Griswold Conference Call—Thursday, September 22, 2011
Partial
Howard Griswold Conference calls:
218-844-3388 pin 966771# (6 mutes & un-mutes),
Thursday’s at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.
‘6’ Mutes and un-mutes
Note: there is a hydrate water call Monday’s, same time and number and pin #.
Howard’s 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 in that mailbox and since he’s on good terms with his wife he isn’t likely to in the foreseeable future.)
Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the week’s call at the following website:
Howard 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 Gemini Research 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.
****************************************
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!
Start
*****************************************************
{03:06:05.826}
[Howard] I’ve got something that is right in line and I strongly would suggest that everybody ask Dave to send you a copy of the article 1 that he just read about the affidavits. And when you write an affidavit in line with what that talked about please do not call it an affidavit of truth. That just makes you look like an idiot patriot to a judge. It’s an affidavit. I damned sight be truthful and it better be truthful facts because that’s all an affidavit is about—it’s a statement of facts and the facts better be truthful. If they aren’t—I don’t know if you realize it or not but some of this silly stuff that patriots put together in affidavits could actually bring a prosecution against you for perjuring yourself because you’re so contradictive in some of the patriot bull crap that you put down. So beware of some of the foolishness that’s out here. But that article about getting the statement into the affidavit that the notary did in fact put you under oath is very important and that is that wording would be extremely good on any affidavit that you put together. Now, let me pick up on a few of the things that Dave talked about and this just covers so many different angles but it was written about Obama Care. So I’ll just read the first part of it about its reference regarding the unconstitutionality of Obama Care and supporting validation of requests for exemptions that have been done. Interesting, who are exempt. Based on the 1st Amendment establishment clause and the 14th Amendment equal protection clause, Obama Care have exempted certain individuals who object to health are and that type of coverage on religious grounds and it actually exempts the Amish and Muslims from participating on religious grounds from participating in the Obama Care health system while forcing all the rest of the American non-exempt people to participate. Well, yeah, that gives me a thought. I have no religious preference in my life whatsoever. Don’t give a damn what you think—don’t care what you believe. I have no religious preference because I have nothing to do with religion. I think they’re all a scam created by man to lead mankind astray. I always look for the truth. I look for the real facts and I don’t find them in most religions. But one way out of Obama Care would be to claim that on your religious grounds of your beliefs, whatever they are, that you don’t believe in health care. That might exempt you too whether you got a religion or not, whether you agree with me and don’t participate in any religions. They still call it a religious ground that you object to inducing any kind of drugs into my body through medical care. That would exempt you from Obama Care and the required insurance and forcing you into these hospitals for different things but that’s probably the easiest way out. It really is unfortunately. The Amish have gotten out of a lot of things including income tax under their religious grounds of their beliefs that they do not participate in government benefits and if you don’t accept the government benefit you don’t have any liability back to government to follow their rules or pay their taxes because all government control is based on contracts that you make with government accepting their benefits. Most Americans are too stupidly educated to realize that. But that’s how you got into all the trouble that you’re in today by cooperating with government and asking government in one way or another to accept some thing of yours like your birth certificate and hold it for you and contracting with them to take care of you and hold you in trust for them for their benefit, not for yours. But anyway, there are several parts of the law that make what they’re doing unconstitutional in addition to this and if you’re willing to get into an argument with them and take it to court you could rely upon things like the commerce clause of the United States Constitution only grants rights to the federal government to regulate interstate commerce which means commerce between the states—that’s what interstate means. It does not give them any authority over intrastate which means inside the state. Intrastate commerce is what goes on within the confines of the authority of a state government to regulate and control businesses that are in commerce within the ground or boundaries of land that they claim to have control over. So, the federal government cannot get involved in health care and force insurance—especially with the federal government—because you cannot buy insurance across state lines under the commerce rules. Isn’t that interesting? There’s a lot of other things you can’t buy across state lines other than insurance. Some of that should be researched and looked into by anybody who cares about what they’re being force into in life. But the other thing is the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their persons, their houses, their papers and their effects against unreasonable searches and seizures and that shall not be violated, it says. Well, it certainly is by things like Obama Care. Your person is in danger by accepting Obama Care and becoming involved in any way with the health care system in this country and its drug-pushing racket that it’s running. If you have any sense at all you’ll stay away from their medicines. Anything approved by the FDA is dangerous. It’s unhealthy and it shouldn’t be gotten anywhere near and you should avoid it. There are other ways to take care of problems. Look on the internet. There is something on there about the alternative bad drugs and good alternatives. Google it. Interesting little book, all kinds of alternatives to using the bad drugs that the medical profession uses. So, your person is in great danger when you deal with something like healthcare of any kind at any location with any doctor. I came up with something the other night and I’ve had to expand it. The word, imbecile, it’s spelled lawyer. Well, I’ve had to expand it. The word, imbecile is also spelled preacher and it’s also spelled doctor. So, be careful of imbeciles by different spellings. It’s the crazy people. The Russian writer that wrote the one article calls these Western people—what was the word that you used, Dave? You just said it and now I’ve forgotten it but more or less he implied that they are imbeciles and we’re Western in case you don’t realize that—we’re the Western Hemisphere. The leadership here in this country is a bunch of imbeciles violating their own rules and their own regulations all the time. The 5th Amendment, and I have talked about this many, many times, says ‘nor shall government take private property for public use without just compensation.’ Anything to do with your private body is your private property. And by the way, that article about the judge and what he declared up on Wisconsin, as long as you consent to being a resident of the state they have every right to control and regulate everything that you do. If you don’t rebut that presumption that you reside as an agent within the state government because you’re not, you’re private, and you do not reside in the state government, and if you don’t rebut that presumption it goes on in the courts as though it were a fact because you failed to rebut it. That rebuttal can be done by an affidavit in the form that that gentlemen’s article about the affidavit talks about and if it is done correctly with an oath it stops them dead.
[Dave] If your land deed is recorded in their records you’re enjoying a benefit and you’re subject.
[Howard] That’s right and you can write an affidavit stating that you didn’t record it and some lawyer recorded it without your permission or knowledge or understanding of what it meant to be recorded and you had nothing to do with the recordation. So, with the affidavit in the proper manner and all of a sudden you are relieved of any liability because you have rebutted their presumption that they have authority over it because they’re holding it in their hands.
[Dave] It was not my authorized signature.
[Howard] That’s right. Well, you didn’t sign it anyway. The lawyer signed those kinds of things. Lawyers sign all those recordings of deeds.
[Dave] If there was no full disclosure there was no authorization.
[Howard] Nope. But most important of all, and I’ve talked about this before, is the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution which states that the powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution and not prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the state respectively and to the people. The people have the most power. Whatever the government has the right to do within the Constitution they can do.
Anything that they do like Obama Care or the Federal Reserve Bank System or the IRS income tax collection which are all outside of the constitutional authority of government can be stopped by the people but the only way you can do it is rebut these presumptions that they make that you are a resident within the state government and you come under all the state rules and regulations and the state being an agency of the United States makes you come under the rules and regulations of the United States too. And the only way to rebut that is to write an affidavit stating that you are not a resident. You are not an agent of the government.
You never have been an agent of the government unless, of course, you are. If you are, don’t write such an affidavit, you’re going to jail for perjury and you can’t get out of the liabilities. You put yourself in that liable position by taking a job with the government. If you like that government job put up with what you accepted. You’re getting paid a nice pay. Take all the benefits and enjoy your life but pay your taxes and don’t object to their rules and regulations—you asked for it.
But if you’re not an officer, employee or agent of government in reality then rebut it. Rebut the presumption that you are one. Whenever they bring a claim against you in your private capacity they are actually abusing the process of the court and an action can be brought against them for abuse of process for doing such a thing, for stepping outside of the boundaries of government’s authority and imposing any internal government rules and regulations, like Dave talked about tonight, that they have no promulgated regulations that impose those rules upon a particular person such as you. Then they can’t and when they do then they’re abusing the court’s process and they can be sued for abuse of process for doing that. Any debt collector lawyer that is not actually collecting the debt for the bank and all you have to do is call the bank and ask the bank if they hired Joe Schmoe lawyer to collect some debt for them and they’ll tell you, ‘no, we didn’t.’
Well, this lawyer has claimed that he’s representing the bank or the credit card company or something like that. He doesn’t have a copy of the original contract that you might have stupidly made with the bank. You should have never dealt with these damned banks—they’re unconstitutional—they’re not American. They’re un-American if they’re anything. They’re not real. They’re just fictitious and you should have never dealt with any kind of bank at all. But if you did, they don’t have any proof that you did because the original signed documents that you gave to the bank were used to create the money that the bank gave you.
They were deposited. They cannot be recovered so they can’t come up with them. An argument has been brought many times into the courts requiring them to produce the original signed document. Well, they’re attempting to get around that. Well, there’s a way to stop them from getting around that and that is this abuse of process. You make a counter action against them for abuse of process because they were never able to prove that there was a contract or an agreement between you and such a bank that they claim that they’re representing and that bank has not acknowledged that this lawyer represents them anyway. So he has falsified the claim for the collection of a debt and abused the process of the court by filing the process without any evidence which would be the contract or agreement to support his claim that there was a debt.
They’re so simple a ways of stopping these kinds of things that if we just learn to think and read a little bit further and realize the power that the people have. The last word is with the people. We can turn everything around backwards in this country. We have the power to do it and by the way, we do have the power of arrest. But I suggest you be very careful with that citizen’s arrest concept. I would have gotten myself in a lot of trouble a number of years ago doing that. I filed a warrant for the arrest of three judges. Two of them shortly after within days dropped dead of heart attacks. I filed a warrant for the arrest of the sheriff of Baltimore county. He packed his belongings and took off for Florida, checked into a motel and they found him the next morning dead of a heart attack. When you file a warrant for their arrest it really upsets them.
They end up having heart attacks—not a good thing to cause. Two judges did drop dead of heart attacks in BaltimoreCounty and the sheriff of BaltimoreCounty quit his job, left, and died of a heart attack the next day. I had made these arrest warrants up and filed them into public records at the court. Well, later on with some of my research, I found out that once it’s filed in the public record it goes down on the record as they have been arrested and charged with these offenses that I had listed. They don’t even have to be arrested and booked in the court. It’s on record that they have been arrested and charged. That was very upsetting to these people and it caused them heart attacks.
I don’t think this was a good thing to do. I think we should make these people suffer and the way to make them suffer is to sue them and drag it out in the courts. Let them suffer worrying about what’s going to happen in the court but don’t create a heart attack by filing a warrant for their arrest. Anyway, be careful of this citizen’s arrest thing. It could backfire on you for one thing, especially if you did it wrong or couldn’t prove what you were claiming. Or if you could prove what you were claiming and it was as well on point as what I had done it, it could cause their rather quick demise.
Anyway, there is a write up in Blacks Law Dictionary on abuse of process under the word, abuse, subheading process—not something that’s quick and easy to find. It’s not alphabetically put in the book under abuse of process. They did it under abuse and a subheading of process.
It says the gist of an action for an abuse of process is improper use or perversion of the process after it has been issued. And they quote a case, Publix Drug Company v. Briar Ice Cream Company and that’s at 32 Atlantic Reporter, page 413. It is a malicious abuse of legal process that occurs where the party employs it for some unlawful object like to extort money from you under some pretense that the regulation applies to you when the actual law, the real law, which is the Constitution says that they cannot apply that outside of government to you in your private capacity. So, that’s how simple this abuse of process can be used.