With our current economy in a state of imbalance to term nicely people being laid off no new jobs to be found. Still others having their homes foreclosed this information in this transcription of a call on Aib radio may help.
Still other information may assist in those who have had cases where a judge or lawyer investigator DA or other public official did not follow the rules and procedures for the people by the people.
When you go to protest they hide behind their immunity or just doing their job in official title and the question of jurisdiction comes into play. In our present court system with these issues the games really began.
December 12, 2009 Rod Class-Aib Radio
With the understanding some don't have fast computers and listening to the radio calls is a long process.
Or those not ably to be around for the call times there are those of us working the issue of putting the calls to text. For those who can listen to the calls they can be accessed on the following links.
Private Attorney General
http://privateattorneygeneral.ning.c...
Aib Radio
http://www.talkshoe.com/...
R: When I first did this, I had someone working with me to help me do it out. Nobody in this country has ever done this. This is technically the first for us to come out and do this, when we did in 2007. The one we had in 2002, we turned it back in to Judiciary Committee in 2007, on the House and Senate side. The one we did in 2008, Marie and I did it while we were in DC. If you even go through laws and go through their paperwork, you have typos all through their paperwork too.
With what we are doing, when we first started this, it was basically a bet that it could not be done. I did it.
The second one was the fact that we actually went into the Judiciary Committee on the House and Senate side and talked with them. We explained the crux of the matter; we laid it out for them. We handed them the documentation, back in 2007. They sat on it and really did not do anything. Then they came out with House Rule 660 where they went back in and tried to give themselves immunity for what they are doing.
What we are dealing with here is that we have the lawyers that are in control of so much of this stuff. It is like I am bringing out in the paperwork what I brought out last night on AIB radio.
If you really, truly, get into the Constitution under,
"U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 6
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 6 - Compensation
"The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.) (The preceding words in parentheses were modified by the 27th Amendment.) They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."
It talks about the House of Representatives, the Congressmen. They are immune from the rest except if they commit a felony, if they are taking bribes, or an act of treason. The moment they get paid off by a lobbyist that is a bribe, a felony that's an act of treason because now they are working against the people.
If you get into U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 4
Article 2 - The Executive Branch
Section 4 - Disqualification
"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"It talks about the President, Vice-President, and civil officers. They cannot commit crimes and it lists them.
In Article 3, Section 1,
"The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office."
It talks about these judges being on good behavior. If you start looking at all of this, and these judges are claiming immunity --- no, you do not have immunity because
Title 18, under Civil Rights Violation, Obstruction of Justice, there are penalties for these people when they do that.
In Title 42, is the section on how we will go back and bust them on it.
Where they are getting their immunity, where they are abusing it, is whenever the Bar Association created the Administrative Procedure Act, 1946, under Senate Bill 7, 60 stat. 237.
"An act designed to give uniformity to the rule-making and adjudicative proceedings of federal administrative agencies. The federal government passed the act in 1946, in response to increasing resentment of the agencies' latitude in matters affecting the rights of individuals. Following the federal lead, most of the states also passed similar statutes during the late 1940s and early 1950s.
Although the APA did not make administrative decision making into a substantially judicial process as some early reformers desired, it nonetheless brought coherence and judicial character to formerly haphazard procedures. The APA provides guidelines for rule-making hearings, adjudicative hearings, intra-agency review, judicial review, and public access to agency rules and decisions, and it creates rights of counsel at hearings, rights of public access to administrative hearings, and rights of an individual to control personal information collected by an agency. Davis, Administrative Law §§6.1 et seq. (3d ed. 1972) (1995 Supp.); 5 U.S.C. §§551 et seq., 3105, 3344, 5371, 7521."
What this was originally designed for, and we talked about this several months ago when we got into the Administrative Procedures stuff, when they created the Administrative Procedures Act, it had one function, supposedly.
That function was to be able to address administrative abuse, whether it was with Child Services, Dept. of Motor Vehicles, IRS, Dept of Justice, FBI it did not make a bit of difference. It was an administrative setup that the people were supposed to be able to go in, pull an administrative hearing, talk to the arbitrator who was the Administrative Judge, lay out the evidence of the corruption and wrongdoing.
The other side was supposed to come as the defendant, never as the plaintiff. You would put forth your evidence, show where the errors are, show where the abuse is, and then the Administrative Judge was to say: "Okay, you are right; you are showing the evidence; you are showing the proof of the abuse.
On our side, we now have to change our policy because we are showing errors and abuse on our side". This is where the Administrative Judge was supposed to have the immunity that he could go to Child Services, IRS, the DOJ, FBI whatever department was involved--and say that the people proved their case. Here are the laws, the statutes, and Supreme Court case rulings.
You have to change your policy. This judge was supposed to be absolutely immune from any type of persecution or retaliation from the agencies. This is where they had their absolute, total immunity. It was from them, it was never supposed to be applied to our side the way they are doing it.
This goes right back into misuse and abuse of when they created this. It is like a lot of things. They created things, knowing that they were able to go back in and misuse it and that the people would never know the difference. The people would never figure it out.
They would drop hints and the people would never be able to pick up the hints that were dropped. Through the years of things that have been done, and that we have worked on, and that people have gathered information on and shared, this is how we are starting to piece all of this together. We are starting to work together and share what we have.
By being able to get into the Congressional Records, which someone had and they gave to us, and going into the Library of Congress and verifying them, we now know that this is where their immunity comes from.
It came from them being able to help us do their job to where their side could not come back in and say: you're not supposed to do this for them, we are supposed to them. No, the obligation of the Administrative Judge was to correct the administration, and they are not doing that. As we are finding out, they are all corrupt. It has come to the place where they are going to do whatever it takes to cover their own.
The reality of it is, this first case that we did in Superior Court, we actually beat the United States. The Judge cannot answer the paperwork, even though he stepped off the bench and played council for these people. We beat them the reality of it is; the judge cannot come back in and answer the reconsideration, because we showed him exactly where the flaws were.
We got the procedure book out and we showed him step for step exactly where he made his flaws. Whether or not they are going to give it to us, is another answer. That is part of the problem.
Everything that we have done, we have taken everything step for step. We have gone through the procedures. We have walked them through their Congressional Records. We have walked them through all the procedures they have done, all of their Executive Orders, rules, regulations.
We showed them where they made their mistakes, how they made their mistakes. Now they have a problem, because now we have exposed it. We were not supposed to be able to expose this the way we exposed it. This was something they never anticipated that we would ever do to them. But we did. We got in. We laid it into them.
The Judge tried to cover it up. We went back and proved that he was in error. It is like the case we are dealing with right now -- the Buess case. We are coming back in and showing them, again, the fraud that they are committing on the people. They do not know how to come back and handle it. They do not know how to answer the paperwork.
H: Rod, If they do not know how to answer the paperwork, what is going to happen?
R: What we are doing is coming back in and showing the fraud by addressing this to Homeland Security, the Committee on Homeland Security, the United States Coastguard (which is the head of the Homeland Security, which is the Military side) getting this out the Provost Marshals and to the CID, trying to notify them.
H: Do you think they will do anything once they are notified?
R: I do not know. We do not know unless we try, unless we put the information out.
In the Letters of Marque and Reprisal (LOMAR) and the Private Attorney General document that were all signed by Congress.
http://www.rayservers.com/...
This is where we have this in our favor. It actually shows that we have tried to go through the system and follow procedure. We actually reported the crimes, the abuse, to the representatives and the Judiciary Committee is the one, if you understand the history that pulls the investigation. They are the ones that come and do the impeachment. It is not the Homeland Security committee; it is not the Ways and Means or Agriculture "it is the Judiciary Committee. They are the ones that actually hold the investigations that deal with public officials. That is why we went to them. That is their job description.
H: Rod, it is like when you and I were in the Military we had to go through the chain of command.
R: Right, and that is exactly what we did. We are showing that we are trying to go through the proper channels. We are trying to get them to fix the problem. We are bringing it to their attention. When we were there in 2007, we handed them a stack of paperwork about 1 foot thick of impeachments against federal judges and other judges for abuse and misuse of their office. We are showing where the crimes are, and how they committed them. They have not addressed it. Not on our side.
With what we are doing, we have two choices. Either we can fold up shop and go home and just get on with our lives, or we can do what we are doing here on Friday and Saturday nights, bringing information forward, trying to bring the education up, keep filing some type of paperwork, letting them know that we are still alive and kicking, that we still have a problem and are trying to address it. If someone has a better way of doing it, or actually is sitting on the answer, and will come on board, I will be more than glad to turn things over.
"? Rod, have you ever thought of a tort claim?
"Tort claims act in a federal or state act which, under certain conditions, waives governmental immunity and allows lawsuits by people who claim they have been harmed by torts (wrongful acts), including negligence, by government agencies or their employees. These acts also establish the procedure by which such claims are made. Before the enactment of tort claims acts, government bodies could not be sued without the specific permission of the government. The Federal version is the Federal Tort Claims Act. (See: Federal Tort Claims Act, tort)"
R: No. We went through the Claims Court. Four of us did. We got our cases kicked back. We went through every single court. We even went through the United States Administrative Office for the United States Court, where we had to go in and ask permission from them to sue the United States. They came back with a document that said they did not see anything wrong with what is going on-- when we had put down all the issues of all of the corruption. We went through the Federal Court of Claims. We ran a tort claim. We had our paperwork kicked back out. Rodger Tanner got sent back to the Federal Court in Ohio because they did not want to address it.
The only court that was left that we did not know about was the Superior Court (DC??) and that is why we tried it.
I am going to send an e-mail for a website. Believe it or not, there is progress being made with the King and Queen of Hawaii. There is an apology bill, signed by Bill Clinton, on www.freehawaii.org . I will send you what they are doing. They have put together a $300 trillion UCC tort claim.
R: As I said, with everything that we are doing, through all the proper channels. At this point in time, by going after (obtaining ??) the Private Attorney General (document), taking it before Congress, going into the Library of Congress and pulling the history on it, pulling the documentation that verifies it, we have done everything humanly possible, up to this point, on our side to try to fix the problem. We are still growing. There is still new information that keeps coming up with what we are doing, as people start to come of the woodwork. They are listening to different segments and they are sending different things that we may not have.
What we have done since 2007, we actually have come a long, long way in exposing so much of what has taken them 600 years to do. We have unraveled quite a bit in the last two years, more than they ever thought we would unravel.
It still comes down to the people. It comes down to us. What do we want to do with the problem? Do we want to throw our hands up into the air, go bury our heads in the sand like an ostrich, or do we want to try through peaceful means to fix this problem. We put in the documentation that shows that we have tried everything, even going into Congress and getting the approval of Congress not once, not twice, but three different times, on a LOMAR. As I said, I do not know of anyone other than myself in this country that has done this. A lot of people want to talk, but I actually did it. I have my signatures on the documents and I have the stamps.
This shows the seriousness of what we are trying to do. We are actually trying to fix the problem.
H: And it is our government to fix.
R: Yes. it ties right into what we talked about last night. The Declaration of Independence and the state Constitutions put the inherited (inherent?) political power with the people. We are technically the government.
These (the government) are employees of ours (the people). We have the right to alter reform or abolish any part of it when it becomes destructive to us. It is just that we have been brainwashed so badly over the years, and browbeaten, and have been brutalized by the system. A lot of people are scared to death, which is understandable. At what point in time do you stand up and say NO.
H: If it is our government, we would not treat ourselves like this.
R: No. So, we need to address the issue with them. That is where we need to get the people with the best education and knowledge, and bring it to the table and ask: why are you doing this. If it is the lawyers, then let's get rid of the Bar Association in this country. Let's put the lawyers under the same guidelines as a doctor or nurse or mechanic.
Make them get a real license from the Secretary of State and operate independently from the courts. When they are operating independently of the courts, then the courts cannot browbeat and threaten them. They (the courts) cannot remind them (the lawyers) that they (the lawyers) are officers of the Supreme Court of the state and we (the courts) can pull your bar card. Well, take your bar card and shove it.
There is an avenue here. The District Attorneys who have come on Talkshoe, who have called me, who have done the research, have been astounded with what we have found, and the information we are running. They have actually validated a lot of it. They were not taught any of this. They are still looking at some of the other stuff.
It comes down to this, as we talked last night, where we are making our mistakes when we are talking to a lot of these people, when we are talking to public officials, when we are saying that a judge violated my rights and is suppressing my paperwork, or when a judge did not allow this -- your statement may be absolutely true.
Jefferson's Manual
We have started to have federal judges coming back in and bringing up the fact that the banks do not have the original note. They do not have the original lien. Therefore, because they do not have it, they cannot evict the people. This is part of what we are looking at.
When we start putting in the paperwork and talking to these representatives, quoting the statutes, explaining it to them, now they are going to start realizing that we a not just complaining. This is the difference. The time we have gone into Congress, eg., into Adam Putman's (SP???) office on the first LOMAR, he told me: no, no, no--we cannot get involved. Well, YES, you can. When I pulled out the Constitution and started explaining it to him, his whole attitude changed 180 degrees, with: yes sir, you are right.
It was the same way when I dealt with the state legislature in Florida when we were talking about impeachments. When we started out wanting an impeachment process, it was: no, we can't do that; we can't get involved; no, that is not our job. I said: Are you going to be here tomorrow? He said: Yes, I am. I said: Good, I'll be back.
I brought in the Constitution for the United States and for Florida, the United States Attorneys' Manual and started explaining this to him. All of a sudden he realized that I knew what I was talking about. I was not just complaining to hear my self talk. I was actually able to show him exactly where the violations were, and what his job was. This is where we are running short on a lot of what is happening. When we were in DC in 2007, even though the people were right with what they were saying, they were not backing up what they were complaining about. By not being able to back it up, they (courts) do not have to do anything for you.
When we laid out the Jefferson's Manual and starting talking to them about it, their attitude changed because now I had the rule books in my hands, I was able to explain it to them.
This is the difference. When you start laying it out, which is actually their procedures, and you explain it to them, their attitude changes. This is where we have fallen short, because the majority of the people who teach do not actually get into the depth that we are getting into on this show. They talk in generalities. When we were at a Florida seminar, the first two gentlemen who spoke on mortgages talked in generalities.
They talked about and around things. The people were really getting upset. When Carl and I had our conversation on Sunday with them, they got a whole different line of information because we were breaking it down and explaining it to them. We showed them exactly where things were at. This is what we need more of among our own people.
A lot of people do not want to get into this because now it is stepping on toes and we do not want to ruffle feathers. Well, ladies and gentlemen, it is getting to be late to start being concerned about ruffling their feathers when they are taking your children and you home. They have shipped you jobs overseas. How much more do we have to lose before we decide that we need to ruffle their feathers? We have to start pushing this, peacefully. But we do have an alternative, if it comes right down to it.
I have not heard anything from Homeland Security at this point on the LOMAR that we have filed with them, with the Private Attorney General material, with the information from the 81st Congress that the National Lawyers Guild is a Communist Party along with the Bar Association, and the information we entered regarding the Trading with the Enemy Act which shows that they were not supposed to steal our gold, but to keep those people from hoarding it who were trying to stockpile it but not to take it from us. By entering this kind of information we are giving them a different perspective from what they were told, what they were allowed to believe.
From 1933--it is like telling a story. From the time you tell someone next to you your story, and it goes through 30 people, the story has changed. Especially if you have lawyers involved, you know they are going to change the stories. That is exactly what has happened. The attorneys have found a way to make money on this; they have modified it. If you really, truly, think about what has actually happened, and we are finding it, everything that they are doing to the people, by changing definitions of words, capitalizing letters, using last names, all of this has been and is being done by them changing corporate law, revising corporate law.
An interesting link that provides more insight to the data already uncovered is here.
The "Missing" 13th Amendment
http://www.dailykos.com/...
So you can stay in the loop, send an email to: rod-class-subscribe@rayservers.com join the automated email update list or become member of the net work.
http://privateattorneygeneral.ning.c...