:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

We hold a Free Conference Call every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time).

Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Join us on, and invite your friends to, our next Conference Call!

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

After reading this announcement, you may remove it by clicking the “X” in the upper right corner of the announcement's green background.

Corporate U.S.

This forum is for topics not listed below.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

Always Learning
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 12
Joined: Tuesday July 8th, 2008 11:51 pm MDT

Corporate U.S.

Postby Always Learning » Sunday September 7th, 2008 1:04 pm MDT

Hello everyone,
I am a bit new here, and have spent many hours reading the amazing information on this website. But by no means have I read it all, or understand it completely. If fact, it has sometimes taken several readings on some issues to really understand what is being said. Such is law, and all of its complexities.

So, with that said, I have a question about one of the main premises that this website promotes: That of our current United States government really being a corporation. That is a big one, and I believe it is crucial for us (at least for me) to really be able to understand how this is really true, as I am considering running for OJ Governor of WA if no one else will, and I want to make sure that I know this is a fact because if it isn't, or if it is but I simply can't prove it, I (we) who run for OJ governor positions could be inviting a lot of trouble from the current establishments in place.

So Team Law, as I understand it, claims that the current United States government, as well as its governing states, counties and cities, are all (privately?) run corporations, and not our true, original jurisdiction government. It makes this claim because Congress passed the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, and because District of Columbia Act was created in 1790, it couldn't have been created for the first time, so it must be a corporation. I am sorry if I am chopping this up and distorting the facts, as this is all very complicated to me. First, it seems that these acts only have reign over the District of Columbia, nowhere else. Thus, this "corporation" could not have authority over the rest of the country. Second, wasn't it the Supreme Court--not Congress--that acknowledged the original act making DC a corporation, and is it possible that congress was just reaffirming its acknowledgment in 1871?

Aside from my obvious lack of understanding of these concepts presented by Team Law, the other thing that I found very convincing that tends to make me believe that our current government is not the original government is the historical review presented by Eric William Madsen on the Governor's Corner page. This is very impressive indeed, and I would like to be able to verify the information given there. Where can I read about the court cases and the statements made by the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of the military?

Thank you all for any information you can give to clarify this claim.
~Craig.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1574
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Corporate U.S.

Postby Admin » Wednesday September 10th, 2008 5:04 am MDT

:h: Craig (Always Learning):
Thank you for your inquiry. Though you are correct the implications of law are complex, understanding it may not be a difficult as most people imagine. The key is to follow the Standard for Review we presented in the Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole article. Once you know who you are and then, if the relationship you want to understand is government, you go to its source (all power in government comes from the people), the relationships can be quite simple. The bottom line, government can have no lawful authority that it does not acquire directly from the people and the people cannot grant to government any authority the people do not individually possess. That stated, we will address your inquiry on a point-by-point basis as follows:

Your first question presupposed the allegation that Team Law’s website promotes:
Always Learning wrote:our current United States government …(as) a corporation.
However, that is contrary to our presentation. We simply show the historical evidence that in the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 the government of the United States of America formed a private corporation said Act named the “District of Columbia”, which was already both the name of a ten mile square district of land (granted to the said government from Maryland and Virginia) and the name of the municipal government that was actually officially incorporated in 1801, by Acts of Congress, and that which followed. Accordingly, we do not call that thing so created in the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 government. The Act itself and that which follows proves it is merely a private corporation that was initially owned by the government; thus, we call it Corp. U.S. We hope you can see the distinction. The only way that thing can govern you is if you contract with it to do so. Even so, such contracting will not make Corp. U.S. the actual government of the United States of America. Our government is a Constitutional Republic. Corp. U.S. is a private foreign corporation that operates on the principles of Communism compelled by corporate contract.

Your second presupposition was that:
Always Learning wrote:(those) who run for OJ (original jurisdiction) governor positions could be inviting a lot of trouble from the current establishments in place.
However, we disagree. In fact, we see the exact opposite of that. And, time has proven our view is correct. We have been doing this for over fourteen years now and we have received recognition that what we are doing is “legal, lawful and correct” from the highest levels of possible recognition. Further, though we nearly have all of the States seated with original jurisdiction governors and we are now preparing to seat the Electoral College, no such officers of the original jurisdiction government have ever even once been challenged for any cause by the corporate bodies some people currently imagine as if they were government. Thus, we say that presupposition is not well founded. We expressed our opinion “the exact opposite is true” because that has been our experience. We also expect that when the time comes to support the original jurisdiction government holding a timely election of the President of the United States of America, that election will have the wide spread support of the people across the nation, which event will have the effect of uniting our Constitutional Republic in accord with Law and the will of the people, it will also bring those corporate governance agencies back into compliance with our Constitution and back under the control of our actual governments (State and Federal).

Again, you incorrectly claim:
Always Learning wrote:Team Law…claims that the current United States government, as well as its governing states, counties and cities, are all (privately?) run corporations, and not our true, original jurisdiction government.
However, your claim is again inaccurate. That claim is the claim of those entities themselves. Team Law simply provides a glimpse of the facts so expressed in the acts, statutes, executive orders and history of such entities, all of which evidence the vacation of the original jurisdiction government in favor of corporate control; the likes of which, if it were governmental control would be unconstitutional. However, when the people bind themselves with contractual agreement to such corporate entities their respective acts remain lawful in accord with the terms of the contracts. That is the effect of history and law. In fact, we ask people not to believe us and rather search out the truth for themselves from their own research. That is when they come to know the truth of the matter, when they do their own research.

The other day we had a call from a gentleman who in doing such research reported discovering a Delaware corporation (namely the: Corporation Trust Company of America) that serves as a parent corporation, under which all of the corporate governance entities are incorporated as sub-corporations and listed in the Delaware Secretary of State’s corporate records. He said he would send us a copy of those records. We are looking forward to receiving those records.

As we have stated before, it is irrelevant what Team Law or any third party says regarding such matters. What matters, is the records and the history itself. You cannot go by hearsay to set your foundation of understanding such matters. You cannot go by what anyone teaches or tells you. You cannot go by the media’s spin or presentation of the “News”. In fact the only things you can go by are your own research of the facts, and God’s support in your discovering the truth as you do your own study of the truth.

You alleged such a claim was made:
Always Learning wrote:because Congress passed the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, and because District of Columbia Act was created in 1790, it couldn't have been created for the first time, so it must be a corporation
No. We showed it is a corporation because that is exactly what the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 says it is. And whereas, the municipal government was incorporated in 1801, it could not be again incorporated for the first time seventy years later. Thus, the only meaning left for the words used in the 1871 Act require the understanding of a separate private corporation owned by the municipality of the same name.

You are correct in your first conclusion that such acts only have effect within the jurisdiction of those districts (both government and corporate). However, your second conclusion is wrong; no provision of fact, history or law could allow said 1871 Act to be so construed a congressional acknowledgment of the Supreme Court’s repetitious rulings. The language of the act simply does not support that stretch of your imagination. Further, Congress was from the beginning aware of their incorporation of the District’s municipal government.

We can read about the court cases and the statements made by the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of the military?
In the topic Restoring the government Admin references the Joint Chiefs and describes their relationship with all of this. In another Topical thread:
Admin wrote:re: References to opinions of a Corp. U.S congressional committee, the Joint Chiefs and the courts.

We addressed the matter regarding Mr. Madsen’s service as Governor and Senator in the Open Forum before noting that the congressional and Joint Chiefs’ confirmations are irrelevant and unnecessary to confirm what we do. They are wonderful tidbits of information about wonderful experiences, but still, we don’t want anyone following us because we accomplished wonderful things. In fact, we don’t want people following us at all. We want the people to learn the law; then follow the law. The founding fathers of this country created our Constitutional Republic form of government (that’s what we follow)—we simply recognize the fact that if we are to win our nation back, it will happen for one reason only—the people of this great country awaken from their sleep learn the law and apply it.

The experiences we had with Congress, the National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs were confirmed by us and secondarily by several others who spent the funds necessary to take Mr. Madsen back with them to the Pentagon to make that confirmation. The Pentagon confirmed the matter and suggested our return was not necessary until we have completed our task. Our position on the matter then and now was the expense was not warranted. The confirmation served no beneficial purpose. We are certain records of all of those meetings still exist there. We are certain if anyone really wanted to do the work and spend the money, they could easily confirm all of it again, but to what purpose? That is all in the past. We maintain our own records safely secured off site; however, we have no expectation of ever needing those records. We see no point in using them to confirm what happened to anyone, because everything we do is easily verifiable in law by anyone interested in verifying it. That is exactly why we got such a favorable review in the District of Columbia arena.

Do you understand? What they said about what we did is irrelevant! The only thing that is relevant is what you do. It seems a fool’s move to do anything simply because someone tells you to, without confirming it is right, proper and in keeping with the law.
We continue to be of that opinion. The Joint Chief’s opinion has no bearing on what we are doing and it should have no bearing on what you do. The only things that should so influence the things you do are your own confirming research and the inspiration from God that compels people to stand in law for the truth. We welcome you to that journey.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Always Learning
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 12
Joined: Tuesday July 8th, 2008 11:51 pm MDT

Re: Corporate U.S.

Postby Always Learning » Friday September 19th, 2008 3:22 pm MDT

[hr][/hr]Inserted by Admin :h:
We were tempted to delete this post because it only asks questions we have repeatedly responded to before. Still, we allowed it to remain because others had already responded to it; so we here simply ask people to first read the material presented both on our websites and on the Open Forum system before you spontaneously make responses to posts that seem new to you. One of our primary purposes in providing our Open Forum system is eliminate repetitious e-mail.

Also, we directly edited this post in line; due both to its size and to the fact that others already responded to it. Also, please be aware we are limited to how far we can go here in the Open Forum; some of the issues presented here border on the necessity for Team Law beneficiary support.

The original post follows with our editorial inserts (all of which are made in color)
[hr][/hr]Thank you for replying to this in such detail. I will be the first to say that my interpretations can well be incorrect and prone to inaccuracies. That is the nature of bumbling through this life communicating with one another through words and interpreting the meanings of those words through the limited knowledge we have to work with. The more we (people) get to communicate and exchange words with each other, the more opportunities we have to make things clearer and to understand what is being said in a more accurate way. So with that said, here are some responses to your thoughts:

You said (starting near the beginning of your response): "We simply show the historical evidence that in the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 the government of the United States of America formed a private corporation said Act named the “District of Columbia”, which was already both the name of a ten mile square district of land (granted to the said government from Maryland and Virginia) and the name of the municipal government that was actually officially incorporated in 1801, by Acts of Congress, and that which followed. Accordingly, we do not call that thing so created in the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 government."

I like to keep things simple for understanding's sake, so let's see if I can sum up this extremely important point you are trying to make: DC was made into a "municipal government that was actually officially incorporated" in 1801. (So a municipal government can become incorporated? And is this privately incorporated?) [hr][/hr]Your answer to this question is, “No. That incorporation was also the Districts formal Organic Creation as a municipality, so it could not possibly be a 'Private Incorporation'.”[hr][/hr]So, because this the municipal government was already done created and incorporated, what was created in 1871 could not be a municipal government, but must be something else. And the assumption is that it is a corporation. Correct? It is still a little foggy for me. [hr][/hr]No assumption is necessary, the Act plainly states they are forming a corporation.[hr][/hr]"The Act itself and that which follows proves it is merely a private corporation that was initially owned by the government; thus, we call it Corp. U.S."
A private corporation owned by the US govt? [hr][/hr]According to the Act, owned by the District of Columbia municipality created in 1801; which people ignorantly but commonly call, “United States Government”. [hr][/hr]Is that possible? [hr][/hr]The Constitution provides to Congress to pass any law within the ten mile square of the District and gives them the authority to enforce the same. [hr][/hr], and who would own it in this case? (We already answered that.)
And it is not now? Is this the quitclaim thing in the Bretton Woods Agreement that I read about? [hr][/hr]Yes. The Corp. U.S. Treasury was provided to the IMF as its individual drawing account in the Bretton Woods Agreement. [hr][/hr]And if so, who gave legal authority to that quitclaim if there was no OJ president at that time? [hr][/hr]Corp. U.S. continues to act under the authority of the Commander in Chief. All of this is found in the WARN Newsletter's Independence Day article. To delve into this matter with us any further than this requires Team Law Beneficiary Support. [hr][/hr]A little further down, you respond that you have not seen much trouble incurred by those who have run for OJ governorships. [hr][/hr]Actually what we said was
Admin wrote:… though we nearly have all of the States seated with original jurisdiction governors and we are now preparing to seat the Electoral College, no such officers of the original jurisdiction government have ever even once been challenged for any cause …
That means no original jurisdiction Governor, Senator or any other officer of any original jurisdiction capacity has been even remotely hassled in any way because of either their election or service in any original jurisdiction official office.
[hr][/hr]I know that Mr. Madsen was challenged quite a bit in CO, and if it weren't for his extensive knowledge of the law, he probably would not have succeeded. [hr][/hr]That is false. The statement above includes Governor Madsen and his service both as Colorado’s original jurisdiction Governor and his current service as an original jurisdiction Senator. The only reaction he ever had from any branch or agency of the Corp. State or Corp. U.S. to the original jurisdiction government seats he has held have been positive confirmations. [hr][/hr]Why I have some concerns about this is because I have done a little research on James David Brailey, WA state's current OJ governor, and he was jailed for "improper possession of firearms" and was accused of plotting to kill the current corporate state governor at the time, Gary Locke. Maybe he is a little loony, and really did things deserving of being jailed. Or maybe, because almost all major news medias are owned by a select few corporations, he simply did not know the law well enough to protect himself in court and the media portrayed him poorly. I am not too concerned about this issue, since I cannot run for governor of WA because I don't own land, but this is the crux of why I have been so adamant about understanding why, and being able to explain and prove in a court of law my right as an OJ governor if I were to run.[hr][/hr]Though Mr. Brailey has not actually served in that office for at least one term, and though he was convicted of a felony gun charge, that has nothing to do with the fact that he was lawfully elected and seated in office. We have never heard the details of his arrest and conviction (nor do we care to) but he did relate to us that it had nothing to do with his service in the original jurisdiction governor’s office. We have no record of anyone being elected in the last election in Washington State. None of that changes the fact that the people of the original jurisdiction Washington State need to elect a governor in this year’s election.[hr][/hr]In regards to my saying you claim the current US government is a corporation, you say, "However, your claim is again inaccurate. That claim is the claim of those entities themselves." These entities claim it themselves? Where might I see this for myself?[hr][/hr]How many times do we have to say this? Read the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, it says it plain and clear as day! Then read any Supreme Court case regarding the corporate nature of the “United States Government”; then read the United States Code; all of those sources call Corp. U.S. a corporation.[hr][/hr]When I asked about the statements made by the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of the military, you said that those statements are irrelevant. In some ways, I cannot disagree. But as to the court cases involving Mr. Madsen, they are extremely relevant, and I would still like to know where I can read about them.[hr][/hr]You are not a Team Law beneficiary and we cannot provide you with that level of support unless you are. Further, we disagree, no such cases add any relevance to the necessity of reseating the original jurisdiction government. The fact remains that even if Mr. Madsen had never been born and no one had heretofore been elected in any original jurisdiction Governor’s seat, the seats would remain vacant and their reseating would still be the best if not only possibility we have to securing our Constitutional Republic. This is the simple fact you and we all must awaken to and then, we must each learn the law for ourselves and put it to work to preserve our nation. If we do not each one do it ourselves, then all will be lost. The bottom line, it is up to you. That is why we keep saying, don’t believe a thing we present—prove it for yourself from your own study of the law and our history.[hr][/hr]In this day and age, with conspiracy theorists being a dime a dozen, why I find your website truly inspiring and a fresh breath of air, is because you consistently tell people to discover the facts for themselves.[hr][/hr]Thank you. WE are pleased that you find our work refreshing. We also hope it is inspiring enough to get you and others to do all they can to read, study, ponder and pray; all as activities focused on learning our history and our laws; then put that to work with action in support of saving our country by using the law to secure our original jurisdiction government. We also hope none of what we have presented is taken in any way but as a positive affirmation that the truth can be found and we can all work together to save this great country. We feel that course will first require the people to repent and realign themselves with our Creator. Then with Him, we put the law to work. That is the path that will win and secure our Liberty and our Constitutional Republic.[hr][/hr]That is truly refreshing, but I have a constructive criticism here for you: You seem to be on a mission to help take our country back. And that requires an informed and educated populace. But many people that would come across your website, including myself, don't know the first thing about law, or how to research it. You give a lot of information on your website, and I have noticed that you try to get a lot of people who ask questions on your forums to verify the facts themselves. I bet over 90% of those people (including myself) wouldn't have the first clue of where to go to verify facts ourselves. I humbly suggest you have a page dedicated--a free training course--teaching the people how and where to research, step-by-step, on their own. Links, libraries...however you would do it if you were to do it yourself.[hr][/hr]That is exactly what Team Law is, a free service to all of its beneficiaries, and we provide everyone that is not yet a Team Law beneficiary free access to our websites with their resource links that also provide exactly what you are asking for.[hr][/hr]This can all be very overwhelming to most people, and to make it as easy and simple as possible, in clear and concise steps, on how to educate ourselves, would, I believe, further your cause to a considerable degree.

Thank you.
~Craig.[hr][/hr]Inserted by Admin:
We said it before, and perhaps it bears repeating. Team Law is a free service. No one in Team Law is paid anything to provide the services we provide. All services are provided by volunteers. No one can pay his or her way into Team Law. There are no dues and there is no membership. Team Law is a totally free organization and Team Law has no organizational relationships with any other organizations. All of Team Law’s beneficiaries are people.

Accordingly, Craig, we suggest you take another look at Team Law’s websites read the
WARN Newsletter again, if not for the first time and start doing something for yourself and for those you come in contact with, to save our nation. Tell everybody about Team Law!
We hope our editorial inserts have been helpful to you. :t^:
[hr][/hr]

Twodog
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 32
Joined: Thursday March 15th, 2007 9:08 pm MDT

Re: Corporate U.S.

Postby Twodog » Saturday September 20th, 2008 12:29 am MDT

Always Learning wrote:In regards to my saying you claim the current US government is a corporation, you say, "However, your claim is again inaccurate. That claim is the claim of those entities themselves." These entities claim it themselves? Where might I see this for myself? ~Craig.

Always Learning,
I posted a thread awhile back and think it may provide some insight on the questions you asked above; here is a link to that topical thread:


Return to “Miscellaneous Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest