And to me it the biggest issue of federal overreach. Much of the attack against the 2nd Amendment is under the abuse and overreach of the Commerce Clause. It seems things like this are copied in other countries. This is an indication it is a international cabal orchestrated scheme. Canada is a good example of this. I recall the story of Rick Simpson, who had a cure for cancer using cannabis oil. He cured his own cancer and started to cure his friends cancer. He never took a single payment; not a red cent from anyone. All they had to do was ask and he'd give them a bottle of the cannibis oil that made from cannabis that grew on his Nova Scotia property. We use to call this ditch weed because that's where you'd find it.
Anyway, word got out and the Canadian medical industry came after him. They harassed him terribly and since it was a home remedy, there wasn't a Canadian medical law that they could use against Rick Simpson. So, they charged him with trafficking a product without a license. This sounded ridiculous because he wasn't selling it or was it ever 'sold' across provincial borders. This didn't stop the corrupt courts though. They ruled even products never sold fell under commerce activity. He was found guilty for 'selling' a product without a license, despite never selling any of it.
The power to misinterpret the original intent of the law is the power to abuse authority. This is what the Commerce Clause is.
I'm going to ask something of you. It's a bit of a big ask, in that it is time consuming, so if you don't have time or don't want to, I understand.
But since you have an interest in law, and the corruption involved, I would be interested in your take on what Robert Fox had to say about his experiences.
There are 6 videos, each around 2 hours long, and it can be frustrating a bit because he gets sidetracked a lot, but there are tons of hidden gems in what he had to say.
I think this information could be a valuable tool towards getting things back on track. Interested in your take:
I appreciate it, but as a general rule I don't listen to anything over 25 minutes. I just don't have the time to do it. If you could give me a bit of a synopsis of it maybe it will perk my interest. My background collided with 'lawfare'. I say this because I was often involved in 'lawfare'. I started out helping a lawyer pass the bar and ended up doing far more legal stuff than I ever want to get involved in again. With out getting into details, I won my cases for the better part and came out relatively unscathed. Later, I use to study common law and how that applied to our Constitution and each of the States Constitutions. This was many years ago, but I saw many of these people giving presentations ending up disappearing one way or another. The IRS and FBI were good at decapitation and railroading people, I've seen it all back in the 1990s. Even the group I attended was infiltrated by FBI and a few members, good honest hard working Americans, were imprisoned on false charges from moles that beared false witness against them. I met people who knew Gordon Kahl and were part of the Montana Freeman. I was friends with a County DA, who was jailed on false charges for exposing the Mena drug running that extended into my State. He had to escape out of the State in the middle of the night for fear of his life. There's far more, but I'll just say the corruption in the judicial system is ubiquitous. There is no real justice, but only the appearance of justice. This is actually taught to law students in their first year. Common law, the basis of our Constitutional laws, is being buried by the ever expanding weight of statutory law. Common law is not taught in law school, but is a mere mention of a bygone time of the past. 'Law Positive' is what is emphasized and taught in all the law schools across America and internationally. If you are not familiar with this term, look it up. It explains everything we have been witnessing. So in the end, the judge knows who their real bosses are, and it ain't you and I, but the money masters. If the judge gets out of line, he or she is falsely convicted of 'something' or ends up dead. The Judge's job is to use the art of rhetoric to provide a 'good' theatrical performance to make it appear that justice is served. Keeping the people believing in the 'balance of justice' and the impartial rulings is the one of the biggest fairy tales. There is no justice in the court room. Everything is better done before ever going into the lion's den.
Robert Fox gave a seminar in that series of videos.
He understood the corruption, first-hand. In the seminar, he goes over stories of things he did, cases he was involved in himself, and helping others.
The reason it is interesting is, according to him, he won cases that you or I would not expect to win, given the corruption.
One of his cases became a published case in the federal appeals court books. He won that, and he says his case was taught in some law schools for awhile -- having to do with immigration law. So, there is some independent corroboration there.
He says he beat the IRS, State Department, DOJ, and various state agencies, among others, on multiple subject matters, for many different people.
Get this: he beat the IRS when the IRS was charging his friend with several felonies, including assaulting 9 federal officials (IRS agents). His friends did not assault them; they assulted him. But the way he beat that charge was pointing out that IRS agents are NOT federal employees! They dropped the charges. Interesting, eh?
He got people release from jail within 1 day (or less) when he filed Habeas Corpus petitions.
He got people, who were charged with multiple felonies (bogus charges, but charges a corrupt system would railroad through), to go free.
His strategy had to do with the real law, rather than the things you are talking about, and according to him, his methods worked most of the time.
He rarely ever got into the facts of a case. Instead, he would end it before it could ever get anywhere, or even after conviction he would get people walking out the front door (convicted of a "crime" by a jury, yet no time in prison due to what occured at the allocution).
He never filed motions (asking the judge to do something the judge wouldn't want to do). Instead, he filed affidavits (statements of fact that could not be refuted, so they became the facts of the case -- binding the judge's ability to overcome). A completely different perspective on how to handle a corrupt system.
That's why I find the videos interesting.
I have seen other videos, and read the writings, of people with various legal theories. This is the first man that I have come across who seems to have been doing something that could work.
And to me it the biggest issue of federal overreach. Much of the attack against the 2nd Amendment is under the abuse and overreach of the Commerce Clause. It seems things like this are copied in other countries. This is an indication it is a international cabal orchestrated scheme. Canada is a good example of this. I recall the story of Rick Simpson, who had a cure for cancer using cannabis oil. He cured his own cancer and started to cure his friends cancer. He never took a single payment; not a red cent from anyone. All they had to do was ask and he'd give them a bottle of the cannibis oil that made from cannabis that grew on his Nova Scotia property. We use to call this ditch weed because that's where you'd find it.
Anyway, word got out and the Canadian medical industry came after him. They harassed him terribly and since it was a home remedy, there wasn't a Canadian medical law that they could use against Rick Simpson. So, they charged him with trafficking a product without a license. This sounded ridiculous because he wasn't selling it or was it ever 'sold' across provincial borders. This didn't stop the corrupt courts though. They ruled even products never sold fell under commerce activity. He was found guilty for 'selling' a product without a license, despite never selling any of it.
The power to misinterpret the original intent of the law is the power to abuse authority. This is what the Commerce Clause is.
I'm going to ask something of you. It's a bit of a big ask, in that it is time consuming, so if you don't have time or don't want to, I understand.
But since you have an interest in law, and the corruption involved, I would be interested in your take on what Robert Fox had to say about his experiences.
There are 6 videos, each around 2 hours long, and it can be frustrating a bit because he gets sidetracked a lot, but there are tons of hidden gems in what he had to say.
I think this information could be a valuable tool towards getting things back on track. Interested in your take:
Part 1 of 6 --
https://www.bitchute.com/video/q6PMqMMSasLW/
I appreciate it, but as a general rule I don't listen to anything over 25 minutes. I just don't have the time to do it. If you could give me a bit of a synopsis of it maybe it will perk my interest. My background collided with 'lawfare'. I say this because I was often involved in 'lawfare'. I started out helping a lawyer pass the bar and ended up doing far more legal stuff than I ever want to get involved in again. With out getting into details, I won my cases for the better part and came out relatively unscathed. Later, I use to study common law and how that applied to our Constitution and each of the States Constitutions. This was many years ago, but I saw many of these people giving presentations ending up disappearing one way or another. The IRS and FBI were good at decapitation and railroading people, I've seen it all back in the 1990s. Even the group I attended was infiltrated by FBI and a few members, good honest hard working Americans, were imprisoned on false charges from moles that beared false witness against them. I met people who knew Gordon Kahl and were part of the Montana Freeman. I was friends with a County DA, who was jailed on false charges for exposing the Mena drug running that extended into my State. He had to escape out of the State in the middle of the night for fear of his life. There's far more, but I'll just say the corruption in the judicial system is ubiquitous. There is no real justice, but only the appearance of justice. This is actually taught to law students in their first year. Common law, the basis of our Constitutional laws, is being buried by the ever expanding weight of statutory law. Common law is not taught in law school, but is a mere mention of a bygone time of the past. 'Law Positive' is what is emphasized and taught in all the law schools across America and internationally. If you are not familiar with this term, look it up. It explains everything we have been witnessing. So in the end, the judge knows who their real bosses are, and it ain't you and I, but the money masters. If the judge gets out of line, he or she is falsely convicted of 'something' or ends up dead. The Judge's job is to use the art of rhetoric to provide a 'good' theatrical performance to make it appear that justice is served. Keeping the people believing in the 'balance of justice' and the impartial rulings is the one of the biggest fairy tales. There is no justice in the court room. Everything is better done before ever going into the lion's den.
Robert Fox gave a seminar in that series of videos.
He understood the corruption, first-hand. In the seminar, he goes over stories of things he did, cases he was involved in himself, and helping others.
The reason it is interesting is, according to him, he won cases that you or I would not expect to win, given the corruption.
One of his cases became a published case in the federal appeals court books. He won that, and he says his case was taught in some law schools for awhile -- having to do with immigration law. So, there is some independent corroboration there.
He says he beat the IRS, State Department, DOJ, and various state agencies, among others, on multiple subject matters, for many different people.
Get this: he beat the IRS when the IRS was charging his friend with several felonies, including assaulting 9 federal officials (IRS agents). His friends did not assault them; they assulted him. But the way he beat that charge was pointing out that IRS agents are NOT federal employees! They dropped the charges. Interesting, eh?
He got people release from jail within 1 day (or less) when he filed Habeas Corpus petitions.
He got people, who were charged with multiple felonies (bogus charges, but charges a corrupt system would railroad through), to go free.
His strategy had to do with the real law, rather than the things you are talking about, and according to him, his methods worked most of the time.
He rarely ever got into the facts of a case. Instead, he would end it before it could ever get anywhere, or even after conviction he would get people walking out the front door (convicted of a "crime" by a jury, yet no time in prison due to what occured at the allocution).
He never filed motions (asking the judge to do something the judge wouldn't want to do). Instead, he filed affidavits (statements of fact that could not be refuted, so they became the facts of the case -- binding the judge's ability to overcome). A completely different perspective on how to handle a corrupt system.
That's why I find the videos interesting.
I have seen other videos, and read the writings, of people with various legal theories. This is the first man that I have come across who seems to have been doing something that could work.
Very good. You now persuaded me to look at these videos. I appreciate you taking the time to give me an idea what to expect.