374
Comments (32)
sorted by:
18
CokeOrPepe 18 points ago +18 / -0

All it takes is one juror. On that note, never plead out, make them prove your guilty. All that “we’ll make sure you rot in prison, just plead out” is just words. Make them prove it.

8
VetforTrump 8 points ago +8 / -0

Better yet, don't contract with the court in the first place.

11
SoMuchWinning45 11 points ago +11 / -0

I firmly believe that lawyers are British agents, and that "judges" are lesser nobility. Maybe we didn't win the War of 1812 after all.

10
LeeChild 10 points ago +10 / -0

Smart....

What gave it away? The "ESQ" in their signatures? Many people gloss over this but this is factual.

16
SoMuchWinning45 16 points ago +16 / -0

Not even that really. That they apply to the "Bar," the British Accredited Registry/Register/Registrar in order to "practice" law. That "judges" can make up decisions and laws out of thin air. Because they seem to have extraordinary power, deciding what may or may not be presented in a case as evidence, telling reporters to delete spoken words from the written record, threatening people with "contempt of court" if they speak out of line or out of turn. That you "rise" when they walk out of their "chambers."

Nobility wore robes when they "held court." You also knelt in front of them as a symbol of subservience, acknowledging that they're actually above you in life as if by divine right. That people call them "Your Honor," rather than Sire, Your Majesty, My Liege, Your Highness.

You can change the language all you want, and even some of the actions, but they have the same, old meaning. You're submitting to people as if they're above you in life by some divine right. That's why I think our entire judicial system should come crashing down, and replaced with American Constitutional Law.

5
tstr 5 points ago +5 / -0

It's maritime or admiralty. The common law, law of the land, was set aside and maritime brought in by the British. You can challenge jurisdiction...

4
SoMuchWinning45 4 points ago +4 / -0

What does challenging jurisdiction do? People on all sides, including on here, laugh at the sovereign citizen movement. I still don't get how maritime/admiralty law is different from British Common Law. We do have juries over here, and the "judge" isn't the sole arbiter of what goes on.

1
tstr 1 point ago +1 / -0

Don't say sovereign citizen. All people of the US Republic were sovereign. This is what made America so different. We had/have a contract with a governing body that limits what they can and cannot do. (Constitution)

A citizen is a member of a political body and is not sovereign. A citizen is the equivalent of a subject, someone who is ruled over. A sovereign is ruled over only by God.

When one agrees to be a US Citizen they lose their sovereignty. Birth certificates, SSN's, drivers licenses are all contracts that adhere you to their political system. The Constitution protected the right to travel. US Citizens have the privilege of driving if licensed.

In Common Law there are Justices, in Admiralrty there are Judges.

They effectively turned all of our rights into privileges. You as an individual can remove yourself from their political corporate system and return to common law but you have to decalre your political status and rescind all the contracts. When in court you have to declare such things and learn their deceptive language. Simple things like admitting to understanding means you now stand under their authority. Answering to your strawman name is agreeing to contract.

This is a huge subject and not one that can be explained in a forum post. You have to dig and do a lot of learning on your own but there are resources and people that can help.

1
VetforTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

When you hire a lawyer he will have power of attorney and he will contract you with the court. Or if you sign a notice to appear you signed a contract. By the way, you have three days to rescind any signature document under the fair trade laws.

2
freedomfountain 2 points ago +2 / -0

THIS

1
VetforTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

You have good reason to believe that. Theybare unwittingly but none the less are as members of the barr own3d by the British guild.

The Barr is not state run its a corporation out of Puerto Rico.

3
MAGA124 3 points ago +3 / -0

"I decline your offer to contract."

2
PepeSee 2 points ago +2 / -0

They better not fuck up voir dire.

2
judypatriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

If they are smart, social media will be checked before the jury pool is notified. That way, anyone who scrubs can be easily identified.

7
inquimous 7 points ago +7 / -0

It was evident in Strzok-page texts that they were keeping Priestap out of the loop. He might be a little peeved with the whole Crossfire Hurricane plan.

7
GreazyCheeks 7 points ago +7 / -0

What about military tribunals?

4
Acala 4 points ago +4 / -0

The chess game isn't over yet. I don't even think we're in the end game yet.

5
HunnyB 5 points ago +5 / -0

Correct they're still cleaning up the pawns...hence the 2000 mules.

Even Soros, Obama, and Hillary aren't the big players they're knights at best.

When we start getting at the ones behind them we will be heading towards endgame.

0
1776forever1776 0 points ago +1 / -1

Too busy talking to China and arming Ukrainian

6
VetforTrump 6 points ago +6 / -0

Good post.

4
GetsTheNogginJoggin 4 points ago +4 / -0

What about the Obama appointed judge limiting the testimony to be heard because “Sussman isn’t charged in a larger conspiracy?”

2
Razo 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ok, its nice their power was removed and that they are cooperating with Durham but that also means they have been out of the FBI (or neutered) for 4 years and the FBI still seems just as corrupt and useless as ever so I hope there is some kind of plan to deal with the FBI because just removing the players above didn't do anything.

Wow that was an epic run-on sentence but I'm keeping it because I still thinks its grammatically correct lol

1
patriot68 1 point ago +1 / -0

*it's 😁

2
y000danon 2 points ago +2 / -0

More than this - Epoch Times ( https://archive.ph/KJmm3 ) is disclosing the Panic in the FBI when GEOTUS started carpet bombing them.

Notable: first time I have seen Tashina Guahar mentioned anywhere near the MSM - also close to 4 years from Q first mention ( https://operationq.pub/?n=1807 )


https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download 
Figure 3.1 - FBI Chain of Command for the Midyear Investigation
James Comey - FBI Director - FIRED
Jim Rybicki - Chief of Staff (JC) - FIRED
Andrew McCabe - Deputy Director - FIRED
James Baker - Office of General Counsel - FIRED
Bill Priestap - Head of Counterintelligence (Strzok's boss) - POWER REMOVED / COOPERATING WITNESS
Lisa Page - Special Counsel - FIRED 
Peter Strzok - Lead Investigator/Deputy Asst Director of Counterintelligence - POWER REMOVED / ESCORTED OUT [CLAS-F]
Michael Steinbach?
John Glacalone?
Randy Coleman?
Trisha Anderson?
Kevin Clinesmith?
Tashina Gauhar?
Sally Moyer?
NOTHING TO SEE HERE?
LOGICAL THINKING.
BIGGEST COVER UP IN US HISTORY [ATTEMPTED].
Q

Guahar is going to jail. Zero ways around it. She was ODNI / ODAG and actively classified much of the Russiagate bullshit knowingly.

1
KEKtheMIGHTY1776 1 point ago +3 / -2

Funny how much less of the "haha Q's a larp, dumbass!" dribble I'm hearing these days

1
HopelesslyHopeful 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just go over to P.Win and you'll here "'Just two more weeks' rofl" or "'trust the plan' lmao" like they're a bunch of Reddit bots that have gotten loose.

Q and anons are still considered to be tinfoil hat wearers sitting at the kids table while people like AJ have left the kids table and are now sitting with the grown-ups.

3
muhqtardtho 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's because p.win is just reddit for the right. They literally got corraled into r/the Donald and migrated there. You can't expect anything from such astroturfed web sites. Thats why I'm glad this board is so small. Shills stick out like bill gates baby bump.

-1
WeAreTheBadGuys -1 points ago +1 / -2

Im not seeing it.