Hey all,
I'ts a looonnng story, but here is a brief overview: I requested a copy of the oath of office for my state senator, Senate Pro-Tempore Toni Atkins and her deputy, Jason Weisz. The oaths came back with all signatures redacted, which indicates to me that one or both of the oaths was never fully executed. But they didn't redact the dates, and both oaths had already expired, which means both Atkins and Weisz are currently working unlawfully.
I filed a bond complaint against both Atkins and Weisz and against the two FOIA people who improperly redacted the documents. No word back on that and Atkins is still working.
I have contacted a bunch of republican organizations, who I thought would be eager to get Atkins arrested for violating Government Code sections 1360, 1362-1369 and Section 3 of Article XX of the Constitution of California, which per Title 18 U.S.C. § 912, includes fines and/or three years imprisonment. Also, all the work she's done since the expiration has to be voided (and if she never signed that oath, everything she's ever done has to be voided). Not a peep from any of them, which makes me think that maybe some republicans are working without proper oaths, too.
Curious about who else didn't have properly executed oaths, I made a request for 22 more oaths, including Scott Weiner's. They have a 2-week turn time. It has now been 7-weeks, and the Senate Committee has made it clear that this request will be "in process" indefinitely and never be fulfilled. I complained to his HR about the FOIA people violating the laws by not providing the documents, and HR didn't do anything
Toni Atkins and Scott Weiner are at the forefront of creating and pushing laws to destroy families and transition children behind parents backs. I feel like there are other groups who will run with this information and get them ousted. Do you guys have any suggestions on who I should contact/what other steps I should take?
(I didn’t search for the video yet, search history is on my home pc)
They don’t need legal standing to write up a bunch of rules, they only need it if they’re going to make a claim against you.
An example, speeding cameras, we know their only purpose is to generate revenue for the state.
They don’t need legal standing to put cameras up everywhere.
They don’t need legal standing to flash you plates.
They don’t need legal standing to send you an bill.
They don’t need legal standing if you choose to pay it.
Now, if they send you a letter saying pay us $xxx and you send a letter back asking what laws they are moving under, now they need legal standing because now if you go to court, you can pick apart their laws. Good chance whatever law they reference will apply to “motor vehicles”. Now you can argue that you were not operating a motor vehicle because you were not using it for commerce.
That concept can be used against every action against you. State, federal, dod, doj, doe, doesn’t matter.
Someone has to make a claim against you otherwise you are presuming it applies to you, and you can’t dismantle a corrupt system with such presumption.
Only when they make the claim that you did xyz can you challenge them; “well how does xyz apply to me?” Since these everyday agents are just doing their job, they will be relentless until they realize they can be personally liable. You do that with bar grievances, judicial complaints. You go after their bond (which includes their oath). You can get them to leave you alone but you can’t get them to leave everyone else alone.
My thoughts are all over the place when it comes to this kinda stuff but I hope that makes sense.
I think you may be conflating two separate issues. Everything you said about jurisdiction is correct. However, the people in the fake jurisdiction still have to sign an oath to that fake jurisdiction and have legal standing within that fake jurisdiction. But we can opt out of their jurisdiction because it is fake.
Right now, few people understand the concept of jurisdiction. In my case, I am trying to show that the legislators are cheating at their own rules. Once they have lost credibility, people will be more open to letting go of the brainwashing that has been ingrained in us since birth. It then opens the door to the constitutionalists to step in and show how the rules the legislators created were never constitutional in the first place.