:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

Please note:
Pastor Butch Paugh, of: GNC Radio Network’s: “Call to Decision” radio show, will interview: Eric W. Madsen, Team Law’s Trustee, this:
Saturday, July. 8, 2017, at: 6:00 PM (MT).
Call In Line: (855) 242-8824,
Listen Line: (605)562-4040.

Our new Free Conference Call schedule is every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time).

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

Though our Trustee is otherwise out of the office this week (July 10, 2017 – July 14, 2017), our Trustee will continue to hold Conference calls
at their regularly scheduled times; with one exception: there will be no conference call Monday, July 17, 2017.

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^:

14 amendment—

The forum is for discussing the myths found on the Team Law website's Patriot Mythology page.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

Dennisl
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 8
Joined: Sunday February 1st, 2009 1:21 pm MST

14 amendment—

Postby Dennisl » Tuesday February 3rd, 2009 10:00 am MST

Hello,
I have a question regarding your Myth #5. Does the 14 amendment create a de facto goverment?

Sincerely
Dennisl

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment

Postby Admin » Wednesday February 4th, 2009 9:35 am MST

:h: Dennisl:
No, the 14th amendment does not create a government.

We have a training tape on the 14th amendment that goes through it with an in depth review, which should put it in its proper perspective both as Corp. U.S.’ 14th Article of amendment and as the original jurisdiction government’s 15th Article of amendment. You might also want to get the training tape on the 13th Article of amendment as well because it shows how that numbering took place and together they both can help you discover what is really going on.

Again, our government was formed by our Constitution for the United States of America, the officers of that government are bound to specific limitations in accord with their oaths to the Constitution of the United States of America and our Historical Outline provides a brief review of the formation of Corp. U.S., which many call “government” even though it is merely a private foreign corporation.

Thus, the answer to your question is, “No, the 14th amendment did not create any form of government.”

But we do not see what that has to do with our Myth 5, which exposes the Patriot mythology alleged in their “Expatriation/Repatriation process”.

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.

Dennisl
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 8
Joined: Sunday February 1st, 2009 1:21 pm MST

Re: 14 amendment

Postby Dennisl » Wednesday February 4th, 2009 10:45 am MST

This is driving me insane......
The relationship to the Myth stems from a book circulating in the "patriot movement" on the 14th amendment. This book describes how the third section of the 14th creates a de facto government and that "government" is the one we should be expatriating from.
I'd love to have the tapes....
I see now that the Titles of Nobility amendment (Original 13th) was clearly ratified considering overwhelming number of places that it was published. That being true then what Constitution was the Supreme Court using when they decided the Slaughterhouse cases?
Are there any Supreme Court opinions that speak to the real 13th in any way what so ever?
Another topic , does buying property without buying the mineral rights prevent someone from having the patent recorded in their name?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated
Dennisl

User avatar
SimplyThinkDreams
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 110
Joined: Thursday February 5th, 2009 4:45 pm MST

Re: 14 amendment

Postby SimplyThinkDreams » Monday February 9th, 2009 5:56 pm MST

Dennisl,
Your err lies in your presumption that there are two different constitutions the Supreme Court can operate under. The evidence shows me that Corp. U.S. was incorporated lawfully. What evidence do you have for yourself that they could possibly be operating outside of their jurisdiction? The Supreme Court must uphold its oath to operate within its granted powers. I think you should go back and review your relationship to the Social Security Trust under the Standard for Review. It is imperative to discover this relationship for yourself.

SimplyThinkDreams

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment

Postby Admin » Tuesday September 22nd, 2009 11:00 am MDT

:h: Dennisl:
We still fail to understand what that has to do with our Myth 5—The Expatriation/Repatriation process, which has nothing to do either with the 14th amendment or with the formation of any government. Our presentation of that myth shows the foolhardy nature of the alleged expatriation process exposing the myth.

Though we appreciate the opinion expressed by others where they show the 13th amendment was published in so many places and thus, conclude that it must have been ratified or it would not have been so published. However, we look at such evidence as being so circumstantial as to not prove anything. Amendments are not ratified because of the number of places that publish them; rather, they are ratified because they followed the path prescribed in the Constitution for the United States of America, which the amendment did follow in accord with the pattern of the interpretation of the Constitution at that time. If we were to hold the amendment to the standard of understanding today, then one might not see it that way. In 1818 when the amendment was ratified, States entering the Union after the measure was considered were not allowed to participate in the ratification process. That is apparent when you consider the content of letters, etc. passing between the States, the President of the United States of America and Congress. The amendment was most certainly ratified in accord with the Constitution’s dictates; which was subsequently evidenced by its publication in so many places, the most important of which was the United States 1868 publication of the Article in the Territory of Colorado’s Revised Statutes. That congressionally approved publication marked the national government’s grand jubilee acknowledgment of the amendment.

Three years later, Corp. U.S. was formed with the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871; wherein, the United States Constitution was adopted as the Corp. U.S. constitution; that constitution is where the original 13th Article of amendment was omitted and the nations 14th, 15th and 16th amendments were published as the United States Constitution’s 13th, 14th and 15th amendments.

We hope our presentation of such matters inspires people to go back and study the actual historical documents, as we have; they provide such incredible insight. This is the very reason Team Law does the work we do to help people learn how to learn the law from their own experience and firsthand study. You simply cannot rely on third party presentments, stories and allegations.

Your final topic asked whether buying property without mineral rights affects having a patent recorded in your name. We find the question confusing primarily because land patents always name the party to whom they are granted—they are not subsequently recorded in any other person’s name. Accordingly, we suggest you read our Land 101 article. It describes what land patents are and how they work.

Still, if we take your question on its face and simply answer it, the answer is “No.” The logic behind that answer is simply, the only name the land patent would ever be reasonably recorded in is the name you find on the land patent. Accordingly, if the land patent reserves mineral rights to any party other than the party named (which some do), then that is elemental to the land patent and certainly could not limit the patent from being recorded.

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.

Clabianco
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 7
Joined: Monday October 18th, 2010 2:54 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment—

Postby Clabianco » Thursday September 25th, 2014 5:20 pm MDT

My own deep thinking about the 14th amendment to the Constitution, but ...which one: the one "For" or the one "of".
If it is not the one "for" then I'm barking up the wrong tree.
If it is the one "for" then I claim that Congress created a separate nation with citizens by the beginning words of the 14th. Any person, born or naturalized in the United States [ D.C.] is a citizen of the United States and of the state [Federal State] in which they are born. Congress, in 1864 defined in the law, the meaning of the term "The United States" to be the District of Columbia.

However, it was my personal conclusion that such Amendment created a nation, District of Columbia, within our national borders, complete with its own citizens.

Any Comments?
Clabianco

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment—

Postby Admin » Friday September 26th, 2014 8:15 am MDT

:h: Clabianco:
We don’t comprehend what you are referring to with the following:
Clabianco wrote:...which one: the one "For" or the one "of".

If you were attempting to refer to the Constitution for the United States of America vs. Constitution of the United States of America, the distinction between those constitutions is that the former has no amendments, while the latter has amendments. Neither of those constitutions are Corp. U.S.’ constitution.

Respectively, because the content you implied 14th amendment contains we expect the amendment you referred to is a Corp. U.S. amendment. Of course, that amendment is linguistically equivalent to the nation’s constitution’s 15 Article of amendment.

Regardless of all of that, the language of those amendments can in no reasonable way be construed as forming a new nation.

You will be benefitted by using the Standard for Review to resolve the true nature of any such relationships. Respectively, Congress does not possess the authority to form a new nation. Also, the amendments only have the capacity to limit the authority granted to government in the Constitution. So, your proposed concept cannot possibly have any merit.

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.

Clabianco
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 7
Joined: Monday October 18th, 2010 2:54 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment—

Postby Clabianco » Friday September 26th, 2014 8:04 pm MDT

Dear TeamLaw.
I read the Standards for Review and your discussion on the Constitution For the U.S. and the Constition of the U.S.
Of course Corp U.S. adopted the their own variation of the Constitution of the U.S.

It is one thing to claim that Congress does not have the power to form a separate nation and it is another thing to claim that Congress did form another nation.
In other words, whether or not they have the power granted by our true Constitution, they did it anyhow. Is that How Dictators arise?
the D.C was not a State of the United States of America so Congress did not have to follow the Constitution for it regarding the creation of a separate nation.
Do you think that Congress would admit to doing that? Such is the power of their deception.
Here is my facts and logic.
In 1864 Congress defined the term, "The United States" as being the "District of Columbia." They also defined State as being a state of the United States. District of Columbia, or its posessions.
Then in 1868 the 14th Amendment came along. " Any person born or naturalized in the United States, is a citizen of the United States and of the State in which they are born."
What Makes a nation? Physical Land bounded. A government. A people who recognize it: Citizens.
The Government of The United States IS the District of Columbia. BUT that Government is not the Government of the United States of America.
They adopted such titles and terms in order to deceive the people into accepting D.C. etc as "our government,"
Social Security is they way for them to obtain citizens. As one cased, the Slater case, contained: the judge said: and the defendant has no 902A evidence...which would have been required to be read into the record, for him to claim lack of jurisdiction by the United States.
So not only do the definitions that I "quoted" but the historical evidence of what Congress did as well as a current ( 1989? ) court record showed, there does exist a separate nation, The United States.
Do you think that they will leave an obvious "tracks" or "trail" of their treasonous deeds?

What say you or anyone else to the above facts and logic, regardless of their lack of authority, they did what I reported . I learned the basics from 2 major sources: The Purging of America by Thomas Nelson and from State-Citizen by Sir Richard McDonald. I myself, not those sources, state that a separate nation was created in actuality; authority for doing it was implied because D.C. was not a state of the union. Congress had "municipal authority regarding it.

Enlighten me regarding my claims s to definitions. Historical facts. And my logic of drawing conclusions from those facts. Namely, we have a separate nation in fact. And in practice, through the Corp.US.

Sincerely yours,
Charles Labianco.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: 14 amendment—

Postby Admin » Monday September 29th, 2014 7:00 am MDT

:h: Charles:
Thank you for your inquiry.
Though we appreciate the thought you put into the matter, the reason (in our last reply to you in this topical thread) we suggested that you review and follow the Standard for Review was that by following that standard you might pick up not only the actual history and authority related to the matter but you might also discover what actually constitutes what it takes to create a nation. Then from those elements see that no separate nation was either formed or claimed to be formed.

We appreciate your implication that such parties do not care about whether they have authority to do a thing; they often do what they do without authority (as is the case with the P.A.T.R.I.O.T., Homeland Security and Øbamba Care Acts).

Still, The territory does not belong to them; it belongs to the people of the United States of America.
They have made no overt claim of being a separate nation unto themselves; or, otherwise.
And, they have made no claim to any interest in being a culture separate from the United States of America.
Finally, that entity is not recognized as a nation anywhere in the world.

Therefore given the meaning of the word “nation”, we can easily conclude that in no stretch of the imagination did Congress create a new nation out of District of Columbia.

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.


Return to “Patriot Mythology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest