Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [tips_and_tricks] Defendant says that "dollars" have been withdrawn from circulation

Expand Messages
  • Frog Farmer
    ... Defendant makes the further mistake of calling that which is measured (money) by the units of measurement (dollars). Dollars can no more be withdrawn from
    Message 1 of 2 , May 14, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      > [40] Defendant further claims that there was error in the trial
      > court's refusal to grant his request that an amended complaint be
      > filed stating the Government's claim in a value other than dollars.
      > Defendant says that "dollars" have been withdrawn from circulation for
      > all practical purposes and that the Government's federal reserve notes
      > should be treated on a depreciated value basis.

      Defendant makes the further mistake of calling that which is measured
      (money) by the units of measurement (dollars). Dollars can no more be
      withdrawn from circulation than quarts or tons can be withdrawn from
      commerce. I've had dollars in my possession continuously since I was
      six years old, including the dates he says there weren't any out there.

      > [41] These arguments are groundless and similar contentions along
      > this line have been rejected as untenable.

      Obviously.

      > Article I, section 8, clause 5 of the Constitution provides
      > that Congress shall have the power "To coin Money, regulate the Value
      > thereof, and of foreign Coin . . ." As the Supreme Court stated in
      > Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421, 448, 4 S. Ct. 122, 130, 28 L. Ed.
      > 204:
      >
      > [42] Under the power to borrow money on the credit of the United
      > States, and to issue circulating notes for the money borrowed, its
      > power to define the quality and force of those notes as currency is as
      > broad as the like power over a metallic currency under the power to
      > coin money and to regulate the value thereof. Under the two powers,
      > taken together, congress is authorized to establish a national
      > currency, either in coin or in paper, and to make that currency lawful
      > money for all purposes, as regards the national government or private
      > individuals.

      They are also free to change their minds, which is what must have
      occurred when they repealed HJR192. Then again, just because Congress
      passes a law, doesn't mean they thought about it first, like the Patriot
      Acts etc., or the original Federal Reserve Act.

      > [43] Congress has exercised this power by means of delegation to
      > the Federal Reserve System, 12 U.S.C. � 411, and the definition of
      > federal reserve notes as legal tender. 31 U.S.C. � 392; see Milam v.
      > United States, 524 F.2d 629 (9th Cir.). There can therefore be no
      > challenge to the legality of federal reserve notes.

      But there can be to FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES and Federal Reserve Notes.

      > And we take
      > judicial notice of the fact that federal reserve notes are valued in
      > dollars. United States v. Anderson, 584 F.2d 369 (10th Cir.
      > 09/28/1978)

      They know what they are typing! No capitals! Anyone else notice?!
      It's not like they cannot find their "Shift" or "Caps lock" keys, is it,
      all you "straw man" theorists out there?

      Regards,

      FF
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.