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

holder in due course

Expand Messages
  • mobinem@aol.com
    Expanding on my most recent theories: ... possessors , agent or agents , or object or objects of an action
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 25, 2007
      Expanding on my most recent theories:
      Definition of your:
      : of or relating to you or yourself or yourselves especially as possessor or possessors <your bodies>, agent or agents <your contributions>, or object or objects of an action <your discharge>
      1) I have checked a few documents, IRS and others, and it seems more than coincidental that one of the first things asked is "your social security number". Once you answer this question any claim to not be a Federal "taxpayer" would be either a sign of insanity and/or an act of perjury. Regardless, such an admission would legally and lawfully allow a judge to claim "the law does not apply in this case" without recourse and/or redress.
      2) Studying the recent Duetsche Bank decisions in Ohio directs one to the concept of "holder in due course"(HIDC), which is fundamentally the bases of the loss for the bank. Since the bank was unable to validate the ownership of the notes because they did not have the originals, they were thusly not the "holder in due course".
        A) Expanding on this with my concept the INTERNAL REVENUE and INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
            are different and separate entities explains the IRS's fear of Title 15.
               If the IR is the HIDC, and you fight the IRS under Title 15 the IR would have to claim they transferred
               the "note" to the IRS or the IR would have to assert the claim of debt themselves.
                   The IR can not transfer a tax debt to any private agent
                   The IR can not claim a tax debt against private sector workers
                          Thusly, the IR uses the IRS fraudulently to do their dirty work and the IRS is unable to validate
                          the debt without brining in the IR.
        B) Using the failed concepts of fighting the IR and IRS as the same entity under Title 26, the HDIC is not
            applicable since all Federal Employees, including everyone with a SSN, is a taxpayer and thusly
            obligated contractually to comply with the IRS, not just the IR.
        C) The judge only required the Plaintiff to supply the required documents after the defendant invoked his
            right to see them, funny how the judge didn't just demand someone's right as  part of due process;
      So here are my points:
      1) Never ever answer the question what is your SSN without a disclaimer and explanation you do not have one, it belongs to the SSA;
      2) Treat a collection agency like a collection agency, it has worked for 41 cases in a row in Ohio, and always ask for a verified assessment and evidence the inquiring party is the "holder in due course" of the note alleging the debt;
      3) Never admit, as any criminal attorney will tell you, to anything. Be ever vigilant in expecting the word wizardry, know what is yours and what is not, and what is theirs and what is not theirs;
         A) It is their number, they are your rights
      4) Rights are only acknowledged and protected when invoked by the party whose rights are at issue. Stating
          what your rights are will not work, it is not the same as invoking your rights in any matter. Judges and
          lawyers will not tell you this.

      John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects

      c/o postal service location
      21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
      Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf

      Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of 2007.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.