Jul
23
THE AUDACITY OF HYPE: NOT MY FOUNDING FATHERS
Filed Under Articles of Confederation, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTION, FREEDOM, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, Martial Law, Northwest Ordinance | 1 Comment
According to Glenn Beck, he never met a Founding Father he didn’t like. Beck gushes over these men like school girls swoon over the latest music celebrity. Beck may never end his love affair with these bewigged silk stockinged part time citizen statesmen. We, however, can take them exactly for what they were savvy men of business.
As leaders of American commerce, the so-called Founding Fathers hitched or rigged what passed for government in America to the rising star of American business enterprise, by taking the United States of America public. The assets of the United States of America were incorporated in the United States Inc. All went well until government started to be the rising star and that proved to be quite a drag, since it is a dead or dying star going nowhere but down.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 was hyped to Americans as a panacea for the kind of economic downturn we would call a recession. Such recessions are part of the business cycle, but now they are the basis for governmental intervention. Up to the time of the Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787, the government of the United States of America was as close as any government has come to being libertarian then George Washington found himself leading the secret Constitutional Convention of May 25, 1787.
The official story of the historians who work at the Library built by Congress is that the Constitution of the United States replaced the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 on March 4, 1789, the date the Congress of the United States first convened. No other historian disagrees with the historians at the Library of Congress. No attorney I know has ever read the Articles of Confederation, so they would not know why the Articles of Confederation were replaced and not repealed.
The hype has always been that the Articles of Confederation were repealed, but that lie had to be modified because the Articles are still part of the four Organic Laws. The Articles formed a Confederacy of sovereign, free and independent States so the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 wouldn’t do for the United States, which were not sovereign, free or independent.
The Articles of Confederation were replaced by the Constitution of the United States, because the Union of United States is much less than the United States of America and that’s not hype.
Veneration of the Founding Fathers violates the principle of not elevating men above law. With the Founding Fathers out of the way of our research and investigation, we can reconstruct the crime scene, when the smartest men in the Constitutional Convention ended freedom in America. Glenn Beck can’t teach you what he doesn’t know. This is the only place in the world where you can learn the truth about law and government came to be what they are. To become a Student contact me, for a good laugh watch or listen to Glenn Beck.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jul
22
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES GEORGE WASHINGTON AND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA GEORGE WASHINGTON THE POWER TO MAKE THE LAW AND TO ENFORCE IT
Filed Under Articles of Confederation, Electoral College, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, Oath of Office, PRESIDENTS, Presidential Elector | Leave a Comment
George Washington was elected President of the United States of America on February 4, 1789, by Article II Section 1 Clause 2 Electors, who are today known collectively as the Electoral College. Article II Section 1 Clause 1 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787 vests the executive Power in “a President of the United States of America.” George Washington took the oral oath to the Office of President of the United States on April 30, 1789.
Article I Section 1 vests “All legislative Powers herein granted” in “a Congress of United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article I Section 7 imposes legislative duties on the President of the United States, making him an employee.
George Washington’s solution to combining executive and legislative powers? Just call Mr. President.
Once a Student masters the Constitution of September 17, 1787, reading the law is child’s play, but why bother, if all law is written for the government or the land owned by the United States of America. Want limited government? Don’t bother voting Libertarian, forget about voting all together. Enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government and learn the law that limits the federal government to what it owns and the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jun
29
PREPARING FOR THE INEVITABLE COLLAPSE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Filed Under COMMON LAW, CONSTITUTION, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, Martial Law, PRESIDENTS, State of California | Leave a Comment
Everyone with an informed opinion knows government in California based on the Constitution of the State of California and the Constitution of the United States is headed toward total collapse. The only viable law outside of that for the land owned by the United States of America will be the English common law.
Fortunately, governments only seek to control productivity governments produce nothing. We can survive the end of this government, if we are prepared. The destruction of Government will not be complete, because the federal government will try to maintain control over the property in California owned by the United States of America. The State of California’s collapse will give us another chance to get it right.
The coming collapse of the State of California will herald the return to the legitimate government that existed during the American Revolution and after the defeat of the English monarchy and before the rise of George Washington and the Presidents. My Students are learning how all governments in America came to be and why the worse ones are teetering near collapse now.
Successful reconstruction of society depends on a total comprehension of the errors of the past and the knowledge necessary to avoid those errors in the future. By becoming a Student, you will learn how government was broken and what can be fixed.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jun
28
WHY YOU HAVE TO LEARN THE LAW
Filed Under Adoption, Articles of Confederation, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTION, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, PRESIDENTS, Supreme Court | Leave a Comment
The federal government isn’t the President and Congress of the United States and the Supreme Court of the United States that just happens to be “the type of a particular activity or the manner in which the Government conducts it.” The “it” is the administration of the United States and other property belonging to the United States of America. The federal government is the United States of America, the Confederacy established by the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777. The Constitution of September 17, 1787 spun the Articles of Confederation into the federal government and made possible the President’s administration. The Federal Crop Insurance case should be read by anyone interested in limited government here is a piece of it:
FEDERAL CROP INSURANCE CORPORATION v. MERRILL
It is too late in the day to urge that the Government is just another private litigant, for purposes of charging it with liability, whenever it takes over a business theretofore conducted by private enterprise or engages in competition with private ventures. Government is not partly public or partly private, depending upon the governmental pedigree of the type of a particular activity or the manner in which the Government conducts it. The Government may carry on its operations through conventional executive agencies or through corporate forms especially created for defined ends. (Citations Omitted) Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority. The scope of this authority may be explicitly defined by Congress or be limited by delegated legislation, properly exercised through the rule-making power. And this is so even though, as here, the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority. 332 U.S. 380, 384 (1947)
The President of the United States, Congress of the United States and the Supreme Court of the United States are limited to the United States, its “government” and its citizens. You won’t be free until you learn how to read and understand the law. To get the information you need, you must enroll in my Basic Course in Law and Government, contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jun
26
WHY THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX OF 1894 WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Filed Under CONSTITUTION, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN | 4 Comments
The federal income tax of 1894 consisted of eleven paragraphs numbered from 27 to 37. Paragraph 29 caused the tax to be declared unconstitutional, because a duty to make a return of taxable property was imposed, without apportioning the tax. The imposition of a legal duty to make a return of taxable property is how a direct tax is created, but the Constitution of September 17, 1787 requires all direct taxes to be apportioned. Now you know why Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says the federal income is voluntary.
ACT OF AUGUST 28, 1894.
28 Statutes at Large 509
CHAP. CCCXLIX, AN ACT TO REDUCE TAXATION, TO PRO-
VIDE REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
***
SECTION 29.
That it shall be the duty of all persons of lawful age having an income of more than three thousand five hundred dollars for the taxable year, computed on the basis herein prescribed, to make and render a list or return, on or before the day provided by law, in such form and manner as may be directed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to the collector or a deputy collector of the district in which they reside, of the amount of their income, gains, and profits, as aforesaid; and all guardians and trustees, executors, administrators, agents, receivers, and all persons or corporations acting in any fiduciary capacity, shall make and render a list or return, as aforesaid, to the collector or a deputy collector of the district in which such person or corporation acting in a fiduciary capacity resides or does business, of the amount of income, gains, and profits of any minor or person for whom they act, but persons having less than three thousand five hundred dollars income are not required to make such report; and the collector or deputy collector, shall require every list or return to be verified by the oath or affirmation of the party rendering it, and may increase the amount of any list or return if he has reason to believe that the same is understood; and in case any such person having a taxable income shall neglect or refuge .to make and render such list and return, or shall render a willfully false or fraudulent list or return, it shall be the duty of the collector or deputy collector, to make such list, according to the best information he can obtain, by the examination of such person, or any other evidence, and to add fifty per centum as a penalty to the amount of the tax due on such list in all cases of willful neglect or refusal to make and render a list or return; and in all cases of a willfully false or fraudulent list or return having been rendered to add one hundred per centum as a penalty to the amount of tax ascertained to be due, the tax and the additions thereto as a penalty to be assessed and collected in the manner provided for in other cases of willful neglect or refusal to render a list or return, or of rendering a false or fraudulent return: Provided, That any person or corporation in his, her, or its own behalf, or as such fiduciary, shall be permitted to declare, under oath or affirmation, the form and manner of which shall be prescribed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, that he, she, or his or her, or its ward or beneficiary was not possessed of an income of four thousand dollars, liable to be assessed according to the provisions of this Act; or may declare, that he, she, or it, or his, her, or its ward or beneficiary has been assessed and has paid an income tax elsewhere in the same year, under authority of the United States, upon all his, her, or its income, gains, or profits, and upon all the income, gains, or profits for which he, she, or it is liable as such fiduciary, as prescribed by law; and if the collector or deputy collector shall be satisfied of the truth of the declaration, such person or corporation shall thereupon be exempt from income tax in the said district for that year; or if the list or return of any person or corporation, company, or association shall have been increased by the collector or deputy collector, such person or corporation, company, or association may be permitted to prove the amount of income liable to be assessed; but such proof shall not be considered as. conclusive of the facts, and no deductions claimed in such cases shall he made or allowed until approved by the collector or deputy collector. Any person or company, corporation or association feeling aggrieved by the decision of the deputy collector, in such cases may appeal to the collector of the district, and his decision thereon, unless reversed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, shall be final. If dissatisfied with the decision of the collector such person or corporation, company or association may submit the case, with all the papers, to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for his decision, and may furnish the testimony of witnesses to prove any relevant facts, having served notice to that effect upon the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, as herein prescribed. Such notice shall state the time and place at which, and the officer before whom, the testimony will be taken; the name, age, residence, and business of the proposed witness, with the questions to be propounded to the witness, or a brief statement of the substance of the testimony he is expected to give: Provided, That the Government may at the same time and place take testimony upon like notice to rebut the testimony of the witnesses examined by the person taxed. The notice shall be delivered or mailed to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue a sufficient number of days previous to the day fixed for taking the testimony, to allow him, after its receipt, at least five days, exclusive of the period required for mail communication with the place at which the testimony is to be taken, in which to give, should he so desire, instructions as to the cross examination if the proposed witness. Whenever practicable, the affidavit or deposition shall be taken before a collector or deputy collector of Internal Revenue, in which case reasonable notice shall be given to the collector or deputy collector of the time fixed for taking the deposition or affidavit: Provided, further. That no penalty shall be assessed upon any person or corporation, company, or association for such neglect or refusal or for making or rendering a willfully false or fraudulent return, except after reasonable notice of the time and place of hearing, to be prescribed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, so as to give the person charged on opportunity to be heard.
***
To learn everything you don’t know now about law and government, take my Basic Course in Law and Government by contacting me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Jun
10
YOU, TOO, CAN BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
Filed Under Adoption, Article II Section 1 Clause 5, Article II Section 1 Clause 8, Articles of Confederation, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTION, Declaration of Independence, Electoral College, FREEDOM, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, Northwest Ordinance, Oath of Office, PRESIDENTS, Presidential Elector | Leave a Comment
Before George Washington could become the first President of the United States, there had to be a United States he could preside over.
The Declaration of Independence created a United States of America on July 4, 1776, but King George III was not sufficiently impressed to let the thirteen American colonies go free. Great Britain would not let go of the Americans until the Treaty of Paris of 1783. In the mean time, the thirteen States began organizing around the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 and by March 1, 1781 all those States were perpetually bound into the Confederacy known to this day as the United States of America.
The Americans, of course, won the War of Independence and lands south of Canada once claimed by the British, the Northwest Territory. The Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 made this former British territory permanently part of the United States of America Confederacy. These United States, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin and part of Minnesota were the first States of a new Union of States, which belonged to the United States of America and were, also, of the United States of America.
The Constitution of September 17, 1787 that comes out of a secret session of the Constitutional Convention of May 25, 1787 was part of the plan for there to be a “United States” for George Washington to be President of the United States of. Before Washington can become President of the United States he has to be first elected to the Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 office of President of the United States of America on February 4, 1789, so he can appoint himself to the office of President of the United States.
As President of the Constitutional Convention, Washington knows that he must first be elected President of the United States of America by the State’s Presidential Electors before he can take the oral oath of office of President of the United States. Those famous Framers of the Constitution have concocted an elaborate oral employment oath grander than the Article VI oath and almost poetic in its tone for the person, who is to fill the office of President of the United States.
Only Washington and his confederates know that neither he nor anyone else will be eligible to the Article II Section 1 Clause 5 Office of President until July 4, 1790. Anyone with any political influence is in on the conspiracy to take over the Confederacy and replace it with a Roman Republic.
Many of these confederates have been elected to the first Congress, which will meet for the first time on March 4, 1789 in New York City. It will be the responsibility of this Congress that all Americans know that this Congress is preparing the new oath of office for the new government and the oath will be the first Bill Congress passes and the first one George Washington signs as President of the United States.
George Washington has made it possible for anyone to be President of the United States. Thanks to George there are no age, citizenship or residency requirements for the office of President of the United States. To be a President of the United States all you have to have is a voice. You can even whisper the oath as George Washington did the first time he took the oath.
Don’t want to President of the United States? You just want your freedom? Then you have to become a Student. Contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Apr
28
SENATORS DIDN’T READ THE DEMOCRAT HEALTH CARE REFORM BILL. WORSE THEY HAVEN’T READ THE ORGANIC LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Filed Under Articles of Confederation, Declaration of Independence, FREEDOM, LAW OF THE LAND, LIBERTARIAN, Martial Law, Northwest Ordinance, ORGANIC LAWS | 1 Comment
All the written laws enacted by the House of Representatives and Senate must conform to all four Organic Laws of the United States of America not just the Constitution of the United States.
These four laws: Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777, Northwest Ordinance of July 13, 1787 and Constitution of September 17, 1787 are the positive Organic Laws that are the basis of the 50 Titles of the United States Code.
Positive law is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Ed. “Positive Law. Law actually and specifically enacted or adopted by proper authority for the government of an organized jural society.” When the four Organic Laws of the United States of America are read and understood as integrated positive law, the interdependence of the first and second and the third and fourth is quite obvious.
A thoughtful and thorough reading of the Declaration of Independence and Articles of Confederation leaves the reader with only one conclusion neither document supported the establishment of a strong central government.
The Northwest Ordinance without question establishes a temporary government for the lands owned by the United States of America and the Constitution of the United States makes that temporary government permanent.
Article IV of the Articles of Confederation makes citizenship optional, so for the federal government to grow the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 must be made to go away. The claim is universal: the Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 were repealed and replaced by the Constitution of the United States. A good story, but totally without foundation and without documentary evidence.
How do prove something to be true, when everyone believes the older model has been replaced by the New an Improved more perfect model? You ask the expert, which in the case of Articles of Confederation of November 15, 1777 and the Confederacy known as the United States of America, is anyone of the 100 Senators. This is exactly what my Students have done and here is the first correspondence:
Friday, April 23, 2010
Senator Bill Nelson
716 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-0903
Dear Senator Nelson:
I am writing you today requesting you instruct me in the appropriateness of my assumption that the Articles of Confederation are and always have been well established as part of the Organic Documents. I can find no evidence that the Articles of Confederation have been repealed, replaced and or superseded by the Constitution of the United States.
Yes or no answer is all that is required by the following questions; however, if you prefer, please respond with the proper documentation featured in your response.
Is there any evidence of the Articles of Confederation being repealed?
Is there any evidence of the Articles of Confederation being replaced by the Constitution of the United States?
Is there any evidence of the Articles of Confederation being superseded by the Constitution of the United States?
By answering the above questions you will be assisting me in my quest and I would like to thank you in advance for your prompt reply.
Sincerely,
Ken the Inhabitant
Dear Mr. Inhabitant:
Thank you very much for sending me your request for information regarding the Articles of Confederation. Unfortunately, due to time constraints and the large amount of correspondence I receive, I will not be able to process your request. I recommend that you conduct research at your local library or go online to http://thomas.loc.gov/ to find this information.
Sincerely,
Senator Bill Nelson
This effort to put the Senators on the Articles of Confederation spot has just begun, if you want to get in on the fun, enroll as one of my Students. Contact me at edrivera@edrivera.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Sep
8
Are you one of those freedom loving souls who thinks a libertarian government is an unrealistic dream? You have been watching too many libertarian celebrities gush to too many television audiences that deep down in their heart of hearts they are Libertarian, but a Libertarian will never be elected President of the United States.
There is hope for you, because you found this website and you will eventually enroll and become a Student and then you will be free.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Aug
22
NEVADA SENATOR AND SENATE MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID: “THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, OUR SYSTEM IS A VOLUNTARY SYSTEM.” ATTORNEY AND BUSINESSMAN INTERVIEWER JAN HELFELD UNCOVERS BY CHANCE EVIDENCE OF A VOLUNTARY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Filed Under CONGRESS, CRIMINAL LAW, LAW OF THE LAND, LIBERTARIAN | 1 Comment
In an interview of Nevada Senator and United States Senate majority leader Harry Reid, all but admitted that the federal government is voluntary to everyone not a part of it or residing on the territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America. The video of the Reid interview on www.janhelfeld.com presents a very confused Senator Reid trying to convince Helfeld that taxation in the United States is voluntary.
Regular readers of my posts know that it is the federal government that is voluntary; taxation by definition is the mandatory imposition of a tax by government. Helfeld’s interview of New Mexico Governor and former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., Bill Richardson, demonstrates dramatically the real basis of federal government power: the proprietary power of the United States of America to defend the territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Transcription of Senator Harry Reid interview
Jan Helfeld: …if the government is in the business of forcefully taking money from some people in order to provide welfare benefits to others, how will the people whose money is being taken feel about the government?
Harry Reid: Well, I don’t accept your phraseology. I don’t think we “force” people…
Helfeld: Taxation is not forceful?
Reid: Well, no.
Helfeld: It’s voluntary?
Reid: In fact, quite to the contrary. Our system of government is a voluntary tax system.
Helfeld: Oh… if you don’t want to pay your taxes, you don’t have to?
Reid: Of course you have to pay your taxes, but…
Helfeld: The government will force you to pay, or they’ll fine you or imprison you. Won’t they?
Reid: We have a voluntary system. The fact of the matter is, that if when you pay your taxes — you see, in many other countries, it’s not voluntary. For example, in many countries, the government makes sure that your employer takes out every penny. Many countries don’t file income tax returns. Why?
Helfeld: We have withholding here too, don’t we?
Reid: Pardon me?
Helfeld: Withholding.
Reid: With some program, yes. But I’m talking about in some countries, European countries as an example, there… you don’t file an income tax return. There is no need to, because your employer takes all the money out. That’s the difference between a voluntary and an involuntary system.
Helfeld: But can…? Can…?
Reid: You can choose to not pay your taxes, but I don’t accept your phraseology, that you forcibly take money from somebody else and give it to others. You know, that’s the way it is on any program. I mean…
Helfeld: Can the taxpayer…?
Reid: …highway program is the same. We…
Helfeld: Excuse me.
Reid: We take money, we “forcibly” take money in your phraseology, but…
Helfeld: But can…? Let me ask you something.
Reid: …build highways with it, put people in the Army.
Helfeld: Can the taxpayer decide not to pay his taxes if he wants?
Reid: He can… He can not pay his taxes if he wants.
Helfeld: What will be the…? What will happen?
Reid: He’ll be subject to civil and criminal penalties.
Helfeld: They’ll put him in jail — they’ll use force against him. He pays…everybody pays taxes under threat of jail or fines: on the threat of force. In other words, you are forced to pay your taxes. Whether you fill out your form voluntarily or whether its withheld by your employer, you
don’t have a choice on whether you can pay taxes that are going to be used for welfare programs — you can’t make that choice.
Reid: Well, but the reason our system is called a voluntary tax system — and I recognize, you know, that ultimately you can’t cheat your taxes, but our… We have many provisions in the law they don’t have in most countries: we have deductibility for home interest on mortgage payment, they don’t have that in most countries, we have deductibility for certain excessive expenses as relates to health — doctors, hospitals — we have all kinds of tax — some people call them “loopholes” but others would call them “incentives for people to do business” — and that’s why… You know, you’re not “forced” to pay certain taxes. There are ways… if you decide to buy a home and…
Helfeld: You can decide not to pay taxes? In the United States?
Reid: I mean, I really don’t understand what you’re trying to get at. If you’re… What… the point of the matter is…
Helfeld: Because you objected to my phraseology. You said that… you say that the government isn’t forcefully taking money from some people to provide welfare benefits to others, and, in fact, that’s what it’s doing, because all taxation is forceful. It’s backed up by physical force. If you
don’t pay your taxes, the government will intervene with you forcefully. So you don’t have a choice. It’s not voluntary. You can’t decide not to pay and not suffer consequences. If you don’t pay, you’ll go to jail. So: you’re forced to pay.
Reid: You don’t… you don’t go to jail. Some people go to jail. There are all kind of civil penalties if you don’t pay your taxes: you pay interest and you pay penalties. The fact of the matter is, our system is a voluntary system.
Jul
21
DR. RIVERA’S STUDENTS ARE MAD AS HELL, SO THEY ARE TEACHING CONGRESS WHERE ITS UNREAD LAWS IS THE LAW
Filed Under Articles of Confederation, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTION, LAW OF THE LAND, LEARNING THE LAW, LIBERTARIAN, ORGANIC LAWS | Leave a Comment
Ed Rivera’s students don’t learn written law, so they can go into government courts and argue with attorneys in suits and have attorneys in Black Robes tell them lies. They learn the law, so they can tell Congress by letter or in person, where its unread laws are the law.
What follows is just the first part of a teaching letter to Congress, to get the rest, become one of his students or you can read the rest of these posts and try to figure out what it all means by yourself.
Dear Mr. Congressman/Senator:
The purpose of this letter is to create a permanent record of my efforts to prove that the legislative power “vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives,” is limited to the territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America and the government that administers that territory and other property belonging to the United States of America. I want to put you and others I inform on the spot. I want the world to know that you were informed and you did nothing.
Americans and other interested parties in the world have learned just recently that members of Congress are not reading the legislation that they vote into law, yet Americans are expected to obey these laws that are limited to territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America. I have had enough of that and I’m not taking any more.
I know that all written law is limited to a specific area or territory, because I sought out and paid for the best legal education available to the ordinary person, who just wants to know the truth about the law. Now that I know the real truth about law and government I’m mad as hell and I’m going to do something about it.
You are bound to the opinion of your Supreme Court in the case, Federal Crop Insurance Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 390 (1947). I will not claim that the House of Representatives doesn’t have authority to originate “All Bills for raising Revenue,” according to Article I Section 7 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787. Of course, the Congress of the United States had the power to tax the inhabitants and settlers in the Northwest Territory, that territory became free and independent States of the United States of America. I contend that the Organic Law of the United States of America limits the exercise of that legislative power to territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America.
The federal government lost the power to make laws for the territory it owned when it was sold to the people of America. What law says that? The Organic Law says so and that law is the foundational law of all Bills made by Congress. The only laws Congress can make are those limited to what it already owns. Once I have demonstrated that the Congress of the United States lacks legislative power over me and my property, you or Congress must demonstrate your legislative authority over me or my property that’s your law.
I have performed my due diligence by engaging the world’s greatest legal mind to instruct me in the subjects of law and government. Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera teaches law by dividing law into written and unwritten law. Unwritten law is made by the highest power period. Written law must conform to the highest form of written law, which is the Organic Law of the United States of America. This letter is based on one that he has prepared for the Representative who claims legislative authority over the area where he lives. He has allowed his personal students to use it for educational purposes.