Latest topics
» Message to Members and Guests
Today at 8:12 am by ANENRO

» The Presence as a Gateway to Eternity
Yesterday at 11:22 pm by PurpleSkyz

» More frogs gay
Yesterday at 8:42 pm by microaggressor

» More Answers From the Field Manuals--- Who Is Responsible For This Mess? by Anna von Reitz
Yesterday at 8:39 pm by microaggressor

» UFO News ~ MYSTERY UFO Speeds By Weather Satellite plus MORE
Yesterday at 1:33 pm by microaggressor

» Orionids 2017 "Meteorlapse"
Yesterday at 12:24 pm by PurpleSkyz

» NIBIRU News ~ Nibiru will soon be ‘visible like moon plus MORE
Yesterday at 10:31 am by PurpleSkyz

» 11:11 Synchronicity- Are You Seeing It Too?
Yesterday at 12:55 am by PurpleSkyz

» World Transformation: 7 Paradigm-Shifting Humanitarian Solutions
Yesterday at 12:49 am by PurpleSkyz

» California Fires Defy the Laws of Physics
Yesterday at 12:14 am by PurpleSkyz

» Alfred Webre ~ War Crimes! Melanie Vritschan's Baby Kidnapped by Brussels Hospital - False Psychiatric Charges
Yesterday at 12:10 am by PurpleSkyz

» Astronomers Just Confirmed That Earth Has Two Moons
Yesterday at 12:06 am by PurpleSkyz

» Puma Punku And Tiwanaku Bolivia September 2017 With Engineer Cliff
Yesterday at 12:01 am by PurpleSkyz

»  View AN OPEN SECRET
Sat Oct 21, 2017 7:54 pm by PurpleSkyz

» The Best Documentary on Weather Weapons
Sat Oct 21, 2017 5:21 pm by Consciousness Of Economic

» Earth's Underworld is Real and Scientists Just Mapped It
Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:59 pm by PurpleSkyz

» The Truth About Dunford -- Get Ready by Anna von Reitz
Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:54 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Trump plans to release classified JFK documents
Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:33 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Las Vegas Shooter Stephen Paddock Ran CIA Child Trafficking Ring
Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:25 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Official? -- Covert Disclosure of Antigravity Craft near MacDill AFB
Sat Oct 21, 2017 1:59 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Disinfowars sells their sheep lead.
Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:55 pm by Avebury

» The Stink of Pink: Why Mammograms Are Vastly Oversold
Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:40 pm by Consciousness Of Economic

» TREK [Part 3] by TS Caladan
Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:35 pm by PurpleSkyz

» "Brian" expected to smash into Ireland and parts of the UK
Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:18 pm by PurpleSkyz

» Operation Social Media Shock and Awe
Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:17 pm by Avebury

Who is online?

You are not connected. Please login or register

Out Of Mind » PEOPLE MAKING AN IMPACT ON THE LEGAL STATUS QUO » SNOOP 4 TRUTH » ROD CLASS & THE "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" HOAX plus way MORE from Snoop4Truth

ROD CLASS & THE "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" HOAX plus way MORE from Snoop4Truth

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" HOAX & THE "NO DRIVER'S LICENSE REQUIRED" HOAX


FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afCz8AjvYdY&t=421s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6SGIfO4ug4&t=69s 

THE HOAX I: Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists falsely claim that A PERSON IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A DRIVER’S LICENSE TO DRIVE A MOTOR VEHICLE on the grounds that every person has a "RIGHT TO TRAVEL". Thus, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe that the "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" is the same thing as the "RIGHT TO DRIVE A MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT A DRIVER'S LICENSE". But, this is not so.

THE TRUTH: The "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" is merely the JUDICIALLY-recognized RIGHT TO LEAVE ONE STATE AND TO ENTER ANOTHER STATE. It has NOTHING to do with "DRIVING" anything. Under the law, there is no such thing as a "RIGHT TO DRIVE" a motor vehicle. But, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know this.

THE HOAX II: Further, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists point out that under FEDERAL law, A PERSON IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE to drive a motor vehicle UNLESS THAT PERSON IS ENGAGED IN "COMMERCE" AMONG ["BETWEEN"] THE "SEVERAL STATES" ("interstate commerce"), a narrow subject governed by FEDERAL law. See Const., Art. 1, Sec. 8 (listing ALL POWERS of Congress).
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/article-i-section-8 . https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause.

THE TRUTH: But, what Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know is that STATE LAW APPLIES TO THE SAME PERSON AT THE SAME TIME. This is because, under the tenth amendment, STATE LAW GOVERNS THE SUBJECT OF DRIVER'S LICENSES OUTSIDE THE NARROW FEDERAL CONTEXT OF "INTERSTATE COMMERCE" (IN ALL OTHER CONTEXTS).
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/tenth-amendment. And, under STATE law, a person is required to have a driver’s license to drive a motor vehicle WHEN THAT PERSON IS NOT ENGAGED IN "INTERSTATE COMMERCE". So, when BOTH FEDERAL law and STATE law are COMBINED AND  APPLIED TO THE SAME PERSON AT THE SAME TIME, A PERSON IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A DRIVER’S LICENSE TO DRIVE A MOTOR VEHICLE IN ALL CONTEXTS, ALL THE TIME, NO MATTER WHAT (whether or not that person is engaged in "interstate commerce"). But, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do  not know this.

THE LAW:

1). OVER A CENTURY AGO, THE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT, in the absence of FEDERAL legislation, THE STATES HAD THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE ALL DRIVERS OF ALL MOTOR VEHICLES TO HAVE DRIVER'S LICENSES, WHETHER OR NOT THAT DRIVER WAS ENGAGED IN "INTERSTATE COMMERCE".

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13681451034893205402&q=1915++%22and+the+licensing+of+their+drivers%22++%22it+may+require+the+registration%22+%22as+well+as+others%22+%22of+all+motor+vehicles%22+%22in+respect+to+the+operation%22++%22a+state+may+rightfully+prescribe+uniform+regulations%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,60

Since this decision, CONGRESS (in compliance with this decision and in compliance with Art. 1, Sec. 8, clause 3, U.S. Const.) passed FEDERAL legislation regulating ONLY THOSE DRIVERS WHO WERE ENGAGED IN "interstate COMMERCE" (not other drivers). Under the tenth amendment (and under this decision), this STILL RESERVED unto THE STATES the power to regulate ONLY THOSE DRIVERS WHO WERE "NOT" ENGAGED IN "interstate COMMERCE" (not other drivers). So, in this sense, FEDERAL law and STATE law are now OPPOSITES of one another (FEDERAL law ONLY governs drivers ENGAGED IN "interstate COMMERCE" and STATE law ONLY governs drivers "NOT" ENGAGED IN "interstate COMMERCE"). So, if you are driver who proves that you were NOT ENGAGED IN "interstate COMMERCE", YOU HAVE JUST PROVEN THAT YOU ARE GOVERNED BY STATE LAW (instead of FEDERAL law). Either way, a driver's license is required.  

2). Under the tenth amendment, the STATES have the RIGHT to require driver's licenses of ONLY THOSE DRIVERS WHO ARE NOT ENGAGED IN "INTERSTATE COMMERCE" .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5478545834163197366&q=%22tenth+amendment%22+%22are+reserved+for+the+states%22+%22A+state%22+%22may+require%22+%22the+licensing+of+their+drivers%22+%22belonging+to+the+states%22+&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4613890670558831166&q=%22may+require%22+%22licensing+of+their+drivers%22+%22state+laws+requiring+valid+driver%27s+license%22+%22belonging+to+the+states%22+%22a+state%22+%22states+have+the+right+to+regulate%22+%22by+requiring+that+drivers%22+%22obtain+driver%27s+licenses%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4259598666103911788&q=%22necessity+of+regulation%22++%22may+constitutionally+regulate%22+++%22states%22+%22license+their+drivers%22+%22the+universal+practice+is+to+register+ownership%22+%22uses+of%22+%22public+highwaysc%22+%22the+supreme+court%22+%22did+not+limit+its+holding+to%22+commercial&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

3). THERE IS NO "RIGHT TO DRIVE".

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9780294138406294886&q=%22the+constitution+recognizes+a+right+to+travel%22+%22it+does+not+recognize+a+fundamental+right+to+drive%22+%22right+to+free+movement%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . (NEAR THE END OF THE CASE)

4). "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" DEFINED.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4721017505990988840&q=+%22the+constitutional+right+to+travel+from+one+state+to+another%22+%22Right+to+travel+discussed+in+our+cases%22+%22protects+the+right+of+a+citizen+of+one+state+to+enter+and+to+leave+another+state%22++&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . (SEE BOTH SECTIONS.).

5). The "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" IS NOT ABOUT "DRIVING" ANYTHING.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5478545834163197366&q=%22the+right+to+travel%22+%22is+not+synonymous%22+%22with+the+right+to+operate+a+motor+vehicle%22++%22The+operation+of+a+motor+vehicle%22+%22is+not+a+natural+right%22+%22It+is+a+conditional+privilege%22+&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9621580109864231465&q=%22this+is+not%22+%22what+is+at+issue+here+is+not+his+right+to+travel+interstate,+but+his+right+to+operate+a+motor+vehicle%22+%22Miller+does+not+have+a+fundamental+right+to+drive%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10451209462604692152&q=%22The+right+to+travel%22+%22is+the+right%22+%22to+travel+from+one+state+to+another%22+%22Petitioners+are+free+to+leave+the+state%22+%22although+they+may+not+drive+without+a+drivers+license%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18159286216902234518&q=complying+without+merit+%22right+to+travel%22+%22petitioner+misunderstands%22+%22there+is+no+fundamental+right%22+vehicle++%22nonexistent+right%22+motor+vehicles+license+%22to+operate%22++%22to+drive%22+%22without+a+valid%22+%22he+was+constitutionally+entitled%22+%22petitioner+claims+that%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

6). State requirements for driver's licenses DO NOT VIOLATE THE  "RIGHT TO TRAVEL".

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4613890670558831166&q=%22state+laws+requiring+valid+driver%27s+license+to+operate+a+motor+vehicle+do+not+violate+right+to+travel%22+%22there+is+no+fundamental+right+to+drive%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8872041112923644828&q=%22right+to+travel%22+%22does+not+impermissibly+burden+his%22+%22does+not+implicate%22+%22only+denies+plaintiff+the+ability+to+drive+himself+in+a+car%22+%22right+to+travel%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8886781550786925928&q=%22right+to+travel+has+not+been+infringed+upon+by+the+requirement%22+%22that+an+individual+have+a+valid+driver%27s+license+to+lawfully+operate+a+motor+vehicle%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12477576553628312121&q=%22does+not+rise+to+the+level+of+a+violation%22%22do+not+violate%22+%22do+not+implicate%22+%22there+is+no+fundamental+right+to+drive+a+motor+vehicle%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

7). A person may freely exercise their "RIGHT TO TRAVEL" without "DRIVING" ANYTHING by walking, riding a bicycle or horse, or as a "PASSENGER" in an automobile, bus, airplane or helicopter.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5478545834163197366&q=+%22If+he+wishes,+he+may+walk,+ride+a+bicycle+or+horse,+or+travel+as+a+passenger+in+an+automobile,+bus,+airplane+or+helicopter.+He+cannot,+however,+operate+a+motor+vehicle%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9621580109864231465&q=+%22the+plaintiff+is+not+being+prevented+from+traveling+interstate+by+public+transportation,+by+common+carrier,+or+in+a+motor+vehicle+driven+by+someone+with+a+license+to+drive+it%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

8). AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES ALWAYS LOSE.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18159286216902234518&q=%22right+to+travel%22+natural++%22another+entity%22+immune+person+foreign+entities+%22American+National%22+corporations+corporate+artificial+entities+sovereign&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9626485208674815070&q=%22dangerous+drivers%22+%22the+operation%22+travelling+ambassador+immunity+traveling+%22in+a+conveyance%22+%22is+a+privilege%22+Diplomatic+%22cannot+be+asserted+unilaterally%22+%22exists+only%22+%22another+state%27s+sovereignty%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8886781550786925928&q=%22Anthony+Troy+Williams%22+%22right+to+travel+has+not+been+infringed+upon%22+%22he+is+not+required+to+have+a+drivers+license+if+he+is+not+traveling+in+commerce%22+%22attorney+in+fact+for+the+legal+fiction%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . Note that this is the same person who stars in the 3 minute video below.

9). WHAT ABOUT CASE LAW THAT AMATEUR LEGAL THEORISTS CITE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR HOAX? Ex: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MZrB0TRFYI

Amateur legal theorists ONLY CITE case law that says a person has a "RIGHT" to: a). "TRAVEL"; b). "USE THE ROADWAYS"; c). "LOCOMOTION"; d). "PASSAGE"; e). "FREE TRANSIT"; and f). "USE ORDINARY CONVEYANCES". Note that the word, "DRIVE" is conspicuously absent in all of these cases.

But, amateur legal theorists DO NOT CITE case law that actually says that a person has a "RIGHT TO DRIVE A MOTOR VEHICLE WITHOUT A DRIVER'S LICENSE" (because no such law exists) AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY WORDS THAT MATTER.

3 MINUTE VIDEO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLbXtscZBM8

SNOPES:
http://m.snopes.com/supreme-court-rules-drivers-licenses-unnecessary/


https://youtu.be/afCz8AjvYdY


https://youtu.be/L6SGIfO4ug4


https://youtu.be/9MZrB0TRFYI


https://youtu.be/cLbXtscZBM8



Last edited by PurpleSkyz on Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:31 pm; edited 1 time in total



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & "THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A CORPORATION HOAX”





A.A.K. THE “28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15) (a) PROVES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A CORPORATION HOAX"
  
FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:
http://blackeyenews.com/?p=272 . http://investmentwatchblog.com/united-states-is-a-corporation-%E2%80%93-there-are-two-constitutions/. https://anticorruptionsociety.com/is-our-government-just-another-corporation/ (See footnote 4). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJCqVS52MCA . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qkRquYDkyQ .

THE HOAX: Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists falsely claim that Title 28 U.S.C.§ 3002 (15) (a) “proves” that the federal government is a “corporation”. But, this is not so.

THE TRUTH: Title 28 section § 3002 merely provides definitions SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF A SINGLE FEDERAL CHAPTER (AND THOSE DEFINITIONS DO NOT APPLY TO ANY OTHER CHAPTER AND CANNOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER PURPOSE). This is why the VERY FIRST WORDS of Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002 read, “As used in THIS chapter... ."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002 (See the VERY FIRST WORDS at the TOP of this section.).

The SINGLE CHAPTER for which Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002  provides definitions is the FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT (chapter 176). This SINGLE CHAPTER provides the "PROCEDURE" ONLY that the "United States" must follow when collecting certain debts.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3001.

BACKGROUND: There are dozens and dozens of types of “corporations”, only one of which is a private, for-profit “corporation” (the "bad kind"). All of the rest ARE NOT private, for-profit “corporations”.

SO, WHAT IS A “FEDERAL CORPORATION”?
A few of our federal agencies are structured as PUBLICLY-OWED, NON-PROFIT “federal corporations” (NO PROFITS, NO “PRIVATE OWNERS”, NO “STOCKHOLDERS”, etc.). In general, all of the federal agencies that are structured this way have two things in common, they all have their own customers (or their own source of revenue) and none of them are supposed to receive any money from Congress. Three well-known examples of such federal agencies are the United States Postal Service, AMTRAK and the Tennessee Valley Authority (a publicly-owned, non-profit ELECTRICAL POWER utility). You will note that ALL THREE of these PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT “federal corporations” have their own customers and none of them are supposed to receive any money from Congress. There are THREE MAIN REASONS that the federal government structured such federal agencies as PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT “federal corporations”: 1). To force each such federal agency to work within their own budgets BY USING THEIR OWN REVENUES (received from their own customers/sources) rather than depending on money from Congress; 2). To relieve taxpayers of the burden of paying for governmental services that they might not even use (ex: not everyone uses snail mail, rides trains or lives in the "Tennessee Valley"): and 3). To ensure that each such federal agency provide the highest possible quality of service at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer in order to avoid their own failure and collapse (which, due to this structure, would have no adverse effect on the taxpayer). It's all about fairness to the taxpayer.

SO, WHAT DOES THIS DEFINITION IN TITLE 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15) (a) ACTUALLY  MEAN?
The Fair Debt Collection Procedure Act requires the "United States" to follow certain "PROCEDURE" when collecting certain debts. And, SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF THAT "PROCEDURE" ONLY, Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15 (a) defines the "United States" to "INCLUDE", among other things, all its "federal corporations". So, if AMTRAK (a "federal corporation") sought to collect on such a debt, it would have to follow the same "PROCEDURE" set forth in the Fair Debt Collection Procedure Act that any other part of the "United States" government have to follow. It's that simple.

CONCLUSION: Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15) (a) DOES NOT define the United States as a ”federal corporation”. Instead, it defines a “federal corporation” (like AMTRAK) as the “United States” SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF THE FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT. Certainly, this definition IN THE FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT does not mean that the entire federal government itself is a “private, for-profit corporation” (the "bad kind"). But, consider this. Even if the "United States" was such a "corporation", and it is not, all of the governmental decisions made by that alleged "corporation" ARE STILL MADE BY PEOPLE THAT WE ELECT TO RUN IT and their appointees. 

THE LAW ON TITLE 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15)(a):

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18159286216902234518&q=%2228+USC+3002%22+(FDCPA)+%22Federal+Debt+Collection+Procedures+Act%22+%22The+FDCPA+does+not+state+that+the+federal+government+is+a+corporation%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (at footnote 2 at the very end of the case).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18159286216902234518&q=%22and+contrary%22+devoid+%22the+federal+government+are+corporations%22+%22neither+of+which+supports+his+claim+that%22+%22petitioner+cites%22++%2228+U.S.C+3002%22+%22Petitioner+also+contends+that%22+%22the++united+states+are+corporations%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (also addresses sovereign citizen, natural person, superior claim and right to the judgment, UCC, right to travel, sovereign & foreign state immunities, capital letters, de facto governments). 

"++"3002%2815%29"+"merely+provides+that+the+term+united+states"+"to+support+his+assertion+that+the+united+states+is+a+corporation"+"erroneously+cites"+"28+U.S.C.+3002%2815%29"&hl=en&as_sdt=40006]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9638202248861590589&q=%2228+U.S.C.%22+++%22when+used+in+this+%5Bstatute%5D%22++%223002(15)%22+%22merely+provides+that+the+term+united+states%22+%22to+support+his+assertion+that+the+united+states+is+a+corporation%22+%22erroneously+cites%22+%2228+U.S.C.+3002(15)%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (at fn.18) (also addresses maritime & admiralty jurisdiction, consent, "stand[ing] under" the court's questions, "his government name", filing a counterclaim is a criminal case, challenging grand jury array, disqualifying a judge for a "personal interest" in case & for practicing law, right to be represented by a non-lawyer, "attorney in fact", right to self-representation).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15212483763058805690&q=%223002(15)%22+%22does+not+define+the+United+States%22+%22as+a+federal+corporation%22+%22which+governs+Federal+Debt+Collection+Procedure%22++%22defines+United+States%22++%22only+for+purposes+of+28+USC+3001%22++%2228+USC+3002+(15)%22++&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (also addresses putting property into other names to avoid a debt, whether IRS tax laws apply outside D.C. & federal territories, whether wages are "income", sovereign and foreign state immunities, denying citizenship, IRS foreclosing on property put into another name).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4484968305092096232&q=%22solely+for+purposes+of+the+chapter+of+which+it+is+part%22++%22+Defendant%27s+reliance+on+28+U.S.C+3002(15)+is+misplaced%22+%22that+statute+is+simply+a+definitional+provision%22+%22defining+the+United+States%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (also addresses U.S. jurisdiction outside borders of D.C., the Act of 1871, whether U.S. is foreign state, the 11th amendment, whether the professional title, "esquire" (a servant of a knight in battle) is a title of "NOBILITY" (a HEREDITARY title for those BORN OF "NOBLE" BLOOD), whether use of the professional title, "esquire" converts American attorneys into agents of a foreign government, whether the "bar association" is a monopoly, whether certain federal statutes were enacted into positive law, whether judges really have a financial interest in their cases).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18372121264929306790&q=%22it+merely+provides+the%22+%22definition+of+United+States+for+purposes+of+the+statute%22+%22does+not+define+the+United+States+as+a+federal+corporation%22++%2228+USC+3002+(15)%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9160057929430622764&q=%22to+(1)+recover%22++%22a+judgment+on+a+debt%22+%223002+is+simply+a+definitions+statute+in+the+chapter+that+authorizes+the+USA%22+%2228+USC+3002+(15)%22+corporation+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (also addresses "absolute judicial immunity", filing fraudulent lien against a judge, 11th amendment immunity, whether a government officer/official can be personally liable for official actions taken under color of law, "absolute prosecutorial immunity", "absolute [government] official immunity", whether a county is a "commercial entity engaged in commerce").

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8251887802426142230&q=%22complete+reading%22+%22belies+this+interpretation%22++%22to+support+their+claim+that+the%22+%22defendants+cite+28+U.S.C.+3002%22+corporation+%22defendants+assert+that+the%22+%22United+States+of+America+is+a+federal%22+%22United+States+is+a%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (SEE ALL THREE SECTIONS) (also addresses "capital letters", "flesh and blood persons", the "name game" ("split personality" & "corporate fiction" defenses) and whether the IRS is a Puerto Rican corporation).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14825357831238654036&q=+repeatedly+rejected+baseless+patently++%22has+been+rejected%22+ludicrous+DENIED+frivolous+%22bordering+on+the+absurd%22+%22without+merit%22+%22contends+that+the+United+States+is+a+corporation+and+thus+has+no+sovereign+authority%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (also addresses whether law only applies to governments & not to humans, whether there are two different constitutions, whether gold and silver are the only lawful money, whether gold fringe on the American flag in court converts the court into an admiralty or military court,  birth certificate bond, strawman, whether "the people, not the government, are sovereign", affect of not being a "party or signatory to any law" & whether such a person is "exempt from all laws except those to which he voluntarily assents").

EXCELLENT LINKS:
http://pseudolaw.com/is-united-states-for-profit-corporation
http://internettheories.blogspot.com/2013/05/united-states-inc.html
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30365.pdf


https://youtu.be/rJCqVS52MCA


https://youtu.be/2qkRquYDkyQ



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & "SEVENTH GRADE CIVICS" EXPLAINED


Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists are unable to distinguish between PLURAL terms and SINGULAR terms. This inability results in much of their confusion about the law. In a republican form of government, such as ours, "WE" (a PLURAL term) the "PEOPLE" (also a PLURAL term) exercise our power and control over our own government COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY). But, as INDIVIDUALS, we exercise no such power or control. In a republican form of government, such as ours, the authority of a government depends on the COLLECTIVE (not INDIVIDUAL) "consent" of the "governed" (a PLURAL term). But, as INDIVIDUALS, our "consent" to our government, its jurisdiction or to our laws IS NOT REQUIRED. (See links at bottom.).  

CIVICS: In a republican form of government such as ours, there are THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. This prevents tyranny from any single branch of government. This legal principle is called the "SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE" which is found in the constitution of every state and in the constitution of the United States. Our three branches of government are the ELECTED LEGISLATIVE branch (the ELECTED statutory law makers), the ELECTED EXECUTIVE branch (the ELECTED law enforcement officials and their appointees) and the ELECTED JUDICIAL branch (the ELECTED judges,  the ELECTED prosecutors and the ELECTED public defenders of the courts). Through the ELECTION process, "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) control ALL THREE BRANCHES of our own government. But, as INDIVIDUALS, we have no such control.

In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our state statutes, then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT DIFFERENT ELECTED state LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES to change or repeal the state statutes that we do not like. This ELECTION process works the same way with our nationally ELECTED LEGISLATORS (SENATORS and CONGRESS MEN & WOMEN) as well as our locally ELECTED law/ordinance makers (county commissioners, city commissioners and city council members, etc.).  

In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our ELECTED state law enforcement officials, their appointees or their practices, then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT DIFFERENT state ELECTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS to change the appointees and/or practices that we do not like (different Governor, different County Sheriffs, different City Police Chiefs, etc.). This ELECTION process works the same way with our nationally ELECTED law enforcement officer (our PRESIDENT ). 

In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our ELECTED state judges, their practices or their rulings , then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT different ELECTED state JUDGES (different Supreme Court Justices, different appellate judges, different circuit judges, different county judges, different city judges, etc.). This ELECTION process works the same way with respect to our ELECTED state prosecutors (state attorneys and district attorneys) and our ELECTED state public defenders. NOTE: In the federal courts, judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, both of which are ELECTED by "We the People". But, those ELECTED representatives of "We the People" (who do the nominating and confirming of our federal judges) can be removed from office by the ELECTION process as well. The ELECTED President also appoints the federal prosecutors, but the President can be removed from office by the ELECTION process too. Some state jurisdictions even use a combination of BOTH systems whereby judges are first APPOINTED to the bench by ELECTED representatives of "We the People", but then must withstand a "retention" vote by "We the People" every single ELECTION cycle thereafter in order to remain on the bench. 

Regardless, EVERY single person in EVERY single branch of our STATE and FEDERAL government is put into office DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY by "We the People" COLLECTIVELY through the ELECTION process.

The fundamental mistake made by ALL AMATEUR LEGAL THEORISTS is their inability to comprehend the difference between the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (which is almost absolute) and the ABSENCE of power of the SINGLE INDIVIDUAL (which is almost nothing) when opposing the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (which is almost absolute). Every single amateur legal theory ever promoted reflects a basic misunderstanding of this simple legal principle, "THE MAJORITY RULES and the INDIVIDUAL DOES NOT." All amateur legal theorists get this simple legal principle exactly BACKWARDS (a common problem in amateur legal theory). 

It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state LAW MAKERS to pass our state statutes and to make them binding upon all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state without the INDIVIDUAL'S "consent" (“contractual” or otherwise), etc.

It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS to ticket, arrest and charge any INDIVIDUAL in the state who violates our state statutes without the INDIVIDUAL'S "consent" (“contractual” or otherwise), etc.

It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state JUDGES to preside over state court proceedings of such an INDIVIDUAL without that INDIVIDUAL’S "consent" (“contractual or otherwise”).

This means that in a republican form of government such as ours, an INDIVIDUAL'S "consent” (“contractual” or otherwise) is NOT REQUIRED in such matters. But, even if some type of "consent" was required in such matters (and it is not), then in a republican form of government such as ours, THAT “CONSENT” WOULD COME FROM “WE THE PEOPLE” COLLECTIVELY, AS A WHOLE, THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS, NOT FROM THE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL OUTSIDE THE ELECTION PROCESS.

THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS, OUR THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAVE THE COLLECTIVE “CONSENT” OF “WE THE PEOPLE” TO MAKE OUR LAW, TO ENFORCE OUR LAW AND TO PUNISH FOR VIOLATIONS OF OUR LAW.

OUR THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT DO NOT ALSO NEED THE INDIVIDUAL “CONSENT” OF ANY INDIVIDUAL TO CARRY OUT THOSE FUNCTIONS. 

So, every single legal burden placed on the INDIVIDUAL in a republican form of government such as ours is a legal burden that is placed upon the INDIVIDUAL directly or indirectly by the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY through the ELECTION process.

In a republican form of government such as ours, the power of the INDIVIDUAL is limited to VOTING, RUNNING FOR OFFICE and to enforcing what few INDIVIDUAL rights and protections that "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) allow the INDIVIDUAL to have (such as those INDIVIDUAL rights and protections listed in the Bill Of Rights). In a republican form of government such as ours, these INDIVIDUAL rights and protections of the INDIVIDUAL are determined by the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (NOT BY THE INDIVIDUAL). This is why in a republican form of government, such as ours, ELECTIONS ARE SO IMPORTANT. In a republican form of government such as ours, ELECTIONS (which reflect the will of the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY) DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CONTROL EVERYTHING ABOUT OUR OWN GOVERNMENT. THESE ELECTIONS DETERMINE WHAT OUR LAWS ARE, WHO OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS ARE, WHO OUR JUDGES ARE, WHO OUR PROSECUTORS ARE, WHO OUR PUBLIC DEFENDERS ARE AND THEY DETERMINE WHAT ANY DESIRED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS OR REPEALS MIGHT BE.

FACT: THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR STATUTES VALID. THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS VALID. THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR COURTS VALID, OUR JUDGES VALID, OUR PROSECUTORS VALID AND OUR PUBLIC DEFENDERS VALID.

FACT: In a republican form of government such as ours, every conviction of a single INDIVIDUAL involves the efforts of ALL THREE ELECTED BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT (the ELECTED LAW MAKERS who write the statutes, the ELECTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS whose appointees make the arrests and who file the charges, the ELECTED JUDGES who preside over proceedings in court AND the ELECTED PROSECUTORS who attempt to convict the statutory violators in court). In a republican form of government such as ours, NO SINGLE ELECTED BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT CAN CONVICT AN INDIVIDUAL WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE OTHER TWO ELECTED BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

FACT: The people who oppose, defy and seek the overthrow our ELECTED government, our ELECTED legislatures, our ELECTED executive (law enforcement) officials, our ELECTED judges, our ELECTED prosecutors and our ELECTED public defenders ACTUALLY OPPOSE, DEFY AND SEEK THE OVERTHROW OF OUR REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT ITSELF and in so doing, SEEK TO OVERTHROW THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY OF "WE THE PEOPLE" OURSELVES. This desire to overthrow our ELECTED republican form of government and the will of the majority of "We the People"COLLECTIVELY, along with his long history of PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS and his MULTIPLE weapons-related FELONIES are the reasons that Rod Class, has been placed on the United States "TERRORIST WATCH LIST".

LINKS:

+by+their+votes+the+people+exercise+their+sovereignty"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2459141824775540924&q=%22Thomas+jefferson+stated+over+150+years+ago+that+%5Bit+is%5D+by+their+votes+the+people+exercise+their+sovereignty%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (SEE HIGHLIGHTED TEXT.).

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/consent-of-the-governed

(CONTINUED IN "ROD CLASS & THE 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' MYTH EXPLAINED")



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN HOAX" EXPLAINED

(CONTINUED FROM "ROD CLASS & SEVENTH GRADE CIVICS EXPLAINED". PLEASE READ THAT COMMENT FIRST.).

Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe that a "SOVEREIGN" is an INDIVIDUAL and that the enemy of a "SOVEREIGN" is the GOVERNMENT of the state and all of the individuals in the state. But, this is not so. The government of the state and all of the individuals in the state IS THE "SOVEREIGN". The INDIVIDUAL IS NOT. But, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know this. They get it EXACTLY BACKWARDS (OPPOSITE) to what the truth actually is (a common problem in amateur legal theory).

Thus, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists who oppose their own government ACTUALLY OPPOSE THE VERY "SOVEREIGN" AND THE VERY "SOVEREIGNTY" THAT THEY CLAIM TO SUPPORT. This means that Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists who oppose their own government ARE ACTUALLY THE ENEMIES of the "SOVEREIGN" and ACTUALLY THE ENEMIES of "SOVEREIGNTY", not their supporters. But, they do not know enough to realize this. This is why many such amateur legal theorists (like Rod Class) find themselves on the United States TERRORIST WATCH LIST (because they actually oppose the "SOVEREIGN" and because they actually oppose "SOVEREIGNTY").

This fundamental mistake (the belief that the INDIVIDUAL is "SOVEREIGN") reflects that the terms, "SOVEREIGN" and "SOVEREIGNTY" are perhaps the single most misused and misunderstood terms in all of amateur legal theory.

BACKGROUND: Originally in politics, a "SOVEREIGN" was a SINGLE "MONARCH" (King or Queen) GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE who GOVERNED a nation state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the nation state. Originally, the RIGHT of a SINGLE "MONARCH" GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE to GOVERN its own nation state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in its own nation state WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE was that MONARCH's right of "SOVEREIGNTY".

Then and now, a "SOVEREIGN" meant/means a "GOVERNMENT" OF ITS OWN NATION STATE and all of the individuals in its own nation state. Then and now, "SOVEREIGNTY," meant/means that GOVERNMENT’S RIGHT TO GOVERN ITS OWN NATION STATE and all of the individuals in its own nation state WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE.

THE STATES: But, here in the United States, we rejected the notion of a SINGLE "MONARCH" GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE to GOVERN the state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state. Here in our country, we adopted a republican form of government whereby "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) GOVERNED our own states and all of the INDIVIDUALS in our own state COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) through our ELECTED representatives of our own STATE.

So, here in our country, THE STATE ITSELF, which consists of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) became "SOVEREIGN" (which still means THE GOVERNMENT OF A STATE). This means that in our country THE STATE ITSELF legally stands in the shoes of the SINGLE MONARCH of yesteryear. So, in our country, THE STATE ITSELF GOVERNS the STATE and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state (instead of the SINGLE MONARCH of yesteryear). But, the right, power and authority of THE STATE ITSELF as a "SOVEREIGN" and the right, power and authority of the MONARCH of yesteryear as a "SOVEREIGN" ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. In our country, a "SOVEREIGN" IS STILL A "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE, but a "SOVEREIGN" is no longer a SINGLE MONARCH.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Thus, In our country, the term, "SOVEREIGN" is a term THAT ONLY APPLIES TO A GOVERNMENT OF "WE THE PEOPLE" COLLECTIVELY (AS A WHOLE) AND NOT TO A SINGLE "CITIZEN", INDIVIDUAL OR PERSON INDIVIDUALLY. But, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to realize this. They get it EXACTLY BACKWARDS (OPPOSITE) to what the truth actually is.

Here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL did not become a "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE. So, here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL did not become a "SOVEREIGN" (a GOVERNMENT OF A STATE). As a result, here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL does not GOVERN the STATE or any of the INDIVIDUALS in the state.

THE UNITED STATES: The United States ITSELF is also a SOVEREIGN nation state consisting of a union of MEMBER SOVEREIGN STATES. So, here in the United States, THE STATES and the United States are both "SOVEREIGN" GOVERNMENTAL HEADS OF STATE (WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE JURISDICTIONS AS DIFFERENTIATED BY SUBJECT MATTER IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION).

This means that here in the United States, THE STATE AND THE UNITED STATES OCCUPY THE SAME EXACT LEGAL POSITION (AND HAVE THE SAME LEGAL RIGHT, POWER AND AUTHORITY TO GOVERN THE STATE AND ALL OF THE INDIVIDUALS IN THE STATE) AS DID THE SINGLE MONARCH OF YESTERYEAR, except that the powers of the United States (as distinguished from the individual STATES) are limited to those powers expressly delegated to it in the United States Constitution (a tiny list of subjects), whereas the powers of the individual STATES (as distinguished from the United States) have no such limitation.

Here in the United States, "We the People" exercise our "SOVEREIGNTY" COLLECTIVELY (NOT INDIVIDUALLY) through our VOTES. ---Thomas Jefferson (see below). Thus, "We the People" exercise our "SOVEREIGNTY" through our ELECTIONS.

But, as INDIVIDUALS, none of us are “SOVEREIGN”(which still means the GOVERNMENT of a state) and as INDIVIDUALS, none of us can exercise any "SOVEREIGNTY" (which still means  the right to GOVERN the state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state). In our country, we no longer recognize a SINGLE INDIVIDUAL (or “MONARCH”) as “SOVEREIGN”. In our country, no single INDIVIDUAL is the GOVERNMENT OF A STATE. This is why, in our country, no INDIVIDUAL can be "SOVEREIGN" (WHICH STILL MEANS A GOVERNMENT OF A STATE).

APPLICATION: This is why every amateur legal theorist who claims to be "SOVEREIGN" (a GOVERNMENT OF A STATE) always LOSES on that issue with law enforcement officers and in court. This is why all law enforcement officers and all courts always treat such amateur legal theorists as the mere INDIVIDUALS that they really are. Amateur legal theorists who claim to be "SOVEREIGN" (a government of a state) to law enforcement officers and in court do nothing but demonstrate their IGNORANCE of the law and their IGNORANCE of history--- AND THEY ALWAYS LOSE!

WHAT YOU CAN DO: If you do not like the laws, the ELECTED legislators, the ELECTED executive officers or the ELECTED judges or the ELECTED prosecutors, then do something about it. VOTE OR RUN FOR OFFICE. Pretending to be an INDIVIDUAL, GOVERNMENT OF A STATE (a “SOVEREIGN” MONARCH) has never, and will never work for you as a “defense” to the application of any law, the jurisdiction of any law enforcement officer or court or to the consequences any arrest, charge or conviction.

CONCLUSION: IN OUR COUNTRY, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN BE A "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" (OR OTHERWISE "SOVEREIGN"). HERE, AND ELSEWHERE, ONLY A GOVERNMENT CAN BE A "SOVEREIGN". So, in our country, an INDIVIDUAL cannot "get his SOVEREIGNTY back".  This is because, In our country, NO INDIVIDUAL WAS EVER "SOVEREIGN" IN THE FIRST PLACE.

DEFINITION:

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/S/Sovereign.aspx

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sovereign

THE LAW:

+by+their+votes+the+people+exercise+their+sovereignty"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2459141824775540924&q=%22Thomas+jefferson+stated+over+150+years+ago+that+%5Bit+is%5D+by+their+votes+the+people+exercise+their+sovereignty%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2011726581563609832&q=++%22is+not%22+%22beyond+the+jurisdiction%22+%22of+the+courts%22+%22regardless+of+an+individual%27s+claimed+status%22+%22no+conceivable+validity%22+%22argument+that+a+defendant+is+a%22+%22rejecting+the%22+individual+repeatedly+rejected+sovereignty+sovereign+citizen&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16993091562091245184&q=%22The+...%22+theory+%22are+not+established+law%22++%22The+...theories+of+...%22++rejecting+argument+%22to+be+to+wholly+insubstantial+and%22+frivolous+%22finding+the%22+sovereign+citizens+citizen+%22This+is+a%22+%22legal+theory+that+is+consistently+rejected%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16820160598854753158&q=%22in+this+country%27s%22+%22legal+system%22++%22theories+of+%27sovereign+citizens%27+are+not+established+law%22+%22Plaintiff%27s+purported+status+as+a+sovereign+citizen+does+not+enable+him+to+violate+state+and+federal+laws+without+consequence%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15013050720983506132&q=refuse+refusal+refusing+bizarre+misguided+citizens++%22have+never+proven+effective%22+anti-government+movement+misplaced+%22out+of+context%22+incoherent+obsolete+antigovernment+movements+extremists+irrational+antics+sovereign+citizen+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

Rod Class is: 1). a functionally-illiterate amateur legal theorist with barely a high school education; 2). the victim of a PSYCHIATRIC ILLNESS; 3). a TWO-TIME, WEAPONS-RELATED, CONVICTED FELON; 4). a person who has LOST EVERY SINGLE ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL CASE IN WHICH HE HAS EVER BEEN INVOLVED (MORE THAN 73 CASES); 5). a person who has been placed on the United States TERRORIST WATCH LIST; and 6). a PROFESSIONAL HOAXER and CHARLATAN.



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
WHY WAS ROD CLASS IN WASHINTON, D.C. IN THE FIRST PLACE?????????????????????????

????????????


ANSWER: He was manufacturing a hoax in an effort to "TRICK" his own followers and the courts into believing that "Congress" had authorized him to practice law without a license. (Class mistakenly believed that Congress had such a power. But, it does not. Class did not know that under Article I, section 8 (which lists all of the powers of Congress) and under the tenth amendment (which reserves TO THE STATES all powers not delegated to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution), ONLY THE STATES HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT.). (1)

Regardless, based on his mistaken belief, Class FORGED a two-page document (in all Italic font) consisting of a "FAKE" CONGRESSIONAL LETTERHEAD and a FAKE SIGNATURE PAGE (with a FAKE signature line for BOTH the HOUSE and the SENATE "judiciary committees"). (2) Class FRAUDULENTLY calls his FORGERY his "PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL CERTIFICATE" or his "CREDENTIALS". In his FORGERY, Class DESIGNATED HIMSELF a "Private Attorney General" under two CIVIL RIGHTS statutes (not realizing that such was actually a CIVIL RIGHTS CLIENT who could NOT practice law or represent another person in court). (3) In his FORGERY, Class also DESIGNATED HIMSELF a "14th Amendment, Section 4 Bounty Hunter" (not realizing that such was actually a Union CIVIL WAR SOLDIER 150 years ago). (4) Finally, in his FORGERY, Class also AUTHORIZED HIMSELF to practice law without a license (not realizing that Congress has no power to provide such an authorization). (No link to this FORGERY is yet available. It was found in Class' cases on Pacer.gov.). Class actually admits to all of this. (5)

BACKGROUND I: When ANYONE hand files ANY document with Congress, Congressional aides sign and date-stamp the word, "RECEIVED" on the top page of that document. Then, they provide the deliverer of the document with a duplicate of that same signed and date-stamped document for their own records (like a "receipt"). Class then uses the signed and date-stamped duplicate of HIS OWN FORGERY to create the illusion that Congress (rather than Class) wrote and issued the FORGERY. (After all, by then Class' FORGERY appears to be on Congressional letterhead, bears Congressional date stamps and has signatures "from Congress"). But, in truth, no single Congressman (much less ALL OF CONGRESS) ever takes any action on the FORGERIES that Class' UNILATERALLY hand files with Congressional aides in this way. Indeed, Congress has no power to take any such action in the first place. But, Class does not know this.

MISTAKES ON TOP OF MISTAKES:  All of this means that Class was so INCOMPETENT that in creating his FORGERY, he actually solicited signatures and date-stamps FROM THE WRONG GOVERNMENTAL BRANCH (legislative instead of judicial) OF THE WRONG GOVERNMENTAL SOVEREIGN (federal instead of state). You cannot get more INCOMPETENT than that. (In order to manufacture a really good hoax, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE LYING ABOUT, and Class does not.).

BACKGROUND II: Class FRAUDULENTLY-MARKED his vehicle with several large FAKE vinyl decals to make it LOOK like a law enforcement vehicle. (6)

FACTS: On May 30th, 2013, Class (in his imaginary capacity as a "Private Attorney General") was en route from North Carolina to Pennsylvania to "help" an unwary victim LOSE his weapons case there. But, Class stopped in D.C. along the way to obtain some Congressional aide signatures and date-stamps on his FORGERY.  In so doing, Class illegally parked his conspicuously-marked vehicle on United States Capitol grounds in a parking lot located closest to occupied Congressional office buildings during business hours. This parking lot was clearly marked in such a way as to indicate that Class was not to park there. 

After illegally parking, Class went inside the adjacent Congressional office buildings for the reasons stated. When Class returned to the parking lot (delighted to have obtained what he had come for), he discovered that his conspicuously-marked vehicle was surrounded by a team of uniformed federal law enforcement officers who were busy peering through its windows counting all of the illegal "dangerous weapons" that were visible inside (and located next to occupied Congressional office buildings during business hours). (Think "Timothy McVeigh", the Murrah Federal Building and the Oklahoma City Bombing in a post-911 world.).

Inside Class' vehicle, federal officers found: one fully-loaded rifle, three fully-loaded handguns, one of which was completely and illegally unsecured and positioned between the front seats for quick and easy access, several hundred more rounds of ammunition for all four firearms on-board, one large machete on the driver’’s side door for easy access, fourteen large knives & daggers of varying size and lethal effect, one illegal spring-deployed switch blade knife and three more axes of various sizes and lethal effect.

When Class returned to his vehicle, officers asked him if the vehicle was his, he replied, "Yes". When officers asked Class it he had driven his vehicle onto United State Capitol grounds and parked it where it sat, Class replied, "Yes". When officers asked Class if the "dangerous weapons" inside the vehicle were his, he replied, "Yes". On the basis of these voluntary confessions (all of which  Class openly admits to), Class was charged and convicted of "carrying" "dangerous weapons" "onto United States Capitol grounds". (7) It's that simple. There was nothing bizarre, unusual, curious, fraudulent, corrupt, illegal or unconstitutional about what the officers or the courts did in this case.

Unknown to Class, his conduct here also violated the terms of his conceal and carry permit from North Carolina. So, unknown to Class, his permit offered him no "defense" to the charges against him here. (8)

Unknown to Class, even if he had a second amendment defense to "carrying" firearms or handguns onto United States Capitol grounds in a post 9-11 world, he had no second amendment defense to "carrying" the other "dangerous weapons" (including machetes, knives & daggers, switch blades and axes) onto United States Capitol grounds.

NOTE: Class is PATHOLOGICALLY DESPERATE to appear to be something that he is not ("Private Attorney General",  "14th Amendment, Section 4 Bounty Hunter", "winning litigator", "legal genius", etc.).

FACT: If Class had not stopped in D.C. to obtain Congressional aide signatures and date-stamps on his FORGERY (in order to appear to be something that he is not), Class WOULD NOT have been arrested and convicted of "carrying dangerous weapons onto U.S. Capitol grounds".

FACT: If Class had not ALSO fraudulently-marked his vehicle with FAKE vinyl decals (in order to appear to be something that he is not), Class' vehicle would have likely escaped the attention of federal law enforcement officers and Class WOULD NOT likely have been arrested or convicted.

FOOTNOTES:
1). See Const., Art. 1, Sec. 8 (WHICH LISTS ALL OF THE POWERS OF CONGRESS).
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/article-i-section-8 (Note that the power to authorize a person to practice law IS NOT ON THE LIST). Unknown to Class, ONLY THE STATES HAVE THE POWER TO DO THAT.  http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/tenth-amendment. Class makes this very same AMATEUR mistake with respect to driver's licenses which are likewise governed by STATE law (not by FEDERAL law).

2. 
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2757756755752158953&q=denied+%22there+is+no+evidence+supporting%22+%22this+allegation%22+%22private+attorney+general%22+%22Rodney+Class%22+%22defendant+claims+he+has+been+given+authority+by+the+house+and+senate+to+act+as+a%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . (See Ruling 35).

3.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16098434127441351570&q=counsel+%22+successful+plaintiffs%22+attorney+attorneys+discrimination+fee+fees+negroes+racial+%22civil+rights%22+%22he+does+so%22+%22when+a+plaintiff%22+%22obtains+an+injunction%22+%22as+a+private+attorney+general%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

What a REAL PAG looks like.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22civil+rights%22+victims&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjp2MH9kubSAhWB1CYKHWXqDjAQ_AUIBygC&biw=1366&bih=613#spf=1.

4.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Bounty-System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounty_jumper 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2388571488588603535&q=+%22by+any+future+congress+controlled+by+southerners+and+their+sympathizers%22+%22in+fighting+the+civil+war%22+%22the+fourteenth+amendment+was+intended+to+prevent+the+questioning+of+the+war+debt+incurred+by+the+union%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

5).
https://itnj.org/wp-content/uploads/ITNJ/ITNJ_Cases/rod_class/case_outline/Rod_Class_DC_Case_Outline_First_Two_Month.pdf (AT PAGE 2 PARA. 2.). Here, Class actually admits to seeking and obtaining Congressional signatures & date-stamps on his FORGERY in furtherance of this hoax.

6.
http://www.nc4x4.com/forum/threads/douche-bag-attractant.159266/

Class was previously convicted for illegally installing a real police blue light on top of his vehicle (to make it LOOK like a law enforcement vehicle). Class was sentenced to A YEAR'S PROBATION conditioned on him "not possessing weapons" of any kind. Class was actually ON PROBATION for that conviction when he was arrested in D.C. with "weapons" here, thereby constituting a VIOLATION OF HIS PROBATION.

7.
+a+dangerous+weapon"+"may+not+carry"+"carry[ing]"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2757756755752158953&q=%22which+will+or%22+%22defining+a+firearm%22+%22capitol+buildings%22+%22on+the+grounds%22+%22expel+a+projectile+by+the+action+of+an+explosive%22+%22is+designed+to%22++%22any+weapon%22+%22%5Bor%5D+a+dangerous+weapon%22+%22may+not+carry%22+%22carry%5Bing%5D%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003 (SEE BOTH SECTIONS).

8. N.C.G.S. 14-415.11(C)(4).
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-415.11.html.



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & "THE SUPREME COURT LOVES MY PAPERWORK HOAX"

THE HOAX: ROD CLASS (THE KING OF HOAXES WHO HAS LOST 73 CASES IN A ROW) NOW FRAUDULENTLY TAKES CREDIT FOR THE SUCCESS OF HIS ATTORNEYS IN GETTING THE SUPREME COURT TO CONSIDER A NEW LEGAL QUESTION THAT CLASS NEVER KNEW ABOUT AND NEVER RAISED ANYWHERE AT ANYTIME. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=48361&cmd=tc (See Episode 1004, Dated 05-26-2017).

BACKGROUND:
Class was charged with "CARRYING" "DANGEROUS WEAPONS" in his vehicle onto "UNITED STATES CAPITOL GROUNDS", a FELONY. 
+a+dangerous+weapon"+"may+not+carry"+"carry[ing]"+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2757756755752158953&q=%22which+will+or%22+%22defining+a+firearm%22+%22capitol+buildings%22+%22on+the+grounds%22+%22expel+a+projectile+by+the+action+of+an+explosive%22+%22is+designed+to%22++%22any+weapon%22+%22%5Bor%5D+a+dangerous+weapon%22+%22may+not+carry%22+%22carry%5Bing%5D%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40003 (SEE BOTH SECTIONS OF HIGHLIGHTED TEXT ABOVE).

Class entered into a plea deal whereby he would plead GUILTY to the FELONY charge against him in exchange for the prosecutor recommending a light sentence to the judge. As part of the plea deal, CLASS WAIVED ("GAVE UP") HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL, first in the plea agreement itself and again in open court.

Thereafter, Class realized that his GUILTY plea to a FELONY (in the plea deal) would make him ineligible for his conceal and carry permit from the State Of North Carolina (which does not allow CONVICTED FELONS to have such permits). So, Class VIOLATED the terms of his own plea agreement (in which he WAIVED his right to appeal) AND FILED AN APPEAL OF HIS CASE ANYWAY.

In his appeal, Class raised a number of amateur legal theories. Class also MISTAKENLY claimed that the statute that he was convicted of violating HAD ALREADY BEEN DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL and he MISTAKENLY claimed that under the "full faith and credit" clause, he was authorized by his North Carolina conceal and carry permit him to "CARRY" handguns/firearms into Washington, D.C. AND onto United States Capitol grounds (which behavior, unknown to Class, ACTUALLY VIOLATED the terms his conceal and carry permit from that state). BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, CLASS NEVER KNEW TO RAISE (AND DID NOT RAISE) THE ISSUE OF WHETHER HE COULD FILE AN APPEAL OF HIS CASE IN THE FIRST PLACE (a right that he had TWICE unconditionally WAIVED, first in his plea deal and again in open court).

The Court Of Appeals received Class' amateur appellate brief and the entire court file from the trial court below (which contained Class' PSYCHIATRIC records). Both PROVED that Class was ILLITERATE, UNEDUCATED and MENTALLY ILL. So, as the trial court had done below (with "STAND BY" counsel to represent Class), the Court Of Appeals ALSO hired, AT THE GOVERNMENT'S EXPENSE, a law firm to represent Class on appeal and ordered it, in writing, to "act on Class' behalf". Because Class wanted to represent himself on appeal, the Court of Appeals "humored" Class by calling the law firm that it hired to represent Class an "amicus curiae" ("friend of court"). But, the reality is that this law firm was under written court orders to represent Class as his law firm on appeal, regardless of the terminology used. Class' law firm DID NOT TAKE CLASS' CASE "FREE" AS A MATTER OF "PRINCIPLE". IT TOOK CLASS' CASE FOR THE MONEY! And, lucky for Class.

Class' law firm immediately realized that Class had MISTAKENLY FAILED to raise the "THRESHOLD QUESTION" of WHETHER HE COULD EVEN FILE AN APPEAL OF HIS CASE IN THE FIRST PLACE (after TWICE waiving that right, in the plea agreement and again in open court). Without addressing and disposing of this legal issue, THERE WOULD BE NO APPEAL. But, Class did not know this. So, Class' law firm "COVERED" FOR HIS MISTAKE by raising this omitted legal issue for him (thereby saving the entire appeal). Unfortunately, the Court Of Appeals held that Class HAD WAIVED HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL.

In response to this adverse ruling, Class' law firm ALONE filed an appeal to the Supreme Court. CLASS WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM (AND WILL NEVER BE SO INVOLVED). The SOLE QUESTION in this new appeal before the Supreme Court is WHETHER A PERSON (ANY PERSON) CAN FILE AN APPEAL challenging the constitutionality of a statute WHICH THEY HAVE ALREADY PLED GUILTY TO VIOLATING. THIS IS THE ONE AND ONLY ISSUE ON APPEAL. See SECOND PAGE, MARKED PAGE "i", BOTTOM PARAGRAPH. 
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/16-424-brief-of-petitioner.pdf . THIS ISSUE IS A NEW LEGAL ARGUMENT THAT CLASS NEVER KNEW TO RAISE (AND DID NOT RAISE) ANYWHERE AT ANY TIME. Class' amateur legal theories ARE NOT NOW (AND WILL NEVER BE) BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT TO CONSIDER. ONLY REAL LAW CONCEIVED AND PRESENTED BY CLASS' LAW FIRM (NOT ROD CLASS) WILL BE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT TO CONSIDER. 

THE HOAX: Class FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMS that the Court Of Appeals hired his law firm to represent him because his amateur "paperwork" WAS SO GOOD. Class also FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMS that his law firm and other interested parties who joined in the current appeal did so to "BACK UP" his amateur "paperwork".  But, none of this so.

THE TRUTH: The Court Of Appeals hired Class' law firm to represent him because his amateur "paperwork" WAS SO BAD!  Further, the Court Of Appeals HAD PROOF in its own files that Class was FUNCTIONALLY-ILLITERATE, UNEDUCATED AND MENTALLY ILL. FACT: COURTS DO NOT PROVIDE ATTORNEYS TO LITIGANTS WHO ARE CAPABLE OF REPRESENTING THEMSELVES.  COURTS ONLY PROVIDE ATTORNEYS TO LITIGANTS WHO ARE INCAPABLE OF REPRESENTING THEMSELVES (as was the case here). Further, the other interested parties who joined in the current appeal DO NOT "BACK UP" Class' amateur "paperwork" either! Instead, they ONLY "BACK UP" CLASS' LAW FIRM IN ITS ENTIRELY SEPARATE LEGAL ARGUMENT WHICH CLASS NEVER KNEW ABOUT AND WHICH CLASS NEVER RAISED ANYWHERE AT ANYTIME.

WHAT THOSE INVOLVED DO NOT YET KNOW:

1. Class WAS ACTUALLY ON PROBATION at the time of his ARREST in this case for a previous North Carolina CRIMINAL CONVICTION (which PROBATION was conditioned upon Class NOT POSSESSING ANY "WEAPONS" OF ANY KIND for a year ). Lincoln Cty [North Carolina] Gen. Ct. Of Justice, Dist. Ct. Div. Case No. 13CR050407. Thus, Class WAS IN ILLEGAL POSSESSION of "WEAPONS" at the time of his ARREST in this case (not even considering his additional violation of FEDERAL law). SO, CLASS WAS NOT A "LAW ABIDING CITIZEN" AT THE TIME OF HIS ARREST, as he fraudulently contends.

2.  Class SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD a conceal and carry permit from the state of North Carolina in the first place. This is because Class was ALREADY A CONVICTED FELON before applying for such a permit from that state (and that state DOES NOT issue such permits to CONVICTED FELONS). N.C.G.S. 14_415.12(b)(3).
http://ncleg.net/gascripts/statutes/statutelookup.pl?statute=14-415.12 . Specifically, in 2001, Class was CONVICTED in Ohio of the FELONY POSSESSION (in his car) a fully-loaded, ILLEGALLY-SAWED-OFF Springfield shotgun. Ct. of Common Pleas, Tuscarawas Cty, Ohio, Case No. 2001 CR 12 0298. Ironically, Class WAS ALSO ON PROBATION at the time of that FELONY ARREST for a previous Ohio gun-related CRIME (which constituted another PROBATION VIOLATION by Class). Canton [Ohio] Mun. Ct., Case No. 1999CRB05550). Regardless, Class DID NOT fit any exception to the conceal and carry statute and WAS NOT eligible for the "restoration" of his firearm rights (so as to be issued such a permit from that state). N.C.G.S. 14_415.4 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (j). http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-415.4.html . Thus, Class apparently obtained his conceal and carry permit from North Carolina by FRAUD (itself a criminal act). N.C.G.S. 14_415.4(l) (this is an "L"). http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-415.4.html.  Further, the sentencing judge in this case DID NOT KNOW that Class was ALREADY a CONVICTED FELON at the time of sentencing (Class INTENTIONALLY OMITTED this fact from the pre-sentencing statement upon which the judge and prosecutor relied). Astonishingly, Class was also  ARRESTED and JAILED TWO MORE TIMES during this case, once for refusing to appear at his own trial and once for resisting arrest following a traffic stop. 

3. Unknown to Class, IT WAS ALSO ILLEGAL for him to have "CARRIED" handguns or firearms onto United States Capitol grounds UNDER HIS OWN CONCEAL AND CARRY PERMIT FROM THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA. Unknown to Class, his permit from that state EXPRESSLY FORBADE CLASS FROM POSSESSING OR CARRYING HANDGUNS OR FIREARMS ON ANY FEDERAL PROPERTY WHERE SUCH WEAPONS ARE NOT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW. N.C.G.S. 14_415.11(C)(4).
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-415.11.html . So, contrary to Class' understanding, his having a North Carolina “conceal and carry” permit DID NOT constitute a "defense" to the federal charges against him in this case.

4. Even if Class had a "second amendment" defense to "CARRYING" three loaded handguns and one fully loaded rifle onto United States Capitol grounds, Class HAD NO "SECOND AMENDMENT DEFENSE" to "CARRYING" THE OTHER "DANGEROUS WEAPONS" onto United States Capitol grounds WHICH WERE ALSO PROHIBITED BY THE SAME FEDERAL STATUTE (one machete, fourteen knives and daggers, one illegal switch blade, three axes, etc.).

5. It is true that Class may not have realized that he had driven and parked his vehicle (loaded with "DANGEROUS WEAPONS") on United States Capitol grounds. Thus, Class may not have had "mens rea" (knowledge of wrongdoing) in connection with that prohibited act. But, Class DID HAVE "MENS REA" ABOUT BEING ON PROBATION AT THE TIME AND THAT HIS  PROBATION MADE HIS POSSESSION OF ANY "WEAPON" AT THE TIME ILLEGAL.

None of the foregoing facts (in paragraphs 1-5) have yet been made known to any court or prosecutor in this case. Neither the State of Ohio nor the State of North Carolina has yet been notified about Class' INTENTIONAL VIOLATION OF HIS PROBATION WITH THOSE TWO STATES. 



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "LAWYERS HAVE NO AUTHORITY HOAX"

FIRST, SEE HOAX HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vieooNH-SkE  


MISUNDERSTANDING FEDERAL LAW: Rod Class mistakenly believes that FEDERAL law governs EVERY legal subject. (1) Class does not know that FEDERAL law ONLY governs that TINY LIST of legal subjects that were expressly delegated to the FEDERAL government in the U.S. Constitution AND THAT under the tenth amendment, STATE LAW GOVERNS EVERYTHING ELSE (including the licensing of lawyers, etc.). http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/tenth-amendment. (2)

MISTAKEN CONCLUSIONS:
Class correctly notes that private lawyers formed the American Bar Association ("ABA") in 1878 and that the ABA was never created, authorized or sanctioned “BY CONGRESS” (the LEGISLATIVE branch of the FEDERAL government). On this limited basis, Class MISTAKENLY CONCLUDED that lawyers have "NO [government] LICENSE" to practice law. (See LINK at top.). THAT IS THE BASIS FOR THIS ENTIRE HOAX.

These mistaken conclusions reveal that Class mistakenly believes that: 1). The licensing of lawyers is a legal subject governed by FEDERAL law ("CONGRESS"); 2). The branch of government with the power to license lawyers is the LEGISLATIVE branch (“CONGRESS”); 3). The ABA IS THE “BAR" (the SINGLE NATIONAL SOURCE of a lawyer's license to practice law). 
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/the-bar-card3.pdf at page 2 (pretending to be "Judge DALE"); http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-ADVENTURE.pdf at pages 7-8 and 75-76 (pretending to be "Judge DALE").

THE TRUTH:
Under the tenth amendment, ONLY the STATES have the power to license and regulate lawyers and the practice of law (the FEDERAL government does not). Under the “separation of powers” doctrine, ONLY the JUDICIAL branch of government has the power to license and regulate lawyers and the practice of law (the LEGISLATIVE branch of government does not). The “ABA” is NOT THE SINGLE NATIONAL SOURCE of a lawyer's license to practice law. The STATES are. The ABA has no connection whatsoever with any FEDERAL or STATE government or agency. The STATE bars ARE NOT “affiliates” or “franchises” or “subsidiaries” or otherwise "regulated" or "governed" by the ABA. The ABA has NOT "taken over the courts", "taken away the common law" or "taken away the grand jury system".

"INHERENT POWER" & THE "SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE" 
Like the FEDERAL government, STATE governments also have three (3) branches of government, the LEGISLATIVE branch (legislature), the EXECUTIVE branch (governor) and the JUDICIAL branch (the courts). All three branches of state government ARE EQUAL IN POWER to the other two branches. But, EACH BRANCH of state government IS INDEPENDENT from the other two branches.

Because of this, EACH BRANCH of state government has the "INHERENT POWER” to manage ITS OWN INTERNAL AFFAIRS (and the HIGHEST AUTHORITY of EACH BRANCH is generally charged with that responsibility). For example, the highest authority of the LEGISLATIVE branch of state government (such as the speaker of the house and/or the senate majority leader) has the "INHERENT POWER" to pick who will "chair" and who will "sit" on ITS OWN state legislative and investigative committees (without interference from the other two branches of state government). Similarly, the highest authority of the EXECUTIVE branch of state government (the governor) has the "INHERENT POWER" to appoint the heads of ITS OWN state agencies (without the interference from the other two branches of state government). Likewise, the highest authority of the JUDICIAL branch of state government (The Supreme Court of the state) has the "INHERENT POWER" to license and regulate who will practice law in ITS OWN COURTS (without interference from the other two branches of state government). These "INHERENT POWERS" of EACH branch of state government to regulate their own INTERNAL AFFAIRS reflect the doctrine of "SEPARATION OF POWERS” which is found in the constitution of every STATE.

CONSTITUTIONAL & STATUTORY POWER:
IN ADDITION to the "INHERENT POWER” of each STATE Supreme Court to license and regulate lawyers who practice law in ITS OWN COURTS, some STATE CONSTITUTIONS ALSO expressly authorize the STATE Supreme Court to license and regulate lawyers and the practice of law (ex: Florida, New Jersey and Texas) and some STATE STATUTES also expressly authorize the STATE Supreme Court to license and regulate lawyers and the practice of law (ex: New York, Texas, Virginia). Most importantly, EVERY STATE has a STATUTE making it a CRIME to practice law without a license, thereby achieving (in reverse) the SAME RESULT as a STATUTE that REQUIRES a person to have a license to practice law.

ABOUT THE ABA:
The ABA is actually an irrelevant, insignificant, voluntary, trade association FOR LAWYERS WHO WANT TO JOIN (and receive a monthly magazine).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bar_Association.  LAWYERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE MEMBERS OF THE ABA and MORE than TWO THIRDS of the lawyers in the United States ARE NOT MEMBERS of the ABA.

COMPARISON TO THE "AAA":
Class' mistaken belief (that the ABA is the SINGLE NATIONAL SOURCE of a lawyer's license to practice law and that the ABA has a "MONOPOLY" on the practice of law) is THE EQUIVALENT of Class believing that drivers of motor vehicles have "no licenses" to drive because they got their license to drive from the American Automobile Association ("AAA") which was never created, authorized or sanctioned by "CONGRESS". But, the reality is that the ABA is to lawyers what the AAA is to drivers, "A CLUB" that one is permitted, BUT NOT REQUIRED TO JOIN. And, like the AAA, THE ABA DOES NOT LICENSE OR REGULATE ITS MEMBERS. But, Class does not know this.

THE ABA IS A "MONOPOLY" HOAX:
Class made this false claim because he mistakenly believed that the ABA WAS THE "BAR" (the SINGLE NATIONAL SOURCE of a lawyer's license to practice law). But, this is not so. MOST LAWYERS ARE NOT EVEN MEMBERS IN THE ABA. Thus, the ABA cannot possibly constitute a SINGLE “MONOPOLY” over the practice of law.

Likewise, the STATE bars in which all lawyers REALLY ARE MEMBERS are not “MONOPOLIES" either. But, even if they were "MONOPOLIES", THEN THERE WOULD BE EXACTLY FIFTY (50) SUCH "MONOPOLIES", THEREBY NOT CONSTITUTING A SINGLE "MONOPOLY", BY DEFINITION.

Here's why. A "MONOPOLY" in a service industry is NOT determined by whether all members of a service occupation are licensed by the STATE. If this were the case, then ANY person employed in a service industry requiring a STATE license would be engaged in  a "monopoly" (all hair dressers, all electricians, all dentists, etc.). INSTEAD, A REAL "MONOPOLY" in a service industry IS DETERMINED BY HOW MANY EMPLOYERS EMPLOY PERSONS WITH LICENSES ISSUED BY THE STATE. So, if all hairdressers worked for A SINGLE BEAUTY PARLOR, then THAT would be a REAL  "monopoly". If all electricians worked for A SINGLE ELECTRICAL COMPANY, then THAT would be a REAL "monopoly". If all dentists worked for A SINGLE DENTIST’S OFFICE, then THAT would be a REAL "monopoly". If all lawyers worked for A SINGLE LAW FIRM, then THAT would be a REAL "monopoly". But, of course, none of that is the case. 

THE "BAR CARD" HOAX:
Mistakenly believing that the ABA is THE SINGLE NATIONAL AUTHORITY which issues licenses to lawyers, Class MOCKINGLY refers to a lawyer's license to practice law as a "UNION" or "BAR CARD" (referring to a MEMBERSHIP CARD in the ABA).
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/the-bar-card3.pdf (contains 100% "FAKE" case law.).  Class does not know that the ABA does NOT issue licenses to lawyers (OR that THE STATES do). 

THE "B.A.R." ("TITLE OF NOBILITY HOAX") HOAX:
Because Class mistakenly believes that the American "BAR" Association is the SINGLE NATIONAL SOURCE of a lawyer's license to practice law, he manufactured an ENTIRELY SEPARATE (and misdirected) HOAX to discredit that particular (and irrelevant) "BAR". Specifically, Class FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMED that the term, "BAR" (as it appears in the ABA), was secretly an acronym for "British ["FOREIGN"] Accreditation Registry" (an IMAGINARY organization which DOES NOT NOW, and NEVER HAS existed). By doing this, and by FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMING that the term, "ESQUIRE" (a "SERVANT of a knight" in battle) was a "FOREIGN" ("British") "TITLE OF NOBILITY" (an "INHERITED" TITLE for those born of "NOBLE BLOOD", like "King", "Prince", "Duke", etc.), Class FRAUDULENTLY CLAIMED that  American lawyers (some of which use the professional title, "esquire") were prohibited from holding office by the "ORIGINAL" or "MISSING" "13TH AMENDMENT" (which was never ratified).
http://freedom-school.com/truth/10/missing13th.htm . But, none of this is so. The term, "bar" (as it appears in the ABA or otherwise) IS NOT really an acronym for anything. There is NOT NOW, and there has NEVER BEEN a "British Accreditation Registry" and the term, "esquire" is NOT an INHERITED, "TITLE OF NOBILITY" for those born of "NOBLE BLOOD", like "Queen", "Princess", Duchess, etc. (much less a "FOREIGN", title of "NOBLE BLOOD").

CONCLUSION:
(See "THE TRUTH" above).

FOOTNOTES:
1.This mistaken belief (see text at top) is why Rodney "DALE" Class ONLY CITES FEDERAL LAW in support of his amateur legal theories, why he mindlessly "PARROTS" the phrase, "CONGRESSIONAL ["FEDERAL"] INTENT" and why he pretended to be a "retired FEDERAL judge" (named "Judge DALE") when writing the "Judge DALE forgeries" (he mistakenly believed that FEDERAL law governed every legal subject). Note that if the law was as Class mistakenly believed it to be, then there would be NO NEED FOR STATE LAW WHATSOEVER and the tenth amendment would be ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS.

2. Class makes this same AMATEUR "tenth amendment mistake" with the legal subject of driver's licenses and dozens of other legal subjects.


https://youtu.be/vieooNH-SkE



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES" NAMES HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE! https://adask.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/north-carolina-police-warned-to-put-their-personal-property-into-someone-elses-name/ . http://2013rainbowroundtable.ning.com/profiles/blog/list?user=06v6zf7ohrnts . http://landrightsnfarming-landrightnfarming.blogspot.com/2011_10_27_archive.html   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZe9-QDsqG4 .
  
THE HOAX: This hoax is unique in that Rod Class created it to support another hoax, the “BOMBSHELL: FOURTH Administrative Ruling Hoax”. (Read that comment first.). In this particular hoax, Class falsely claims that, IN DIRECT RESPONSE to his having obtained "FOUR" “Administrative Rulings” to the effect that "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” are “PRIVATE ENTITIES” (imaginary rulings which Class NEVER obtained), a North Carolina judge “WARNED” ALL NORTH CAROLINA "POLICE OFFICERS" TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES (to protect their property from the consequences of lawsuits that the public would file against such "police officers" now that they would no longer be protected from such lawsuits by governmental immunity). But, these claims are not so.

NOTE: First of all, if Class had known ANYTHING at all about North Carolina law at the time, then he would have NEVER created the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax” in the first place, because doing so only demonstrates the extent of his own IGNORANCE of North Carolina law (explained below). 

THE TRUTH:
1. No such “warning” was ever issued BECAUSE CLASS NEVER OBTAINED THE IMAGINARY UNDERLYING RULINGS THAT WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE NECESSITATED SUCH A “WARNING” IN THE FIRST PLACE. (See the "BOMBSHELL: Fourth Administrative Ruling Hoax".). This is why Class has never published a copy of this imaginary "warning" online (something that he would have certainly done if this imaginary warning had actually been real).
    
2. Unknown to Class, IT HAS BEEN AN ILLEGAL ACT IN NORTH CAROLINA FOR OVER A CENTURY FOR DEBTORS (like police officers facing future lawsuits) TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES in an effort to avoid paying their creditors (like future lawsuit judgment creditors).

+not+retain+property"+++"If+the+conveyance+is+voluntary+and+the+grantor"+"Aman+v.+Walker"++"fraudulent+conveyances"&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=4,34]http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8215431564769338814&q=%22fair+price%22+%22when+the+purchaser+does+not+pay+a%22++%22it+is+invalid+as+to+creditors%22+%22to+pay+his+debts%22++%22%5Bdid%5D+not+retain+property%22+++%22If+the+conveyance+is+voluntary+and+the+grantor%22+%22Aman+v.+Walker%22++%22fraudulent+conveyances%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=4,34 (citing Aman v. Walker, 165 N.C. 214, 81 S. E. 162 (N.C. 1914) (for which no link is available and which held that any such purported transfer is "VOID", which means, "it never happened"). Thus, any such purported transfer would be absolutely POINTLESS. But, Class does not know this. 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8320948887856749126&q=+%22made+with+the+actual+intent+upon+the+part+of+the+grantor+to+defraud+creditors,+it+is+void%22++%22(1914),+the%22++%22north+carolina%22+%22supreme%22+%22court+set+forth+the+principles+governing+fraudulent+conveyances%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=4,34 (also citing Aman, Supra).

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3897743448276756122&q=+%22and+the+debtor%22+%22became+insolvent+as+a+result%22+%22equivalent+value+in+exchange%22+%22without+receiving%22+%22if+the+debtor+made+the+transfer%22+%22is+fraudulent%22+%22by+a+debtor%22+%22a+transfer+made%22+%22North+Carolina%27s+fraudulent+transfer+statute%22+%22Uniform+Fraudulent+&hl=en&as_sdt=4,34

http://law.justia.com/codes/north-carolina/2012/chapter-39/article-3a/section-39-23.1

3. Unknown to Class, FOR SEVERAL DECADES, BY STATUTE, any attempt by creditors (like police officers facing future lawsuits) to put their property into other peoples' names in an effort to avoid paying their creditors (like future lawsuit judgment creditors) HAS BEEN "VOIDABLE" (which means, "REVERSIBLE like it never happened"), which, of course, defeats the purpose of putting property into other peoples' names in the first place (because doing so WOULD NOT protect a debtor’s property from lawsuit judgment creditors ANYWAY). Thus, any such purported transfer would be absolutely POINTLESS. But, Class does not know this.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7637218883617703060&q=%22of+chapter+39%22+%22as+article+3A%22+%22of+the+north+carolina+general+statutes%22+%22the+uniform+voidable+transactions+act+(%22UVTA%22)+%22+%22uniform+fraudulent+transfers+act,+later+renamed%22+%22nearly+two+decades+ago%22+%22fraudulent+conveyance%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=4,34

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7637218883617703060&q=+%22present+creditors%22+%22transfers+or+obligations%22+%22voidable+as+to%22+%22present+or+future+creditors%22++violation++UVTA+%22Uniform+Voidable+Transactions+Act%22&hl=en&as_sdt=4,34

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10642538579338858526&q=%22owner+of%22++%22it+would+constitute+a%22+%22and+could+be+avoided%22+%22was+valid%22+%22even+if+the+conveyance%22+%22defendant+purported+to+convey+the+property+to+the+Pallie+Trust%22+transfer+fraudulent+%22by+the+judgment+creditor%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=4,34

http://law.justia.com/codes/north-carolina/2015/chapter-39/article-3a

4. Unknown to Class, FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN AN ILLEGAL ACT in North Carolina (and a violation of the Judicial Code Of Conduct) FOR A JUDGE TO ILLEGALLY “WARN”, COUNSEL, ADVISE OR RECOMMEND that anyone (including police officers facing future lawsuits) "BREAK THE LAW" by putting their property into other peoples' names in an effort to avoid paying their creditors (AN ILLEGAL ACT that would not protect the debtor's property anyway).
http://www.nccourts.org/Courts/CRS/Councils/JudicialStandards/Documents/Amendments-NCJudicialCode.pdf . Any REAL judge who issued such an ILLEGAL "warning" would be removed from office and disbarred. But, Class does not know this.

Thus, in manufacturing the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax”, Class was so IGNORANT of North Carolina law that he did not know then and does not know now that ALL OF THE "FACTS" that he alleges in this hoax are LEGALLY IMPOSSIBLE UNDER NORTH CAROLINA LAW, which conclusively establish this lie as the hoax that it is. THIS IS BECAUSE NO REAL NORTH CAROLINA JUDGE WOULD "BREAK THE LAW" --- BY "ILLEGALLY" WARNING POLICE OFFICERS TO "BREAK THE LAW" --- BY DOING SOMETHING "ILLEGAL" (PUTTING THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID PAYING LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS)--- IN ORDER TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY FROM LAWSUITS WHICH WILL "NEVER  SUCCEED" (DUE TO IMMUNITY)--- OR FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS WHO WILL "NEVER EXIST" (DUE TO IMMUNITY) --- ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT ANY SUCH "ILLEGAL " ACT IS "REVERSIBLE" ANYWAY AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT PROTECT THE DEBTOR'S PROPERTY FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS IN THE FIRST PLACE (MAKING SUCH AN EFFORT ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS). But, Class does not know this.

5. If more be necessary, North Carolina law already makes the EQUITY IN A HOMESTEAD (a residential property occupied by the owners), VEHICLE AND CERTAIN OTHER PROPERTY “EXEMPT” (“protected”) from the claims of lawsuit judgment creditors up to a certain amount ANYWAY. THUS, IN MOST CASES, THIS EXEMPTION WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR POLICE OFFICERS TO "ILLEGALLY" PURPORT TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES, EVEN IF THAT "ILLEGAL" ACT WOULD PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS (AND IT WOULD NOT). But, Class does not know this. Constitution of the State Of North Carolina Art. 16 § 1C-1601.
http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/ByArticle/Chapter_1C/Article_16.pdf

For more information on the “Property In Other Peoples' Names Hoax”, see Class’ internet radio show, “Episode 966" on Talkshoe (spelled correctly) AIB radio, recorded or posted on 12-12-2015
http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=48361&pageNumber=2&pageSize=15 or simply Google “Post Oak Public Relations”. https://www.linkedin.com/in/harvey-wharfield-0b56746 .

Suffice it to say, this is one of Class’ more embarrassingly-amateur hoaxes. (In order to manufacture a really good hoax, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE LYING ABOUT ---  AND CLASS DOES NOT.). Class does not lie to people for whom he has respect. Class only lies to people for whom he has no respect. The lies reflected in this particular hoax speak volumes about what Class REALLY thinks of the American people. Class pretends to be a humble public servant who is only revealing the "hidden truth" about the law and the legal system to the down-trodden masses. But, this is not so. Class is actually a calculating and manipulative charlatan with no conscience whatsoever and no moral compass whatsoever. Class' sole mission in life is to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED representatives of "We the People" and their appointees for doing their jobs. If he has to lie to the American people and commit fraud upon the American people in the process of doing so, that is perfectly fine with him. Class has no intention of telling the truth. None. Class is a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR and is simply PSYCHOLOGICALLY INCAPABLE of telling the truth. Indeed, Class' whole world is nothing but ONE BIG LIE AFTER ANOTHER. 

ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
Snoop4truth did not expose the “BOMBSHELL: FOURTH Administrative Ruling Hoax” or the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax” to harm Rod Class. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed these hoaxes solely to reduce the catastrophic damage that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day. Had it not been for Rod Class' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have exposed these two hoaxes here.

The message to all charlatans and hoaxers? Just tell the truth.


https://youtu.be/rZe9-QDsqG4



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "BOMBSHELL FOURTH ADMINISTRATIVE RULING HOAX"



A.K.A. THE "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE PRIVATE ENTITIES HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE: http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/corporate_u_s/news.php?q=1350315108 . http://sgtreport.com/2012/12/bombshell-rod-class-gets-fourth-administrative-ruling-govt-offices-are-vacant-all-govt-officials-are-private-contractors . https://scannedretina.com/2012/10/15/govt-offices-are-vacant/. And, speaking of "BOMBSHELL" hoaxes, for more "BOMBSHELL" hoaxes by one of the same charlatans involved here, go to: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2014/06/bombshell-nasa-war-document-exposed-extinction-of-humanity-deborah-tavares-sheila-zilinski-video-dont-miss-this-2978738.html
 http://meetnigerians.net/members/videos.php?cmd=w&t=bombshell+nasa+war+document+exposed%3A+extinction+of+humanity-deborah+tavares&v=LIIw5xhG5Ho&ch=UCKnnee98ihoTszlL_G6tQ6Q .
http://www.takdownloadfree.com/-LIIw5xhG5Ho/Bombshell-NASA-War-Document-Exposed-Extinction-of-Humanity-Deborah-Tavares.html .


THE HOAX SIMPLIFIED: This HOAX arose out of TWO cases that Class LOST. In BOTH of these two cases, Class sued BOTH private corporations AND government agencies IN THE SAME CASE. Like all of the cases that Class files, he LOST these two cases too. In their DISMISSALS of these two cases (throwing them out of court), the judges in BOTH OF THESE TWO CASES referred to the private corporations that Class had sued and to the government agencies that Class had sued SEPARATELY (one ruling DISMISSING the government agencies that Class had sued and a different ruling DISMISSING the private corporations that Class had sued). But, in trying to explain away these two LOSSES to his followers, Class fraudulently “SWITCHED” the judges’ words about the private corporations that Class had sued with the judges’ words about the government agencies that Class had sued. By “SWITCHING” the judges’ words about the private corporations with the judges’ words about the government agencies, Class fraudulently created the ILLUSION that when the judges were actually talking about the private corporations, they were instead talking about all of the government agencies. This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judges words (from one group of defendants to the other group of defendants) created the ILLUSION that when the judges were actually referring to THE PRIVATE CORPORATIONS  that Class had sued as “corporate appellees” or as a SINGLE “private entitY” as applicable, they were instead referring to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” that Class had sued as “corporate appellees” or as “private entitIES”, as applicable. But, that was not so.

THE TRUTH. FIRST CASE: In this case, Class sued BOTH private corporations AND government agencies IN THE SAME CASE. In his DISMISSAL of the first case (throwing it out of court), the judge used the term, “Corporate Appellees”, when referring (BY NAME) to a private bank and to two private insurance companies that Class had sued. But, instead of telling his followers the truth, Class fraudulently told his followers that in his DISMISSAL of this case, the judge was instead referring to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" that Class had sued in the same case as “corporate appellees”. This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judge’s words (from one type of defendant to the other type of defendant) is how Class reached the desired (and entirely fictional) conclusion that the judge had ruled that "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" were “corporate appellees”. Unfortunately for Class, the truth about this hoax can be found here. Go to page 6, lines 13-15.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca10-07-05026/pdf/USCOURTS-ca10-07-05026-0.pdf .  After reading what the judge in this case actually said, ask yourself this. Did the judge in this case really refer to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” that Class sued as “corporate appellees” OR instead, did the judge in this case actually refer ONLY to the private bank and the two private insurance companies that Class used as “corporate appellees"?
        
THE TRUTH. SECOND CASE: In this case, Class sued a STATE-WIDE government "agency", a “LOCAL unit of government” and a SINGLE “private entitY”, ALL IN THE SAME CASE. Specifically, Class filed an administrative suit against the North Carolina Department of Transportation (a STATE-WIDE government "agency" which was immune from suit by statute), against a “LOCAL” city police department (over which the administrative court had no jurisdiction because it was a "LOCAL" “UNIT OF GOVERNMENT", rather than a STATE-WIDE "agency" under the Governor) and against a SINGLE private contractor that sold vehicle license plates for the State of North Carolina (over which the administrative court had no jurisdiction because it was a SINGLE “private entitY”). In his DISMISSAL of this second case (throwing it out of court), the judge used the SINGULAR term, “private entitY” when referring ONLY to that SINGLE “private entitY” that Class had sued. But, instead of telling his followers the truth, Class fraudulently told his followers that in his DISMISSAL, the judge used the PLURAL term, “private entitIES” and fraudulently told his followers that the judge was instead referring to ALL THREE DEFENDANTS that Class had sued as “private entitIES” (including the state-wide government "agency" and the “local unit of government” that Class had sued). This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judge’s actual word, “entitY” (a SINGULAR term) to the FRAUDULENT word, “entitIES” (a PLURAL term) is how Class reached the desired (and entirely fictional) conclusion that the judge had ruled "ALL GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES" were “private entitIES” (a PLURAL term that does not appear in the ruling). Unfortunately for Class, the truth about this hoax can be found here. Go to “Conclusions Of Law” paragraph. 4, sentence 2. (Look for the SINGULAR term, "entitY".). 
https://unmasker4maine.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/nc_certification_copy_complete.pdf . After reading what the judge in this case actually said in this case, ask yourself this. Did the judge in this case really refer to “ALL THREE DEFENDANTS” that Rod Class had sued as “private entitIES”, a PLURAL term OR instead, did the judge in this case actually refer ONLY to the SINGLE private contractor that sold license plates for the State of North Carolina as a SINGLE “private entitY”, a SINGULAR term?

In fairness to Class, who only has a high school education and who is functionally illiterate, CLASS  MISTAKENLY BELIEVED THAT HE HAD SUED THREE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES in this case. That is why he sued all three defendants in state administrative court. (He mistakenly believed that all three defendants were state-wide government "agencies" over which state administrative courts usually have jurisdiction.). But, in fact in this case, Class had actually sued ONLY TWO GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (OR “UNITS”) and a SINGLE PRIVATE CONTRACTOR that sold vehicle license plates for the State of North Carolina.

Class mistakenly believed that the SINGLE “private entitY” that he had mistakenly sued in this case was a government agency because he did not know that FOR MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY, THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA HAS USED PRIVATE CONTRACTORS TO SELL VEHICLE LICENSE PLATES TO NORTH CAROLINA VEHICLE OWNERS. If Class had bothered to do a little research before filing suit, he would have discovered that the SINGLE “private entitY” that he mistakenly sued (in the mistaken belief that it was a government agency) was a not a governmental agency at all. Unknown to Class, almost all of the vehicle license plate agencies in the State Of North Carolina (outside the Charlotte  & Raleigh areas) are now owned and operated by private contractors of the type that he mistakenly sued in this case (in the mistaken belief that it was a government "agency"). Despite that the State of North Carolina uses private contractors to sell its vehicle license plates, IT DOES NOT USE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS FOR ITS LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY-TYPE FUNCTION. It only uses private contractors to sell vehicle license plates (includes titling services). This has been PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE to everyone except Rod Class for over half a century.

WHAT CLASS DID NOT (AND DOES NOT NOW) KNOW:
http://www.ncleg.net/ped/reports/documents/tags/tags_report.pdf (Scroll down to "BACKGROUND" on the 4th page, marked "page 2").

https://apps.ncdot.gov/newsreleases/details.aspx?r=10646

http://www.wral.com/dmv-defends-system-of-independent-license-plate-offices/11753455/

http://myfox8.com/2015/01/15/dmv-seeks-applications-for-new-license-plate-agency-in-stokes-county/

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/n-c-division-of-motor-vehicles-seeks-contract-applicants/article_697fc01e-5d50-11e3-8887-001a4bcf6878.html

CLASS MAKES MISTAKES ON TOP OF MISTAKES: So, not knowing any better, when the judge in this case DISMISSED (threw out) Class' lawsuit against this SINGLE private contractor on the grounds that it was a SINGLE"private entitY" (and not a STATE-WIDE government "agency" over which the administrative court usually has jurisdiction), Class mistakenly believed he had "forced" the courts to "admit" that a SINGLE "private entitY" was a SINGLE "private entitY" (something that everybody except Class has known for over half a century). This means that Class' own IGNORANCE (of the fact that North Carolina has used private contractors to sell vehicle license plates for more than half a century) led to him reach the mistaken conclusion that he had miraculously become a "legal genius". To this very day, Class does not know that the SINGLE “private entitY” that he mistakenly sued (in the mistaken belief that it was a government agency) had actually been a SINGLE "private entitY" all along. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

(CONTINUED ON THE "PROPERTY INTO OTHER NAMES HOAX")




  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "MY PAPERWORK WOULD'VE OVERTURNED EVERY PRIOR CASE HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:  http://sitsshow.blogspot.ca/2014/11/rod-class-is-under-house-arrest-here-is.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWKEmiMZTOc&t=348s  (Do not click on the following blue numbers. They link to wrong video. Instead, GO TO THE VIDEO FIRST. They are the EXACT TIMES for the hoax exposed in video above. At: 3:25:-3:50, 5:35-6:05, 8:50-9:20).

THE HOAX: Rod Class falsely claims that the court in his Washington, D.C. case "sealed" the court file in that case because his amateur "paperwork" (contained in that court file) would have "overturned all of the court cases that [ever] came before" it. But, this is not so.

THE TRUTH: The court "sealed" the court file in that case BECAUSE IT CONTAINED ROD CLASS' PSYCHIATRIC RECORDS.

FACT: Because court files are public, courts often "seal" court records TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY of certain types of litigants such as juvenile offenders, victims of sexual assault, parties to an adoption AND PERSONS WHOSE PSYCHIATRIC RECORDS ARE CONTAINED IN THE COURT FILE. (1) Indeed, it is precisely because courts “seal” such court files (or parts thereof) that CLASS’ FOLLOWERS HAVE NEVER KNOWN ABOUT HIS LONG HISTORY OF PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS.

THE CASE: Class was CHARGED WITH A FELONY and FACED SERIOUS PRISON TIME. What's more, Class (who only has a high school education and who is functionally illiterate) ASKED THE COURT IF HE COULD REPRESENT HIMSELF. To make matters even worse, Class EXHIBITED SIGNS OF MENTAL ILLNESS. (In this case, the court stated, in writing, that it had become concerned about Class' mental health because his court filings were "SIMPLY INCOMPREHENSIBLE" and because of the delusional "SUBSTANCE" of his written and oral communications with the court,  all signs of mental illness). It is customary in such circumstances for the court to have such a defendant UNDERGO A PSYCHIATRIC EXAMINATION before making a decision as to whether such a defendant may represent himself. (2) The purpose of such a psychiatric examination is to determine whether such a defendant is mentally competent TO MAKE THE DECISION TO REPRESENT HIMSELF. The purpose of such a psychiatric examination IS NOT TO DETERMINE WHETHER SUCH A DEFENDANT IS MENTALLY CAPABLE OF ACTUALLY REPRESENTING HIMSELF. (Under the law, the court must allow such a defendant to represent himself if he is mentally competent to make the decision to represent himself EVEN IF, AS HERE, HE WAS NOT MENTALLY CAPABLE OF ACTUALLY REPRESENTING HIMSELF.). (3) So, on February 3rd, 2014, the court ordered Class to undergo a psychiatric examination and appointed a psychiatrist for that purpose. (4) After the psychiatric examination, the clerk filed Class' psychiatric records in the court file. So, the court properly "sealed" the court file TO PREVENT THE PUBLIC FROM HAVING ACCESS TO CLASS' PSYCHIATRIC RECORDS. (5)

RESULTS:  Based on all the evidence, the court determined that Class WAS NOT mentally capable of actually representing himself. While OBVIOUSLY TRUE, this determination was legally irrelevant. (Under the law, the court is only supposed to determine whether such a defendant is mentally competent enough to make the decision to represent himself.). Clearly, the court here was sympathetic towards Class under the circumstances and was going out of its way to prevent him from committing "legal suicide". (6) Regardless, the court made a second determination and found that Class was mentally competent ENOUGH to make the decision to represent himself (despite correctly finding that Class WAS NOT mentally capable of actually representing himself).

THE "PAPERWORK": Amateur legal theories are pure "pretend" and "make believe" AND CANNOT "OVERTURN" ANYTHING. The amateur "paperwork" that Class misguidedly brags about in this hoax was 36 "motions" reflecting classic amateur legal theories ("capital letters", "fictional entities", "natural persons" "corporations", "living flesh and blood man", "with a soul", "UCC", "registered trade name", "Coram Nobis", etc.). To see just how likely it was that Class' amateur "paperwork" would have "overturned all of the court cases that [ever] came before [it]", simply click on the first link below. This is the court's ACTUAL RESPONSE to the very amateur "paperwork" that Class misguidedly brags about in this HOAX. Look for the term, "DENIED", after EACH and EVERY such amateur legal theory.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2757756755752158953&q=soul+human+%22coram+nobis%22+irrelevant+inapplicable+relevant+denied+business+%22registered+trade%22+%22uniform+commercial+code%22+natural+person+persons+%22flesh+and+blood%22+corporate+corporation+fictional+entity+entities+%22capital+letters%22+%22utterly+incomprehensible&hl=en&as_sdt=40003

FOOTNOTES:
1).
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9360424473304630524&q=%22in+a+public+forum%22+%22mental+health+information%22+%22medical+records+under+seal%22+%22I+conclude+that+there+is+good+cause+to+place+plaintiff%27s+certified%22+%22I+recognize+plaintiff%27s%22+%22concerns+regarding+the+availability+of+his+sensitive%22+%22mental+health+information%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5601006984893862219&q=%22compiled+by+a+state+licensed%22+%22shall+be+filed+with+the+clerk,+who+will+seal+such+report%22+%22a+court-ordered+private+evaluation+report%22+%22mental+health+professional%22+&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006 (at footnote 4 near end of case)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6844040484297740765&q=%22sealing+a+psychological+evaluation+report%22+%22a+common+law+or%22+%22avoid+substantial+injury+to+a+party+by+disclosure+of+matters+protected+by%22+%22privacy+right%22+%22the+following+records%22+%22shall+be+confidential%22+&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

http://www.illinois17th.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=382&Itemid=75  (at 16.02 (b) and (d))

2).
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9638202248861590589&q=%22as+the+hearing+continued%22+%22knowledge+of+the+federal+rules+of+evidence+and+criminal+procedure%22+%22his+education.+mental+health+history%22+%22the+court+asked+wiggins+about%22+%22represent+yourself%22+conspiracy+%22to+distribute%22+%22possess+with+intent%22+heroin&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

3).
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13448720628873766473&q=ability+%22not+the%22+%22to+represent+himself%22+%22to+waive%22+%22right+to+counsel%22+%22no+bearing%22+competently+competence+competent+%22whether+he+is%22+%22not+relevant%22+%22legal+knowledge%22+%22choosing+self-representation+must+do+so+competently%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (at the very end of section "A.")

4).
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?68235-Rod-Class-ordered-for-Psych-Evaluation

5). Other courts have also ordered Class to undergo similar psychiatric examinations. In the “Judge DALE forgery” entitled, "The Great American Adventure: Secrets Of America", Rodney DALE Class (while pretending to be "Judge DALE") wrote TWO ENTIRE, SEPARATE PARAGRAPHS about HIS OWN many, previous experiences with similar court-ordered psychiatric examinations and hospitalizations. To read these two separate paragraphs, go to page 107.
http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-ADVENTURE.pdf. OR go to page 110. https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/the-great-american-adventure-sm-book-format_pdf.pdf  Class made a similar admission in the “Judge DALE forgery” entitled “The Matrix And The US Constitution” (while pretending to be “Judge DALE”) on page 5 at end of paragraph 2. https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/the-matrix-and-the-us-constitution-sm-bk-format1.pdf. See also "Sorry It Has Come To This" in Episode 917 dated 1-29-15. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=48361&pageNumber=5&pageSize=15

According to documents filed by amateur legal theorist, Carl Miller (real name "Richard John Champion") himself and found on
Pacer.gov., he has had similar experiences to those of Class with respect to court-ordered psychiatric examinations and hospitalizations, as have many other such amateur legal theorists. http://privateaudio.homestead.com/__lentz-isms_v2.doc . http://redcatsboards.yuku.com/topic/8216/Fraud-artists-sentenced-to-prison#.WDYUm1KFPIU (at the 3rd complete sentence). 

6). WHAT JUDGES KNOW THAT CLASS AND HIS FOLLOWERS DO NOT:
[url=http://www.aija.org.au/acag09/Papers/Lester 1.pdf]http://www.aija.org.au/acag09/Papers/Lester%201.pdf[/url]
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.582.832&rep=rep1&type=pdf
http://jaapl.org/content/45/1/62
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/ajp.59.2.279
http://www.nicolastato.com.ar/esp/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=87:querulous&catid=7:categartfilosofia&Itemid=8
http://www.tjeffersonlrev.org/sites/tjeffersonlrev.org/files/30-02-09-Diesen.pdf
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/RPO1061-0405020251

Class has already been JUDICIALLY DECLARED such a VEXATIOUS LITIGANT within the meaning the foregoing PSYCHIATRIC PUBLICATIONS. Class v. Gwin [the judge in a case that Class had just LOST] et al. [means "and others", including 30 governmental officials], Case No.
5:06-CV-1465, U. S. Dist. Ct. N.D. Ohio (Akron). Filed 06-14-06. Dismissed (means THROWN OUT OF COURT) 07-25-06. (available on pacer.gov.). See also http://www.topix.com/forum/city/archdale-nc/TT9PLIDASAV6NENR8 (Here, Class seeks help of other amateurs with the same PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS.).

ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
The facts of this hoax are very sad. Tragically sad. Snoop4truth did not expose this hoax to harm Rod Class. instead, Snoop4truth exposed this hoax solely to reduce the catastrophic damage that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day.


https://youtu.be/HWKEmiMZTOc


https://youtu.be/FBYEpB_CqBM



  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
FAMOUS HOAX BY ROD CLASS' PARTNER IN THE "JUDGE DALE HOAX"

A.K.A. "THE NASA WAR DOCUMENT HOAX"

FIRST, SEE HOAX HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EKGNjOwGFs ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4BNNkEc9Qshttp://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/nasa-thefutureof-war.pdf
THE HOAX: The promoter of this hoax falsely claims that the “NASA War Document” is a “secret” government document that was discovered and downloaded (or “leaked”) from a “NASA website” which she claims proves that NASA and/or the United States government are developing and using terrifying, horrific, futuristic, high-tech weapons AGAINST the American people. But, these claims are not so.

THE TRUTH: The “NASA War Document” is NOT what promoter claims it is, was NEVER on a NASA website, was NEVER “secret” and does NOT reflect existing or future high-tech weapons that NASA and/or the United States government are developing or using AGAINST the American People. 

Instead, what the promoter calls the “NASA War Document” is simply her HIGHLY-“MODIFIED” version of an original 2001 power point slide show presentation (WITHOUT THE ACCOMPANYING ORAL COMMENTARY THAT EXPLAINED IT). The original power point slide show presentation was created by a NASA scientist for his use as a "VISUAL AID" for his ORAL presentation AT A 2001 CONVENTION OF MILITARY CONTRACTORS THAT WERE IN THE BUSINESS OF DEVELOPING COUNTERMEASURES TO POTENTIAL, FUTURE, HIGH-TECH WEAPONS THAT OTHER NATIONS COULD THEORETICALLY DEVELOP IN THE FUTURE TO USE AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OVER THE NEXT 25 YEARS. The purpose of the original power point slide show presentation was to introduce the thousands of military contractors in attendance at the convention to potential, future, high-tech weapons that OTHER NATIONS could theoretically develop for use against the American people (AS DEPICTED IN THE ORIGINAL POWER POINT PRESENTATION) AND TO ENCOURAGE THOSE MILITARY CONTRACTORS IN ATTENDANCE TO DEVELOP COUNTERMEASURES AGAINST THEM.

Obviously, the FIRST such military contractors to develop successful COUNTER MEASURES to use AGAINST such theoretical, potential, future, high-tech weapons (as depicted in the original slide show presentation) would be more likely to be awarded profitable government contracts to manufacture them. This is why the thousands of military contractors in attendance at the convention would have been so interested in this particular subject. Nowhere in the subject original document does it imply, suggest or state that NASA itself or the United States Government were developing or using any of these horrific, potential, future weapons AGAINST the American people themselves.

BACKGROUND: The original power point slide show presentation was created by Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief NASA Scientist at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Langley, Virginia. As NASA's chief scientist, Bushnell was an expert on potential, future, military technology that OTHER NATIONS might theoretically develop for use against the American people. For this reason, Bushnell was asked to speak at an upcoming CONVENTION which would be attended by thousands of military contractors who were in the business of developing COUNTERMEASURES to such theoretical, potential, future, high-tech weapons.

The title of the Bushnell’s presentation at the upcoming convention was “FUTURE Strategic Issues/FUTURE Warfare (CIRCA 2025)" (note the YEAR, "2025"). Bushnell first published his original power point slide show presentation TO THE PUBLIC on the “US Department of Defense’s Defense Technical INFORMATION CENTER" website (a PUBLIC website) in July 2001, a month BEFORE the convention at which he was to speak on the subject. (So much for the promoter's “secret” or “leaked” document story.).  

Bushnell actually gave his power point slide show presentation on August 14th, 2001 at the “4th Annual Testing and Training FOR READINESS ["having successful COUNTERMEASURES"] Symposium and Exhibition" which was held at the Rosen Centre Hotel (then, the OMNI Rosen Hotel) in Orlando, Florida. The theme of the convention/symposium/exposition was “EMERGING CHALLENGES [potential FUTURE weapons] AND OPPORTUNITIES ["BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES"]  (its REAL name)”. The convention was hosted by the National DEFENSE Industrial Association ("NDIA"), a trade association for American military contractors.  

PDF metadata (see below) of the promoter’s HIGHLY “MODIFIED” version of the original document indicates that it was “created” on “March 27, 2011 (10 years AFTER Bushnell’s presentation), that it was "created" by the promoter’s co-conspirator and that it was “LAST MODIFIED” (means last "changed", “altered” or “re-written”) on January 23, 2013 (12 years after Bushnell’s presentation). The promoter and her co-conspirator made these extensive "MODIFICATIONS" to the original document in order to make the promoter’s HIGHLY- "MODIFIED" version better fit THE FRAUD that they were peddling (“NASA is killing us all with horrific, high-tech weapons.”). Not surprisingly, the promoter never disclosed ("revealed") these extensive (AND SECRET) "MODIFICATIONS" to her followers. Needless to say, the truth does not need "MODIFICATION". Only lies need "MODIFICATION". 

Archive.org (which records everything ever posted online) indicates that Bushnell’s original power point slide presentation was posted in the “PUBLIC DOMAIN”  FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE on the “US Department of Defense’s Defense Technical INFORMATION CENTER website" (a PUBLIC website). (So much for the promoter's “secret” document story.). Archive.org indicates that the subject original document WAS NEVER POSTED ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE WEB (including any NASA website).

The promoter had good reason for misleading the American people about the true source of the original document. If she truthfully admitted that the original document was downloaded from the website of the “US Department of DEFENSE’S DEFENSE Technical INFORMATION CENTER” (a PUBLIC website), then the original document would not appear to be "secret", nefarious or otherwise part of a conspiracy. This is because, as a general rule, the government does not usually post written proof of its own conspiracies against its own people on ITS OWN PUBLIC “INFORMATION CENTER” WEBSITES).

CONCLUSION: Contrary to the promoter's claims, THE "NASA WAR DOCUMENT" DOES NOT REFLECT AN EFFORT ON THE PART OF NASA (OR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT) TO KILL ALL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH HORRIFIC, FUTURISTIC, HIGH-TECH WEAPONS. To the contrary, the ORIGINAL "NASA WAR DOCUMENT" actually reflects an effort on the part of a single NASA scientist (and hundreds of American military contractors) TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM POTENTIAL, FUTURE, HIGH-TECH WEAPONS THAT OTHER NATIONS COULD THEORETICALLY DEVELOP FOR USE AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE FUTURE (AS DEPICTED IN THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION), exactly backwards to what the promoter claims in her hoax. The promoter of this hoax knew the truth about the original document all along, but nevertheless decided to lie to the American people about it anyway. Sadly, this hoax is but a small part of a much larger pattern of fraud on the part of this promoter to defraud the American people. See the comments by snoop4truth posted below the following video on "Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Bk_YmrK-M&t=4477s (Read comments by Snoop4truth posted below this video.).

SOURCE DOCUMENTS

ARCHIVE.ORG’S RECORDS ON THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT:
https://archive.org/details/FutureStrategicIssuesFutureWarfareCirca2025

ONLY WEBSITE WHERE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WAS EVER POSTED (DTIC):
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/

TRADE ASSOCIATION THAT SPONSORED THE SUBJECT CONVENTION (NDIA):
http://www.ndia.org/Pages/default.aspx

NDIA CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS BY YEAR SHOWING THE RECORD OF THE THE SUBJECT CONVENTION:
(SCROLL DOWN TO YEAR 2001, GO TO 5th ITEM DOWN, SEE THE ENTRY DATED 13-16 2001.).
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Bk_YmrK-M&t=4477s

COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF PDF METADATA OF THE PROMOTER’S HIGHLY-“MODIFIED” VERSION OF THE SUBJECT DOCUMENT (Scroll down and read the comments of senior member, “Flamesong” beginning with the comment posted on “26-06-2013,
09:02 PM” and the following comment posted on “26-06-2013, 09:39 PM”):
https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=248938&page=2

BELOW, THE PROMOTER IS ACTUALLY CAUGHT ON TAPE WHILE ENGAGED IN THE "JUDGE DALE HOAX". In this hoax, the promoter, her co-conspirator and "Rodney DALE Class" disseminated FAKE legal books that revealed FAKE legal information WHICH THEY THEMSELVES ACTUALLY CREATED, but which they fraudulently told the American people were written by a FAKE "retired federal judge" named, "Judge DALE" (which uses Rodney DALE Class' middle name, "DALE", as an inside joke). Jeff Rense is NOT involved in the hoax. (Do not click on blue numbers below. They link to the wrong video.
Instead, go to the following videos FIRST. Then, go to the times indicated below. They are the exact times of the hoax documented therein.).  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o4CpB9I8g&t=260s (Go to this video FIRST, then go to 2:25-11:35)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTRPZD3_w5k (Same as above. 42:10-49:15)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKI4zPI504E (Same. 3:50-4:30 & 7:15-56:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dgYbD6fcw8 (Same. 34:20-36:30)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAryrdGenL4 (Same. 1:30-1:45)

ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
Snoop4truth did not expose the "NASA War Document Hoax" to harm anyone, including Rodney DALE Class. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed this hoax to solely reduce the CATASTROPHIC DAMAGE that this (and similar) INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day.

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video NASA FUTURE WARFARE DOCUMENT Deborah Tavares interview with Trevor Coppola (Conspiracy Con 2013)



Preview YouTube video The NASA War Document (Your Silence Is Your Permission)


Preview YouTube video SILENT WEAPONS FOR QUIET WARS: Deborah Tavares joins Joyce Riley on The Power Hour


Preview YouTube video Rod Class Cestui Que Vie Trust Fact Check Birth Certificate Estate A4V Discharge Research


Preview YouTube video Judge Dale - Secrets of America, Great American Adventure


Preview YouTube video USA, Inc. - "MARKETS" of Crime


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares & Al Whitney/World Bank Attorney Exposes the Game


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares and Ron Angell 21st Century Weapons at the Speed of Light


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares and Ron Angell Stop the Crime




  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "DEBRA JONES HOAX" & THE "JUDGE DALE HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE: https://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2014/07/10/rod-class-a-former-policewomanattorney-reveals-what-it-is-like-inside-thanks-to-j/ . http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=48361&pageNumber=7&pageSize=15 (Click on Episode 869 dated 07-08-2014.).

ROD CLASS:
Class is a functionally-illiterate amateur legal theorist with barely a high school education, a history of PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS and a record of LOSING EVERY SINGLE ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL CASE IN WHICH HE HAS EVER BEEN INVOLVED (MORE THAN 73 CONSECUTIVE LOSSES IN A ROW AND STILL COUNTING). In addition, Class is a TWICE-CONVICTED, weapons-related, CONVICTED FELON (possessing in his car an illegally-sawed-off, fully-loaded, Springfield shotgun, two night sticks outfitted with concealed razor blades, one fully-loaded rifle, three fully-loaded handguns, one of which was illegally unsecured and positioned between the front seats for quick and easy access, several hundred more rounds of ammunition for all four firearms on-board, one large machete on the driver’s side door for easy access, fourteen large knives and daggers of varying size and lethal effect, one illegal spring-deployed switch blade knife, three axes of various sizes and packages of concealed razor-type blades found beneath his clothing when frisked, etc.).

But, more importantly, Class is a NOTORIOUS PROFESSIONAL HOAXER AND CHARLATAN who is behind the “Judge DALE Hoax”, the” BOMBSHELL: FOURTH Administrative Ruling Hoax”, the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax”, the “Court Registry Investment System Hoax” and numerous other legal hoaxes, all of which he uses to “TRICK” his own followers into believing his intentionally false claims about the law and the legal system.

Class has his own internet radio show on AIB Talkshoe Radio (which broadcasts a pre-recorded "CONFERENCE CALL").
http://removingtheshackles.blogspot.com/2013/11/judge-dale-global-currency-reset-and.html. On this show, Class makes intentionally FALSE and FRAUDULENT claims about the law and the legal system to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED representatives of "We The People" and their appointees. On his show, Class advocates suing these people and their agencies for doing their jobs. For jurisdictional reasons, Class recommends suing them in administrative court using the "ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS".  http://removingtheshackles.blogspot.com/2013/01/judge-dale-on-ucc-filings-and-further.html .

DEBRA JONES HOAX:
On July 8, 2014, in Episode 869, Class purported to bring in a "LEGAL INSIDER" as a guest on his radio show and introduced her as "former attorney" and "former law enforcement officer", "Debra Jones’’. (See links at very top.). 

Not surprisingly, during this 2 hour 43 minute show, Jones made the same utterly delusional claims about the law and the legal system that Class himself makes. But, Jones also claimed that: 1). as a “former police woman”, she and her fellow officers did nothing but intentionally break the law to harm the public; and that 2). as a “former attorney”, she, the judges, the prosecutors and her fellow attorneys did nothing but intentionally break the law to harm the public. (See links at very top.).

Class’ radio audience was understandably SHOCKED and HORRIFIED by the claims of Jones whom they genuinely believed was a REAL "legal insider" who was actually telling them the TRUTH. This radio show became an internet sensation, much to the delight of Class and Jones (because it successfully incited the hatred and violence that is was intended to incite).

THE TRUTH:
There was only one problem. THE WHOLE THING WAS ONE BIG HOAX. Before putting her on his internet radio show, Class already knew that Jones WAS NOT a “legal insider”,  WAS NOT a "former attorney" and  WAS NOT a "former law enforcement officer".  In fact, Class already knew that Jones was EVERY BIT THE FRAUD AND CHARLATAN THAT HE WAS.

ABOUT JONES:
1. Jones’ REAL name is "Debra Jenks Jones";
2. Jones is 50 years old;
3. Jones lives in Puyallup, Pierce County, Washington State. This is why many of her seminars are conveniently held in nearby Yelp, Washington State;
4. Jones HAS NEVER HAD a professional license of ANY TYPE from ANY STATE (which means that she was NEVER an attorney). This is why Jones will not reveal the name of the law school that she allegedly attended or the state(s) that allegedly issued her a law license;
5. Jones was NEVER a "law enforcement officer". This is why Jones will not reveal the name and location of the law enforcement agency/ies at which she was allegedly so employed;
6. Jones STILL solicits and collects money from her victims for seminars by FRAUDULENTLY claiming to be a "former police officer" and a former "police woman".
http://protrustacademy.com/

NOTE:
It is a STATE crime to impersonate an "attorney" or a "law enforcement officer”. It is a FEDERAL FELONY to use a "means of interstate commerce" (like the internet) to commit fraud (like soliciting money for seminars by fraudulently claiming to be a "former attorney", "former police officer" or by fraudulently claiming to be "Private Attorney General" who can "train" others to become the same).
http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2015/06/rod-class-live-call-tonight-tues-jun-23.html. Victims who have paid for such seminars may recover THREE TIMES their money back under FEDERAL RICO.

JUDGE DALE HOAX:
Rodney "DALE" Class and two other NOTORIOUS PROFESSIONAL HOAXERS AND CHARLATANS distributed FAKE legal books online that revealed FAKE legal information WHICH THEY THEMSELVES ACTUALLY CREATED, but which they fraudulently told the American people were written by a FAKE “retired federal judge” named, “Judge DALE” (which uses Rodney DALE Class’ middle name, “DALE”, as an inside joke). The “Judge DALE forgeries” include: “The Matrix And the US Constitution” (2010), “The Great American Adventure: Secrets Of America” (2012) and “Lawfully Yours” (2014). Most of the other “Judge DALE” articles posted online are mere re-prints of section five of “The Great American Adventure” under different names (“Legal Advice From A Retired Federal Judge Turned Whistle Blower”, “Retired Federal Judge Spills The Beans”, etc.). In the “Judge DALE Forgeries”, Rodney "DALE" Class confirmed his own delusional claims about the law and the legal system while FRAUDULENTLY pretending to be "Judge DALE". Like all of Rod Class’ claims about the law and the legal system, his claims in the “Judge DALE forgeries” were also designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED representatives of "We the People" and their appointees. As hard as it is to believe, Class’ two co-conspirators in this hoax still peddle all three of the “Judge DALE forgeries” from their own personal websites DESPITE THAT EVERYONE KNOWS THEY ARE ENTIRELY FAKE.
http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-ADVENTURE.pdfhttps://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/the-great-american-adventure-sm-book-format_pdf.pdf
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/the-matrix-and-the-us-constitution-sm-bk-format1.pdf
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/2014/05/05/the-matrix-and-the-us-constitution/
And, speaking of "MATRIX" hoaxes, for more "MATRIX" hoaxes by the very same charlatans involved here, go to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts7CejgSkjc&t=22s (Go to this video FIRST. Then, go to :30-:45 for an ACTUAL PHOTO of THE REAL "Judge DALE" inside the "MATRIX"); http://www.globaltruth.net/jeff-rense-deborah-tavares-escaping-the-matrix/; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sykRuXXNJzU ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HX5IJMevyP8 ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4eRlBbcFkc
(FORGERIES CONTINUED)
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/lawfully-yours-ninth-edition.pdf
https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/bond-vs-united-states1.pdf
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/tag/judge-dale/

RELATED DOCUMENTS:
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/rod-class/
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/tag/rodney-dale-class/
https://anticorruptionsociety.com/2013/09/23/our-courts-have-nothing-to-do-with-justice/

OTHERS DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE "JUDGE DALE HOAX":
http://removingtheshackles.blogspot.com/2013/11/judge-dale-global-currency-reset-and.html
http://removingtheshackles.blogspot.com/2013/01/judge-dale-on-ucc-filings-and-further.html
http://www.shiftfrequency.com/admiralty-courts-law-of-the-see/#more-26988

CLASS' CO-CONSPIRATORS CAUGHT ON TAPE WHILE ACTUALLY ENGAGED IN THE THE "JUDGE DALE HOAX".  (Jeff Rense is NOT involved in the hoax.). Go to the following videos FIRST. Then, go to the times indicated below. They are the exact times of the hoax documented therein.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o4CpB9I8g&t=260s (Go to this video FIRST, then go to 2:25-11:35)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTRPZD3_w5k (Same as above. 42:10-49:15)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKI4zPI504E (Same. 3:50-4:30 & 7:15-56:00)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dgYbD6fcw8 (Same. 34:20-36:30)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAryrdGenL4 (Same. 1:30-1:45)

Class’ co-conspirators in the “Judge DALE Hoax” are the same two charlatans who assisted Class in ALL OF THE “LEGAL” HOAXES DESCRIBED ABOVE (in the second paragraph). These two charlatans are also behind the “NASA War Document Hoax” and the “Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars Hoax”. For more on these hoaxes, read the comments by snoop4truth posted below the following videos. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4J7NLlloN0&t=274s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_Bk_YmrK-M&t=3701s

ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
Snoop4truth did not expose these two hoaxes to harm Rod Class or Debra Jones. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed these two hoaxes solely to reduce the catastrophic damage that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day.

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video Government Taking 2012 Very Serious - Rod Class



Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares - NASA War Document (Matrix Deciphered)


Preview YouTube video Escaping The Matrix Deborah Tavares & Jeff Rense


Preview YouTube video The Matrix of Control→ Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars - DARPA - Agenda 21 - DNA Mapping


Preview YouTube video Judge Dale - Secrets of America, Great American Adventure


Preview YouTube video Rod Class Cestui Que Vie Trust Fact Check Birth Certificate Estate A4V Discharge Research


Preview YouTube video USA, Inc. - "MARKETS" of Crime


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares & Al Whitney/World Bank Attorney Exposes the Game


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares and Ron Angell 21st Century Weapons at the Speed of Light


Preview YouTube video Deborah Tavares and Ron Angell Stop the Crime


Preview YouTube video USA INC, Nasa War Document Depopulation & You - Deborah Tavares Conspiracy Con


Preview YouTube video SILENT WEAPONS FOR QUIET WARS: Deborah Tavares joins Joyce Riley on The Power Hour




  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "14TH AMENDMENT, SECTION 4 BOUNTY HUNTER HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22&biw=1366&bih=622&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwir6YX-5t_OAhVJ2B4KHQQzC_kQ_AUICCgD&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22+%22Rod+Class%22&*

THE HOAX: Rod Class falsely claims to be a "14th Amendment, Section 4, Bounty Hunter" and that as such, he is EXTREMELY powerful, EXTREMELY important and that he represents an EXTREME threat to government agencies and officials in that imaginary capacity. But, none of this is so. 

BACKGROUND: Class mistakenly believes that all governmental agencies have public money that they should not have (the subject of a different comment). So, he set out to recover that public money and created an appropriate TITLE, COSTUME, VEHICLE and some imaginary POWERS to help him in that regard. For his title, Class picked the term, "14 Amendment, Section 4 Bounty Hunter". This is because both the term, "PUBLIC DEBT" and the term, "BOUNTIES" actually appear in  the fourteenth amendment, section 4 and because such a title would help create the IMAGE he wanted. But, Class should have researched these terms first.

Class mistakenly defines a "14th Amendment, Section 4, Bounty Hunter" as "Public Debt Collector" and/or a "Public Bounty Hunter". These mistaken definitions (along with his description of his imaginary role in that imaginary capacity) reflect TWO FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKES that Class makes about the fourteenth amendment, section 4. First, Class mistakenly believes that the term, "public debt" means MONEY THAT OTHERS OWE TO THE PUBLIC. But, this is not so. (The term, "public debt", ACTUALLY MEANS MONEY THAT THE PUBLIC OWES TO OTHERS). Second, Class mistakenly believes that the "bounties" referred to in the fourteenth amendment, section 4 are "bounties" that are owed and paid to those who find and recover MONEY THAT IS CURRENTLY OWED TO THE PUBLIC NOW. But, this is also not so. (The term, "bounties", referred to in the fourteenth amendment, section 4 ACTUALLY MEANS THE "BOUNTIES" THAT THE PUBLIC ONCE OWED (AND PAID) TO THOSE WHO HELPED THE UNION DEFEAT THE CONFEDERATE SOUTH DURING THE CIVIL WAR OVER 150 YEARS AGO.). But, Class does not know this.  Not surprisingly, Class has NEVER found any missing public money, has NEVER recovered any missing public money and has NEVER been paid a "bounty" in connection with finding any missing public money.

Regardless, in pretending to be a "14th Amendment, Section 4 Bounty Hunter" (as he mistakenly defines it), Class: 1). claims to have a number of imaginary "duties" that he is "obligated" to perform in that imaginary capacity; 2). signs and seals his court papers to that effect; 3). had made, and often wears a FAKE, homemade "COSTUME"  falsely indicating such; 3). marked his used Jeep with FAKE vinyl decals falsely indicating such; 4). adorned the "backdrop" of his backyard radio/video studio/set with a FAKE wall plague falsely indicating such; and 5). files lawsuits and disrupts court proceedings pretending to be such. 

THE TRUTH:
1). The term, “Public Debt” means MONEY THAT THE PUBLIC OWES TO OTHERS (not the other way around).

2).  The fourteenth amendment, section 4 DOES NOT CREATE OR ENFORCE A "BOUNTY"  FOR THOSE WHO RECOVER MONEY THAT IS CURRENTLY OWED TO THE PUBLIC NOW.

3). The fourteenth amendment, section 4 ONCE REQUIRED THE PUBLIC TO PAY "BOUNTIES" TO THOSE (AND ONLY TO THOSE) WHO "SUPPRESS[ED]... INSURRECTION... [AND] REBELLION" (REFERRING TO THE CONFEDERATE SOUTH DURING THE CIVIL WAR OVER 150 YEARS AGO).

The fourteenth amendment, Section 4 reads:

"The validity of the public debt of the Unites States [money that the public owes to others], ... INCLUDING DEBTS INCURRED [by the public] FOR PAYMENT OF PENSIONS AND BOUNTIES [to others] FOR SERVICES [rendered] IN SUPPRESSING INSURRECTION OR REBELLION [referring to the Confederate South during the Civil War] SHALL NOT BE QUESTIONED [means 'must be paid']."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Id. Thus, the fourteenth amendment, section 4 IS EXCLUSIVELY ABOUT MONEY/DEBTS THAT THE PUBLIC ONCE OWED (AND PAID) TO OTHERS, NOT ABOUT MONEY/DEBTS THAT OTHERS CURRENTLY OWE TO THE PUBLIC NOW. Further, the ONLY "bounties" created or enforced by the fourteenth amendment WERE THOSE "BOUNTIES" THAT THE PUBLIC ONCE OWED (AND PAID) TO THOSE WHO HELPED THE UNION DEFEAT THE CONFEDERATE SOUTH DURING THE CIVIL WAR OVER 150 YEARS AGO. The 14th amendment DOES NOT CREATE OR ENFORCE "BOUNTIES" FOR THOSE FIND MONEY/DEBTS THAT OTHERS CURRENTLY OWE TO THE PUBLIC NOW. But, Class does not know this.

4). This provision in the United States Constitution was written immediately following the Civil War in direct response to a specific threat made by Southern states and their sympathizers. At the time (150 years ago), the Union had promised to pay "PENSIONS" and "BOUNTIES" to people who had helped the Union defeat the confederate South during the Civil War (to which the terms, "INSURRECTION" and "REBELLION", refer in the 14th amendment, section 4). The Southern states objected to the payment of these "PENSIONS" and "BOUNTIES" (effectively "rewards" to people for defeating the confederate South during the Civil War) and they threatened to pass federal legislation banning the payment of these "PENSIONS" and BOUNTIES" in the event that they ever became a majority in Congress. SO, THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION OF THE CONSTITUTION WAS TO PREEMPTIVELY NULLIFY ANY FUTURE EFFORTS ON THE PART OF THE SOUTHERN STATES TO PASS FEDERAL LEGISLATION BANNING THE PAYMENT OF "PENSIONS" AND "BOUNTIES" TO PEOPLE THAT HAD HELPED THE UNION DEFEAT THE CONFEDERATE SOUTH DURING THE CIVIL WAR OVER 150 YEARS AGO. But, Rod Class does not know this.

5). CONCLUSION:  Because it is impossible for Class to travel back in time to "SUPPRESS... [AN] INSURRECTION OR REBELLION" DURING THE CIVIL WAR, Class IS NOT a "14th Amendment, Section 4, Bounty Hunter". Indeed, he doesn’t even know the meaning of the term.

THE REAL "FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, SECTION 4 BOUNTY":

https://www.google.com/search?q=union+%22civil+war%22+bounty&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiiloiYudTSAhXKQSYKHVL5Dv8Q_AUICCgD&biw=1366&bih=613

https://www.britannica.com/event/Bounty-System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounty_jumper 

http://www.lib.umd.edu/civilwarwomen/exhibition/10bounties.html

http://www.oah.org/site/assets/documents/09_JAH_1966_murdock.pdf

http://www.cincinnaticwrt.org/data/ccwrt_history/talks_text/moffat_soldiers_pay.html

WHAT A REAL "FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, SECTION 4 BOUNTY HUNTER" LOOKS LIKE:

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/a-rogues-gallery-bounty-hunters.110966/

https://www.google.com/search?q=union+soldier+civil+war+bounty&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjB4pzk09TSAhUJfiYKHfoFBfEQ_AUICCgD&biw=1366&bih=613#tbm=isch&q=union+soldier+%22civil+war%22+&*

THE LAW:

THIS SECTION:
1). CANNOT be used as the basis for "bounties" for services that DO NOT ARISE OUT OF THE CIVIL WAR.
2). CANNOT be used to adversely affect the property rights of U.S. GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
3). DOES NOT even "come into play" UNLESS A GOVERNMENT "questions" (REFUSES TO PAY) a debt THAT THE PUBLIC OWES TO OTHERS. 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10653104269145873517&q=%22of+United+States+officials%22+%22or+to+adversely+affect+the+property+rights%22+%22provide+no+authority+for+plaintiffs+to+establish+an+irrevocable+bounty+in+this+case+%22+%22sections+3+and+4+of+the+fourteenth+amendment%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 .

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2388571488588603535&q=+%22by+any+future+congress+controlled+by+southerners+and+their+sympathizers%22+%22in+fighting+the+civil+war%22+%22the+fourteenth+amendment+was+intended+to+prevent+the+questioning+of+the+war+debt+incurred+by+the+union%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10653104269145873517&q=%22in+fighting+the+civil+war%22+%22section+4+of+the+fourteenth+amendment+was+intended+to+prevent+the+questioning+of+the+war+debt+incurred+by+the+union%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2388571488588603535&q=%22This+section+is+only+brought+into+play+when+some+state+or+federal+government+agency+questions+a+debt%22+%22This+little+used+provision+of+the+fourteenth+amendment%22+%22No+such+questioning+occurred+here%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10653104269145873517&q=%22questions+a+debt%22+%22state+or+federal+government+agency%22+%22is+only+brought+into+play+when+some%22+%22Section+4+of+the+fourteenth+amendment%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

FAKE VEHICLE:
http://www.nc4x4.com/forum/threads/douche-bag-attractant.159266/
  
FAKE COSTUME:
(Go to the following videos FIRST. Then, go to times below.).
1).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZEYI-PTzUc&list=PLfuM34UqkW0c0UDc6psQfXTA0a1t-O7ux (at 1:35).
2).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCisCCMQqng (at 10:15).

FAKE PLAQUE:
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22&biw=1366&bih=622&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwir6YX-5t_OAhVJ2B4KHQQzC_kQ_AUICCgD&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22+%22Rod+Class%22&*

FAKE VIDEOS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7EVPSf-9gw&t=61s (note video TITLE).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCisCCMQqng&t=2647s (describing his imaginary powers and duties).

FAKE PAPERS:
[url=https://itnj.org/wp-content/uploads/ITNJ/ITNJ_Cases/rod_class/dc_case_files/130618_1st DC Filing_FIRST_COMPLAINT_JUNE_18TH_2013.pdf]https://itnj.org/wp-content/uploads/ITNJ/ITNJ_Cases/rod_class/dc_case_files/130618_1st%20DC%20Filing_FIRST_COMPLAINT_JUNE_18TH_2013.pdf[/url]

It would be funny if it weren't so sad. So very, very sad.

SNOOP4TRUTH:
Snoop4truth did not expose this hoax to harm Rod Class. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed this hoax solely to reduce the catastrophic damage that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day.

The message? Just tell the truth.

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video ROD CLASS - PAG - LIVE with RTR - LIBERTY EXPLOSION



Preview YouTube video Rod Class Cestui Que Vie Trust Fact Check Birth Certificate Estate A4V Discharge Research


Preview YouTube video Rod Class Q&A #3: The Private Attorney General In Court


Preview YouTube video Rod Class - 14th Amendment Bounty Hunter




  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
ROD CLASS & THE "PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL HOAX"

FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:  https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22&biw=1366&bih=622&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwir6YX-5t_OAhVJ2B4KHQQzC_kQ_AUICCgD&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22+%22Rod+Class%22&*

THE HOAX: Rod Class falsely claims to be a "Private Attorney General" ("PAG") and that as such, he is EXTREMELY powerful, EXTREMELY important and that he represents an EXTREME threat to government agencies and officials in that imaginary capacity. But, none of this is so.

BACKGROUND: The terms “attorney”, “attorney general”, “judge” and “prosecutor” are all "professional titles" for highly-educated, legal experts in powerful and important public positions. Class wanted to be what these people were. So, he created an appropriate TITLE, COSTUME, VEHICLE and some imaginary POWERS to help him in this regard. For his title, Class picked the term, "PAG" because this term actually appears in the case law (only) and because it would help create the IMAGE he wanted.

Class falsely claims that: 1). the term, PAG, is a professional title for a non-attorney who is authorized to practice law without a license; 2). the purpose of the PAG is to “do accountability” against our ELECTED representatives and their appointees for doing their jobs; and that 3). his authority as a PAG comes from "Congress" (two federal CIVIL RIGHTS statutes). But, none of this is so. 

THE TRUTH:
1). The term, PAG is NOT a professional title.

2). The purpose of a PAG is NOT to "do accountability" against our ELECTED representatives and their appointees for doing their jobs.

3). Class has NO authority from Congress. Congress has NO POWER to authorize any person (including Class) to practice law. Const., Art. 1, Sec. 8 (listing ALL POWERS of Congress).
http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/article-i-section-8  (Note that the power to authorize a person to practice law IS NOT ON THE LIST). Under the tenth amendment, ONLY THE STATES have that power. http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/page/tenth-amendment .

4). As used in connection with the two federal CIVIL RIGHTS statutes upon which Class relies (and herein), the concept of a PAG relates SOLELY to providing PAYMENT to attorneys who WIN cases for CIVIL RIGHTS VICTIMS.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16098434127441351570&q=counsel+%22+successful+plaintiffs%22+attorney+attorneys+discrimination+fee+fees+negroes+racial+%22civil+rights%22+%22he+does+so%22+%22when+a+plaintiff%22+%22obtains+an+injunction%22+%22as+a+private+attorney+general%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3704494267863674576&q=%22he+does+so%22+%22obtains+an+injunction%22+%22when+a+plaintiff%22++black+hispanic+racially+%22as+private+attorneys+general%22+%22civil+rights%22+%22plaintiffs+act%22+%22plaintiff%27s+role%22+%22as+a+private+attorney+general%22+%22the+characterization+of+the+plaintiff%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

5). What a REAL PAG looks like.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22civil+rights%22+victims&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjp2MH9kubSAhWB1CYKHWXqDjAQ_AUIBygC&biw=1366&bih=613#spf=1

6). What a FAKE PAG looks like.
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22&biw=1366&bih=622&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwir6YX-5t_OAhVJ2B4KHQQzC_kQ_AUICCgD&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=%22Private+Attorney+General%22+%22Rod+Class%22&* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLbXtscZBM8

7).  DEFINITION: A PAG is the actual CLIENT of an attorney who has already WON a federal civil rights lawsuit. Such a PAG must have been the actual VICTIM of the federal civil rights violation and must have been the actual PLAINTIFF in the federal civil rights case. A PAG has NO powers, NO authority and NO importance that any other CLIENT does not have.

8). The subject federal civil rights statutes (and the statutes they refer to) only do two things: a). they permit the actual VICTIM of the federal civil rights violation TO SUE the violator in federal court; and b). they permit the federal judge TO AWARD ATTORNEYS FEES to pay the winning side's attorney. There is nothing in either of the two federal civil rights statutes that authorizes a non-attorney to practice law without a license or to use the term, PAG as if it were a professional title.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1988 (See section (b))
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-78/pdf/STATUTE-78-Pg241.pdf (See Section 204(b))

9). An attorney IS an attorney IN EVERY sense of the word. But, a PAG IS NOT an attorney IN ANY sense of the word. An attorney represents a party in court. But, a PAG IS A PARTY IN COURT. An attorney represents a client in court. But, A PAG IS A CLIENT IN COURT. An attorney acts on behalf of people WHO ARE IN COURT. But, a PAG acts ONLY on his own behalf and ONLY on behalf of people WHO ARE OUT OF COURT. A person’s status as an attorney CONTINUES AFTER THE CASE. But, a person’s status as a PAG ENDS WITH THE CASE. The term, "attorney" refers to a LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE. But, the term, "PAG" refers to a CLIENT.

10). ORIGIN: A REAL governmental "Attorney General" WINS civil rights lawsuits which benefits society as a whole. Likewise, an ordinary CLIENT who WINS civil rights lawsuits does the same. Noting the similarity IN FUNCTION between such litigants, federal courts began jokingly referring to such winning civil rights CLIENTS as PAG's. The federal courts still use this term to remind the parties that a such a CLIENT has rendered a public service and is, therefore, statutorily eligible for an award of attorney fees to pay his/her attorney.

11). EFFECT: Thus, in using  the term, “PAG”, the federal courts: 1). were NOT elevating non-attorneys to the professional level of real attorneys or real attorneys general; 2). were NOT recognizing a special class of FAKE "attorneys" who were somehow authorized to practice law without a license; and 3). were NOT creating a professional title for non-attorneys (like Class) to use.

CONCLUSION: Rod Class is not a PAG. He doesn’t even know the meaning of the term.

THE LAW:
Note: Not a single case below has anything to do with "doing accountability" against a government agency or official.

1). PAG DEFINED:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4612481658703000905&q=%22authorizes+a+court+to+award%22+%22prevailing+party%22+%22allows+the+award+of%22+%2242+U.S.C.+1988%22+%22attorney%27s+fee%22+%22Private+attorney+general%22+violation+%22civil+rights%22++%22when+a+plaintiff+succeeds+in+remedying+a%22+%22he+serves+as+a%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8789673379809042125&q=+%22attorney%27s+fees%22+%2242+U.S.C.+1988%22+%22as+a+private+attorney+general%22+%22a+plaintiff+who+obtains+relief+in+a%22+%22civil+rights%22+%22lawsuit+does+so%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12968550988292561231&q=++%22prevailing+party%22+%22prevailing+parties%22+%2242+U.S.C.+1988%22+%22attorney%27s+fee%22+%22civil+rights%22+%22both+fee+award+provisions%22+%22are+intended+to+reward+the+successful+plaintiff+acting+as+a%22+%22private+attorney+general%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

2). CLASS NOT A PAG:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18329059960657595131&q=Class+%22unauthorized+practice+of+law%22+%22to+represent+a+party+in+a+court+proceeding%22+%22permit+an+individual+not+licensed+to+practice+law%22++%22in+no+way+does+the+concept+of+a%22++%22private+attorney+general%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9078043099739209784&q=%22to+appear+as+a%22++%22Debtors+asked+this+court+to+allow+Mr.%22+Rodney+Dale+Class+%22this+court+denied+the+debtors%27+request+for+supplemental+representation+by+Mr.%22%22was+not+an+attorney%22++%22private+attorney+general%22+&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 (READ FOOTNOTE 8, INCLUDING ITS FINAL SENTENCE)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16401726907532358555&q=+%22devoid+of+merit%22++%22a+lay+person+cannot+appear+as+counsel+for+others%22+%22other+individuals%22+%22as+a+lay+person,+he+cannot+prosecute+a+claim+on+behalf+of%22+Rodney+DALE+class+%22private+attorney+general%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2757756755752158953&q=denied+%22there+is+no+evidence+supporting%22+%22this+allegation%22+%22private+attorney+general%22+%22Rodney+Class%22+%22defendant+claims+he+has+been+given+authority+by+the+house+and+senate+to+act+as+a%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . (See Ruling 35.). 

Note: More Class LOSSES with identical rulings on
Pacer.gov. (which will not allow our links).

3). OTHER FAKE PAG's:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9735994746043500386&q=not+%22unauthorized+practice+of+law%22+%22to+represent+a+party+in+a+court+proceeding%22+%22permit+an+individual+not+licensed+to+practice+law%22++%22in+no+way+does+the+concept+of+a%22++%22private+attorney+general%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . Cites to Class' LOSS in Pertuset above as authority.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11372513585713361155&q=%22demonstrate+competence%22+authorize+authorized+not+%22no+authority%22+%22unauthorized+practice+of+law%22+%22attorney+in+fact%22+%22Power+of+Attorney%22+%22Anthony+Williams%22++%22private+attorney+general%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006 . Same FAKE PAG who stars in video below.

VIDEOS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLbXtscZBM8   (another FAKE PAG goes to jail)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCisCCMQqng&t=630s   (CLASS describing his imaginary powers as a PAG)

VEHICLES:
http://www.nc4x4.com/forum/threads/douche-bag-attractant.159266/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts7CejgSkjc&t=8s   (Go to video FIRST. Then, go to :05-:20 & :30-:45).

COSTUME:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZEYI-PTzUc&list=PLfuM34UqkW0c0UDc6psQfXTA0a1t-O7ux

PAPERS:
[url=https://itnj.org/wp-content/uploads/ITNJ/ITNJ_Cases/rod_class/dc_case_files/130618_1st DC Filing_FIRST_COMPLAINT_JUNE_18TH_2013.pdf]https://itnj.org/wp-content/uploads/ITNJ/ITNJ_Cases/rod_class/dc_case_files/130618_1st%20DC%20Filing_FIRST_COMPLAINT_JUNE_18TH_2013.pdf[/url]
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video Would you take legal advice from this guy?



Preview YouTube video Rod Class Q&A #3: The Private Attorney General In Court


Preview YouTube video Government Taking 2012 Very Serious - Rod Class


Preview YouTube video ROD CLASS - PAG - LIVE with RTR - LIBERTY EXPLOSION




  

PurpleSkyz

avatar
Admin
FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCisCCMQqng&t=610s
THE HOAX: In BRAGGING about LOSING Harold Stanley's case. Class BRAGS that he testified in court that "FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES ARE NOT MONEY". Class falsely claims that he LOST Harold Stanley's case because the judge excluded (or later "struck") that "EVIDENCE". Further, Class falsely claims that when the judge excluded (or "struck") that "EVIDENCE", that ruling constituted the “crime” of suppressing or withholding  exculpatory “EVIDENCE”. So, Class  purported to sue the judge, the prosecutors and others on behalf of Stanley for this imaginary "crime". 

THE TRUTH: 
Class did not know then and does not know now that SUCH TAX PROTESTER ARGUMENTS: 1). ARE NOT "EVIDENCE" in the first place (they are "ARGUMENT"); 2). WERE NOT LEGALLY “RELEVANT” (to the actual claims or defenses of the parties); and 3). WERE LEGALLY ERRONEOUS (opposite to what the law actually is/was).  FINALLY, CLASS DID NOT KNOW THEN AND DOES NOW KNOW NOW THAT THIS TAX PROTESTER ARGUMENT HAS BEEN PUTTING TAX PROTESTERS IN PRISON FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS.

CLASS' MISTAKES WHICH SENT HAROLD STANLEY TO FEDERAL PRISON FOR 5 to 8 YEARS!

1. MISTAKE 1- Class had no idea what Harold Stanley’s case was actually about. Class mistakenly believed that Stanley’s case was about the IRS claiming that Stanley owed income taxes to the IRS. (But, it was not.). So, Class mistakenly set out to prove that Stanley did not owe income taxes to the IRS (something that, unknown to Class, was completely IRRELEVANT to Stanley’s case).

In order to prove that Stanley did not owe income taxes to the IRS (something that, unknown to Class, was completely IRRELEVANT to Stanley’s case), Class claimed that he testified (or sought to testify) that "Federal Reserve Notes ("FRNs") are not money".

NOTE: The “reasoning” behind this particular tax protester argument is that if "FRNs are not money", then a tax protester (like Stanley) who is paid in the form of “FRNs” can argue that he did not receive any “MONEY” and therefore incurred no "INCOME" tax liability to the IRS. Further, if  “FRNs are not money”, then it would be “impossible” for a tax protester (like Stanley) to “PAY” any "INCOME" taxes to the IRS since all he/she has to “PAY” "INCOME" taxes with are FRNs which “are not money” making true “PAYMENT” of income taxes “impossible”, etc.

To make matters worse, Class could not understand why Harold Stanley's case was filed in the Federal Court For The Western District of Missouri, instead of being filed in a "Tax Court" (where Class usually LOSES his IRS cases). Class even erroneously claimed that the district court "did not have jurisdiction" over Stanley’s case because the case was filed in the “wrong court”. But, this was not so.

Unknown to Class, the reason that this case was filed in in federal district court was that the United States DID NOT merely charge Stanley with not paying income taxes (in which event, the case would have been filed in "Tax Court", where Class usually LOSES his IRS cases)). Instead, in this case, the United States charged Stanley with federal CRIMES  which can only be filed in federal district court (not in "Tax Court" where Class usually LOSES his IRS cases). Specifically, in this case, the United States charged Stanley with: SUBMITTING FAKE MONEY ORDERS TO THE IRS; SUBMITTING FALSE DOCUMENTS TO THE IRS FALSELY INDICATING THAT HIS TAX DEBTS WERE "SATISFIED" BECAUSE THEY HAD BEEN "ACCEPTED FOR VALUE"; SUBMITTING FAKE PAYMENT VOUCHERS TO THE IRS WITHOUT SUBMITTING THE PAYMENT "VOUCHED" FOR and SUBMITTING A FALSE COMPLAINT TO A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY FALSELY ACCUSING THE IRS OF A CRIME (something that Class likely had a hand in himself). 

This means that even if Class had been allowed to testify that “FRNs are not money” (and even if that testimony had been legally correct, and it was not), STANLEY WOULD HAVE STILL BEEN CONVICTING OF SUBMITTING FAKE MONEY ORDERS TO THE IRS, SUBMITTING FALSE DOCUMENTS TO THE IRS FALSELY INDICATING THAT HIS TAX DEBTS WERE PAID, SUBMITTING FAKE PAYMENT VOUCHERS TO THE IRS WITHOUT SUBMITTING THE PAYMENT “VOUCHED” FOR AND FILING A FALSE COMPLAINT WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES, ETC. This is because whether or not FRNs are "money" has no bearing whatsoever ON WHETHER HAROLD STANLEY SUBMITTED FAKE MONEY ORDERS TO THE IRS, WHETHER HE SUBMITTED FALSE DOCUMENTS TO THE IRS FALSELY INDICATING THAT TAX DEBTS WERE PAID, WHETHER HE SUBMITTED FAKE PAYMENT “VOUCHERS” TO THE IRS WITHOUT SUBMITTING THE PAYMENT “VOUCHED” FOR OR WHETHER HE FILED A FALSE COMPLAINT WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES.

So, Class’ proffered testimony about FRNs was NOT LEGALLY”RELEVANT” to the ACTUAL claims and defenses of the parties and was therefore legally “INADMISSIBLE” under the Federal Rules of Evidence and the judge PROPERLY EXCLUDED IT. But, Class does not know ANY of this.

2. MISTAKE 2- Unknown to Class, TAX PROTESTER ARGUMENTS ARE NOT “EVIDENCE” IN THE FIRST PLACE (they are "ARGUMENT").

"FACTS" are "EVENTS" that can be "WITNESSED". But, AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, TAX PROTESTER ARGUMENTS and the "LAW" ARE NOT "EVENTS" that can be "WITNESSED".

"FACT WITNESSES" (of the type that Class was in this case) can ONLY testify as to RELEVANT “EVENTS” that they actually "WITNESSED" (ex: "I saw him crawl out the window."). But, “FACT WITNESSES”, of the type that Class was in this case, cannot testify as to “OPINIONS”, the “LAW” or “LEGAL ARGUMENTS OR CONCLUSIONS” about the “LAW” (because those things are not “EVENTS” that Class actually "WITNESSED").  

ALL APPLICABLE “LAW” IS ALWAYS PRESENTED TO THE JURY IN EVERY SINGLE JURY TRIAL, AS IT WAS IN THIS CASE. But, such “LAW” is not presented to the jury by mere “FACT WITNESSES” of the type that Rod Class was in this case. It is the JUDGE who presents all applicable “LAW” to the jury in all jury trials (meaning “LAW” that actually relates to the claims and/or defenses of the parties). And, Class was not a judge.

Further, it is the attorneys at law or the pro se parties themselves who make all legal ARGUMENTS (like tax protester ARGUMENTS) to the jury, not mere “FACT WITNESSES” of the type that Rod Class was in this case. Because legal theories, legal arguments and legal conclusions are NOT "EVENTS" that Class actually "WITNESSED", the judge properly "excluded" or "struck" Class' proffered testimony about FRNs. But, Class does not know ANY of this. 

3. MISTAKE 3- Unknown to Class, under the law itself, FRNs ARE MONEY! (See links below.). This means that Class was so ignorant of the law that he did not even know then, and does not know now that his "excluded" or "stricken" ERRONEOUS "testimony" about FRNs WAS EXACTLY BACKWARDS (OPPOSITE) TO WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY WAS!

THE LAW: "FRNs ARE NOT MONEY" IN THE TAX PROTESTER CONTEXT:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4823644493408609770&q=%22federal+reserve+notes%22+%22are+not+money%22+rejected+frivolous+groundless+%22repeatedly+considered+and%22+universally+%22other+protester-type+arguments%22+ambassador+%22who+accepts+no+governmental+privileges%22+exempt+%22was+improperly+ratified%22+%22sixteenth+amendment%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3006283153837357387&q=%22we+will+not+waste+our+time+discussing+such+hollow+arguments%22+%22not+reportable+as+income%22+%22which+have+been+considered+and+rejected+on+numerous+occasions%22+%22constitute+income%22+%22federal+reserve+notes%22+%22not+money%22+%22It+has+been+consistently+held+however+that%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10850436806728706662&q=%22They+must+be+rejected+again%22+%22all+of+these+tired+allegations+have+been+considered+by+the+courts+and+rejected+repeatedly%22+%22are+not+income%22+%22federal+reserve+notes%22+%22are+not+money%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4117162275911214916&q=valueless+%22Not+redeemable%22+%22constitutional+money%22+%22not+dollars%22+%22lawful+money%22+unredeemable+fraudulent+fraud+worthless+imposed+penalty+additional++sanctions+%22protester+allegations%22+misguided+groundless+frivolous+%22Federal+Reserve+Notes%22+%22are+not+money%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

THE LAW: "FRNs ARE NOT MONEY" OUTSIDE THE TAX PROTESTER CONTEXT. 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14753248592698700360&q=%22has+established+that%22+%22Congress,+in+full+accordance+with+its+authority+under%22+%22the+constitution%22+%22do+not+constitute+money%22+%22are+legal+tender%22+%22is+clearly+without+merit%22+%22clearly+baseless%22+%22Federal+reserve+notes%22+%22are+not+money%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8617227736829971139&q=%22constitutional+form%22+%22are+not+money%22+%22legal+tender%22+%22prohibiting+states%22+%22preventing+states%22+rejected+%22has+been+rejected%22+%22finding+untenable%22+dismissing+%22is+meritless%22+%22does+not%22+%22Federal+reserve+notes%22&hl=en&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7559490608550942578&q=untenable+baseless+dismissed+insufficient+%22absolutely+no+merit%22+rejected++frivolous+hopeless+%22federal+reserve+notes%22+%22not+money%22+%22are+legal+tender%22+%22as+legal+tender%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13457230164550911078&q=%22the+award+of+attorney+fees+was+an+appropriate+deterrent+to+future+frivolous+suits%22+%22has+been+rejected+by+every+court+considering+the+claim%22+%22the+claim+that%22+%22federal+reserve+notes%22+%22are+not+valid+money%22&hl=en&scisbd=2&as_sdt=40006

Rod Class has LOST every single case in which he has ever been involved (73 consecutive cases in a row, and still counting).

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video Rod Class Q&A #3: The Private Attorney General In Court




  

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum