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

Re: [tips_and_tricks] defy citation with administrative procedures act

Expand Messages
  • Troy Duwayne, Barclay
    Hobot, There is NO due process in the phantom law rules (i.e. administrative law). Mike covered this point  very well. One has to ask what attaches one to
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 9, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hobot,
      There is NO due process in the phantom law rules (i.e. administrative law). Mike covered this point  very well. One has to ask what "attaches" one to that fiction of phantom law? Mike covered that also in an excellent way. Status in law determines jurisdiction.  Just google phantom law rules.

      It appears you do not want to address the WHY you are where you are, in that phantom law system, but you want "the administrative law" to play fair and on your terms, but, the fact is it does NOT and will NOT do that. You apparently have something like an SSN that attaches you to their jurisdiction. In the eyes of the law the term is hypocrite when one wants it both ways. One wants the benefit without paying the cost.
      Troy
    • originalfrogfrmr
      ... I always heard and believed (due to the results) that one starts with an administrative hearing because of the need to exhaust administrative remedies and
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 9, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        > It appears you do not want to address the WHY you are where you are, in
        > that phantom law system, but you want "the administrative law" to play
        > fair and on your terms, but, the fact is it does NOT and will NOT do that.
        > You apparently have something like an SSN that attaches you to their
        > jurisdiction. In the eyes of the law the term is hypocrite when one wants
        > it both ways. One wants the benefit without paying the cost.

        I always heard and believed (due to the results) that one starts with an
        administrative hearing because of the need to exhaust administrative
        remedies and because that is when and how you prove you are a natural man
        and not a corporation. I had also heard that when one goes into court as
        defendant, it is assumed that one lost at the administrative level and is
        appealing that decision.

        I had heard from Walt Mann III that in order to strike terror in one's
        adversaries, one should always make a demand for "a formal docketed
        administrative hearing on the record". When I tried that, they decided to
        forget the whole problem at hand and see things my way.

        Regards,

        FF
      • Troy Duwayne, Barclay
        Quote from Phantom Law Rules at page 36:   “The purported passage of these war amendments has led us, this day, to look at a seven-point summary of what is
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 10, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Quote
          from Phantom Law Rules at page 36:
           
          “The
          purported passage of these war amendments
          has
          led us, this day, to look at a seven-point summary of
          what
          is espoused by the administrative Supreme Court
          of
          the United States as the Ashwander Doctrine rules.
          This
          administrative doctrine should be studied carefully
          to
          understand where the Supreme Court has been coming
          from
          since the Civil War era. These rules are self-denying
          ordinances
          set forth in a concurring opinion in 1936,
           Ashwander
          v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297
          U.S.288:
           
          1.
          The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality
          in
          a friendly, nonadversary, proceeding.
          2.
          The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional
          law
          in advance of the necessity for deciding
          it.
          3.
          The Court will not formulate a rule of law broader
          than
          the facts of the case require.
          4.
          If possible, the Court will dispose of a case on non-constitutional
          grounds.
          5.
          The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute
          on
          complaint of one who fails to show injury to
          person
          or property.
          6.
          The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality
          of
          a statute at the instance of one who has accepted
          its
          benefits.
          7.
          Whenever possible, statutes will be construed so
          as
          to avoid a constitutional issue (Alpheus Mason
          and
          Donald Stephenson, American Constitutional
          Law: Introductory Essays and
          Selected Cases, 9th  ed., 1990, p. 19)."

          Regards,
          Troy



          I always heard and believed (due to the results) that one starts with an
          administrative hearing because of the need to exhaust administrative
          remedies and because that is when and how you prove you are a natural man
          and not a corporation. I had also heard that when one goes into court as
          defendant, it is assumed that one lost at the administrative level and is
          appealing that decision.
        • Troy Duwayne, Barclay
            Hi FF,   I say:  I am not trying to find fault, just attempting to give a little  support. I am speaking from my past experiences chasing the phantom
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 10, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
             
            Hi FF,
             
            I say:  I am not trying to find fault, just attempting to give a little  support. I am speaking from my past experiences chasing the phantom called “administrative law.” And, for sure, I for one do not have all the answers.
             
             You said:  “I always heard and believed (due to the results) that one starts with an
            administrative hearing because of the need to exhaust administrative
            remedies and because that is when and how you prove you are a natural man
            and not a corporation. I had also heard that when one goes into court as
            defendant, it is assumed that one lost at the administrative level and is
            appealing that decision.”
             
             I say: If I had followed administrative law rules of court, I would have been jailed for longer than 20 days. If you have any ties to their system, like Ashwander Doctrine rules # 6 your status defeats you in any court setting. For 20 days in Dec. 1991, the IRS tried their best to get me back in their system with offers and tricks to take the SSN back. When they determined that I was not going “to come around” they kicked me out of jail and after that one more try to serve papers on me.  I have not heard a word from them since February 1992. Not even a postcard. Status matters and if one has any kind of attachment to the phantom law rules system, he has voluntarily forfeited all rights, constitutional or common law there are. I my opinion you will never reach an Article III court, ever, via appeals, writ of errors or any pleading of that ilk. Because, and I witnessed this first hand in a willful failure to file case where it was brought out that he was receiving some small benefits from the VA, therefore he was considered a hypocrite in the eyes of “the law” and they found him guilty and gave him 5 years. That was in 1982. The very first day, just after the trial started, his lawyer for his defense was questioning an IRS agent on the stand, asking him questions about the constitution and him knowing it, and the judge slammed his notebook down on the podium, and leaned over and pointed his finger at the lawyer and said, “Counselor, I have you know that everybody studies the constitution in the 5th grade on the 4th day, and we are not going to talk about the constitution anymore in my court room.” The next day the judge corrected the record by saying that he did not know for sure the constitution was studied on the 4th day or not but it was studied in the 5th grade. If one’s status is correct, and kept correct, then he is “in law” at common law and phantom law rules cannot attach any of the Aswander rules to him/her. 

            You said: “I had heard from Walt Mann III that in order to strike terror in one's
            adversaries, one should always make a demand for "a formal docketed
            administrative hearing on the record". When I tried that, they decided to
            forget the whole problem at hand and see things my way.”
             
            I say: I have never heard of Walt Mann III that I remember and I am nearly 70 years young. You may strike terror in a few sometimes but they can change the rules and direction in the middle of the stream.  In administrative situations they win in the long run, because they know what attachment(s) one has to their phantom law system, and if need be, it is their “ace in the hole” and they will use it.  We have been duped, deceived and tricked since the so-called civil war amendments and this so-called administrative law. They, the powers that be, know that probably 95% of the current population have such attachment(s) of some kind or form as they pass out SSN at birth now. Administrative law is fairly new invention for a tyrannical kind of so-called law that is really and truly a true phantom. On page 7 of Phantom Law Rules it states: “There is civil law, common law, criminal law, natural law, the law of nations, public law, private law, canon law, martial law, municipal law, foreign law, positive law, statute law, written law, unwritten law, international law, merchant law, and maritime law. But no where, no where, does this prominent 1859 (Bouvier’s) law dictionary mention anything, whatsoever, about administrative law.”
             
            For Freedom and Liberty ,
            Troy


            From: "frogfrmr@..." <frogfrmr@...>
            To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:41 AM
            Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] defy citation with administrative procedures act

             
            > It appears you do not want to address the WHY you are where you are, in
            > that phantom law system, but you want "the administrative law" to play
            > fair and on your terms, but, the fact is it does NOT and will NOT do that.
            > You apparently have something like an SSN that attaches you to their
            > jurisdiction. In the eyes of the law the term is hypocrite when one wants
            > it both ways. One wants the benefit without paying the cost.

            I always heard and believed (due to the results) that one starts with an
            administrative hearing because of the need to exhaust administrative
            remedies and because that is when and how you prove you are a natural man
            and not a corporation. I had also heard that when one goes into court as
            defendant, it is assumed that one lost at the administrative level and is
            appealing that decision.

            I had heard from Walt Mann III that in order to strike terror in one's
            adversaries, one should always make a demand for "a formal docketed
            administrative hearing on the record". When I tried that, they decided to
            forget the whole problem at hand and see things my way.

            Regards,

            FF



          • hobot
            ... Troy I have authenticated sealed full proof ID from US Sec. of State that I have no legal presence in United States, no SSN [as I do not qualify for SSN]
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 10, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              On 4/9/2013 9:26 AM, Troy Duwayne, Barclay wrote:
               
              Hobot,
              There is NO due process in the phantom law rules (i.e. administrative law). Mike covered this point  very well. One has to ask what "attaches" one to that fiction of phantom law? Mike covered that also in an excellent way. Status in law determines jurisdiction.  Just google phantom law rules.

              It appears you do not want to address the WHY you are where you are, in that phantom law system, but you want "the administrative law" to play fair and on your terms, but, the fact is it does NOT and will NOT do that. You apparently have something like an SSN that attaches you to their jurisdiction. In the eyes of the law the term is hypocrite when one wants it both ways. One wants the benefit without paying the cost.
              Troy

              Troy I have authenticated sealed full proof ID from US Sec. of State that
              I have no legal presence in United States, no SSN [as I do not qualify
              for SSN]  nor as a resident or any nexus "in this state"   You are making
              assumptions that do not apply to me. I have nothing to rescind or cancel
              that implies I'm under some Administrative or Statutory jurisdiction. i just
              need a forum that can hear someone of my standing and nature to get
              some remedy for folks like me to travel free.  I've got banking and IRS and my
              professional license all licked by simple form driven Adm. procedure,
              so its worked out great for me where it really matters.  Traffic cases
              are small potato's that's a game hobby to learn procedures and maybe
              get my final solution via a Federal level declaratory judgement case.

              Mike's post has vital data in it but too long to reply too w/o breaking in up
              in bite sizes point by point, but will get around too it.  I am seeking how
              to make my simple no driver license case and my standing a Federal
              issue.to counter claim to put me on the offensive and stay the lower state
              courts til its heard first.  hobot


               

               


            • Troy Duwayne, Barclay
              Hobot,  Thanks! It sounds good and my best to you in your endeavors.   I just have an awfully hard time wrapping my mind around trusting this fairly new
              Message 6 of 11 , Apr 11, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Hobot, 
                Thanks! It sounds
                good and my best to you in your endeavors.
                 
                I just
                have an awfully hard time wrapping my mind around trusting this fairly new government created Administrative jurisdiction and expecting such administrative
                procedures act and its outcomes by said government's 4th branch invention to be honest,
                fair and unbiased towards anything of its creation and governance.
                 
                I was
                born in Texas and live in Texas and I want to maintain a "lawful"
                status in law which I consider to be different than just "legal". I
                think that an offence is really needed, as a lot of time is spent on defense
                and trying to keep this phantom law rules system at bay and off one's back. Thanks again for your clarification. Please
                excuse and forgive my assumptions?
                Blessings,
                Troy
              • originalfrogfrmr
                ... I appreciate that! I sure don t have all the answers either. You might have noticed I stick to a few topics. It s mainly because they re all I personally
                Message 7 of 11 , Apr 11, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  > I say:  I am not trying to find fault, just attempting
                  > to give a little support. I am speaking from my past
                  > experiences chasing the phantom called administrative law.
                  > And, for sure, I for one do not have all the answers.

                  I appreciate that! I sure don't have all the answers either. You might
                  have noticed I stick to a few topics. It's mainly because they're all I
                  personally need to wend my way down life's path so far. I like
                  specialized tools for the job. I like the way a good tool makes a job
                  faster and easier so I collect information as tools just like hand tools.

                  > You said: I always heard and believed (due
                  > to the results) that one starts with an
                  > administrative hearing because of the need to
                  > exhaust administrative
                  > remedies and because that is when and how you
                  > prove you are a natural man
                  > and not a corporation. I had also heard that
                  > when one goes into court as
                  > defendant, it is assumed that one lost at the
                  > administrative level and is
                  > appealing that decision.
                   
                  > I say: If
                  > I had followed administrative law rules of court, I would have
                  > been jailed for longer than 20 days. If you have any ties to
                  > their system, like Ashwander Doctrine rules # 6 your status
                  > defeats you in any court setting.

                  For those still unfamiliar, #6 is:

                  6.The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the
                  instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.

                  FF sez: If I pee on your leg, have you availed yourself of the benefit of
                  my specially formulated moisture enhancement??

                  I like how you made a choice between following administrative rules and
                  not following them. It shows you are thinking for yourself. I too have
                  always heard, "rules are made to be broken". I like that you have a way
                  to insert a first step in front of the one they assume you'd take.

                  We (our local trouble-makers) took note of #6 when we went through George
                  Gordon's course. It's one that makes one think and make life changing
                  adjustments to how one thinks and speaks and acts. It separates you from
                  the herd. And from the lemmings. Makes you wary of "benefits".

                  Somewhere on this list I told the story of my administrative hearing at
                  the DMV which was fun and very instructive in my quest for understanding
                  this weird world I'm in. It's funny how when you get into this stuff, you
                  encounter things that you have a hard time believing. Right now, I don't
                  think ANYONE is doing the job they were hired to do, ANYWHERE!! But back
                  then, I was more naive than I am now. I still thought I'd reach the
                  people in charge who could reason and act appropriately.

                  Today, my step one is to let the subject incriminate themselves out of
                  their own mouths and then by my own decree disqualify them from making any
                  official determinations or taking any official actions, leaving what they
                  were attempting to accomplish with me to their superiors who, if I get
                  within range, get a report on their demonstrated inadequacies and a
                  warning notice from me that I may proceed in that direction with
                  additional contestants if further stimulated. I prefer disengagement with
                  no diminishment of my own rights. I understand that they may know no
                  better way to live and may have to follow orders and struggle for their
                  paycheck...

                  Reminds me of an old TV show I saw when I was a kid:
                  Ramar of the Jungle to his side-kick Howard as he blasts a spear-chucker
                  with his elephant gun: "The poor devils..."

                  > For 20 days in Dec. 1991, the IRS tried their best to get me
                  > back in their system
                  > with offers and tricks to take the SSN back.

                  That confirms a lot I've believed about that number. Many say that there's
                  no way to get rid of it. But there sure is a way not to claim it or use
                  it! There's a way not to fall for the trick question, "what is YOUR
                  Social Security Number?"

                  > When they determined that I was not going to come
                  > around they kicked me out of jail

                  I have a friend who liked to get kicked out of jail. He was kicked out
                  several times. I haven't been arrested since I was 18 (on a false
                  charge).

                  > Status matters and if one has any kind of attachment
                  > to the phantom law rules
                  > system, he has voluntarily forfeited all rights,
                  > constitutional or common law there are.

                  The truth is harsh. How do you get more people to realize that fact?

                  > Because, and I
                  > witnessed this first hand in a willful failure to file
                  > case where it was brought out that he was receiving
                  > some small benefits from the VA, therefore he was considered
                  > a hypocrite in the eyes of the law and they found him
                  > guilty and gave him 5 years.

                  Many people prove themselves hypocrites when they attempt to use the money
                  issue.

                  > I say: I have never heard of Walt Mann III that I
                  > remember and I am nearly 70 years young.

                  They threw him down the memory hole.

                  > You may strike terror in a few sometimes but they can
                  > change the rules and direction in the middle of
                  > the stream. In administrative situations
                  > they win in the long run, because they know what attachment(s)
                  > one has to their phantom law system, and if need be, it
                  > is their ace in the hole and they will use it.

                  They lost in mine, badly. To me, they seemed vulnerable, weak, unprepared.

                  > We have been duped, deceived and tricked since the
                  > so-called civil war amendments and this
                  > so-called administrative law. They, the powers that be,
                  > know that probably 95% of the current population have
                  > such attachment(s) of some kind or form as they pass out
                  > SSN at birth now. Administrative law is fairly new invention
                  > for a tyrannical kind of so-called law that is really and
                  > truly a true phantom. On page 7 of Phantom Law Rules it states:
                  > There is civil law, common law, criminal law, natural law,
                  > the law of nations, public law, private law, canon law,
                  > martial law, municipal law, foreign law, positive
                  > law, statute law, written law, unwritten law,
                  > international law, merchant law, and maritime law. But
                  > nowhere, nowhere, does this prominent 1859 (Bouvier's) law
                  > dictionary mention anything, whatsoever, about administrative law.

                  Maybe, if they are able to get a qualified set of players, that would be
                  the first matter of business...

                  So, if you don't play in administrative hearings, where and how do you
                  communicate with these people to get them to leave you alone?

                  Regards,

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