The People of the State of Colorado, EX REL.; Citizen and Relator; James D. Hardin,
hereby files this Notice and Complaint pursuant to C.R.S. 24-10-114(1)(b), the
limitations on judgments as set forth in C.R.S. § 24-10-114(1)(a)(I) & (II). (See:
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/info_center/files/LimitationsOnJudgments.pdf & https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-24-government-state/co-rev-st-sect-24-10-118.html )

This presentment has been set up per the requirements of the Colorado Sovereign
Immunity Act, which said requirements are quoted below in Bold Face; and
Complainant/Citizen and Relator has provided the answers below each Bold Face
paragraph of the CSIA, and the required answers have been provided in Italicized font;
and has also been expanded upon herein under the title: “HISTORICAL
TIMELINE AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF THE PARTIES”

“(1) Any person claiming to have suffered an injury by a public entity or by an

employee thereof while in the course of such employment, whether or not by a
willful and wanton act or omission, shall file a written notice as provided in this
section within one hundred eighty-two days after the date of the discovery of the
injury, regardless of whether the person then knew all of the elements of a claim or
of a cause of action for such injury. Compliance with the provisions of this section
shall be a jurisdictional prerequisite to any action brought under the provisions of
this article, and failure of compliance shall forever bar any such action.

(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:

3
 Complainant’s initial injuries occurred on or about September 19, 2018; and this
Notice has been filed within the 182 day deadline. (See: Colorado Revised
Statutes Title 24 Government - State C.R.S.§ 24-10-109.)

(2) The notice shall contain the following:

(a) The name and address of the claimant and the name and address of his
attorney, if any;

(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
The People of the State of Colorado, ex rel.;
James D. Hardin, Absent Counsel
c/o: 2169 Riverwalk Pkwy.
Colorado Springs, Colorado U.S.A.
[NEW STATES POSTAL CODE: 80951]

(b) A concise statement of the factual basis of the claim, including the date, time,
place, and circumstances of the act, omission, or event complained of;
(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Claimant personally filed his pleadings with the Court Clerks Office, who kept the
courts copy and Claimant personally walked to the Prosecutors offices and also
had said office file stamp the copies, including Claimant’s copy. Claimant then
served the Prosecutors office with their copy, on or about August 27, 2018, with
proper Notice of a hearing to be had on September 19, 2018, at 2:30pm., in the
Castle Rock First Appearance Center; and

On or about Wednesday September 19, 2018, just prior to 2:30pm, Claimant and
his wife arrived at the First Appearance Center, located in the Castle Rock
Justice Center and signed in. The Magistrate, Frank Anthony Moschetti was
already on the Bench with another prior case; and

After signing in with the Court Assistant, Claimant and his wife had a seat on the
wood bench’s outside of the BAR; and began looking over the pleadings filed in
Claimant’s Case Number: 18R2242 (See: https://www.scribd.com/document/387174158/JH-Filed-
Douglas-County-Filing-8-27-2018 ) ; and complainant has waved the filing of the below
Complaint Form because it would adversely affect the timeline of this Complaint
filed (http://www.coloradojudicialdiscipline.com/PDF/CJD_ComplaintForm.pdf); and Claimant was
observing the unknown Defendant G.I. Joe case in his military uniform inside the
BAR at that time. For the record, Claimant did not know the identity of the
Magistrate until after the Kangaroo Court Proceeding had ended on against
Claimant, that day of September 19, 2018,
(See: ).
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiM08GvzOTeAhUFLqwKHWJHDZIQFjAMegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Flegal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com%2Fkangaroo+court&usg=AOvVaw3PQh9KDOyy5i8i0x-nQgH8

Claimant didn’t know because there was no name-plate on the

Magistrates/Judge’s Bench, like there normally are in courtrooms and even in
Administrative Centers; and

4
It is worthy of note, that nowhere online, nowhere at the outer entry of the First
Appearance Center/Court, nor inside the same, which provides the required
disclosure, which discloses the fact that it is only an Administrative Court, with
an Administrative Magistrate, whom appears to be absent a lawful Oath of Office,
pursuant 4 U.S.C. §102, which is applicable to Colorado law also.

For this reason and many others, Claimant moves for Legislative impeachment
proceedings against the said Magistrate, Frank Anthony Moschetti, under both his
past and present status of a judicial officer. Because Claimant herein believes the
Offenses are crystal clear; and that a clear and provable (hard
evidence) "pattern of misconduct” is evidenced by the First Appearance Centers
Records.

It is furthermore, “Conclusionary” assertions of serious abuse by this public

office, contumacy, and/or have and continues to commit bad faith acts, omissions,
in wanton disregard for the rights of the People of the State of Colorado; and for
acts constituting moral turpitude which are daily practices by the said Magistrate,
who knows, or should know better, seeing as the said Magistrate is a past head
County Prosecutor for Douglas County.

However, in lieu of Justice being administered on the day complained of herein,

and in lieu of a lawfully established judicial court with a lawful judge (with a
valid Oath of Office) who is a judicial officer, and who has Constitutional
limitations upon his/her Constitutional Powers & Authority, but the people
received in stead, a non-judicial attack upon US and our Posterity, by a Rouge,
unlawful Tyrant imposing nothing short of “STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM”
upon the People/Citizenry of this State and placing all the same under a
unauthorized, un-sanctioned, unlawful Kangaroo Court presided over by a, let’s
see how the traitorous appeals court stated it, to wit: not unlawful, just in a de
facto status!!! PLEASE!!! The very definition of “De Facto” is
“UNLAWFUL”, to wit:

“De facto government. One that maintains itself by a display of force against
the will of the rightful legal government and is successful, at least temporarily,
in overturning the institutions of the rightful legal government by setting up its
own in lieu thereof. Wortham v. Walker, 133 Tex. 255, 128 S.W.2d 1138, 1145.

And…

“De facto judge. A judge who functions under color of authority but whose
authority is defective in some procedural form. Riley v. Bradley, 252 Ala. 282,
41 So.2d 641.

5
This is why is would be futile for Claimant to even entertain wasting his time and
money appealing the matter, as obviously, the Colorado Appeals Court and its
Personnel, are De Facto themselves, so why would the people PAY for other de
facto unlawful Terrorist and defectors, to extort our property (our money is our
property) under any delusions that the people of the state of Colorado ever could
obtain justice under their lawful constitutional government, when they are all DE
FACTO, DEFECTIVE, TRAITORS OF AN UNLAWFUL GOVERNMENT OF
FORCE, WHICH IS NOT OURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And whom ALL are flying
foreign, military jurisdictional Marshal Law, Executive office of the Commander-
n-Chief of the Armed Forces Gold Fringe on 3-sides of our State & National
Flags.

WOW! The definition of Emergency certainly explains exactly what happened to

Claimant in “Castle Rock, Colorado”! Where an ex-prosecutor now sits as a
Magistrate, who has no prosecutors in the court, because now, Mr. Moschetti,
Frank Anthony continues to ACT as Prosecutor, only now from the bench where
he wears a black robe while doing so; and now he is intentionally, recklessly and
wantonly impersonating the Court Clerk, the County Prosecutor, the Judge, the
court reporter, the bailiff and is also Allegedly a Magistrate. So, Magistrate,
Frank Anthony Moschetti it seems is performing all positions simultaneously and
is doing it all from the bench! Practicing Law from the Bench; and

Mr. Moschetti, Frank Anthony denied Complainant(s) legal pleadings and the
Countries Constitutional guarantees, along with the rights and freedoms of the
people, as stated above; and including Equal protection equal access to the
courts; along with the LIMITATIONS upon his (Judges) Powers & Authorities. In
my Case No. 2018R 002242, Mr. Moschetti denied my Constitutional and
Supreme Court Case Citations, as frivolous;?

Moreover, he did so, prior to their being “heard” (i.e.) argued on the record
(“He said he wasn’t even entertaining hearing arguments on my pleadings (which
I objected to); and in fact, Mr. Moschetti threatened to jail me if I said anything,
other than yes or no. So I stated that because I believe he is attempting to defraud
me and obstruct the record of the proceedings I Noticed him that I am “piercing
his corporate veil” for the record. Claimants understanding is as follows:

“Piercing the corporate veil. Judicial process whereby court will

disregard usual immunity of corporate officers or entities from
liability for wrongful corporate activities; e.g. when incorporation
exists for sole purpose of perpetrating fraud. The doctrine which
holds that the corporate structure with its attendant limited liability
of stockholders may be disregarded and personal liability imposed on
stockholders, officers and directors in the case of fraud or other
wrongful acts done in name of corporation. The court, however, may
look beyond the corporate form only for the defeat of fraud or wrong

6
 or the remedying of injustice.” Hanson v. Bradley, 298 Mass. 371, 381,
10 N.E.2d 259, 264. See also Instrumentality rule.

At that time Mr. Moschetti went off on Claimant again… again threatening to jail
Claimant, and telling Claimant he is not allowed to speak, unless Claimant
wanted to go to jail… Telling Claimant that he was not allowed to say anything,
except, yes, or no… But even then, only when asked a question directly by the
court”!

For the record, Claimant was never disrespectful, insulting, or the like… Mr.
Moschetti was clearly bias & prejudice and was never fair, nor impartial. Before
he called Claimants case, Magistrate Frank Anthony Moschetti had additional
police, ET AL come in and stand at the front of the Center, then “State Police”
come in and surround Claimant and his wife, while they were sitting on the
benches of the First Appearance Court.

Then after calling Claimants case and Claimant move forward to the table within
the BAR, officers ET AL continue swarming around Claimants wife and staring at
her. This evidenced the State’s intentions that day. It was a cheap shot attempt to
impose fear & intimidation tactics (PSYOPS WARFARE TACTICS & STATE
SPONSORED TERRORISM). But doing it all like a bunch of BULLIES &
COWARDS. In that they CONTINUED SAID BEHAVIOR behind my back. So
Claimant could not see what they were doing to his wife behind the BAR, while
inside the BAR, Magistrate Frank Anthony Moschetti continued gross violations
of Claimants Constitutional Rights, Human Rights, et al.; and

So prior to the Battle, Mr. Moschetti just took my sword and shield of protection
away from me (i.e.) had me disarmed prior to the battle??? Mr. Moschetti so that
he could all the more easily insult me, threaten me, threaten to kidnap me via a
false arrest; and to hold me hostage and ransomed for my release, via false
imprisonment and fraudulent bail demands for my release???

For purposes of further documenting these matters, Mr. Moschetti did so with
callous, willful and WONTON disregard for the Rights, Life(s) and Liberty(s) and
the Pursuit of Happiness of The People of the State of Colorado. More especially,
while actually threatening to jail the people in cases pertaining to non-jail-able
offenses; and

Magistrate Frank Anthony Moschetti, threatened to jail the Claimant, for merely
objecting to his reckless contempt and reckless disregard for the very documents
which he swore an oath and affirmation to uphold. This fact begs for an answer
to the question (i.e.) by what authority is Mr. Moschetti trespassing upon the
Constitutional guarantees regarding the rights of the people of Colorado and the
limitations upon their government?;

7
 By whose authority and by what delegated authority is Magistrate Frank Anthony
Moschetti taking our property without the guarantee of Due Process, without
Trial by Jury, yet with bios and prejudice refused Claimant equal access to the
courts; the right to face your accuser and to cross-examine the same on the stand,
et al; to argue the merits or lack thereof with regards to the pleadings on file
with the court.

(c) The name and address of any public employee involved, if known;
(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Douglas County Magistrate
Frank Anthony Moschetti -
4000 Justice Way #2009
Castle Rock CO 80109
Division: FAC
Phone: 720-437-6242)

And…

(d) A concise statement of the nature and the extent of the injury claimed to have
been suffered;
(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Complainant hereby gives his Concise Statement of the Nature and extent of the
damages & injuries sustained by the Claimant; ET AL., listing the resulting damages and
injuries and which Defendant(s) are responsible for the Constructive Treason, Sedition,
Treachery & Perfidy, Slavery, et al.

1) DEFENDANT, THE STATE OF COLORADO (DUNN AND BRADSTREET

Incorporated entity Number: 076438621 & Capital City of Denver Incorporated entity
Number: 066985480)

The State of Colorado ET AL, has and continues to violate, trespass, trample,
deceive, defraud, extort, plunder and the like, from the people of the State of Colorado,

8
absent constitutional authority to do so; and in fact does so contrary to Constitutional
Prohibitions as shown herein, by the past Attorney General of Colorado.

Below are listed violations by the States, with regards to Federal and State Constitutional
violations regarding certain Acts of State and deprivations by the State, to the detriment
of the people, to wit:

“Insurance regulation is run by the states, instead of the federal government…

Under the state-based insurance regulation system, each state operates
independently to regulate their own insurance markets, typically through a state
department of insurance or division of insurance. Stretching back as far as
the Paul v. Virginia case in 1869, challenges to the state-based insurance
regulatory system have risen from various groups, both within and without the
insurance industry. The state regulatory system has been described as
cumbersome, redundant, confusing and costly.[12]

and…

The United States Supreme Court found in the 1944 case of United States v.
South-Eastern Underwriters Association that the business of insurance was
subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause of the U.S.
Constitution.[13] The United States Congress, however, responded almost
immediately with the McCarran-Ferguson Act in 1945.[14] The McCarran-
Ferguson Act specifically provides that the regulation of the business of
insurance by the state governments is in the public interest. Further, the Act
states that no federal law should be construed to invalidate, impair or supersede
any law enacted by any state government for the purpose of regulating the
business of insurance, unless the federal law specifically relates to the business
of insurance.[15]

Therefore, there can be no arguments with regards to rather the State(s) are over their
own State Insurance Scheme. Including the levels of profitability and as a Corporation,
engaged in business for a profit, have implemented several mandatory State Law
Requirements, which constitute State Sanctioned Slavery. However, that does not
include, nor limit a states right to impose double jeopardy upon the people of the State of
Colorado, in direct violation of Constitutional Limitations to the contrary, to wit:

9
 “The Double Jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution
provides that “No person shall ... be subject for the same offense to be twice put
in jeopardy of life or limb.” Most states have the same guarantee for defendants
appearing in state court.” (See: )

Some of these requirements spoken of in the State of Colorado are the State DMV POINT
SYSTEM, to wit:

“Colorado uses an accumulating point system according to the Colorado

Division of Motor Vehicles Point Schedule. [22] Suspension of driving
privileges can result from as few as 6 points in 12 months by a driver under 18
years old. Points remain on the driver's motor vehicle record for 7 years. Some
motor vehicle offenses carry 12 points per incident, which could result in
immediate suspension of the drivers license. Multiple traffic violation
convictions can also result in a suspension of the drivers license if a sufficient
number of points are accumulated during a 12- or 24-month period.[23]”
(See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_system_(driving)#Colorado )

It is important here to take notice of the fact that the State of Colorado has failed to
disclose the FACT that the MANDATORY State Insurance Scheme requires your provider
to “Raise” the People(s) monthly Insurance Premium Cost, until the points clear, which
is usually not even reviewable until at least six (6) months after the points drop from
peoples records. Once those points are there on people:

“The data shows that, on average, insurance rates increase by 26 percent after
a single incident! Whether it’s a speeding ticket, running a red light, or
causing an accident, one thing is certain – your insurance rates will suffer.”
(See: https://quotewizard.com/auto-insurance/car-insurance-for-people-with-tickets-or-accidents )

Pertinent and mandatory facts, which are required to be disclosed. Yet, the “Magistrate
didn’t assess Claimant with an additional monthly penalty, payable to the State monthly,
or each 6 months and/or 12 months, dependent upon when the policy was pre-paid.
Penalty rates, at a rate of not less than 26% increase, to the cost of the same policy prior
to the added point(s) to this “State Division of Motor Vehicles Point Schedule/System”;
and to be collected by State Licensed Policy Provider(s) and the State Licensed Agent(s)

10
thereof, shall be responsible for remitting said increase(s) to the State. NO SUCH
DISCLOSURES HAVE BEEN GIVEN!

It should also be noted that the State of Colorado knows that Point System, is designed to
enrich the State to the grave harm, detriment, loss and complete economic destruction of
its victims/defendant’s who, contrary to the State’s claim(s) of being lawful and approved
by the people, the State has failed to call for a VOTE of the People of Colorado, for such
said undisclosed, TAX.. A TAX, Claimant adds, which is COMMUNIST USERPATION
and HUMAN ENSLAVEMENT, when the People have no choice in the matters which are
MANDATORY… Worse than a mere single count of Fifth Amendment violations
pertaining to prohibition against DOUBLE JEOPARDY.

Among many other things, this 42 State Point Scheme, is nothing short of an organized
intrastate criminal collusion and corporate conspiracy to defraud the People, using
strong arm collection tactics, which among other things, are terroristic by definition.

“Put the UN definitions of Terrorism , et al here”

It is Terrorism to use threats, duress, coercion, slander, sabotage, torture, destruction

and theft of private property, or the threat of torture, et al., imposing fear and
intimidation upon an individual, a citizen, a citizenry, a group, or population, and
corporate fraud, extortion, TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!!!! The
Colorado voters have limited the ability of government to impose taxes without the
people’s consent [Article X section 20], and have limited the terms of state officials
[Article XVIII section 11]. By the important power to initiate constitutional amendments,
the voters of Colorado have been able to successfully rein in government.

How so, one may ask? Well, the State regulates and underwrites all insurance policies in
the State. The same State which licensed the officer to write the traffic citation; had
another State Licensed Agent impersonating a Judge/magistrate who always finds the

11
Defendant’s guilty; and denies them due process; trial by jury; equal access to the courts
and Justice, equal protection under the law; the right to face your accuser; and to cross
examine the same on the stand; to petition and protest the government; to peaceably
assemble with others; right to keep and bare arms; to be safe in your house, papers,
property and affects from unlawful, unwarranted search and seizure; the right not to
incriminate or be a witness against ones self; equality of Justice; inalienable rights; et
al.; pursuant to the Colorado State Constitution, Article II, Bill of Rights. (See:
https://law.justia.com/constitution/colorado/cnart2.html )

Then, while disclosing the assessed points and penalty imposed, the State fails to disclose
that above and beyond those assessed penalties, that day in the court, that the State will
impose double jeopardy, triple jeopardy, quadruple jeopardy, etc., etc. This is without
any doubt imposing further cruel and unusual punishment and continued assessing
undisclosed and none-court ordered penalties by the State.

In fact, the State continues imposing undisclosed State sanctioned penalties/Taxation

without Representation. The State and NO OTHER, are illegally and continually
assessing penalties which in the end, extorts thousands from the people individually, and
it adds up to millions and hundreds of millions; and in many cases billions of dollars that
are being taken collectively. All in the name of the people under the guise of State
Mandated Insurance Premiums.

All of this under the States Regulated Insurance Scheme. No matter how deceptive the
magicians, illusionist, hypnotists, spell makers, workers of inequity and darkness and the
like; and no matter how the artist paint the picture, or how silver the tongue from which
Words of Art do flow, and no matter what tune is piped by the Pied Pipers of Babylon
The SS Mother-ship has US all in The State of National Emergency and Marshal Law!

12
That is all after the date that Claimant paid the Disclosed Court Ordered “penalty in
full”, at the Unlawful Emergency Military Tribunals across the State of Colorado. The
State personnel under sworn solemn Duties and Obligations, have abandoned the people
thereof and subjected the people to foreign jurisdictions, powers and authorities.

The State of Colorado and its Officers, Agents, Clerks, Employees, and other underlings
thereof, including, but not limited to Frank Anthony Moschetti and the Assigning Chief
Judge of the 18th Judicial District Courts, Chief Judge Michelle Amico. The same have
been knowing and intentionally, willful and wantonly perpetrating a fraud upon the
Courts, the Public Records, et al.

Under false and fraudulent pretenses, the same said Chief Judge and impersonating
Magistrate mentioned above, have continually, knowingly, intentionally, willfully,
recklessly and wantonly been making a daily practice regarding their RICO conspiracy
and Criminal Collusion to commit the intentional heinous, seditious and treasonous acts
in Breach of the mandatory and required Oath of Office. Furthermore, this is done to
unlawfully Deny the people their Constitutional Guarantees and Protections from an out
of control, reckless, wanton, communist and tyrannical government/State.

More especially, when such said acts and omissions are being committed under false and
frivolous pretenses, under a military (PSYOPS) area commander. The same said Oath
Breakers have aided a Foreign Military Criminal Belligerent, to deceive the people into
believing they have had original de jure Constitutional Government from the time of the
Declaration of Independence to the present.

However, in reality, the only way those Gold Fringed Flags can be in what is deceptively
alleged to be our civilian courts, is because of Traitorous and Seditious Acts and
Treachery. The State clearly does not posses clean hands regarding this matter, of the
State as Principle and its and the Agents Acts of the Poisonous Tree.

13
To evidence this extortion, theft, and plunder of the People of the State of Colorado,
along with the attempted enslavement by the State, (via.) the State Insurance Scheme,
which penalizes the people, at least another $100.00 per month, or more, depending upon
the number of points for up to 36 months. That is a Prohibited ACT TO ENSLAVE THE
PEOPLE TO THE INCORPORATED ARTIFICAL Bankrupt STATE ENTITY. As for
those seditious and treasonous officers and agents who are committing such said
unlawful and prohibited activities in the name of the State, and in breach of their
respective oath’s of office, etc., ARREST THEM!

Therefore, the State doesn’t do anything, absent a human being personally performing
the unlawful, prohibited acts and omissions. So they will be put on the stand because
only someone with a “Condition of the Mind” would even believe they can bring “THE
STATE” in to court and put it on the stand.

The State neither speaks, nor acts, nor answers. In fact, the State can DO NOTHING AT
ALL, absent some human being speaking, answering, or acting in one manner or another.
The State has no life and absent the People thereof, there would not even be any need for
such a thing as “A State”.

This is why Claimant Pierced the Corporate Veil of alleged impersonating Magistrate,
Frank Anthony Moschetti at the time of the September 19, 2018 Kangaroo Court
proceeding in the First Appearance Center located in Douglas County, Colorado.

14
Claimant was already fined $300.00, which is six times beyond the $50 limit under the
infamous crimes clause, whereby Jury trial is required. Yet Claimant was denied all his
Rights guaranteed under Article II – Bill of Rights of the Colorado Constitution by Frank
Anthony Moschetti. Alleged Magistrate, Frank Anthony Moschetti, impersonating a
judge and a State court and makes a practice of knowingly, intentionally, willfully,
recklessly and wantonly disregarding the Rights of the People of the State of Colorado.

Furthermore, Frank Anthony Moschetti continually, criminally, treasonously and

seditiously acts in wanton disregard of Government limitations, Constitutional
limitations, et al., which restricts government officers, agents, clerks, employees and
other underlings of State from prosecuting the people in non-constitutional courts, to wit:

In Short, the State of Colorado, and the political extensions thereof, have limited powers
and authorities from doing certain things, or from committing certain Acts which are
either violative of either State and/or Federal Constitutional prohibitions, or beyond their
Charter’s authority delegated to said officers, agents, etc., under the HOME RULE
County, City, or Town which has been granted a Corporate Charter from the State. If
any of them, rather incorporated, or unincorporated has no authority, which is not
specifically delegated under Constitutional law, and furthermore has NO POWERS or
AUTHORITIES not specifically granted to it in their State granted Corporate Charter(s).
Now then, when the State insurance scheme, further penalizes Defendant’s based upon
the State DMV Point Scheme, to further violate the Colorado Constitution, under Art. II,
Section 20., to wit:

“Excessive bail, fines or punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

Now this is a Conflict of Law making everything that much more confusing for
everybody. I am even more so confused regarding how both, an un-incorporated County
has its courts & County Seat in an Incorporated Town or City, which is under the Home
Rule?

15
Moreover, how can any County be unincorporated, when its judicial arm is located
within an Incorporated County, City, Town, or for that matter, any State under the
HOME RULE? None hold sovereignty, in their Corporate bodies and operating in
Municipal capacities, as clearly stated above.

Yet this whole HOME RULE thing is something, which I was never taught in the
mandatory Constitutional government sanctioned public school curriculum. That is
because this HOME RULE Charter stuff was not taught along with the history, nor
classes on our Constitutional government.

The evidence, which Claimant has found makes it really clear that: “The State of
Colorado” knows all to well the level of Municipal violations on a daily basis. This
willful and wanton disregard of basic ethical expectations, perceptions and norms of the
People, is evidenced right in the Heart of Colorado Ethics.

Claimant say’s the heart, because it is the life sustaining source of the State of Colorado,
(i.e.) the Colorado Constitution, Article XXIX Ethics in Government, whereby
explaining the intent in Section 1., which states in part:

“Section 1. Purposes and findings.

(1) The people of the state of Colorado hereby find and declare that:
(a) The conduct of public officers, members of the general assembly, local
government officials, and government employees must hold the respect and
confidence of the people;
(b) They shall carry out their duties for the benefit of the people of the state;
(c) They shall, therefore, avoid conduct that is in violation of their public trust
or that creates a justifiable impression among members of the public that such
trust is being violated;”

The reason why Claimant wants to bring this matter to light, is due to the Counties and
Municipalities HOME RULE exemptions in Section 7 below. This is but further
confirmation regarding the message which Claimant is attempting to convey herein.
Primarily to show that while exceptions do exist, those exemptions or exceptions do not

16
extend to Unincorporated Counties, which have no charter, ordinances, or resolutions of
matters covered by this article. The exceptions under Section 7, state as follows:

“Section 7. Counties and municipalities.

Any county or municipality may adopt ordinances or charter provisions with
respect to ethics matters that are more stringent than any of the provisions
contained in this article. The requirements of this article shall not apply to home
rule counties or home rule municipalities that have adopted charters, ordinances,
or resolutions that address the matters covered by this article.”

Therefore, Douglas County has no Constitutional authority to create a Municipal styled

Court, absent a Corporate Charter for the same, which specifically describes the rights,
duties and obligations of those under the said Municipal powers and authorities. In
short, the combined courts of Douglas County cannot just turn the rights, guarantees,
prohibitions, and the like powers of the Constitution “off and on” at the will of County
personnel, officers, agents, clerks, employees, contractors and other underlings, so long
as it is to the financial devastation, detriment and economic destruction of the people of
the State of Colorado and to the financial gain to the county…

It is nothing short of fruit of the poisonous tree, in violation of the clean hands doctrine
and cannot even be done under the guise of “freeing up the State District Court
Dockets”. These things are not usually done to the General Public At Large, absent a
State granted HOME RULE corporate charters, et al.

The officers, agents, employees and the like have no authority under the Police Powers of
the defined Municipal jurisdiction, nor otherwise, which are not specifically granted by
the Corporate Charter. But this is not the case with a non-incorporated County. The
State’s arm, are these counties and therefore can have no courts applicable to the public,
contrary to the contractual compact between the People and the State, known as the
Constitution the administrative, none judicial Magistrate, along with this Legislative
Kangaroo Court are unlawful, illegal and wanton.

17
As a direct result of the herein named Respondent(s) RICO Criminal Syndicate
connection pertaining to their highly organized, high powered, high leveled State, the
County, the Kangaroo County Court (FAC), the lawless ex-county lead prosecutor,
masquerading as a County Magistrate/Judge and
and flying a military Flag in, all of which violates “Section 1. Purposes and findings”,
and including but not limited to (1)(c) of the same, which states:

“(c) They shall, therefore, avoid conduct that is in violation of their public trust
or that creates a justifiable impression among members of the public that such
trust is being violated;”
(See: https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/ArticleXXIX_IEC.pdf )

“The people of the state of Colorado”, EX REL.; Claimant, James D. Hardin provides
further complaint as against Magistrate Moschetti pursuant to the “Colorado
Constitution Article XXIX Ethics in Government, Section 1. Purposes and findings”
and Claimant, having first hand knowledge and witness/victim experience, hereby states
for the record that the ways, means and practices of “Magistrate Frank Anthony
Moschetti” of the “First Appearance Center” of Douglas County Colorado is conduct:

“…in violation of their public trust or that creates a justifiable impression

among members of the public that such trust is being violated;”

Again, this whole home rule theory was not taught to the people in any public schools
pertaining to Claimant’s generation. That is why Claimant continues finding it necessary
to define the things, which Claimant speaks of.

More especially, when Claimant has had to personally contact Wikipedia personnel
recently, and others, for methodically removing the things, which Claimant had quoted
from their own servers, systems & websites, and which later on where, and are even now,
removed from the same said Wikipedia systems, servers, etc.?

If anything by mere definition could ever explain what happened to Claimant in Castle
Rock, Colorado, on September 19, 2018, it is said best in the definitions pertaining to

18
Emergency. For only under an Emergency, as defined herein, could one more
accurately explain exactly what happened to Claimant in “Castle Rock, Colorado”!

The location where an ex-prosecutor now sits as an Municipal Judge, only absent a
corporate Charter and who has no prosecutors, no court clerks, no court reporters, no
jury, no witnesses, no injured parties, or any of the other requirements necessary in a
real Constitutional Court. This is primarily because now, past Douglas County Lead
Prosecutor, Frank Anthony Moschetti impersonates them all!!! Including, but not limited
to impersonating the fallacy of being a: “State Magistrate Judge”?

Claimant can’t even locate, find, nor be shown, any such a state authority as a “State
Magistrate Judge” anywhere else in the entire State of Colorado. This is because a
Magistrate is a Federal title, not a State title, as frivolously being used by impersonating
a Federal officer. It is fraudulent to illegally impersonate a Federal Officer, by
deceptively impersonating a Federal Magistrate, as RICO Conspirator, and criminal
collaborator, with two or more others, in an official capacity, under the authority of the
Seal of the State of Colorado, (State Sponsored Terrorism, Prohibited Military Authority
in Civilian affairs, the obvious and recognizable use of PSYOPS warfare, and the like).

It should also be further noted that the people of the State of Colorado have never
authorized, nor surrendered to anybody or to any person, nor any branch of the
Colorado State government. This is a case of Seditious Association in official capacity as
which authorizes the same to act on behalf of the people. It is a seditious criminal
syndicate, constituting State Sponsored Acts of Terrorism, via strong-arm collection and
extortion tactics under the color of law. Using Terror to instill fear and intimidation or
Government enterprise.

The deceptive practices, all of which a long time lead County Prosecutor of one Frank
Anthony Moschetti (Past Douglas County Lead Prosecutor), knows or should know
better. There can be no question as to rather Frank Anthony Moschetti, knows he is
acting way beyond his State Delegated Authority.

19
Frank Anthony Moschetti, has and continues to unethically, recklessly, and other
prohibited wanton disregard of the legal limitations upon Moschetti’s Authority to ACT
as State District Court Magistrate; authorizing the same to Prosecute Cases from the
bench; and while wearing a Rob! Therefore, let us define Magistrate, under the
Colorado Revised Statutes, to wit:

However, after exhaustive research of the Colorado Revised Statutes on this subject
matter of a state district court magistrate, Claimant has become aware of the following
statutes regarding this subject matter of a State District Court Magistrate and their
limited powers and authorities. The State law of Colorado/Colorado Revised
Statutes, Title 13 - Courts and Court Procedure › Courts of Record › Article 6 - County
Courts › Part 2 - Judges and Other Personnel › § 13-6-201. Classification of counties
states; more specifically, for purposes relating to Douglas County, can be found under
(2)(b), to wit:

“(b) Class B. Class B shall consist of the counties of Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder,
Douglas, Eagle, El Paso, Fremont, Jefferson, La Plata, Larimer, Mesa,
Montrose, Pueblo, Summit, Weld, and the city and county of Broomfield.

(2) In Class B counties, as defined in section 13-6-201 , county court magistrates may be
appointed pursuant to section 13-3-105 , if approved by the chief justice.

(3) Any county court magistrate shall be a qualified attorney-at-law admitted to practice
in the state of Colorado and in good standing;  except that a county court magistrate who
hears only class A and class B traffic infraction matters need not be an attorney-at-law
and except that any duly appointed county judge may act as a traffic magistrate regardless
of whether he is an attorney-at-law.
(4) Subject to the provision that no magistrate may preside in any trial by jury, county
court magistrates shall have power to hear the following matters:
(a) Class 2 misdemeanor traffic offenses and class A and class B traffic infractions, as
defined in section 42-4-1701, C.R.S .;
(b) Such other matters as determined by rule of the supreme court.
(4.5) County court magistrates shall have the power to solemnize marriages pursuant to
the procedures in section 14-2-109, C.R.S .
(4.7) County court magistrates shall have the power to preside over matters specified
in section 13-17.5-105.
(5) Except in class A and class B traffic infraction matters, before a county court
magistrate may hear any matter, all parties thereto shall have waived, on the record, their

20
right to proceed before a county judge. If any party fails to waive such right, or objects
to the magistrate, that party's case shall be rereferred to a county judge.
(6) Magistrates, when handling county court matters and class A and class B traffic
infraction matters and where the parties to such proceedings, other than traffic infraction
matters, shall have waived their right to proceed before a county judge, shall have all the
jurisdiction and power of a county judge, and their orders and judgments shall be those of
the county court.

So what is a Class A and Class B traffic infractions which a Magistrate is authorized to

proceed over, if no objections existed, to wit:

“Class A traffic infractions are a category of Colorado traffic violations. Unlike

Colorado traffic misdemeanors, infractions are not a crime, they are civil
matters. Class A infractions are considered more serious than
Colorado class B infractions. ... The Colorado infraction of failing to pay a toll.
Class A traffic Infractions in Colorado - Shouse Law Group
https://www.shouselaw.com/colorado/classAinfraction

And…

“What are class B traffic infraction penalties in Colorado? Infraction sentences

include no jail time. Instead, the punishment consists of fines ranging from $15 to
$100 plus a small surcharge. They do not carry points on the person's driver's
license. Class B traffic Infractions in Colorado (See:
https://www.shouselaw.com/colorado/classBinfraction

(7) Procedure in matters heard by a county court magistrate shall be determined by

statute and by rules promulgated by the supreme court and by local rules.
(8) The duties, qualifications, compensation, conditions of employment, and other
administrative details concerning magistrates who hear traffic infraction matters not set
forth in this part 5 shall be established in accordance with the provisions of section 13-3-
105 .
(9) The supreme court shall adopt such rules and regulations as it deems necessary or
proper to carry out the provisions of this part 5 relating to traffic infraction matters,
including, but not limited to, procedural matters.

21
(10) Existing space provided by a county, including already existing courtroom and
administrative space, shall be used to the maximum extent possible for hearings on traffic
infraction matters.
(11) Before any county court magistrate is appointed pursuant to the provisions of this
part 5, the judicial department shall consult with the board of county commissioners of
the affected county or counties regarding any additional space or facilities that may be
required. All feasible alternatives shall be considered and the least costly alternative
shall be accepted by the department whenever practicable.

And pursuant to C.R.S. 13-3-105, WHICH APPLIES TO ADMINISTRATIVELY

APPOINTED EMPLOYEES WHICH MAY BE HIRED AND FIRED AT THE
DESCRETION OF THE COLORADO STATE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Only now, Mr. Moschetti is illegally and unlawfully prosecuting cases from the
BENCH!!!, Mr. Moschetti also wears a black robe while doing so; to better trick, and
TRAP the people of the State of Colorado. Only now, as previously stated, he is willfully,
recklessly, fraudulently and wantonly doing it from the bench (i.e.) Practicing Law from
the Bench… This is legally prohibited by law and is also prohibited by the State BAR
Associations.

Magistrate, Frank Anthony Moschetti denies legal pleadings and the Countries
Constitution along with the rights and freedoms of the people, as stated above; and
including equal access to the courts; equal protection under the law, along with the
LIMITATIONS upon his (Judges) Delegated Powers & Authorities. In Claimant’s Case
No. 2018R 002242, Mr. Frank Anthony Moschetti denied Claimant’s Constitutional and
Supreme Court Case Citations, as frivolous;?

Moreover, he did so, prior to their being “heard” (i.e.) individually argued and objected
to on the record (“Mr. Moschetti said he wasn’t even entertaining hearing arguments on
Claimant’s pleadings (which Claimant objected to); and in fact, Mr. Moschetti
threatened to jail Claimant if said Claimant said anything else, other than yes or no. So
Claimant stated that because Claimant believes the said Magistrate Frank Anthony

22
Moschetti is attempting to defraud Claimant and obstruct the record of the proceedings,
so Claimant verbally Noticed Magistrate Moschetti that Claimant is piercing Moschetti’s
corporate veil for the record.

At that time Mr. Moschetti went off on Claimant again threatening to jail Claimant and
telling Claimant he is not allowed to speak, unless Claimant wanted to go to jail…
Telling Claimant he is not allowed to say anything, except, yes, or no… But even then,
only when asked a question directly by the court”!

For the record, Claimant was never disrespectful, insulting, or the like… Mr. Moschetti
was clearly bias & prejudice and was never fair, nor impartial. Before he called
Claimant’s case, Magistrate Moschetti had additional police, ET AL come in at the fron
of the room and other “State Police” had either entered, or stayed after the cases they
were present for were concluded. The same said State Police surrounded Claimant and
his wife, while sitting on the benches of the First Appearance court.

Then after calling Claimant’s case and Claimant had moved forward to the table within
the BAR, State Police and others, continue swarming around Claimant’s wife and staring
at her, at a cheap attempt of imposing fear & intimidation tactics (PSYOPS WARFARE
TACTICS) upon Claimant’s wife. But doing it all like a bunch of TERRORIST, BULLIES
& COWARDS, in that they did all this behind Claimant’s back. Claimant could not see
what State Police and others were doing behind him, outside the BAR, where Claimant’s
wife remained seated, while Claimant, was TRAPED in a Foreign Military Jurisdiction
inside the BAR.

So prior to the Battle that day, Mr. Moschetti just took Claimant’s sword and shield of
protection away (i.e.) had Claimant disarmed prior to the battle??? Magistrate
Moschetti’s unlawful Strong Arm Tactics were done so that he could all the more easily
insult Claimant, threaten Claimant, threaten to kidnap Claimant via a false arrest; and to
hold Claimant hostage and ransomed for Claimant’s release, via false imprisonment and
fraudulent bail demands for Claimant’s release???

23
For purposes of further documenting these matters, Magistrate Moschetti did such said
willful, reckless and wonton acts with callous, willful, reckless and wonton disregard for
the rights, Life(s) and Liberties of The People of the State of Colorado. More especially,
while actually threatening to jail the people in cases pertaining to non-jail-able offenses.

Moreover, for merely objecting to Magistrate Moschetti’s reckless contempt and reckless
disregard for the very documents, which Magistrate Moschetti swore an solemn oath and
affirmation to uphold. All these unauthorized Acts which begs for an answer to the
question (i.e.) by what authority is Magistrate Moschetti trespassing upon the
Constitutional guarantees and rights of the people of Colorado?; Claimant wants to
know, by whose authority, by what delegated authority, does Magistrate Moschetti, or the
“First Appearance Court” to take property, money and other things of value, without the
Constitutional guarantees. In fact, by refusing the guarantee of Due Process, refusing
Trial by Jury, refusing equal access to the courts; refusing one the right to face his
accuser and to depose and cross examine the said accuser on the stand, and refusing to
recognize, or respect the rights of the People of the State of Colorado, and knowingly,
intentionally, recklessly and wantonly denies the peoples rights to a fair and impartial
court, not full of bias and prejudice, et al?

The bias and prejudice of the Magistrate Moschetti became even more apparent when he
had the officer who issued the citation testify. But Claimant was not allowed to object,
question, cross-examine the same, etc. That bias and prejudice was further apparent
when Magistrate Moschetti asked the State Police Officer if he had copies to provide to
the Defendant and the Officer stated No. So Magistrate Moschetti instructed the officer
to just show the documents and certificates, just testified about to the Defendant.

However, upon the officer doing so, Claimant realized that the officer who just testified
that all his training and certificates pertaining to RADAR were all up to date and current,
when they were not. As the State Police Officer was showing the Defendant in Court,
Defendant saw that the Certificates were dated 2008 and not 2018 as the State Police

24
Officer had just testified to on the stand. At which time Magistrate Moschetti began to
twist off on Claimant again, saying: “you just don’t get it do you? What are you talking
about now?” …!!!”

So Claimant began to explain that Claimant had just saw that the officer’s testimony was
perjured and that his certifications were not up to date and current for 2018, regarding
RADAR and the required testing to insure that the RADAR Calibrations, etc., were
accurate and correct at the time of the Traffic Stop because they are dated 2008.
However, the Magistrates bias and prejudice did not end there and was further
manifested again when Magistrate Moschetti again screamed at Claimant saying:
“O’COME ON!’ and stopped Claimant from speaking again, when finally allowed to
speak and to question the witness.

Claimant started by stating that he didn’t want the officer to get the wrong idea
regarding Claimant’s beliefs regarding the State Police, etc. Claimant stated that he
appreciates the Officers daily services and understand the dangers thereof on a daily
basis and was suddenly and rudely interrupted by the Magistrate suddenly Screaming
out: “O’ COME ON” and threatening Claimant again, further depriving Claimant of the
Constitutional Guarantees of both the Constitution for the State of Colorado and the
United States Constitution. In Colorado an Oath of Office requires swearing to both, the
National and the State Constitutions.

The said Magistrate is required to swear a solemn oath and affirmation to, upon entering
his capacity as a State magistrate, judge, etc., of the State or Municipal Courts. All in
blatant violation of Claimant’s guarantees under the Bill of Rights (rather in whole or in
part) as clearly stated on the Constitution for the State of Colorado.

The last thing Claimant was really able to get on the record is when questioning the
officer about the type of automobile that Claimant was traveling in the day that he issued
the citation and he stated it was a white Mazda and when Claimant asked if he agreed
that it was a 2018 White Mazda CX5 and not a 2012 Mazda 5 Sport wagon VIN:

25
JM1CW2CL8C0127094 and he agreed that was what Claimant was traveling in that
day. So Claimant brought it to the Issuing Officers attention that the Citation he issued
that day was for a 2012 White Mazda 5 VIN: JM1CW2CL8C0127094, which was no
longer owned by Claimant as it was traded in for the 2018 White Mazda CX5 VIN:
JM3KFBCM0J0322258 and identified by Colorado Plate Number: DNO-095.

The Officer said that Complainant was in the White Mazda with Plate Number: DNO-
095 that day. Claimant moved that the court dismiss the faulty complaint and the
Magistrate stated: “No!, I’m not dismissing it because the Officer identified the correct
Plate Number!” And further stated that: “the fact that the Issuing citation or complaint
has the wrong year and VIN number doesn’t make it a faulty complaint.”
What??????????

Then Claimant moved to dismiss the charges because they were sworn to incorrectly on a
faulty complaint, swearing Claimant was traveling in an automobile wrongly identified
by year and wrongly identified by a VIN number that was inaccurate, the citation was
blank under the Vehicle Description, so he didn’t know, CX5, or 5? To find claimant
guilty, falsifies the public record and the court record because it confirms that Claimant
was traveling in an automobile Claimant no longer insured and no longer had possession
of, for well over a month at the time the citation was issued… The Magistrate stated none
of that had any baring on the case. But Claimant says that it does have a baring… For
example, what if somebody had murdered somebody in that car and now the Court
records show Claimant was convicted of speeding in that same car after the time of the
murder??? That would cause the innocent Claimant to be arrested WRONGFULLY, and
WRONGFULLY CHARGED WITH MURDER, and they had videos and witnesses saying
that car was used in the murder… That is why you can’t wrongfully convict people using
faulty complaints, because it can easily cause them to be double and triple victimized.

Claimant was in complete shock! Wondering what planetary jurisdiction this Magistrate
is getting his legal authority or case precedent from, for making that statement??? The

26
Magistrate Moschetti then proceeded to explain his opinion finding Claimant guilty and
assessing Claimant with $274.50 in penalties; and then stated that that carries 6 Points
on the States Point System and how after 12 Points in any 12 month timeframe can cause
Claimant’s license to be suspended…

However, Claimant would like to bring a few things to light with regards to the receipt he
received upon Claimant paying the said penalty, under threat, duress and coercion.

The Douglas County Combined Courts, located at 4000 Justice Way STE 2009 Castle
Rock, Colorado 80109 being deceptive in nature and subduing the people into a
Jurisdictional TRAP, which are prohibited acts internationally. That is to say, under the
law of land warfare, and international peace treaties, setting TRAPS for Human Beings
is considered Prohibited Activities, and is not allowed.

under the fraudulent display of the peoples recognized local state and National Flags of
Piece flying outside! But once one enters… they are no longer in the jurisdictions which
they saw just outside the entry doors on the front lawn of the Buildings. But are rather
TRAPED in and by a Foreign Jurisdiction.

Furthermore, this can only be identified by one with a trained eye to see and only thus,
can be identified as an Admiralty/Maritime Jurisdiction; a Foreign jurisdiction by a
Military Court, or Military Courts Marshal Court, as evidenced by the standard national
or state flag, with the addition of gold fringe on three sides is a Military flag;, which
under the law of the flag, is meant to be a sign or ensign to all who approach that the
Captain/Master and his crew are governing themselves under the law of the flag which
they are flying.

When the flags on the inside are different than the flags on the outside, it is not merely
acts of treachery, to fain peaceful negotiations and on terms of peace, under a white flag,
only to entice superior officers under the guise of peace negotiations under false
pretenses meant to TRAP them/entrap them, to only murder them all once they arrive is

27
an unlawful attacks or ruses of war which gives one enemy belligerent an unfair
advantage over his enemy for the purposes of ambush. The reasoning is clearly stated in
the following, to wit:

“50. Treachery or Perfidy

“Ruses of war are legitimate so long as they do not involve treachery or perfidy
on the part of the belligerent resorting to them. They are, however, forbidden if
they contravene any generally accepted rule.

The line of demarcation between legitimate ruses and forbidden acts of perfidy
is sometimes indistinct, but the following examples indicate the correct
principles. It would be an improper practice to secure an advantage of the
enemy by deliberate lying or misleading conduct which involves a breach of
faith, or when there is a moral obligation to speak the truth.

For example, it is improper to feign surrender so as to secure an advantage

over the opposing belligerent thereby. So similarly, to broadcast to the enemy
that an armistice had been agreed upon when such is not the case would be
treacherous. On the other hand, it is a perfectly proper ruse to summon a
force to surrender on the ground that it is surrounded and thereby induce such
surrender with a small force. Treacherous or perfidious conduct in war is
forbidden because it destroys the basis for a restoration of peace short of the
complete annihilation of one belligerent by the other.”

And…

Bill of Rights

In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the principles upon
which our government is founded, we declare:

28
Section 1. Vestment of political power. All political power is vested in and derived from
the people; all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their
will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.

Section 2. People may alter or abolish form of government �proviso. The people of this
state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves, as a free, sovereign and
independent state; and to alter and abolish their constitution and form of government
whenever they may deem it necessary to their safety and happiness, provided, such
change be not repugnant to the constitution of the United States.

Section 3. Inalienable rights. All persons have certain natural, essential and inalienable
rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and
liberties; of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; and of seeking and obtaining
their safety and happiness.

Section 4. Religious freedom. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession
and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed; and no person
shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his
opinions concerning religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be
construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness or justify
practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the state. No person shall be
required to attend or support any ministry or place of worship, religious sect or
denomination against his consent. Nor shall any preference be given by law to any
religious denomination or mode of worship.

Section 5. Freedom of elections. All elections shall be free and open; and no power, civil
or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.

Section 6. Equality of justice. Courts of justice shall be open to every person, and a
speedy remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character; and right and
justice should be administered without sale, denial or delay.

Section 7. Security of person and property � searches � seizures � warrants. The

people shall be secure in their persons, papers, homes and effects, from unreasonable
searches and seizures; and no warrant to search any place or seize any person or things
shall issue without describing the place to be searched, or the person or thing to be seized,
as near as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation reduced
to writing.

Section 8. Prosecutions � indictment or information. Until otherwise provided by law,

no person shall, for a felony, be proceeded against criminally otherwise than by
indictment, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia when in
actual service in time of war or public danger. In all other cases, offenses shall be
prosecuted criminally by indictment or information.

29
Section 9. Treason � estates of suicides. Treason against the state can consist only in
levying war against it or in adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort; no
person can be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same
overt act, or on his confession in open court; no person can be attainted of treason or
felony by the general assembly; no conviction can work corruption of blood or forfeiture
of estate; the estates of such persons as may destroy their own lives shall descend or vest
as in cases of natural death.

Section 10. Freedom of speech and press. No law shall be passed impairing the freedom
of speech; every person shall be free to speak, write or publish whatever he will on any
subject, being responsible for all abuse of that liberty; and in all suits and prosecutions for
libel the truth thereof may be given in evidence, and the jury, under the direction of the
court, shall determine the law and the fact.

Section 11. Ex post facto laws. No ex post facto law, nor law impairing the obligation of
contracts, or retrospective in its operation, or making any irrevocable grant of special
privileges, franchises or immunities, shall be passed by the general assembly.

Section 12. No imprisonment for debt. No person shall be imprisoned for debt, unless
upon refusal to deliver up his estate for the benefit of his creditors in such manner as shall
be prescribed by law, or in cases of tort or where there is a strong presumption of fraud.

Section 13. Right to bear arms. The right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense
of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally
summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to
justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

Section 14. Taking private property for private use. Private property shall not be taken
for private use unless by consent of the owner, except for private ways of necessity, and
except for reservoirs, drains, flumes or ditches on or across the lands of others, for
agricultural, mining, milling, domestic or sanitary purposes.

Section 15. Taking property for public use � compensation, how ascertained. Private
property shall not be taken or damaged, for public or private use, without just
compensation. Such compensation shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners, of
not less than three freeholders, or by a jury, when required by the owner of the property,
in such manner as may be prescribed by law, and until the same shall be paid to the
owner, or into court for the owner, the property shall not be needlessly disturbed, or the
proprietary rights of the owner therein divested; and whenever an attempt is made to take
private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use
be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any
legislative assertion that the use is public.

Section 16. Criminal prosecutions � rights of defendant. In criminal prosecutions the

accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person and by counsel; to demand
the nature and cause of the accusation; to meet the witnesses against him face to face; to

30
have process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his behalf, and a speedy public trial
by an impartial jury of the county or district in which the offense is alleged to have been
committed.

Section 16a. Rights of crime victims. Any person who is a victim of a criminal act, or
such person's designee, legal guardian, or surviving immediate family members if such
person is deceased, shall have the right to be heard when relevant, informed, and present
at all critical stages of the criminal justice process. All terminology, including the term
"critical stages", shall be defined by the general assembly.

[As enacted November 3, 1992 �� Effective upon proclamation of the Governor,

January 14, 1993. (For the text of the amendments and the votes cast thereon, see L. 91,
p. 2031 and L. 93, p. 2154.)]

Section 17. Imprisonment of witnesses � depositions � form. No person shall be

imprisoned for the purpose of securing his testimony in any case longer than may be
necessary in order to take his deposition. If he can give security he shall be discharged; if
he cannot give security his deposition shall be taken by some judge of the supreme,
district or county court, at the earliest time he can attend, at some convenient place by
him appointed for that purpose, of which time and place the accused and the attorney
prosecuting for the people shall have reasonable notice. The accused shall have the right
to appear in person and by counsel. If he has no counsel, the judge shall assign him one in
his behalf only. On the completion of such examination the witness shall be discharged
on his own recognizance, entered into before said judge, but such deposition shall not be
used if in the opinion of the court the personal attendance of the witness might be
procured by the prosecution, or is procured by the accused. No exception shall be taken
to such deposition as to matters of form.

Section 18. Crimes � evidence against one's self � jeopardy. No person shall be
compelled to testify against himself in a criminal case nor shall any person be twice put
in jeopardy for the same offense. If the jury disagree, or if the judgment be arrested after
the verdict, or if the judgment be reversed for error in law, the accused shall not be
deemed to have been in jeopardy.

Section 19. Right to bail � exceptions. (1) All persons shall be bailable by sufficient
sureties pending disposition of charges except:

(a) For capital offenses when proof is evident or presumption is great; or

(b) When, after a hearing held within ninety�six hours of arrest and upon reasonable
notice, the court finds that proof is evident or presumption is great as to the crime alleged
to have been committed and finds that the public would be placed in significant peril if
the accused were released on bail and such person is accused in any of the following
cases:

31
(I) A crime of violence, as may be defined by the general assembly, alleged to have been
committed while on probation or parole resulting from the conviction of a crime of
violence;

(II) A crime of violence, as may be defined by the general assembly, alleged to have been
committed while on bail pending the disposition of a previous crime of violence charge
for which probable cause has been found;

(III) A crime of violence, as may be defined by the general assembly, alleged to have
been committed after two previous felony convictions, or one such previous felony
conviction if such conviction was for a crime of violence, upon charges separately
brought and tried under the laws of this state or under the laws of any other state, the
United States, or any territory subject to the jurisdiction of the United States which, if
committed in this state, would be a felony; or

(c) (Deleted by amendment.)

(2) Except in the case of a capital offense, if a person is denied bail under this section, the
trial of the person shall be commenced not more than ninety days after the date on which
bail is denied. If the trial is not commenced within ninety days and the delay is not
attributable to the defense, the court shall immediately schedule a bail hearing and shall
set the amount of the bail for the person.

(2.5) (a) The court may grant bail after a person is convicted, pending sentencing or
appeal, only as provided by statute as enacted by the general assembly; except that no
bail is allowed for persons convicted of:

(I) Murder;

(II) Any felony sexual assault involving the use of a deadly weapon;

(III) Any felony sexual assault committed against a child who is under fifteen years of
age;

(IV) A crime of violence, as defined by statute enacted by the general assembly; or

(V) Any felony during the commission of which the person used a firearm.

(b) The court shall not set bail that is otherwise allowed pursuant to this subsection (2.5)
unless the court finds that:

(I) The person is unlikely to flee and does not pose a danger to the safety of any person or
the community; and

(II) The appeal is not frivolous or is not pursued for the purpose of delay.

32
(3) This section shall take effect January 1, 1995, and shall apply to offenses committed
on or after said date.

[ Repealed and reenacted, with amendments, November 2, 1982 �� Effective January 1,

1983. (See L. 82, p. 685.); as amended November 8, 1994 �� Effective upon
proclamation of the Governor, January 19, 1995. (See L. 94, p. 2853.) ]

Section 20. Excessive bail, fines or punishment. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Section 21. Suspension of habeas corpus. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall
never be suspended, unless when in case of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may
require it.

Section 22. Military subject to civil power � quartering of troops. The military shall
always be in strict subordination to the civil power; no soldier shall, in time of peace, be
quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war except in the
manner prescribed by law.

Section 23. Trial by jury � grand jury. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate in
criminal cases; but a jury in civil cases in all courts, or in criminal cases in courts not of
record, may consist of less than twelve persons, as may be prescribed by law. Hereafter a
grand jury shall consist of twelve persons, any nine of whom concurring may find an
indictment; provided, the general assembly may change, regulate or abolish the grand
jury system; and provided, further, the right of any person to serve on any jury shall not
be denied or abridged on account of sex, and the general assembly may provide by law
for the exemption from jury service of persons or classes of persons.

[As amended November 7, 1944. (See Laws 1945, p. 424.)]

Section 24. Right to assemble and petition. The people have the right peaceably to
assemble for the common good, and to apply to those invested with the powers of
government for redress of grievances, by petition or remonstrance.

Section 25. Due process of law. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property,
without due process of law.

Section 26. Slavery prohibited. There shall never be in this state either slavery or
involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted.

Section 27. Property rights of aliens. Aliens, who are or may hereafter become bona fide
residents of this state, may acquire, inherit, possess, enjoy and dispose of property, real
and personal, as native born citizens.

33
Section 28. Rights reserved not disparaged. The enumeration in this constitution of
certain rights shall not be construed to deny, impair or disparage others retained by the
people.

Section 29. Equality of the sexes. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or
abridged by the state of Colorado or any of its political subdivisions on account of sex.

{Adopted November 7, 1972 �� Effective upon proclamation by the Governor, January

11, 1973. (See Laws 1972, p. 647.)]

Section 30. Right to vote or petition on annexation � enclaves. (1) No unincorporated

area may be annexed to a municipality unless one of the following conditions first has
been met:

(a) The question of annexation has been submitted to the vote of the landowners and the
registered electors in the area proposed to be annexed, and the majority of such persons
voting on the question have voted for the annexation; or

(b) The annexing municipality has received a petition for the annexation of such area
signed by persons comprising more than fifty percent of the landowners in the area and
owning more than fifty percent of the area, excluding public streets, and alleys and any
land owned by the annexing municipality; or

(c) The area is entirely surrounded by or is solely owned by the annexing municipality.

(2) The provisions of this section shall not apply to annexations to the city and county of
Denver, to the extent that such annexations are governed by o

34
(e) A statement of the amount of monetary damages that is being requested.

(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Claimant/Complainant is hereby and herein requesting the policy limit pursuant
to (See: https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/info_center/files/LimitationsOnJudgments.pdf ) to wit:
“For claims for relief that accrue on or after January 1, 2018 and before
January 1, 2022, the adjusted limitation is $387,000.00 for any injury to one
person in a single occurrence…”

(3)(a) If the claim is against the state or an employee thereof, the notice shall be
filed with the attorney general. If the claim is against any other public entity or an
employee thereof, the notice shall be filed with the governing body of the public
entity or the attorney representing the public entity. Such notice shall be effective
upon mailing by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or upon
personal service.

(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
The herein named complainant has mailed an exact duplicate copy of this
complaint to the below; and requested restitution to the
representative/attorney/agent for each of the above named Government entities
and/or agents thereof, including but not limited to:

THE STATE OF COLORADO; AND INCLUDES POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS

THEREOF:

1) THE STATE OF COLORADO; AND INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING

POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS, TO WIT:
2) DOUGLAS COUNTY (UN-INCORPORATED); AND
3) THE INCORPORATED HOME RULE TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK;
(THE DOUGLAS COUNTY SEAT OF GOVERNMENT); AND
4) DOUGLAS COUNTY 18TH STATE JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CHIEF JUDGE, MICHELLE A. AMICO (SEE:
); AND
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/18th_Judicial_District/18th_Courts/Amended%20Chief--Assignments%20(CJO%2018-01%20effective%208-20-18)%20(Final).pdf

5) DOUGLAS COUNTY MAGISTRATE, FRANK ANTHONY

MOSCHETTI – FIRST APPEARANCE CENTER
6) THE TOWN COUNCEL MEMBERS OF CASTLE ROCK

35
The above Government Parties may be served with process, by and through their council
of record pursuant to:

Office of the Attorney General

Colorado Department of Law
Ralph L. Carr Judicial Building
1300 Broadway, 10th Floor
Denver, CO 80203
P: 720-508-6000
F: 720-508-6030
); and

Douglas County Attorney

Lance Ingalls
100 Third Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
P: 303-660-7414
Email: attorney@douglas.co.us
See: https://www.douglas.co.us/government/departments/attorney/ ); and/or

Town Attorney
Bob Slentz
Town of Castle Rock
100 N. Wilcox St.
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: 303-660-1388
Email: Bslentz@crgov.com
See: https://www.crgov.com/1941/Town-Attorney )

(b) A notice required under this section that is properly filed with a public entity's
agent listed in the inventory of local governmental entities pursuant to section 24-32-
116 , is deemed to satisfy the requirements of this section.

(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Complainant has timely documented and filed this, his complaint and request for
restitution pursuant to the statutory limitations noted above within 90 days or less
as required in the timeline, which began on or about September 19, 2018. )

(4) When the claim is one for death by wrongful act or omission, the notice may be
presented by the personal representative, surviving spouse, or next of kin of the
deceased.

36
 (CLAIMANT’S ANSWER:
Complainant hereby and herein states for the record that at the present time of
this filing, no deaths have occurred in association with this event, nor as a direct
result of complainant filing the same.)

(5) Any action brought pursuant to this article shall be commenced within the time
period provided for that type of action in articles 80 and 81 of title 13, C.R.S.,
relating to limitation of actions, or it shall be forever barred;  except that, if
compliance with the provisions of subsection (6) of this section would otherwise
result in the barring of an action, such time period shall be extended by the time
period required for compliance with the provisions of subsection (6) of this section.
(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER: N/A )

(6) No action brought pursuant to this article shall be commenced until after the
claimant who has filed timely notice pursuant to subsection (1) of this section has
received notice from the public entity that the public entity has denied the claim or
until after ninety days has passed following the filing of the notice of claim required
by this section, whichever occurs first.
(CLAIMANT’S ANSWER: Claimant, The People of the State of Colorado; et al;
have not filed any further judicial proceedings prior to this notice, nor prior to receiving
notice from public entity has denied the claim, or the passage of ninety days following. )

However, the physical Address for this “First Appearance Center (FAC)” is located at:

4000 Justice Way

Castle Rock, Colorado
80109

The Incorporated Town of “Castle Rock” is a Municipal Township under the HOME
RULE; along with the other very important fact, which is the:

“Town of Castle Rock” is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO. Categorized
under Government Offices City Village and Township. Current estimates show this
company has an annual revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 10 to
19.; and additional incorporated entity information is as follows:

Town of Castle Rock

37
 100 Wilcox Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: (303) 660-1377
Web: Crgov.com
 Name: Trish Muller, Director
Job Title: Director

And…

County Of Douglas is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO. Categorized under
Sheriff. Current estimates show this company has a annual revenue of unknown and
employs a staff of approximately 250 to 499.

County Of Douglas
4000 Justice Way # 1611
Castle Rock, CO 80109
Phone: (303) 660-7546
Web: www.douglas.co.us
 Name: David Weaver
Job Title: Principal

And…

Douglas County Sheriffs Office is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.
Categorized under Sheriff. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue
of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 250 to 499.

Douglas County Sheriffs Office

County Of Douglas
4000 Justice Way
Castle Rock, CO 80109
Phone: (303) 660-7505
Web: www.douglas.co.us
 Name: David Weaver

And…
County Government Sheriff is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.

County Government Sheriff

355 South Wilcox Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: (303) 660-7505
Web: www.dcsheriff.net/

38
And…

Douglas County Sheriff-Civil is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.

Categorized under Sheriff. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue
of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 5 to 9.

Douglas County Sheriff-Civil

4000 Justice Way
Castle Rock, CO 80109
Phone: (303) 660-7527
Web: Dcsheriff.net
 Name: David Weaver, Manager
Job Title: Manager

And…

County Sheriff Investigation Division is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.
Categorized under Sheriff.
County Shriff Invstigation Division
County Of Douglas
401 South Wilcox Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: (720) 441-3522
Web: www.douglas.co.us
 Name: Tony Spurlock
Job Title: Owner

Now lets take a look at the names on the outside of the buildings located at 4000 Justice
Way in “Castle Rock”, starting with:

Douglas County Community Justice is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.
Categorized under County Government Offices. Current estimates show this company
has an annual revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 10 to 19.
Douglas County Community Justice
4000 Justice Way
Castle Rock, CO 80109
Phone: (303) 660-7552
Web: Dcnet.com
 Name: Scott Matson, Director
Job Title: Director

39
And…

Douglas County Justice is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO.

Categorized under County Government Offices. Current estimates show this company
has an annual revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 5 to 9.
Douglas County Justice
4000 Justice Way
Castle Rock, CO 80109
Phone: (303) 663-7200
Web: Douglas.co.us
 Name: Curtis Spradlin, Other
Job Title: Other

“the injury complained of is attended by circumstances of fraud, malice, or

willful and wanton conduct; and

When one considers the Acts committed by one, Magistrate Frank Anthony Moschetti
(FAC) on September 19, 2018, there can be no confusion with regards to rather the said
acts were then and are now:

“willful and wanton conduct" means conduct purposefully committed which

the actor must have realized as dangerous, done heedlessly and recklessly,
without regard to consequences, or of the rights and safety of others,
particularly the plaintiff.”;

Now let us define “RIGHT”, so as to make it clear what a right is and who possesses
Rights, to wit:

“Right. A well-founded claim. If people believe that humanity itself

establishes or proves certain claims, either upon fellow beings, or upon
society or government, they call these claims human rights; if they believe
that these claims inhere in the very nature of man himself, they called them
inherent, inalienable rights;

and…
“Under basic rules of construction, statutory laws enacted by legislative
bodies cannot impair rights given under a constitution. 194 B.R. at 925.”
(See: In re Young, 235 B.R. 666 (Bankr.M.D.Fla., 1999))

40
Therefor, with all due respect, Claimant remains very confused as to how Douglas
County could possibly claim to be un-incorporated, while openly admitting that the
Incorporated HOME RULE “TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK” is the Douglas County Seat
of Government? The County doesn’t have jurisdiction in HOME RULE jurisdiction(s).

The County Sheriff has jurisdiction only in un-incorporated areas of his county. It Cannot
be otherwise? The Douglas County Sheriff understands this jurisdictional fact, which is
why he stated:

“We’ll admit it’s confusing. Technically, we serve and protect across Douglas
County outside of cities.” (See: http://www.dcsheriff.net/sheriffs-office/where-is-unincorporated-douglas-county/)

It is important to take note of the fact that there do exist exceptions to this rule. That is to
say, with regards to the Un-incorporated County areas and the Incorporated City/Town,
jurisdictions, etc., within the County.

It does however, seem very odd to the Claimant, the Incorporated HOME RULE “Town
of Castle Rock” (the Douglas County Seat of Government) is not listed amongst those
exceptions to that rule by the Sheriff? Nor did the Sheriff list “Castle Rock” as an area
for which the Douglas County Sheriff has jurisdiction? More specifically, the area must
be outside of a HOME RULE jurisdiction, in order to exercise jurisdictional or
enforcement authority?

What is strange to the Claimant, is the fact that this jurisdictional “hick-up” was not even
dealt with when the opportunity had presented itself for the Sheriff to do so, as seen
below:

“But there are exceptions to the rule. Some places, like Castle Pines and
Larkspur contract with us for law enforcement.

The Douglas County Sheriff took further steps to clarify this matter regarding the County
Sheriff’s jurisdiction when he further stated:

41
 “The jurisdiction for the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office Unincorporated
Douglas County is:

 City of Castle Pines

 Deckers
 Franktown
 Grandview Estates
 Highlands Ranch
 Louviers
 Parker Heights
 Parker North
 Perry Park
 Perry Pines
 Pinery
 Pradera
 Rainbow Trout Falls
 Roxborough
 Sedalia
 Stonegate
 Town of Larkspur
 West Creek
If you’re still not sure if you are in our jurisdiction, please call the Sheriff’s
Office at 303-660-7500. (See: http://www.dcsheriff.net/sheriffs-office/where-is-unincorporated-douglas-county/)

It is important to take note here of the fact that the Douglas County Sheriff never
mentioned “Castle Rock”, at all. Yet it’s the alleged “County Seat of Government”
for the County of Douglas/Douglas County? It certainly makes one wonder? More
especially when the people can see the Sheriff’s flag being flown outside of the Castle
Rock Justice Center? Not picking on the Sheriff here, but merely showing the quagmire
of jurisdiction(s). Because they didn’t appear to be protecting the rights of Claimant?

Under those conditions how could Douglas County be considered anything but an
Incorporated County, that is engaging in prohibited activities, known as: co-mingling of
funds, jurisdictions, powers and authorities.

And…

State Of Colorado is a privately held company in Denver, CO and is a Headquarters

business. Categorized under Governors' Office. Our records show it was established in

42
1876 and incorporated in Colorado. Current estimates show this company has an annual
revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 81349.

State Of Colorado
200 East Colfax Avenue # 91
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 866-5000
Web: www.cde.state.co.us
 Name: John W Hickenlooper
Job Title: Governor

And the Capital of the State of Colorado, to wit:

City And County Of Denver is a privately held company in Denver, CO.; and is a
Single Location business. Categorized under General Government Administration.

City And County Of Denver

201 West Colfax Avenue # 1010
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: (720) 913-5516
Web: www.ci.denver.co.us
 Name: Kelly Leid
Job Title: Executive Director

And…

Colorado Department Of State is a privately held company in Denver, CO. Categorized

under State Government-General Offices, whose identifying corporate entity information
is as follows:

Colorado Department Of State

Secretary Of State, Colorado
1700 Broadway # 350
Denver, CO 80290
Phone: (303) 860-6959
Web: www.sos.state.co.us
 Name: Trevor Timmons
Job Title: Chief

And…

43
Colorado State Patrol is a privately held company in Castle Rock, CO. Categorized
under State Government-Police. Current estimates show this company has an annual
revenue of $5 to $10 million and employs a staff of approximately 5 to 9.

Colorado State Patrol

900 Wilcox Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: (303) 688-3115
Web: www.states-arrest-records.com
 Name: Steve Powell
Job Title: Manager

And…

They are, never the less, mere extensions of a bankrupted, insolvent, dysfunctional
Incorporated State of Colorado – (D&B#: 076438621), which is itself, a Bankrupt,
insolvent, dysfunctional Incorporated State, just as its Parent Company (i.e.) United
States of America, via its incorporated Seat of Government, The District of Columbia, or
Washington D.C. .

Government Of District Of Columbia is a privately held company in Washington, DC .

Categorized under State Government Offices. Current estimates show this company has
an annual revenue of unknown and employs a staff of approximately 20 to 49.

Government Of District Of Columbia

801 Shepherd Street Nw
Washington, DC 20011
Phone: (202) 576-7493
Web: www.dc.gov
 Name: Cathy Lanier, Executive Director
Job Title: Executive Director

Now then, let us look into the United States Capital City (i.e.) Washington/The District of
Columbia. Congress passed the Organic Act of 1871, which revoked the individual
charters of the cities of Washington and Georgetown and combined them with
Washington County to create a unified territorial government for the entire District of

44
Columbia.[6] The new government consisted of an appointed governor and 7-11-member
council, a locally elected 22-member assembly, and a board of public works charged with
modernizing the city.[7]

The Seal of the District of Columbia features the date 1871, recognizing the year the
District's government was incorporated.[8] There is no Nation and there are no States,
just bankrupted corporations, under reorganization, by a Foreign, Alien Military
Occupying Belligerent Forces/Powers.

Therefore, the same said incorporated HOME RULE Counties, Cities, Towns,
Townships, and the like, are compromised by Foreign Powers, Authorities, Corporations,
Organizations and Associations; and their foreign, alien Constitution(s); Charter(s); and
including, but not limited to, their many Foreign Officers, Agents, Employee and other
foreign, alien underlings. This is further elaborated upon in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary,
to wit:

“By the act of July 16, 1790, accepted the same for the permanent seat of
government of the United States.

The seat of government was removed from Philadelphia to the District in

December, 1800. As it exist at present, it constitutes but one county, called
the county of Washington.

By act of July 11, 1846, congress ceded back the county of Alexandria, part
of the District of Columbia, to the state of Virginia.

By act of Congress of Feb. 21, 1871 (See: http://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-

large/41st-congress/session-3/c41s3ch62.pdf & http://legisworks.org/sal/16/stats/STATUTE-
16-Pg419.pdf ), a territorial government was created for the District; 16 Stat. L.
419; which was not a mere municipality in its restricted sense, but was held
to be placed upon the same footing with that of the states or territories within
the limits of the act; Grant v. Cooke, 7DC. 165.

This government was, however, abolished by the act of June 20, 1874, and a
temporary government by commissioners was thereby created, which existed
until;

By act of June 11, 1878, provision was made for the continuance of the
District “as a municipal corporation” and its control by the federal

45
 government through these commissioners, two of whom are appointed by the
president and confirmed by the senate, and the other is an engineer officer of
the army to be detailed for the service by the president. It is a municipal
corporation having a right to sue and be sued, and is subject to the ordinary
rules that govern the law of procedure between private persons. The sovereign
power is lodged in the government of the United States, and not in the
corporation of the District; Metropolitan R. Co. v. District of Columbia, 132
U.S. 1, 10 Sup. Ct. 19, 33 L. Ed. 231.” (See Bouvier’s Law Dictionary and
Concise Encyclopedia of the Law, 3rd Revision pgs. 896-897);

and Direct rule by Congress continued until the passage of the District of
Columbia Home Rule Act in 1973.[11]”

Now when a Nation or States Capital City is one-in-the-same with the County (i.e.) the
City and County of Denver, under its Incorporated HOME RULE City and County of
Denver Charter. That is the evidence that the State is actually incorporated because the
County is the Arm of the State.

So when both the City and the County is incorporated, then the State is, in fact,
incorporated. In these cases, both, the Nation & the State lays down its sovereignty, to
engage in corporate commerce for profit. The laws of this land have long ago been
established with regards to a Nation entering the domain of commerce, to wit:

“If the nation comes down from its position of sovereignty and enters the
domain of commerce, it submits itself to the same laws that govern
individuals therein. It assumes the position of an ordinary citizen and it
cannot recede from the fulfillment of its obligations” (See: U.S. v.
Commercial Co., 74 Fed. 145, following Cooke v. U.S., 91 U.S. 398, 23 L. Ed.
237)

and…
“These considerations make Congress' need to possess the power to condition
entry into the market upon a waiver of sovereign immunity (as “necessary
and proper” to the exercise of its commerce power) unusually strong, for to
deny Congress that power would deny Congress the power effectively to
regulate private conduct. Cf. California v. Taylor, 353 U.S. 553, 566 (1957).
At the same time they make a State's need to exercise sovereign immunity
unusually weak, for the State is unlikely to have to supply what private firms
already supply, nor may it fairly demand special treatment, even to protect
the public purse, when it does so. Neither can one easily imagine what the
Constitution's founders would have thought about the assertion of sovereign

46
 immunity in this special context. These considerations, differing in kind or
degree from those that would support a general congressional “abrogation”
power, indicate that Parden’s holding is sound, irrespective of this Court's
decisions in Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996), and Alden
v. Maine, ante , p. (Also See: College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid
Postsecondary Education Expense, 527 U.S. 666 (1999))

Therefore, Complainant hereby states his objection to the Colorado Revised Statutes, in
whole, or in part, which denies, or would attempt to deny the above named complainant
restitution and/or which further Bars the same from any remedy, or restitution for injuries
and damages. In Short, governments are liable for their acts, when they are engaged in
corporate commerce for a profit.

Moreover, the people being disenfranchised from their property (and our money is our
property) by and through a scheme of the Legislature, who claims to be empowered with
their Powers and Authorities by the very people, whose property(s) and right(s) are taken
rather than protected. The People of The State of Colorado can never empower, nor
sustain any State Chartered Organizations, Institutions, or otherwise, which are wholly
dependent upon their continued existence, via funds which are and can only be, illegally
taxed under the guise of administrative statutory and code violations, committed by Code
Breakers and penalties assessed.

Then the properties of the people are taken under threat of arrest in the alternative, from
the very same people, whom empowered those in government for the purposes of
protecting their rights, lives, liberties and pursuits of happiness. That is to say, of the
Sovereign People (i.e.) the people of the State of Colorado, who are duped by reverse
psychology and breach of trust by those allegedly elected representatives.

For a prime example, when they purport, as the City and County of Denver does, by
showing their emblem on their City Police Car doors and elsewhere which city emblem
states: “Protect & Serve”. Isn’t that deceptive practices?

47
I would also like to bring out the fact that these Chartered Cities all claim therein, that
they must do this and that for the purposes of the safety and protections of the people of
the City. More especially, under the City Police Powers Sections of these Charters, yet
the Supreme Court has issued Rulings pertaining to such said Chartered HOME RULE
Cities and the like, to the contrary when stating in their opinions:

“It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the
Corporation and arrest code breakers.” (See: Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So.2nd.
363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of
Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247)

and…

“The respective trial judges held that the police were under no specific legal
duty to provide protection to the individual appellants and dismissed the
complaints for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
Super.) Ct.Civ.R. 12(b)(6)”;

and the Court later made further clarifications regarding this matter:

“The court en banc, on petitions for rehearing, vacated the panel's decision.
After re-arguments, notwithstanding our sympathy for appellants who were
the tragic victims of despicable criminal acts, we affirm the judgments of
dismissal.” (See: Warren v. District of Columbia 444 A.2d 1 (1981); (Nos. 79-
6, 79-394); and ( http://law.justia.com/cases/district-of-columbia/court-of-appeals/1981/79-6-3.html )

Now then, let us see some cases which these so-called Mayor(s), City Council(s) and
Alderman are named in which will further clarify what is being conveyed herein, to wit:

“"The People" does not intend to include you and me. (Barron v. Mayor &
City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243);
(also see: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/32/243/case.html)

and…

You cannot use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a
party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of
Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)

48
This is only done and this Corporate Scheme could only be done, authorized,
implemented, practiced, sanctioned, utilized, furthered, continued, or the like, if done by
those whom are “Engaged in Anarchistic and Seditious Association”, to
misappropriate funds, powers and authorities; and which will guarantee the furtherance of
their Economic benefit and unfair gains, of money and other things of value, or continued
benefit; and doing the same, so as to give an unfair advantage by their intentional Non-
Disclosure of the Facts and the Truth to the People whom these Chartered Entities
purport to exist on the behalf of, to wit:

“cite the police authority of charter here”

But which is the furthest thing from the truth. Whereby the corporation may benefit
greatly and profit beyond the wildest dreams of the collective victims of said HOME
RULE Chartered entities, whom have suffered great damage(s), losses, detriment, and
destruction and deprivation of Life, Liberty and Property of others.

When they knowingly, intentionally, fraudulently, deceptively, recklessly & wantonly

trick the people by placing them under the “SPELL and ILLUSION” that they are
walking into a lawful state, city or federal court via the Law of the Flag, which they see
flying at the front of the “Court House Building”, but only on the outside!!! That is
Constructive fraud, usurped jurisdiction, deception for the purpose of Extortion, to wit:

49
and now a close-up:

But these flags and jurisdictions are not the same once you enter. The flags change on
the inside of every single court, office, or the like therein. Then, absent any Lawfully
required disclosure being posted outside at the entries thereof. There should be “Posted
Notices”, which state that upon your entering the portals of this building, you are leaving

50
 the jurisdiction of your nation or state and entering a foreign military emergency power,
admiralty flag under a foreign admiralty jurisdiction, or the like.
(See:https://www.google.com/search?q=Pictures+of+flags+in+Colorado+court+rooms&client=safari&channel=mac_bm&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=PX0Q15Lhgpw81M%253A%252C1nMg8wVOxr
Q0eM%252C_&usg=AI4_-kTCwOuenYv1IG6hrihnCO48agO0Kw&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiLqYnA4-TeAhUKRK0KHbynBoYQ9QEwAHoECAUQBA#imgrc=o1jT1YyIfpuDnM )

These courts with gold fringed Admiralty flag(s), or Executive flag(s) of the President, as
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces changes the jurisdictions of our civilian
courts, to that of military Marshal Law Tribunals. In these Military Courts, the people
are not innocent until proven guilty… It is more like a military Court, where the
Defendant’s are considered guilty until proven innocent.

These undisclosed military jurisdictions in our civilian courts, are nothing short of
“Kangaroo Courts” and the flags in them all look the same, regardless of which court it
is in. They all have gold fringe around the outer parameter on three sides of what
otherwise appears to be the National or State flag(s).

Claimant can testify as to how these admin Public Servants make the Public (The People)
feel with regards to obtaining justice in these kangaroo courts. The signs of the flags,
along with the signs given by the judges, which are clearly seen and felt by the General
Public at Large who has been deceptively lured into a foreign military, non-constitutional
court proceeding.

Now when we consider the “LAW” with regards to the “Castle Rock” jurisdiction, we
must consider their Town Chartered requirements and their applicability, which can be
found under Title 10 – VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC, to wit:

 Title 10 - VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

51
 Chapter 10.04 - Model Traffic Code

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

 10.04.010 - Adoption.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

Pursuant to Parts 1 and 2 of Article 16 of Title 31, C.R.S., there is hereby adopted
by reference as a primary code the Model Traffic Code for Colorado (2010 Edition),
promulgated and published as such by the Colorado Department of Transportation,
Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch, 4201 East Arkansas Avenue, EP 700, Denver,
Colorado 80222 (the "Model Traffic Code"). The subject matter of the Model Traffic
Code relates primarily to comprehensive traffic control regulations of the Town. The
purpose of this Chapter and the code adopted herein is to provide a system of traffic
regulations consistent with state law and generally conforming to similar regulations
throughout the State and the nation. Three (3) copies of the Model Traffic Code
adopted herein are on file in the office of the Town Clerk and may be inspected during
regular business hours.

(Ord. 2012-15 §1, 2012)

 10.04.020 - Application.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

This Chapter shall apply to every street, alley, sidewalk area, driveway, park and
to every other public way or public place, public parking area, either within or outside
the corporate limits of the Town, the use of which the Town has jurisdiction and
authority to regulate. The provisions of Sections 1401, 1402, 1409(3) and 1413 of the
adopted Model Traffic Code, respectively concerning reckless driving, careless driving,
compulsory insurance and eluding a police officer, shall apply not only to public places
and ways but also throughout the Town.

(Ord. 2012-15 §1, 2012)

 10.04.030 - Amendments.

52
SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF
SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

The Model Traffic Code for Colorado (2010 Edition) is hereby amended as
follows:

A.
All provisions containing enumerated penalties for violations are deleted.

B.
All provisions containing surcharges or fees not due the Town are deleted.

C.
There shall be no division into classes of traffic infractions, traffic offenses or
misdemeanor traffic offenses. Any reference to a "class A" or "class B" traffic
infraction is deleted and replaced by "traffic infraction." Any reference to a "class 1" or
"class 2" traffic offense or misdemeanor traffic offense is deleted and replaced by
"traffic offense."

ET AL; (See: https://library.municode.com/co/castle_rock/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT10VETR_CH10.04MOTRCO )

NOW THEN, All provisions containing enumerated penalties for violations are
deleted; and when a De Facto Administrative Magistrate [ ]
[https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/Hodges-thesis.pdf ] presides over all Vehicle and Traffic matters
in the said jurisdiction, as a matter of “FIRST APEARANCE” who is sitting in the
jurisdiction of Castle Rock has just penalized Claimant based upon “class A” or “class B”
traffic infractions; and did so based upon a Infraction on a Toll Road, which operates on
surcharges or fees, not due the town of Castle Rock which has also been deleted.

The same could only be construed or attempted under a hodgepodge of jurisdictions; and
when done by a magistrate (Past Head Prosecutor for the same said County), knows or
should know that it is unfair business practices, to fail to disclose that as an
administrative magistrate, he has no authority to seat, nor hear jury trials, constitutional
questions, arguments, or the like; and because it is not a judicial proceeding, nor a
judicial court, but rather an administrative proceeding, in an administrative Corporation
Court. All such chicanery is but further evidence of the RICO Enterprise of the “De
Facto” State of Colorado.

53
The De Facto State of Colorado, knowing that the Incorporated Town of Castle Rock can
do nothing, nor can it contract with others to do what is not expressly authorized in their
CORPORATE CHARTER. Moreover a past Head Prosecutor, knowing that a defendant
has filed demanding a Constitutional proceeding and requesting a hearing on the merits,
knows or should have known that the only way he could possibly hear one thing
pertaining to the same could only be accomplished by failure to disclose and an unlawful
de facto usurped jurisdiction.

This was far more than enough to qualify the fact that the Defendant is NOT voluntarily
proceeding before an Administrative Court, nor a Magistrate. What this case rather
shows, is that the Administrative Magistrate presiding over the Administrative First
Appearance Center, knowingly, willfully and Wantonly usurped jurisdiction, which
Frank Anthony Maschetti, does not posses under the Colorado Revised Statutes as a
Magistrate, nor are such rights specifically delegated to the same under the Corporate
Charter powers of the Incorporated Town of Castle Rock.

This makes the people outraged in violation of CRS at the audacity of such behavior by
the said Magistrate Frank Anthony Moschetti. The below pictures shows perfectly what
is attempting to be conveyed in words above with regards to said Magistrates behavior
and the resultant outraged citizenry, to wit:

54
Now, when a “Public Servant” does what he wants to, unlimited by Law, recklessly, and
in wanton disregard of the Rights of the People of the State of Colorado and the United
States of America. Furthermore, the said Magistrate is obviously suffering from a
Condition of the Mind, known as “God Syndrome”.

Therefore, the said Magistrate must be removed from the bench. When a judge, police
officer, or otherwise becomes confused with regards to the people, and in lieu of what
they are supposed to do, pursuant to their Sworn Oath of Office and rather in stead, they
trample the Rights of the people (Public) by the ones under oath (Servant/Constituted),
then they are no longer lawful, nor authorized with lawful Powers & Authorities…

They are acting beyond their delegated powers and authorities. No matter rather a higher
court confirms the Constructive Fraud and states that a judge, or Magistrate that doesn’t
have a valid Oath on file, still has authority, in a De Facto status!
Rather under 4 USC or 5 USC (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/102 &
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2010-title5/USCODE-2010-title5-partIII-subpartB-chap33-
subchapII-sec33311 )

Are they serious? Absent the oath, its prohibited to ACT as such! They can’t rule on
Constitutional Pleadings and from the onset, the said Magistrate knew, or should have
known that all he could do is reset any such cases for a future date, before a County court,
which has jurisdiction to hear Constitutional Arguments. (See the CRS regarding
Administrative Magistrates and their authority herein)

In short, Hardin is Public, Moschetti’s is the Servant/the Constituted (i.e.) Public Servant,
but is not the County Prosecutor anymore. Magistrate Moschetti seems to be criminally
confused with regards to his current and present limitations as a mere magistrate.

Said public Servants are, under these circumstances: “Oath Breakers, who are committing
Constructive Fraud and Treason, by, through and in their organized criminal conspiracy
and collusion. When this is the case, with and/or between two or more others acting in

55
collective concert, then they are by definition, a criminal syndicate, under the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

The Law & the appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C.

“The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate
red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a
blue field.” (my note- of course when new states are admitted, new stars are
added.)

A foot note was added on page 1113 of the same section which says:

“Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and
arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but
within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army
and Navy.” [1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483]

The president, as military Commander-In-Chief, can add a yellow fringe to our

flag. When would this be done? ONLY during times of war. Why? A flag with a fringe
is an ensign, a military flag. Read the following.

“Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834, August

21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag
of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on
three sides. The President of the United States designates this deviation from

56
 the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-
IN-CHIEF of the Armed forces.”

From the National Encyclopedia, Volume 4:

“Flag, an emblem of a nation; usually made of cloth and flown from a staff.
From a military standpoint flags are of two general classes, those flown from
stationary masts over army posts, and those carried by troops in formation.
The former are referred to by the general name flags. The latter are called
colors when carried by dismounted troops. Colors and Standards are more
nearly square than flags and are made of silk with a knotted Fringe of Yellow
on three sides…use of the flag. The most general and appropriate use of the
flag is as a symbol of authority and power.”

“…The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag.
The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at
the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind
the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent
has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His
notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the
master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with
the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his
relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and
with power well defined under the national maritime law.” Bouvier’s Law
Dictionary, 1914.

Don’t be thrown by the fact they are talking about the sea, and that it doesn’t
apply to land. Admiralty law came on land in 1845 with the Act of 1845 by Congress.
Claimant has provided a court case regarding the Law of the Flag with regards to a
military flag, to wit:

“Pursuant to the “Law of the Flag”, a military flag does result in

jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the following:
“Under what is called international law, the law of the flag, a ship owner who
sends his vessel into a foreign port gives notice by his flag to all who enter
into contracts with the shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to
regulate those contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its
operation or not contract with him or his agent at all.” Ruhstrat v. People,
57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76 AM.

57
In these courts, you have no local state or federal constitutional rights, guarantees, nor
limitations upon the “Constituted Authorities” impersonating your local state and national
governments, including no rights:
1) to equal access under the law;
2) to equal access to the courts; and
3) to the right to council; and
4) the right to face your accuser; and
5) to cross-examine the same on the stand; and
6) to due process of law; and
7) to a trial; and
8) to a trial by jury; and
9) to the right to be safe in your home and papers; and
10) to be free from warrantless searches and seizures; and
11) to be free from false arrest; and
12) free from false imprisonment; and
13) the said alleged courts, makes them believe a lie

, and to maintain certain powers and authorities of the people, via: Deceptive Trade
Practices! False Advertisement! Fraudulent alterations of the truth, Extortion, Plunder,
Theft, Breach of Contract, Breach of Oath and Affirmation, False Swearing,

The unlawful appropriations from the same individuals whom purport their job was
secured by the votes of the people can no longer be tolerated. The People/voters whose
rights were to be protected from those very same people whom they purport to represent
cannot be sustained by the same people being plundered.

Not when their daily functions and continued existence is wholly dependent upon the
damages and injuries, which their offices can impose upon the people of the State of
Colorado. The damage and injuries sustained as a result of any form of government, or
its officers, agents, clerks, employees and other underlings thereof can no longer be
allowed to exist, to the damage, injury and detriment of the People of this State.

58
Claimant herein objects to the circumstances, along with any and all State Laws
applicable only to the same. Because State Statutes and Codes govern the actions and
prohibitions governing government, as Principal and its employees, as Agent; and the
agent can never do an act not authorized by the Principal, etc.

Now if the State created these Legislative Corporations as a Corporate Body Politic,
which may sue and be sued, pursuant to the corporate laws of commerce. Then the same
Corporate State later issues conflicting legislation, along with City Codes to the extent
that they are in conflict or inconsistent conflicting legislation.

Then while claiming that these HOME RULE Entities and their rules, ordinances, codes,
regulations, statutes, proclamation’s, etc., which claim to have enforcement authority, or
the powers to delegate the hindering, limiting, restricting, or refusal of certain
Constitutional guarantees preserved in the Federal and State Constitutions, reserved to the
People, and within the people; and that any and all powers and authorities not expressly
delegated to the government by the people, nor expressly prohibiting or limiting the
same, remains with the people.

What does that mean? It means that the Corporate State of Colorado wants the best of
both worlds, or otherwise stated, wants the cake and wants to eat it too. The conflict with
regards to the Government Immunity Act, The Act of State, Sovereign Immunity, et al, is
that none of them (STATES) are sovereigns. The Government as incorporator, laid down
its Sovereignty and takes on that of, and may be proceeded against as a mere private
citizen…

Therefore these alleged state and federal governments have NO authority not derived
from their corporate charter(s). Not to mention the fact that the Federal Government and
the several states thereof, have publicly declared an EMERGENCY because they are
bankrupt and insolvent.

“Section 1. - Incorporated.

59
 SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF
SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

“The municipal corporation known as the City of Denver and all municipal
corporations and that part of the quasi-municipal corporation known as the
county of Arapahoe, in the state of Colorado, included within the exterior
boundaries of the said city of Denver as the same shall be bounded when this
amendment takes effect, are hereby consolidated and are hereby declared to be
a single body politic and corporate, by the name of the "City and County of
Denver." By that name said corporation shall have perpetual succession, and
shall own, possess, and hold all property, real and personal, theretofore owned,
possessed, or held by the said city of Denver and by such included municipal
corporations, and also all property, real and personal, theretofore owned,
possessed, or held by the said county of Arapahoe, and shall assume, manage,
and dispose of all trusts in any way connected therewith; shall succeed to all the
rights and liabilities, and shall acquire all benefits and shall assume and pay all
bonds, obligations, and indebtedness of said city of Denver and of said included
municipal corporations and of the county of Arapahoe; by that name may sue
and defend, plead and be impleaded, in all courts and places, and in all matters
and proceedings; may have and use a common seal and alter the same at
pleasure; may purchase, receive, hold, and enjoy or sell and dispose of, real and
personal property;…”

Then at a later date, after passing legislation for Corporate Municipal Charters with their
required, proper and necessary language, to the effect that they amount to the same as
shown below, to wit:

1) “are corporate and therefore may sue and be sued, plead and be
impleaded in all courts and places and in all matters and proceedings”.

2) “… by that name may sue and defend, plead and be impleaded, in all
courts and places, and in all matters and proceedings; may have and use a
common seal and alter the same at pleasure; may purchase, receive, hold,
and enjoy or sell and dispose of, real and personal property;…”

Yet the State of Colorado turns around and attempts to overthrow its own
Legislation (LAWS) by fraudulently passing legislation nullifying the State’s own
Legislation and Corporate Charters by passing the CGIA in conflict with the same, absent
uniformity.

60
The State, thereby creating a conflict of Colorado Law in that Legislation under the
Charters say that HOME RULE entities can be sued and impleaded in all courts. The
Supreme Court has ruled to the same effect. But then again, what is the law and what is
Legislation? Nobody answers those questions better than Frederic Bastiat himself, to wit:

“What, then, is law? It is the collective [VOLUNTARY] organization of the

individual right to lawful defense. Each of us has a natural right—from God—
to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic
requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely
dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties
[RIGHTS] but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an
extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend—even by
force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of
men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these
rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing,
its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that
protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any
other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an
individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of
another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot
lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or
groups.” (See: The Law, page 2, by Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850))

and…

“What, then, is legislation? It is an assumption by one man, or body of men,

of absolute, irresponsible dominion over all other men whom they call
subject to their power. It is the assumption by one man, or body of men, of a
right to subject all other men to their will and their service. It is the
assumption by one man, or body of men, of a right to abolish outright all the
natural rights, all the natural liberty of all other men; to make all other men
their slaves; to arbitrarily dictate to all other men what they may, and may
not, do; what they may, and may not, have; what they may, and may not, be.
It is, in short, the assumption of a right to banish the principle of human
rights, the principle of justice itself, from off the earth, and set up their own
personal will, pleasure, and interest in its place. All this, and nothing less, is
involved in the very idea that there can be any such thing as human [CIVIL]
legislation that is obligatory upon those upon whom it is imposed.” (See:
Natural Law, Chapter 1, Section IV, Lysander Spooner)

61
and…

The government claiming Sovereign Immunity is a further violation of Equal

Protection under the law. The Declaration of Independence asserts that all men are
created equal. An ancient maxim of law states: “What is imposed directly, is also
imposed indirectly.” Yet claimant was told he will appear, or else?

The State never filed anything in writing asking Claimant if he would lay down his
sovereignty, so that THE STATE can sue Claimant, under its right to Regulate
Commerce. But what is commerce? Apparently, this term or word needs to be defined,
because it is being wrongfully used as an authority to restrict the People of Colorado, in
their Natural and Perfect Right’s, the Right to Travel, et al; to wit:

“Commerce. The exchange of goods, productions, or property of any kind; the

buying, selling, and exchanging of articles. [Anderson v. Humble Oil and
Refining Co., 226 Ga. 252, 174 S.E.2d 415, 417]. The transportation of persons
and property by land, water and air. [Union Pacific R. Co. v. State Tax
Commissioner, 19 Utah 2d 236, 429 P.2d 983, 984].

Intercourse by way of trade and traffic between different peoples or states and the
citizens or inhabitants thereof, including not only the purchase, sale, and ex-
change of commodities, but also the instrumentalities and agencies by which it is
promoted and the means and appliances by which it is carried on, and
transportation of persons as well as of goods, both by land and sea. [Brennan v.
Titusville, 153 U.S. 289, 14 S.Ct. 829, 38 L.Ed. 719; Railroad Co. v. Fuller, 84
U.S. (17 Wall.) 568, 21 L.Ed. 710; Hoke v. United States, 227 U.S. 308, 33 S.Ct.
281, 57 L.Ed. 523]. Also interchange of ideas, sentiments, etc., as between man
and man.

The term "commerce" means trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or

communication among the several States, or between the District of Columbia or
any Territory of the United States and any State or other Territory, or between any
foreign country and any State, Territory, or the District of Columbia, or within the
District of Columbia or any Territory, or between points in the same State but
through any other State or any Territory or the District of Columbia or any foreign
country. National Labor Relations Act, § 2. ( Pg. 269)

62
Doesn’t that just clarify it? The meaning of a word is everything because it means what
it says and it says what it means. And that is all it means! But THE STATE has a
financial interest in false arrest, falsely charging/complaining, unlawful taxes, Funding
Cash Slush Funds, Victims Assistance Funds, Family Friendly Surcharges, etc., and
claiming in the name of the people, absent one single injured party, under the guise of an
administrative violation? When claimant was not engaged in, nor charged with, violation
of any commercial activity, transporting goods and/or passenger’s for hire.

Therefore claimant was not subject to the said traffic regulations and absent a corpus
delicti (the body of an injured Party), to wit:

“Corpus delicti Ikorp;}s d;}liktayI. The body of a crime. The body (material
substance) upon which a crime has been committed, e.g., the corpse of a
murdered man, the charred remains of a house burned down. In a derivative sense,
the objective proof or substantial fact that a crime has been committed. The
"corpus delicti" of a crime is the body, foundation or substance of the crime,
which ordinarily includes two elements: the act and the criminal agency of the act.
State v. Edwards, 49 Ohio St.2d 31, 358 N.E.2d 1051, 1055.

Corpus pro corpore Ikorp;}s prow korp;}riyI. In old records, body for body. A
phrase expressing the liability of manucaptors.” [Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed.
Pg. 344]

THE STATE has no right to violate Claimant’s Constitutional Rights, in the name of
administrative regulations, in violation of the Colorado Constitution forbidding any
TAXES, which the people did not specifically call for a vote on, and thereafter only,
passing the said TAX, officially into law.

Last time Claimant looked, there was no Public vote authorizing a Tax to be laid, under
the fraudulent guise of a Traffic Penalty with Five additional TAXES, which if one is
TAXED with TRAFFIC FINE, then EX POST FACTO, they are TAXED with SIX (6)
additional TAXES, to wit:

1) “Genetic Testing Surcharge (of who & for what??); or

63
 2) Victims Assistance Fund (Absent any victims?); or
3) Traumatic Brain Injury Tr (again, absent any injured property, no injured
bodies, and no brain injuries were caused by Claimant?); or
4) Court Security Cash Fund (is that like a Cash Pay Merit Award? Who gets
this cash?); or
5) Court Cost (its not a court, its an admin. Center and Frank is not a judge); or
6) Traffic Fine (under the State’s Authority to REGULATE COMMERCE?);
and my personal favorite, the:
7) Family Friendly Surcharge (What is that? Where does it go and who
receives it and how?”?

I would remind all, rather the Magistrate, the Town, Managers, the State; ET AL; For
clarification purposes, I offer proof, via Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., whom,
not only understood these laws and their principles, but also understood the true nature of
the Federal Reserve Act, to wit:

“This Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. … THE PEOPLE
MUST MAKE A DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE TO RELIEVE
THEMSELVES FROM THE MONETARY POWER.”

A man who truly believes, and lives accordingly, can offer proof that his
spiritual training and belief in his Supreme Being absolutely forbids his voluntary
participation in Babylon; making him a “Religious Objector” for he is commanded by
his Supreme Being to get out of Babylon and, therefore, has no choice in the matter;
that his spiritual training and belief forbids his voluntary participation in “Wager
Policies” which, by definition, are violative of God's law - being hurtful and
destructive to Society in general, to the man, and man's neighbors who is
commanded to “love as thyself,” with all his heart and soul. (See also: Pied Piper of
Babylon, by: Verl K. Speer)

We have problems when there are very few at the top, and a very large lower
class. A wise man summed it up some years ago. He said:

64
 “I feel more anxiety today than even in the midst of war. As a result of
the war, the corporations have now been enthroned, and an era of
corruption will follow in the high places. The moneyed powers will
endeavor to prolong their reign on the prejudice of man, until all wealth
is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed….”
(Abraham Lincoln) (See: 'The Trilateral Commission and Elite planning
for World Management' pg. 514)

and, therefore, We the People of the State of Colorado and of the United States of
America state as follows:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed.” (See: Declaration of Independence)

An extension of the above requirement is that all “persons” are equal and that the only
difference between human “persons” and artificial “persons” is the applicability of the
Bill of Rights to humans but not artificial “persons”. Here is an example of this equality
from federal statutes, keeping in mind that all GOVERNMENTS are also “persons”:
(See: TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > Sec. 1981. Sec. 1981. - Equal rights under the law ), to wit:

“(a) Statement of equal rights

All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same
right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be
parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and
proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white
citizens, shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses,
and exactions of every kind, and to no other.”

And…
“The fourteenth amendment prohibits a State from denying to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws; but this provision
does not, any more than the one which precedes it, and which we have just
considered, add anything *555 to the rights which one citizen has under the
Constitution against another. The equality of the rights of citizens is a
principle of republicanism. Every republican government is in duty bound to
protect all its citizens in the enjoyment of this principle, if within its power.

65
 That duty was originally assumed by the States; and it still remains there.
The only obligation resting upon the United States is to see that the States do
not deny the right. This the amendment guarantees, but no more. The power
of the national government is limited to the enforcement of this guaranty.”
[U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 1875 WL 17550 (U.S.,1875)]

Why is all of this relevant and important to the subject of government authority over
private persons? Because once you understand this concept of equality, you also
understand that the following case.

The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged the conclusions of this section when it
admitted that when governments enter what it calls “private business”, they take on the
same legal standing as any private person:

See also Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 U.S. 363, 369 (1943) ("`The
United States does business on business terms'") (quoting United States v.
National Exchange Bank of Baltimore, 270 U.S. 527, 534 (1926)); Perry v.
United States, supra at 352 (1935) ("When the United States, with constitutional
authority, makes contracts, it has rights and incurs responsibilities similar to
those of individuals who are parties to such instruments. There is no difference
. . . except that the United States cannot be sued without its consent") (citation
omitted); United States v. Bostwick, 94 U.S. 53, 66 (1877) ("The United States,
when they contract with their citizens, are controlled by the same laws that
govern the citizen in that behalf"); Cooke v. United States, 91 U.S. 389, 398
(1875) (explaining that when the United States "comes down from its position
of sovereignty, and enters the domain of commerce, it submits itself to the same
laws that govern individuals there").

While Claimant may be confused, it is due to no delusions or conditions of the mind of

Claimant’s own, so much as the downright continual conflicts in the Official Public
Records. Conflicts, which differ from the official(s) claims, such as to how Douglas
County is, or could be an un-incorporated County to name another?
How can this even be claimed publicly, when the Douglas County Seat(s) own Towns
“Budget Books”, clearly and absent revision, states over and over again, regardless as to
rather it was the 2012 “Budget Book”, at page 18, the 2013 Ed., 2014 Ed., 2015, 2016
and 2017 “Budget Book, at page 19, ET AL.; they all say the same thing about Douglas
County, to wit:

66
 “DATE OF INCORPORATION: 1861: The Colorado Territorial Session
Laws created Douglas County, named after Stephen A. Douglas”; and

“FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Statutory County, governed by a three panel

Board of County Commissioners”; and

“INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITIES: Aurora, Castle Pines, Castle Rock

(County Seat), Larkspur, Littleton, Lone Tree, and Parker”; and
incorporated

I could be confused, but usually when a county, town, city, or state says
INCORPORATED on this or that date, it is because they incorporated on that date…
Note it does not state the town was founded in 1861, but rather, states that the Town was
incorporated in 1861.

The Incorporated State of Colorado’s Capital City is operating under a perpetual

EMERGENCY Charter (i.e.) City of Denver - DUNN and BRADSTREET #: 066985480,
which only makes all this very confusing to me… Even more so than before… I’m like,
where in the Hell Am I? Not to mention the fact that an emergency suspends the
constitution and these same Charter’s declaring an emergency, purport their existence to
be perpetual???

That would mean the constitution(s) of the several states issuing these charters did so
knowing the state(s) Constitutional & State(s) Powers and Authorities of said State(s)
saw what they knew to be their end and knowing that end was immanent, issued these
charters from their death beds with desperate hope.

Not to mention the United States Government - DUNN and BRADSTREET #:

052714196; and

Now that we understand that the State, the County, the City, the Town, et al., are all a
Corporate Body Politic. We must bring up another fact, more especially once we

67
understand they are all corporations, and even those unincorporated counties, are still
corporate as a result of its parent company being corporate. Everything is corporate and
not land masses. That is to say, when they incorporate a city, they are incorporating
every citizen therein. They insure them also!

Now when loans and Bonds are made for the city, it is US, who are and who have been
incorporated; and who are pledged as the Human Resources, the Human Capital and
collateral on City Bonds, City Loans, etc., so if a citizen dies in that city, the city looses a
Human Resource (i.e.) City pledged collateral. Therefore, the City and Town purchase
Corporate Insurance Policies, or Dead Peasant Insurance Policies on US. To protect the
corporate integrity of course; don’t you know… oh and the people, to wit:

“Corporate-owned life insurance (abbreviated COLI) is life insurance

purchased by a business on the life of an employee. The business is the
beneficiary and the employee is the insured (subject of insurance). When the
employee dies, the business receives death benefits from the insurer. The
company may remain the beneficiary even after the insured employee has
left the firm. COLI may be written on one employee or a group of workers.”
(See: https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-dead-peasant-insurance-4161324 )

and…

“How would you feel if your employer wanted to insure your life — with the
company as sole beneficiary? What if this has already been done, without
your knowledge or consent?

Such practices are not only legal, they’re commonplace, despite attempts in
recent years to curb the more flagrant abuses of what’s formally known as
corporate-owned life insurance, or COLI, and informally as “dead peasant”
insurance.

“Typically, the range of emotions I almost always see when people learn
about this is disbelief to extreme anger,” says Mike Myers, an attorney with
the McClanahan Myers Espey law firm in Houston, who has tried 18 COLI
class-action lawsuits that resulted in settlements. “They usually don’t take
the attitude of, ‘What’s the harm?’”

and…

68
 “A ‘moral hazard’
It creates a moral hazard,” says J. Robert Hunter, director of insurance for
the Consumer Federation of America. “The employer might think, ‘Hmm,

I’m starting to lose money; maybe I should knock off a few insured
employees.’
“Obviously, Wal-Mart wouldn’t do that,” he adds. “But not everybody is
Wal-Mart.”

In 2011, police in Ohio arrested the owner of an oil-change business and

charged him with trying to hire a hit man to kill a former employee to collect
on a $250,000 COLI policy, according to The Columbus Dispatch.
While such cases are rare, it’s little wonder that the insurance earned the
pejorative “dead peasant” nickname.

Over the years, hundreds of companies are believed to have been named as
beneficiaries in the deaths of current or former employees. Myers’ firm lists
more than 200, including many familiar brand names.”
(See: https://www.bankrate.com/finance/insurance/dead-peasant-life-insurance.aspx )

Therefore, I think the reader can now understand the concern here. Hey, if you don’t
disclose these facts, nor explain the same to the people, nor disclose to the people that
they have been made, along with all their property, the “Pledged Collateral”, and even
the peoples current and future labor and/or potential labor output has been pledged, in the
form of “HUMAN CAPITAL” for their future output of “ENERGY” on and for the
State, County, City, and/or Town loans, bonds and the like, by and through the Federal
Reserve Banks. By all means, what’s to stop them from doing this? (i.e.) start a life
insurance policy on everyone who has been issued a License from that jurisdiction.

The common herd does not understand this and if you told them this to their face, they
would probably physically rake out your eyes at the least, before telling you “LIKE
HELL THEY ARE PLEDGED” as the sworn collateral for Any corporation”

These HOME RULE Corporations claim they have the authority to harass, threaten,
plunder, stalk, poison, and even murder the People under the guise that they are, or
Citizens have been deemed/declared, ET AL.; a Terrorist! So, let Claimant ask this, how

69
often are these attacks actually done on Governments and those officers, agents, clerks,
employees, contractors and other underlings???

The only reason that Claimant ask this, is because the percentages just don’t add up…
You see, all we see or hear about are individuals whom have been labeled a Terrorist,
along with any and all others associated with the same. This is because all the
individuals alleged to be a Terrorist, even if combined, don’t equal to the amount of
individuals liable in only one swoop of a Government(s) “State Sponsored Terrorism”,
who is committing Terrorist Act(s) on a national and even an international scale.

Can you even imagine the amount of individuals necessary to pull that off? Now
consider what has been stated regarding who are, and are not, considered Terrorist
according to the United Nations Security Council, General Assembly, along with the
former Commission on Human Rights Council and the newer Human Rights Council 7.

The point Claimant is getting at here, is that it’s criminal to intimidate the
population of a nation or state, for the destructive impact of terrorism on human rights
and security, which has been recognized, as previously mentioned above, at the highest
level of the United Nations as unlawful, notably, by the Security Council, the General
Assembly, the former Commission on Human Rights and the new Human Rights Council
7. Specifically, Member States have set out that terrorism:

“Threatens the dignity and security of human beings everywhere, endangers

or takes innocent lives, creates an environment that destroys the freedom
from fear of the people, jeopardizes fundamental freedoms, and aims at the
destruction of human rights;”

And…

“Has links with transnational organized crime, drug trafficking, money-

laundering and trafficking in arms, as well as illegal transfers of nuclear,
chemical and biological materials, and is linked to the consequent
commission of serious crimes such as murder, extortion, kidnapping, assault,
hostage-taking and robbery;”

70
 In the CIA - World Factbook holds the answers regarding the Transnational drug
trafficking and who is over its premier money laundering centers and where they are. But
first let’s look to the free internationally recognized encyclopedia which is known as
Wikipedia for other definitions pertaining to crimes committed against a nations own
people in criminal and unlawful acts of terrorism, to wit:

“State-sponsored terrorism is a term used to describe terrorism sponsored by

nation-states. As with terrorism, the precise definition, and the identification
of particular examples, are subjects of heated political dispute. In general
state-sponsored terrorism is associated with paramilitary. It is also
frequently used in conjunction with state terrorism, which is (an accusation
of) terrorism committed by governments.”
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism )

And…

“A death squad is an armed military, police, insurgent, or terrorist squad

that conducts extrajudicial killings, assassinations, and forced
disappearances of persons as part of a war, insurgency or terror campaign.
These killings are often conducted in ways meant to ensure the secrecy of the
killers' identities, so as to avoid accountability.
Death squads are often, but not exclusively, associated with the violent
political repression under dictatorships, totalitarian states and similar
regimes. They typically have the tacit or express support of the state, as a
whole or in part (see state terrorism). Death squads may comprise a secret
police force, paramilitary group or official government units with members
drawn from the military or the police. They may also be organized as
vigilante groups.” (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Squads )

And…

“An extrajudicial killing is the killing of a person by governmental

authorities without the sanction of any judicial proceeding or legal process.
Extrajudicial punishments are by their nature unlawful, since they bypass
the due process of the legal jurisdiction in which they occur. Extrajudicial
killings often target leading political, trade union, dissident, religious, and
social figures and may be carried out by the state government or other state
authorities like the armed forces and police.”
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing)

71
 WOW, I guess we now have a clearer understanding of the true nature of the
responsible parties, which apparently, are not middle-eastern people, but rather
ENGLAND!!! I believe the following quotation will further clarify this matter much
further for us all, to wit:

“It is patently impossible to discuss social engineering or the automation of a

society, i.e., the engineering of social automation systems (silent weapons) on
a national scale without implying extensive objectives of social control and
destruction of human life, i.e., slavery and genocide.

This manual is in itself an analog declaration of intent. Such a writing must

be secured from public scrutiny. Otherwise, it might be recognized as a
technically formal declaration of domestic war. Furthermore, whenever any
person or group of persons in a position of great power, and without the full
knowledge and consent of the public, uses such knowledge and methodology
for economic conquest – it must be understood that a state of domestic
warfare exist between said person or group of persons and the public.” (See:
Top Secret Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars Operations Research Technical
Manual 7905.1 at Pg. 6, under the title ‘Security’)

So, all the talk about Sovereign Immunity with regards to any of the HOME RULE
states, counties, cities, towns, and their corporate activities (i.e) corporations engaged in
business for profits, is either conspiracy, or just that, (i.e.) TALK! This includes, but is
not limited to the acts of their corporate officers, agents, and other underlings operating
under all sorts, kinds and types of names and titles,. Some of which include officer,
judge, bailiff, clerk, reporter and even president is simply mind boggling to imagine,
absent constructive fraud, fraud upon the court, and defrauding the public records, just to
name a few.

Now this is a Conflict of Law making everything that much more confusing for
everybody. The corporate Charter of the HOME RULE Town of Castle Rock states:

 “ARTICLE I - Name, Boundaries, Powers, and Form of Government

72
 SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF
SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

 Section 1-1. - Name, Boundaries.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

The municipal corporation now existing as the "Town of Castle Rock" shall
remain and continue to be a body politic and corporate under the same name and with
the same boundaries until lawfully changed.

 Section 1-2. - Powers of the Town.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

The Town shall have all the power of local self-government and home rule and all
power possible for the Town under the Constitution of the State of Colorado. The Town
shall also have all powers granted to municipalities by the laws of the State of
Colorado. The enumeration of specific powers in this Charter shall not be considered as
limiting or excluding any other power. All powers shall be exercised in the manner set
forth in this Charter or, if not provided for in this Charter, in such manner as shall be
provided ordinance or resolution.

 Section 1-3. - Form of Government.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

The Town shall operate under the Council-Manager form of government.

 Section 1-4. - Eminent Domain.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

The Town shall have all powers of eminent domain, within and without the limits
of the Town, for all municipal purposes whatsoever.

(Added by Ord. 97-37, 10-7-97 election)

73
 Section 1-5. - Constitutional Rights.

SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF

SECTIONSEMAIL SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS

Any restriction or limitation on the rights of citizens to keep and bear firearms
enacted by the Town Council shall require the approval of the registered electors as a
referred measure under Section 15-4 of this Charter. This Section shall not apply to
Town Council action which makes unlawful the discharge or brandishing of firearms.
This Section shall govern and control over Articles II and VII or any other conflicting
provision of this Charter, and shall apply only to Council action taken after its adoption.

(Added by Ord. No. 2014-16 , § 1, 6-17-2014)”

Claimant is even more so confused regarding how both, an un-incorporated County has
its courts & County Seat in an Incorporated Town or City, which is under the Home
Rule?

Moreover, how can any County be unincorporated, when its judicial arm is located within
an Incorporated County, City, Town, or for that matter, any State under the HOME
RULE? None hold sovereignty, in their Corporate bodies and operating in Municipal
capacities, as clearly stated above.

Yet this whole HOME RULE thing is something, which I was never taught in the
mandatory Constitutional government sanctioned public school curriculum. That is
because this HOME RULE Charter stuff was not taught along with our history. Nor were
these Incorporated Charter Cities/Towns, et al; taught in our mandatory classes on our
Constitutional government.

Again, this was not taught to the people in any public school pertaining to my generation.
That is why I am finding it necessary to define the things, which I speak of; and more
especially when I have had to personally contact Wikipedia recently and others for
methodically removing the things, which I have quoted from their own servers, systems
& websites, that are now removed?

74
The United States, The State of Colorado, it’s Capital City of Denver, under Emergency
Charters, much like most of the Corporately Chartered States have done with regards to
their Capital Cities, ET AL., to wit:

“… and Declaring an EMERGENCY…”

Then, the same said Emergency corporate City charter(s) go on to state that their
existence is perpetual…? (i.e.) a Perpetual/Permanent State of Emergency. Hhmm…?

In all the research I have done, in an attempt to grasp all this and in an attempt to
understand why these Corporate City Charters have the language above quoted/; and
Why they all seem to have began, for the most part, on or about the early 1900’s? (A
Long Range Plan of War, applicable to bankrupt cities,; ET AL., later granted Emergency
Corporate City Charters). I also found the following on Wikipedia, to wit:

“A state of emergency is a situation in which a government is empowered to

perform actions that it would normally not be permitted. A government can
declare such state during a disaster, civil unrest, or armed conflict. Such
declaration alerts citizens to change their normal behavior and orders
government agencies to implement emergency plans. Justitium is its
equivalent in Roman law—a concept in which the senate could put forward a
final decree (senatus consultum ultimum) that was not subject to dispute.”

And…

“States of emergency can also be used as a rationale or pretext for

suspending rights and freedoms guaranteed under a
country's constitution or basic law. The procedure for and legality of doing
so vary by country.”
(See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_emergency )

There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been
Administrators (See: FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v PE 261 US 428 1 Stat. 138-178);
and the Seat of Government was removed from Philadelphia to the District in 1800. As it
exist today, it constitutes but one county, called the county of Washington.

75
and…

There have not been any Article III Judicial Courts and there are no Article III Judicial
judges, with the only exception being the Judges of the Supreme Court. (See: Judicial
Code of 1911… the U.S. Congress passed the Judicial Code of 1911 and thereby made all
District and Circuit courts into entirely administrative Art. IV Territorial Courts, which
had jurisdiction only, over the federal zone. All the federal courts except the U.S.
Supreme Court changed character from being Article III Judicial Courts to
Administrative Article IV Territorial Courts only. All the district courts were renamed
from:
“District Court of the United States” to “United States District Court”.

Furthermore: The Supreme Court said in Balzac v. Puerto Rico, 258 U.S. 198 (1921) that:

“the “United States District Court” is an Article IV territorial court, not an

Article III constitutional court.”

Consequently, all the federal courts excepting the Supreme Court became administrative
Art. IV courts that were part of the Executive rather than the Judicial Branch of the
government and all the judges became Executive Branch employees, and could no longer
claim Art. III status, nor authority. See article “Authorities on Jurisdiction of Federal
Courts” for further details. (Also See: Judicial Code of 1911…)

Now that the definitions of Emergency, Marshal Law, War Powers, etc., the only
definition necessary now, to evidence without question, that our nation has been in a state
of War and furthermore, evidences that our Lands are now and have been under a foreign
military occupation. The evidence of this fact that America is Occupied, by an
Occupying Belligerent and War Criminal, is found in the definition of PRIZE COURT,
and other related legal definitions, to wit:

PRIZE COURT. That branch of admiralty which adjudicates upon cases of

maritime captures made in time of war. (See: ADMIRALTY and Dougl. 613.
Also See: JUDICATURE ACTS AND BOUVIER’S LAW DICT. 1857 Pg.
2724)

76
and…

“In the United States, the admiralty courts discharge the duties both of the
prize and an instance court (q.v.) The District Courts are prize courts; (See:
Glass v. The Betsey, 3 Dall. (U.S.) 6, 1 L. Ed. 485. And are given much
jurisdiction by the Judicial Code, March 3, 1911, with a direct appeal to the
Supreme Court.”

And…

“A prize court of the captor cannot sit in neutral territory, though it may in
conquered territory, and in that of a co-belligerent”; (See: 2 Halleck, int. L.,
Baker’s ed. 401)

and…

“Enemy. Adversary; e.g. military adversary.

Enemy alien. An alien residing or traveling in a coun- try which is at war with
the country of which he is a national. Enemy aliens may be interned or restricted.

Enemy belligerent. Citizens who associate themselves with the military arm of
an enemy government and enter the United States bent on hostile acts. [Ex parte
Quirin, App.D.C., 317 U.S. 1, 63 S.Ct. 2, 15, 87 L.Ed. 3].

Enemy's property. In international law, and particularly in the usage of prize

courts, this term designates any property which is engaged or used in illegal
intercourse with the public enemy, whether belonging to an ally or a citizen, as
the illegal traffic stamps it with the hostile character and attaches to it all the penal
consequences.

Public enemy. A nation at war with the United States; also every citizen or
subject of such nation. Term however does not generally include robbers, thieves,
private depredators, or riotous mobs. The term has acquired, in the vocabulary of
journalism and civic indignation, a more extended meaning, denoting a
particu-larly notorious offender against the criminal laws, especially one who
seems more or less immune from successful prosecution, or a social, health or
economic condition or problem affecting the public at large, which is diffi-cult to
abate or control. [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 528]

and…

“Plunder, v. To pillage or loot. To take property from persons or places by open

force, and this may be in course of a war, or by unlawful hostility, as in the case
of pirates or robbers. The term is also used to express the idea of taking property
from a person or place, without just right, but not expressing the nature or quality

77
 of the wrong done.

Plunder, n. Personal property belonging to an enemy, captured and appropriated

on land; booty. Also the act of seizing such property. See Booty; Prize.

Plunderage. In maritime law, the embezzlement of goods on board of a ship is so

called. [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 1154]

and…

“A vessel or cargo, belonging to one of two belligerent powers, apprehended

or forcibly captured at sea by a war-vessel or privateer of the other
belligerent, and claimed as enemy's property, and therefore liable to
appropriation and condemnation under the laws of war. The apprehension
and detention at sea of a ship or other vessel, by authority of a belligerent
power, either with the design of appropriating it, with the goods and effects it
contains, or with that of becoming master of the whole or a part of its cargo.

Prize courts. Courts having jurisdiction to adjudicate upon captures made at

sea in time of war, and to condemn the captured property as prize if lawfully
subject to that sentence. In England, the admiralty courts have jurisdiction
as prize courts, distinct from the jurisdiction on the instance side. A special
commission issues in time of war to the judge of the admiralty court, to
enable him to hold such court. In the United States, the federal district courts
have jurisdiction in cases of prize. 28 V.S.C.A. § 1333.

Prize goods. Goods which are taken on the high seas, jure belli, out of the
hands of the enemy.

Prize law. The system of laws and rules applicable to the capture of prize at
sea; its condemnation, rights of the captors, distribution of the proceeds, etc.

Prize money. A dividend from the proceeds of a cap- tured vessel, etc., paid
to the captors. V. S. v. Steever, 113 V.S. 747, 5 S.Ct. 765, 28 L.Ed. 1133.
[Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 1200]

And…

“Belligerency Ib;)lij;)r;)nsiy/. In international law, the status of de facto

statehood attributed to a body of insurgents, by which their hostilities are
legalized. The international status assumed by a state (i.e. nation) which
wages war against another state. Quality of being belligerent; status of a
belligerent; act or state of waging war; warfare.

Belligerent Ib;)lij;)r;)ntl. In international law, as an adjective, it means

engaged in lawful war. As a noun, it designates either of two nations which

78
 are actually in a state of war with each other, as well as their allies actively
co-operating, as distinguished from a nation which takes no part in the war
and maintains a strict indifference as between the contending parties, called
a "neutral." As a personality trait, refers to one who is overly assertive,
hostile or combative.

Belligerents. A body of insurgents who by reason of their temporary

organized government are regarded as conducting lawful hostilities. Also,
militia, corps of volunteers, and others, who although not part of the regular
army of the state, are regarded as lawful com- batants provided they observe
the laws of war. See also Belligerency; Belligerent.

Bellum Ibel;)m/. Lat. In public law, war. An armed contest between nations;
the state of those who forcibly contend with each other. Jus belli, the law of
war. [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 155.]

And…

“Booty. Property captured from the enemy in war, on land.

[Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 187]

and…

“A piratis aut latronibus capti liberi permanent /ey preyts ot ltrownbs

kreptay libray p:}rmnnt/. Persons taken by pirates or robbers remain free.

A piratis et latronibus capta dominum non mutant /ey preyts et ltrownbs

krept dminiym non myu.wtrentl. Capture by pirates and robbers does not
change title. No right to booty vests in piratical captors; no right can be derived
from them by recaptors to the prejudice of the original owners. [Black’s Law
Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 95]

And…

“Angary, right of. In international law, formerly the right (jus angarire)
claimed by a belligerent to seize merchant vessels in the harbors of the
belligerent and to compel them, on payment of freight, to transport troops
and supplies to a designated port.

The right of a belligerent to appropriate, either for use, or for destruction in

case of necessity, neutral property temporarily located in his own territory or
in that of the other belligerent. The property may be of any description
whatever, provided the appropriation of it be for military or naval
purposes.” [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 87]

79
And…

“Aniens, or anient. Null, void, of no force or effect. See Anniented. [Black’s

Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 87.]

And…

“Anti manifesto. A term used in international law to denote a proclamation

or manifesto published by one of two belligerent powers, alleging reasons
why the war is defensive on its part. [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 93.]

And…

“Belief. A conviction of the truth of a proposition, existing subjectively in the

mind, and induced by argument, persuasion, or proof addressed to the
judgment. Latrobe v. J. H. Cross Co., D.C.Pa., 29 F.2d 210, 212. A conclusion
arrived at from external sources after weighing probability. Conviction of
the mind, arising not from actual perception or knowledge, but by way of
inference, or from evidence received or information derived from others.

Knowledge is an assurance of a fact or proposition founded on perception by

the senses, or intuition; while "belief' is an assurance gained by evidence, and
from other persons. "Suspicion" is weaker than "belief," since suspicion
requires no real foundation for its existence, while "belief' is necessarily
based on at least assumed facts. Cook v. Singer Sewing Mach. Co., 138
Cal.App. 418, 32 P.2d 430, 431.

Belief-action distinction. The distinction noted in analysis of cases under

First Amendment, U.S. Constitution-freedom of speech and religion-to the
effect that one is guaranteed the right to any belief he chooses, but when that
belief is translated into action, the state also has rights under its police power
to protect others from such actions. Reynolds v. U. S . , 98 U . S . 145, 164.
Also see: [Black’s Law Dict. 6th Ed. Pg. 155.]

And…

It is necessary for American’s to clearly understand, by what Lawfully delegated Civil

Authority, or whose appointment/assignment Authority; (Rather the same be a Military
Occupying Belligerent of a foreign alien enemy (THE BANK & THE FUND), or
otherwise); and Claimant further states that everything today is a result of a “National
PSYOPS Plan. That is to say, as a result of a Psychological Warfare (PSYOP) Plan, and
ALL AREA PSYOP COMMANDERS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE

80
NATIONAL PSYOPS PLAN that American’s are being sifted like wheat THROUGH
today. [FM33-1; et al.] (See: https://www.psywar.org/psywar/reproductions/FM_33_1_1968.pdf )

This and other related documents show a far more sinister inter-dependent operation
which evidences what has happened over and over and over in Claimant’s cases, on the
record, regarding the plunder, extortion, sabotage, economic warfare, electronic warfare
and the theft, losses, damages, injuries, both loss and destruction of private property,
systems, systems of records, resources, have been poisoned, evidence destroyed,
witnesses attacked and heinous lies and seditions, un-registered foreign alien
associations, organizations and Corporations run wild like viruses in our systems which
are both; real and tangible.

Under all kinds of Declaration(s) of Emergency, States of Emergency, National

Emergency, Economic Emergency, International Economic Emergency, Marshal Law, or
otherwise; as stated in the above descriptions,: “for suspending rights and freedoms
guaranteed under a country's constitution or basic law. “; and “could put forward a
final decree (senatus consultum ultimum) that was not subject to dispute.”

Our Countrymen must know… BY WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY and HOW
are such said Judges & Magistrates swearing Oaths and Affirmations to uphold the
Constitution(s) which have been Dissolved and/or Suspended, set aside, or otherwise,
pursuant to declared states of Emergency, or national emergency, to wit:

The National Emergencies Act (Pub.L. 94–412, 90 Stat. 1255, enacted

September 14, 1976, codified at 50 U.S.C. § 1601-1651) is a United States federal
law passed to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize the
power of Congress to provide certain checks and balances on the emergency
powers of the President.

Codified they say, at 50 USC? Pardon me, but isn’t that the portion of the United States
Code which applies to the Government and matters of WAR? It appears that 27 of the 53
United States Codes have never been enacted into positive (statutory) law, including, but
not limited to 50 U.S.C., which as seen above, they claim to be CODIFIED???

81
The Emergency is well documented in Senate Report 93-549; and admits in full to
what is being said here. (See: https://archive.org/stream/senate-report-93-549/senate-report-93-549_djvu.txt)

Only failing to touch upon the subjects of Corporate Charter(s) and Declaring an
Emergency, of a perpetual magnitude.

Which is to say, an Emergency, which has coincidently, made Mr. Langford and his
MUNICODE Corporation, the Superior codifier regarding over 3,500 municipalities, in
50 states??? So with all due respect, I am requesting Mr. Langford’s authority to act as
such, and by what authority, or originating source from whom & where did that authority
originate, or training came from? What roll does the French Military play in your
training? Are they (the French Armed Forces) not the entity whom trained Mr. Langford
on the whole HOME RULE Municipal workings?

But when I looked up the Government Records and Authorities for the United States
Codes, it shows that 50 U.S.C. has not been Ratified into positive (statutory) law, (i.e.)
and therefore it is not Applicable to the General Public At Large. This is because Titles
under the United States Code that have not been enacted into positive law are only prima
facie evidence of the law (Illusion & Magical Appearances). In that case, the Statutes at
Large still govern.? To wit:

“UNITED STATES CODE

The United States Code is the codification by subject matter of the general and
permanent laws of the United States. It is divided by broad subjects into 53 titles
and published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of
Representatives. The U.S. Code was first published in 1926. The next main
edition was published in 1934, and subsequent main editions have been published
every six years since 1934. In between editions, annual cumulative supplements
are published in order to present the most current information.

FDsys contains virtual main editions of the U.S. Code. The information contained
in the U.S. Code on FDsys has been provided to GPO by the Office of the Law
Revision Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives. While every effort has
been made to ensure that the U.S. Code on FDsys is accurate, those using it for
legal research should verify their results against the printed version of the U.S.
Code available through the Government Publishing Office.

82
 Of the 53 titles, the following titles have been enacted into positive (statutory)
law: 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 23, 28, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,
44, 46, 49, 51, and 54. When a title of the Code was enacted into positive law, the
text of the title became legal evidence of the law. Titles that have not been
enacted into positive law are only prima facie evidence of the law. In that case,
the Statutes at Large still govern. Note: Title 52 is an editorially-created title, and
Title 53 is currently reserved. For the current list of titles,
see http://uscode.house.gov.”

(See: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionUScode.action?collectionCode=USCODE )

The U.S. Code does not include regulations issued by executive branch agencies,
decisions of the Federal courts, treaties, or laws enacted by State or local governments.
Regulations issued by executive branch agencies are available in the Code of Federal
Regulations. Proposed and recently adopted regulations may be found in the Federal
Register. About the United States Code.

Also NOTE that Title 2 U.S.C. which is applicable to the authority of the Congress, has
nothing more than prima fascia law as well??? Wherefore the Statutes At Large
Govern??? Hmm??? Because the Statutes At Large, absent the USC, give NONE of these
authorities.

So, again, where is the authority of Congress, which is legally sanctioned with Sovereign
Powers and Authorities of Government and where have they been and what of their
intentions regarding the War upon anybody in the U.S., under the Trading with the
Enemy Act as revised in 1933? Not the unlawful, illegal, bankrupt corporate body
(artificial) politic… beholden to foreign powers and from its inception has been a Joint-
stock corporation. See the specifics from the Houston Municipal History documents and
digital links to same as provided herein.

It could hardly be argued that there could be a just war on its citizens, since the only
purpose of the government is for the benefit of its citizens, therefore, if the government declared
war on its people, it would fail to perform the function for which it was created, an absurdity
under the law of agency, for an agent can never lawfully go against the will of the principal, and

83
the people would never have to go to war against their own government. If it failed to meet its
internal and external obligations, they would merely expatriate, as a government without any
citizens is a nullity.

In light of the evidence that the several states United have been placed into the hands of
foreign private corporations, engaged in business “FOR PROFIT”, such as the MUNICIPAL
CODE CORPORATION who has been Codifying the history of the worlds largest Bankruptcy
reorganization in the history of the World. They are incapable of meeting their internal and
external obligations on a daily basis. On March 17, 1993, in Congressional Record-House, at Pg.
5321, Mr. Traficant stated:

“Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11. Members of Congress are official
trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any bankrupt entity in world
history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully a blue print for our
future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our
demise...

...But let me give one word of caution here today. America already has race wars,
let us be honest about it. We already have gender wars, let us be honest about it.
We already have age wars, let us be honest about it. One thing this Congress had
better not get involved in and get trapped into is a class war on money. In America
if you can not earn all that you can, there is something wrong and there is no more a
spirit of free enterprise.

I want to say this to the members. We may talk about taxing the rich, but the rich
people have already taken their companies and their jobs out of America. Be
careful that the rich people do not take their money out of America, because the
Government already raises our kids, feeds our kids, houses our kids, and the
government is doing a very poor job of it. I think mom and dad would be better
utilized there once again...” [Underlined emphases are mine]

The peril evidence presented is already on the record. The records clearly show that the
daily functions have been turned over to a private foreign, alien, corporation. The funds they are
collecting do not go for the welfare of the government of the United States or the several States
united; as stated above, they are dysfunctional.

The funds, therefore, are used to support diverse interests around the world, little of
which has to do with the interests of the people of the United States and the several States united.
I hope we are worthy of the task that lies before us, but it is my belief that with the help of God,

84
that His principles, and His righteousness will prevail in spite of the handicap that we have
become, and the obstruction that we have caused.

Now, while on the subject of 50 U.S.C. and Emergency War Powers, which if applicable
to the civilian population, would render civilian courts sitting as Military Court’s under
Marshal Law, to wit:

“mar·tial law
ˈˌmärSHəl ˈlô
noun
military government involving the suspension of ordinary law.”

and…

“Martial law
Martial law is the imposition of direct military control of normal civilian
functions of government, especially in response to a temporary emergency such as
invasion or major disaster, or in an occupied territory. Martial law can be used by
governments to enforce their rule over the public. Wikipedia

And…

“Martial law Imarsh;}1 16l. Exists when military authorities carry on

government or exercise various degrees of control over civilians or civilian
authorities in domestic territory. [Ochikubo v. Bonesteel, D.C.Cal., 60 F.Supp. 9
16, 928, 929, 930]. Such may exist either in time of war or when civil authority
has ceased to function or has become ineffective. A system of law, obtaining
only in time of actual war and growing out of the exigencies thereof, arbitrary in
its character, and depending only on the will of the commander of an army, which
is established and administered in a place or district of hostile territory held in
belligerent possession, or, some- times, in places occupied or pervaded by
insurgents or mobs, and which suspends all existing civil laws, as well as the civil
authority and the ordinary administration of justice. See also Military
government; Military law. ( pg. 974)

And…
“Definition of martial law.

85
 1: the law applied in occupied territory by the military authority of the occupying
power. 2: the law administered by military forces that is invoked by a government
in an emergency when the civilian law enforcement agencies are unable to
maintain public order and safety. (See: “Martial Law | Definition of Martial Law by
Merriam-Webster- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martial%20law)

Further understanding with regards to this time frame regarding Martial Law, etc.,; and
when it all really began starting and why it was in the latter 1800’s. Nobody in America
had ever really heard of Martial Law.

The reason why is because When the Southern states walked out of Congress on March
27, 1861, the quorum to conduct business under the Constitution was lost. The only votes
that Congress could lawfully take, under Parliamentary Law, were those to set the time to
reconvene, take a vote to get a quorum, and vote to adjourn and set a date, time, and place
to reconvene at a later time, but instead, Congress abandoned the House and Senate
without setting a date to reconvene. Under the parliamentary law of Congress, when this
happened, Congress became sine die (pronounced see-na dee-a; literally "without day")
and thus when Congress adjourned sine die, it ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative
body, and the only lawful, constitutional power that could declare war was no longer
lawful, or in session.

The Southern states, by virtue of their secession from the Union, also ceased to exist sine
die, and some state legislatures in the Northern bloc also adjourned sine die, and thus, all
the states, which were parties to creating the Constitution ceased to exist. President
Lincoln executed the first executive order written by any President on April 15, 1861,
Executive Order 1, and the nation has been ruled by the President under executive order
ever since.

When Congress eventually did reconvene, it was reconvened under the military authority
of the Commander-in-Chief and not by Rules of Order for Parliamentary bodies or by
Constitutional Law; placing the American people under martial rule ever since that

86
national emergency declared by President Lincoln. The Constitution for the United States
of America temporarily ceased to be the law of the land, and the President, Congress, and
the Courts unlawfully presumed that they were free to remake the nation in their own
image, whereas, lawfully, no constitutional provisions were in place which afforded
power to any of the actions which were taken which presumed to place the nation under
the new form of control.

President Lincoln knew that he had no authority to issue any executive order, and thus he
commissioned Executive Order 1, (April 24, 1863) as a special field code to govern his
actions under martial law and which justified the seizure of power, which extended the
laws of the District of Columbia, and which fictionally implemented the provisions of
Article I, Section 8, Clauses 17-18 of the Constitution beyond the boundaries of
Washington, D.C. and into the several states. General Orders No. 100, also called the
Lieber Instructions and the Lieber Code, extended The Laws of War and International
Law onto American soil, and the United States government became the presumed
conqueror of the people and the land.

Martial rule was kept secret and has never ended, the nation has been ruled under
Military Law by the Commander of Chief of that military; the President, under his
assumed executive powers and according to his executive orders. Constitutional law
under the original Constitution is enforced only as a matter of keeping the public peace
under the provisions of General Orders No. 100 under martial rule. Under Martial Law,
title is a mere fiction, since all property belongs to the military except for that property
which the Commander-in-Chief may, in his benevolence, exempt from taxation and
seizure and upon which he allows the enemy to reside.

Therefore, President Lincoln knew very well that the Nation was facing grave matters, as
Lincoln stated, “a crises” and Lincoln knew all to well who was behind this crises when
he stated:

87
 “The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire
against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a
monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy.
They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light
upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of
me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest
foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places
will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign
by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in
the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. (See: Abraham
Lincoln (more by this author) 1809-1865 (Age at death: 56 approx.)

President Lincoln was assassinated before he could complete plans for reestablishing
constitutional government in the Southern States and end the martial rule by executive
order, and the 14th Article in Amendment to the Constitution created a new citizenship
status for the new expanded jurisdiction. New laws for the District of Columbia were
established and passed by Congress in 1871, supplanting those established Feb. 27, 1801
and May 3, 1802. The District of Columbia was re-incorporated in 1872, and all states in
the Union were reformed as Franchisees of the Federal Corporation so that a new Union
of the United States could be created.

The key to when the states became Federal Franchisees is related to the date when such
states enacted the Field Code in law. The Field Code was a codification of the common
law that was adopted first by New York and then by California in 1872, and shortly
afterwards the Lieber Code was used to bring the United States into the 1874 Brussels
Conference and into the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I,
Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917) was passed and which defined, regulated and
punished trading with enemies, who were then required by that act to be licensed by the
government to do business. The National Banking System Act (Public Law 73-1, 73rd
Congress, Session I, Chapter 1, March 9, 1933), Executive Proclamation 2038 (March 6,
1933), Executive Proclamation 2039 (March 9, 1933), and Executive Orders 6073, 6102,
6111 and 6260 prove that in 1933, the United States Government formed under the
executive privilege of the original martial rule went bankrupt, and a new state of national

88
emergency was declared under which United States citizens were named as the enemy to
the government and the banking system as per the provisions of the Trading with the
Enemy Act.

Further admissions of such wars are found in the Official Public Record as a result of Ex-
Congressman James Traficant’s Statement in the Congressional Record, March 17, 1993,
Vol. 33, Page H-1303, which states:

“...But let me give one word of caution here today.

America already has race wars, let us be honest about it.
We already have gender wars, let us be honest about it.
We already have age wars, let us be honest about it...”
(See: https://www.pdfnano.com/ex/96w4wnw0ve_ex_congressman_james_traficant_39_s_statement_in_the_congressional_record_march_17_1993_vol_33_page_h_1303 )

The legal system provided for in the Constitution was formally changed in 1938 through
the Supreme Court decision in the case of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 US 64, 82
L.Ed. 1188. On April 25, 1938, the Supreme Court overturned the standing precedents
of the prior 150 years concerning "COMMON LAW" in the federal government, when
stating:

“THERE IS NO FEDERAL COMMON LAW, AND CONGRESS HAS NO

POWER TO DECLARE SUBSTANTIVE RULES OF COMMON LAW
applicable IN A STATE, WHETHER they be LOCAL or GENERAL in their
nature, be they COMMERCIAL LAW or a part of LAW OF TORTS.” (See:
ERIE RAILROAD CO. vs. THOMPKINS, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L. Ed. 1188)

The Common Law is the fountain source of Substantive and Remedial Rights, if not our
very Liberties. (See also: Who is Running America?)

In 1945 the United States gave up any remaining national sovereignty when it signed the
United Nations Treaty, making all American citizens subject to United Nations
jurisdiction. The “constitution” of the United Nations may be compared to that of the
old Soviet Union.

89
BUT MAKE NO MISTAKES ABOUT IT, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
NATIONS IS THE OLD SOVIET UNION. Those Past U.S. Presidents Such as George
Herbert Walker Bush's Statements long ago about how: "They have long awaited a New
World Order and how... now they can see all their (U.N. P5 Members) work coming into
Effect... along with their Real Prospect of a New World Order, etc.,...

So, Now let us reflect on who has long been in command of the U.N. New World Order
Forces, say, from 1946, after WWII, to the present days of which George Herbert Walker
Bush made those statements in 1990 & 1991. The words of George Herbert Walker Bush
as he said on January 17, 1991:

“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future
generations a new world order, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the
jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful, and we will be,
we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible
United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of
the United Nation’s founder.”

-or- When he (George Herbert Walker Bush) said on September 11, 1990:

“The crisis in the Persian Gulf offers a rare opportunity to move toward an
historic period of cooperation. Out of these trouble times…. a new world order
can emerge in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south,
can prosper and live in harmony…. Today the new world is struggling to be
born.”?

The major author of the United Nations Charter was a communist named Alger
Hiss. According to the Stage III Plans of the Department of State Publication 7277 on
Disarmament. It further states that the UN peace Keeping Forces shall be commanded, at
all times, by a Russian.

90
In considering the United States under jurisdiction of this “higher authority”, understand
that the following people have served the UN as Military Staff Leader to the UN Dept. of
Political and Security Council Affairs:

1946-1949: Arkady Sobolev (USSR)

1949-1953: Konstaintin Zinchenko (USSR)
1953-1954: Dragoslav Protitch (Yugoslavia)
1954-1957: Ilya Tchernychev (USSR)
1958-1960: Anatoly Dobrynin (USSR)
1960-1962: Georgy Arkadev (USSR)
1963-1965: V.P. Suslov (USSR)
1965-1968: Alexei E. Nesterenko (USSR)
1968-1973: Leonid N. Kutakov (USSR)
1973-1978: Arkady N. Shevchenko (USSR)
1978-1981: Mikhail D. Sytenko (USSR)
1981-1986: Viacheslav A. Ustinov (USSR)
1987-1990: Vasilly S. Safronchuk (USSR)

So, No not TRUMP, the RUSSIAN collusion started with the prior President’s. Not to
mention the George Herbert Walker Bush's private business dealings with CUBA all
those years...

ALL OF WHICH THE (1990-91) EDITION OF THE CIA WORLD FACTBOOK

STATES THAT USSR/RUSSIA WAS THE "BENNIFACTOR" OF CUBA?!?!?!
HMMM??? SO WHO AGAIN WAS BUSH REALLY DEALING WITH, UNDER
GUISE OF COMMUNIST CUBA??? COMMUNIST RUSSIA, THAT'S WHO!

Somebody in the U.S.A., please tell me, who has really been doing business, along with
disclosure of classified information with and to Russia, via Communist Cuba, whose
entire business dealings were for their "BENEFACTOR" (COMMUNIST
USSR/RUSSIA)... Just look up Humble Oil, the Barbara 1, Barbara 2 and Barbara 3
planes of George Herbert Walker during his business ventures off the coast of Cuba.

Furthermore, I wonder if they were properly registered as a card carrying communist, or

communist sympathizers/ businessmen / agents / representatives, et al; along with their
foreign agents registration & statements to do business with these foreign powers and

91
foreign agents / principles and their "BENEFACTORS" OF THE COMMUNIST
PARTY???!!! Pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938.

It is my understanding that you, your company (The Municipal Code Corporation-

MUNICODE), or others representing the same, are the REGISTERED AGENT(S) for
these State sanctioned Emergency Corporate Chartered States, Counties, Cities, Towns;
et al., which are operating under a “permanent state of emergency,” under the HOME
RULE, as municipalities which is shown above and elsewhere herein. (See:
https://library.municode.com); along with the military training in France, prior to starting
the Municipal Code Corporation, as once mentioned on the MUNICODE website, only
further attest to what is being said here.

The Emergency Legislation and the Reorganizational Bankruptcy status has been
ongoing and continuing from the 1930’s to the present. The record is long, ongoing and
continuing, as evidenced in the long list of Reorganization Plans (See:
http://uscode.house.gov/tables/usctable6.htm and https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/pagedetails.action?collectionCode=USCODE&searchPath=Title+5%2FTitle+5%2F-1408&granuleId=USCODE-2011-

title5-app-reorganiz-other&packageId=USCODE-2011-title5&oldPath=Title+5%2FTitle+5%2F1408%2F-1409&fromPageDetails=true&collapse=true&ycord=1022 ), to wit:

“…”

It is for this reason and others that I am contacting you and respectfully requesting the
general liability policy information, errors & omissions, negligence, including other
Policy numbers and policy contact information, which includes, but is not limited to the
request for any Bond policy information pertaining to:

1) Mr. Frank Anthony Moschetti; and

2) the “First Appearance Court of Douglas County Colorado; and
3) the Douglas County Seat and HOME RULE Township of Castle Rock; and
4) the HOME RULE State of Colorado; and
5) Colorado State District Judge in the 18th Judicial District, who has authorized
the continual fraudulent alterations of our Judiciary, by and through County

92
 Chief Judge’s Assignments to the said Frank Anthony Moschetti and the First
Appearance Court.

It is worthy of note with regards to the real and true incorporated, or non-incorporated
status of the County of Douglas (See: https://dola.colorado.gov/dlg_portal/filings.jsf?id=18003 ),
as there appears to be a conflict of law, to wit:

“ Local Government Filings

Local Government: Castle Rock, Town of (18003)
Type: Home Rule Municipalities
Associated Counties: Douglas

Summary
Budget
Finance
Elections
Maps & Boundaries
Organizational
Contacts
Other Filings
CTF
Mailing Address 100 North Wilcox Street
(1):
Mailing Address
(2):
City/State/Zip: Castle Rock, CO 80104
Date Formed: 01/01/1881

It is important to recognize here that pursuant to the official State of Colorado Website, it
states that the Date of the Douglas County Formation was 01/01/1881

However, when one goes to the official Douglas County Webpage, you will find the
Douglas County Budget Books (See: https://www.douglas.co.us/documents/2012-budget-book.pdf), which
states on page 18 of the 2012 Edition, as follows:

“Date of Incorporation: 1861: The Colorado Territorial Session Laws

created Douglas County, named after Stephen A. Douglas”

93
Therefore, the County of Douglas was formed on 01/01/1881, yet was Incorporated on or
about 1861 (i.e.) approximately 20 years prior to the date of formation??? Isn’t that
putting the cart before the horse?

This tells me that there was and/or is two (2) different Douglas Counties! I don’t believe
in coincidences, so how can these official documents (i.e.) State and County records be in
conflict? The 2017 Budget shows a color-coded map of the incorporated areas of
Douglas County. (See: https://www.douglas.co.us/documents/2017-budget-book-final.pdf )

NOTE: The said Douglas County Municipal Styled “First Appearance Court” which
hears traffic violations, etc., is physically located in HOME RULE JURISDICTION of
Castle Rock, Colorado. The same State of Colorado functions on a daily bases, as a
Corporation engaged in corporate commerce for Profit. All to the damage, injury, loss,
destruction and economic devastation of the people.

However, when one looks up the Douglas County Seat, which is in Castle Rock, it states
that the Castle Rock Municipal Court, is located at 100 Perry St. It further states: The
Castle Rock Municipal Court has jurisdiction over violations of Town ordinances. This
court handles traffic, parking, animal and misdemeanor & criminal offenses that have
occurred within the Castle Rock Town limits. Open 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, at the Municipal Court, 100 Perry St.

So please provide me with the information regarding how the Douglas County First
Appearance Court has jurisdiction to hear traffic cases at 4000 Justice Way, in lieu of 100
Perry Street at the Castle Rock Municipal Court? It appears that the State of Colorado
has conflicting duplicated, County, City, Town, etc., causing a conflict of authority and a
conflict of Jurisdiction and a Conflict of Law.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in Mackin v. U.S. (117 U.S. 384, et

al,) that:

94
 “Any crime for which a person may be incarcerated is an infamous crime.”

The Fifth Amendment provides for indictment in all infamous crimes.

It is important to take note of the fact that:

“Fines imposed or imprisonment in the county jail constitutes “infamous

crimes,” (see: Early v. Winn, 109 N.W. 633, 640; 129 Wis. 291., Maxey v. U.S.,
207 F 327, 331, and Lee v. Stanfill, 186 S.W. 1196, 1198.)

and…

I also think that the statement made in Cohen v. Virginia, 6 Wheat 264, 5 L Ed. 257

(1821) is worthy of note:

“We [Courts] have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which
is given, than to usurp that which is not given. THE ONE OR THE OTHER
WOULD BE TREASON TO THE CONSTITUTION.” Also see: (U.S. v. Will,
449 US 200, 66 L. Ed. 392, at page 406.)

The laws of this land have long ago been established with regards to a Nation entering the
domain of commerce, to wit:

“If the nation comes down from its position of sovereignty and enters the
domain of commerce, it submits itself to the same laws that govern
individuals therein. It assumes the position of an ordinary citizen and it
cannot recede from the fulfillment of its obligations” (See: U.S. v.
Commercial Co., 74 Fed. 145, following Cooke v. U.S., 91 U.S. 398, 23 L. Ed.
237)

In Closing, please provide me with the above requested Policy information on the above
mentioned parties, along with any other and further documents, forms, or the like to file
official municipal complaint(s) and Removal Remedies regarding these matters.

Kind Regards,

/s/James Hardin

95
 FURTHER NOTICE WITH
HISTORICAL, FACTUAL BACKGROUND
WITH DECLARATION:

96
This research has been compiled and organized from on or About September 19, 2018,
the date of the offenses complained of herein, until the on or about the date of
presentment, or mailing/emailing/faxing. The research presented herein, as remarkable
as it may be, has not been the most difficult part of this work.

The most difficult part of it all, has been figuring out the ways and means for a carpenter
to accomplish this task. That is to say the task of presenting this research in such a way as
to offend not those whom the Claimant truly wishes to reach out to, with the
understanding that we are all in this mess together. As a parent loves their child, so does
claimant love his Country, along with his brothers and his sisters thereof.

Therefore, Claimant wills that those reading this presentment, will do so with the
understanding and state of mind, moreover with the clear understanding, that the
messenger is your brother and is not to be confused with the enemy. Claimant, seeing the
immanent dangers and a destruction, which have been long coming; and which cannot be
diverted, stopped, prevented, nor delayed and so with great travail, is crying out from the
wilderness, in an attempt to save his people.

Claimant is sounding the Trumpet in the land; and with a corresponding duty to his
people (countrymen) is sounding the alarms of WAR! See the Federal and States
Constitutions and Corporate Charters, to wit:
Set contains:
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. I United States-Alabama-District of Columbia
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. II Florida-Kansas
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. III Kentucky-Massachusetts
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. IV Michigan-New Hampshire
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. V New Jersey-Philippine Islands
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. VI Porto Rico-Vermont
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. VII Virginia-Wyoming-Index

DECLARATION
of
Cause and Necessity
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people

97
 to devolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to
assume among them the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to
which the laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the
opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel
them to the separation.-

We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-
That to secure these rights, Governments are Instituted among Men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,-

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these

ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new
Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in
such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.-
(DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE - JULY 4, 1776)

To prove this, 'Facts Have Been Submitted to a candid world,'

Complainant wishes to add to this RECORD, to show that it has long been a plan of
foreign Sovereigns to overthrow American Sovereignty. It is all too arrogantly admitted
in the secret treaty of Verona of November 22, 1822 (See:
http://www.rvbeypublications.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/treatyveronajesuits.pdf ), showing
what this ancient conflict is between the rule of the few and the rule of the many.

I wish to call the attention of the Senate to this treaty because it is the threat of this treaty,
which was the basis of the Monroe doctrine. It throws a powerful white light upon the
conflict between monarchial government and government by the people. The Holy
Alliance under the influence of Metternich, the Premier of Austria, in 1822, issued this
remarkable secret document which can be found in the “American Diplomatic Code,
1778 - 1884, vol. 2 ; Elliott, p. 179.”

SECRET TREATY OF VERONA

The undersigned, specially authorized to make some additions to the treaty

of the Holy Alliance, after having exchanged their respective credentials, have
agreed as follows :

98
 ARTICLE 1. The high contracting powers being convinced that the
system of representative government is equally as incompatible with the
monarchial principles as the maxim of the sovereignty of the people with the
high divine right, engage mutually in the most solemn manner, to use all
their efforts to put an end to the system of representative governments, in
whatever country it may exist in Europe, and to prevent its being introduced
in those countries where it is not yet known.

ART. 2. As it can not be doubted that the liberty of the press is the
most powerful means used by the pretended supporters of the rights of
nations to the detriment of those princes, the high contracting parties
promise reciprocally to adopt all proper measures to suppress it, not only in
their own states but also in the rest of Europe.

ART. 3. Convinced that the principles of religion contribute most

powerfully to keep nations in the state of passive obedience which they owe
to their princes, the high contracting parties declare it to be their intention
to sustain in their respective States those measures which the clergy may
adopt, with the aim of ameliorating their own interests, so intimately
connected with the preservation of the authority of the princes ; and the
contracting powers join in offering their thanks to the Pope for what he has
already done for them, and solicit his constant cooperation in their views of
submitting the nations.

ART. 4. The situation of Spain and Portugal unite unhappily all the
circumstances to which this treaty has particular reference. The high
contracting parties, in confiding to France the care of putting an end to
them, engaged to assist her in the manner which may the least compromit
them with their own people and the people of France by means of a subsidy
on the part of the two empires of 20,000,000 of francs every year from the
date of the signature of this treaty to the end of the war.

ART. 5. In order to establish in the Peninsula the order of things

which existed before the revolution of Cadiz, and to insure the entire
execution of the articles of the present treaty, the high contracting parties
give to each other the reciprocal assurance that as long as their views are
not fulfilled, rejecting all other ideas of utility or other measure to be taken,
they will address themselves with the shortest possible delay to all the
authorities existing in their States and to all their agents in foreign countries,
with the view to establish connections tending toward the accomplishment of
the objects proposed by this treaty.

ART. 6. This treaty shall be renewed with such changes as new

circumstances may give occasion for, either at a new congress or at the court
of one of the contracting parties, as soon as the war with Spain shall be
terminated.

99
 ART. 7. The present treaty shall be ratified and the ratifications
exchanged at Paris within the space of six months.

Made at Verona the 22d November, 1822.

For Austria : ------------------------------------------------ METTERNICH.

For France : ------------------------------------------------ CHATEAUBRIAND.

For Prussia : ------------------------------------------------- BERNSTET.

For Russia : ------------------------------------------------ NESSELRODE.

I ask to have printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD this secret treaty, because I
think it ought to be called now to the attention of the people of the United States and of
the world. This evidence of the conflict between the rule of the few verses popular
government should be emphasized on the minds of the people of the United States, that
the conflict now waging throughout the world may be more clearly understood, for after
all said the great pending war springs from the weakness and frailty of government by the
few, where human error is far more probable than the error of the many where aggressive
war is only permitted upon the authorizing vote of those whose lives are jeopardized in
the trenches of modern war.

Mr. SHAFROTH. Mr. President, I should like to have the senator state whether
in that treaty there was not a coalition formed between the powerful countries of Europe
to reestablish the sovereignty of Spain in the Republics of South and Central America?

Mr. OWEN. I was just going to comment upon that, and I am going to take but
a few moments to do so because I realize the pressure of other matters. This Holy
Alliance, having put a Bourbon prince upon the throne of France by force, then used
France to suppress the constitution of Spain immediately afterwards, and by this very
treaty gave her a subsidy of 20,000,000 francs annually to enable her to wage war upon
the people of Spain and to prevent their exercise of any measure of the right of self-
government. The Holy Alliance immediately did the same thing in Italy, by sending
Austrian troops to Italy, where the people there attempted to exercise a like measure
of liberal constitutional self-government; and it was not until the printing press, which
the Holy Alliance so stoutly opposed, taught the people of Europe the value of liberty that
finally one country after another seized a greater and greater right of self government,
until now it may be fairly said that nearly all the nations of Europe have a very large
measure of self government.

100
However, I wish to call the attention of the Senate and the country to this important
history in the growth of constitutional popular self-government. The Holy Alliance
made its powers felt by the wholesale drastic suppression of the press in Europe, by
universal censorship, by killing free speech and all ideas of popular rights, and by
the complete suppression of popular government.

The Holy Alliance having destroyed popular government in Spain and in Italy, had well-
laid plans also to destroy popular government in the American colonies which had
revolted from Spain and Portugal in Central and South America under the influence of
the successful example of the United States.

It was because of this conspiracy against the American Republics by the European
monarchies that the great English statesman, Canning, called the attention of our
government to it, and our statesmen then, including Thomas Jefferson, took an active part
to bring about the declaration by President Monroe in his next annual message to the
Congress of the United States that the United States should regard it as an act of hostility
to the government of the United States and an unfriendly act if this coalition or if any
power of Europe ever undertook to establish upon the American Continent any control of
any American Republic or to acquire any territorial rights. This is the so-called Monroe
doctrine.

The threat under the secret treaty of Verona to suppress popular governments in the
American Republics is the basis of the Monroe doctrine. This secret treaty sets forth
clearly the conflict between monarchial government and popular government and the
government of the few as against the government of the many.

It is a part, in reality, of developing popular sovereignty when we demand for women

equal rights to life, to liberty, to the possession of property, to an equal voice in the
making of the laws and the administration of the laws. This demand on the part of the
women is made by men, and it ought to be made by men as well as by thinking,
progressive women, as it will promote human liberty and human happiness. I
sympathize with it, and I hope that all parties will in the national conventions give their
approval to this larger measure of liberty to the better half of the human race.

Official Records of the Union Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion

And…

Now, in considering what has been said here and the parties to the “HOLY
ALLIANCE”, in November of 1822, their plans to carry out the stated goals of the
HOLY ALLIANCE in Europe, is put into action by the same said “HIGH
CONTRACTING PARTIES” pursuant to the Model Corporations Act from the

101
Municipal Program Adopted by the National Municipal league in 1899. Which
coincidentally mentions most of the same parties from Europe as the 1822 Secret Treaty
of Verona.

The 1899 Municipal Program had targeted Cities in mind, which also shows the
conspiracy to overthrow the United States and the Several States of the Union, via
Corporate City Charters and the like, created by authority of the State(s) Constitution(s).
The Corporate City Charter(s) claiming City Charter(s) authority takes precedence over
and above their creator(s), (i.e.) the several State Constitution(s). By the early 1900’s the
targeted cities corporate City Charter(s) began showing up, as documented in the Chicago
Charter Convention for the purposes of providing a “Model” for legislation and pushed.
(See: https://ia800203.us.archive.org/34/items/digestcitychart01illgoog/digestcitychart01illgoog.pdf )

It is also important to note that the States granted these Corporate Municipal Charters and
Corporate Banking Charters, which is seen in the below link to the picture of Andrew
Jackson slaying a several headed beast and the heads of that Beast, are all marked by the
name of one of the several State(s).
(See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_War#/media/File:General_Jackson_Slaying_the_Many_Headed_Monster_(cropped).jpg)

However, I don’t agree with that and our peoples laws were never meant to be interpreted
like that from the prospective of the people; and in the Constitution for the United States
of America (1787) and as ratified (1789), to wit:

“ARTICLE VI, CLAUSE 2. The Constitution, and the Laws of the

United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties
made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall
be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be
bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the
Contrary notwithstanding.”

102
The internationally targeted cities of the Municipal Plan are listed under the Preface on
page VII, and includes cities in France, England, the United States, ET AL;, to wit:

Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, New Orleans, New

York, Philadelphia, Saint Louis, San Francisco, Glasgow, London,
Manchester, Toronto, Berlin, Paris, and Vienna. In addition, provisions
regarding Buffalo, Galveston, Grand Rapids, Houston, Las Angeles and
Portland have occasionally been inserted where they present interesting
variations from the types represented by the other cities.

Complainant was born in Houston Texas on February 20, 1972; and Complainant
requested the City of Houston provide him with the Cities Registered Agent information
pertaining to the Cities Corporate Charter, along with the Cities Municipal Charter. The
reply came by way of the City Attorney’s Office and stated as follows:

“Municipal Code Corporation (MUNICODE) in Tallahassee, Florida”

The Houston Texas Municipal Charter is very, very methodical and prior to its
Emergency Chartered Incorporation, the City hired a City Representative to conduct a six
(6) month study of the oldest and most successful Municipalities world-wide. They did
this prior to creating their own Corporate City Charter for Houston, which was bankrupt
under the Cities founders (i.e.) the Allen Brothers after only one year. (See:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b22668;view=1up;seq=13 ) Then when the Houston Charter was
completed for Houston, and declaring an emergency in its beginning and then in the last
paragraph under Section 16 PEACE AND GOOD ORDER, it states:

“To regulate and control the sale, gift, barter, or exchange of cocaine, opium,
morphine, and the salts thereof.”

Well now, did I just provide the answer to what President Trump just stated regarding the
illicit cocaine into the country has been primarily an issue at the SOUTH BORDER?
Yea, because it is a TRANSNATIONAL ILLICIT DRUG CARTEL, which is
CONTROLLED BY, and HEADQUARTERED IN the HOME RULE Governmental

103
Jurisdiction known as the Corporate Chartered City of Houston, VIA EMERGENCY
CHARTERED CITY LEGISLATION as authorized by the Corporate State of Texas.

There is much more historical knowledge on the Charter(s) via the International
Municipal Congress. There is more factual history on municipal Governments than one
could have ever hoped to find in todays times under that title. Everybody should read
this document to gain a proper understanding of the municipal undertaking in the United
States of America. (See: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hx4qq9;view=1up;seq=17 )

When one truly considers all the many reasons for the sudden Municipal push throughout
the Several States the list of considerations grows very long, however, one reason which
seems to continually make the short list around the same time period, is found in the
Secret Treaty of Verona, but one piece, which I believe to be a nexus connection via the
same parties participating therein. This connection is found in Art. 7, to wit:

“ART. 7. The present treaty shall be ratified and the ratifications exchanged
at Paris within the space of six months.
Made at Verona the 22d November, 1822.

So, this secret treaty (of HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES) had to be ratified and
exchanged in Paris France. Again tying to France and when the France Armed Forces
trained the MUNICODE Registered Agent of these Charter Counties, Cities, Townships,
et al.; and the Municipal Code Corporation (as Supreme Codifier of Home Rule
Chartered Counties, Cities, Towns, et al), as previously stated above.

TODAYS EVIDENCE OF THE HOLY WAR ON AMERICA

Further evidence of the parties true intent and their long established and deep rooted ties
back to British Intelligence in London, England. Accomplished by and through the
military organization known as the “BRITISH-ISRAEL MOVEMENT”.

This organization’s true plans and intents are the same today, as they have been for over
200 years now! That is to say, to overthrow the constitutional government in America,
bringing both America; and the People thereof, back under British Sovereignty.

104
This and sooooo-much-more is outright confessed and admitted to, along with their
admissions to their planned ways and means to bring America back under British
Sovereignty. (See: https://www.scribd.com/document/365794464/British-Israel-Movement-A-Congressional-Investigation )

Now one may think that there is no way this could be true. However, contrary to popular
belief, it is so true that its scary. However, is there any further evidence of this plan to
overthrow the Sovereignty of the United States of America by any other entity, one must
first understand that the British – Israel Movement is but further evidence with regards to
a British “HOLY WAR” being waged upon the United States of America and the people
thereof. This HOLY WAR currently being waged upon the American people, was also
told to our people during the time of our Nations birth and infancy, (i.e.) 1781.

Allow me to take us back over 230 years, when our founding father George
Washington (Son of the Republic) was told of this coming battle or “HOLY WAR”!
Recalling the comments of Cornwallis upon his surrendering to George Washington was
in reference to the “battle”, not the “war”. See the Article of Capitulation signed by
Cornwallis at Yorktown. Jonathon Williams recorded in his book, ‘Legions of Satan,’
(1781), that Cornwallis revealed to Washington during his surrender that:

“a holy war will now begin on America, and when it i s ended

America will be supposedly the citadel of freedom, but her
millions will unknowingly be loyal subjects to the Crown.”… “ in
less than two hundred years the whole nation will be working for
divine world government. That government that they believe to
be divine will be the British Empire.”

One may ask: But how are they doing this and who are those utilized to attack and wage
WAR on the American People. And where are the documents evidencing that the people
are actually targeted as the enemy, or that a state of WAR even exist today, much less,
against the People? Maybe even asking: and where is the evidence of this Occupying
Belligerent and what government does this belligerent represent?

105
Claimant will provide all those answers herein. Let us first touch upon the evidence of
the War extending to the people themselves here in America, which is still operative
today. This can be found under the “Trading With The Enemy Act” of October 16,
1917 and March 9, 1933.


Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 & 1933

(NOTICE: You Have Been Declared the Enemy!)

The first Act was dated October 6, 1917, under the Trading with the Enemy Act, Section
2, subdivision (c), Chapter 106 - Enemy defined:

“other than citizens of the United States...”

However, on March 9, 1933, Chapter 106, Section 5, subdivision (b) of the Trading with
the Enemy Act of Oct.6 1917 (40 Stat. L. 411) was amended as follows:

“...any person within the United States..” (Also See: H.R. 1491 Public No.1)

Sir, we are at war, as evidenced herein or as shown in the Exhibits attached

hereto, rather we would have it or not, our enemies have breached our borders, breached
our walls and are now at our inner-gates. They have already seized control of the
American Nation and the several states thereof. They have been and in fact, they are
now, mobilizing our own defenses against us, at least those of us who may attempt to
oppose them. They are so advanced and well trained in the art of war, that they have
deceived US (We, The People), into financing the “Quiet War” being waged against us,
in lieu of them financing their own military campaign. Knowing that any “Bankrupt”
entity is no longer that as it was before, they have created our current “Financial Crisis”
through particular and well defined design!

106
 This includes attacks on the Nation, State(s) and US, (We, The People). But the
attacks do not come in the light of day as a respectable and honorable man would, but
rather like cowards, they come in the night while we sleep, using not the conclusions
made of their own minds, but rather, from the evil wicked spirit forces of the machine
nations, i.e. “Top Secret - Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars Operations
Research Technical Manual 7905.1 ”. For those behind these programs, one
must look to the Congressional Records, to wit:

“(See: Attached Exhibit “2”) consisting of 28 pages from the 1940

Congressional Record. THE 76th CONGRESS, THIRD SESSION – Steps
Toward British Union, a World State, and International Strife- Part I –
IX (1940)”

This in and of itself, are Banned Criminal Acts of “Ethnic Cleansing,” and
“Racial Discrimination!”

There have long been well recognized prohibitions against “Ethnic Cleansing,”
on the National and International Levels, to wit:

“Ethnic cleansing as a crime under international law

There is no formal legal definition of ethnic cleansing.
However, ethnic cleansing in the broad sense - the forcible
deportation of a population - is defined as a crime against
humanity under the statutes of both International Criminal Court
(ICC) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia (ICTY). The gross human-rights violations integral to
stricter definitions of ethnic cleansing are treated as separate
crimes falling under the definitions for genocide or crimes against
humanity of the statutes.

The UN Commission of Experts (established pursuant to

Security Council Resolution 780) held that the practices
associated with ethnic cleansing "constitute crimes against
humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes.
Furthermore ... such acts could also fall within the meaning of the
Genocide Convention." The UN General Assembly condemned
"ethnic cleansing" and racial hatred in a 1992 resolution.

107
 There are however situations, such as the expulsion of
Germans after World War II, where ethnic cleansing has taken
place without legal redress (see Preussische Treuhand v. Poland ).
Timothy V. Waters argues that if similar circumstances arise in
the future, this precedent would allow the ethnic cleansing of
other populations under international law.”

The purpose of ethnic cleansing is to remove competitors.

The party implementing this policy sees a risk (or a useful
scapegoat) in a particular ethnic group, and uses propaganda
about that group to stir up FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in
the general population. The targeted ethnic group is marginalized
and demonized. It can also be conveniently blamed for the
economic, moral and political woes of that region.”
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing )

Therefore, it is criminal to intimidate the population of a nation or state, for the

destructive impact of terrorism on human rights and security has been recognized at the
highest levels of the United Nations as unlawful, notably, by the Security Council, the
General Assembly, the former Commission on Human Rights and the new Human Rights
Council 7. Specifically, Member States have set out that terrorism:

“Threatens the dignity and security of human beings everywhere,

endangers or takes innocent lives, creates an environment that
destroys the freedom from fear of the people, jeopardizes
fundamental freedoms, and aims at the destruction of human
rights;”

And…

“Has links with transnational organized crime, drug trafficking,

money-laundering and trafficking in arms, as well as illegal
transfers of nuclear, chemical and biological materials, and is
linked to the consequent commission of serious crimes such as
murder, extortion, kidnapping, assault, hostage -taking and
robbery;”

There are many Foreign and Domestic Corporations, Organizations and

Associations under many different names, faces and mask. But suffice it to say, those
mentioned in the 76th CONGRESS, THIRD SESSION – Steps Toward British Union,
a World State, and International Strife- Part I – IX (1940)” are by far the primary

108
parties of interest, via interlocking directorates, etc, are recognizable by their fruits! They
are now running the world’s show through their International Arena and are on the record
bragging about the same. Remember we shall know them by their “Fruits!” Worst of all,
they (The Foreign Alien Enemies) of our several states, collectively known as America,
have deceived US, (We, The People) into financing (via taxation) their “HOLY WAR”
against us (We, The People).

These Foreign Alien Enemies of our people have infiltrated our Government
(both local state and federal) at the highest levels, our Schools, our Colleges/Universities,
our Churches/Religious Institutions, our Banks, our Treasuries, our Armed Forces, our
largest Corporations and the like.

It is stated best by Vattel, to wit:

“If he (the sovereign) puts justice and duty first, if he aspires to

the lofty and immortal honor of being the father of his people, let
him distrust the selfish suggestions of the minister who represents
to him as rebels all citizens who do not hold out their hands to the
chains of slavery and who refuse to bow without a murmur under
the rod of a despotic rule.”(See: Vattel, Book III, § 290)

And…

“The surest method of appeasing se ditions, and at the same time

the most just one, is to satisfy the grievances of the people! If
they have revolted without cause, which perhaps is never the case,
…” (See: Vattel, Book III § 291)

The true parties responsible for the “holy war” upon America, are known as the
“Pilgrims”. The attached 28 page Congressional Investigation done by the “76th
CONGRESS, THIRD SESSION – Steps Toward British Union, a World State, and
International Strife-Part I – IX (1940)” clearly describes their intent to overthrow the
Sovereignty of the united States of America, further bragging that their “plans will not
be stopped by any U.S. President, Congressman or otherwise”! They are furthering,
promoting and financing the “holy war” upon America!

109
 Wherefore, it is criminal to intimidate the population of a nation or state, for the
destructive impact of terrorism on human rights and security has been recognized at the
highest level of the United Nations as unlawful, notably, by the Security Council, the
General Assembly, the former Commission on Human Rights and the new Human Rights
Council 7. Specifically, Member States have set out that terrorism:

“Threatens the dignity and security of human beings everywhere,

endangers or takes innocent lives, creates a n environment that
destroys the freedom from fear of the people, jeopardizes
fundamental freedoms, and aims at the destruction of human
rights;”

And…

“Has links with transnational organized crime, drug trafficking,

money-laundering and trafficking in arms, as well as illegal
transfers of nuclear, chemical and biological materials, and is
linked to the consequent commission of serious crimes such as
murder, extortion, kidnapping, assault, hostage -taking and
robbery;”

The CIA - The World Factbook holds the answers regarding the Transnational
drug trafficking and who is over its premier money laundering centers and where they
are. But first let’s look to the free internationally recognized encyclopedia which is
known as Wikipedia for other definitions pertaining to crimes committed against a
nations own people in criminal and unlawful acts of terrorism, to wit:

“State-sponsored terrorism is a term used to describe terrorism

sponsored by nation-states. As with terrorism, the precise
definition, and the identification of particular examples, are
subjects of heated political dispute. In general state -sponsored
terrorism is associated with paramilitary. It is also frequently
used in conjunction with state terrorism, which is (an accusation
of) terrorism committed by governments.”
(See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State -sponsored_terrorism )

110
And…

“A death squad is an armed military, police, insurgent, or

terrorist squad that conducts extrajudicial killings,
assassinations, and forced disappearances of persons as part of a
war, insurgency or terror campaign. These killings are often
conducted in ways meant to ensure the secrecy of the killers'
identities, so as to avoid accountability.
Death squads are often, but not exclusively, associated with the
violent political repression under dictatorships, totalitarian states
and similar regimes. They typically have the tacit or express
support of the state, as a whole or in part (see state terrorism).
Death squads may comprise a secret police force, paramilitary
group or official government units with members drawn from the
military or the police. They may also be organized as vigilante
groups.”
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_Squads )

And…

“An extrajudicial killing is the killing of a person by governmental

authorities without the sanction of any judicial proceeding or
legal process. Extrajudicial punishments are by their nature
unlawful, since they bypass the due process of the legal
jurisdiction in which they occur. Extrajudi cial killings often
target leading political, trade union, dissident, religious, and
social figures and may be carried out by the state government or
other state authorities like the armed forces and police.”
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing )

WOW, I guess we now have a clearer understanding of the true nature of the
responsible parties, which are not middle eastern people, but rather ENGLAND!!! I
believe the following quotation will further clarify this matter much further for us all, to
wit:

“It is patently impossible to discuss social engineering or

the automation of a society, i.e., the engineering of social
automation systems (silent weapons) on a national scale without
implying extensive objectives of social control and destruction of
human life, i.e., slavery and genocide.

111
 This manual is in itself an analog declaration of in tent.
Such a writing must be secured from public scrutiny. Otherwise,
it might be recognized as a technically formal declaration of
domestic war. Furthermore, whenever any person or group of
persons in a position of great power, and without the full
knowledge and consent of the public, uses such knowledge and
methodology for economic conquest – it must be understood that a
state of domestic warfare exist between said person or group of
persons and the public.”
(See: attached EXHIBIT: Top Secret Silent We apons for Quiet
Wars Operations Research Technical Manual 7905.1 at Pg. 6
under the title ‘Security’)

The United States Code at 18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy, states as
follows:

“If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to
destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against
them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent,
hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to
seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the
authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than twenty years, or both.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat.
623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat.
2148.)

The attached Congressional Investigation, ET AL;, is summary judgment evidence of the

parties and their many corporations in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2384 to the extent that
the facts and the parties, including their summery judgment guilt is undeniably admitted.

These expatriated aliens, under pretext and pretense of UNITED STATES

(marshal, treasury, attorney, etc.), were then given weapons/arms and ordered to take,
seize, steal, and trespass upon the property and rights to property of the Citizens of the
several Republican States of the Union, constituting an act of invasion, war, insurrection

112
and rebellion by Foreign Powers and their Agents/Subjects. (See: Constitution for the
United States of America (1787), Article III, Section 3, Article IV, Section 4)

A further objective of the International Organizations was to disarm the Militia

(See: Constitution for the United States of America (1787), Amendment II, 10 U.S.C.A.
31), the free born Natural Citizens of the several Republican States of the Union (See: A
New World Order, pgs. 11-12), a viable deterrent to a furtherance of their fraudulent,
arbitrary international activities, armed pacific settlements, and covinous, seditious
agreements and associations.

These aliens were further authorized by Congress to enter into our State police,
under pretense of the “Police Corp And Law Enforcement Training And Education Act”,
Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control And Safe Streets Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C.A. 3711, et
seq). Section 2405 of the amended Act subtitled “Selection of Participants” declared:

“(A) IN GENERAL – Participants in State Police Corps programs shall be

selected on a competitive basis by each State under regulations prescribed by
the Director.

(a) Selection Criteria And Qualifications. – (1) In order to participate in a

State Police Corps program, a participant must –

(A) be a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for

permanent residence in the United States.” (See: Exhibit N-9, Congressional
Record – House, October 22, 1991, pg. H8154)

The alien, inter-agency INTERPOL operations can and do obtain information on

Citizens and their families even though no specific criminal incident has occurred, and
use numerous documents to access and obtain information, including but not limited to,
social security numbers, passports, drivers licenses, vehicle registration, finger prints,
medical and dental records, bank accounts, and numerous other inter-agency records,
indexes and files (See: Exhibit N-10, GAO Briefing Report, Role of Interpol and the U.S.
National Central Bureau, GAO/GGD-87-93BR, pgs. 2, 3, 17, 18), and claims exclusion
and immunity from Freedom of Information Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974, 5

113
U.S.C.A. § 552, and numerous other domestic Laws. (See: Executive Order No. 12425,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 5.4)

The Internal Revenue Service, being represented members of INTERPOL, also uses
telephone numbers through the “Automated Collection System (ACS)” to access files.
(See: GAO Report to the Joint Committee on Taxation, U.S. Congress, “Tax
Administration”, Extent and Causes of Erroneous Levies, December 1990, GAO/GGD-
91-9, pg. 1) The inter-agency, international Law merchants and their factors had
obtained access to all facets of anyone’s private life, affairs and their property, whether
corporeal or incorporeal in their nature. Those of alien character and certain expatriates
had declared themselves above the Law of Nations or of any particular Nation/State.

The Principal/Sovereign, “WE THE PEOPLE” formed, ordained and established

the several Republican States and Union and empowered our Public Office for the
primary, express purposes and reservations set forth in the “Preamble”, (See: U.S. vs.
Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 588, pg. 590, Colorado Anti-Discrimination Commission vs. Case,
380 P.2d 34) and as clearly stated by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Papers No. 84:

“It has been several times truly remarked that the bills of rights are in their
origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgments of
prerogative in favor of their privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered
to the prince. Such was Magna Carta, obtained by the barons, sword in
hand, from King John. Such were the subsequent confirmations of that
charter by subsequent princes. Such was the Petition of Right assented to by
Charles the First in the beginning of his reign. Such, also, was the
Declaration of Right presented by the Lords of Commons to the Prince of
Orange in 1688, and afterwards thrown into the form of an act of Parliament
called the Bill of Rights. It is evident, therefore, that, according to their
primitive significance, they have no application to constitutions, professedly
founded upon the power of the people and executed by their immediate to
their primitive signification, they have no application to constitutions,
professedly founded upon the power of the people and executed by their
immediate representatives and servants. Here, in strictness, the people
surrender nothing; and as they retain everything they have no need of
particular reservations. “WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, to secure
the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish
this constitution for the United States of America.” Here is a better
recognition of popular rights than volumes of aphorisms which make the

114
 principle figure in several of our States bills of rights and which would sound
much better in a treaties of ethics than in a constitution of government.”

One cannot disparage, impair, abrogate, or diminish the Liberties, Rights,

Privileges or Immunities of another, without necessarily diminishing their own and that
of their Posterity. Wholly ignoring the prime directive, the contrived “Emergency”
usurpations and abridgments are of the same general character and reaction. “In the
general course of human nature, a power over a man’s substance amounts to a power over
his will.” (See: Federalist Papers No. 79) The adverse affects and intent reached far
beyond the misrepresented exigency.

“…the full meaning of that word “emergency” related to far more than
banks: it covered the whole economic and therefore whole social structure of
the country. It was an emergency that went to the roots of our agriculture,
our commerce, and our industry; it was an emergency that existed for a
whole generation in its underlying causes and for three and one-half years in
its viable effects. It could be cured only by a complete reorganization and a
measure of control of the economic structure. It could not be cured in a
week, in a month, or a year. It called for a long series of new laws, new
measures affecting different subjects; but all of them component parts of a
fairly broad plan. Most of all it called for readiness and understanding on
the part of the people. We could never go back to the old order.” (See: A
Brief History Of The Emergency Powers In The United States, A working
paper prepared for the Special Committee on National Emergencies and
Delegated Emergency Powers, U.S. Senate, 93rd Congress, 2nd Session, July
1974, pg. 56, citing F.D. Roosevelt)

The de facto “state” willfully ignored the express prohibitions on numerous

occasions and counts. The Department of Treasury, under purported direction and
authority of the office of governor have in fact lent and pledged the faith and credit of the
State and assumed responsibility for the debts, liabilities and obligations of others, and
further, have invested in such operations as the International Bank For Reconstruction
And Development. The de facto “state” did and does now have a financial interest in
the fraudulent and deceptive practices and the de facto inter-agency, international
operations, not to mention that the de facto agents are remunerated for their illicit acts by
non-redeemable, non-current warrants (Bills of Credit) drawn on the fiscal and depository

115
agent of “The Fund” and “The Bank”, and use the public Offices to fraudulently force
their illicit law merchant obligations and substitutions off on others.

Having violated the fundamental Law of the Land and the de jure State and
Forum, and breaching numerous duties imposed upon our public Offices by law, those
holding, enjoying and wrongfully exercising our Public Offices of Honor, Trust and
Profit determined that it was in their de facto providence to further violate the
fundamental Constitution For the State of Colorado, Article III, Section 30, and deposit
and pay all fees, etc. into their Foreign Organizations “fiscal and depository agency.” 22
U.S.C.A. 286d, (See also, Exhibit C–5 , Public Law 95-147, 91 Stat. 1227)

“There is no position which depends on clearer principle than that every act
of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under
which it is exercised is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the
Constitution, can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy
is greater than his principal; that the servant is above the master; that the
representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men
acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not
authorize, but what they forbid.” (See: Federalist Papers No. 78, Alexander
Hamilton)

The government by becoming a corporator, (See: 22 U.S.C.A. 286e) lays down its
sovereignty and takes on that of a private citizen. It can exercise no power which is not
derived from the corporate charter. (See: The Bank of the United States vs. Planters
Bank of Georgia, 6 L.Ed. (9 Wheat 244), F.H.A. vs. Burr, 309 U.S. 242) The real
character of the party in interest is not the de jure “United States of America” or “State”,
but rather, “The Bank” and “The Fund.” (See: 22 U.S.C.A. 286, et seq.) The exercise of
delegated Power to regulate commerce (See: Constitution for the United States of
America, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) and the act of engaging in commerce are two
different acts, and those dealing with “The Bank” and “The Fund” act “under and
according to its charter.” (See: Osborn vs. The Bank of the United States, 6 L.Ed. (9
Wheat) 204, pg. 220, 22 U.S.C.A. 286q)

116
 The continual commission and enforcement of such acts are committed under
false and fraudulent pretenses and impersonations (See: 18 U.S.C.A. 219, 18 U.S.C.A.
912, 18 U.S.C.A. 951), colors (See: 18 U.S.C.A. 241), fraud (See: 18 U.S.C.A. 1001),
liens, assessment, dispossession, alienation, seizures (See: 18 U.S.C.A. 645, 18 U.S.C.A.
654), force, threat of force and expropriation (See: 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2384, 2385), and
many times are done under “Letters of Marque and Reprisal”, i.e. “recapture.” (See: 31
U.S.C.A. 5323) Such principles as “Fraud and Justice never dwell together” (See:
Wingate’s Maxims 680), and “A right of action cannot arise out of fraud” (See: Broom’s
Maxims 297, Cowper’s Reports 343, 5 Scott’s New Reports 558, 10 Mass. 276, 38 Fed.
800), are too high of a thought concept, as is “Due Process”, “Just Compensation”, and
“Justice” itself. Honor is earned by honesty and integrity, not under false and fraudulent
pretenses, nor will the color of the cloth one wears, nor fine spun illicit prevarications,
cover-up, and conceal the usurpations, lies, frauds, trickery and deceit. When Black is
fraudulently declared to be White, not all will live in darkness. (Isaiah 5:20-23) As
observed by Will Rogers, “there are men running governments who shouldn’t be allowed
to play with matches”, and is as applicable today as Jesus’ statements about Lawyers.
(See: Bible, Luke 11:42, Luke 11:52)

The contrived “emergency” has created numerous abuses and usurpations, and
abridgments of delegated Powers and Authority. As stated in Senate Report No. 93-549:

“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared
national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidentially
proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national
emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the
national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950,
during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by
President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.

These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal Law. These

hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers,
ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American
citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers,
taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without
reference to normal constitutional process.

117
 Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize
property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities;
assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all
transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private
enterprise; restrict travel; and in a plethora of particular ways, control the
lives of all American citizens.” (See: Foreword, pg. III)

The “Introduction”, on page 1, begins with a phenomenal declaration, to wit:

“A majority of the people of the United States have lived all of their lives
under emergency rule. For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures
guaranteed by the Constitution have in varying degrees been abridged by
laws brought into force by states of national emergency…”

According to the research done in 16 American Jurisprudence, 2nd Edition,

Constitutional Law, §§ 71, 82, no “emergency” justifies a violation of any Constitutional
provision. (See also: In Re: Powell, 602 P.2d 711 (1979), Home Bldg & Loan Assn. vs.
Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398 (1933)) Arguendo, “Supremacy Clause” and “Separation of
Powers”, it is clearly admitted in Senate Report No. 93-549 that abridgment has occurred.
The statements heard in the federal and state Tribunals, on numerous occasions, that
Constitutional arguments are “immaterial”, “frivolous” etc., is based upon the
concealment, furtherance and compounding of the Frauds, Usurpations an “Emergency”
created and sustained by the “Expatriates” and ALIEN agents of the United Nations and
its Organizations, Corporations and Associations. (See: 60 Stat. 1401, Article IX,
Section 8(ii), at pg. 1414, also see, Letter, Insight Magazine, February 18, 1991, pg. 7,
Lowell L. Flanders, President, U.N. Staff Union, New York)

8 U.S.C.A. 1481 is one of the controlling statutes on expatriation, as is 22

U.S.C.A. §§§ 611, 612, 613 and 50 U.S.C.A. 781, and unless one expatriates and wears
the badge of the United Nations Organizations, they are to be selectively and continually
subjected to fraud, extortion, dispossession, embezzlement, alienation, expropriation and
extradited into Foreign Jurisdictions, maliciously prosecuted under undisclosed Foreign
Laws, or any number of other injuries, damages and evils which manifest themselves
from the arbitrary minds of those who have forsaken and disavowed their allegiance to
the Nation, State and People. (See: Letter July 24, 1991, Department of Treasury/Internal

118
Revenue Service, to Jay Depew, also see, A New World Order, Essays On Restructuring
The United Nations)

The present operation of the de facto government is under Foreign/Alien

Constitutions, Agreements, Pactions, Charters, Laws, Rules, Policies and Regulations.
The overthrow of the “essential engine” declared in and by the ordained and established
Constitution for the United States of America (1787), and by and under the “Bill of
Rights (1791) is obvious. The covert procedures used to implement and enforce these
Foreign Constitutions, Laws, Procedures, Rules, Regulations, etc., is in direct
contravention to the Law of our Land and Forum, in wanton breach of express and
conditional duties, in excess of delegated authority, in felonious violation of our Law,
evidencing gross moral turpitude, breach of faith, obligations, malfeasance, and willful
and knowledgeable violation of Public Policy as declared by WE THE PEOPLE, the
Principal, the sovereign, the superior Creditor, the Heirs in Law, and as against the Laws
of the Creator, the Laws of Nature and the Peace, Dignity and Security of the Citizens,
and our Posterity.

The foreign paramilitary control over the de facto departments and agencies,
acting under purported doctrines of “Emergency” and “Necessity”, which has no law
(See: Plowden’s 18, 15 Viner’s Abridgments 534, 22 Viner’s Abridgments 540, also see,
U.S. vs. Will, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, pg. 405), should resolve the question of why the
Executive/Admiralty flag is displayed in the court rooms in opposition to the lawful
National flag (See: Executive Order No. 10834, Part II, 4 U.S.C.A. 1, Executive Order
No. 12778), and why the Executive Seal is displayed in the (world) federal courts in
opposition to that of the Judicial Seal. (See: Seals And Other Devises, GPO Publication
250.3, Executive – pg. 22, Judicial – pg. 57)

The International Organizational intents, purposes and activities include complete

control of “Public Finance”, i.e. “control, supervision, and audit of indigenous fiscal
resources; budget practices, taxation, expenditures of public funds, currency issues, and
banking agencies and affiliates.” (See: FM 41-10, pgs. 2-30 thru 2-31, Section 2-51) This

119
of course complies with “Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars”, Research Technical
Manual, TM-SW7905.1, which discloses a declaration of war upon the American
people, to wit:

“This manual is in itself an analog declaration of intent. Such a writing must

be secured from public scrutiny. Otherwise it might be recognized as a
technically formal declaration of domestic war. Furthermore, whenever any
person or group of persons in a position of great power, and without the
consent of the public, uses such knowledge and methodology for economic
conquest – it must be understood that a state of domestic warfare exists
between said person or group of persons and the public…” (See: pg. 3)

“CONSEQUENTLY, in the interest of future world order, peace, and

tranquility, it was decided to privately wage a quiet war against the
American public with an ultimate objective of permanently shifting the
natural and social energy (wealth) of the undisciplined and irresponsible
many into the hands of the self-disciplined, responsible, and worthy few.”
(See: pg. 7)

It boils down to monetary control by the Internationals & High Contracting

Parties, through information etc., solicited and collected by the Internal Revenue Service:

“A silent weapons system operates upon data obtained from a docile public
by legal (but not always lawful) force. Much information is made available
to silent weapons programmers through the Internal Revenue Service. (See:
Studies in the Structure of the American Economy for an I.R.S. source list.)
This information consists of the enforced delivery of well organized data
contained in federal and state forms collected, assembled, and submitted by
slave labor provided by the taxpayer and employers.” (See: supra, pg. 48,
also see, Executive Order No. 10033, 22 U.S.C.A. 286f, also see, GAO
Briefing Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional
Rights, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, June
1987, GAO/GGD-87-92BR “Counterterrorism”, pg. 17, 18)

Furthermore, as aforesaid, who is aiding, abetting, counseling, commanding, procuring

and enforcing the seditious International programs and policies. (See: supra, pg. 52, 18
U.S.C.A. 2, 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2384, 2385)

The miseducation of the masses and in particular the minor children having been
effectively implemented; the three distinct Departments, the Executive, Legislative and

120
Judicial being essentially compromised and covertly confederated, consolidated, usurped
and overthrown; left only skeletal remains and deceptive rhetorical smoke. The
worthless, empty and deceitful words of sycophants, pettifoggers, and drone of political
hacks had done virtually irreparable injury, damage and harm. Only the institution and
providence of the jury was left to be disfigured, discredited and dismantled. The jury
institution of Citizens historically retained immense control, Power and Authority over
public justice and those operating under pretense or colors of authority, power or
privilege. As stated by Sir William Blackstone:
“Here therefore, a competent number of sensible and upright jurymen,
chosen from among those of middle rank, will be found to be the best
investigators of truth, and be found the surest guardians of public justice.
For the most powerful individuals in the state will be cautious of committing
any flagrant invasion of another’s right, when he knows that the fact of his
oppression must be examined and decided by twelve indifferent men, not
appointed till the hour of trial; and that, when once the fact is ascertained,
the law of course must redress it. This therefore preserves in the hands of
the people that share which they ought to have in the administration of
public justice, and prevents the encroachment of the powerful and wealthy
without intervention of the jury (whether composed of Justices of the Peace,
Commissioners of the Revenue, Judges of a Court of Conscience, or any
other standing magistrate) is a step towards establishing aristocracy, the
most oppressive of absolute governments.

…It is, therefore, upon the whole, a duty every man owes his country, his
friends, his posterity, and himself, to maintain to the utmost of his power this
valuable constitution in all its rights; to restore it to its ancient dignity, if at
all impaired by different value of property, or otherwise deviated from its
first institution; to amend it, whenever it is defective; and, above all, to guard
with most jealous circumspect against the introductions of new and arbitrary
methods of trial, which, under a variety of possible pretenses, may in time
imperceptibly undermine the best preservation of English liberty.

Upon these accounts, the trial by jury ever has been, and I trust ever will be,
looked upon as the glory of English law. And if it has so great an advantage
over others, in regulating civil property, how much must that advantage be
heightened, when it is applied in criminal cases…It is the most transcendent
privilege which any subject can enjoy, or wish for, that he cannot be affected
in his property, his liberty, or his person, but by the unanimous consent of
twelve of his neighbors and equals. A constitution, that I may venture to
affirm has, under providence, secured the just liberties of this nation for a
long succession of ages. And therefore a celebrated French writer, who
concluded, that because Rome, Sparta, and Carthage have lost their liberties,

121
 therefore those of England in time must perish, should have recollected that
Rome, Sparta and Carthage, at the time when their liberties were lost, were
strangers to the trial by jury.” (See: Blackstone’s Commentaries, Vol. 1)

The people forming and ratifying our ordained Constitution(s) knew of and had
experienced massive and gross abuses of powers, authority, characters, franchises, etc.,
and having provided for Trial by Jury in all criminal cases, pursuant to the Constitution
for the United States of America, Article III, Section 2, Clause 3, and yet feeling a lack of
confidence and trust, presented the “Resolution Of The First Congress Submitting
Twelve Amendments To The Constitution”, on March 4, 1789, and declared that:

“The Convention of a number of States, having at the time of their adopting

the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order TO PREVENT
MISCONSTRUCTION, OR ABUSE OF ITS POWERS, that further
DECLARATORY AND RESTRICTIVE CLAUSES SHOULD BE ADDED:
and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will
best secure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

Among these “declaratory and restrictive clauses” were Articles of Amendment

I, reserving to the People, among other things, the Right to Assemble and to Petition the
Government for redress of grievance; Amendment V, not to be held for a capital or
otherwise infamous crime unless on PRESENTMENT or INDICTMENT of a GRAND
JURY; nor deprived of Life, Liberty or Property, without due process of Law; nor having
their private property taken for public use, WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION;
Amendment VI, the Right to a speedy and public trial, BY AN IMPARTIAL JURY OF
THE STATE AND DISTRICT where the crime is alleged to have been committed;
Amendment VII, in suits at common Law, where the value in controversy exceeds
twenty “DOLLARS”, the RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY SHALL BE PRESERVED, and
NO FACT TRIED BY A JURY shall be otherwise RE-EXAMINED IN ANY COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES THAN ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF COMMON
LAW; Amendment IX, reservation of UN-ENUMERATED RIGHTS RETAINED BY
THE PEOPLE; Amendment X, reservation of POWERS to the States or to the People.

122
 The Grand Jury being chosen by the de facto agents, who themselves being venal
subjects and Agents of Foreign Principals and Powers, and woefully compromised,
would in all probability choose (voir dire) a “homage jury” of questionable character,
allegiance and array. (See: Exhibit P-5, U.S. vs. Ralph Daigle, Case No. 92 CR 80161,
Transcript of Hearing, Monday, April 20, 1992, pg. 28, lines 22 – 24) Expatriates,
Denizens and Aliens are excluded from setting on said juries as a matter of fundamental
Law. (See: 3 American Jurisprudence 2d, Alien and Citizen, § 40) The issue that the
Law retains the remedial RIGHT to the accused to voir dire the Grand Jurors, pursuant to
28 U.S.C.A. 1867(a) & (b), and by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(b), has
and remains ineffectual due to the indolence of the members of the Bar. It is simple
reasoning that where the Law says that a particular act, such as voir dire, is within the
procedural due process scope and purview of the Act, and the members of the Bar refuse
to take cognizance or accent to its mandate, it is as if no such law was passed or ever
existed, and upon coram non judice determination, quasi repeal or amendments could be
effectively implemented. As recognized and stated by Thomas Jefferson over two
hundred (200) years ago:

“One single object, if your proposed code of Laws attains it, will entitle you
to the endless gratitude of society: that of restraining judges from usurping
legislation. And with no body of men is this restraint more wanting than
with the Judges of what is called our general Government, but what I call
our Foreign Department. They are practicing on the Constitution by
inferences, analogies, and sophisms as they would ordinary law. They do not
seem aware that it is not even a Constitution, formed by a single authority
and subject to a single superintendence and control; but that it is a compact
of many independent powers, every one of which claims an equal right to
understand it, and require its observance…They imagine they can lead us
into a consolidated government, while their road leads directly to its
dissolution. This member of the Government was first considered as the
most harmless and helpless of all its organs. But has proved, that the power
of declaring what the law is ad libitum, by sapping and mining slyly and
without alarm, the foundations of the Constitution, can do what no open
force would dare to attempt.” (See: Thomas Jefferson, Albert E. Bergh,
(1907), Volume 15, pg. 331)

The “Jury”, a viable and independent “institution” of the de jure Government, was
not yet wholly impaired nor compromised, and being arrayed of “IMPARTIAL” citizens

123
“OF THE STATE AND DISTRICT” wherein the act was allegedly committed, the
Citizens retained certain substantial control and powers. (See: Constitution for the
United States of America, Amendment VI) Trial by Jury was considered by all
members of the Constitutional Convention to be “a valuable safeguard to liberty” or “the
palladium of free government”, and was “esteemed useful or essential in a
REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC” and “a barrier to tyranny.” An “impartial jury”
chosen from the Citizens “of the State and District” was and is mandatory in all criminal
cases pursuant to the Constitution for the United States of America, Article III, Section 2,
Clause 3, and under the declaratory and restrictive clauses of Articles of Amendments VI,
and further, was expressly preserved by Amendment VII “in Suits at common Law.”

“For my own part, the more the operation of the institution (jury) has fallen
under my observation, the more reason I have discovered for holding it in
high estimation; and it would be altogether superfluous to examine to what
extent it deserves to be esteemed useful or essential in a Representative
Republic, or against the oppression of an hereditary monarch than as a
barrier to the tyranny of popular magistrates in a popular government.
Discussions of this kind would be more curious than beneficial, as all are
satisfied of the utility of the institution, and its friendly aspect to
liberty…Arbitrary impeachments, arbitrary methods of prosecuting
pretended offenses, and arbitrary punishments upon arbitrary convictions
have ever appeared to me to be the engine of judicial despotism…” (See:
Federalist Papers No. 83)

The prospective jurors of the Petit Juries are many times summoned upon the
basis of “license” issued by the de facto “state”, which admits of permission to engage in
a particular business or occupation, and may very well be within and under other
confederations, alliances or pactions, such as the “Drivers License Compact.” Other
engagements, agreements, entitlements, etc., might readily admit of Foreign or
International character, bias, prejudice, interest or fear of reprisal. The Social Security
(totalization) Agreement 42 U.S.C.A. 433 would be of such foreign subordinate
subjection and character, especially considering that certain assessments made under the
International Agreements (unilateral) are fraudulently declared not to be subject to
Article I, Section 8, Clause 9, Tribunals, nor Article III Judicial Power Courts, pursuant
to 26 I.R.C. 6305(b). Such documents as a Voters Registration admit of the status of U.S.

124
Citizens, who were not afforded the elective franchise, as were free born, natural Citizens
of the several free, independent, sovereign, Republican States of the Union. (See: U.S.
vs. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 588)

The jury, usually being precluded from its providence of “Jury Nullification”, i.e.,
to rule on the law, is further limited to knowledge and foundations of Law as espoused
only by the members of the “closed union shop” Bar. Other times, especially where a
Citizen is appearing without a member of the Bar Association as a Carte blanch
representative, the jurors are summarily excluded from knowing of or entertaining
affirmative defenses, etc., irrespective of the facts or Law. (See Exhibit P-3 , Special
problems In Handling Pro Se Litigation, Workshop For Judges Of The Seventh Circuit,
Notre Dame, Indiana, October 16 – 18, 1989) The Jurors are thereby reduced in their
Rights, Duty and providence to a mere “advisory jury” (See: F.R.C.P. Rule 39(c) ), to the
prejudice of one of the parties to the action. The Jury then becomes the mere tool of the
“closed union shop”, and can be influenced to use the same said power and impaired
providence “for whatever the market will bear.” (See: Exhibit D-4 , Silent Weapons
For Quiet Wars, pg. 52)

The reason and rules of common Law having been unlawfully abolished and
usurped by the de facto legislative/quasi judicial fiat, left the substantive and adjective
Rights of the Citizen without redress or remedy, and effectively left the provisions of
Articles of Amendment VII, to wit, “no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-
examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law”,
as empty and senseless words. (See: F.R.Cr.P. Rule 26) Certain associations of the Bar,
apparently not wishing to show a discrimination, equally infringed upon all Citizens, and
thereby unconstitutionally abrogated and usurped the Rights and Powers as expressly
reserved by and to WE THE PEOPLE under authority of the duly ordained and
established Constitution for the United States of America, Amendments IX and X and as
reiterated and incorporated in the Constitution for the State of Colorado, Article I,
Section 1, 2, and 29 to wit:

125
 “AMENDMENT IX. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

“AMENDMENT X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the

Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.”

As recognized by statesmen such as Thomas Jefferson:

“It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of

our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights; that confidence is
everywhere the parent of despotism; free government is founded in jealousy ,
and not in confidence; it is jealousy, and not confidence which prescribes
limited Constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with
power; that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and
no further may our confidence may go…In questions of Power, then let no
more be heard of confidence in man…” (See: The Annuls Of America,
Alder, et al., Volume 4, pgs. 65 – 66)

By abridging the providence and power of the Jury, the way was clear for
reinstitution of Star Chamber Summary Proceedings. Summary pre-disposition of issues
“TO CONFORM TO A TREND OF JUDICIAL DETERMINATIONS” and “TO
ACCOMPLISH SIMILAR OBJECTIVES,” was not only plausible but effectively
implemented. Usurpations and even heinous acts could be committed and concealed
from adjudication to the prejudice, damage, injury and public endangerment of the
Citizen and their Posterity. According to the policy “Report To The Attorney General,
Truth In Criminal Justice Series, Report no. 5 (See: Exhibit P-5 ), the power and
authority of the Judicial Power Court to review and curb certain Executive Branch
activities was and is an unauthorized intrusion by the judicial Branch. A “Dictatorship”
not only over finance and money, but over every facet of life, Liberty and Property.

“Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people
were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without
consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has
ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such made attempt.” (See:
Debates in The Several State Conventions On the Adoption Of The Federal
Constitution, Johnathan Elliot Ed., Vol. 3, pg. 59)

126
 The Constitutional office of a lawful, Constitutional, Article III judicial power
Judge being debauched and usurped, and the individuals holding and exercising the
Office no longer qualifying as Officers or employees of the United States of America,
and receiving their remunerations from the foreign/alien financial institution(s) , namely,
the International Monetary Fund (established 22 July 1944 as UN specialized agency)
(See: CIA Fact Book 1995-96, pg. 469) or its subsidiary Organizations, Corporations or
Associations, as deceitfully and craftily designated as the UNITED STATES
TREASURY (See: Exhibit M-7 , Cromelin vs. U.S., 177 F2d. 275, Exhibit C-3 , Public
Law 94-564, Legislative history, pg. 5967, 22 U.S.C.A. 286a (d) (1) ), the stage was set
for the overthrow of the Constitutional, judicial Power Courts and implementations of
diverse, de facto, legislative Article I, Section 8, Clause 9, Administrative/Executive
Tribunals, and the establishment of a fourth (4th) branch of government (See: 1 American
Jurisprudence 2d, Administrative Law § 78, Exhibit M-8 , Executive Order No. 12778,
October 23, 1991, Federal Register, Volume 56, No. 207) where a non-Article III
Administrative Law Judge or Commissioner sets under pretense of “judge.” (See:
Judicial Improvement Act of 1990, Public Law 101-650, Legislative History, pg. 6877,
Exhibit M-6 , Terry J. Hatter, Jr., et al. vs. U.S., Case No. 91-5039, U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Decision, January 16, 1992, footnote, pg. 2, UNDER
International Agreements (See: U.S. vs. Ferreira, 13 Howard 42), and thereby assumes
the role of prosecutor, accuser, judge and jury, and is consistent with the term and
meaning of a “Totalitarian Dictatorship.” (See: Exhibit G-6 , 50 U.S.C.A. 781, 783)

The de facto legislative body of the “state”, believing themselves to be of like

capacity, and greater than the people they falsely professed to represent, also perceived it
to be within their authority to “Create A Structure of STATE GOVERNMENT.” (See:
Constitution for the State of Colorado, Article I, Section 1 & 2) The de facto new
“State”, not being delegated any authority to create Administrative Tribunals by the
Constitution for the State of Colorado, usurped authority and implemented such diverse
summary Executive Tribunals to try pretended statutory crimes and enforce executive
policy and who act under doctrines of “Expediency”, “Necessity” and “Emergency”.

127
 “No political truth is of greater intrinsic value…The accumulation of all
powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether
hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may be justly pronounced the very
definition of tyranny.” (See: Federalist Papers No. 47)

“If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority
and make tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must
appeal to the standard they formed, and take such measures to redress the
injury done to the Constitution as the exigencies may suggest and prudence
justify.” (See: Federalist Papers No. 33)

The three distinct and separate Departments, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial,
had been and are now hodgepodged and consolidated together under pretense of
“necessity” and “emergency”, in contravention to the “Separation of Powers
Doctrine.” The basic principles and concepts of “Justice” were then perverted to “Just
Us.”

It was then possible for the bankrupt and insolvent “de facto state”, under
direction, control and apparatus of an alien/foreign, inter-agency, socialist, Dictatorial
Oligarchy, to plunder under pretended acts of legislation and under pretenses and colors
of power and authority. It was then possible to treat the free, independent, sovereign
Citizen, the real victim, as a criminal under fraudulent assessments and pretended crimes.
(See: The Law, Frederick Bastiat, (1850)) It was then possible to reverse the basic
principles of Creator/Creation law and the fundamental reasons for the formation of a
society to take, seize, alienate, and expropriate their corporeal and incorporeal property
and rights to property. It was then more than possible to effectively implement the
doctrines of Karl Marx’s declaration of war i.e. the Communist Manifesto as openly
reiterated in Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session, “Contracts Payable In
Gold, An Article Entitled “Contracts Payable In Gold” By George Cyrus Thorpe,
Showing The Legal Effects Of Agreements To Pay In Gold”, at pg. 9:

“The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called

“ownership” is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law amounting to mere
user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the
necessity of the State.” (See: Hearing Before A Subcommittee Of The

128
 Committee On Foreign Relations, February 17, 1950, pg. 494, also see,
Constitution For The United Nations Industrial Development Organization,
Treaty Document 97-19, and the Communist Manifesto)

There is nothing new under heaven. It is but a repeat of historical delusions,

mischiefs and evils. As observed by Gandhi, three of the great sins of the world are, (1)
Wealth WITHOUT Work, (2) Business WITHOUT Morals, and (3) Government
WITHOUT Principles, and as evidenced herein, all three have been achieved to a very
high degree of hedonism, degeneracy and public corruption.

With that being exhibited, I wish to quote the peoples reservation of rights regarding
military courts, whereby establishing the sentencing penalty standard, or measure of
fairness, as a matter of Military protocol, pursuant to MILITARY LAW REVIEW
[VOL. 79], to wit:

“111. HOW DOES THE PUNITIVE DISCHARGE FIT INTO TODAY’S

PENAL PHILOSOPHY?
If the premise is accepted that the military should mirror the society it was
created to defend, it logically follows that the military’s rationale for imposing
a punitive discharge should rest upon a contemporary, widely accepted,
rational philosophical basis.

A. BASIC PHILOSOPHIES OF PUNISHMENT

There are six basic philosophies of punishment generally accepted by writers
in the fields of criminology and penology: 33 retribution, deterrence, social
defense, prevention, maintenance of respect for law, and rehabilitation.

1. Retribution
The oldest philosophy of punishment is that of retribution. Probably the most
ancient though well known recorded reference to it is found in “Deuteronomy
19:21” which exhorts punishment to be eye for an eye, tooth for tooth. Among
the leading philosophers that advocated retribution as the reason for
punishment were Aristotle, 35, St. Thomas Aquinas 36 and Immanuel Kant.
37”

The de facto state/federal/international chartered and compacted inter-agency

“Institutions”, their officers, employees, servants, agents and representatives are subject
to both Impeachment and Removal; and further, having acted in Bad Faith, in violation of

129
the “Clean Hands Doctrine”, and in Fraud and Contravention of the Law of the Land and
Forum, should be turned over to a Court of Law for prosecution, trial, and judgment
according to Law. The members of the British Accredited Registry (BAR), being highly
compromised, and dependent upon turbulence and contention for their livelihood, prefer
to evade duties and obstruct such remedies and corrections.

“….From time to time immemorial it has been the recognized duty of such
courts to exercise a discretion: to refuse their aid in enforcement of
unconscionable, oppressive, or iniquitous contracts; and to turn the party
claiming benefit of such contracts over to a court of law…. It is said that the
plaintiff must come into court with clean hands, and that a defendant may
rest a bill for specific performance, by showing that under the circumstances
the plaintiff is not entitled to the relief he asks. Omission or mistake in the
agreement, or that it is unconscientious or unreasonable, or that there has
been concealment, misrepresentation, or any unfairness, are enumerated
among the causes which will induce the court to refuse its aid.” (See: Pope
Mfg. vs. Gormully, 144 U.S. 414, at pg. 419, also see, 22 U.S.C.A. 286q)

The acts declared and complained of clearly evidence numerous iniquitous, illegal,
unlawful and fraudulent agreements entered into under pretense and colors of authority,
and which were subsequently and continually misrepresented and craftily and subtly
drawn to conceal fraudulent, unlawful, derivative and adhesion terms and parties, and to
unlawfully and fraudulently obtain a benefit, gain, and title therefrom. “He acts contrary
to law who does what the law prohibits; but he acts in fraud of the law who, when the
letter of the law being inviolate, uses the law contrary to its intentions.” (See: Digest of
the Civil Law, Book 1, Title 3, Law 29)

“Fraud vitiates the most solemn Contracts, documents and even judgments.”
(See: U.S. vs. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61, pg. 65)

The willful and wanton violations of the Laws of the Creator, the Laws of Nature, the
ordained and established Constitutions, and Laws made in Pursuance thereof, and the
fundamental principles of a valid, viable society have been and are now being committed.
The usurpations and abridgments have been and are now being aided, abetted, counseled,
commanded and procured by special, partisan, interest groups of highly questionable

130
character, intents and purposes, and when brought to the attention of the de facto
judicature, is like telling a snake about a snake. It is the equivalent of telling the pimp
about the whore, who upon being informed, only demands a cut and commission from the
licentious acts. The numerous arbitrary and capricious acts, and willful violations of law
and principles, left the Citizens and Posterity in a state of permanent endangerment.
When the Laws of the State fail, everything ought to be suspect, leaving the Citizens and
Posterity to resort only to the remedies of the Laws of the Creator and Nature to secure
their Tranquility, Welfare, and Security.

The determination made in Cohen vs. Virginia, 6 Wheat 264, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821) is more
than applicable, and should be executed on both Counts as stated, to wit:

“We [Courts] have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which
is given, than to usurp that which is not given. THE ONE OR THE OTHER
WOULD BE TRESON TO THE CONSTITUTION.” (See: U.S. vs. Will, 449
U.S. 200, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, pg. 406)

It is, therefore, necessary and imperative to our Lives, Liberty, Property and Safety to
show cause and issue this, our “DECLARATION OF CAUSE AND NECESSITY TO
ABOLISH” under NOTICE OF MISPRISON of Felony and Treason, having reason to
believe that the criminal acts declared herein have been and are now being committed
(See: 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 4 and 2382, and Constitution for the United States of America,
Amendments I, IX, X, Constitution for the State of Colorado, Preamble and Article I,
Sections 1, 2 & 29.),

And further, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler and Creator of the Universe,
and the Laws of Nature, and under and within the Law of Nations, and the Law of the
Land and Forum, to declare and assume our status and separate station amongst the
Powers of the earth to which our forefathers claimed and established, and we are entitled
to as a matter of Birth Right, and as Testamentary Heirs and Heirs in Law. With
reservation and such respect for the opinions of mankind as is due and owing, and upon
the grounds heretofore declared, it is right and necessary to issue:

131
 DECLARATION

OF SEPARATE AND EQUAL STATION

WHEN IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN EVENTS…WHENEVER ANY

FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE…WHEN A
LONG TRAIN OF ABUSES AND USURPATIONS, PURSUING
INVARIABLY THE SAME OBJECT, EVINCES A DESIGN TO REDUCE
THEM UNDER ABSOLUTE DESPOTISM, IT IS THEIR RIGHT, IT IS
THEIR DUTY….” See: Declaration of Independence (1776),

Numerous actions being commenced, and our Public offices being duly noticed and
served in this matter, and having heretofore exhibited and established a willful and
wanton disregard for the Law and the Rights, Safety and Security of the Citizens and our
Posterity, WE THE PEOPLE give notice and Exercise our Rights and Duties to throw off
the de facto government, to extradite, arrest, prosecute and adjudge those who have
willfully committed other wrongs against the Peace, Dignity and Security of We The
People, the principal, heirs and superior Creditor.

One cannot make agreements with sodomites, BABYLONIANS and/or Satanist. Their
words, oaths and signatures are of no meaning or value; their intent and purpose is to
deceive, cheat, steal, lie, defraud and destroy. The seditious covert conspiracy and
collusion of certain Organizations, Corporations and Associations to damage, injure,
oppress, threaten, intimidate and enforce their fraudulent, foreign, socialist, communist,
“DEMOCRACY”, and foist their delusions upon the Citizens and children of this Land,
and to corrupt our de jure Public Offices established to accomplish the purposes set forth
in the “Preamble” to the ordained and established Constitution is cause and necessity
enough.

“The supreme power cannot take from any man any part of his property
without his consent. For the preservation of property being the end of
government, and that for which men inter into society, it necessarily

132
 supposes and requires that the people should have property, without which
they must supposed to lose that [property] by entering into society, which
was the end for which they entered into it.
“….[Therefore,] whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy
the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary
power, they [representatives, employees, servants] put themselves into a state
of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further
obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for
all men against force and violence. Whensoever, therefore, the legislative
shall transgress this fundamental rule of society, and either by ambition,
fear, folly, or corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands
of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the
people, BY THIS BREACH OF TRUST THEY FORFEIT THE POWER
THE PEOPLE HAD PUT INTO THEIR HANDS…AND IT DEVOLVES
TO THE PEOPLE, WHO HAVE THE RIGHT TO RESUME THEIR
ORIGINAL LIBERTY [natural, personal, civil, political], and …provide for
their own safety and security.” (See: Second Essay Concerning Civil
Government, John Locke)

As clearly understood by the American forefathers:

“It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number
of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights,
or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civilized
government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support,
protection, and defense of those very rights; the principles of which are
…Life, Liberty and Property. If men, through fear, fraud or mistake,
should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal
law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such
renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not
in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.”
(See: The Life And Public Service Of Samuel Adams” Wells, Volume 1, pg.
504)

Once again finding our safety, happiness and liberties to be in imminent danger, it has
become necessary and imperative to our Rights, Duties, Privileges, Immunities, Lives,
Liberties and Property and that of our Posterity, to declare our separate and equal station,
and exercise our Right and Duty to throw off and abolish the form and operation of the de
facto, fraudulent, seditious “state.” (See: Constitution For The State/Common Wealth of
Pennsylvania, Article I, Section 2, Declaration of Independence (1776), Constitution For
The United States Of America, Amendments IX and X.

133
 “Preamble:
We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler
of the Universe, in order to form a more independent and perfect
government; establish justice; insure tranquility; provide for the common
defense; promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the
"State of Colorado".” [

And…

“BILL OF RIGHTS

ART. II:In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim
the principles upon which our government is founded, we declare:

Section 1. Vestment of political power. All political power is vested in and

derived from the people; all government, of right, originates from the people,
is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the
whole.

Section 2. People may alter or abolish form of government � proviso. The

people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves,
as a free, sovereign and independent state; and to alter and abolish their
constitution and form of government whenever they may deem it necessary
to their safety and happiness, provided, such change be not repugnant to the
constitution of the United States.

Section 3. Inalienable rights. All persons have certain natural, essential and
inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and
defending their lives and liberties; of acquiring, possessing and protecting
property; and of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.

- IT IS HEREBY DEEMED NECESSARY -

JURE CORONEA – TESTE MEIPSO

WHEREFORE, WE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, EX

REL; PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL & REDEEMER, James D. Hardin, et al.,
respectfully Petition’s Common Council to assemble and for setting of Privy Council to
receive “Presentment(s)” and take evidence and testimony and issue a True Bill, pursuant
to the Constitution for the United States of America (1787) [See:

134
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-6.pdf], Amendment V. [See:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-7.pdf] Numerous High Crimes,
Misdemeanors and gross Malfeasance have been committed under the Constitution for
the United States of America, and Laws made in Pursuance thereof, and under the
Constitution for the State of Colorado, and the Laws made in pursuance thereof, and
against the Peace and Dignity of US, the People.

It is against the Laws of the Creator, and the Law of the Land and forum to aid, abet,
counsel, command or procure the commission of criminal acts or contract with a
belligerent. (See: Hall vs. Coppell, 74 U.S. (7 Wall) 244, Ward vs. Smith, 74 U.S. (7
Wall) 210)

The members of the de facto judicature having heretofore claimed for themselves
“ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY” for acts committed under false and fraudulent pretenses
and colors of law and authority [Stump vs. Sparkman, 435 US 349, 55 L. Ed. 2d 331, 98
S. Ct. 1099] and having aided, abetted, counseled, commanded and procured the
furtherance, compounding and concealment of the unlawful acts declared and evidenced
herein, and having obstructed “Presentments” to the Grand Jury, or after Presentment
was served upon the foreman thereof, appeared before the same to influence them not to
investigate the cause of the Citizens, and having criminally breached the duties imposed
upon OUR offices of Honor, Trust and Profit, usurped Powers and Authority not
delegated or specifically prohibited by law, have claimed a Title of Nobility, and have
openly declared the Principle, Citizen to be the ENEMY, of whom is without remedy.
ONLY A SLAVE HAS NO REMEDY! We The People were not born slaves, nor are
we cannon fodder of, nor on the behalf of Traitorous, Treacherous, Seditious, Treasonous
Oath Breakers, and their illicit, profligate acts and associations.

The aforementioned persons, individuals, organizations, corporations and associations are

hereby charged with High Crimes, misdemeanors, gross Malfeasance and moral
Turpitude. And pursuant to the Law of the Land and its meaning and intent, Claimant

135
chosen by God, for God; and is the chosen one of God, who has been sent forth, to
Redeem the people of God.

As such, Claimant, et al., hereby declare the same said persons, individuals,
organizations, corporations and associations to be insolvent, anarchistic, de facto,
belligerent, terroristic and seditious in character; and who are further engaging in RICO
unlawful association. Wherefore, WE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Rightfully claim sovereign dominion in the name and authority of WE THE PEOPLE
pursuant to Common Law Lien/Writ Of Attachment/Writ of Escheat, and In Rem Claim
and In Rem Siezure, as on file in the office of the Clerk and Recorder, County of
Douglas, State of Colorado, found at Book ___________, Page ______ - _______. (See:
Exhibit ____), and the same said persons, individuals, organizations, corporations and
associations, being insolvent, of foreign character and allegiance, having trespassed and
committed numerous High Crimes and Misdemeanors within the several Republican
States of the Union, and against the Peace, Dignity and Security of the People and
inhabitants thereof, are in DEFAULT of sums due and owing to ourselves and our de jure
Treasuries, and are hereby declared to be enemies of the Principal/Citizen/People and de
jure, free, sovereign, independent States. It being against the Law of the land and Forum
to aid, abet or give comfort to such enemies of the State of society, WE THE PEOPLE,
rightfully declare that all obligation and obedience are absolved, and the delegated
Powers and Authority heretofore extended are claimed and devolve back to the source
from which they were derived, as a matter of corporeal and incorporeal Right, natural,
personal, civil and political Liberty, distributive and commutative Justice and adjective
and substantive Law. (See: Texas vs. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall) 227)

Attested to this ___ day of _______________, in the year 2019.

I, The Redeemer, et al., the undersigned, having reason to believe that the
aforesaid unlawful acts have been and are now being committed against the
Peace, Dignity and Security of the People, hereby attest and affirm that upon
investigation and exhaustive research, the facts stated herein are true and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief.

136
 /s/______________________________
The Redeemer, Jus sanguinis, Jus soli,
Jure Coronea, Jure Divino, ex rel,

137
 BRIEF’S IN SUPPORT OF
CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS

138
 “Implicit faith belongs to fools…and it might be added that blind obedience
belongs to rogues and not to honest men.”
(Legal and Political Hermeneutics, Francis Lieber)

The year 2018 has come and gone, including another 4th of July has arrived with the
Declaration of Independence of 1776 marking the event for those in the United States of
America. The causes that were stated in that Declaration of political liberty fell squarely
within the recognized principles laid down by John Locke in Chapter 17 (Usurpation),
Chapter 18 (Tyranny), and Chapter 19 (Dissolution of Government), his seminal work, to
wit:

“The True Original Extent And End Of Civil Government.”

Mature and sober circumspect of those same fundamental principles is not only the “right”,
but the “duty” of the people who exercise their political liberty and vest limited powers into
any body politic. That act of sovereignty (“truly free and independent will”) is reserved to
the people by the Constitution for the United States of America, Preamble, and by
Amendment X. It is not only the “right” but the exercise of the “duty” that are called upon
here.

“THERE ARE NONE SO HOPELESSLY ENSLAVED AS THOSE WHO

FALSELY BELIEVE THEY ARE FREE.”
(Johann W. Goethe (German Poet, 1749-1832)

and…

“THE PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE WOULD SEEM TO REQUIRE, THAT THE

LAW SHOULD ADMINISTER ITS BENEFITS TO THOSE WHO ARE
VIGILANT IN EXERCISING THEIR RIGHTS, AND NOT TO THOSE WHO
SLEEP OVER THEM.”
(See: Justice Story, Ricard vs. Williams, 20 U.S. 59, 116 [1882])

139
COMES Now, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, with this, their
Historical Background & Introduction, stating as follows:

“Come now let us reason together.”

Before one can consider as to rather anybody will exercise Sovereignty, claiming
Sovereign Immunity under the State, as the State, agents of the State, or the like, must
first be proven. That is to say, First Prove their delegated authority (i.e.) Show their
Authority to Act, (i.e.) to do what they have done; and moreover, to do it in the capacity
which it was done in.

The State officers, agents, clerks, employees, contractors and other underlings thereof,
must prove first that they are in fact legally authorized by the State, etc., and that they
are, in fact, who they purport to be. Then show their authority for actually acting on the
lawful Constitutional Authority of the State (i.e.) The People are “the State”; and are “the
Sovereign(s)” of Colorado, to wit:

“We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence for the Supreme
Ruler of the Universe, in order to form a more independent and perfect
government; establish justice; insure tranquility; provide for the common
defense; promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the
"State of Colorado". [Preamble – Colorado Constitution]

Now let us look to just a few of the first sections of Article II, of the Colorado
Constitution, to see who is Sovereign (the people, or the government). That answer can
be found and answered under Art. II – Bill of Rights, of the Colorado Constitution, to
wit:

“In order to assert our rights, acknowledge our duties, and proclaim the
principles upon which our government is founded, we declare:

140
 Section 1. Vestment of political power. All political power is vested in and
derived from the people; all government, of right, originates from the people,
is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the
whole.”

Claimant again, believes the Colorado Constitution makes it real clear that all Power is
vested in and derived from “the People.” Notice it DOES NOT SAY all power is
vested in and derived from “the Government”. Nor does it say it’s derived from
Government officers, agents, clerks, employees, contractors and other underlings of the
Government. Now let us look at Section 2, in order to further clarify what is being
conveyed here, to wit:

“Section 2. People may alter or abolish form of government � proviso. The

people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves,
as a free, sovereign and independent state; and to alter and abolish their
constitution and form of government whenever they may deem it necessary
to their safety and happiness, provided, such change be not repugnant to the
constitution of the United States.”

Notice that section says: “the people may alter or abolish form of government” and it
further says: “The people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing
themselves, as a free, sovereign and independent state…”. That is the exact reason
why Claimant has been known for saying: “He is the State”.

It is also extremely important to note here, that while the people have the authority to
abolish the form of government, nowhere does a constitution give the Government(s)
authority to abolish any of the people! Nor that they may do so absent due process of
law!

Therefore, any law, rule, regulation, code, statute, or otherwise, which has anything to do
with targeting people, under the guise of the person or group have been deemed a
“Terrorist” by some Government personnel, or unconstitutional law, by or in some
governmental department, agency, etc. ALL OF WHICH ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL,
and are therefor, NULL and VOID! The People never had the right to run around like

141
guerillas in the night assassinating people without due process of law! Therefor, the
People could have never given nor transferred such authority, nor powers to any arm of
the any government.

This is why all such unconstitutional acts, laws, rules, codes, regulations, statutes and
even judgments are considered NULL and VOID from the date of their face, along with
any and all other such laws, or the like which obtains its authority from the same.

Now to quote Section 3, for further clarification of what is being conveyed above and
elsewhere herein, to wit:

“Section 3. Inalienable rights. All persons have certain natural, essential and
inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and
defending their lives and liberties; of acquiring, possessing and protecting
property; and of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.”

The important thing here, in part is “which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and
defending their lives and liberties; of acquiring, possessing and protecting
property”. The right of enjoying and defending their lives is a right which God gave to
all His creatures and it is a right which all God’s creation should exercise and the portion
which says: “and of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.”

“UNLAWFUL GOVERNMENT” v. “LAWFUL GOVERNMENT”

There are many ways to figure out the actual and true status of your government if one is
but willing to invest the necessary time and efforts in researching the matter. However,
the bigger question, is rather one really wants to know the actual, real and true status? So
then, what conclusion will they come to once they do know? Well, that all depends on
the one doing the research.

For purposes of this work, Let us first look at what an unlawful government is and that
can be found under the definition of “Government de facto”, to wit:

142
Government de facto: A government of fact. A government actually
exercising power and control in the state, as opposed to the true and lawful
government; a government not established according to the constitution of the
state, or not lawfully entitled to recognition or supremacy, but which
nevertheless supplanted or displaced the government de jure. A government
deemed unlawful, or deemed wrongful or unjust, which, nevertheless, receives
presently habitual obedience from the bulk of the community. Aust. Jur. 324.

There are several degrees of what is called “de facto government.” Such a
government, in its highest degree, assumes a character very closely
resembling that of a lawful government. This is when the usurping
government expels the regular authorities from their customary seats and
functions, and establishes itself in its place, and so becomes the actual
government of a country.

The distinguishing characteristic of such a government is that adherents to it

in war against the government de jure do not incur the penalties of treason;
and, under certain limitations, obligations assumed by it in behalf of the
country or otherwise will, in general, be respected by the government de jure
when restored.

But there is another description of government, called also by publicists a

“government de facto,” but which might, perhaps, be more aptly
denominated a “government of paramount force.” Its distinguishing
characteristics are (1) that its existence is maintained by active military
power, within the territories, and against the rightful authority, of an
established and lawful government; and (2) that, while it exist, it must
necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by private citizens who, by acts of
obedience, rendered in submission to such force, do not become responsible,
as wrong-doers, for those acts, though not warranted by the laws of the
rightful government.

Actual governments of this sort are established over districts differing

greatly in extent and conditions. They are usually administered directly by
military authority, supported more or less by military force. Thorington v.
Smith, 8 Wall. 8, 9, 19 L. Ed. 361 The term “de facto,” as descriptive of a
government, has no well-fixed and definite sense. It is, perhaps, most
correctly used only temporarily, established in the place of the lawful or
regular government, occupying its capital, and exercising its power, and
which is ultimately overthrown, and the authority of the government de jure
re-established. Thomas v. Taylor, 42 Miss. 651, 703, 2 Am. Rep. 625.

A government de facto is a government that unlawfully gets the possession

and control of the rightful legal government, and maintains itself there, by
force and arms, against the will of such legal government, and claims to
exercise the powers thereof. Chisholm v. Coleman, 43 Ala. 204, 94 Am Dec.

143
 677. And see further Smith v. Stewart, 21 La. Ann. 67, 99 Am. Dec 709;
Williams v. Bruffy, 96 U.S. 176, 24 L. Ed. 716; Keppel v. Railroad Co., 14
Fed. Cas. 357. (BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 2ND EDITION PG.
545(1910))

So now that we understand what an Unlawful government is and what it is called, we

need to know what a lawful government is and what it is called. This is a necessary
requirement so that the People of the State of Colorado can identify them both; and to
know and to understand the differences between them, along with their identifiable
actions and practices , to wit:

“Government de jure. A government of right; the true and lawful

government; a government established according to the constitution of the
state, and lawfully entitled to recognition and supremacy and the
administration of the state, but is actually cut off from power or control. A
government deemed lawful, or deemed rightful or just, which, nevertheless,
has been supplanted or displaced; that is to say, which receives not presently
(although it received formerly) habitual obedience from the bulk of the
community.” Aust. Jur. 324. (BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 2ND
EDITION PG. 545 (1910))

The Federal Constitution, the Supreme Law of this land, states in Art. 4, Sec. 4., as
follows:

“Section 4 - The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union
a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against
Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when
the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”
(See: U.S. Constitution Art. 4, Sec. 4)

OK, so now that we understand that “the United States shall guarantee… a Republican
form of Government…”, we now must understand what a “Republican Government”
actually is. Black’s Law Dictionary says it like this:

“Republican Government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are

vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or
through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are
specially delegated.” Black. Const. Law (3d Ed.)309; In re Duncan, 139 U.S.

144
 449, 11 Sup. Ct. 573, 35 L. Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 175, 22 L.
Ed. 627. (BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 2ND EDITION PG. 545(1910))

Now while a Colorado Appeals Court finds the fact that an acting Judge or Magistrate
isn’t unlawful, in that he has no Oath of Office on file, but is acting in a De Facto status,
like there is nothing wrong with it, IS HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TO CLAIMANT! Because
the rest of the People of Colorado may not understand what is being said there, but
Claimant understands it clearly.

What the Pretended judge should have said, was sir, you have no claim for which relief
may be granted, as a POW! That is, in fact what was being said there regarding Mr.
Frank Anthony Moschetti’s lack of required Oath on file. The Appellant Court’s De
Facto decision by a de facto court, as stated herein by definition is NOT THE LAWFUL
GOVERNMENT!

The Colorado Appeals Court and it’s De Facto belligerents Powers are understood Load
& Clear [https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/16/16-1239.pdf] with rulings like this. However, for the
record, here are several citations under Colorado Law and United States Law to the
contrary, to wit:

This is a list of the latest Colorado Oath of Offices, ACTS pertaining to the same, which
were passed as recently as 3-22-2018 and signed into law on 4-2-2018

3-22-2018 that passed

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2018A/bills/2018a_1138_enr.pdf

and...

04-02-2018 Signed ACT

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2018A/bills/2018a_1138_signed.pd
f

and...

145
This link is to all applicable matters regarding the Oath of Office recent Changes in
Colorado with links to all the Legislation and other related documents, to wit:

Public Official Oaths And Affirmations | Colorado General Assembly

Public Official Oaths And Affirmations |

Colorado General Assembly

and...

The Oath of Office Form

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/business/PDFFillable/OATH.pdf

and...

Article 12 - Colorado Constitution - Officers - et al:

Article 12

With all this showing it is required to have an oath of office and then to read decisions
like that De Facto Appeals decision provided above makes the People of Colorado
POLITICAL PRISONERS OF WAR (POW’s). POW’s subject to a Hostile Belligerent
Power, who is not the Lawful Government, but one of FORCE (De Facto); and therefore,
is the current RULING POWER nevertheless! A POW is defined as:

“A prisoner of war (POW) is a person, whether combatant or non-combatant,

who is held in custody by a belligerent power during or immediately after
an armed conflict. The earliest recorded usage of the phrase "prisoner of war"
dates to 1660.[1]

Belligerents hold prisoners of war in custody for a range of legitimate and

illegitimate reasons, such as isolating them from enemy combatants still in the
field (releasing and repatriating them in an orderly manner after hostilities),
demonstrating military victory, punishing them, prosecuting them for war crimes,
exploiting them for their labour, recruiting or even conscripting them as their own
combatants, collecting military and political intelligence from them,
or indoctrinating them in new political or religious beliefs.[2]

(See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner_of_war )

146
 With regards to Sovereignty, they depended highly upon the Law of Nations as a guide of
what is fair and right, along with that which is wrong. In the Law of Nations, Vattel states:

“If he (the sovereign) puts justice and duty first, if he aspires to the lofty and
immortal honor of being the father of his people, let him distrust the selfish
suggestions of the minister who represents to him as rebels all citizens who do not
hold out their hands to the chains of slavery and who refuse to bow without a
murmur under the rod of a despotic rule.” Vattel, Book III, § 290

and…

“The surest method of appeasing seditions, and at the same time the most just one,
is to satisfy the grievances of the people! If they have revolted without cause, which
perhaps is never the case, …” Vattel, Book III § 291

and…

“The fact of having entered into civil society does not bind one to follow its lot when
it dissolves itself in order to be subject to foreign control. . . We owe it obedience so
long as it remains a body politic; when it divest itself of that character and receives
the law of another state it breaks the bonds which unite its members and releases
them from their engagements.” Vattel, Book I, § 184

The record clearly shows that the deception is planned to mislead and cause confusion
and strife so that the people can be plundered without their understanding of what is really going
on. Vattel, in Book III, ch. 12, § 188, clearly states that under the law of nations:

“an unjust war can give rise to no legal rights, no certain possession can be
obtained of any property captured…such property will always be subject to a claim
for recovery, as in the case of goods stolen by robbers.”

EXAPLES OF THE WAYS, MEANS & METHODS WHICH

ARE USED UPON THE PEOPLE DOMESTICALLY

Ways, Means, Methods and the like used against any person (i.e.) the People, within the
United States, are military, and includes, but is not limited to the following, to wit:

Naval Special Warfare Development Group

147
 As the action arm of the NCS, SAD/SOG conducts military direct action missions
such as raids, ambushes, sabotage, targeted killings[9][10][11] and unconventional
warfare (e.g., training and leading guerrilla and military units of other countries in
combat). SAD/SOG also conducts special reconnaissance, that can be either military or
intelligence driven, but is carried out by Paramilitary Officers (also called Paramilitary
Operatives) when in "non-permissive environments". Paramilitary Operations Officers
are also fully trained case officers and as such conduct clandestine human intelligence
(HUMINT) operations throughout the world.[12] SAD/SOG officers are selected from
the most elite U.S. military units.[8]
The political action group within SAD conducts the deniable psychological
operations, also known as black propaganda, as well as "Covert Influence" to effect
political change as an important part of any Administration's foreign policy.[1] Covert
intervention in a foreign election is the most significant form of political action. This
could involve financial support for favored candidates, media guidance, technical support
for public relations, get-out-the-vote or political organizing efforts, legal expertise,
advertising campaigns, assistance with poll-watching, and other means of direct action.
Policy decisions could be influenced by assets, such as subversion of officials of the
country, to make decisions in their official capacity that are in the furtherance of U.S.
policy aims. In addition, mechanisms for forming and developing opinions involve the
covert use of propaganda.[13]
Propaganda includes leaflets, newspapers, magazines, books, radio, and
television, all of which are geared to convey the U.S. message appropriate to the region.
These techniques have expanded to cover the internet as well. They may employ officers
to work as journalists, recruit agents of influence, operate media platforms, plant certain
stories or information in places it is hoped it will come to public attention, or seek to deny
and/or discredit information that is public knowledge. In all such propaganda efforts,
"black" operations denote those in which the audience is to be kept ignorant of the
source; "white" efforts are those in which the originator openly acknowledges himself;
and "gray" operations are those in which the source is partly but not fully
acknowledged.[13][14]
Some examples of political action programs were the prevention of the Italian
Communist Party (PCI) from winning elections between 1948 and the late 1960s;
overthrowing the governments of Iran in 1953, and Guatemala in 1954; arming rebels in
Indonesia in 1957; and providing funds and support to the trade union federation
Solidarity following the imposition of martial law in Poland after 1981.[15]
SAD's existence became better known as a result of the "Global War on Terror".
Beginning in autumn of 2001, SAD/SOG paramilitary teams arrived in Afghanistan to

148
hunt down al-Qaeda leaders, facilitate the entry of U.S. Army Special Forces and lead the
United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan against the ruling Taliban.
SAD/SOG units also defeated Ansar al-Islam in Iraqi Kurdistan prior to the invasion of
Iraq in 2003[16][17] and trained, equipped, organized and led the Kurdish peshmerga
forces to defeat the Iraqi army in northern Iraq.[12][16]
Despite being the most covert unit in U.S. Special Operations, numerous books
have been published on the exploits of CIA paramilitary officers, including Conboy &
Morrison's "Feet to the Fire: CIA Covert Operations in Indonesia",[18] and Warner's
"Shooting at the Moon: The Story of America's Clandestine War in Laos.[19] Most
experts consider SAD/SOG the premiere force for unconventional warfare (UW),
whether that warfare consists of either creating or combating an insurgency in a foreign
country.[6][20][21]
In the 2003 book, "Special OPS: America's elite forces in 21st century combat", the
author states:
"Highly classified, the SAD is regarded as the preeminent special operations
unit in the world. Members are the elite of the elite; "the best period." This
results from the sources from which the organization recruits its members:
Special missions units (SMUs); such as Delta Force and NSWDG (United
States Naval Special Warfare Development Group)..."[22]

There remains some conflict between the National Clandestine Service and the more
clandestine parts of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM),[23]
such as the Joint Special Operations Command. This is usually confined to the
civilian/political heads of the respective Department/Agency.
The combination of SAD and USSOCOM units has resulted in some of the most notable
successes of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to include the locating and killing of
Osama bin Laden.[21][24] SAD/SOG has several missions. One of these missions is the
recruiting, training, and leading of indigenous forces in combat operations.[21]
SAD/SOG and its successors have been used when it was considered desirable to have
plausible deniability about U.S. support (this is called a covert operation or "covert
action").[12] Unlike other special missions units, SAD/SOG operatives combine special
operations and clandestine intelligence capabilities in one individual.[8] These
individuals can operate in any environment (sea, air or ground) with limited to no
support.[6]

149
[edit]
Covert action

Under U.S. law, the CIA is authorized to collect intelligence, conduct counterintelligence
and to conduct covert action by the National Security Act of 1947.[1] President Ronald
Reagan issued Executive Order 12333 titled "United States Intelligence Activities" in
1984. This order defined covert action as "special activities," both political and military,
that the U.S. government would deny, granting such operations exclusively to the CIA.
The CIA was also designated as the sole authority under the 1991 Intelligence
Authorization Act and mirrored in Title 50 of the United States Code Section
413(e).[1][21] The CIA must have a "Presidential Finding" issued by the President of the
United States in order to conduct these activities under the Hughes-Ryan amendment to
the 1991 Intelligence Authorization Act.[25] These findings are then monitored by the
oversight committees in both the U.S. Senate, called the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence (SSCI) and the U.S. House of Representatives, called the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).[26]
Every U.S. President since George Washington has used covert action as a part of their
broader foreign policy, whether Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative.[27] A
majority of these covert action operations were successful.[28] Most of the operations
that were not successful were directed by the President over the objections of the
CIA.[28]
Some of the most controversial "covert action" programs, such as the Iran-Contra affair,
were not primarily the work of the CIA.[29] Covert action programs are also much less
expensive than overt political or military actions.[1] The Pentagon commissioned a study
to determine whether the CIA or the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) should conduct
covert action paramilitary operations. Their study determined that the CIA should
maintain this capability and be the "sole government agency conducting covert action."
The DoD found that, even under U.S. law, it does not have the legal authority to conduct
covert action, nor the operational agility to carry out these types of missions.[30] The
operation in May 2011 that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden was a covert action
under the authority of the CIA.[24][31]
[edit]
Selection and training

SAD/SOG has several hundred officers, mostly former members of special operations
forces (SOF) and a majority from the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC).[32]
The CIA has also recruited individuals within the agency.[33] The CIA's formal position
for these individuals is "Paramilitary Operations Officers" and "Specialized Skills
Officers." Paramilitary Operations Officers attend the Clandestine Service Trainee (CST)
program, which trains them as clandestine intelligence operatives (i.e. "spies"; known as
"Core Collectors" within the Agency).
The primary strengths of SAD/SOG Paramilitary Officers are agility, adaptability, and

150
deniability. They often operate in small teams, typically with six operators (with some
operations being carried out by a single officer), all with extensive military special
operations expertise and specialized skills that do not exist in any other unit.[8]
As fully trained intelligence case officers, Paramilitary Operations Officers possess all
the clandestine skills to collect human intelligence—and most importantly—to recruit
assets from among the indigenous troops receiving their training. These officers often
operate in remote locations behind enemy lines to carry out direct action (including raids
and sabotage), counter-intelligence, guerrilla or unconventional warfare (UW), counter-
terrorism, and hostage rescue missions, in addition to being able to conduct espionage via
HUMINT assets.
There are four principal elements within SAD's Special Operations Group: the Air
Branch, the Maritime Branch, the Ground Branch, and the Armor and Special Programs
Branch. The Armor and Special Programs Branch is charged with development, testing,
and covert procurement of new personnel and vehicular armor and maintenance of
stockpiles of ordnance and weapons systems used by SOG, almost all of which must be
obtained from clandestine sources abroad, in order to provide SOG operatives and their
foreign trainees with plausible deniability in accordance with U.S. Congressional
directives.
Together, SAD/SOG contains a complete combined arms covert military. Paramilitary
Operations Officers are the core of each branch and routinely move between the branches
to gain expertise in all aspects of SOG. [33] As such, Paramilitary Operations Officers
are trained to operate in all of these areas and environments. Because these officers are
taken from the most highly trained units in the U.S. military and then provided with
extensive additional training to become CIA clandestine intelligence officers and
SAD/SOG operatives in all of these environments, many U.S. security experts assess
them as the most elite of the U.S. special missions units.[34]
SAD, like most of the CIA, requires a bachelor's degree to be considered for
employment. Many have advanced degrees such as Master's and law degrees.[35] Many
candidates come from notable schools, such as many Ivy League institutions, but the
majority of recruits today come from middle-class backgrounds.[36]
SAD officers are trained at Camp Peary, Virginia (also known as "The Farm") and at
privately owned training centers around the United States. They also train its personnel at
"The Point" (Harvey Point), a facility outside of Hertford, North Carolina.[37][38]
In addition to the twelve months of training in the Clandestine Service Trainee (CST)
Program[39] to be a clandestine intelligence officer, Paramilitary Operations Officers are
trained to a high level of proficiency in the use and tactical employment of an unusually
wide degree of modern weaponry, explosive devices and firearms (foreign and domestic),
hand to hand combat, high performance/tactical driving (on and off road), apprehension
avoidance (including picking handcuffs and escaping from confinement), improvised
explosive devices, Cyberwarfare, covert channels, Military Free Fall parachuting, combat
and commercial SCUBA and closed circuit diving, proficiency in foreign languages,
entry operations and vehicle hot-wiring, Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape
(SERE), extreme survival and wilderness training, combat EMS medical training, tactical
communications and tracking.

151
____________________________________________________

152
American Peace Flag

IN THE
COMMON COUNCIL

Case No. _________________

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO,

EX REL;, PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, James D. Hardin, et al.,
Jure divino, Jure Coronea, PRINCIPLE/SOVEREIGN
By
Petitioner/Plaintiff/Citizens SPECIAL APPEARANCE
SPECIAL PROCEEDING
Vs.

THE COUNTY OF DOUGLAS; THE MUNICIPAL TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK; THE

CASTLE ROCK TOWN COUNCIL, TOWN MANAGER; MAGISTRATE FRANK
ANTHONY MOSCHETTI (INDIVIDUALLY); THE DE FACTO STATE OF
COLORADO; THE DE FACTO UNITED STATES; THE DE FACTO PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES, DONALD J. TRUMP; THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK(s)
AND IT’S BOARD OF GOVERNORS; THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
(IMF) OR (THE FUND), THE WORLD BANK (THE BANK) And DOES 1
THROUGH 10,000 inclusive;

Respondent(s)/ Defendant(s)/ Foreign Agent(s)/ Occupying Beligerant(s)

BRIEF AND JUDICIAL NOTICE

ON THE TITLE 4 U.S.C. 1,
American Flag of Peace
of the United States of America

THE FLAG, AS WITH ALL THINGS

IN LAW, IS HIGHLY DEFINED

153
 COMES Now, The People of the State of Colorado, Ex Rel; Private Attorney
General, James D. Hardin, with this, his Brief and Judicial Notice in Support of
Correcting the current illegal Display(s) of our National Republic(s) Title 4 U.S.C. 1
“Free Flag of Peace”, which are contrary, fraudulent impersonations of the Title 4
U.S.C. 1 national flag, rather in color or proportional sizing, as shown and argued below,
to wit:

American Peace Flag

This is what our Title 4 U.S.C. 1 “Free Flag of Peace” looks like and is
approximately 3’x5’ on standards, flag poles, etc. It is important to understand the long
undisclosed fact pertaining to the law of the flag. That is to say, only when this flag is
present, are the laws of this Nation’s Constitution applicable and binding upon all.

The People of the State of Colorado openly promotes stopping and/or preventing
the current Fraudulent, Prohibited, unlawful and illegal display of Gold Fringed Flag(s)
placing ALL under the EXECUTIVE WAR POWERS / MARSHAL LAW of the
Executive Office of the President, in his capacity as Commander-In-Chief of the
ARMED FORCES. Furthermore, THE GOLD FRINGE around three (3) sides of the
National Flag, is emblematic of a Congressionally Mandated All-out Declaration of War;
or Declaration of Executive War Powers, or Declaration of Marshal Law, all of which
suspends the Constitution, civil authorities, including civilian courts.

Any of the available options as just mentioned above, will all lead back to the
same result, (i.e.) Suspension of the U.S. Constitution, which gets set aside during times
of a Declared State of War; or Declaration of a National Emergency, Economic
Emergency, et al; regardless of where said Emergency Exist, and could be anywhere on
earth, or invoking the Emergency War Powers Act, etc. All of which are evidenced by
ensign. That is to say the unlawful Display of the ARMY REGULATION Gold Fringed
Flag in open civilian courts, to wit:

154
 ARGUMENT

On or about the date of June 14, 1776, Congress made the following resolution
pertaining to the law of the flag, to wit:

“The flag of the United States shall be thirteen stripes, alternate red and
white, with a union of thirteen stars of white on a blue field…”

Because of the fact that Congress made no rule for the arrangement of the stars,
they were displayed in different ways, most usually in a circle. As new states joined the
Union, they demanded representation in the stars and stripes of the flag. In 1795
Congress voted to increase to 15 the number of stars and stripes. Legislation enacted in
1818 reestablished the number of stripes at 13, and instituted the policy, to wit:

“That on the admission of every new state into the Union, one star be added
to the Union of the flag...”.

An executive order issued by President William Howard Taft on October 29,

1912, fixed the overall width and length of the U.S. flag, known technically as the hoist
and fly, respectively, in a ratio of 1: 1.9. The thirteen stripes were fixed at equal width.

The hoist of the blue field containing the stars was fixed at seven-thirteenths of
the overall hoist, that is, as extending from the top of the flag to the bottom of the seventh
stripe. The fly of the blue field was fixed at a tiny fraction over three-fourths the overall
hoist. The diameter of each star was established as a minute fraction under one-sixteenth
of the overall hoist.

Currently, the Flag of the United States of America is defined at title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2
and Presidential Executive Order 10834, found in the Federal Register at Vol. 24. No.
166, P. 6365-6367. The American Flag of Peace of the United States of America is
described as red, white and blue, with thirteen alternating red and white horizontal
stripes, and a blue field (union) with 50 stars, one to represent each of the several States.

155
 The Flag is proportional, (1 X 1.9). This proportion is easily determined by
measuring the length (fly) and dividing by the measurement of the width (hoist). The
length divided by the width should be very nearly 1.9. If the flag is not to the correct 1
X 1.9 proportion, it is not a Title 4 U.S.C. 1,2 American Flag of Peace of the United
States of America.

THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO PROVISIONS IN THE LAW FOR ADDING A

FOURTH COLOR (YELLOW FRINGE) TO THE TITLE 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 FLAG.

Title 4 U.S.C. 3 provides that anything put on the Title 4 U.S.C. 1,2 Flag (such as
gold fringe) MUTILATES the Flag, and carries a one-year prison term. This is
confirmed by the authority of Title 36 U.S.C. 176 (G). The gold fringe is the fourth
color and represents “color of law”, and, when placed on the Title 4 U.S.C. 1,2 Flag,
mutilates the Flag and suspends the organic Constitution for the United States of
America, and establishes “color of law”. (Refer to Title 18 U.S.C. 242. Also See Black’s
Law Dictionary).

156
 As provided by Title 36 U.S.C. 173, and Army Regulation 840-10, chapter 2-
1(b), the Flag of the united States of America is defined and described in Title 4 U.S.C.
1,2. Civilians must use the Title 4 U.S.C. 1,2 Flag (See: Title 36 U.S.C. 173 and Army
Regulation 840-10, chapter 2-7) and when military flags are displayed by Army
Regulation 840-10, chapter 2 and Title 36 U.S.C. 175.

THE ONLY AUTHORITY FOR A FRINGE ON THE FLAG IS IN THE ARMY

REGULATIONS FOR THE NATIONAL (MILITARY) FLAGS ONLY.

The U.S. Attorney General has stated:

“The placing of a gold fringe on the National flag, the dimensions of the flag,
and the arrangement of the stars in the union are matters of detail not
controlled by statute, but are within the discretion of the President as
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy. . . ancient custom sanctions the
use of fringe on regimental colors and standards, but there seems to be no
good reason or precedent for its use on other flags. . . the use of such a fringe
is prescribed in current Army Regulations, No. 260-10.” (See 34 Ops. Atty.
Gen. 483 & 485).

The only statute or regulation, in the United States, prescribing a yellow-fringed

United States flag is Army Regulation No. 260-10, making it a military flag.

By Army Regulation 260-10, the gold fringe may be used only on regimental
“colors”, the President’s flag, for military courts martial, and the flags used at military
recruiting centers, to wit:

“A military flag emblem of a nation, usually made of cloth and flown from a
staff; FROM A MILITARY STANDPOINT flags are of two general
classes… those flown from stationary masts over army posts, and those
carried by troops in formation. The former are referred to by the general
name of flags. The latter are called colors when carried by dismounted
troops. COLORS AND STANDARDS are more nearly square than flags,
and are made of silk, with a knotted FRINGE OF YELLOW ON THREE
SIDES... USE OF A FLAG -- THE MOST GENERAL AND
APPROPRIATE USE OF THE FLAG IS AS A NATIONAL SYMBOL OF
AUTHORITY AND POWER” (National Encyclopedia, Vol. 4)

157
 The adornments on the top of the flag pole are for military use only. The gold
eagle is for the use of the President of the United States only, and only in time of war. (Or
when he is standing as Commander-in-Chief of the military, having declared Martial
Law, and suspended the Constitution). The gold spear ball is for military recruiting
centers only. The gold acorn is for military parades only. (Army Regulation 840-10,
chapter 8).

In Webster’s Dictionary, the word Colors is defined as:

“A flag, ensign, or standard borne in an army or fleet.” (Webster’s, 1971).

And furthermore, Black’s Law Dictionary defines “Color” as follows, to wit:

“Color An appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from

that which is real. A prima facie or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive
appearance; a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack or reality; a
disguise or pretext. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)

Now let us define the applicable U.S. Case Law, which defines the “Color of
law” as follows, to wit::

“Color of law. The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal

right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible
only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken
under “color of state law”. Colorable That which is in appearance only, and
not in reality, what it purports to be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the
appearance of truth.” (Windel v. Flinn, 251 P 2d 136, 146).

This, of course is done, for purposes of Fraud and of Colorable alteration, to wit:

“One which makes no real or substantial change, but is introduced only as a

subterfuge or means of evading the patent or copyright law.”

Now, let us look back in Black’s we also find “Colorable Imitation”, to wit:

158
 “Colorable imitation In the law of trademarks, this phrase denotes such a
close or ingenious imitation as to be calculated to deceive ordinary persons.”
(See: Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed.).

The Title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 American Flag of the united States of America takes
precedence over all other flags, as it is the superior flag, and establishes the jurisdiction
of the united States of America, and the laws made in pursuance thereof. The law of the
flag defines the law as applicable to the law of the flag; and to whom it applies to, as a
matter of compulsion; and further states as follows:

“THE LAW OF THE FLAG”

The Law of the Flag, an International Law, which is recognized by every nation
of the planet, is defined as:

“...a rule to the effect that a vessel is a part of the territory of the nation
whose flag she flies. The term is used to designate the right under which a
ship owner, who sends his vessel into a foreign port, gives notice by his flag to
all who enter into contracts with the ship master that he intends the Law of
that Flag to regulate those contracts, and that they must either submit to its
operation or not contract with him or his agent at all.” (Ref. Ruhstrat v.
People, 57 N.E. 41)

By the doctrine of “four cornering: the flag establishes the law of the country that
it represents. For example, the embassies of foreign countries, in Washington, D.C., are
“four cornered” by walls or fencing, creating an “enclave.” Within the boundaries of the
“enclave” of the foreign embassy, the flag of that foreign country establishes the
jurisdiction and law of that foreign country, which will be enforced by the Law of the
Flag and international treaty. If you enter an embassy, you will be subject to the laws of
that country, just as if you board a ship flying a foreign flag, you will be subject to the
laws of that flag, enforceable by the “master of the ship,” (Captain), by the law of the
flag.

Under Article IV, Section 3, of the organic Constitution for the United States of
America (1787), no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any

159
other State. So -- why have the Germans been allowed to erect a German enclave at
Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, under the Law of the Flag? Why have the
judges of the State and Federal Courts been allowed to erect foreign enclaves within our
courthouses under the foreign flag of the yellow fringe on the soil of our Republic?

The flags displayed in State courts and courts of the United States have gold or
yellow fringes. It is your warning that you are entering a foreign enclave and will be
subject to the jurisdiction of that flag. The flag of the gold or yellow fringe has no
constitution, no laws, and no rules of court, and is not recognized by any Nation on the
earth, and is foreign to this Republic and the United States of America.

When you enter a courtroom displaying a gold or yellow-fringed flag, you have
just entered into a foreign country, and you had better have your passport with you, you
may not be coming back. The judge under a gold or yellow fringe flag become the
“captain” or “master” and has absolute power to make the rules as he goes.

The gold or yellow fringe flag is your warning that you are leaving your
constitutionally secured rights at the door, to wit:

“It is an elementary rule of pleading, that a plea to the jurisdiction is a tacit

(silent) admission that the court has a right to judge in the case and is a
waiver to all exception to the jurisdiction.” (Girty v. Logan, 6 Bush KY. 8)

You can watch over the ramparts by the dawn’s early light, with bombs bursting
in the air, until you go blind, but you will not see a title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 Flag with its bright
stars and broad stripes. When the flags are gone, the Country is gone!

You may see something that looks like an American Flag, (a colorable flag, a
colorable alteration or imitation) but it is a shortened National Flag, for military use only.
Take your tape measure and calculator to determine what kink of a flag it is.

160
 Five will get you ten that its proportion is 1 X 1.66 or 1 X 1.5. It looks like a
duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, but it isn’t a duck. It is something far more
insidious and hedonistic!

It is Far more Treacherous, Far more Seditious and it is Far more Perfidious! So,
who can answer the following questions for me, to wit:
1) Why do private businesses display National Flags with Military adornments
on the flag-pole? and

2) Why do banks display gold or yellow-fringed flags, with gold adornments, in

their lobbies? and

3) Is McDonald’s competing with the United States Army recruiters? and

4) Why do churches & Religious Institutions display Military flags in every

church in the United States? and

5) Why do Public Schools display gold or yellow-fringed flags, with gold

adornments, in their lobbies? and

6) Why do 99% of Municipal Buildings and Municipal Courts display gold or

yellow-fringed state flags and gold-fringed United States flags, with gold
adornments, in their lobbies, and court rooms? It certainly is not for “Indoor
Displays, Decorative, etc.” But rather, it is because we are currently under a
Foreign Alien Enemies Belligerent Occupation; and

7) Can anyone tell me the truth regarding the “Church(s)”! If so, Who among
your churches can actually tell me if their church has a “Pastor,” or a
“Chaplain?” and

161
 8) Can anybody tell me why, or how for that matter, do we have military
“colors” placed in our public schools? and

9) Why are our children being taught under “Martial Law,” in a foreign or
Military “enclave” with no U.S. Constitutionally secured rights, under the
Law of the Flag?

A military or foreign flag, displayed without the presence of a Title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2

Flag suspends the Constitution, by the International law of the flag. Furthermore, the
Attorney General issued an Opinion on the matter, which states as follows, to wit:

“Flag - Martial law “The placing of a fringe on the national flag, the
dimensions of the flag and the arrangement of the stars in the union are
matters of detail not controlled by statute, but are within the discretion of the
President as Commander In Chief of the Army and Navy.” 34 Ops. Atty.
Gen. 483.

and...

“The use of such a fringe is prescribed in current Army Regulation, No. 260-
10.” 34 Ops. Atty. Gen. 483, 485.

and...

“Ancient customs sanctions the use of the fringe on regimental colors and
standards, but there seems to be no good reason or precedent for its use on
other flags.” The Adjutant General of the Army, Mar. 28, 1924, (1925) 34
Ops. Atty. Gen. 483, 485.

And now, with regards to the “Display of Military Flag”, the following law
always previous and takes precedence in all cases regarding the same, to wit:

“Display of Military Flag

Flag - Martial Law “2-3” Sizes and Occasions for Display.
b. National flags listed below are for indoor display and for use in ceremonies

162
 and parades. For these purposes the United States flag will be rayon banner
cloth, trimmed on three sides with golden yellow fringe, 2 1/2 inches wide. It
will be the same size as the flags displayed or carried with it.
c. Authorization for indoor display
4. Each Military courtroom. [The Municipal Courts of the State
Republic???] “1-6. Restrictions. The following limitations and prohibitions
are applicable to flags, guidons, streamers, and components.
e. Unauthorized use of official flags, guidons, and streamers. Display or use
of flags, guidons, and streamers or replicas thereof, including those presently
or formerly carried by U.S. Army units, by other than the office, individual,
or organization for which authorized, is prohibited except as indicated in (3)
below, to wit:

“(3) Recognized United States Army division associations...” United States

Army Regulation AR 840-10, October 1, 1979.

The month the present case is set for seems most appropriate, as a “SIGN” or
“The Times” for it was under the EIGHTH month; and also that Presidential Executive
Order 10834 was issued, to wit:

“Flag - Martial Law Pursuant to 4 U.S.C. chapter 1, §§ 1, 2, & 3; Executive

Order 10834, August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that
resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW
FRINGE border on three sides. The President of the United States designates
this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as
Commander-in-Chief.

And...

“Flag - “The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes,
alternating red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars,
white in a blue field.” 61 Stat. 642, July 30, 1947, ch. 389. 4 U.S.C.A. 1. (This
describes the civil flag of the United States as it is to be flown in the District
of Columbia, its enclaves and overseas on ships and embassies.)

Now let us examine the military Law of the Flag of the United States, to wit:

“Army Regulation 840-10 update

163
 2-1. Authorization
(a) The flag of the United States is the symbol of our nation. The union white
stars on a field of blue, is the honor point of the flag. The union of the flag,
and the flag itself when in company with other flags, is always given the
honor position: for example, the marching right, the flag’s own right, or an
observer’s left facing the flag.”

But most of all, why do civilian courts display military or foreign flags? Why do civilian
judges conduct courts martial courts proceedings for the civilian population(s)?
Under Martial Law, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent, not innocent until
proven guilty pursuant to the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States. That is
a violation of both, 1) Civilian Law; and 2) Military Law.

Why does it seem that there are no longer any lawful flag manufacturers? The
law, the size, the ways and means of display, should all be DISCLOSED, on a printed
Notice with every flag sale! Yet they don’t and in fact, they only appear to sale
fraudulent alterations which only appears to be the lawful flag of our country. That is to
say, flag manufacturers, that produce correct and lawful Title 4 U.S.C. 1 flags? (you ever
try to buy one of lawful size 3’ x 5’ dimensions, absent the gold fringe?)

America has been conquered, and by tacit admission and tacit consent, of and by,
the American people, whom have surrendered!!! As such, We, The People have been and
remain Prisoners of War (i.e. P.O.W.’s), captured by the current criminal occupying
Belligerent and including, but not limited to, War Criminals masquerading as “Official’s
– Under Sworn Oaths” and then fly a Marshal Law Flag inside, while claiming it is a
civilian court?!

Our flag (Title 4, U.S.C. 1) is the American FREE FLAG OF PEACE and
Hardin further states and declares that, should he fall, at anytime, when as now, he
was acting in the capacity of the “Flag Bearer” of our Nation, then ye shall honor
him as such. He should be buried with full Military Honors and his family should
be given his medal in his honor, even the medal given to Citizens, in recognition of
their Meritorious Civilian Service Award, pursuant to:

164
 “FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES. By the act entitled "An act to establish
the flag of the United States," (Rev.St. §§ 1791, 1792), it was provided "that,
from and after the fourth day of July next, the flag of the United States be
thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be twenty
stars, white in a blue field; that, on the admission of every new state into the
Union, one star be added to the union of the flag; and that such addition shall
take effect on the fourth day of July then next succeeding such admission.”
(See: Act July 30, 1947, c. 389, §§ 1, 2, 61 Stat.. 641; 4 U.S.C.A. §§ 1, 2.)

And...

“BEARER. One who bears, carries, or holds a thing. Defined by the

Negotiable Instruments Act as the person in possession of a bill or note which
is payable to bearer. Miller v. People's Say. Bank, 193 Mo.App. 498, 186
S.W. 547, 550. When a check, note, draft, etc., is payable to "bearer," it
imports that the contents thereof shall be payable to any person who may
present the instrument for payment.” Thompson v. Perrine, 106 U.S. 589, 1
S.Ct. 564, 568, 27 L. Ed. 298 and (BLACK’S LAW DICT. 4TH ED.).

Whom among you shall step forward first? For the day is come! That Specified
TIME, whereby ye have heard shall come and when ye Stand, STAND FIRM, in the
Armor of God! STAND! TAKE UP THE IMMORTAL OBLIGATION of being the
father of your people, or to bare the pangs, blisters and stripes, as God’s man does now!

The foundation of god’s throne, is: “righteousness” and “justice”. Wherefore,

both must be restored! When two nations go to war, the object of the game is to capture
the other guy’s flag. When you go onto foreign soil, take the other guy’s flag down and
put yours up, you have captured the other guy’s territory and put it under the law
(constitution) of your flag.

Sun tzu, the ancient Chinese philosopher and general, said that when the art of
war is brought to its highest pinnacle, the enemy will be conquered without the opposing
armies ever having met in the field. By skillfully using the art of deception, and skillful
use of agents to infiltrate the enemy’s government, the enemy may be conquered without
the enemy ever knowing that it had been conquered.

165
 We have been conquered! Where is the VFW? Where are the veterans that paid
so high a price for the Title 4 U.S.C. 1,2 American flag and the liberty and country that it
represents? Will these men who sacrificed so much continue to consent to the fall of our
nation by their continued silence? Have they capitulated by tacit agreement, to wit:

“Capitulation The act or agreement of surrendering upon negotiated or

simulated terms.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)

Tacit Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated,

implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as a tacit agreement or tacit understanding.
Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. Manifested by
the refraining from contradiction or objection, inferred from the situation and
circumstance, in the absence of express matter. (Black’ Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)

Tacit admissions. An acknowledgment or concession of a fact inferred from

either silence or from the substance of what one has said. One of the Maxims of Law is:
“Tacita quaedam habentur pro expressis” (THINGS UNEXPRESSED ARE
SOMETIMES CONSIDERED AS EXPRESSED).

CONCLUSION
Our elected officials, judges, county commissioners, city councils, school boards
and school administrators, police, State Legislators, Governor, the U.S. Congress, and
even the President have all committed acts of CONSTRUCTIVE TREASON, defined as:

“...an attempt to establish treason by circumstantiality, and not by the simple

genuine letter of the law, and therefore is highly dangerous to public
freedom.” C.J.S., vol. 87, p. 910)

The FRAUD complained of, either knowingly or unknowingly, against the People
of the United States of America by surrendering the American Flag of Peace of the
United States of America to the foreign state/power of the yellow fringe flag and erecting
“foreign enclaves” on the soil of the several States in breach of Article IV, Section 3.

166
When all of the title 4 U.S.C. 1, 2 American Flags are gone, our country, the United
States of America and our precious constitutions are gone.

If the flag is not important, why then, did an entire battalion of Marines, in early
1942, die to the last man on Wake Island defending the flag against the Japanese? These
Marines did not surrender the flag!

In early 1942, in the Philippines, a young officer named Lt. Ramsey, under the
command of Gen. Wainwright, led the last mounted cavalry charge in the history of the
U.S. Army. Lt. Ramsey and his men fought so viciously and with such determination
that, against overwhelming odds, the Japanese were routed, buying precious time to
enable the American forces to retreat to the peninsula of Bataan.

When the American forces were finally forced by starvation to surrender to the
Japanese, Lt. Ramsey refused to surrender and slipped through the Japanese lines with a
handful of his men and continued to make war against the Japanese with the Philippine
Army. By hiding in the mountains and jungle, Lt. Ramsey, though poorly equipped, was
able to train a guerrilla army and wreak havoc on the Japanese until Gen. McArthur
returned. Lt. Ramsey did not surrender his flag!

DEFINITION

“Constructive Treason. Officers that swear an oath and affirmation for

supporting and defending the organic Constitution for the United States of
America, and by surrendering the oath and affirmation to the foreign
state/power of the foreign yellow or gold fringe flag, causing the party before
the court a deprivation of rights, with will of intent by the judge, by overt
acts to surrender the organic Constitution for the United States of America
(1787) into the hands of a foreign power/state, by definition, is guilty of
constructive treason.”

Treason imputed to a person by law from his conduct or course of action, though
his deeds taken severally do not amount to actual treason. (See: Flag Code, Etiquette
and Laws)

167
Now tell me, how does your flag measure up?

Title 4 of the United States Code describes the specifications of the OFFICIAL
United States Flag and yet up until now there have been no OFFICIAL flags made
available to the Citizens of our country!

If the U.S. Code defines the specific design of the official U.S. Flag, then what
statement are we making when we fly a flag that does not represent our country...the
United States???

Dated this 22nd Day of January, in the year of THE DECLARATION, 2019.

Respectfully Submitted,

By: ______________________________
/s/ James D. Hardin

168
American Peace Flag

IN THE
COMMON COUNCIL

Case No. _________________

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO,

EX REL;, PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, James D. Hardin, et al.,
Sui juris, Jure divino, PRINCIPLE/SOVEREIGN
By
Petitioner/Plaintiff/Citizens SPECIAL APPEARANCE
SPECIAL PROCEEDING
Vs.

FAC MAGISTRATE FRANK ANTHONY MOSCHETTI (Individually); DOUGLAS

COUNTY; TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK; TOWN COUNCIL OF CASTLE ROCK, THE
18TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CHIEF JUDGE, MICHELLE AMICO; PRESIDENT
DONALD J. TRUMP OF THE DE FACTO UNITED STATES (D&B#;-052714196);
AND DE FACTO STATE OF COLORADO (D&B#: 076438621); THE FEDERAL
RESERVE BANK(S) AND THE BANK(S) BOARD OF GOVERNORS; THE
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF) OR (THE FUND), THE WORLD
BANK (THE BANK) And DOES 1 THROUGH 10,000 inclusive;

Respondent’s/ Defendant’s/ Foreign Agent’s

COMES Now, The People of the STATE OF COLORADO, EX REL; Private

Attorney General, James D. Hardin with this, his Notice and Brief in Support of
the Assignment upon Civilian, James D. Hardin as “Private Attorney General”
and/or “Citizen’s suit”; pursuant to:

Title 42 U.S.C. §2000a–3[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000a-3];

18 U.S. Code § 1961 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961];

169
 33 U.S.C. 1365 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1365];
42 U.S.C § 1983 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983];
28 U.S.C. § 1343 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1343];
arguing as follows:

Private Attorney General

A private attorney general is a private party in the United States who

brings a lawsuit that is considered to be in the public interest, (i.e.) benefiting
the general public and not just the plaintiff. The private attorney general is
entitled to recover attorney's fees if he or she prevails. The purpose of this
principle is to provide extra incentive to private citizens to pursue suits that
may be of benefit to society at large.

Examples of application

Most civil rights statutes rely on private attorneys general for their
enforcement. In Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, 390 U.S. 400 (1968) - one
of the earliest cases construing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the United States
Supreme Court ruled that:

“A public accommodations suit is thus private in form only. When a

plaintiff brings an action . . . he cannot recover damages. If he
obtains an injunction, he does so not for himself alone but also as a
'private attorney general,' vindicating a policy that Congress
considered of the highest priority.”

The United States Congress has also passed laws with "private attorney
general" provisions that provide for the enforcement of laws prohibiting
employment discrimination, police brutality, and water pollution. Under the
Clean Water Act, for example, "any citizen" may bring suit against an
individual or a company that is a source of water pollution.

170
 Another excellent example of the "private attorney general" provisions is
the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. RICO allows
average citizens (private attorneys general) to sue those organizations that
commit mail and wire fraud as part of their criminal enterprise. To date, there
are over 60 federal statutes that encourage private enforcement by allowing
prevailing plaintiffs to collect attorney's fees.

Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award Act

The U.S. Congress codified the private attorney general principle into
law with the enactment of Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Award Act of 1976, 42
U.S.C. § 1988. The Senate Report on this statute stated that The Senate
Committee on the Judiciary wanted to level the playing field so that private
citizens, who might have little or no money, could still serve as "private
attorneys general" and afford to bring actions, even against state or local
bodies, to enforce the civil rights laws.

The Committee acknowledged that:

“[i]f private citizens are to be able to assert their civil rights, and if
those who violate the Nation's fundamental laws are not to proceed
with impunity, then citizens must have the opportunity to recover
what it costs them to vindicate these rights in court.”

Where a plaintiff wins his or her lawsuit and is considered the

"prevailing party," § 1988 acts to shift fees, including expert witness fees [at
least in certain types of civil rights actions, under the Civil Rights Act of 1991,
even if not in § 1983 actions], and to make those who acted as private attorneys
general whole again, thus encouraging the enforcement of the civil rights laws.

171
 The Senate reported that it intended fee awards to be "adequate to attract
competent counsel" to represent client with civil rights grievances. S. Rep. No.
94-1011, p. 6 (1976). The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the act to
provide for the payment of a "reasonable attorney's fee" based on the fair
market value of the legal services.
(See: Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_attorney_general )

and…

Categories: Civil procedure

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I, § 1988, to wit:

“Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

(a) Applicability of statutory and common law The jurisdiction in
civil and criminal matters conferred on the district courts by the
provisions of Titles 13, 24, and 70 of the Revised Statutes for the
protection of all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and
for their vindication, shall be exercised and enforced in conformity
with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to
carry the same into effect; but in all cases where they are not
adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to
furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the
common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and
statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such
civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent
with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be
extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of
the cause, and, if it is of a criminal nature, in the infliction of
punishment on the party found guilty.

(b) Attorney’s fees

In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981,
1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law
92–318 [20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.], the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act of 1993 [42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.], the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 [42 U.S.C. 2000cc et seq.], title

172
 VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.], or
section 13981 of this title, the court, in its discretion, may allow the
prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable
attorney’s fee as part of the costs, except that in any action brought
against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such
officer’s judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any
costs, including attorney’s fees, unless such action was clearly in
excess of such officer’s jurisdiction.

(c) Expert fees

In awarding an attorney’s fee under subsection (b) of this section in
any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of section 1981 or
1981a of this title, the court, in its discretion, may include expert fees
as part of the attorney’s fee.”

and…

Then, if one turn to TITLE 42, CHAPTER 21, SUBCHAPTER II, §

2000a–3, they will find the following with regards to Civil Actions, to wit:

“Civil actions for injunctive relief

(a) Persons aggrieved; intervention by Attorney General; legal
representation; commencement of action without payment of fees,
costs, or security.

Whenever any person has engaged or there are reasonable grounds

to believe that any person is about to engage in any act or practice
prohibited by section 2000a–2 of this title, a civil action for
preventive relief, including an application for a permanent or
temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order, may be
instituted by the person aggrieved and, upon timely application, the
court may, in its discretion, permit the Attorney General to
intervene in such civil action if he certifies that the case is of general
public importance.

Upon application by the complainant and in such circumstances as

the court may deem just, the court may appoint an attorney for such
complainant and may authorize the commencement of the civil
action without the payment of fees, costs, or security.

173
 (b) Attorney’s fees; liability of United States for costs.
In any action commenced pursuant to this subchapter, the court, in
its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United
States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs, and the
United States shall be liable for costs the same as a private person.

(c) State or local enforcement proceedings; notification of State or

local authority; stay of Federal proceedings.
In the case of an alleged act or practice prohibited by this
subchapter which occurs in a State, or political subdivision of a
State, which has a State or local law prohibiting such act or practice
and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or
seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings
with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, no civil action
may be brought under subsection (a) of this section before the
expiration of thirty days after written notice of such alleged act or
practice has been given to the appropriate State or local authority
by registered mail or in person, provided that the court may stay
proceedings in such civil action pending the termination of State or
local enforcement proceedings.

(d) References to Community Relations Service to obtain voluntary

compliance; duration of reference; extension of period.
In the case of an alleged act or practice prohibited by this
subchapter which occurs in a State, or political subdivision of a
State, which has no State or local law prohibiting such act or
practice, a civil action may be brought under subsection (a) of this
section: Provided, That the court may refer the matter to the
Community Relations Service established by subchapter VIII of this
chapter for as long as the court believes there is a reasonable
possibility of obtaining voluntary compliance, but for not more than
sixty days: Provided further,

That upon expiration of such sixty-day period, the court may extend
such period for an additional period, not to exceed a cumulative
total of one hundred and twenty days, if it believes there then exists
a reasonable possibility of securing voluntary compliance.”

Now with regards to the Private Attorney General Act and to whom the
same is applicable to, to wit:

174
 PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ACT

The Legislature, has enacted a law, which allows private citizens to sue
for civil fines and penalties for violations of certain California Labor Code
provisions. Previously, this could only be done by a State agency such as the
Labor Commissioner or the Attorney General.

Under the Private Attorney General Act of 2004, private citizens can sue
for these violations. If they are successful, the fines imposed under the law are
split with 75% of the amount going to the State of California Labor and
Workforce Development Agency and 25% going to the injured employees.
This 25% is in addition to any other monies owed the employees such as
unpaid overtime, unpaid meal premiums, bounced check fees, etc.

Since this is going to be split with Plaintiff at the rate of 75% to him and
the Private Attorney General in and for this case, will receive 25% of the equity
from this case as provided by law.

With this being explained, let us now move on to what the rule of law is
with regards to “Court Costs”, to wit:
COURT COSTS

“1) NO ATTAINDERS, NO EMOLUMENTS & NOTWITHSTANDING.

1. NO ATTAINDERS, Our public officials can not enact bills of attainders,

such as tickets, inspection fees, state taxes, gas taxes, child support, fees for
licenses, demand you pay for any service rendered by a public servant, their
salary is only to be paid out of the United States Treasury.

2. NO EMOLUMENTS & Emolument clause refers to a provision in Article

I, Section 9, Clause 8, that forbids the United States from granting titles of
nobility and restricts members of the government from receiving gifts from
foreign states without the consent of the United States Congress.

175
 3. NOTWITHSTANDING. All state laws, all state codes, all state statutes, all
federal statutes, all federal codes, and federal rules of civil procedure which
conflict with the constitution are contrary and void. Anything in the
Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. All laws
which violate the constitution, enumerate our rights are likewise void,
NOTWITHSTANDING.”

and…

Now let us examine what the “SUPREME COURT OF THE U.S. - RULES Part
VII. Practice and Procedure” say with regards to Rule 39, to wit:

“Rule 39. Proceedings In Forma Pauperis

The courts provide in propria persona parties wide latitude when construing
their pleadings and papers. When interpreting pro se papers, the Court
should use common sense to determine what relief the party desires.

Defendant has the right to submit in propria persona briefs on appeal, even
though they may be in artfully drawn but the court can reasonably read and
understand them. See, Vega v. Johnson, 149 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 1998).

Acting Private Attorney General: James D. Hardin, files this presentment

pursuant to:

Title 42 U.S.C. §2000a–3[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000a-3]; and

18 U.S. Code § 1961 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961]; and
33 U.S.C. 1365 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/1365]; and
42 U.S.C § 1983 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983]; and
28 U.S.C. § 1343 [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1343]; and

The term Private Attorney General refers to private citizens who in any civil
or criminal court proceeding, is acting on behalf of that person’s rights and
equal protection of Civil Rights under the law, or for prosecution’s under the
RICO Statutes. The private attorney general is entitled to recover attorney's
fees if he or she prevails.”

Dated this 22nd day of January, in the year of THE DECLARATION, 2019.

Respectfully Submitted,

By: ____________________________________
/s/ James D. Hardin/ sui juris, Jure Divino,
Plaintiff/Citizen and Sovereign Relator;

176
and Considering the fact that Douglas County is an alleged Un-Incorporated County, I
have multiple objections for the record; and for the following reasons:
1) a conflict of delegated authority; and
2) a Conflict of Authority to Act; and
3) a Conflict of Legal Entity Existence; and
4) a Conflict of Legal Entity Authority; and
5) a Conflict of Legal Entity Jurisdiction; and
6) a Conflict of Law; and
7) a Breach of Sworn Oath and Affirmation; and
8) (a) Tort actions, including but not limited to actions for negligence, trespass,
malicious abuse of process, malicious prosecution, outrageous conduct,
interference with relationships, and tortious breach of contract
9) Treason (See: C.R.S. § 18-11-101); and
10) Membership in anarchistic Seditious Association (See: C.R.S. § 18-11-203)
11) …; and
12) …; and
and

177
 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this 22nd day of January, 2019, I, James D. Hardin emailed a true and
correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE pursuant to the Colorado Governmental Immunity
Act
regarding a public entity, as defined in the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) 24-10-101 et seq.;
upon the parties listed herein below; and mailed the same after first signing, before a witness who has
certified the same in the sight of God; and in view of the Holy Mountain from the Garden of the God’s,
Colorado U.S.A. and the location of mailing via the United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed
to counsel for parties on the attached service list:

Counsel of Record for the Named Defendant’s

Office of the Attorney General

Colorado Department of Law
Ralph L. Carr Judicial Building
1300 Broadway, 10th Floor
Attn: Phil Weiser
Denver, CO 80203
P: 720-508-6000
F: 720-508-6030); and

Douglas County Attorney

Lance Ingalls
100 Third Street
Castle Rock, CO 80104
P: 303-660-7414
Email: attorney@douglas.co.us
See: https://www.douglas.co.us/government/departments/attorney/ ); and/or

Town Attorney
Bob Slentz
Town of Castle Rock
100 N. Wilcox St.
Castle Rock, CO 80104
Phone: 303-660-1388
Email: Bslentz@crgov.com
See: https://www.crgov.com/1941/Town-Attorney ) and…

The Registered Agent for 50 Incorporated State’s, and over 3,500 incorporated municipal County, City, Town,
Township, or otherwise governmental entities as named herein:
Municipal Code Corporation (Municode)
Physical Address
1700 Capital Circle SW
Tallahassee, FL 32310

Mailing Address
P.O. Box 2235
Tallahassee, FL 32316
Phone: 1-800-262-2633
Fax: 1- 850 564-7492

Dated this 22nd day of January, in the year of THE DECLARATION, 2019.

Respectfully Submitted,
By: ____________________________________

178
 James D. Hardin/ sui juris, Jure Divino,
Plaintiff/Citizen and Sovereign Relator;

“When ye come to appear before me, who hath

required this at your hand, to tread my courts?”
(See: Isaiah 1:12)

179
NOTICE OF IN REM CLAIM
AND IN REM SIEZURE
BY THE PEOPLE
AND FOR THE PEOPLE

180
 “In rem jurisdiction. Refers to an action that is taken directly against the
defendant's property. The term may be contrasted with in personam jurisdiction.
Power over a thing possessed by a court which allows it to seize and hold the
object for some legal purpose; e.g. boat on which narcotics are found. Calero
Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 416 U.S. 663, 94 S.Ct. 2080, 40 L.Ed.2d
452. See also Jurisdiction in rem; Jurisdiction quasi in rem.

and…

“Actio in rem Irekshiyow in rem/ . In the civil and common law, an action for a
thing; an action for the recovery of a thing possessed by another. An action for the
enforcement of a right (or for redress for its invasion) which was originally
available against all the world, and not in any special sense against the individual
sued, until he violated it. See In rem.” Pg. 28)

and…

“In rem lin rem/. A technical term used to designate proceedings or actions
instituted against the thing, in contradistinction to personal actions, which are said
to be in personam.

and…

"In rem" proceedings encompass any action brought against person in which
essential purpose of suit is to determine title to or to affect interests in specific
proper- ty located within territory over which court has jurisdic- tion. ReMine ex
reI. Liley v. District Court for City and County of Denver, Colo., 709 P.2d 1379,
1382. It is true that, in a strict sense, a proceeding in rem is one taken directly
against property, and has for its object the disposition of property, without
reference to the title of individual claimants; but, in a larger and more general
sense, the terms are applied to actions between parties, where the direct object is
to reach and dispose of proper- ty owned by them, or of some interest therein.
Such are cases commenced by attachment against the property of debtors, or
instituted to partition real estate, foreclose a mortgage, or enforce a lien. Pennoyer
v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 24 L.Ed. 565. In the strict sense of the term, a proceeding
"in rem" is one which is taken directly against property or one which is brought to
enforce a right in the thing itself.

Actions in which the court is required to have control of the thing or object and in
which an adjudication is made as to the object which binds the whole world and
not simply the interests of the parties to the proceeding. Flesch v. Circle City
Excavating & Rental Corp., 137 Ind.App. 695, 210 N.E.2d 865.

See also In personam; In rem jurisdiction; Quasi in rem jurisdiction.

Judgment in rem. See that title.
Quasi in rem. A term applied to proceedings

181
 which are not strictly and purely in rem, but are brought against the defendant
personally, though the real object is to deal with particular property or subject
property to the discharge of claims asserted; for example, foreign attachment, or
proceedings to foreclose a mortgage, re- move a cloud from title, or effect a
partition. Freeman v. Alderson, 119 U.S. 185, 7 S.Ct. 165, 30 L.Ed. 372. An
action in which the basis of jurisdiction is the defendant's interest in property, real
or personal, which is within the court's power, as distinguished from in rem
jurisdiction in which the court exercises power over the property itself, not simply
the defendant's interest therein.

and…

In rem actio est per quam rem nostram qure ab alio possidetur petimus, et
semper adversus eum est qui rem possidet. lin rem aksh(iy)ow est pr kwrem
rem n6strm kwiy reb eyliyow posdiytr petms, et sempr redvrss iym est kway
rem p6sdt/. The action in rem is that by which we seek our property which is
possessed by another, and is always against him who possesses the property.

IN REM CLAIM and IN REM SIEZURE of all lands, property (rather tangible or
intangible) and whose legal boundaries are defined in the State Constitution(s), State
granted Municipal Charter’s to Counties, Cities, Towns, et al.; within said states. Over
3,500 municipal Charters and their boundaries can be found on the Municipal Code
Corporation Website. The website of their Registered Agent, located in the Municipal
Chartered City of Tallahassee, Florida. The website evidencing these Charters and their
boundaries can be viewed in the Municode library found at [https://library.municode.com]; and

The land boundaries for the several states can be found, along with all their legal
background, both as Sovereign States before their being ceded to the United States and
after, have been compiled by order of the United States Congress who contracted the task
of collecting the official records in every state. That Federal Contract was with Francis
Newton Thorpe, who accepted the task under contract with the United States Congress,
then published the same under the title:

“Francis Newton Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions”

This compilation of “Official Government Documents” (the best evidence there is,
because it is already signed and certified by government as “authentic” by the
government(s) themselves). The compilation even includes every Papal Bull ever
pertaining to the North American Continent prior to the United States and after. This
history of OTHER DIGITAL EVIDENCE OF THE STATES AND THEIR

182
CHARTERS and all the official Government Documents, Records, Treaties,
Constitution(s), Charter(s) and all recorded land boundaries thereof can be found in the
listed links below, in their entirety, to wit:

Francis Newton Thorpe, The Federal and State Constitutions

 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. I United States-Alabama-District of

Columbia
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. II Florida-Kansas
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. III Kentucky-Massachusetts
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. IV Michigan-New Hampshire
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. V New Jersey-Philippine Islands
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. VI Porto Rico-Vermont
 The Federal and State Constitutions, Vol. VII Virginia-Wyoming-Index

The Fraud is and has been evidenced for the record. We are apparently Living and
working FOR & IN a ONE WORLD WIDE, or DIVINE WORLD GOVERNMENT.

What we were taught in the public fool system, was not what we were led to believe; and
what we were led to believe, was not and is not BASED UPON, NOR IN, REALITY.
But rather, it is based upon a fantastic fantasy and/or fairytale, which CAPTURES the
minds and imaginations of the people, placing the same under a self destructive hypnotic
spell and enslaves the people with delusions, based upon the use of (White & Black
Magic).

So the people, as a direct result of authorities “failure to disclose” the truth and the facts,
has left them unaware that they have been fraudulently, deceptively, coercively, and in
the majority of cases left in complete darkness with regards to the realities of those
governing authorities. Authorities who have failed to disclose to them that they are
victims of an organized criminal conspiracy.

A conspiracy, mind you, which the people are and have been, completely unaware of.
They failed to disclose the fact that the peoples minds have been hijacked, absent their

183
knowledge, the obvious result when a party has deceptively failed to disclose all the
pertinent facts and conditions to a contract.
That is to say, when the people, absent their own awareness, have been falsely induced by
illusions; and other psychotropic prescribed delusional based conditions of the mind,
including Brain Washing, being a premeditated scientific scheme and fraud based
extortion vehicle, using powerful suggestion and subconscious based methods which are
hidden messages in plain site, in plain sight for a trained observer.

This is one of the many reasons why it is really hard to get your mind around these truths.
But it is time to come to grips with the obvious reality that the system is a for profit
corporation and there is a real conflict of interest when the system goes after us, and our
property. There is no incentive for the system (Governments engaged in Corporate
Commerce for profit) to rule in our favor as it would cost the corporations and dip into
ill-gained Corporate gains, or profits. Therefore, Jurisdiction must be questioned in every
case as it cannot exist without a contract with the corporation and even then, not without
full disclosure.

Dunn & Bradstreet (D&B) DUNS code numbers are assigned to corporations in America
to track their credit ratings. Below you will find the DUNS numbers for the aggregate
US government and each of its major agencies.

Those of the aggregate governments of each US state along with that of its largest city
(usually their capital city), and those of the aggregate United Nations and some of its
major agencies. These corporate code numbers can be verified by using the following
link to the D&B website and typing in the required information:
[http://mycredit.dnb.com/search-for-duns-number/ ]

In checking DUNS code numbers for governments, you will find that they have many
subsidiaries and shell corporations to lessen financial accountability. You will find that
some of them are listed as being in a geographical location other than in their territorial
authority, making their operations even more suspicious.

184
The City of Chicago corporation, for example, is located in Washington, DC, the State of
Montana Corporation is located in Chicago, Illinois and the State of Maine corporation -
listed with seemingly sardonic humor as "State-O-Maine Inc." - is located in New York
City, New York. You will often also see executive, legislative and judicial offices
themselves listed as corporations.

You will also see in the aggregate valuations of their assets as recorded by: Manta.com
(See: www.Manta.com), which is vastly greater than what is listed in these private
government corporations' fraudulent but well-publicized budget documents. Budget
documents that seek to justify draconian but fraudulent budget cuts and their related tax-
based extortion rackets.

This confirms that many hundred of trillions of dollars of the people's money listed in the
semi-secret government Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) as
government institutional investments are being siphoned off by the global banking cartel
and those sinister forces behind it. They are doing this via that obscure subsidiary of the
private, for-profit Federal Reserve System, known as the “Depository Trust Clearing
Center” (DTCC), dba: “Cede Inc.” (Again, note the sardonic humor.)

This semi-secret entity fraudulently confiscates these investment funds as an executor

after they have been registered by brokers, relegating investors to mere beneficiaries
whose funds can then be lawfully - at least according to presently and commonly used
Universal Commercial Code (UCC)-based statutory law, not constitutional or common
law -- confiscated at the will of said executor. The implications of this are staggering:
not only has this corporate subversion of government happened in America and with the
United Nations headquartered here.

Believe it or not, it has happened in almost all of the nations of the world by means of
similar corporate subversion enacted under different names. This definitely explains why
governments at all levels in almost all nations no longer protect the public interest, but

185
only special interests. More specifically, the interests of their fellow predatory for-profit
corporations whose actions are now destroying this planet and all life upon it.

This explains why the people of the world are soon going to see sweeping
constitutionally-based legal and law enforcement actions in all of the nations of the world
against those who, unrepentantly abusing these ill-gotten gains, have perpetrated crimes
against nature and humanity. This also explains the honest transitional governments and
financial systems that are going to be installed as the callous, corrupt human systems of
the past collapse.

The new transparent governmental and financial models now being tested in the nation of
Iceland, as well as the likewise poorly publicized/contextualized mass resignations of
government, banking and corporate officials now occurring worldwide are heralds of
these imminent planetary events.

DUNS Numbers of the US Corporate Government and Most of Its Major Agencies, have
already undergone what is known as a “Hostile Corporate Takeover”. After all, are you a
shareholder, have you taken an oath of allegiance?

Are you Incorporated? YES! If you are not aware of this fact, then you are another
victim of corporate fraud. The subject and proximate Cause and Necessity regarding this
IN REM CLAIM and IN REM SIEZURE of all such said “Government”, or
“SYSTEM CORPORATIONS” are strictly for the Purposes of Repatriating them and
ALL OF THEM, back home.

The question of importance here, is who are the shareholders of all of these corporations?
Do you have any shares? If not, then why not? Have you taken an oath of allegiance to
the US Corporation? Think not? Maybe you better read the attached file, Very carefully!

Hard Evidence of Corporate Takeover at All Levels of Government in America, as Well

as of the United Nations is as follows:

186
 DUNS Numbers of the US Corporate Government
and Most of Its Major Agencies
United States Government-052714196; and
US Department of Defense (DOD)-030421397; and
US Department of the Treasury-026661067; and
US Department of Justice (DOJ)-011669674; and
US Department of State-026276622; and
US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS)-Office of the Secretary-112463521;
and
US Department of Education-944419592; and
US Department of Energy-932010320; and
US Department of Homeland Security-932394187; and
US Department of the Interior-020949010; and
US Department of Labor-029536183; and
US Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD)-Office of the Secretary-
030945779; and
US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)-931691211; and
US Transportation Security Administration (TSA)-050297655; and
US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-056622429; and
Bureau of Customs & Border Protection (CBP)-796730922; and
Federal Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE)-130221646; and
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-057944910; and
National Aeronautics & Space Administration (NASA)-003259074; and
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)-079933920; and
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-364281923; and
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-037751583; and
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-020309969; and
US Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC)-003475175; and
US Public Health Service (USPHS)-039294216; and

187
National Institutes of Health (NIH)-061232000; and
US Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC)-927645465; and
US Food & Drug Administration (FDA)-138182175; and
US Internal Revenue Service (IRS)-040539587; and
Federal Reserve Board of Governors (Fed)-001959410; and
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)-878865674; and
National Security Agency (NSA)-617395215; and
US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)-167247027; and
Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms & Tobacco (BAFT)-132282310; and
Federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-926038563; and
Federal Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)-926038407; and

DUNS Numbers of Each US Corporate State(s) and Its

Largest City, (Usually its Capital City)

State of Alabama-004027553 City of Birmingham-074239450; and

State of Alaska-078198983
State of Arizona-068300170
State of Arkansas-619312569
State of California-071549000
State of Colorado-076438621
State of Connecticut-016167285
State of Delaware-037802962
District of Columbia-949056860
State of Florida-004078374
State of Georgia-069230183
State of Hawaii-077676997
State of Idaho-071875734
State of Illinois-065232498
State of Indiana-071789435
State of Iowa-828089701
City of Fairbanks-079261830; and
City of Phoenix-030002236; and
City of Little Rock-065303794; and
City of Los Angeles-159166271; and
City of Denver-066985480; and
City of Bridgeport-156280596; and
City of Wilmington-067393900; and
City of Washington-073010550; and
City of Miami-965299576; and
City of Atlanta-065372500; and
City of Honolulu-828979612; and
City of Boise-070017017; and
City of Chicago-556057206; and
City of Indianapolis-964647155; and
City of Davenport-963855494; and

188
State of Kansas-827975009
State of Kentucky-828008883
State of Louisiana-0612389911
State of Maine-061207536
State of Maryland-847612442
State of Massachussetts-138090548
State of Michigan-054698428
State of Minnesota-050375465
State of Mississippi-008210692
State of Missouri-616963596
State of Montana-945782027
State of Nebraska-041472307
State of Nevada-123259447
State of New Hampshire-066760232
State of New Jersey-067373258
State of New Mexico-007111818
State of New York-041002973
State of North Carolina-830979667
State of North Dakota-098564300
State of Ohio-034309166
State of Oklahoma-050411726
State of Oregon-932534998
State of Pennsylvania-933882784
State of Rhode Island-008421763
State of South Carolina-067006072
State of Tennessee-04143882
State of Texas-002537595
State of Utah-009094301
State of Vermont-066760240
State of Virginia-047850373
State of Washington-079248936
City of Wichita-069862755; and
City of Louisville-943445093; and
City of New Orleans-033692404; and
City of Portland, Maine-071747802; and
City of Baltimore-052340973; and
City of Boston-007277284; and
City of Detroit-021733631; and
City of Minneapolis-009901959; and
City of Jackson-020864955; and
City of Kansas (City)-832496868; and
City of Billings-068925759; and
City of Omaha-926604690; and
City of Las Vegas-019342317; and
City of Manchester-045009073; and
City of Newark-019092531; and
City of Albuquerque-129962346; and
City of New York-021741036; and
City of Charlotte-809275006; and
City of Bismarck-080245640; and
City of Columbus-010611869; and
City of Oklahoma (City)-073131542; and
City of Portland (Oregon)-054971197; and
City of Philadelphia-929068737; and
City of Providence-069853752; and
City of Columbia-878281562; and
City of Memphis-051386258; and
City of Houston-967421590; and
City of Salt Lake City-017096780; and
City of Burlington-037442977; and
City of Virginia Beach-074736299; and
City of Seattle-009483561; and
189
State of West Virginia-828092515 City of Charleston (West Virginia)-197931681; and
State of Wisconsin-001778349 City of Milwaukee-004779133; and
State of Wyoming-832826015 City of Cheyenne-021917273; and

DUNS Numbers of the United Nations Corporation and

Some of Its DUNS evidenced Major Corporate Agencies
United Nations (UN)-824777304; and
UN Development Program (UNDP)-793511262; and
UN Educational, Scientific, & Cultural Organization (UNESCO)-053317819; and
UN World Food Program (UNWFP)-054023952; and
UN International Children's Education Fund (UNICEF)-017698452; and
UN World Health Organization (WHO)-618736326

AND…

190
This IN REM CLAIM and IN REM SIEZURE is also applicable to the following
incorporated parties, their alleged land claims, or claims to property, their holdings of
money; and other things of value, including but not limited to those assets held outside of
the country; and also includes, but is not limited to all Patent Rights, Patent’s Pending,
Patent Royalty Payments on Patents Rights held and enjoyed by third parties, including
any and all Land Patents, Bank Accounts, Saving Accounts, Trust Accounts, credit,
currencies of whatever kind at all; including all other accounts whatsoever; and / or under
whatever name, or identity whatever and wherever; or under any entity name whatsoever,
rather said assets are considered onshore, or offshore, rather the same has been
repatriated, or is expatriate.

This in rem claim and in rem seizure still applies in its entirety, upon all parties to the
RICO Corporate criminal and fraudulent activities complained of herein and pertaining to
the herein below named and/or mentioned Accused Corporate Adversaries; rather the
same be national, or International in Character. Regardless of the Character of the
incorporated entity, this seizure still applies via the Nexus Connection between them all,
along with the Dunn and Bradstreet Incorporated Entity Number which evidences their
Incorporated Charter Status.

“10 Ye stand this day all of you before the LORD your God; your captains of
your tribes, your elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel, 11 Your
little ones, your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, from the hewer of
thy wood unto the drawer of thy water: 12 That thou shouldest enter into
covenant with the LORD thy God, and into his oath, which the LORD thy God
maketh with thee this day: 13 That he may establish thee to day for a people
unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and
as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.” (Duet.
29:10-13)

And…

As Sovereign Principal Relator, The People of the State of Colorado, hereby

Summon CALVARY OPERATIONS pursuant to [Headquarters Department of the Army
FM 17-95] (See: http://www.bits.de/NRANEU/others/amd-us-archive/FM17-95%2896%29.pdf) for
the purposes of establishing PEACE [LAW OF PEACE VOL. 1. FM 27-161-1] (See:
https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/law-of-peace_Vol-1.pdf ).

The Current Law of Belligerent Occupation pursuant to the Judge Advocate General’s
J.A.G.S. TEXT No. 11; ET AL; [The Judge Advocate General's School] (SEE:
https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/law-of-belligerent-occupation_11.pdf ) Those De Facto
Agents currently claiming to be the representatives of The Sovereignty (i.e.) The People

191
of the State of Colorado and The People of The United States of America, and
nobody in their De Facto existence has authority to ACT, negotiate, or otherwise with
foreign Communist Powers, under the fraudulent auspices that they are acting on behalf
of the American people. THEY ARE NOT!!!

WHEREFORE, The People of the State of Colorado; and The People of The United
States of America, hereby Demand the convening of Courts Martial United States
[JOINT SERVICE COMMITTEE ON MILITARY JUSTICE] (See: https://jsc.defense.gov/Portals/99/Documents/MCM2016.pdf?ver=2016-12-08-181411-957)

JOINT SERVICE COMMITTEE ON MILITARY JUSTICE - The Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM), United States
(2016 Edition) updates the MCM (2012 Edition). It is a complete reprinting and incorporates the MCM
(2012 Edition), including all amendments to the Preamble, Rules for Courts-Martial (R.C.M.), Military
Rules of Evidence (Mil. R. Evid.), Punitive Articles, and Non judicial Punishment Procedures made by the
President in Executive Orders (EO) from 1984 to present, and specifically including EO 13643 (15 May
2013); EO 13669 (13 June 2014); EO 13696 (17 June 2015); EO 13730 (20 May 2016); and EO 13740 (16
September 2016). See Appendix 25. This edition also contains amendments to the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) made by the National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) for Fiscal Years 2014
through 2016. Finally, this edition incorporates amendments to the Supplementary Materials accompanying
the MCM as published in the Federal Register on 8 July 2015, 16 July 2015, 22 March 2016, 15 June 2016,
8 November 2016, and 8 December 2016. The aforementioned NDAAs, EOs, and Supplementary Materials
are available at the Joint Service Committee on Military Justice website at http://jsc.defense.gov. Because
this manual includes numerous changes, practitioners should consider the MCM completely revised.

And…

Furthermore, and for the purposes of establishing both, fairness and justice,
“Hardin” does herein and hereby establish the said sentencing penalty standard, or
measure of fairness, as a matter of Military protocol and by long held and accepted
practice, as established by Divine Law and as now, made the “STANDARD” with
regards to this and other cases. The long and firmly held belief precedent, and well
established “practice” of “Judgment” is self explanatory.

This matter is further clarified pursuant to MILITARY LAW REVIEW

[VOL. 79], to wit:

“111. HOW DOES THE PUNITIVE DISCHARGE FIT INTO TODAY’S

PENAL PHILOSOPHY?
If the premise is accepted that the military should mirror the society it was
created to defend, it logically follows that the military’s rationale
for imposing a punitive discharge should rest upon a contemporary, widely
accepted, rational philosophical basis.

192
 A. BASIC PHILOSOPHIES OF PUNISHMENT
There are six basic philosophies of punishment generally accepted by writers
in the fields of criminology and penology: 33 retribution, deterrence, social
defense, prevention, maintenance of respect for law, and rehabilitation.~~

1. Retribution
The oldest philosophy of punishment is that of retribution. Probably the
most ancient though well known recorded reference to it is found in
"Deuteronomy 19:21" which exhorts punishment to be eye for eye, tooth for
tooth. Among the leading philosophers that advocated retribution as the
reason for punishment were Aristotle, 35, St. Thomas Aquinas 36 and
Immanuel Kant. 37”

The maxim of Law is: “What is imposed directly, is also imposed indirectly.”
(See: Bouvier’s Law Dictionary- Maxims of Law). This is why it is crucial prior to the
Imminent & Permanent shut down of the Government, or the complete collapse of the
same.

This is all further reasoning for arresting their makers, who are responsible for
fraudulently redeeming the said two party notes.

Wherefore, “Hardin” respectfully reminds all parties to these proceedings of the

following facts and law, to wit:

“Soluspopulisupremaestlex: The welfare of the people is the supreme law”

And…

“Voxpopuli, Vox die: The peoples voice is God’s voice.”

193