2013 jan 31 howard griswold conference call m

7/29/2019 2013 Jan 31 Howard Griswold Conference Call M

1/19

Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, January 31, 2013Partial

Howard Griswold Conference calls:conf call (talkshoe) 724-444-7444 95099# 1#

(non-talkshoe members must use the 1# after the pin number)Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.Talkshoe mutes the phone lines

****************http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=661654&cmd=apop

**********************************

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd=hrepi

**************************

Howard's link for Thursday:http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd=hrepi

Hosted by: Gemini Research GroupPhone Number: (724) 444-7444Call ID: 95099

Howard is the Guest Featured Speaker on Saturday at 6 p.m., Eastern Time at:

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=99043&cmd=tcHosted by: :Mighty-Mo;Phone Number: (724) 444-7444Call ID: 99043

Rod Class AIB call on Talkshoe, the pin number is 48361 at nine oclock PM, Tues &Fri (Eastern Time). Thats Americas Independent Bureau, AIB on Talkshoe.

**************************

Howard is listed on Angela's at :http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Guest-Speaker-Pages-Info.html

http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Talkshoes.html****************************

Howard Griswold talks about contracts and the application of the law on the KMA Club.*****************************

http://geminiinvestmentsresearchgroup.wordpress.com/forms


2/19

***************************http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IanYOTLI8

******************************

Note: there is a hydrate water call 8 pm, Eastern Mondays, 218-844-3388 966771#Howards home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)

All correspondence to:Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, Delmar, Del. 19940

(do not address mail to Howard Griswold since Howard has not taken up residence inthat mailbox and since hes on good terms with his wife he isnt likely to in the

foreseeable future.)Donations are accepted.Dave DiReamer can be reached at: [email protected]

c/o 1624 Savannah Road, Lewes, Delaware 19958********************

I am not a public servant {officer or employee} and any claim to the contrary must

be proved by payroll records and my alleged public servant {officer} title and sworn

under penalty of perjury with full commercial liability for the person who swears to

it.

Im not an officer or agent or employee of the government. I am not resident within

the government and any claim to the contrary must be proved by payroll records.Prove that Im being paid by the government to be a government employee. If you

cant then your law doesnt apply to me.

Government has all the right in the world to make laws and rules regulating itself.

When they impose any of these rules and regulations beyond government upon any

of us {private} theyre breaching their fiduciary duty {as public officers and trustees

of government}. All employees of government are in a trustee position. The courts

have said this emphatically

Public means governmentprivate means non-government.

Your acceptance of anything that government offers you at any level in any way,

shape or form is a consent to cooperate with them and to put yourself under their

authority and control.

Governments have all the authority, rights and duties to make all the laws necessary

to regulate themselves. Their law, rules, regulations, codes and so-called statutes do

not apply to the people outside of government.

****************
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/19

The scam that has been used is this lawyer reference to resident. You are a residentof the State of Blank. They will always say that. They will go so far as to put it in

writing in the complaints or motions to the courts that the defendants, the plaintiff

or any other party is a resident of the State of Blank. In order to get the individual

under the jurisdiction of the courtthey use this languagethis is a presumption

that is created which must be rebutted with rebuttable evidence to prevent themfrom proceeding against you. Now, this is going to really upset lawyers and judges

because if you learn how to do this, and its not hard, but if you learn how to do this

and you take an affidavit into court with a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6),

they fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, thats Rule 12(b)(6)

because the complaint is made against a person who is not a resident of the State.

Accompany that with an affidavit signed and sworn to under penalty of perjury and

witnessed by a notary public that states the same thing, I am not a resident of the

State of Blank because I do not work for the State of Blank. I am not employed in

any way, shape or form. I am not an officer of the State of Blank. The presumption

that I am is erroneous and must be corrected on the record. Simple enough, isnt

it? Motion to dismiss this claim under Rule 12(b)(6) because the claim fails to state aclaim upon which relief can be granted against a person who is not a resident of the

State of Blank. End of motion. Between the two, the motion and the affidavit, the

court must rule and it must rule that you are not the person that the complaint can

be lodged against. The case must be dismissed. When they dont then you want to

start looking up this Code of Judicial Ethics. Theyre not following the law.

********************

If they create the presumption and you rebut it and then they come back at you

with, well you do have a drivers license, you say, well, if I do its also erroneous.

Dont let them trick you back into admitting that youre within the state because if

you have a drivers license its within the states jurisdiction.

***********************

There is no government left. The government has ceased to function in its normal

position that it was in under the Constitution. Everything has been farmed out to

privately owned corporations to do the government work. So Social Security is

actually a private insurance company. Its not government. Its doing it for

government but its there for anybody to do business with it. So, in reality social

security is not a benefit or a privilege from government but theyll try to tell you it

is. All you got to do is do a little bit of leg work to find where its listed as a business

on Dunn and Bradstreet and present it to them that, look, this is a private company.

Its in business to make money. This is not government.

*********************************If you look at most statutes thats what they say and all persons only applies to all

persons in the agency that they give it to unless it specifically says, all persons who

have a license to sell alcohol or all persons who operate a motor vehicle or all

persons who have a license to sell tobacco products. It has to be specific. It cant just

say all persons and when it does it hasnt been properly assigned to the agency for

implementation. So what the agencies do is they sue in their own name. For

instance, the IRS makes a complaint against you under United States v. You or The


4/19

United States of America v. You, IRS, Department of the Treasury complaining that

you didnt pay taxes. Well, what they are doing is acting as an assignee of an

authority to collect taxes but where in the statutes were they assigned this authority

to take you to court, to bring claims against you? Its not there.

**********************************

This is all important to understand that in most cases the actual action is beingmade against you by an assigned person. Either the agency has been assigned or has

not been assigned. The police department is acting like they are the assignee but by

law have not been assigned to do the functions that theyre doing. There is no

statutory law that they can bring themselves within a provision of in order to

execute the assignment of action that theyre doing, an action on a negotiable

instrument of any kind is an action on a note or on a chosen action.

*******************************

Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest.

The rule requires you to objectan objection for ratification of commencement of

the action by or joinder or substitution of the real party in interest and such

ratification, joinder or substitution shall have the same effect as if the action had beencommenced in the name of the real party in interest. See the trickery of this kind of

stuff that lawyers put together? As long as you dont object we can do this with

assignment and get away with it and theyre doing it and theyre getting away with

it because we dont know enough to object.

**********************************

It is a dishonest act of enforcing a law upon a private individual that government

has no right, no power, no authority whatsoever to enforce upon the private

individual. That is breach of their fiduciary duty with no stupid questions asked.

When you file a breach of fiduciary duty case you are actually filing in equity. Leave

out all statutory references even though that example that we send around came out

of Colorado forms and it refers to a Colorado statutory representation that does put

it in equity but it isnt necessary to quote any statutory reference in order to open

the court of equity which is the Article 3 courts

(unless youre a teacher or government worker or have contracted with the

government with full disclosure, etc whereby youre not private anymore and youre

resident within the government.)

You got to be party to government to enjoy governments benefits, privileges and

opportunities.

*********************The executive branch of government is only enforcing the legislation for the benefit

of protecting the government and not necessarily doing what theyre supposed to do

to protect us. The one that is the most guilty of not following the law is the judges. It

comes from the canon of ethics for judicial conduct. Canon #2, very important, the

canon says: a judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of

the judges activities. Subsection A,Promoting Public Confidence. You know

anybody whos competent in the courts? I dont. Nobody believes the courts are

honest, correct and truthful and fairnot even most of the lawyers.


5/19

********************This defendant states that he is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as tothe correctness of the statement of the claim of the plaintiffs and he neither admits

nor denies the allegations concerning the claims of the plaintiffs but demands the

plaintiffs strictly prove their claim.

************************************Failing to answer is devastatingits a total loss. Failing to answer and back theanswer up with an affidavit denying what they claim amounts to a total loss. A vague

or ambiguous complaint is remedied by a request for a more definite statement.

That will put things off for a little while until you get a decent statement. You must

object to whatever they finally state by affidavit.

************************************Now, another rule that I found to be interesting Rule 11. Rule 11, its called signing

of pleadings but its got a very interesting statement in it that I think clarifies

something I bought up a week or two ago and that is I have been finding that

lawyers are not making a notice of appearance and putting it in the docket record of

the case and I thought sure they were supposed to because I read parts of thedictionary definition to you about the appearance of an attorney and the duty of the

court recorder to put it in the docket. The docket is the list of actions that are done

within a court action. The complaint itself, the answer to the complaint, the motion

to dismiss, all those different functions that go on within a complaint, notices that

are written into it, theyre all docketed in this sheet called the docking sheet or a

docket sheet depending upon what court and what name they have for it.

*************************************We need to object every time an attorney goes into court and the docket sheet shows

that they have not entered their appearance on the docket sheet with an official

entry that everything that theyre doing is a sham pleading and that they should be

sanctioned for this or at least ordered by the court to put the notice into the record

that they are the attorney for the attorney for the party before they proceed any

further. That will stop the proceeding for that day.

********************************************The reason why lawyers dont write affidavits is because the lawyer cant. They

dont have first-hand knowledge. They cannot testify because they werent there.

*******************************Sometimes theyll get an affidavit signed by somebody they call a robo signer,

somebody who signs hundreds and hundreds of these affidavits for the benefits of

the lawyers that theyre not the real party in interest. Theyre not real either and

that can be proven. All you have to do is object to that affidavit because you have no

proof from this party that they actually work for such-and-such a bank or such-

and-such a government agency or whatever. You have no proof given within the

affidavit and you have no proof that this individual was there at the time of the

incident or the transaction and really does have first-hand knowledge because they

didnt express that in the affidavitand they dont. And thats how you object to

their affidavits and that proves that theyre just a robo-signer, theyre not the real

party.


6/19

***************************************Theyll always say that we need the information from you.The burden of proof isupon the complaining party, not upon the defendant. That, again, is a violation of

due process.

****************************************

You didnt give me enough knowledge or information about what youre talkingabout to give you a responsive answer.***************************************

How can there possibly be a credit card when the law forbids the banks to lend

credit?

**************************************

Dont give them the facts that they want. Dont give them the answers to creates

facts or even the appearance of facts that they want. The burden of evidence

according to the law is upon the complaining party, not upon the defendant.

The defendant doesnt have to produce or admit to anything.

***************************

Their own paperwork is your evidence to prove their dishonest act, have a copy ofthe statute, for instance, that shows what they were supposed to do which they

didnt do or a copy of the rule that shows what they were supposed to do that they

didnt donot that complicated for any of us to do.

****************************************The state of some name is the government.

We have been so misled into thinking that we live in the state of something but when

in fact the only time youre in the state of something is when youre employed as an

officer or an employee of the state government or any of its political subdivisions.

***************************************

Look it up in the states laws. Every state has laws on the procedure of how theyre

supposed to do things, even the rules of filing a complaint. They can be found and

those rules require things that are commonly left out of complaints.

***************************************The whole basis of appeal is based on whether or not due process was met and

whether the judge erred in the due process.

****************************Resident means located at, an agent of or associated with the state government when

you admit to being a resident of the state. When they make a claim that youre a

resident of the state you can rebut that claim by an affidavit stating that you are not

a resident of the state.

You are not employed by the government and if they want to claim that you are all

they have to do is come up with payroll records to prove it.

Caution: The Department of Education is an agency of the State.

*****************************What land is in the State of Blank? Certainly not your private land that you bought

the land that the state bought to build state office buildings or state agencies

would be in the State of Blank, not your private land. That law does not apply to


7/19

private land and it cannot. The law is not allowed by the constitutional mandates to

extend any of its law and its activities of taxation and regulation to private property.

So it cannot extend to your private land and cannot require your private land to be

recorded. But some lawyer told you it had to be because he lies and you didnt

question it, you let it happen and its recorded. If you want to get out of the private

property tax or the property tax on private propertyI should have said that morecorrectlyyou have to get that deed back out of their records, out of their recording

to that land. The same thing applies to birth certificates. The only thing that the law

related to births can apply to its corporations. It cannot apply to a natural child

birth of people because the government is a corporation and the only thing a

corporation can do is deal with other corporations and it can even extend the

authority of operating as a corporation to individuals who request such an authority

from the state. And on the date that that requested corporation is authorized that

corporation is born and that birth has to be recorded in the states records as a

corporation. A natural child from natural people does not fall under that statute.

The wording does not cover people and any lawyer that will tell you that it does is

lying to you.

********************************Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, EasternTime. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesdays

number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in onWednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?

masterId=41875&cmd=tc

Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the followingwebsite:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruthHoward approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting

to Howard.

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to GeminiResearch rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of

bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs.

*********************Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

***********************************************************************************************************

For reference:Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd )
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruthhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth


8/19

**********Project for all:

Howard needs information on how to write a complaint for breach of the trust.Hit the libraries!

He would appreciate any research help.

*****************************************************Start

*****************************************************{01:41:18.798 }

[Howard] Lets start out with the normal music behind press release type of a newsbroadcast delete-delete-delete. News broadcast from the American press-press-press,you know damned well theres no such thing because no thing ever named itself withthree of the same words. But American Press-press-press is announcing the FederalReserve Bank is taking chances giving you an option to take a chance for one skinny

dollar. One little measly dollar, you can take a chance by guessing the exact minute anddate that the entire monetary system will collapse and if you chose the exact date and theexact minute you will win all the dollars that stupid people were willing to take a chanceon trying to guess. IdiotsAmerican Press, Press, Press release. Stupidity abounds us;intelligence alludes us. Most of the people that listen to these programs have theintelligence to know better and understand what Im talking about. It is the rest of thesociety around us that would fall for something like that. Its a damned shame they dontactually do it and reveal just how ignorant and asinine their entire system is to the stupidpeople and maybe enlighten the stupid people a little bit but they havent done that. Itwill collapse as the article that Dave mentioned was in those e-mails written bysomebody about the fact that it will collapse, the entire United States will collapse. TheUnited States is not alone in this. I dont know if youve been noticing but the value ofthe Euro keeps going up. You know what that actually means, everything is backwardsthe way things are done. When the value of the Euro goes up it goes up against the valueof the dollar. Now, the value of the dollar is what supports the Euro. The Euro is now atclose to $1.35 again going upward. It was all the way down around $1.20 a few monthsago. Things were not quite as bad. There was a little bit of uplift in the economic statusbecause of quantitative easing. Banks are throwing money out on the money that hasnothing behind it. Thats quantitative easingput more money into circulation. Well,thats why interest rates go up. Because theres too much money in circulation they haveto pull it back. Thats why they raise interest rates. Right now interest rates are downaround zero because nobodys borrowingtheyre trying to prompt people to borrow.Theres very little borrowing going on, very little money being paid into the banks oninterest. So theyre throwing money out there to people, making it cheap, making it easyto get. Still its not working. But thats whats causing inflationit always does. Wheninflation gets too rampant then they raise the interest rate. Thats how they play thisgame, back and forth, back and forth. The imminent collapse is sometime in the nearfuture. Anybody who tried to put the finger on a date in a minute and actually claimedthat they knew what they were talking about is some kind of a moron. It actually dependsupon the faith that people have in the system as to how long it will take. Well, the faith is


9/19

disappearing rapidly. But how rapidly and now many will give it up how soon is veryhard to determinealmost impossible to determine. So the date that it will collapsecannot be predicted no matter how much any of you would like me to put a date on it Icant because I dont know how ignorant how many people are that will continue to stickto it until they finally wake up and realize that its falling apart around their ears. Its the

mind that controls and I dont just mean males, the mind of mankind which includes thefemale as well as the male that determines how these things will go and when things willhappen. As long as people have faith and keep investing which is whats been going on.If you noticed the market is going up, up, up, up, up, up, up. Its only about 200 pointsyesterday from setting a new record. To some people Im sure impressive. To me what Ithink about it is, well, the further up it goes the further down it has to go to fallthebigger it will crash. Thats the way I look at it because what goes up must come down.Its an old fashioned adage but its very truewhat goes up must come down. Somehow,somewhere it will come down and this market is reversing here in the last day or two.Theyll be a pull back. There might be another little uplift. There might be anotherpullback, might be another little uplift and then all of a sudden theres going to be a big

dip, a really big dip again like it was back in 2007 into 2008. Were going to see the samething all over again because it is not supported by anything of substance. It is onlysupported by rhetoric, bull crap and stupid peoples belief in the rhetoric and bull crap.And believe me thanks to education most of us are stupid enough to believe their bullcrap and their rhetoric and when the people fall for it, it makes it work for a little bitlonger. Thats the only thing keeping it together right now is the peoples belief in italthough theres an awful lot of the population that has lost their faith in it, are notparticipating in it, and this is why theres not enough money coming in off interest ratesand off of taxes because people are just not working, theyre not borrowing, theyre notworking to get the money to pay what they borrowed. Theyre just laying back. Theyrenot doing anything. That means the system is not getting what it needs to pay these bondinvestors and this is whats going to bring it down. Itll take time. The bond investorsmight even be patient enough to say, well, if the news media tells us and the predictors,the stupid people that think they know what theyre doing that claim to be experts infinance and things of that nature keep predicting that, oh, things are getting better. Itscoming up. The price of housing is getting better, its going up 5%. And as long as theycan get investors and other people to believe this then it will continue to be supported alittle bit until they finally get a report that, well, even though it went up the housing salesfell off by another 60% this month. Boom, all of a sudden it drops. You watch, youll seehow it works. Its not really funny. Its pathetic. Its all based on stupidity and stupidbelief and thats why its so pathetic. If you have enough intelligence to see it ahead oftime and not become involved you can sit back and laugh at how stupid some of thesepeople can be about it. But thats not what I wanted to talk about tonight. Those e-mailsthat Dave was reading led me to that and I think everybody in the country should take aone-dollar chance on betting on what day, what day and what time of the day this wholesystem will collapse and you will be lucky enough if you pick the right day and the righttime to win all of these worthless paper dollars that just collapsed that are in the fundfrom the chance that you took. I think its a great idea. Right now, the Federal ReserveBank could keep things going a little bit longer if they would run a scam like that and youknow how many people would fall for it?


10/19

Anyway, what I want to talk about is again back to the breach of fiduciary duty lawsuitsthe collective information that you can come up with to use to bring these suits. Wetalked a couple of weeks ago, maybe a week or so ago about in the code books of everystate and the federal code under the rules of court there is a section there about theconduct of professional people like lawyers, in relation to lawyers. There is also a section

in the code and in every state code and in the federal code on the canons of ethic ofjudicial conduct for judges. Now, this one doesnt start out telling you as the one onlawyers told you that the legal system was a public trust and that the lawyers are thetrustees. This one gives you a little bit different insight into it but basically tells you thesame thing if you understand what trust is. Trust is a confidence in someone. It doesntmatter whether you have a written document of trust or not. We do with the Constitutionwhich what ties all government officials into a fiduciary and trust duty to the Americanpeople which they breach all the time, by the way. But under the Code of JudicialConduct in Delawarethis is what Im reading from, the Delaware Code:Canon #1: The judge should uphold the integrity and the independence of the judiciary.An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A

judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing and should himselfthe highest standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary

may be preserved. The provisions of this code should be construed and applied to furtherthat objective.

Canon #2, Subsection A:A judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance ofimpropriety in all his activities. A judge should respect and comply with the law.Have you ever looked up what the law said before you went into court? They dont dothat. They twist it to suit themselves. They twist the application of it. They twist thevenue of it to suit profit. He does not comply with the law but a judge should respect andcomply with the law and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotespublic confidence. Now, theres your trust position.A fiduciary duty arises from anyonein whom you or I put confidence to be honest, to conduct themselves in a high level of

integrity and impartiality and good faith. So, theres the reference, right there, to the trustsituation, the fiduciary duty that judges would have. Where it said, that at all times in amanner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and the impartiality of thejudiciary. Its a position of confidence. Thats a position of trust. Thats a position offiduciary duty for a judge.Canon 2, Subsection B:A judge should not allow his family, social or otherrelationships to influence his official conduct or judgments.Other relationships? What about his relationship with lawyers? That always influenceshis judicial conduct, doesnt it? If a lawyer said it hell go along with it. Whether itsright or not hell go along with it just to see if the other party knows that it isnt right. So,thats not really upholding the confidence and integrity of the judiciary, is it, much lessmy confidence in him as a judge or her, whatever it may be? Anyway, this was all writtenmany years ago when there werent very many female judges. Its referring to his and he,the male gender. But it refers to both because both are in that position today. And it goeson to say:He should not lend the prestige of his office to advance the private interests of others.

What the hell do you think the courts are doing? Theyre advancing the private interestsof government agencies and facilities of government that are there to extort from the


11/19

American people and thats all theyre there today. Theyre barely there for entertainingan argument between you and I as they were intended to be there for to protect us fromone another. Thats not what theyre doing. Theyre being used by the government to takeadvantage of the American people. The interest of others that he is private interest, that is,of others. That he, the judge is lending his prestige to advance for their benefit, definitely

a breach of our confidence in the judge and a breach of his fiduciary duty because theconfidence is what puts him in that fiduciary duty. Am I getting through to you? Anyway,it goes on to say:Nor should he convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a specialposition to influence him.

What does the judge do? Mr. Attorney, what do you have to say about this? Hes askingto be influenced. He does it all the time. He should shut his mouth and just wait to seewhat is presented, not help to present the issue on one side only. He should not assist. Asa matter of fact there are court cases that state that a judge who aids one party over andabove the other party is liable, personally liable, to that party for the injury that he causesthem. Well, that would be right in lineof course, they dont bring it out as breach of

fiduciary duty because they dont want this known. If people understood this and knewthis the system would be torn apart rapidly because the system stinks. It is corrupt as itcan be for the benefit and advancement of private interests of certain people, mostlygovernment agencies and the people in them and lawyers. Anyway, and it goes on to saythis is still Section B of Canon 2:He should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.I wouldnt want him to testify for me as a character witness. I wouldnt trust anything hesaid. Anyway, a commentary on this underneath of the Canon says:Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible and improper conduct by

judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. He mustexpect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. He must therefore accept restrictions

on his conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do

so freely and willingly.This is what a judge should do. Is this what youve seen a judge do?

Canon #3: A judge should perform the duties of his office impartially and diligently. Thejudicial duties of a judge take precedence over all other activities. His judicial duties

include all the duties of his office prescribed by law.

Im sure if we do a little bit of research we could find some things on his dutiesprescribed by law and show very specifically that he does not follow the law. But in othercases we could just show that he does not follow the law as it is written and hessupposed to be judging someone on. So, theres a lot of different ways that this could beapproached to go after judges.In the performance of these dutiesthe following standards apply, adjudicativeresponsibilityin other words, acting like a judge.#1 A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it.He doesnt even look at the law and look at what the purpose of the law is. He just looksat the complaint presented by a lawyer, a prosecuting attorney. Then he takes theprosecuting attorneys side, doesnt he? But this gets worse. He should be un-swayed bypartisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism. Boy, Ill tell you what, dont criticize


12/19

the judge, hell lock you up for contempt of court. Hes not supposed to let things likethat bother him being criticized.#2 A judge should maintain order and decorum in the proceedings before him.#3 A judge should be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses,

lawyers, and others with whom he deals in his official capacity and he should require

similar conduct of lawyers and of his staff, court officials and others subject to hisdiscretion and control. Commentary: the duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with

patience is not inconsistent with the duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court.

Courts can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and deliberate.#4 A judge should accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding or

his lawyer the full right to be heard according to law. I dont know how many times Ivebeen told by people around the country that the judge cut him off, the judge wouldnt lethim bring it up. The judge wouldnt let him enter a pleading into the court. The judgesent it back and refused to accept it. The judge cut him off in the courtroom and wouldntlet him talk about something. Thats a breach of their duty, their fiduciary duty, becauseof the confidence that we have in them. Now, if he were to be patient and do his job of

cleaning up the courts business as quickly as possible he would listen and then say,well, I dont think you have anything there. You havent backed it up with any legalquotes, any court decisions, any substance of statutory authority. So what youre saying isdenied because youre a patriot idiot, you didnt study far enough and you dont knowwhat the hell youre doing. But Im being very polite in telling you that youre just apatriot idiot and you didnt do it correctly. Ill give you a chance. If you wish to postponethis hearing to go look up the cites and back up what youre saying and well continuethis for two weeks. He could be nice and do thatsee. Even though hes calling youstupid, calling you an idiot, hes doing it to correct you. There wouldnt be anythingwrong with that. Im sure somebody would take offense to it but the hell with stupidpeople. A judge has a duty to be there, to be patient and to give you a right to be heardaccording to law. You can bring in the proper legal argument and present it. He doesnthave to tell you that you did it wrong because you can do it right and you can shoot thewhole court down, particularly on the subject of venue. Venue is the place. The peoplewho work for government are in the place. They are agents of the state. They are citizens,they are residents of the state. They come under the states laws. They are within thevenue of that court. The people who live in the territory by the same name that the state isa government of are not in the same venue. But they will drag you into it. They will trickyou into it and then they wont let you be heard. They wont let you argue that youre nota party to it. Thats a breach of their fiduciary duty. Anyway, thats the first and mostimportant thing that a judge has to give you the full right to be heard according to law andit goes on to say: except as authorized by law neither initiate nor consider ex parte orother communications concerning a pending or impending procedure. In other words, hehas no right to talk to the lawyers outside of this court hearing unless he invites the otherparty to come to the meeting. If its done just one side only its called ex parte and that isnot proper. A judge, however, may obtain advice of a disinterested expert on the lawapplicable to the proceedings before him if he gives notice to the parties of that personconsulted and the substance of the advice and affords the parties a reasonable opportunityto respond. This never happens even if he does get advice from somebody else. Maybehes got court clerks that he sends down to the library to look things up. He doesnt give


13/19

you a chance to respond because theres conflict of law. I can find something in a lawbook that says youre guilty of anything they want to charge you of. Then I can findsomething in a law book that says nobody can be held guilty of this particular claim. See,thats conflict of law. Now, its prejudiced on the part of the judge to send his clerk to golook it up for the benefit of the court and the lawyer and the government agency thats

bringing these claims to only bring up the part that is beneficial to them and to ignore thepart the part that is beneficial to you but they do it all the time. That is the biggest part ofthis Canon number 3, that they dont allow you to bring in your side. And theres plentyof commentary in the Delaware Code, three and a half pages of commentary on thatCanon alone.If you have a problem with a judge you need to go into the court rules books into thecode for the state that youre having trouble with, the state governments code books.Look this up on your own and figure out how it applies to your situation. You cant usewhat I tell you about the Delaware Code if you live in Californiait doesnt apply inCalifornia. The California Code applies. Im sure its written pretty close to the samething. Go look it up, youll find out its very close if not verbatim but perhaps a few

words have been changed and they only recognize their wording.

Canon #4:A judge may engage in activities to improve the law, the legal system, and theadministration of justice. A judge subject to the proper performance of his judicial duties

may engage in a quasi-judicial activity including without limitations the following if in

doing so he does not cast doubt on his capacity to decide impartially any issue that may

come before him.Section A: He may speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in other activities

concerning the law, the legal system and the administration of justice including projects

directed to the drafting of legislation. If hes intelligent and honest in his job I guess therewould be no harm in doing that. I dont think that would be anything that wed beconcerned about. He may appear in a public hearing before an executive or legislativebody or officials on matters concerning the law, the legal system and the administrationof justice. He may otherwise consult with an executive or legislative body or official butonly on matters concerning the legal system and the administration of justice, not aparticular case. If there is a particular case going on he cannot go out and talk to peopleanywhere about that case. He can only hear what is presented in the court by each partyand rule properly on what is presented and he has to give each party their chance topresent and he has to follow the rules of court. They dont do it. They avoid it. The avoidallowing you to bring anything in that isnt beneficial to the governments side to theirbanking system to their whole legal system, to their medical system. They only allowwhats beneficial to them to be used in a hearing on a case. But when its not a case butwhen its not a case and theyre asked to speak about the legal system they have fullauthority to do that as long they dont bring up somebodys case.

Section C: He may serve as a member, officer or director of any organization or

governmental agency devoted to the improvement of law, the legal system or theadministration of justice. He may assist such organization and may participate in its

management and investment but should not personally participate in fund raising

activities. He may take recommendations to public and private fund granting agencies on


14/19

projects and programs concerning the law, the legal system and the administration of

justice.

You might catch a judge stepping out of line somewhere but I wouldnt go after him andlook for something like that. Let the system find it if its going to, if a judge doessomething thats not in line with that canon.

Canon #5:A judge should regulate his extra-judicial activities to minimize the risk ofconflict with his judicial duties.

a). A vocational activity. A judge may write, lecture, teach or speak on non-legal subjectsand engage in the arts, sports or speak in other social and recreational activities. If such

advocational activities do not detract from the dignity of his office or interfere with the

performance of his judicial duties.

There was a judge here in Delaware about twenty years ago, he would go into thecourtroom and he would open the court as though he was competent and all during thecourt activities he had this little flask in his pocket of booze of some kind. I dont knowwhat he had in itnever asked him. But hed be nipping away at that flask of booze all

the time he was in court. Eventually hed get so damned drunk hed fall asleep during thecourt proceedings while the lawyers were talking and presenting evidence and hed fallasleep. Hed wake up and hes say to the lawyers, well, what do you want me to do?And one of the lawyers would speak up and say, I want you to convict this man and puthim in jail for five years under the penalties of the statute. Yeah, ok. And Mr. Attorneywhat do you want me to do? I want you to dismiss the case because they didnt bring itproperly. Oh, he said, I think they brought it properlyhes guilty. Put him in jail forfive years that the code allows The lawyers got so upset with his incompetence that thelawyers finally moved to have him removed from the bench and it happened, theyremoved him. Now, why does it take lawyers and that kind of incompetent display tofinally bring something like this about when these judges are very incompetent inexecuting the whole law the way theyre supposed to? They just dont do what theyresupposed to do.b) Civic and charitable activities.A judge may participate in civic and charitable

activities that do not reflect adversely upon his impartiality or interfere with the

performance of his judicial duties. A judge may serve as an officer, director, trustee ornon-legal advisor of an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic

organization not conducted for the economic or political advantage of its members

subject to the following limitations:

1. a judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will be engaged inproceedings that would ordinarily come before him or will be regularly engaged in

adversary proceedings in any court.

I dont think he should become involved in anything that might end up in his court. Iwould agree with that, but most of them probably dont.

2. A judge should not solicit funds for any educational, religious, charitable,

fraternal, or civic organization or use or permit the use of the prestige of his office forthat purpose. But he may be listed as an officer, director or trustee of such organization.

He should not be a speaker or a guest of honor at an organization fund-raising event but

he may attend such events. A judge should not give investment advice.


15/19

Dont ever ask me to be a judge then because Im always going to give you investmentadvice. My advice is that government is a damned poor investment. Dont invest in thegovernment. Anyway, I dont want to be a judge. I want to tell you how bad theinvestment is to invest in government.A judge should not give investment advice to such an organization but he may serve on

the board of directors or trustee even though it has a responsibility of approvinginvestment decisions.

C. Financial Activities. A judge should refrain from financial and business dealings that

tend to reflect adversely on his impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of hisjudicial duties, his judicial position or involve him in frequent transactions with lawyers

and persons likely to come before the court on which he serves.

Every judge has investments in banks. They have bank accounts. Anything to do with adebt related to that bank that comes before him he is going to be biased and prejudicedagainst you because he does not want the bank to take a loss because he has his moneyinvested in that bank. Theres another areaa little bit of investigation on your part, alittle bit of work to find out the judges holding which have to be publicly noticed. In

California theres a form for that is spoken about quite frequently on Jack Bowersprogram. Form #7 or something like that I believe it is but anyway

[Dave] I thought it was 61.

[Howard] It might be, I dont know, I thought it was #7. I believe thats what I heardhim say. Checkfor California but check in your state and youll find out every state inthe country has that kind of a form. It might have a different name or a differentnumbering system on it but every states got that form and all public officials aresupposed to fill out that form and reveal their public holdings, their private holdings, theirproperties, everything that they got. All of their financial status is supposed to be on thatdisclosure form and if they have an interest in a bank that you have a dispute with that isbefore his court then he cant hear it and if he does thats a breach of his fiduciary duty. Itbreaks the confidence of the people to allow him to do such a thing. I think most of thejudges have accounts in several different banks.

Subsection 2: Subject to requirements of subjection 1 a judge may hold and manageinvestments including real estate as either an individual or a closely held corporate

entity and he may engage in other remunerative activities but should not serve as an

officer or a director or a manager, advisor, or employee of any business except that hemay serve as an officer, director non-legal advisor of a family business or a corporate

entity by which he holds and manages his own investments.

Thats where the conflict comes in. If anything to do with that business, investments,connections, family connections that he may have happens to be infringing upon in any

way something that youre involved then he cant honestly sit on the court and hear the

case. And again, there are comments on this and comments and comments and thenSubsection D is fiduciary activities. A judge should not serve as the executor,

administrator, trustee, guardian or other fiduciary except for the estate, trust or person

of a member of his family and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper

performance of his judicial duties. Members of his family including a spouse, child,


16/19

grandchild, parents and grandparents or other relatives by blood or marriage or persons

with whom the judge maintains a close family relationship. As a family fiduciary a judge

is subject to the following restrictions: 1. he should not serve if it is likely that as afiduciary he will be engages in proceedings that would ordinarily come before him or if

the estate, trust, or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on

which he serves or one under his appellate jurisdiction. 2. while acting as a fiduciary ajudge is subject to the same restrictions on financial activities that applied to him in his

personal capacity

And then theres commentary, commentary, commentary about that. This is veryinteresting reading. Im not going to go over every last little bit of it because were notgoing to stay up that late at night to do that because I could probably stay on this thingand talk about it and read his commentaries and stay on this until one or two oclock inthe morning and Im not going to do that. Im already getting tired. Its been a long day.Ive been busy.

6. A judge should regularly file reports of compensation received for quasi-judicial and

extra-judicial activities.

Thats really up to him. That has little or nothing to do with you unless you happen to beinvolved in some organization, a quasi-judicial organization, a fund-raising organizationof some kind that the judge got involved in and you happened to catch him doingsomething like receiving compensation that he should not have received or personalassistance in different things for that organizationthen you got him. But thats a rarething. Thats not our great concern. Dont really care what they do as long as theyrehonest in the proceeding that we are in front of them with. Thats really the only thingthat we He is in a fiduciary position other than the one that might have for a familyrelationship and that is the fiduciary position of the confidence that the American peopleare supposed to be able to have in the judiciary system as part of the government which isa trust that is supposed to be there to look out for the good and the benefit of the people,not the good and benefit of government. But it seems to be reversed, doesnt it? And innumber 7:7. The judge should refrain from political activities inappropriate to his judicial office. Ajudge should not act as a leader or hold any office in a political organization.

Like Democratic Club or anything like that.He should not make speeches for a political organization or candidate or publicly

endorse a candidate for public office. He should not solicit funds for or pay an

assessment or make a contribution to a political organization or a candidate, attend

political gatherings or purchase tickets for political party dinners or other functions.Let me ask you a question. There was a lady senator that was shot and seriously injuredin Arizona about two years ago. Wasnt there a judge in that gathering with her that wasshot and killed? {Judge Roll} I wonder if that judge should not have refrained from hispolitical activity with that lady senator. Maybe that whole thing wouldnt have happenedif he hadnt been there. I dont know, Im just making sort of a snap statement.A judge should resign his office when he becomes a candidate either in a party primaryor a general election for a non-judicial office.

Yeah, he should resign.A judge should not engage in any other political activity except on behalf of measures to

improve the law, the legal system and the administration of justice.


17/19

He shouldnt get involved in a whole lot of the things that some of them do get involvedin. but thats up to the system to prosecute him or fine him or do something to removehim from office if they get involved in those These things are not the important part.The important part was the first couple of canons. And the reason they were is because ofwhat it says in here and what it tells you this is all about. It tells you that the Supreme

Court of the State of Delaware has advanced this set of rules and it appearing that theadoption in Delaware of the judicial conduct has been approved and recommended by thejudicial conference of the State of Delaware after consultation with the executivecommittee of the Delaware BAR Association and others. It further appearing that thepromulgation of such a code would be consistent with similar actions being taken in otherjurisdictions.See, Im telling you this is about the same in every other state in their rules and would bedesirable for the state of Delaware.Now, therefore, it is so ordered.And on April 1, 1974 Rule 33(1) of this court be and ishereby amended by deleting the said rule and by substituting the following in lieu

thereof: The judicial ethics, the Code of Judicial Conduct approved and adopted by the

American BAR Association.Who done it? The American BAR Association. Who runs the courts then? Whos reallythe courts? They arent the courts established by the Constitution. They are now owedand operated by the American BAR Association. And they did this, the American BARAssociation did this on August 16th, 1972 as modified and attached hereto and it shallgovern the conduct of all judges of this state in their constitutional and statutoryfunctions. Whos in control? The Constitution? The actual government? Or is this aprivate organization running a government function? The answer lies in some of the workthat Rod Class has done and gotten some judicial responses from courts stating that theseagencies of government are not actually agencies of government. They are privatebusinesses contracting with the government to do the governments work. Thats exactlywhat the whole damned court system throughout the United States is but they haveinternal rules to guide themselves. They dont follow them all the time. They dont haveto. Theyre not going to make themselves follow them. How many times have you everhear of a judge being prosecuted for something? I dont remember ever hearing of ajudge being prosecuted. A few judges have been looked into by the judicial review boardand removed from office because of a few things that violated the rules. But usually iswas this stuff about campaigning and raising campaign funds for somebody elseapplying their judicial authority in the wrong way, never the first three sections of thecanons that I just read to you where they have to give you your chance to be heard.Nobody brings anything about that because thats up to the people. The only way you canbring that thats going to be successful is to bring it in a court action against them forbreach of their fiduciary duty because if you just report it to the judicial review boardtheyre going to look at it and say, well, hell, we do this all the time. Were not going todo anything about this judge just because you complained because all the judges do this.They always expedite the courts business as quickly as possible to get you out of thereso they can get onto the next case and get done for the day.


18/19

[Dave] Because, remember, the definition of justice is collection of the justamount. It is presumed that you already owe or you would not be in the debtors court inthe first place.

[Howard] Exactly.

[Dave] And the American BAR Association from Chicago, Illinois is a corporatemunicipal subdivision of the International Lawyer BAR from London, England.

[Howard] Thats correct. Its one big scam isnt it? I wouldnt call it a conspiracy.Id call it a scam. Theyve been scamming the people here in America for years. {US =Uncle Scam}. For some reason the people do nothing about it. This is what worries me. Idont worry that somebody will get angry because that somebody will end up gettingarrested for saying the wrong thing or doing the wrong act and in front of other peoplewhere theres evidence and witnesses to take him to court and prosecute and put him injail for causing a disturbance. They do that and they get arrested and it has happened. It

happens quite frequently. And the judge will get you arrested. Hell put you in jail forcontempt because you disrupted the court. Those things happen all the time. That doesntworry me at all. What worries me is the anger of the entire population growing andgrowing and growing and this thing is going to lead to tremendous violence, not just oneor two people standing up against the court but the Biblical prediction that the citiesmeaning the civil governments including the courts and all the records that are kept incivil government buildings being burned and totally destroyed and the people in thoseplaces being massacred because the masses are so angry. We might be as Neil Bortzrefers to us, the dumb massesnow, dont say that too fast or youll understand what hereally called the people. We may be the dumb masses call get angry and will get angrywhen the goodies that have been promised us by government suddenly are taken away ordisappear because governments failure to come through and courts oppression to try toforce us to cooperate with new rules and new concepts of government, do away with theold form of government. Well, isnt that exactly what Obamas talking about? Were on anew era. Were heading into a new time. Everything is changing. Yeah, its changing intocommunist dictatorship control. I grant you we need a dictator. We need to throw thiswhole system out and put a dictator in there. But you go back and look in history therewere many and many and many a good dictator but theres very little written about them.The only ones that were ever written about were the evil ones. But we have an evil one inthere right now that wants to be the dictator. We just threw an evil one out by electionthat wanted to be a dictator that was on the Republican party side. Prior to that we hadanother one in there that wanted to be a dictator that was a Democratic side and theythrew him out by election and put the Republican one in. Were just replacing evildictators. We need to get rid of this evil stuff and it will be done by violence if this is notcurbed by force in the courts. And this is where Id rather see it done by force in thecourts. I dont like the idea of all this violence because its going to kill a bunch of evilpeople but a bunch of good people are going to get killed while theyre doing it and itsthe good ones that Im concerned about. I dont care about the evil ones. But evil onesyou take them to court and you beat them to death properly using this breach of fiduciaryduty type of a lawsuit against these judge, these lawyers as we have just explained to you,


19/19

how it can be done in the last couple of weeks of going over these particular rules fromthe courts. You got them in a position where you can show that theyre in a position ofconfidence which is what you have to show in order to prove that there is a fiduciaryposition. Youve got them by showing that they have not done what the law says theyresupposed to do, that they have breached their duty by being dishonest and its not hard to

do. Their own papers that they put out prove their dishonesty. They proved beyond ashadow of a doubt. We can go after these people. We can use the courts and Id prefer todo that. If the violence comes because the courts fail us completely then theres nothingwe can do except let the violence take over....This government has a tendency to have people in it that are very dishonest. Now, thatdoesnt make the government wrong. It doesnt make the government dishonest. It makesthe people that are in it dishonest. They dont apply the law. The judges assist them in notapplying the law. This is where you can go after the judges following their own rules of

conduct out of the states rule book in your state, whatever state youre dealing with. Thisis what you have to know. This is what you have to study and look up and read and beready and bring your groups together, work on it together, not one at a time, not all byyourself. Dont leave it to one person to do. All of you get together in groups and workon these kinds of things and come up with it and so it fast. Im telling you we dont havea lot of time because this monetary system is collapsing and it might last six months, itmight last six more yearsI dont know. But I dont see it lasting very much longer. Idont see it making anything like six years. But then again I could be really wrong. Itcould last that long.

2013 jan 31 howard griswold conference call m

Documents