Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

Standard Oil Company, originally founded in the 1890's, was a business trust, not a corporation (which were not in common use back then). Due to Rockfeller's attempts at monopoly, we get such terms as "trust busting" and "anti-trust" laws which were aimed at breaking up the monopoly power of the Standard Oil buiness trust. That's how business was done back then.

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court has called a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would make it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank in America, like the one they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed every 20 years.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.

Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

Standard Oil Company, originally founded in the 1890's, was a business trust, not a corporation (which were not in common use back then). Due to Rockfeller's attempts at monopoly, we get such terms as "trust busting" and "anti-trust" laws which were aimed at breaking up the monopoly power of the Standard Oil buiness trust. That's how business was done back then.

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court has called a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would make it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank in America, like the one they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.

Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

Standard Oil Company, originally founded in the 1890's, was a business trust, not a corporation (which were not in common use back then). Due to Rockfeller's attempts at monopoly, we get such terms as "trust busting" and "anti-trust" laws which were aimed at breaking up the monopoly power of the Standard Oil buiness trust. That's how business was done back then.

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court would call a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would make it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank, like they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.

Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

Standard Oil Company, originally founded in the 1890's, was a business trust, not a corporation (which were not in common use back then). Due to Rockfeller's attempts at monopoly, we get such terms as "trust busting" and "anti-trust" laws which were aimed at breaking up the monopoly power of the Standard Oil buiness trust. That's how business was done back then.

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court would call a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would made it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank, like they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.

Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

Standard Oil Company, originally founded in the 1890's, was a business trust, not a corporation (which were not in common use back then). Due to Rockfeller's attempts and monopoly, we get such terms as "trust busting" and "anti-trust" laws which were aimed at breaking up the monopoly power of the Standard Oil buiness trust. That's how business was done back then.

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court would call a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would made it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank, like they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.

Contract law is a tool of cabal power

No, contract law is part of the common law.

The US Constitution even guarantees the right to contract.

Article 1, Section 10:

No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts ...

States add statutory (civil law) over the top of the common law structure, but the common law structure is still there.

What the cabal has done is to use contract law in a deceptive and hidden way.

For example, you sign a contract (whether you know it or not) as a condition of obtaining a "driver's license."

You have no idea what that contract says or obligates you to do or not do, because that is not disclosed to you.

This makes it a voidable contract, by common law, but nobody knows that.

It also does not disclose to you when the "driver's license" is required and when it is not.

Like a real estate contract, ONLY that which is in writing matters.

They can lie to you all they want, because their verbal claims mean nothing. It is ONLY what is in the contract that matters -- and you have no idea what that is.

It would be good to have a discussion on corporations as well and their place in society.

Corporations are creatures of the state. You enter into an agreement WITH THE STATE to create a corporation. By doing so, you agree to FOLLOW THE STATE'S RULES regarding that corporation.

Again, you have a common law RIGHT to enter into that contract. But the problem is that the state does not tell you all the rules -- some of which might be made up as they go -- which means it is not a valid contract, per common law (because there is no real "meeting of the minds," which is a common law principle for a valid contract, and one that all civil law courts recognize because it is so obvious; they hide it though, when the government is the one committing the fraud).

Before corporations, businesses were either sole proprietorships, partnerships, or the sophisticated businessman created a business trust (also known as common law trust).

All 3 central banks in the United States (Bank of the United States, Second Bank of the United States, and the Federal Reserve Bank) were created as business trusts.

Such trusts would usually have a fixed term of 20 years before they would expire.

This was due to the common law trust principles developed in Engand, going back 500 years.

The Bank of the United States was the first central bank, established in 1791. It was a trust (business trust, or common law trust, or what the US Supreme Court would call a pure trust).

As such, it MUST have an expiration date, which could not exceed "21 years after lives in being," which was an English common law principle of trusts.

As a practical matter, they would made it a nice, round 20 years.

Which means, it would expire in 1811.

THIS was the real reason for the War of 1812. The US Congress was not going to renew the central bank, and England's power structure (Rothschilds, etc.) wanted the central bank, like they controlled in England.

Although the US won that war, the central banking crowd still got what they really wanted by creating the Second Bank of the United States, in 1816.

That, too, was a business trust which would expire in 20 years. But President Andrew Jackson was in office, and he was opposed to renewal. The bankers tried to assasinate him to get what they wanted.

But, they failed. I believe this is why he is on the $20 bill. It is their "fuck you" to Jackson. Because although he won the day, and central banking ceased to exist in 1836, it would rear its ugly head again in 1913.

From 1836 to 1913, WITHOUT a central bank, America experienced the greatest period of economic expansion and prosperity in the history of the world.

The Federal Reserve Bank was created in 1913, and it too was a business trust -- orginally.

It would expire in 1933, the year they confiscated gold.

But this time, the central bankers were prepared. They had developed the civil law for corporations from around 1900 until the 1920's.

In 1927, the Federal Reserve Bank business trust converted from a business trust to a corporation. The reason: corporations have perpetual life, and never expire. They no longer needed congressional approval (or oversight) to be renewed.

THIS is what gave them their ultimate power.

Corporations are a good thing, overall. They were originally created by the king (once again!) to limit liability of investors.

This is a NECESSARY component in a strong, economic system. Today, it is abused. But the concept is a good one, at least in theory.

The king would create a special charteer for a corporation. Any investor would be able to contribute money, but if anything went wrong (the ship sinks, for example), nobody could sue the investor (or the king!). They could only sue the corporation, which might or might have have any assets left.

The corporation has taken over for the buisness trust. The business trust still exists, but so few people understand it -- especially attorneys and bankers -- that it is rarely used as a practical matter.

Before corporations, the trustees had liability for the wrongful acts of a business owned by the trust. Today, neither the shareholders, directors, nor officers of a corporation are held accountable for wrongful acts -- even if it is outright criminal in nature.

That is where it has gone off the rails. A corporation should not be able to shield the individual for CRIMINAL acts. Investment ideas that don't work out and lose money? Ok. That's one thing. But outright fraud or other criminal acts (such as these vaccine companies) should be prosecuted against the individuals who committed the crimes.

I believe they were originally meant to be temporary arrangements, to help with national projects such as building railroads,

No, that is not correct, but ...

but the concept has been abused because of its power.

Yes, that is correct. But this is due to the liability shield that the government grants to the individuals who work for the corporation, but commit crimes.

This can be changed by the legislature, excpet that they are bought and paid for by these very people who like getting away with their crimes.