2013 Jun 27 Howard Griswold Conference Call

7/28/2019 2013 Jun 27 Howard Griswold Conference Call

1/25

Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, June 27, 2013Partial

Howard Griswold Conference calls:conf call (talkshoe) 724-444-7444 95099# 1#

(non-talkshoe members must use the 1# after the pin number)Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.Talkshoe mutes the phone lines

********************************************http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=661654&cmd=apop

**********************************

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd=hrepi

**************************

Howard's link for Thursday:http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd=hrepi

Hosted by: Gemini Research GroupPhone Number: (724) 444-7444Call ID: 95099

Howard is the Guest Featured Speaker on Saturday at 6 p.m., Eastern Time at:

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=99043&cmd=tcHosted by: :Mighty-Mo;Phone Number: (724) 444-7444Call ID: 99043

Rod Class AIB call on Talkshoe, the pin number is 48361 at nine oclock PM, Tues &Fri (Eastern Time). Thats Americas Independent Bureau, AIB on Talkshoe.

**************************American Reconstruction Project.The talkshoe phone number: 724-444-7444 The pin number: 126101 # .10:00 pm Eastern Time, 9 central, 8 mountain and 7 pm Pacific Time.Amber and Colin will be running the call.

**********************************

Howard is listed on Angela's at :http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Guest-Speaker-Pages-Info.html


2/25

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Talkshoes.html****************************

Howard Griswold talks about contracts and the application of the law on the KMA Club.*****************************

http://geminiinvestmentsresearchgroup.wordpress.com/forms

***************************http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IanYOTLI8******************************

Note: there is a hydrate water call 8 pm, Eastern Mondays, 218-844-3388 966771#Howards home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)

All correspondence to:Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, Delmar, Del. 19940

(do not address mail to Howard Griswold since Howard has not taken up residence inthat mailbox and since hes on good terms with his wife he isnt likely to in the

foreseeable future.)

********************I am not a public servant {officer or employee} and any claim to the contrary must

be proved by payroll records and my alleged public servant {officer} title and sworn

under penalty of perjury with full commercial liability for the person who swears to

it.

Im not an officer or agent or employee of the government. I am not resident within

the government and any claim to the contrary must be proved by payroll records.Prove that Im being paid by the government to be a government employee. If you

cant then your law doesnt apply to me.

Government has all the right in the world to make laws and rules regulating itself.

When they impose any of these rules and regulations beyond government upon any

of us {private} theyre breaching their fiduciary duty {as public officers and trustees

of government}. All employees of government are in a trustee position. The courts

have said this emphatically

Public means governmentprivate means non-government.

Your acceptance of anything that government offers you at any level in any way,

shape or form is a consent to cooperate with them and to put yourself under their

authority and control.

Governments have all the authority, rights and duties to make all the laws necessary

to regulate themselves. Their law, rules, regulations, codes and so-called statutes do

not apply to the people outside of government.


3/25

****************

The scam that has been used is this lawyer reference to resident. You are a residentof the State of Blank. They will always say that. They will go so far as to put it in

writing in the complaints or motions to the courts that the defendants, the plaintiff

or any other party is a resident of the State of Blank. In order to get the individualunder the jurisdiction of the courtthey use this languagethis is a presumption

that is created which must be rebutted with rebuttable evidence to prevent them

from proceeding against you. Now, this is going to really upset lawyers and judges

because if you learn how to do this, and its not hard, but if you learn how to do this

and you take an affidavit into court with a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6),

they fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, thats Rule 12(b)(6)

because the complaint is made against a person who is not a resident of the State.

Accompany that with an affidavit signed and sworn to under penalty of perjury and

witnessed by a notary public that states the same thing, I am not a resident of the

State of Blank because I do not work for the State of Blank. I am not employed in

any way, shape or form. I am not an officer of the State of Blank. The presumptionthat I am is erroneous and must be corrected on the record. Simple enough, isnt

it? Motion to dismiss this claim under Rule 12(b)(6) because the claim fails to state a

claim upon which relief can be granted against a person who is not a resident of the

State of Blank. End of motion. Between the two, the motion and the affidavit, the

court must rule and it must rule that you are not the person that the complaint can

be lodged against. The case must be dismissed. When they dont then you want to

start looking up this Code of Judicial Ethics. Theyre not following the law.

********************

If they create the presumption and you rebut it and then they come back at you

with, well you do have a drivers license, you say, well, if I do its also erroneous.

Dont let them trick you back into admitting that youre within the state because if

you have a drivers license its within the states jurisdiction.

***********************

The state can regulate itself means that it applies to the state. It does not apply to

the people. Theyre not a party to the State. Then we have this presumption under

International Shoe Company v. State of Washington, the court gains its jurisdiction

by presumption that we are assuming the benefits and privileges of dealing with the

State or resident of the State (part of government) and thats the one that they use.

You have a right to join the government. The trick is that you as a government

official, now that youve joined it, do not have any right to impose your rules and

regulations upon me and the rest of society out here that is not party to government.

But the lawyers have created this presumption underInternational Shoe decision of

the court that we are all resident within the government meaning that were an

agent of the government. Were a party to it, were an officer or agent of the

government and we all come under the laws because of this presumption. That is

created by the registration of our name in some manner through any type of

registration (birth certificate, land deed, etc.) Now the presumption is that youre a

resident because youre doing business within State corporations and because that


4/25

presumption now exists if it is unrebutted by you it remains a fact before the courts

and thats part of their corrupted damn commercial laws. In the Uniform

Commercial Code under the definitions section look up the definition of

presumption and it says that a presumption before the court remains a fact until it

is rebutted by rebuttable evidence.

*********************************************************************

Well, commerce is the only real authority that government has in its regulatory and

taxing powers is the power to tax commerce and to regulate it. It doesnt have any

powers at all over private property. It never did. These lawyers, scum that they are,

have duped their people into registering their property telling them that they all

have to do it in order to gain the appearance of authority over the property that is

your private property (a taking). They still dont have any authority over it. The

higher courts have upheld it over and over again in different cases that their

registration scams do not hold enough water to give them the authority to regulate

your property such as the birth certificate gives them the authority to regulate yourbody property.

********************************

Any pleading that uses the law to gain an advantage over your private property is in

fact a sham pleading and under Rule 11 can be struck upon a proper request to the

court to doso.********************************

There is no government left. The government has ceased to function in its normal

position that it was in under the Constitution. Everything has been farmed out to

privately owned corporations to do the government work. So Social Security is

actually a private insurance company. Its not government. Its doing it for

government but its there for anybody to do business with it. So, in reality social

security is not a benefit or a privilege from government but theyll try to tell you it

is. All you got to do is do a little bit of leg work to find where its listed as a business

on Dunn and Bradstreet and present it to them that, look, this is a private company.

Its in business to make money. This is not government.

*********************************If you look at most statutes thats what they say and all persons only applies to all

persons in the agency that they give it to unless it specifically says, all persons who

have a license to sell alcohol or all persons who operate a motor vehicle or all

persons who have a license to sell tobacco products. It has to be specific. It cant just

say all persons and when it does it hasnt been properly assigned to the agency for

implementation. So what the agencies do is they sue in their own name. For

instance, the IRS makes a complaint against you under United States v. You or The

United States of America v. You, IRS, Department of the Treasury complaining that

you didnt pay taxes. Well, what they are doing is acting as an assignee of an

authority to collect taxes but where in the statutes were they assigned this authority

to take you to court, to bring claims against you? Its not there.


5/25

**********************************

This is all important to understand that in most cases the actual action is being

made against you by an assigned person. Either the agency has been assigned or has

not been assigned. The police department is acting like they are the assignee but by

law have not been assigned to do the functions that theyre doing. There is no

statutory law that they can bring themselves within a provision of in order toexecute the assignment of action that theyre doing, an action on a negotiable

instrument of any kind is an action on a note or on a chosen action.

*******************************

Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.

The rule requires you to objectan objection for ratification of commencement of

the action by or joinder or substitution of the real party in interest and such

ratification, joinder or substitution shall have the same effect as if the action had been

commenced in the name of the real party in interest. See the trickery of this kind of

stuff that lawyers put together? As long as you dont object we can do this with

assignment and get away with it and theyre doing it and theyre getting away with

it because we dont know enough to object.

**********************************

It is a dishonest act of enforcing a law upon a private individual that government

has no right, no power, no authority whatsoever to enforce upon the private

individual. That is breach of their fiduciary duty with no stupid questions asked.

When you file a breach of fiduciary duty case you are actually filing in equity. Leave

out all statutory references even though that example that we send around came out

of Colorado forms and it refers to a Colorado statutory representation that does put

it in equity but it isnt necessary to quote any statutory reference in order to open

the court of equity which is the Article 3 courts

(unless youre a teacher or government worker or have contracted with the

government with full disclosure, etc whereby youre not private anymore and youre

resident within the government.)

You got to be party to government to enjoy governments benefits, privileges and

opportunities.

*********************The executive branch of government is only enforcing the legislation for the benefit

of protecting the government and not necessarily doing what theyre supposed to do

to protect us. The one that is the most guilty of not following the law is the judges. It

comes from the canon of ethics for judicial conduct. Canon #2, very important, the

canon says: a judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of

the judges activities. Subsection A,Promoting Public Confidence. You know

anybody whos competent in the courts? I dont. Nobody believes the courts are

honest, correct and truthful and fairnot even most of the lawyers.

********************This defendant states that he is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as tothe correctness of the statement of the claim of the plaintiffs and he neither admits


6/25

nor denies the allegations concerning the claims of the plaintiffs but demands the

plaintiffs strictly prove their claim.************************************

Failing to answer is devastatingits a total loss. Failing to answer and back the

answer up with an affidavit denying what they claim amounts to a total loss. A vague

or ambiguous complaint is remedied by a request for a more definite statement.That will put things off for a little while until you get a decent statement. You must

object to whatever they finally state by affidavit.

************************************Now, another rule that I found to be interesting Rule 11. Rule 11, its called signing

of pleadings but its got a very interesting statement in it that I think clarifies

something I bought up a week or two ago and that is I have been finding that

lawyers are not making a notice of appearance and putting it in the docket record of

the case and I thought sure they were supposed to because I read parts of the

dictionary definition to you about the appearance of an attorney and the duty of the

court recorder to put it in the docket. The docket is the list of actions that are done

within a court action. The complaint itself, the answer to the complaint, the motionto dismiss, all those different functions that go on within a complaint, notices that

are written into it, theyre all docketed in this sheet called the docking sheet or a

docket sheet depending upon what court and what name they have for it.

*************************************We need to object every time an attorney goes into court and the docket sheet shows

that they have not entered their appearance on the docket sheet with an official

entry that everything that theyre doing is a sham pleading and that they should be

sanctioned for this or at least ordered by the court to put the notice into the record

that they are the attorney for the attorney for the party before they proceed any

further. That will stop the proceeding for that day.

********************************************The reason why lawyers dont write affidavits is because the lawyer cant. They

dont have first-hand knowledge. They cannot testify because they werent there.

*******************************Sometimes theyll get an affidavit signed by somebody they call a robo signer,

somebody who signs hundreds and hundreds of these affidavits for the benefits of

the lawyers that theyre not the real party in interest. Theyre not real either and

that can be proven. All you have to do is object to that affidavit because you have no

proof from this party that they actually work for such-and-such a bank or such-

and-such a government agency or whatever. You have no proof given within the

affidavit and you have no proof that this individual was there at the time of the

incident or the transaction and really does have first-hand knowledge because they

didnt express that in the affidavitand they dont. And thats how you object to

their affidavits and that proves that theyre just a robo-signer, theyre not the real

party.

***************************************


7/25

Theyll always say that we need the information from you.The burden of proof isupon the complaining party, not upon the defendant. That, again, is a violation of

due process.

****************************************

You didnt give me enough knowledge or information about what youre talking

about to give you a responsive answer.***************************************How can there possibly be a credit card when the law forbids the banks to lend

credit?

**************************************

Dont give them the facts that they want. Dont give them the answers to creates

facts or even the appearance of facts that they want. The burden of evidence

according to the law is upon the complaining party, not upon the defendant.

The defendant doesnt have to produce or admit to anything.

***************************

Their own paperwork is your evidence to prove their dishonest act, have a copy of

the statute, for instance, that shows what they were supposed to do which theydidnt do or a copy of the rule that shows what they were supposed to do that they

didnt donot that complicated for any of us to do.

****************************************But the fact is, an affidavit has to state that I have personal knowledge because I

was there and I saw it take place. I am familiar with the transactionI experienced

it. I was there and saw the incident. What ever we are saying, it has to be truthful

that we were there and we saw it happen. We know the facts, not to the best of my

knowledge and belief because that indicates that I wasnt there {hearsay?} which

means that it is a phony affidavit and it cant be used as evidence.

**************************************************

The state of some name is the government.We have been so misled into thinking that we live in the state of something but when

in fact the only time youre in the state of something is when youre employed as an

officer or an employee of the state government or any of its political subdivisions.

***************************************

Look it up in the states laws. Every state has laws on the procedure of how theyre

supposed to do things, even the rules of filing a complaint. They can be found and

those rules require things that are commonly left out of complaints.

***************************************The whole basis of appeal is based on whether or not due process was met and

whether the judge erred in the due process.

****************************Resident means located at, an agent of or associated with the state government when

you admit to being a resident of the state. When they make a claim that youre a

resident of the state you can rebut that claim by an affidavit stating that you are not

a resident of the state.


8/25

You are not employed by the government and if they want to claim that you are all

they have to do is come up with payroll records to prove it.

Caution: The Department of Education is an agency of the State.

*****************************What land is in the State of Blank? Certainly not your private land that you bought

the land that the state bought to build state office buildings or state agencieswould be in the State of Blank, not your private land. That law does not apply to

private land and it cannot. The law is not allowed by the constitutional mandates to

extend any of its law and its activities of taxation and regulation to private property.

So it cannot extend to your private land and cannot require your private land to be

recorded. But some lawyer told you it had to be because he lies and you didnt

question it, you let it happen and its recorded. If you want to get out of the private

property tax or the property tax on private propertyI should have said that more

correctlyyou have to get that deed back out of their records, out of their recording

to that land. The same thing applies to birth certificates. The only thing that the law

related to births can apply to its corporations. It cannot apply to a natural child

birth of people because the government is a corporation and the only thing acorporation can do is deal with other corporations and it can even extend the

authority of operating as a corporation to individuals who request such an authority

from the state. And on the date that that requested corporation is authorized that

corporation is born and that birth has to be recorded in the states records as a

corporation. A natural child from natural people does not fall under that statute.

The wording does not cover people and any lawyer that will tell you that it does is

lying to you.

********************************Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, EasternTime. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesdays

number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in onWednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?

masterId=41875&cmd=tc

Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the followingwebsite:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruthHoward approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting

to Howard.

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to GeminiResearch rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of

bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs.

*********************Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruthhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth


9/25

***********************************************************************************************************

For reference:Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd )**********

Project for all:Howard needs information on how to write a complaint for breach of the trust.

Hit the libraries!He would appreciate any research help.

*****************************************************Start

*****************************************************

{01:17:42.566}

[Howard] and they brought up the subject of relevant evidence. And I got the books that I have here,Moores Federal Practice RulesPamphlet, Federal Rules of Evidence book. These books are what they call annotated.The rule takes up two-thirds of one page and then the explanation of it takes up frompage 22 page 29 just explaining what they mean by whats on the two-thirds of that onepage. This is very helpful. They state court cases to back up the use and application ofrules, what they mean in these books for the Rules of Civil Procedure, the Rules ofCriminal Procedure and the Rules of Evidence. But that question they asked in that pre-trial hearing that was going on the other morning in that Florida caseTrevon Martin Ithink was the name of the young boy that was murdered, killed, whatever, and I forgetthe name the guy theyre accusing of itGeorge Zimmerman. They mentioned this stuffabout relevancy of evidence. And I thought, now, they didnt explain what they mean bythat. Im sure the judge knows or I hope the judge knows but then again Im not too surethat these judges know very much. Theyre programmed to do a certain function in atraining program that they go to. Just how much they know even about their own rules isalways questionable. As a matter of fact a friend of mine out in Ohio was in court arguingwith some stupid lawyer and he quoted the rule and the lawyer commented that thatsutterly ridiculous, hes an idiot, he doesnt know what hes talking about. Well, our friendhad a copy of it with him. Your honor, may I hand this to you? Yes So he handed it tohim. The judge read it. The judge said, Mr. Attorney, it says exactly what he said.Apparently, youre the idiot that doesnt know what it means. Now that just shows youthat the judge didnt know either until he read it, doesnt it?Rule 104 of the Rules of Evidence are called preliminary questions. Now, it has nothingto do with the questions you ask. It has to do with how the questions can be presented.Its about admissibility of evidence and what can be admitted to the court and acceptedby the court. And I can tell you that ninety-nine percent of the judges ignore this rule.Maybe its because nobody brings up what its supposed to do.


10/25

But Subsection Bits Rule 104 of Rules of Evidence, Preliminary Questions,Subsection B, Relevancy.Relevancy is conditioned on facts. When the relevancy ofevidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of facts the court shall admit it

upon or subject to the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the

fulfillment of the condition of facts.

Now, thats lawyer talk. It does sort of leave you hanging a little bit but it doesnt really ifyou really think about it. Basically what it said was the evidence has to be relevant to thefactsthe conditions that exist, the facts. Well, what facts do they have in any case atall? Im not going to get into the one down there in Florida thats going on with Mr.Zimmerman because I havent heard enough of what facts they may have. All we know isthat the young boy is dead. We dont know what the real facts are because all thetestimony isnt available and hasnt come out yet. But lets just take something as silly asa credit card case. In order to present any kind of documentation as evidence that youowe a credit card debt. The first thing they have to do is show that you have some kind ofan agreement in writing that is signed by you. Now, remember, a signature can be handwritten, it can be hand lettered, it can be type written. It can even be just an X if you

dont know how to write. So the law allows a signature to be quite broad. You could haveapplied for this credit card on-line because youre some stupid computer moron and dontknow any better than to stick all your personal information on a computer and theres lotsof people in that position in life and you might let your friends that youre aware not todo those kinds of things know that they should be aware not to do those kinds of thingsbecause some of you are intelligent enough to know it but anyway for those who arentyou should never have done anything like that but if you did the type-written nameconstitutes a signature but they have to produce this agreement in order to show the factthat you are involved in an agreement with the credit card company. They never do. Theynever do and I think most people know why. Its been discussed many time on theseprograms especially with us that what we found out is that they deposit the signedinstrument that you give them and thats what creates the money because if you look intothe code, the commerce code, the commerce codes says that money is a signature. Itdoesnt say that money is gold. It doesnt say that money is silver. It doesnt say thatmoney is green paper. It says that money is a signature. So your signature on thisdocument in that they call an application for the credit is the way they create the moneyby depositing your application. Well, once its deposited its in the banks records. Itcant be pulled out otherwise its un-deposited and now they have to put the moneyback. They cant take it out because then the money is unsupported so they have to putthe money back in some way or another in order to equal zero and balance out theaccount so they dont do this. The bank is holding on to that instrument so its not therefor them to produce in the court in order to prove that there is a factual relationshipbetween an individual like yourself and the credit card company or the bank. Am I clearhere with this? Do you comprehend what Im saying, that you produce the facts? Thatwould establish the facts that there is an agreement and perhaps youve breached theagreement. Well, other facts presented may prove that you breached the agreement. Butthey can start trying to prove that youve breached the agreement until they prove thatthere is an agreement because one fact builds upon another fact and no evidence can bepresented unless its relevant to the conditions of the facts. Isnt that interesting? Now, inBlacks Law Dictionaryvery interesting read by the wayunder the letter F is the


11/25

word, fact. Its defined as being a thing done, an action performed or an incidenttranspiring, an event or a circumstance, an actual occurrence. Notice thatnot fictionalbull crap, not patriotic fictional bull crap either much less lawyer fictional bull crapanactual occurrencean actual happening in time or space or an event, mental or physicalthat which has taken place. These little short statements are the beginning of the

definition of the word, fact. In other words not a presumption because a presumption isnot something that has taken place. It is not something that is an actual occurrence. It isnot factual then. It is strictly an unsupported presumption. Well, if its an unsupportedpresumption its not supported by fact. Then its not permissible in a court case much lessis any pretend evidence to back it up such as a computer printout. A computer printoutcan be produced by any idiot with fingers and a small brain and a computer. Anythingcan be produced out of that computer but its not provable, is it? And its probably notrelevant to the facts. So it cannot be produced. But it is, this is done all the time in courtcases. It is produced to the court or presented to the court as evidence. The court allows itdespite the fact that its not relevant. And you know why? Because lawyers all worktogether to deceive the people, to take advantage of the people, to use the courts to take

advantage of the people and the people dont know these things. The people dont knowthe difference between fiction and reality. The lawyers do. They create the fiction.Almost everything to do with law is fictional, almost everything, not quite. There are afew real things but most are fictional that they use.Anyway, this definition goes on to say, a fact is either a state of things that is in existenceor a motion that is an eventin other words, a happening, the quality of being actual. Afact has to have the quality of being real, of being actual, actual existence or occurrence.It just keeps saying the same thing over and over again. Thats only the first paragraph.The next paragraph is subheading of evidence, a circumstance, event or occurrence as itactual takes or took place. A physical object of appearance as it usually exists or existed.When were done here Im going to give you a couple of examples of their fictional bullcrap that they use that if you would object and explain that it is not factual, its not real,its not actual that you would shut down a lot of this stuff that they put in there asevidence and get away with because understanding that its not relevant under the rules ofevidence and bringing that up to the court, the court would have to agree with youaccording to their rules. Their rules can be found, by the way, in the code books for eachof the states for the state courts and in the United States Code Books for the United Statescourts. There are rule books. Title 28 is civil, Title 18 is criminal and the rules are inthose books and photocopies can be made and taken into the courts. Each state has itsown set of rule books in some way or another that allow it to proceed with court actionsunder certain specific rules and guidelines and they can be found in the basement of thecourthousetheres a library. And the librarian if you have a case going on will gladlyhelp you. Theyre usually very nice people.Anyway, it goes on to say that a fact is an actual, an absolute reality as distinguishedfrom a mere supposition or opinion, the truth as distinguished from a fiction or error. Afact means reality. A fact means reality of events or things, the actual occurrence orexistence of which is to be determined by evidence. In order to prove the facts there hasto be evidence but the evidence has to be relevant to the facts. If the fact isnt there andisnt presented then how can there be any evidence? But like I said, theyll make thesecomputer printouts, theyll present them, theyll get it accepted by the court because you


12/25

and I didnt know enough to object. And Im just learning and I apologize for being solong and so stupid getting around to this because people need help. And I know wevelost many a case because we didnt handle it correctly because were still learning. Andits a shame that we have to take so much time and effort to learn.But anyway, this goes on to say, under rules of civil procedure Rule 41 (b) providing for

motions for dismissal at the close of the plaintiffs evidence in a non-jury case ongrounds that upon the facts and the law plaintiff has shown no right to relief and the factsreferred to are the prima facie facts shown by plaintiffs evidence viewed in the mostfavorable to him then hes failed. This is exactly what Dave was trying to tell you aboutthe Rule 12(b)(1) , (2) and (3) and how they fit together to prove a 12(b)(6) that theyfailed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. It fits right into it. They cannotcome up with a bunch of allegations that are unsupported by substantial facts. But this iswhat they do all the time. I was speeding so some cop wrote me a ticket. They tell me tobe in court. What the hell for? All Ive got is a summons to be in court. They didnt giveme a complaint. The complaint wasnt signed by an attorney. The summons is signed bythe cop but theres no complaint signed by an attorney. The rules of procedure require

that a complaint be served along with a summons. Rule 11 requires that it be signed by anattorney. If its not signed by an attorney its a sham pleading and should be struck fromthe record of the court. They get away with doing this stuff and were not stopping themshame on us. But thats just a traffic case. That think about many of the cases that wehave been involved in that some little idiot from the government called a codeenforcement officer comes around and tells you, you got to paint your rain spoutsbecause theyre rusty looking. If you dont youre going to be fined. Well, you dont do itbecause you dont have the money to buy the paint. You dont have the time or the abilityto get up there and do the painting. If you dont do it within the ten days he gave youmaybe you could have done it within the next six months but you didnt do it in the tendays he gave you so he poses this ticket to come to court and be finedsame kind ofcircumstance. There is no complaint, just a summons. Its like a traffic ticket. A lot ofthese complaints that are signed by lawyers are nothing but a bunch of allegations such ascredit card collection cases, just a bunch of allegations with no actual facts backing themup, no fact that says there was an agreement that I was the party that was responsible forthe performance or I was the party that was responsible for specific performance. Specificperformance really is a commercial term applying to commercial products, not applyingto anything that I do in life because Im not a provider of commercial products. I didntmake them. I didnt provide them. How can these complaints be worded against me? Butthey do this all the time to the people. Lawyers do it and they get away with it becausethe people dont know enough to bring these kinds of arguments up and show that, look,none of these allegations have any facts. There are no facts supported here by any type ofdocumentation of proof that any such thing existed. (01:39:34.821} So there is no reasonto go any further and theres no reason for me to consent to go any further in thisproceeding so I do not consent to this proceeding. Now, were right back to somethingthat Howard Griswolds been teaching since 1994I do not consent. And along comessome moron in life and tells people to accept for value. Ive told you not to consent.When you accept you consent. And then you accept for value? There is nothing in lawthat justifies that. That was done to get a lot of people in trouble and it sure didjustanother one of these misleading misdirecting idiotic things that has been passed around


13/25

this country and people fall for it because they dont go bother to look in the law books.Well, I did and there is nothing there to justify that as a legal existence at all but there is away in commerce to justify it and Ive explained this before. I happen to like 66Thunderbirds, 1966 T-bird, they were beautiful automobiles. Powerfulas a matter offact if it was the convertible you cant use it the same way but if it was the hardtop you

can mount a howitzer up on the roof and use the damn thing for a tank. Thats how wellthey were builtfabulous automobiles. You got one for sale? You offer it to me for areasonable price; I will accept your offer for value and pay you the damned value becauseI agreed to do it by accepting your offer. But I cant accept your offer for value and tellyou to pay the offer and give me the car. Thats exactly what stupid people were trying todo with the government, accept their offer and tell the government to pay their own offer.No, it doesnt work that way. Anyway, this is the world of fiction and people dontunderstand it. Thats why they get in so much trouble listening to stupid stuff like thisthat comes out. They dont understand reality, they dont understand fiction and theyretrying to mix their fictional religious world, their fictional educational world with thereality of their life and the two dont mix. You cant mix fiction and reality together and

think youre going to come out of the mix unharmed.Anyway, the definition goes on, it says, facts and law are distinguished. Now, listenclose. Fact is very frequently used in opposition or contrast to law, not the same thing.Thus questions of fact are for a jury and questions of law are for the court. The court issupposed to explain the law clearly. It rarely ever does that but its supposed to do that.The jury is supposed to determine whether the facts fit what the law says. I doubt thatvery seriously. The people dont know the difference between fact and fiction so how canthey figure out what the facts are? They really dont know the difference. Education hasled us down the rosy pipeline of following all the fictional bull crap of government so wethink that were doing the right thing and were living in a world of fiction.Anyway, it goes on to say that a question of law for the court is a question of fraud in factwhich consists in an actual intention to defraud carried into effect while fraud input bylaw it arises from a persons conduct. It is necessary in its necessary relation andconsequences. Thats how the law would be applied. A fact as distinguished from the lawmay be taken as that out of which the point of law arisesin other words, the storytheguy walks into the store, he pulled out a gun, he pointed it at the owner, he made theowner take the money out of the cash drawer and give it to him and he ran out the doorwith the money. Now, these are the facts of what happened. How does that fit the law?The law says that there is a criminal penalty of as much as three years in jail for armedrobbery. Armed robber consists of using a weapon, threatening an individual with thatweapon while taking something of value from that individual. Now, did the facts I justexplained fit what the law said? I think they did. That person is guilty. Now its up to thejudge to determine just how much time in jail he should get out of that up to the threeyears that he could possibly get. The facts are that he violated that law. That is a criminalcode law and the facts match what the law says. He used a firearm to threaten anindividual and took something of value from the individual and took his money and ran.The facts fit, dont they? So, a fact as distinguished from the law may be taken as that outof which the point of law arises, that which is asserted to be or not to be and is to bepresumed or proved to be or not to be for the purpose of supplying or refusing to supplythe rule of law. The court has that job of supplying or refusing to supply the rule of law to


14/25

the facts. You have to force the facts to be brought out and proven. Now, how would youdo that? Well, you cant very well have a cop who wasnt there and didnt see a damnedthing happen, who arrived on the scene twenty minutes later or further, more time thanthat sometimes and was told that this guy that everybody in the neighborhood knowsnamed Johnny, the robber, was here with a gun and he robbed the owner. Now, the cop

has a duty to go and arrest this guy. The cop has a duty to come into court but the copcannot testify to what happened at the robbery. He wasnt there. If they cant get theowner of the store who got robbed to come in and testify then they dont have anyevidence to support their claim of facts because they dont have any facts to prove theirpoint in the first place, even make their point. So you see how technical some of this stuffis? It really isnt as easy as it is made to sound by lawyers and maybe thats the mainreason we have so much trouble with law in this country. The cops and the lawyers andthe sheriffs who are supposed to be enforcing the law take too damned many short cuts.They leave out things that they are supposed to do and the judges let them get away withit.Anyway, one last statement here that would sum this up and separate the understanding a

little bit for you is that law is a principle. Now, hopefully, we understand that. It isagainst the law to rob somebody. That is a principle that were all supposed to live by.Personally, I dont rob people. I believe in that principle. I live by that principle and if Icatch somebody robbing somebody that person is going to be in trouble right then andthere. Theyre going to confront me and theyre going to have a lot of difficulty. I dontlike people like that and I let them know it and I have a way of doing it which is just ascharming as I can possibly be until I get close enough to hit them the right way and theyhit the floor. I love charming people, its very easy to do. But I believe in thoseprinciples. I stand behind those principles. I am in favor of this government. I am in favorof the principles of law of this government. I am not in favor of the terrible and I meanterrible enactment of this governments principles by the people that are in it, thecorruption of those principles by the people that are in it. Thats what Im not in favor of.Im in favor of this government 100% all the way as it was supposed to be but not theway it is. It is time to get rid of it because it is so corrupted, because its principles are notbeing applied at all. What they call the rules of law are being used to extort from theAmerican people as much money and property and wealth and they possibly can to putinto their own pockets. Thats definitely corruptionthats not what theyre there for.But anyway, the principles of law are the law. A fact is an event. Now, try to keep that inmind. Rememberwell, some of you might not be old enough to rememberbut back inthe fifties and sixties and I think all the way up into seventies there was a televisionprogram that came on sometime around dinner time in the evening. It was a family typeshow. It was called Dragnet. It was all about Sgt. Friday (Webb) and him investigatingand bringing criminals to justice into courts. And every time Sgt. Friday went out toquestion somebody about an occurrence, an incident, that has taken place they wouldstart to give him some kind of an answer and he would stop them and say, no, no, wait aminute, youre getting off point, the facts, maam, just the facts. That show was trying toteach the people. I dont think it ever got through to the people. I think education hadruined the minds of the people that things like that just didnt penetrate the people.Maybe a few picked up on it but most it went right over their head. Just the facts,maam, what is the story of the event? whatever the event might be, what is the factual


15/25

story, what is the real occurrence, not who struck John, not how much you dont likesomething, how much you think something isnt being done the correct way, none of thatis factual. What are the facts? Is there an agreement? Almost, and Im telling you, this isfactual, almost everything in life stems from an agreement of some kind. Where is theagreement? An agreement in the dictionary is defined as a contract. A contract in the

dictionary is defined as an agreement. So, an agreement and a contract are one and thesame thing. So refer to it as a contract or an agreement. Where is it? Its like that sillyquestion of one of the ads on television for years, wheres the beef, wheres the meatbehind this? Where is the contract or agreement that brought me into this situation?Well, if there isnt any contract of agreement we dont have any facts to base anythingon. This case must be dismissed. They failed to state a claim upon which relief can begranted. They failed to state any factual occurrence, any real actual anything. A law is aprinciple spelled out in the books and a fact is a story of the event. Law is conceived bythe mind of man. That doesnt mean that its factual at all. Its just a principle laid downby the mind of man. The law is conceived but fact is actual. Again, it says the same thing.Law is a rule of duty. That duty is what is conceived by man as what how man should

live. It is the principles upon which man has set up a way of life. Thats not the facts,though, is it? The facts are actual occurrences. A fact is that which has been according toor in contravention of the rule of law, the actual event. This case down in Florida, whatevidence do they have of the actual event other than the fact that the young boy is dead?George Zimmerman is claiming it was self defense, the boy was attacking him. The Stateis trying to claim that he murdered him because he doesnt like black people. Now, theState would come up with that kind of a The State loves to create those kinds ofcontroversies. Does the State have any evidence that is relevant to a fact that establishedwhat theyre claiming? Im afraid, people, theyre not going to be able to show that.They may because I havent heard any of these details and I dont have time to just sitand listen to that thing. Its going to go on day after day after day after day even for thenext month or two Ill bet you. I dont have time for that but therell be summaries by thenews media and thats good enough to tell me enough and eventually Ill be able to makea conclusion from those summaries that, yeah, its just what I thought. They didnt haveany evidence to prove their claim and thats the way its probably going to come outbecause they cant prove it.The fact is, most of this stuff that these lawyers bring you and I into court on they cantprove it but you know how they get the conviction on us?They get us on the stand and get us to admit that weve been cooperating with theirfictional bull crap. Thats how they get the evidence presented to the court by questioningyou and I. Their question could be anything. Your answer should be: already told you Idont consent to this proceeding. They havent established any facts. Until they establisha fact theres nothing I can answer. I do not consent to this proceeding. Where are thefacts? They stated them in the complaint, the judge will say. Well, thats a bunch ofallegations. Theres nothing substantiating those allegations as actual facts. Wheres theactual facts? Where is the agreement? Wheres the beef? Its not there. They never put itthere. Everything is done in these courts with allegations. As a matter fact we filed acourt case, somebody that had something going on and I took a real interest in what theywere doing because they were going to file a lawsuit against the government personnelfor what the government personnel did wrong. Well I helped them and they wrote up


16/25

most of the complaints, sent it to me, I checked it over, I made a few comments aboutlegal wording that I thought they could do better with. And then I sent them a little noteand I said, now, what you want to do is you want to go to the library and look up asmuch case law as you can find to substantiate or prove your claim here that its within thelaw. And then what you want to do is you want to find every document that this

government person created and sent to you that establishes what they did and make themexhibit #1, exhibit #2, exhibit #3 and refer to them within the context of the complaintthat this is what happened, see exhibit #1. This is what happened, see exhibit #2. Andthen create this brief in support showing what the case law shows supporting what yourcomplaint is. Well, he did itsurprised the dickens out of me. Very few people have theinitiative to go that far to do any kind of work on their own. They want somebody like meto do it all for them. Well, I dont have time to do it all for every one of youits utterlyimpossible. Ive sort of worn myself out in life doing as much as I have done putting allthis together. My health is failing me and its because its the stress I put myself under togo this far in life for as many years as Ive been doing it. So, Im not available to write itfor you. But he wrote it and he followed my directions and he put it all together with

documentation as exhibits supporting what he said in the allegations and the complaintsand with a brief in support citing the case law that just absolutely what he found justabsolutely verified everything he said in his complaintentirely wrongly done by thisgovernment individual. Needless to say this government individual had a lawyer and itturned out to be the states attorney general and we argued that he was supposed toprotect the American people from the government. And he argued back that its his job toprotect the government from the American people. But then he cried to the court and Imean he cried real tears. You could see the tear drops on his motions that we cant dothis. We cant support the complaint with any kind of facts or evidence because then theycant use all those motions. He really cried. Well, the court told him he had to answer.But he admitted he couldnt make a motion to dismiss because there were too many facts,too much evidence supporting the facts. He couldnt make up a motion to dismiss. Hecouldnt drag the thing out with silly little motions. He had to actually answer and theonly way he could answer was to admit and ask for leniency from the court and he didntwant to do that. So, see what we did by doing it the old fashioned way. We boxed him in.But this is what lawyers never do. They cant make enough money doing itstraightforward like that. They have to be able to do all these motions and all thisdiscovery and then have hearings and get you on the stand and ask you questions andthen do more discovery and then make more motions. Thats how they make their money.Well, thats not what the system was originally intended to do and its very evident byreading a definition like this definition of the word, fact, whats supposed to be. Not thesewild allegations that amount to nothing with no substantiation of any kind behind theallegations but actual facts and then the presentment of evidence. This Florida caseapparently has no evidence, circumstantial. One of the things that were mentioned here inthis definition was opinion. A fact is an absolute, its a reality as distinguished from meresupposition or opinion. It is the opinion of the state that Mr. Zimmerman murdered thisboy on purpose. Thats not a fact, is it? Now, how are they going to come up with anyrelevant evidence when they dont have a fact? This is going to be a long drawn out casebecause thats the kind of things they do but they dont have any evidence to proveanything. They dont have any facts other than the boy is dead which Im telling you is


17/25

shameful. I would venture a guess that something different should have been done but itshard to say. We dont know what the boys conduct was. There werent any witnesses.

[Dave] Can I offer something, Howard?

[Howard] Yeah, go ahead.

[Dave] Look up US Code, Title 31, Section 285.12. Thats where the law says bankshave to turn you signature over to the treasury. Thats what all this securitization is basedon, US Code, Title 31, Section 285.12. I accidentally heard this on a conference call byEddie Craig who had his pal who is an attorney, Doug Rhodes, an attorney, mention that.And I wasnt sure I heard correctly so I called in and asked him to please repeat the titleand section number so I could get it accurately and he did, he repeated this Title 31,Section 285.12. So now its on the archives on the conference call. But you got to go toRule of Law Radio.com to look up the archive, I guess or Logos Radio Network archiveto get that particular show. Anyway this Title 31, Section 285.12 is where it actually says

in print that the government has to take these documents and signatures and turn themover to the Treasury. All these banks, thats what theyre doing. But look it up and letscheck the wording and be sure to do it. He says is thats what it does say.

[Howard] I just heard recently in line with the same kind of evidence thats coming outabout things of that nature that I think it was Rutgers University which is a law school.

[Dave] Its up in New Jersey.

[Howard] Yeahhas a law review article on the capital letter spelling of names statingthat a capital spelling has no significance whatsoever. They just hope that youll come inand represent that claim but it has no real significance to start with because there isnt anyreal person by that name. Theres also a court case where this has been to court finally.One of the higher courts has made a determination that there is no significance to thecapital letter spelling of a name to represent anything or anybody. Its all fiction. Andthats just one thing and then. We just had a very interesting incident. I have commentedsince the year 2000 that with our secured interest that we do for peoplewe have adocument where we assign any debt that was caused by government upon you, anyexpense that government imposes upon you has to be reimbursed under the FifthAmendment of the US Constitution and some language that is in the state constitutionsthat says, government cannot take private property for public use without justcompensation. They have to compensate you in some way or another for any expense thatgovernment causes you. So if they give you a traffic ticket for $20 they have to pay you$20 in order to collect the $20 otherwise its a taking of private property, which would beyour money, your labor that made that money, for public use without just compensation.So when we figured all this out with this secured interest that we did we figured out thatwe could assign an interest in a particular account that government has under your socialsecurity number. It is not the social security accountdont go confusing this. Thats adifferent account. This is an account under, believe it or not the research showed us, thatit was under the Ship Mortgage Act that can be found in Title 46, the Shipping Code.


18/25

And they consider all the American people to be citizens of the United States and citizensof the United States are vessels of the United States and as a vessel youre a ship and theycan make a mortgage to build and maintain your ship, just like you make a mortgage tobuy a house. So they make this mortgage called a ship mortgage for vessels of the UnitedStates which is citizens of the United States which means all us, the American people so

they put us in this category. They create a bond but its not a bottomry bondno, thatssomething else. That has to do with cargo and were not the cargowe are the ship.

[Dave] The vessel in commerce.

[Howard] Were a vessel in commerce, thats right. So we have made up this documentthat we call a partial assignment of interest in the account, so-and-so capital letter spelledname under such-and-such a social security number account and there is a number infront of that that we looked up that is identifier number for the Federal Reserve Bank ofNew York which happens to be according to Congress law back in 1947, I believe itwas, now the Treasury of the United States. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is

the United States Treasury. They gave away the authority of government to have its owntreasury in that act that was done, I think it was back in 1947. We found all this over theyears researching when we started putting these pieces together and we came up with thisassignment. Now, there have been numerous bogus bull shit things put out around in thepatriot community writing promissory notes to pay debts, writing a bond, a silver bond,in some cases, or any kind of a bond to pay debt. What was the thing thatit was a bankfunctionI forget the name of it. It was real popular for a while. This was just thrown allover the place. Everybody jumped on it and was talking about itjust write this bankfunction up and give it to them to pay the debt. Well, if its a bank function you cant doit unless the bank agrees to it.

[Dave] It was a bankers acceptance.

[Howard] Yeah, something like thatyeah. That was one of them. And then there wasanother one too by a different term but it was similar to bankers acceptance too thatpeople were throwing aroundall kinds of stupid things. And people have been going tojail right and left for doing these things. People have been getting themselves in trouble,been losing property because they just come and take stuff from you when you do thesekinds of things because you dishonored their claim. And whenever you dishonor a claimthey can set the law aside and go immediately to collection under the law of dishonorwhich they did and people lost. But back in 1999 we developed this security interestdocument and very early, along about March in the year 2000, we have developed thisdocument that we called an assignment of partial interest in the account to pay the debtthat was claimed. But now, we told people that this is not to be used to buy a new stereoset, to buy a new automobile, to pay your alimony. This is used only for things thatgovernment caused you an expense like medical. Medical is all governmental expenseand if you dont believe that why do you thinkwell, its not quite allwhy do youthink the government pays 80% on Medicare of your expenses and you pay 20%? Thereason is government regulations caused 80% of the medical bills to be as high as it is.The other 20% is what the legitimate price should be, thats whats left for you to pay.


19/25

The government knows what theyre doing. Its amazing how tricky they do it though.But anyway, any kind of fines, fees and taxes that are applied to anyone other thangovernment officials and people who have asked the government for a particularprivilege to have a license from government to do certain things like sell alcohol orpromote and sell drugs or manufacture and sell firearms. And believe it or not firearms

are not what you think they are. A firearm is a sawed off shotgun. Thats almost the limitof what a firearm is and some explosives such as gun powder. Gun powder itself comesunder firearms. The bullet that has gunpowder in it does not come under firearms. Andmost guns, hand guns, and rifles, long rifles, and regular shotguns do not come underfirearms. The only thing that does is a sawed off shotgun. It has to be sawed off less thaneighteen inches then it becomes whats known as a firearm and you need a license to sellthose kinds of things. Well, that is certainly misused because they make you think youneed the license to sell any kinds of guns at all and dont explain that the only one thatyoure licensed to sell is the ones that are sawed off with a shorter barrel. That shortbarrel shotgun is a very deadly weapon. It is more deadly than any 357 magnum pistol.

[Dave] Some people can discharge court judgments using that assignment of partialinterest.

[Howard] Weve used it on all kinds of things. And I have bragged about it many times.All these other things, people are getting in trouble, theyre going to jail for using thesethings. Nobody that weve done an assignment for has been bothered by lawenforcement. That is from 2000 all the way up until last week, all those years nobody hasbeen bothered by law enforcement about these assignments. {02:19:25.742} Finally somefruitcake cop or maybe it was the fruitcake judge in the traffic court in Pennsylvania, oneof the two fruitcakes called the FBI and reported to the FBI that they had received aphony monetary document from somebody related to a traffic ticket and wanted the FBIto investigate it. The FBI came and got a copy of it I guess and they read it and they hadno idea what the hell they were looking at because they know nothing about that kind ofstuff. They have no training in it. So they went to the guy who had written the assignmentwith his name on it and questioned him. Now, this really surprised the hell out of me. Im70 years old now and my memory is failing me. I forget some of the most importantdamned things like the names of things and specifics of things and itll come back to melater but by golly when I needed it, it just does not come to mind real quick and Im only70 years old. This gentleman that was approached by the FBI is 90 years old. He justturned 90. Now, I would think that he would be having some memory difficulties at 90years of age. By golly, he was as sharp as tack. He explained this thing thoroughly to theFBI and they wrote him a document stating that his document was absolutely within thelimits of the law. There was no criminal violation in what he had doneamazing that atthat age his ability to explain it was that sharp and that clear that by the time he was donenow, I dont know whether they did that immediately or if they went and checked withtheir lawyers and told the lawyers what they found out from him but whatever. Theyfinally acknowledged to him that there was no wrong doing in this document called anassignment of partial interest.

[Dave] Did you get a copy of that guys letter?


20/25


21/25

[Howard] Exactly what it isyes.

[Dave] Its the render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. You just turning thatback around against them and handed them so much of Caesars own FRNs, out of that

account. They created it. Now they can pay their own phony claim of debt with a phonyclaim of money. Well, see, whats what that account was established for. This screwyidea of a ship mortgage against our body as though it were a vessel in commerce, thatsall fictional but it was done to establish a fund to pay the just compensation that they arerequired to pay for the property that theyre taking and the value of life and everythingelse theyre taking from us. Thats what its there for. So we just delved into it with theassignment to pay whatever expense government is causing us and just have itreimbursed. But see, thats all from research of how the law works. An assignment isactually all spelled out in the commercial code. All these other things that people weretalking about doing, they arent spelled out in the commercial code as to how they can beapplied, how they can be used. Thats why people got in trouble with them because the

law doesnt back up the use of them the way they were promoted to be used. But theassignment according to the law, anybody can assign anything to anybody else. Well, ifthey owe us compensation we can assign the debt back to them for compensation. Verysimple, isnt it? Well, even though finally now somebody has been bothered by lawenforcement to investigate it, law enforcement has backed off and said that there was nowrongdoing. So, again, our assignment is in accordance with what the law allows you todo. It is not patriot bull crap like acceptance for value.

[Dave] Looking at my Blacks Law Dictionary finally. Im looking up bankacceptance, it says a draft drawn on and accepted by the bank.

[Howard] Rightthrough the bank to be functional. If you dont put it through thebank then its actually defrauding the bank.

[Dave] Here it is, I found the other one also in Blacks 5th, its on the next page. Itpays to read both pages, huh? Bankers acceptance, a bill of exchange draft payable atmaturity that is drawn by a creditor against his or her debtor. Bankers acceptances areshort term credit instruments most commonly used by personsthats all capital letterfictitious name, corporate fiction persons subjectscommonly used by persons or firmsengaged in international trade. They are comparable to short term government securities(for example, treasury bills ) and may be sold on the open market at a discount.

[Howard] Bills of Exchange, that was another thing that was very popular. Butnotice that thats a bankers acceptance. That has to go through the bank to be legitimate.Being in the construction business so much of my life I have dealt in Bills of Exchangemany, many times. I gave my contract to do a particular construction job over to the bankto hold and they gave me money against it. That was a Bill of Exchange. They gave methe money in exchange for the contract. They were able to collect on the contract at theend of the contract and in the interim I got X number of dollars but I never got the entireamount of the contract because they charged me for lending me the money in advance


22/25

that might have been 10 percent. So, if I had a $1000 contract, 10 percent of $1000 is$100they charged me $100 but they let me have $900 worth of contract. Thats justsimple little bit of round figures. Thats not what they were. We were dealing incontracts, sometimes theyre up in the millionsits a little bit more complicated and alittle bit more expensive too. But in order to have the money to handle the contract that

big I had to deal through the banks and I dealt in a thing called ait was a Bill ofExchange in actualitytrying to remember what they did call it. It was a Bill ofExchange in actuality because they exchanged the money for the contract. They call it aconstruction loan.

[Dave] Construction draw schedule.

[Howard] They call it a construction loan.

[Dave] Draw schedule.

[Howard] They wouldnt make a construction loan without something to secure it.So that every Bill of Exchange of any kind has something to secure it. You cant justwrite a Bill of Exchange and send it somewhere with nothing set up to secure it and nobank transaction for it to go through and thats what people were doing and they weregoing to jail for it. Well, we didnt do that. We looked at what the law said and wecreated this assignment and like I said, nobody has been bothered until this little idiotjudge in the traffic court decided to harass this poor old fellow and call the FBI in. Butthe FBI has cleared it as being an absolute legitimate function within the law.

[Dave] Heres another one again in Blacks 5th edition Law Dictionary, page 12.Type of acceptance is a conditional acceptance, it is an engagement to pay the draft oraccepts the offer on the happening of a condition. A conditional acceptance is in effect astatement that the offeree is willing to enter into a bargain differing in some respects fromthat proposed in the original offer. The conditional acceptance is therefore itself a counteroffer. A different type of acceptance, not conditional, but expressan express acceptanceis an undertaking in direct and express terms, that means written to pay the bill, draft, etcan absolute acceptance then an implied acceptance is an undertaking to pay the draftinferred from acts of the drawee of a character, or acts of a character, which barelywarrant such an inference. In the case of a unilateral contract acceptance of an offer neednot be expressed (written) but may be shown by any words or acts indicating theofferees assent to the proposed bargain.

[Howard] But see, now, were back to the word, fact. His assent done in writingestablishes an event, doesnt it? An actso theres the facts.

[Dave] The acceptance is taking and receiving of anything in good part as if itwere a tacit agreement to a preceding act which might have been defeated or avoided ifsuch acceptance had not been made. The act of a person to whom a thing is offered ortendered by another whereby he receives the thing with the intentiontheres yourpurposeful availment againintention of retaining it, such intention being evidenced by a


23/25

sufficient act. {02:35:08.597}and they give a corporation,Etna Investment Corporationv. Chandler Landscape and Floral Company 227 MO Appeals, pg. 17, 50 also SW Rptr,2d, pg. 195 and 197. The exercise of power conferred by an offer, by performance ofsome act. That is the acceptance, the exercise of power conferred by an offer byperformance of some act. And then they give another case.and commercial paper.

Acceptance is the drawees signed engagement to honor the draft as presented. It must bewritten on the draft and may consist of his signature alone. It becomes operative whencompleted by delivery or notification, UCC, Section 3-410. Certification of a check isacceptance. UCC Section 3-411: A draft may be accepted although it has not been signedby the drawer or is otherwise incomplete or is overdue or has been dishonored, UCC 3-410 (2). See also Acceptor, bankers acceptance and honor. Then it goes into contracts.

[Howard] And when you look up honor youll be led to dishonor. And I justexplained when you dishonor by refusing to do something that you should have donecorrectly they have an immediate right to go to collection. And most of the stuff that thispatriot community does is an absolute dishonor and they have an immediate right to go to

collection. They can ignore anything and everything else that you do because youdishonored them.

[Dave] Thats what they base their Section 3-601, 602, 603, 604, 605 on, tenderoffered, tender refused, debt is discharged. 02:37:50.072 So once youve tendered thatoffer of the assignment of partial interest they have a choice of either credit the accountor refuse which is a dishonor in which case the debt is dischargedthey blew it. So theyhave a choice of either return the instrument or credit the account and theyve securitizedit already. Theyre not about to return your MSO on your automobile or return your bankcheck or your assignment of partial interest with your signature on there. Theyre notgoing to return that because thats the tender offer. The Code says once youre tendered ityou dont care whether they actually negotiated the instrument or not. Tender offered, ifthe tenders refused the debt is dischargedtheir own code says so. Section 3-602, 3, 4 &5.

[Howard] And 3-601, subsection 3 says that if an individual finds himself in aposition of having no right of recourse hes automatically discharged. Well, we have noright of recourse under this debtor-creditor law called commerce. So all debt isautomatically discharged, isnt it? And it has to be. Title 31, Section 5118 and 5119, Ibelieve it is. Title 31, Section 5118 and 5119 states that there can be no debt in any coinor currency of the United States. Under the word, Federal Reserve Note on the papermoney it says United States of America. So thats coin or currency of the United States.There can be no debt in it. In most cases lawyers bring these actions to collect the debt,not the individual who may have established the existence of a debt like a bank or ahospital or government agency that would fine you or something and create this claim ofa debt, a tax bill that would create a claim of a debt. The people who established thosekinds of things do not follow through and file these law suits. Theyre picked up bylawyers and filed by lawyers in the name of the original person who would be the creditorlisting you as the debtor but listing them as the plaintiff, not the lawyer. But the fact is inmost cases those people are not the ones who are filing the complaint. So theres no real


24/25

party in interest and there are no facts that can be sustained by any kind of evidence thatis relevant in those kinds of claims. Thats why almost claim that a lawyer writes can bethrown out of court. And really the best approach is this stuff weve been finding out andlearning and sending information around the country about Rule 11 and sham pleadingsbecause most everything that a lawyer does is a sham. Theres very little that is honest,

that is actual, that is factual and actual. Anyway, thank you, Dave. That was all good stuffbacking up what we were talking about and its all right there in the dictionary. Allpeople ever had to do when they heard about things like this, like accepted for value wasgo look up the definition of acceptance, bankers acceptance or bills of exchange. Allthey had to do is go look them up in a law dictionary and theyd have found out theyshould have stayed away from that kind of stuff. It had nothing to do with them but theydont look it up. They just follow whatever leader comes along thatll lead them in anydirection at all. Actually it is my consensus that when they got in trouble for doing it theydeserved exactly what happened to them because they didnt apply themselves. So please,people, learn to apply yourselves so you wont be deserving of what happens.

[Dave] Im looking in the Uniform Commercial Code in Section 3-603, what wasthat paragraph you mentioned?

[Howard] I said 601.

[Dave] Oh, 601ok.

[Howard] 601, Subsection 3.

[Dave] Isnt that interesting. That must be in the official comments. Of course,Ive got an old book. Maybe mine doesnt have that. This is the 2001 edition. Maybethats a new section. Its got A & B. This is under discharge and effect of discharge?

[Howard] Yeah.

[Dave] Yeah, A & B are there in the official comment. I wanted to be sure I wasin the correct section. Ill do some more

[Howard] 3-601.

[Dave] Yeah, thats the one Im looking at.

[Howard] Alright, theres subsection 1, subsection 2 and subsection 3.

[Dave] Well, theyve got Subsection A in parentheses and subsection small b inparentheses but there is not section c so I must have an old edition. Thank you, sorry Ijust wanted to know.

[Howard] What Im telling you I found inAnderson on the Uniform CommercialCodevery large series of books on the UCC. Am Jur on the UCC goes all the way back


25/25

in the 1970s. It was there then. Maybe they purposely left it out of that book because theydont want you to know about it.

[Dave] Could very well be true.

[Howard] Thats done with a lot of printingsthey leave things outthey leavestatutes out of the code books, the ones that they dont want you to know how to use.They leave them out. Once people start learning about the next time they print it theyleave that statute out because they want you to think that its been done away with. But inorder for it to be done away there has to be something under that statute number that saysrepealed and if it doesnt do that then the statute is still viable. Its just not there in thebook anymore on purpose.Hope weve learned something tonight. Hope you realize the difference between fictionaland reality and beginning to learn how to look for the real as opposed to the fiction andrealize that the fiction is usually not supportable by any kind of a story of facts ofsomething actually happening , a real occurrence. For instance, this claim that

everybodys a resident of the statewhere is the agreement that I made with the state tobe a resident, to be within the state. The state is the government, not the land. I dontknow how many times weve gone over this. If you just get a map out and look at ityoull never find a state of anything. There are no states on a map. Now, New Yorks ona map, Pennsylvanias on a map, Floridas on a map, California is on a map but theresno State of New York, no State of Florida, no State of California on the map. There areno states anywhere on a map. States is the government is a corporate fiction. Things thatare listed on a map are real, theyre places, but theyre not the states. We dont live in theState unless you work for the State or one of its political subdivisions like the county, thecity, the town governmentstheyre political subdivisionsthen youre in the State.You put yourself there by taking that job but if you dont have a job in those kinds ofplaces then youre not a resident in the State. But they always claim that we are in orderto make the State laws and rules and regulations apply to us which is not factual. Itsunsupportable fiction. It immediately be thrown out of court but it wont be unless youbring it up unless you show that they failed to state a claim upon which relief can begranted because they didnt have any supportable facts.

Documents

2013 Jun 27 Howard Griswold Conference Call