The State of California is an example of a modern political state, which was first devised by George Washington and the so-called Founding Fathers at the secret Constitutional Convention of 1787. After the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 and the success of the War for Independence, American politicians slowly realized that few Americans would only consent to be governed, if deceived or threatened by some form of coercion. Shays Rebellion supplied an imminent threat of anarchy and the result was the Constitution of the United States, which provides a State of a new Union completely controlled by a government of politicians.
A state consists of a large group of people who share a common territory, law and language. When California was part of the Estados Unidos Mexicanos, the law and language was different from what they are today, but the territory was much the same. The State of California went from a Mexican State to a State of the United States, while California remained unchanged except by its eternal earthquake activity.
In the coming crash of the government of the State of California there will be a tremendous opportunity for those who are prepared to replace old disreputable law with the more liberating English common law. Government law has slowly replaced common law, but it cannot be repealed as it is contained within the English language. With the collapse of the State of California comes the collapse of government law and the inevitable revival of English common law, unless unscrupulous politicians like George Washington intervene to take advantage of the crisis.
Only my Students know how George Washington engineered the overthrow of the free and independent States of America and plotted the substitution of the States of the United States. The commercial enterprise known as the State of California is about to liquidate, don’t invest in the newer model of that old lemon that will surely be offered. The Golden State will thrive under new management, if you arm yourself with the facts by enrolling in my Basic Course in Law and Government. Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
What is worse, the further extension of the martial law begun by George Washington or the socialism proposed by Barack Obama in his speech before a joint session of Congress? The near total control of right to contract for the payment of health expenses is fast approaching.
Insurance is a contract between the insurer and the insured. In the insurance contract, the insurer seeks to make a profit by keeping the amount paid in claims significantly lower than the amount of consideration received to make the insurance contract. Here Obama proposes that a denial of insurance coverage, because of a pre-existing medical condition be made a civil or criminal wrong:
What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.
Notice how Barack Obama uses the term “United States of America” to geographically place persons, who file for bankruptcy after a serious illness. He says “broke” not bankrupt, because the bankruptcy laws are federal. A person who files for bankruptcy should satisfy the territorial jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court, which is part of the United States district court. These courts are found in Sections 81 to 131 of Chapter 5 of Title 28 U.S.C. There in the “Historical and Revision Notes” will be found the most important sentence in the United States Code: “Sections 81-131 of this chapter show the territorial composition of districts and divisions by counties as of January 1, 1945,” which is fully discussed in these posts.
Federal civil and criminal cases meeting Barack Obama’s idea of “against the law” should, also, have to meet the territorial jurisdiction for the United States district court, where the case was brought. When no objection is made, because of the lack of territorial jurisdiction, the myth of universal federal jurisdiction is perpetuated. Federal district courts are supposed to be
limited to the federal territory contained within the counties that comprise the district and division of that court. As these are legislative courts and not judicial courts, the same federal territory constitutes the same territory that will determine representation in the House of Representatives, according to Article I Section 2 Clause 3 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787. This Constitution has not been adopted by a legitimate government, so there is no legal obligation to correct the Congressional districts created by the States. The first census of 1790 began the extension of federal power outside of federal territory and every subsequent census has compounded the problem.
Congress, Representatives and direct taxes, “this Union” as opposed to “the Union” and many other subjects relating to Article I of the Constitution of September 17, 1787 are dealt with in the Advanced Course on Congress. In this Course, the Advanced Student learns how to prove that “the People of the several States” refer to those persons residing on territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America.
The Basic Course in Law and Government is a pre-requisite to the Advanced Courses, to begin the Basic Course contact me at email@example.com
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
The State of California is looking for buyers for some of its property. Up for sale is the land under the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, San Quentin State Prison, Ventura County Fairgrounds and the Del Mar Fairgrounds among other properties.
State of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has floated a “going out of business” trial balloon to warn State of California voters of what might happen if Tuesday’s State budget balancing propositions are not approved. The threat to start selling the State’s assets probably won’t work on U.S. voters. We will see tomorrow, Tuesday.
The State of California can own land in California, but it cannot own land in the State of California because that is the California owned by the United States of America. There are two kinds of land in America¾land that is the territory owned by and ceded to the United States of America and land that is not. The United States of America is the biggest landowner in America. The United States of America has been secretly operating under a charter called the Articles of Confederation since 1788, when New Hampshire became the ninth State to ratify the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
California can’t go bankrupt because it is just a place on the face of the earth. The State of California can’t go bankrupt because according to Article III Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of California: “The State of California is an inseparable part of the United States of America, and the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land.” The United States of America has been administering its proprietary United States under the martial law authorized by Article I Section 8 of the Constitution of September 17, 1787.
If this summary of the law and government doesn’t make complete sense to you, it is because you are not an enrolled student. Contact me at: firstname.lastname@example.org to receive all the information you need to understand the combination of law and government.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
Talk that some banks might have to be taken over by the government neglects one fact: there is no government in America.
There is a business enterprise called the United States Government that began operation when George Washington became President of the United States by accepting at will employment by agreeing to do his best to “preserve, protect and defend” the assets belonging to the United States of America.
Dissection and examination of the business plan that is the Constitution of the United States does not reveal a government of three branches. At best there is a much despised lawmaking body of old men and some women, who claim to have been elected by persons who are not technically qualified to represent themselves.
If the United States Government is going to start taking over banks, it will first have to come up with a word to properly describe the process.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
I have just received a new teaching assignment: what authority do the city officials of Atwater, California have to determine the use of real property allegedly located in Atwater. This teaser post will be the first of many on the disintegration of government in America and Atwater in particular.
The State of California is bankrupt or near bankruptcy. Does the State of California have any assets and if it does, is Atwater an asset?
The Bear Flag California Republic will continue to be one of the Articles of Confederation states of the United States of America. The State of California has reached the end of its usefulness. I invite true libertarians to come forward and join in the discussion of the end of the left coast.
These are interesting and exciting times for those smart enough to be inhabitants and not citizens in California.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
In the movie, “Who Framed Roger Rabbit,” the sad tale of the loss of the Pacific Electric Railway is told Hollywood style. Politicians and big business got rid of mass transit in Los Angeles, just so they could sell more cars. As a kid growing up in Compton, I would take the Red Car to the Long Beach Nu Pike to spend the day and night gambling at the Penny Arcade.
General Motors deserves to go bankrupt just for what it did to mass transit in California, but that’s not all it did. GM created smog so bad I couldn’t take a deep breath and, of course, it was hard to play with tears in my eyes.
There should be no bailout for any company with a history like General Motors. I have no tears for GM.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
When I, as a young attorney, started representing individuals in filing personal bankruptcy petition under Chapter 7, the petitioner would have to sign the petition before a Notary Public. Now simple signatures under penalty of perjury is all that is required.
I was admitted to the State Bar of California in 1972, but to file a bankruptcy petition I had to be admitted to practice before the bankruptcy court where the petition would be filed. I had to be sponsored by someone who was already a member of the United States district court for the Central District of California.
Before I could represent the petitioner in bankruptcy, I had to swear that I was a resident within the Central District of California. My sponsor did not tell me that the Central District of California was only the government’s land in the four counties that made up the Central District. It would take me more than 30 years to figure that out.
So, back in the 1970s I would just tell my bankruptcy clients to sign their petitions that stated they were residents of the Central District of California. My clients were insolvent. They could not pay their debts as they came due. They had no money. They had some Federal Reserve Notes, which were treated like money, so they waited to file until after they received any federal income tax refund or the trustee in bankruptcy would claim it.
Bankruptcy no matter what the chapter is for residents of government land. A lying bankruptcy attorney saying that his automobile making client is incorporated within the United States and has been a resident within the United States for the requisite amount of time does not make it so. There can be no enduring solutions to our economic problems until we start telling the truth.
The United States district courts, as I have written, are territorial courts limited to government land. These courts are not part of an independent judicial department. The so-called “federal courts” are part of the United States Congress.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says the bankruptcy of the auto makers is not possible while she rules the House of Representatives. She can say this because the Congress controls the courts. The truth about how Congress can control what goes on in the United States needs to be told, so the people can begin to decide important issues like who goes bankrupt and who or what gets bailed out.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera