Usufruct Affidavit

Notice that Boris's latest 10/23 audio confirms my assertion that bills are really credit vouchers, and that we should accept, indorse, and return them as lawful money payments. 

So does Anna Reitz, in here remarks cited at:
What appears to be a bill comes addressed to YOUR NAME in capital letters and your address.  Unknown to you, this "billing statement" isn't really a true bill and it isn't addressed to you.  It is addressed to a franchise of a governmental services corporation and the "statement" is actually a voucher allowing you to cash in a "dividend" equal to the amount shown as due and owing-- but of course, you are never told this and you are never told how to fill out the coupon for credit.  

Dishonors of these "indorsed bill payments" would constitute insurrection and rebellion against the United States per Section 4 of the 14th Amendment by questioning the public debt.

Notice that the "public debt" has to have a counterpart "public credit" according the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles" (GAAP) that governs all commercial activity using the double-entry bookkeeping paradigm.

Anna Reitz concurs:
Beyond that, we also come to the issue of National Credit. All these fiat money systems have been operated as debt-credit systems.  Every time you create a debt in such a system you also create a credit. Therefore, every National Debt is counterbalanced by a National Credit. Why have you never heard about your National Credit, only your National Debt? 
Because the perpetrators fully intended to leave the working people holding the bag while they siphoned off and absconded with not only the National Credit owed, but the underlying actual physical assets as well. 
They won't be able to do that now, because now you know the truth about "National Debts" and how those National Debts were accrued by credit fraud, and you also know that you are owed an equal National Credit.

This "public debt" is owed to people for their deposit of their private labor as the "public credit" of the nation, pledged at birth.

Notice this excerpt from "Public Debt Private Assets" publication from the FRB in Chicago, at the top of page 5 (boldface added):

"We all know what debt is when it is our own—we owe money to someone else. On the other hand, it may not be so easy to understand that many of our financial assets are someone else’s debts. For example, to a consumer a savings account at a bank is an asset. However, to the bank it is a debt."

This "public credit" should be accessible to the people that provide it.

See "Accessing your own value - A Paradigm Shift" and "Indorsed Bill Remedy" to see how it could be done.


In Support of
Indorsed Bill Payment

John Henry Doe, being duly sworn, does hereby solemnly declare:

1.      That the Undersigned, John Henry Doe, hereinafter "Affiant", is over the age of eighteen (18) years and competent to testify; and further,
2.      That Affiant has first hand knowledge of the facts testified to herein; and further,
3.      That the facts testified to are true, correct, certain, and not misleading; and further,
4.      That it was, is, and always will be the intent and deed of the Affiant to demand lawful money for all transactions ever since <date of first demand>, per 12 USC 411; and further,
5.      That it was, is, and always will be the intent and deed of the Affiant to demand full discharge and acquittance for all transactions tendering payments for all obligations ever since <date of first demand>, per 12 USC 95a(2); and further,
6.      That Affiant has not seen or presented with any verified evidence, and believes that none exists, that sufficiently demonstrates probable cause to believe:
  1. that a bank emergency was not declared on March 9, 1933 by the President Roosevelt because of the insolvency of the United States; and,
  2. that gold was not transferred from U.S. Citizens to the United States by Executive Order 6102 on May 1, 1933 for the purpose of mitigating said insolvency; and,
  3. that charges of treason and theft were not filed by Congressman Louis T. McFadden on May 23, 1933 concerning said transfer; and,
  4. that Congress did not pass House Joint Resolution 192 on June 5, 1933 to mitigate said charges by providing to U.S. Citizens the consideration of the equitable right of setoff of their debt obligations, dollar for dollar, by the United States Treasury; and,
  5. that said transfer did not create a trust, hereinafter “Trust”; and,
  6. that the right of setoff of all debt obligations of U.S. Citizens is not the res of said Trust; and,
  7. that said transfer did not make U.S. Citizens the Grantors of said Trust; and,
  8. that said transfer did not make U.S. Citizens the Beneficiaries of said Trust; and,
  9. that the Beneficiary is not a U.S. Citizen; and,
  10. that said transfer did not make the United States Congress, hereinafter “Trustee”,  the Trustee of said Trust; and,
  11. that all commercial entities operating under the jurisdiction and licensing of the United States are not thereby agents or instrumentalities thereof, acting as its trustees having the capacity to ledger the equitable right of setoff payments via deposit of same to the United States Treasury; and,
  12. that the failure of said agents to ledger upon receipt the indorsed obligations of any U.S. Citizen as a right of setoff does not constitute a breach of said Trust; and,
  13. that payment by performance, specifically the performance of Beneficiary’s indorsement authorizing the Trustee to pay by setoff against the debt of property and labor owed by the United States Treasury to the Beneficiary, is not the only means of payment available to the Beneficiary per the intent and purpose of said Trust; and,
  14. that “payment” and “promise of payment” are not economic and accounting terms that are essentially different in form and substance, in that the former has the capacity to settle and discharge a debt and the latter does not, but can only delay and displace such debt; and,
  15. that presentments of debt for settlement are not asking for payment, but rather for the promise of payment that are represented by liability instruments such as Federal Reserve Notes, checks, and credit; and,
  16. that said payment cannot be effected solely and simply by the Beneficiary’s indorsement on the presentment of debt obligations, for deposit to the United States Treasury; and,
  17. that the liability for a debt obligation does not transfer to the holder of said payment for said obligation if holder fails to make deposit of said to the United States Treasury or fails to receive a rejection by the United States Treasury of said deposit; and,
  18. that the Beneficiary’s acceptance and indorsement of debt obligation presentments do not constitute contracts made in good faith reliance on 12 USC 411 and 12 USC 95a(2) to transfer said Beneficiary’s equitable title to the public credit associated with said obligations to the presenters of same and thereby enable said presenters to deposit said credit to the United States as tender of payment in lawful money for full acquittance and discharge of said obligations; and,
  19. that, absent refusal for cause of said payments for deposit to the United States, any further attempts at collection of said obligations after said payments for same were tendered in good faith and received, would not constitute questioning the validity of the public debt and credit of the United States, and be a cause of action against same for instigating insurrection and rebellion against the United States pursuant to Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, and for imposing involuntary servitude under 18 USC 241, 1584 and U.S. v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931 (1988); and,
  20. that said payments do not constitute negotiable instruments that have the capacity to transfer title to transferee of same; and,
  21. that this instant Affidavit does not constitute admissible evidence, truth in commerce, and equitable estoppel if not timely rebutted point by point by parties so noticed thereof, under the full faith and credit of the United States for public acts and records of each State (Article IV); and,
  22. that said Beneficiaries may not collect bounties for services rendered in suppressing insurrection and rebellion against the United States instigated by parties who question the public debt and credit of the United States by dishonoring tenders of lawful money payments in good faith reliance upon 12 USC 411, 12 USC 95a(2) and Section 4 of the 14th Amendment; and,
  23. that Affiant is not one of the general executors for the Beneficiaries which are agents and instrumentalities of the United States, and as such has a duty and the authority to protect the property of the United States; and,
  24. that failure to report insurrection and rebellion against the United States to government authorities would not constitute Misprision of Felony under 18 USC 4; and,
  25. that parties so notified under 18 USC 4 that collude to ignore or obstruct said reports of insurrection and rebellion against the United States would not likewise be reportable for conspiracy for same under 18 USC 371; and,
  26. that the honoring of said payments would not immediately stimulate the economy of the United States, reduce the national debt, and restore our national security and sovereignty as successfully proven by the example of same by the Monetary Policies of President Lincoln’s Administration in the 1860’s; and,
  27. that military rule is not extant in the United States by the presence of the military in the country and over the people since President Lincoln’s proclamation on April 15, 1861 because of the extraordinary occasion of a sine die Congress; and,
  28. that said military rule is not governed by the Lieber Code and the International Law; and,
  29. that the rules of usufruct are incorporated into the Lieber Code and International Law; and,
  30. that said rules of usufruct are not currently acknowledged as applicable by international organizations, such as the International Red Cross; and,
  31. that Article 38 of the Lieber Code is not the codification of the rule of usufruct requiring receipts for indemnification when private property is seized by the occupying force; and,
  32. that said receipt for indemnification is not effected by the Certificate of Live Birth instruments upon seizure of the people’s estates at birth by said occupying forces and agents thereof; and,
  33. that Article 55 of the 1907 Hague Convention does not establish that said occupying forces or State shall be regarded only as administrator and usufructuary of public buildings, real estate, forests, and agricultural estates belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country; and must safeguard the capital of these properties, and administer them in accordance with the rules of usufruct; and,
  34. that the Law of Nations and all treaties made in accordance thereto, are not currently binding on all nations on Earth; and,
  35. <<< TO BE CONTINUED >>>
Further Affiant sayeth naught.

By: /s/ John Henry Doe, a man, certificate holder, general executor for JOHN HENRY DOE, estate in reversion; 
All rights reserved

STATE OF                                                                            )
                                                                                                )  ss.                       
COUNTY OF                                                                        )

On the ______ day of ____________________, 20____ A.D., before me, the above signatory personally appeared before me and proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he or she executed the same in his or her authorized capacity and as a free act and deed, and that by his or her signature on the instrument, the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, signed under oath or asseveration, and accepts the truth thereof.

______________________________ __________________________
Notary name PRINTED                 Notary Signature Seal/Stamp

______________________________ __________________________

Notary City and State                 My commission expires

AFFIDAVIT in Support of Indorsed Bill Payment in RE: JOHN HENRY DOE              Page __ of __

COVER LETTER TO COUNTY CLERK (leave 2-inch margin at top):

John H. Doe
100 Main Street
City, State 99999

___________ County Registrar
100 Main Street
City, State 99999

In Re: the matter of JOHN HENRY DOE

Dear Register of Deeds:

The enclosed documents, listed below, are provided for ENTRY into the record, by special appearance, In Re: the matter of JOHN HENRY DOE.

Thank you for your attention in this matter.


John Henry                       Doe
Christian Name                Surname

1. 12 USC 95a (accepted)
2. 12 USC 411 (accepted)
3. Affidavit in Support of Indorsed Bill Payment
4. Notary Certificate of Commission 


No comments:

Post a Comment