transcript audios all tami dave

Audio Transcripts -- A Companion Resource to the Traveler’s Guide……...page 1 of 86

TRACK 1 – THE ORDINANCE OF WILLIAM I, SEPARATING THE SPIRITUAL AND THE TEMPORAL COURTS [The “Ordinance of William I” is at the Avalon Project under Medieval Documents. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/ordwill.asp Dave: Okay, now what is this thing called? The Ordinance of William the First, Separating the Spiritual and Temporal Courts. Okay, now what you’re saying is, he separated… Tami: …he separated you and your body. Dave: …your body from your soul. Tami: Now, there’s two bishops. There’s the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York. That IS the House of Lords. The House of Lords is separated into the Lords Spiritual, and the Lords Temporal. Dave: Okay. Tami: [reading from Wikipedia]

The Lords Spiritual of the United Kingdom, also called Spiritual Peers are the 26 bishops of the established Church of England who serve in the House of Lords along with the Lords Temporal.

Now, when you look in Black’s [Law Dictionary]:

The House of Lords is the upper chamber of the British parliament, of which the eleven-member judicial committee provides judges who serve as the final court of appeal in most civil cases. In practice, the Lords sit as committees, usually of five but occasionally of seven. Two committees may sit simultaneously.

Now, what does this say?

The House of Delegates: 1) the body vested with control and administration of the American Bar Association; 2) the lower chamber of the state legislature in Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia.

Dave: …and, DC is a part of Maryland and Virginia. Tami: Absolutely. Now, when you go all the way back to the Lords Spiritual and the Lords Temporal… Dave: … you see that it connects itself to DC – through this, right here – what is this called? Tami: The House of Delegates. And, again, back to the Bible, you have delegated your authority to somebody else. That’s what vesting power means. Power is always vested. It cannot be taken. It has to be vested. Dave: It has to be given. Tami: Right. Dave: Even in this manner – through fraud and coercion and everything else. Tami: Absolutely. Now, look at your constitution. You vested – you delegated – your authority. You vested power in Congress.


TRACK 2 – CHARTER OF LIBERTIES, PRIVILEGES, FYANTS, MARKET CONDITIONS, REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH Tami: When you go back to the original Charter of Liberties, and the Charter of Forests and Chases… Dave: That’s what you showed me last time. Tami: The Charter of Liberties was handed out by Henry the First in 1100. This is what they’ve renewed when William Penn did the Charter of Liberty. Remember here? …establishing all this Pennsylvania ‘chit’? What they did was, they revisited it. Yeah. Watch this. And I’ll show you what an affiant statement is. Remember, I tell everybody not to do an affidavit? Dave: All right, definition… Tami: These are the beasts of the forest… [reading from http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests/glossary.htm#B ]

animals having ‘privilege within the Forest’: also including red deer (hart, hind) roe deer until reign of Edward III (buck, doe) hare, boar…

This is where you’re defined – animals having PRIVILEGE within the forest. You know, you have ‘rights and privileges, right? This is where you’re chased. Dave: Whats’ this? Tami: [reading]

Some authorities gave different categorizations, with roe deer as beasts of the forest and wolves and foxes as beasts of the chase…and it is probable tha some animals were treated differently in different forests. See also ‘venison’, ‘vermin of chase’

Now, fyant, the word ‘affiant’… Dave: ‘Animals having privilege within the forest’ – now, that definition there – privilege – that’s the same definition that you’re saying that they carry all the way through to when they give us privileges. Tami: And, then it’s revisited… Dave: How do you get there – from that standpoint? Tami: What does it say in USC Title 7, Section 136? Dave: [reading from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/7/136 ]

(d) Animal. The term “animal” means all vertebrate and invertebrate species, including but not limited to man, and other mammals, birds, fish and shellfish.

Okay. That made the connection. Tami: In the Statutes at Large, it’s again reiterated all over – Am Jur and the Statutes at Large – where, it just keeps calling us animals. We’re just vermin. When you look at the first and second Welfare Theorum, we’re pollution. We’re not evolution, we’re not devolving. We are POL lution – many. Everybody asks me why I don’t like affidavits. [reading from http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests/glossary.htm#F ]

fyants – the excrement of a fox and other vermin, reported on by foresters.


Now, when we enter into the incorporated state of liberty… Dave: So, how do you get from fyants to affiant? Tami: You’re accepting their authority. When you go in and you speak something out of your mouth – declare something out of your mouth – you’re appearing in front of the judge. You’re granting them jurisdictional ability in the forest, and you’re claiming that authority over you – within the forest. Dave: Yeah – the joinder thing. I understood that before. But how to you get from fyants to affidavit? Tami: Well, that’s what that is. It’s excrement of you. They consider it excrement. They don’t hear anything. You’re dead. Dave: That’s true. Yeah, I know they don’t hear it. That’s true. I know they can’t hear it, because, if you were actually there living, they would get up and walk out, because they wouldn’t be able to do anything. Tami: Right. The court’s nullified, because, if the living is there, there’s no fiction of law. If the truth is known, then, there’s no fiction of law. The reason we’re entering into liberty… See the definition of liberty? Dave: The definition of liberty under Forests and Chases [reading from http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests/glossary.htm#L ]

liberty: also known as ‘franchise’, the exemption by royal decree from general provisions or regulations, whether judicial, commercial, or ecclesiastical by which powers could be exercised and appointments made locally (e.g. within manors) by lords, burgesses, clerics, or corporations, or regionally (e.g. within honors)…

Tami: …which in the Forgiveness doc, you’re coming into dignity. You’re only claiming you ARE dignity…

…exemption might also be claimed as a prescription, i.e. from time memorial… ….which is what we’re doing. We’re BE/living. Dave: You explained that – before in the document. Okay. Tami: Here is the actual Charter of Forests and Chases. [http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests/Carta.htm ] Charter of Liberties. That’s the original and then you want to look at the William Penn’s as well. [ http://www.constitution.org/bcp/penncharpriv.htm ] Dave: Charter of Liberties of Henry I – 1100. Tami: [reading from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/hcoronation.asp]

First, Henry formally bound himself to the laws, setting the stage for the rule of law that parliaments and parliamentarians of later ages would cry for. Second, it reads almost exactly like the Magna Carta…..

…because the Magna Carta is sine die. Our constitution / Magna Carta is sine die – without a day – without a death – it just keeps moving. The only thing – in politics – the political stage or


‘ism’ – it only changes according to market conditions. YOU are the commercial unit. So, if you hold the majority of the wealth as a male, they’re going to implicate feminism against you. Dave: Okay, so how does the Magna Carta become ‘without a day’? Tami: I don’t know how else to explain it. Politics only changes according to market conditions. Dave: Okay, and, the Magna Carta is a document of politics? Tami: Right. At that time it separated the powers – enumerated powers, right? Well, what happened was, at that time the wealth was spread across the board, right? So, in order to separate a power, they were redistributing that power – they were going against that power. Then, later on, when we came here, all there was in the United States at that time were, the ground that was here – where the United States of America is – the ground was only ‘community.’ To redistribute community, they have to implicate the individual by constitutional theory, okay? …take away the community’s rights by reserving your rights over theirs. Well, then, you move along. Market conditions change when the MALE holds the majority of the wealth, so you have to redistribute him by reserving the Female’s rights over him – that’s feminism. Okay? When the white male holds the majority of the wealth and the ‘off-color anybody’ does not, they reserve the rights of the ‘off-color’ within racism -- that’s a political tool – to redistribute the white male, okay? And, it goes along. If the corporations hold the majority of the wealth – which is what’s happening now – they implement what? Environmentalism – to redistribute the corporations. So, now they’re saying, “Well, Walmart, here – you’re polluting this much land, we’re going to fine you.” And they say, “No, no, no, I’m not doing anything wrong.” And, the attorneys come in and they say, “Yes, you are. Here’s a summons. You appear in court. This is what I’m fining you with.” Where do these fines go? Environmentalism is to protect YOU and the rest of the environment. The attorneys are pocketing that money – carbon credits, everything else – the attorneys are pocketing those. How are they helping the environment? Bottling sunlight? That’s what Gore was doing, right? It’s so ridiculous. It’s right there in front of you. The FAA, the EPA – all of these things – the SEC, FDIC insurance is supposed to be protecting YOU, right? So, if the airline does something wrong, and they’re fined for harming YOU, right? Now, if an airline does something wrong and they’re fined – for harming you, or a group of you – what happens? They get fined! Where do those fines go? Who’s making money off of what’s happening to you? The EPA is the same. Where do those fines go? Did it help rebuild the environment? Absolutely not! There’s nothing there. It’s just the attorney pocketing those moneys. And, those are the market conditions. If the corporations hold the majority of the wealth, environmentalism is employed. If the Jews hold all the wealth, Catholicism is employed. If the Zionists hold all the wealth, Islamism is employed. If there’s so much money in Islam – which they’re doing now – Zionism is employed against them, and the U.N. is responsible for that. So, they’re going in and they’re razing the homes all across the Islamic nations, is what’s happening. Dave: …saying, you’re not up to code! Tami: Right. And, they’re blaming the Jew. So, here’s all these Islamists are blaming the Jew again – Zionism – but it’s the U.N. doing this. It’s the attorneys. It’s always been the attorneys. It’s always been the PHARoahs of the SEE – Pharisee.


TRACK 3 – BILLS, ADDRESSES, HOUSE, SEAL, PUBLIC RECORD Dave: So, sine die– without a day – means that the document can just change and move however it feels like? Tami: Yes. And, that’s what I was trying to explain with a Bill – earlier. Dave: You say there’s nine parts to a Bill. Tami: Once you read it, you’re going to get it, because the bill changes by the address TO… not the address – like YOUR address. You think that it means, like a physical THING – an address. No! It’s an address TO – a verbal declaration – an ADDRESS. Okay, so when the President comes in and he does the Address to Congress or an Address to the Senate, he’s verbally pointing at them and saying, now, YOU are the ones that hold them attaint. Dave: …hold that Bill of Attainder. Tami: …hold the Bill of Attainder of ‘whoever’ they’re notating in that Bill/Address. Nobody ever pays attention to those things! What’s an inaugural address? That is changing the Bill of Attainder. Dave: To what? Tami: To whatever they want it to be. That’s how they’re picking you up. Dave: Just every time? Tami: Every single time. The President does this Address TO the Holder-of-the-Great-Seal. Dave: Is he changing the delegation of authority then at that point? Tami: Yes, in each address. Read the nine parts of a Bill. It’s the Address TO the Holder of the Seal. Dave: The Address to the Holder of the Seal is… Tami: The Holder of the Seal is ‘whoever.’ Because, Congress has a seal, the Queen has a Seal, everybody has a seal except for you – until NOW. Dave: That’s why your seal is so important. Tami: It’s absolutely important because, that seal. they cannot do anything with it. You HAVE to have your seal. Now, YOU’re the Holder of the Great Seal, and you are your own House. Dave: That’s what Kennedy was referring to… about becoming the Master of your own House. Tami: You HAVE to be in your own House. You can no longer be in the House of Delegates… the House of Lords.... or, the House of Representatives. And, with the Atlantic Charter, the House of Representatives got global governance. It’s not the New World Order coming – it already IS and it always HAS BEEN. Each House, each Charter, designates the House that has global governance. It always has. There was a House of Lombardy, House of Urso, House of Gowan. You have the Magna Carta which is the House of Italy – that means ‘Big Charter’ – Magna Carta – Big Charter. That was the House of Italy. Dave: How does the House of Italy get into all the Barons in England and take King John down to the Thames and threaten to cut his head off? Tami: It’s ALL of it! It’s just the House. Whoever has the global governance is the House. Now YOU do! You have to rise up and BE in your House. USE that seal. You’re not just taking back your physical ‘land’ property. You’re taking back your soul and everything that’s of your domain. Demesne means, ‘of mine’ – period. And now, you’re obliterating their use of any other seal to alter yours – a Notary seal, another private seal. Dave: Where it always gets defunct by them counter-deeding your will.


Tami: Absolutely. And, now they can’t do that because we’re using their laws against them: 18 USC 1506. We’re saying, “No, you cannot alter, obliterate, omit, or avoid the public record. You’re an estopped thing.” Dave: Yeah, they can’t mess with the public record! Under no circumstances! Tami: And, nobody’s ever, ever held them accountable for that. Nobody’s ever tried. Dave: Yeah, but that was something that I knew awhile back – like, every single time. And, then, somebody said to me: No, they’re not obliterating it because none of the stuff they DO is ON public record! Tami: Right – because it counters it. Dave: Yeah, and then I explained it to someone else and they said, “Well, no, of course it has to be on public record.” I said, “When you ask for a transcript, it says, This is a… Tami: ‘Certified’ – whatever it is. Dave: It’s a copy of a transcript – or something like that – it’s NOT an actual transcript. Because, no actual transcripts exist because, if it was IN public law… Tami: Until you put it on to public record. Dave: Right …until it was actually IN public law, is there actually a true record of it. Other than that, nothing else exists. Tami: And, that’s where they’re shooting themselves because, we’re admitting court records ON TO public record as evidence, and NOW they’re being held accountable. But, they can’t before that – you’re in an administrative process – it’s an Article IV court that you’re consenting to just by submitting to their authority… by answering their summons. But, the nine parts of a bill – you can see now. Read the definition because, that’s the most amazing thing. Dave: Okay, ‘bill’ – and this is Black’s 7th Edition Deluxe – okay. TRACK 4 – PUBLIC RECORD, LETTERS PATENTS Tami: …the distinction between sovereignty and a foreign state. Dave: Right, using private acts and acts of commerce instead of public law Tami: And, 18 USC 1506 is a public law: “Do not alter the record.” I’m not arguing that you’re injuring a stop sign or you’re injuring a curtain or injuring a wall. That’s a HARM. You’re removing something off the record that COULD obliterate a future order. Dave: And, you’re not allowed to do that, because, this is public law, this is on record… Tami: Absolutely. Dave: Actually, being ON court record, because nothing else that they ever do is on court record. And, I think I’ve just started to kind of get that idea through some people’s head. It’s really difficult for them, especially the people that have fought there entire lives IN THIS SYSTEM. And, then you hit them with the fact that, nothing you’ve ever done is relevant, and nothing you have ever done is on the record, and they go, “What?” Tami: And, they’ve learned so much. I’ve had so many fight with me because they’ve been through years and years and years of all the statutory bullshit and case law and common law, and when I SIMPLIFY, they get pissed off at me. It’s like a balloon deflating because, that’s years and years of their life that they’ve stuck into this shit. Dave: But, if you’re not willing to change your mind, if you’re not willing to keep your mind open about what the truth is, then, well, Good Luck to you because, it’s not going to work.


[1:26] PATENTS. PRETENDERS Dave: [reading from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/magframe.asp]

The Letters Patents of King Henry the Seventh Granted unto Iohn Cabot and his Three Sonnes, Lewis, Sebastian and Sancius for the Discouerie of New and Unknowen Lands.

Tami: So, here’s how they first started invoking – one of the ways they first started invoking the patent. Dave: YOU – being the land. Because, when they’re saying New and Unknown Lands, they’re talking about the actual body – YOU THE BODY as the land. Tami: Right. Because, you can never, ever, ever patent an old thing. Dave: You can never patent the actual physical earth. Tami: And, you’re only known when you’re CON CEIVED – that’s a conception. When you are CON CEIVED, or ‘with thought’, then you’re known. Dave: Ah, crap – yeah. Good point. Tami: [reading from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/magframe.asp]

We have given and granted to them, THEIR heires and deputies, that all the firme lands, isles, villages, townes, castles and places whatsoever they be that they shall chance to finde, may not of any other of our subjects be frequented or visited without the licence that the foresayd John and his sonnes, and their deputies, under payee of forfeiture.

So, the way that you forfeited land, is that, you BOUGHT IT BACK FROM THEM and entered into the Borrower’s Covenant. That was YOURS! You ACKNOWLEDGED that they had a patent on it when you BOUGHT it from them. Dave: That’s in all these documents – on all the mortgages. Tami: Right! When you mortgage something, it’s already yours. You’ve acknowledged their authority by BUYING it – and, entering into contract to buy your own land. Dave: Because they can’t patent the land. You’re just stating, “Yep, you had authority to keep it.” What was that part specifically in there – the part that you just read – does that go back to… Tami: See, “their heirs and deputies.” The term now they use, after they adopted statute and adopted the United States Inc., is SUCCESSOR. A SUCCESSOR is not an HEIR. A successor can be another corporation that takes over one corporation, or a corporation under or another franchise under another franchise under another franchise – those are successors. You can’t be a successor. You’re the heir. Dave: What was this defining in there – as far as that goes? Tami: The succession. I mean, we give you everything – whatever you find – and, it comes down to YOUR heirs. And, that’s where the Kapicinin Dynasty comes in again. Dave: So, basically what that little thing did was just saying, Hey, whatever people you go out there and you find – meaning, the lands – that’s what they’re referring to – what – his sons could do what with – whatever they felt like, for the most part? Tami: Right. Forever and ever and ever and ever. Dave: All right. Kapicinin Dynasty.


Tami: So, you had France, Spain, and Duke Henry of Luxembourg, Germany, are members of the Kapicinin Dynasty. You know, it keeps on coming down to the same people – over and over and over again. Dave: [reading] Current Kapicinin Pretenders. Duke of Anjou… [see ‘Top 10 Pretenders to the Thrones of Europe’ http://listverse.com/2007/09/27/top-10-pretenders-to-the-thrones-of-europe/ ] Tami: Now, you have to really pay attention to these. The pretender to Brazil since 2007 – if you look at the U.N… Dave: What does it mean – pretender? Tami: Pretender – PRE tender – before it’s tendered. It can’t be money. It’s always before money. But, you’re always negotiable. You are always money or a negotiable instrument. Dave: …the fee. Tami: And, they’re always PRE tender. Dave: Oh, that’s why it says the pretender. Tami: He – they – can never be tender. But, YOU can be tender because you’re never a pretender. Dave: Is that something that you become when you actually become master of your own house? Do you then become a pretender? Tami: You’re no longer even a – because, that’s always a delegated authority too. A pretender is something maintained by somebody else. Dave: Under that house? Tami: Right. Right. Kapicinin. Dave: Under the Kapicinin House, okay. TRACK 5 – CHARTER OF URSO Tami: Okay, so, we’ll start with the Charter of Urso – 44 BC. There’s the Charter… is an agreement: “I want this, we’re going to take this… and have our way with it.” Now, after the original charter, they take the land, they have to implicate a constitution. Dave: Now, who did that? Where was this done – the Charter of Urso? Where was it – I mean like, location? Tami: The time is perverted. Dave: Not so much the time, but who did this? Was this Greece, was this….? Tami: Well, they’re calling it Genetiva – which is Geneva. This is by Julius Caesar. Dave: Okay….drafted in outline by Julius Ceaesar…

Tami: [reading from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/charter_of_urso.asp ]

Mark Antony had this document, marginal comments and all, along with other papers, enacted into law. … This history accounts for repetitions, redundant phrases, disorderly arrangement, and general lack of finish in the law as it has descended to us.

So, here they’re trying to tell you… Don’t worry about the time-frames, because, when is this written? 44 BC – okay? How many years did Jesus live? They said 35 – about 35 years, right?


At this point, this is before Christ. And, you have Julius Caesar being spoken of in the Bible, when Jesus was walking around and they said, “Should we pay homage to Caesar?” And he says, “Show me a penny” – remember? “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s. Dave: And, supposedly, Caesar came…yeah. Tami: …with Jesus. Okay, so, here you have 44 BC, and then, it says, “This history accounts for repetitions, redundant phrases, disorderly arrangements and general lack of finish in the law as it has descended to us.” So, here they’re saying, “Don’t look at the guy behind the curtain! Don’t worry about that guy over there…just, don’t pay attention!” This is what people – when they first start reading these, it’s really, really hard to untwist these things in the mind. They have to realize that, time is not linear. It’s not supposed to be linear – it never has been. Physics – of all things – energy is here. We’re beginning and ending at the same time. DON’T look at the dates, because, then it’s just going to pervert everything. Dave: Okay, let’s just then look at the information of WHAT they’re saying. Tami: Right. So, basically, the Charter of Urso says, “We’ve come onto this land. I’m going to take it. I agree with you.” A charter is – “I hand you one-half of it. You hand me one-half.” We rip it apart. That’s our receipt that we’re taking this shit. Dave: Okay, like you said before, it’s like something that just happened… TRACK 6 – ANCIENT CHARTERS [reviewing documents posted at http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/ancient.asp ] Tami: After the original charter, when you find a community, if it has a whole bunch of wealth – say, you have a whole bunch of trinkets, you have your stuff saved, you have everything saved – what you have to do is, you have to create an individual, okay? So, here we come from the Charter of Urso to the Athenian Constitution. Dave: Okay. Tami: Just like here. They got here, they landed here, they saw a community of Indians in the United States of America – or whatever you want to call this land mass – the next step is to redistribute the community, by creating the individual or the separation FROM the community into an individual in order to do that. So, the individual rights are now reserved, the community has to now fight for their rights by court process – legal process. Now, when you go up, you have – in here – you have the Code of Hammurabi – you know, ”An Eye for an Eye, a Tooth for a Tooth.” Now, here’s where they start creating – or, it looks like they just now began creating – judicial process in Cyrene. Dave: Now, this is… Tami: Edicts of Augustus Caesar and Decree of the Senate on the Judicial process in Cyrene, in 64 BC. Now again, when Jesus was maintaining – they were speaking about Caesar in the Bible – you see the mention of Caesar. Which one? Augustus that was in 64 BC? Or, were they talking about Julius, in 44 BC? Okay? And, this is before Christ, okay? Now, the Twelve Tables happens to be Uniform Commercial Code, okay? …the very basic outline of Uniform Commercial Code.


Dave: The Twelve Tables – 451 BC, or thereabout. [http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/twelve_tables.asp] Tami: So, you have – here’s how it goes up: proceedings – this is talking about legal process preliminary to trial… Now, YOU know Title One, Two, Three, Four – Title Four is Social Services, right? Dave: Okay. Tami: Social Security, Welfare, everything else. What that has on the flip side – the back side of it is that, Title 4 has always been paternal power. So, if you accept a benefit – welfare, social security, whatever – you’re calling something your dad, okay? Dave: Thank you, Daddy. Tami: What does Title Four say – under 2b? Dave: “If a father thrice surrenders a son for sale, the son shall be free from the father.” Tami: What? Dave: So, if he does it three times, um, he’s not your son any more? Tami: Not YOURS. Who …SURRENDERS a son for sale three times, the son shall be free from THE father – the paternal father. Now, before we were speaking about the three variances of law: Meta, which is morality, Soma, which is psychology, and Veta, which is the law itself. So, each time, you are put into – YOU, JOB – are put into legal process, and they are attacking your morality, your psychology and legally. You will be criminalized. You will be hospitalized. You will be demoralized and called, “You are a bad man.” “You are a bad father.” “You are a bad girl.” “You are a bad mother.” Dave: So, what they’re saying here: “If a father…” THIS father is talking about the State. Tami: No, that’s you. Dave: If A father – me… Tami: …thrice surrenders the son for sale… the son shall be free from THE father – THE State. Dave: So, be free from THE father, the STATE… Tami: Right. So, how do you extrapolate you and your estate? They go after you with morality, which is divorce process. They go after you with psychology, which is institutionalization. They go after you with criminality, which is Veta. Meta, Soma, Veta – all three variants. So, by the time you’re done, you’re broke! You have nothing left. And, all that is left now is for you to die. You’re free from the father, but now he gets you on the flip side, with the medicine. He’s going to put you in an old folks home, or you’re going to be in an institution or in prison somewhere, and you’re going to die this way. You’re going to be sick, reliant on the father for medicine, reliant on the father for your care, reliant on the father for your estate, and you continue, continue, continue to call that thing your Father. Dave: Now, you’re getting this from the standpoint that, there’s the word father in the same sentence here – is why it has to have two different meanings here? Tami: It does. “If A father thrice surrenders…” – surrenders to who? You have to be surrendering your son to somebody. Dave: To the state. Tami: Right. “…a son for sale shall be free from THE father.” Dave: Shall be free from the father – the state. Tami: Right. Dave: If I give my son three times to the state, he’s free from the state? That doesn’t make any sense. Tami: Well, that’s what it is though.


Dave: How does that make any sense? Tami: Because you’re free after you’re fully extrapolated with morality, psychology, and law. You’re no longer under their thumb. But, you can also step out. Why are you surrendering your son three times? You’re going into court based on implied color. And, here you are – you’re saying, “I didn’t do it, I didn’t do it. I AM a good father.” You’re consenting to the authority of that father. Dave: The state. Tami: Don’t consent! Don’t SELL the child. Don’t SURRENDER the child three times. These are THEIR laws. This is UCC – the original UCC. See Title 4… [ http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/twelve_tables.asp ]

Title IV. Paternal Power Table V. Inheritance and Guardianship?

Who’s making these laws – that you can inherit? They’re already shutting up your ability to be the heir.

Table VI: Ownership and possession. Table VII: Real property

Dave: And, this is the starting point from Rome? Tami: Absolutely – from what we know as Rome. So, we’ve gone through the Charter (of Urso), Code of Hammurabi, we’ve gone through the Twelve Tables… Dave: We didn’t really go through the Code of Hammurabi, but the only thing you mentioned about it was just, basically… Tami: Eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. Dave: That’s basically the most important things that are in there. Tami: Right. Now, when you have the Constitution set up, you have the individual created. You can also create the individual as a Corporation, which was what happened in the 14th amendment – that created the corporate person. Now, what’s the next step? Environmentalism. Agrarian Law. Dave: Agrarian Law; 111 BC. Now, this is environmentalism. Tami: Right. Dave: [reading from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/agrarian_law.asp]

“In the early Roman Republic, there were three kinds of land: private land, common pasture, and public land, or land of the public domain, which was rented to private entrepreneurs. By the second century BC, however, much of the land was treated by its occupants as though it were private.”

[7:40] Tami: So, then they start limiting. Okay, here’s where they’re taking it back.

(1) limited the amount of public land rented to one person to 500 jugers (about 330 acres), (2) ordered the States repossession of all lands in excess of this…”

So, that’s what they did – especially, like your place – they put it into federal reserve – or, whatever they do… Dave: …make it into a state park or county park or whatever.


Tami: …(3) assigned these lands to the poor in lots of 30 jugers for a small annual rent…

Okay, this is very important. If you look at what happened with the crucifixion of Jesus Christ – what happened? First of all, when Judas came back and he gave the silver back to the church – right? … to the priest – they said, “We cannot put this – this is blood money – this cannot go into the treasury. Therefore, we are going to do…what?” They’re going to establish paupers’ cemeteries. Dave: Pauper cemetery? Tami: Right. It’s the GUISE of charity. It’s ALWAYS the guise of charity. What did they do? They took your land to reserve federal land for animals. Those animals were already there. Quit removing them. Stop renting us the right to… We have to get a license to hunt. Why? These are our lands! We’re accepting this authority over and over and over again. And, it’s done under the guise of charity. The church looks charitable. It’s never been charitable. It IS the state. Dave: And from this point – the agrarian law – the charity is from the standpoint of….assign these lands to the POOR, in lots of THIRTY, for a SMALL annual rent. So, they’re taking it from larger people and giving it to little people. Tami: [reading]

(4) Appointed a board of triumvirs, as a land commission, to repossess and to redistribute this land.

This is the same thing they did with the Reclamation Act. This is the same thing they do with the Preservation Acts. This is the inception. Dave: Okay. Agrarian Law. Tami: Environmentalism. Reclamation. Water reclamation. You have preservation. You have all of these different acts under the guise of environmentalism, and it just goes back to the state, back to the church, and shifts around. Okay, now, here’s another one: “Law of Caesar on Municipalities.” [ http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/ancient.asp ] Okay? You have to look at Blackstone’s Commentaries when you read this one. [ http://www.mindserpent.com/American_History/books/Tucker/tucker_index.htm ] [10:05] Dave: Okay, why is that? Tami: That’s the municipality. Dave: Blackstone’s Commentary is… Tami: It’s the _____ of what a person is, of what a citizen is – everything. There’s a whole bunch of different definitions for you of the Kingdom. His Title, Of the King’s Royal Family, Of the Council’s Belonging to the King, Of the Clergy, Of the Civil State, Of the Military, Of Master and Servant, Of Husband and Wife, Of Parent and Child, Guardian and Ward, Corporations, Of Property in General, Of Real Property and, First, of Corporeal Hereditaments, Incorporeal Hereditaments, Of the Feodal System – Dave: This just goes, and goes and goes… Tami: But, this is the Bible written all over again. This is telling you exactly how they’re doing this – step by step. This manual – or, whatever we’re writing now – it’s all WRITTEN in Blackstone’s Commentaries. It’s written again in Emile – The Treatise on Education – How to Remove Man or Woman – before they even have a name – from the natural state and MAKE


them a person, MAKE them a citizen, make them civil, make them whatever you want them to be – make them politically correct. A lot of people will not read the Blackstone’s Commentaries because it’s written in Old English. Dave: Well, then basically, all we need to state then is, the importance of it, or what did it do that wasn’t there before. Tami: If you can get through all of Blackstone’s Commentaries, you will find out what exactly you were, and now what you are, and what you’re accepting by accepting their authority. I believe that EVERYBODY should read Blackstone’s Commentaries. Dave: And, nothing has changed from the standpoint of Blackstone’s Commentaries, to what they’re still doing to us right now. Tami: Absolutely. Dave: And, it all stems from here, more or less, because they very, very precisely go through it, obviously, with all these chapters. These chapters are unbelievably long. Tami: The Rights of Persons, The Rights of Individuals, Parliament, the King and his Title, the King’s Royal Family, Councils, King’s Duties, King’s Prerogative, King’s Revenue, Magistrates, Of PEOPLE, Whether Aliens, Denizens or Natives, Of the Clergy, Of the Civil State – which is another name for you, Military and Maritime States… Dave: Okay, that’s what I was just going to ask. When we come IN as the united states, where would we fall in here? Would it be…. Tami: Nowhere. No. You are not civil, you are not individual, you are I AM or, the united states united. You’re just the BE ING. You don’t fall in any of these laws. Dave: So, you remove yourself from all of this gibberish? Tami: Absolutely. See, even the 14th-amendment-created-person was in Chapter XVIII. Dave: It was already there? Tami: Absolutely. It just changes sine die. If there’s no need for a corporation, they won’t have a corporate government. If there’s need for a corporate governance, they’re going to incorporate sine die. And, it’s simple. If you can get through just that one aspect of ancient documents and realize, this is the same thing over and over and over again, then they’ll be better prepared and they can see what’s happening today. Here’s the definition of the judicial process. Everything’s there. Dave: This is what? Tami: Edicts of Augustus and Decree of the Senate on the Judicial Process in Cyrene, 64 B.C. [ http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/ancient.asp ] Here you have the Senate Judiciary Committee again – the first one. Dave: So, good old Augustus decided to… Tami: …implement the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 64 BC. Dave: And so, that then created what judges in Rome that could then do something important… Tami: Absolutely. The Senate Judiciary Committee – look at what they’ve been doing. They ended up with more power. In 1974 when Patty Hearst was kidnapped…what had happened was, you saw this big show: Oh, my gosh, there’s somebody kidnapped… and here’s a big show. On the flip side of that, they implemented the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Act. Nobody notices that one. Dave: Well, let’s do broad strokes too here. What did this do for Augustus back then? Tami: It brought the state back in to a tighter formulation. So, when you’re taught the separation of powers, there’s the legislative branch, the judicial branch, and the executive branch. When you do the Senate Judiciary Committee, you’re bringing in the legislative branch


and the judicial branch together. NOW, it’s so bad that, you have in the White House an attorney-senator President, an attorney-senator Vice-President, and an attorney-senator Secretary of State. There’s absolutely NO separation of powers. Dave: An attorney-senator secretary of state… Tami: Hillary Clinton. Dave: What do you mean…ends up being a senator at the same time that she’s…? Tami: When she took off her senate hat, did she stop being a senator? And, that’s the same thing – when you’re disbarred, does that mean you’re no longer an attorney? Like, mentally you’re not ever thinking like an attorney any more? Dave: Obviously not. Tami: Right. So, where’s the separation of powers? Dave: Well, she can’t go in and use her power as a senator while she’s.. Tami: The hell she can’t! Because, here you have – remember, we talked about the House of Delegates, okay? SENATOR Patrick Leahy is on the House of Delegates. Who do they control again? They have the administrative control of the American Bar Association. Dave: Oh. Okay. Tami: So, where’s the separation of power? There is absolutely NO separation of power. The power has always been the attorneys. It’s always been the lawmakers and whatever they’re delegating, but they’ve gone – there’s no such thing as legislation. You have the Uniform Law Commission that’s implementing laws. You have the Municipal Code Corporation that’s granting out all these municipal codes. And, it all stems from the same place. Read Blackstone’s Commentaries. It all stems from the same place. It just moves forward depending on the market conditions. In here, look at the definition of commercial unit. You are a commercial unit. One – your family is one commercial unit before you break it up. Your community is one commercial unit. Dave: In Black’s 7th? Tami: In any Black’s – commercial unit. A community is a commercial unit before you break it apart. A country is a commercial unit before you break it apart. So, each ‘ism’ – you can pull everything apart witin an ‘ism’ Specialized female, specialized male, specialized Jew, specialized Catholics, specialized Muslims. THAT starts breaking out those commercial units, depending on market conditions. Whoever holds the wealth at that time, they are going to redistribute – based on ‘ism’. Dave: And, just always take a piece of it. Tami: Right. By reserving rights superior to one party or one person over another whereby the other has to buy their rights back by court process. That’s all it ever is. They implicate the law and then you get to play with the law. Dave: So, Lords Temporal – what was that about now? What were you going on to? Tami: That is who has your – everything – Ecclesiastical goods, your spiritual goods, your temporal goods. Dave: You said, there’s two splits from William the First – the temporal and the body? They split the body and the soul, basically? Tami: Right. Or, the emission. Anything that you emit, that’s the derivatives off of your productive value. Dave: You mean, in definition terms, or…? Tami: Right. The emission, or the soul – whatever you can produce, that’s the derivative. It’s derived from YOU. Okay, you have your general product, which you pay taxes – this is inside,


right? You pay taxes. You consume. And, then, off of that, is derivatives – an emission off of you. Derivative. It’s derived FROM your state of being. Dave: Something derived from the value of something else. Tami: Right. [18:58] – ORDINANCE OF WILLIAM I Tami: [reading from the Ordinance of William I http://avalon.law.yale.edu/medieval/ordwill.asp ]

…in the kingdom of the English have not been right or “according to the precepts of the holy canons…

Remember where those stem from? Dave: Yeah, from the Papal Bull, or the Bull Pope. Okay, interesting. Okay, he’s going back and saying, Okay, everybody, this is what the Bull Pope said, so I’m doing this. Tami: It’s the same thing. As soon as you read through you’ll see it. Dave: [reading]

…shall be emended. Wherefore I command, and by royal authority decree, that no bishop or archdeacon shall any longer hold, in the hundred court…

Tami: Way back when, a Grand Jury was of a hundred people. That’s A Hundred Court. So, now we’re going to take away the grand jury ability. Dave: [reading]

…shall any longer hold in the hundred court, pleas pertaining to episcopal laws, nor shall they bring before the judgment of secular men any case which pertains to the rule of souls; but whoever shall be summoned, according to episcopal law, in any case or for any fault, shall come to the place which the bishop shall choose or name for this purpose…

Tami: Okay, now that goes directly into the 1789 Judiciary Acts, where they name the places where you’re holding court. Dave: [reading]

…and shall there answer in his case or for his fault, and shall perform his law before God and his bishop not according to the hundred court…

No more grand jury. …but according to the canons and the episcopal laws. But if any one, elated by pride, shall scorn or be unwilling to come before the judgment seat of the bishop, he shall be summoned once and a second and a third time; and if not even then he comes to make amends, he shall be excommunicated; and, if it be needful to give effect to this, the power and justice of the king or the sheriff shall be called in, But he who is summoned …

Tami: You’re going to be held in contempt. Dave: [reading]

…But he who is summoned before the judgment seat of the bishop shall, for each summons pay the episcopal fine.

Tami: What you’re doing is, you’re not paying fines for violating any laws. You’re under the codes and statutes. Dave: You’re under the bishop, paying a bishop, paying a fine to the church…because, you didn’t come in…


Tami: Not to our church, because, the church that WE know believes in God. This is the Court of Ba’al. This is explaining how you sell the soul – how the soul is stolen and the body is going over to the bishop. This is Ba’al-ism. And this is worshiping – when he mentions God, it should be lower case – because he’s mentioning Marduk. Dave: This is the cult of Rome that he’s speaking of. [reading]

…This also I forbid and by my authority interdict… Tami: …dictate in between… Dave: [reading]

…that any sheriff, or… Tami: …provost ….which everybody is trying to get the military provost in here to help us. He’s one of them. Dave: [reading]

… provost, or minister of the king… Tami: …they’re all clergy, even the provost… Dave: [reading]

…or any layman concern himself in the matter of laws which pertain to the bishop, nor shall any layman summon another man to judgment apart from the jurisdiction of the bishop.

Tami: Right. And, that’s what we’re doing now. We’re going up into the U.S. District Court and we are saying, No, it’s ours. We are the united states. I’m no longer adhering to William I’s Ordinance, because, I’m the king. I’m the state of being. I’m the Absolute. Dave: So, the hell with your…Ba’al courts and begging the bishop. [reading]

…But judgment shall be passed in no place except within the episcopal see, or in such place as the bishop shall fix upon for this purpose.

Tami: Now, you want to see Marduk. Dave: Okay, to connect this into the cult of Rome and Marduk’s laws? Because, Marduk was the name in the Epic of Gilgamesh that they gave to basically the devil, or the dragon. Tami: Right. And, what’s the god of Ba’al which is bail? That’s what we’re doing – we’re paying bail. You’re going to court, and you can have your children back if you pay the fine or fee, if you fight this case and fight for your rights – it’s all Ba’alism is. They’re worshiping Ba’al – or Marduk. It has nothing to do with God – never did. TRACK 7 – POSTING, UTILITIES NOTICE, RECORDING DOCUMENTS Tami: So, what we’re talking about is your ability of you posting your own bonds. Each time you take some thing out of the mail, you’re using and assuming the fiction – the title – and, you’re being held attaint, and charged as a felon – every single time that you’re posting your own bond, and you’re generating revenue for the United States, Inc.

Title 18 USC §1342 – Fictitious name or address. Whoever, for the purpose of conducting, promoting, or carrying on by means of the Postal Service, any scheme or device mentioned in section 1341 of this title or any other unlawful business, uses or assumes, or requests to be addressed by, any fictitious, false,


or assumed title, name, or address or name other than his own proper name, or takes or receives from any post office or authorized depository of mail matter, any letter, postal card, package, or other mail matter addressed to any such fictitious, false, or assumed title, name, or address, or name other than his own proper name, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Dave: Proper name…which is the first and middle Tami: … the first and middle. Now, what we’ve done is, we now notify any body who’s sending us articles of mail through the postal service, that they are not to address us by the common name. The common name is the one that the Crown owns. The Crown owns your last name. They have a patent on it until you do the patent infringement. This is working. When he (Bo) used the document that he and I prepared, sent it in to the utility companies and told them that they could only address him by his first and middle name, as per 18 USC 1342… Dave: …which you state in the document itself when you send it. Did you quote the whole section – in the document? Tami: Yes. We gave them the whole thing. Bo: Let me read this second one… Tami: We have to back up. What had happened was, Bo had done this and noticed them, and then they had sent him again a half-assed version of the modification, so tell them about the half-assed version. Bo: They did one that put the proper name in all-caps, and then the street address, and then care of “temporary post location” BELOW that and, just different…. Dave: It wasn’t quite there. Bo: Right. I followed up then and said, ”USPS records show that [cert. mail #] was received by your corporation on August 17th, which constitutes proper notice. Copy is provided for your reference. Your records were not accurately changed. This is an opportunity to make the change accurately. Please modify the proper name upper and lower case letters rather than the all caps as record # [Forgiveness doc # on file] and be sure to place “temporary post location’ on line 2…” I spelled it out for them, so there’s no mistake now. Tami: Now, since that time you have received NO utility bills whatsoever and all the gas and lights are on – everything is still on – and yet, they have not sent you a bill. I don’t think that they have that ability without being sued. Dave: Right, without violation of the code – 1342. Tami: And 1341. [reading]

Title 18 USC §1341 – Frauds and swindles. Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security, or other article, or anything represented to be or intimated or held out to be such counterfeit or spurious article, for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice or attempting so to do, places in any post office or authorized depository for mail matter, any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by the Postal Service, or deposits or causes to be deposited any matter or thing whatever to be sent or delivered by any private or commercial interstate carrier, or takes or receives therefrom, any such matter or thing,


or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail or such carrier according to the direction thereon, or at the place at which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any such matter or thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

Dave: Now, what about every single time that they send you something from their ‘court’ that has the NAME on it? Tami: Absolutely! Absolutely! Now, he’s put them on notice… Dave: The court too? Tami: I don’t know who all he’s put on notice, but right now he’s in the middle of a process so we have to maintain right now to get the children out of the system first. Now, this thing, when he put them on notice, now if they try make money – they’re asking for money when they do this – that is a fraud and swindle. They have been NOTICED of 1342. So, I do not think they CAN bill him. And, I also don’t believe that they can shut off his utilities because they can no longer collect – it is unlawful for them to collect money through the postal service. Now, tell me how they’re going to do this? They cannot. I do not believe that they can do anything any further. Dave: Now, how do you think that the scenario is that they CAN’T shut off the utility? Tami: Because, they can never… Okay, if he has it shut off… Dave: I mean, I understand what we talked about before – that you OWN it, that YOU created the infrastructure… Tami: Say, he has it shut off. If he mails THEM anything – what is a corporation? Dave: A fiction of law. Tami: Okay, so if somebody receives something and accepts something or refuses or assumes something in the mail – on that side – what are they doing? THEY are now the felon under 18 USC 1342. So, it goes both ways. So now, how does anything happen? Commerce cannot happen. They’re always violating this law unless they’re talking to us as the proper name -- and, THEY are a proper name. Dave: Yeah, that’s right. THEY have to be some sort of proper name too. They can’t BE a fiction, which is funny. Tami: It’s hilarious, because we’re using their law right up against them now. NOW, try to wiggle out of that. They can’t wiggle out of it. To wiggle out of it they have to nullify their laws. Dave: Oh, and, I’m sure there’s also a law stating that they have to send you a notice that they’re going to cut off your electricity, which they can no longer do, because you’ve given them notice. So, they can’t even notice you back! Tami: No, they’re always extorting money. They’re always wanting money. If they send you a notice, that says, “If you don’t pay this,” they’re in violation of Title 18 Section 1342. Dave: That makes sense. That’s a “Got ‘em” type scenario! Tami: And, he didn’t ask for money. When he noticed them, he noticed the fiction. Dave: “Do not send anything by this name.” Tami: And, he never, ever facilitated a schematic to extort money or anything other. He just put them on notice. They can no longer send him mail, they can’t send him a notice, they can’t ask for any money through the mail – that’s mail fraud. So is the IRS in mail fraud. Any time you get a foreclosure notice, they’re committing mail fraud. They’re committing ALL this under 18 USC 1342 and 1341.


Dave: ANY collection of ANY thing from ANY where – INCLUDING notices from the court to come to court. Tami: Right. This would supercede the debt collection act. It’s everything! They’re asking for money – through the mail! To the fiction. As a fiction. They’re assuming and they’re asking US to address them as a fiction. That’s in violation of 18 USC 1342. THIS is the ONLY WAY that they’re holding you attaint. You’re VIOLATING THIS by accepting and using and assuming the fiction. You’re always held in attaint. Now, they either have to obliterate this law or adhere to it on the other side, whereby THEY become the dead thing. Always. But, that’s my whole process. Each and every time that I file anything, there’s no loopholes in it. It goes front to back and then back to front. So, no matter what, to argue my process, they have to argue that that law exists. To argue the whole process, they have to argue that the ability of charter is obliterated – it no longer exists. It has the double function. It always has the same end and the same beginning. Dave: Because, you’d be saying that the charters of which they’ve stated this stuff on, can’t exist. Tami: Right, they can’t exist. That’s the only way for them to GET OUT of this. And, if they nullify their original charters, they don’t own anything. There’s no law. Dave: Which they should do anyway because it was illegitimate to begin with. Tami: Right. But, because they want the benefit, they want the revenue, they don’t want to fail, they’re going to have to cannibalize each other, unless they want to admit that their charter-ability does not exist. And, at that time, they don’t own anything anyway – it’s mine. Dave: Ab initio. Tami: I AM. Yeah. Dave: Or, from inception – as you like to say. Tami: So, they’re already in violation, because you put them on notice – that’s ‘with knowledge.’ Every time they send you something from that corporation, you can charge them under 18 USC 1342. On their envelope, they’re asking you to address them as a fiction. Read that again: 18 USC 1342. Because, it comes in the name of a fiction. So, the only way you can answer them is through a fiction. They’re asking YOU to address THEM as a fiction. That’s also a violation. And, all he did was, he noticed them, which is beautiful. Anyway, his lights are still on. [Discussion about Bo’s second notice to the utility company when they sent him an incorrectly addressed piece of mail after his first notice.] -------------------------- [Discussion about recording Bo’s documents at the recorder’s office – and how the clerk suddenly ‘found’ Bo’s ‘lost’ original documents. Bo’s documents were finally recorded without being altered by the clerk with the verbiage: “Record as per customer.” One definition of ‘customer’ is ‘hooker, prostitute’ but you will need to dig into the etymology of the word to find this definition.] Dave: Okay. Now, when you file the Forgiveness and Executor documents… Tami: …you get the originals back. Dave: You take it to them and they make a digital copy of it… Tami: …and you get the originals back. Do you have to ask them for the originals back?


Tami: No, they’re required to give the originals back. Because, in the executor document, if Senate has the originals, they can impeach the executor. Remember? They can impeach the executive office. They can only do that if they have the original document. Dave: How does that work? Tami: That was in the Constitution. Only the Senate can impeach – like a President? They can only impeach a president. He’s the executor office – of everything. And so, you want the originals back, and from there on forward, you only REFER to the document recording number when you’re putting anybody on notice. You do not give them the originals, because the senate does have the ability to impeach you as the executor – if they have that original document. Dave: Yeah, that’s a piece of pertinent information that needs to go in the training manual. TRACK 8 – COMMON NAME, FAMILIAR NAME, PROPER NAME Tami: So, Philip Earl goes down into Louisiana doing some job, and he hits some guy at a stop sign and he settles up with the guy and says he’s responsible for the damage to the vehicle. The police come, because they’re required to make a report – the guy calls them in. Philip Earl goes down to the police department and, of course, during this time, he’s got his executor doc, he’s got his forgiveness doc, and he’s showing them he’s only Philip Earl. Dave: Does he keep those with him? Tami: Yes. Dave: So, you always keep those with you? Tami: Yes. You always keep those with you – the originals – so nobody can confiscate them, because they’re public record and they’re yours. So, as Philip Earl, they could not charge him. They said, We see here that Philip Earl Jonassen has a $40,000 warrant out for his arrest by Oceana County, Michigan. He said, I’m not Philip Earl Jonassen, I’m only Philip Earl. They had to release him. What happened next is, he went back to Oceana County to get his equipment, and his fricking last name is written across the truck: Jonassen. So, the cops come out looking for Philip Earl Jonassen. He says, I’m Philip Earl, I’m Philip Earl, I’m Philip Earl. The cop says, Is that your truck? He says, Yeah. He says, Come with me. So, he’s still potted. But, he consented by using the Crown’s last name. Dave: Because, it was on his truck? …splatted across his damn truck… Tami: Right. As long as you’re not claiming that last name – let go of it, don’t claim the last name. Dave: So, any time someone comes with a warrant, and they say, Are you So-and-So Last Name, you always say, NO. I am just First and Middle name. Tami: First and middle – that’s your Proper Name. If you claim or assume to be the fictional character, you can be held as a felon too. Dave: Sure. They’ve got you. That was another thing. Is it truly – by definition – a first and middle name – isn’t it your two given names? Isn’t that what it’s supposed to be? Because, I thought the ‘First Middle and Last’ is how THEY describe that fictional name? Tami: Yes, by commonality. That’s your – it never started out being a family name. In Black’s, it’s called the ‘familiar’ name. That’s what THEY named you. Each time they give us a last name, they designate it as a new species of Human. Dave: Oh, crap, really?


Tami: Well, this is what you do: Smith – you’re a blacksmith, Johnson, Erickson. That was describing you. You’re a new species at that time. That’s how you’re made secular and away from the One or overall I AM. Dave: So, how do you go about stating your house as the “last name”? Tami: You’re the House of ‘That.’ Dave: You can have your house be anything then. Tami: Right. But, it should have – something – not a commonality – it’s just your house, which denotes almost a physical location. In order to do this, you have to have something of a physical location or something to stand on. Dave: It’s just your body, right? Tami: Right, and your House. That’s what your house is. Jesus said your body is your temple. It’s your House. That’s the House of God. They perverted the House of God. When he turned over the tables of the money-changers, what did he say? You have turned my House into a den of thieves. They’re inside of you – entering you into commerce, by enfranchisement. Dave: Right. Okay. So, it doesn’t really matter if you say, First and Middle name – that’s still fine. Tami: That’s the Proper Name – as defined in Black’s. You don’t want the common name. Dave: That’s what I was trying to get to – the differences between the two definitions of the name. You have a COMMON name – which is what THEY go after you. That’s your COMMON name. Tami: FAMILIAR– not FAMILY. It’s commonly used. Dave: Okay, then the PROPER name is the one that we SHOULD be using. That’s our First and Middle. Tami: Or, I AM. Dave: Right, you could just go: I AM. Who are you? I AM. As long as you have this document, and it’s been filed, you are I AM. Tami: And, in our natural state, prior to the intercession of law, by attorney, by judge – whatever else – we do not refer to each other. Not one time, when I’m speaking to you… Dave: …do you continue to call me by a name – every single time. Right. Tami: Never, ever. You’re in my presence. I’m in your presence. We don’t need to refer to each other. We already know who we are. THEY’ve taught us that we are NOT. Therefore, we need to earn the right to BE. That’s what the rights and privileges are. You have to EARN the right to be this. So, how? “Well, you’re not a good man.” Well, why not? They’re attacking you – morally attacking you. Dave: Particularly that part that we read before – William I. Was there a name to that document? Tami: Separation of the Spiritual and the Temporal – the Ordinance of the Separation of the Spiritual and Temporal Courts. Tami: The courts exist only by psychology. If you look in Gray’s Anatomy, at the corpus callosum – the ‘big body’ – corpus callosum – you will find that it’s separated into cira and distrite. That means, Circuits and Districts. When you go to the 1789 Judiciary Acts, you will find that the courts that you enter into every day do not exist. You can go to court in Oceana, Michigan. If you go in there on the second Tuesday in November, where are you located? Delaware. What about the first Monday in April? Massachusetts. Don’t quote me on these – it’s in the Judiciary Act. That’s where the revenue is being filtered to. You’re not in that actual


court because of the separation between the spiritual and temporal. These courts are all psychological. You just believe that it exists. They are always Agencies by Estoppel. [7:21] -- ADMITTING EVIDENCE, COMPELLING THE JUDGE Dave: Do you have to file your papers in a court of record, or are you basically creating your own court that doesn’t even have a name? Like when you go in and squash their process… they’ve got a process going in a Nisi prius court of no record administrative process. That’s their venue. Tami: Right – only through attorney work-product doctrine. Dave: So, they’re doing their thing, shuffling.. Tami: …shuffling off of the court record by attorney work-product doctrine and different variants on privacy laws. Dave: So, that’s their venue. Tami: You can invoke your venue at any time by admitting evidence on to the court record. Dave: Okay, so when you ADMIT EVIDENCE on to the court record – it’s public record – Tami: It becomes public record. Dave: It becomes public record because it’s public law. Tami: AND, it compels a judge to be there. Only a judge can view evidence and rule accordingly. An administrator or a Trier-of-Fact can hear hearsay, testimony, see exhibits – which are only examples… Dave: Right. They’re not actual evidence. Tami: That’s why they use attorney work-product doctrine. Dave: So, when you actually admit evidence properly, you are actually COMMANDING the judge to be there. Tami: Right. Dave: If he decides to show up, and then does something stupid, regarding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law – and, if he doesn’t chose to be there, he can’t do that! Tami: Right. He never does. Dave: They never actually do that. Tami: He can’t. So, you come in and demand more specific Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and at that point in time, usually what he’ll do is re-consider his own order. Now, this is the funny part. This becomes schizophrenia. Because, you have a judge there that just issued an order, and is now, sua sponte, asking HIMSELF to reconsider his own order. So, at this time, you feed him to the system, and you say, “This is an adult in need of protection. We need to appoint a guardian ad litem over him, because, he just maintained an order, and has asked himself, within schizophrenia or some other mental deficiency, to reconsider his own order.” Dave: That’s brilliant. Tami: You have to feed them to each other. Dave: In that case, you’re feeding the man… to… the man. Tami: Absolutely. And, it’s so beneficial, because, once you invoke the administrative process over that judge, you’re putting HIM in that cell where you used to be. You do the same with an attorney. Usually attorneys will come back and they’ll say – the other day I got one – okay. To strike evidence, they have to prove that it’s false – that means usually that it does not exist… which is impossible. You’ve admitted it – revealed it on court record. There are some idiots out there that will try and lie and admit evidence on to court record that’s not evidence and they’ll


get nailed for it. They’ll absolutely be nailed for it. But, when an attorney comes in and tries to strike… the letter I got the other day was a LETTER to NULLIFY everything that was put on the court record. So, in response to that, I put in a notice, saying, “Are you aware that your client is asking you to violate 18 USC 1506? This allows you to be a felon. Are you sure you want to go any further?” They didn’t go any further. They cannot. Once admitted – on to court record or any public record – that evidence CANNOT be removed, altered, omitted, avoided – anything else. That stays there. You have to stand your ground and make sure… By letter – I mean, he quoted a whole bunch of shit, but the whole thing was, it was a letter– not a motion to strike. It was just a letter to the court and cc’d to my client. All it was was hot air. Make sure that you’re going through and you follow through… “Are you sure you want to do this, because this is a violation of 18 USC 1506 and you WILL be nailed with a felony violation. This is your opportunity….” Dave: …to knock it off. Tami: …AND, to pick a fall guy. You’ve already told them, in your initial evidence, to pick a fall guy. Now, you’re circling down and you’re making sure that someone is being put into that chute. “Are you aware that you’re going to be a felon too? Do you want to go this route, or do you want to roll over on the guy that I already gave you?” Dave: Which is, in that case, who? Tami: It was the other party – his own client. That one was an administrative case. She came in and said, This is all hearsay. It was recorded documents that she said to MY client that she would never, ever lie and falsely accuse him again, IF he removed the contempt motion from last year. At that time, he stipulated – he was nice and chivalrous and said, Yes, I will remove it, as long as you’re never going to lie again. And, in a recorded conversation, she promised not to lie. In a written documentation, she promised not to lie, when they stipulated. So, this year, when she again falsely accused my client, we brought in a writ of scira fascia and said, “Why should that not be revisited? Now, you show cause to me why we’re not going to revise that order – because, you’ve lied?” And, we put on to evidence that she lied and she promised not to lie, and then she came in kicking and screaming. Well, she didn’t give her attorney any of that documented evidence. She said, she was served with this evidence and she wanted it stricken from the court record. And, that’s what that letter was. So, when I wrote back and said, “Are you sure you want to be a felon?” I said, “She’s unable to assist counsel, therefore, she requires a guardian ad litem over her. Go ahead – administer her all you want to.” She’s the one that assigned the parenting rights on to the state. She’s the one that falsely accused. That’s how the assignment occurred. And, it’s still the same thing that I said in the beginning, because we’re throwing her under the bus. This is putting the title on to her forehead, by the way, that makes Babyl fall. You have been taught to be chivalrous. You have been taught to protect the female at any and all costs. And, that’s what he was doing last year. He learned from that mistake. He spent another year fighting to see his children – fighting to be involved in their lives, as she falsely accused him over and over again. And, as these false allegations go along, they get more aggravated. It started out… Dave: But, that’s all evidence. When you actually PUT THAT ON TO EVIDENCE, then it’s there. That’s it. Tami: It’s there, and the guardian ad litem already indicted. Dave: And, you can’t wiggle out of it, once it’s properly put there, and once you properly put it there, that answers this question. It automatically becomes a court of record. You don’t have to STATE it as a court of record – it IS a court of record.


Tami: Absolutely. And, the judge is being compelled, and the judge is acting accordingly in that case. And, when he was notified, HE notified my client….everything is straight down the middle. And now, there’s a judge, and he has two hats on. He’s a judge over my client and the children, because he doesn’t have any jurisdiction over my client or the children any longer. He only has jurisdiction as an administrator over her and her estate now. Okay? So, we fed her to the system. Every body needs to be aware that, even though she has big brown eyes or big blue eyes, and she looks really sweet, and she has tits and a vagina, she is NOT to be protected. The only way that Babyl falls is what? When the Whore of Babylon has the title written on her forehead. You have to put her in the chute to get the children out. It’s a requirement to get the children out. TRACK 9 – THE BANKRUPTCY, CHILD TRAFFICKING, GENEVA CONVENTION, CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER DOCTRINE, ATTORNEY WORK-PRODUCT Tami: When you file bankruptcy, it’s at the core level, which is the federal state. What had happened is, this attorney came in as an adversary, and he tried to drop it in the non-core status, which means, it goes across the county – state. Dave: Municipal. Tami: Municipal-state. Dave: Foreign state. Tami: Right. This lost income now – I think it was 300 grand – when they drop it down into that municipal-state, they have to generate that revenue in another way to pay that back. So, these attorneys start trafficking children – amongst themselves. Dave: Back and forth between each other… Tami: Right, and that’s how they put those moneys back in there – okay? When I called them out on not only… they were claiming that my client was already an heir to an estate… Dave: …of which the woman hadn’t died yet. Tami: The woman hadn’t died yet. He had dropped it down…and I made note that he’d dropped it down from core-status to non-core status, and then, on top of that, he was claiming attorneys’ fees but he had split them up. So, there was $20,000 over here, the bankruptcy claimed all $80,000 – okay? So, he was claiming 80,000 plus 20,000 dollars. And so, I got him for that one through bankruptcy fraud itself. But, the thing that got him killed was that, he dropped it down from core to non-core, but throughout the whole case, I had shown how they traffic children throughout the case, and this is all on record. So, he just opened up the whole court’s hand… Dave: How can you show that they traffic children? How did you get those documents? What kind of documents could you possibly get to show that? Tami: That’s what a court case is. When you have a false accuser on one side – and she’s been deemed a nut five or six or seven times – and then you have a guardian ad litem for the children that comes in and she makes recommendations to leave the children with that nut, it’s already opening up a can of worms, right? On top of this, the children – in this particular case… Dave: You said, from the core level to the non-core level – that’s where they violate the Geneva Convention? Tami: Right. You’re determining rank…you’re determining status…


Dave: Oh, they’re rank because, they’re not allowed to change your rank. Tami: They’re not EVER allowed to change your rank or status. Even if you’re a government or state employee, they can never change your rank. You get paid the same amount that the military would be paid. But, you’re still a prisoner of war. And the state employees have no idea. All these teachers, all these people that are playing into this game, they’re still prisoners of war. They’re not going to get their inheritance. They’re not going to get their retirement benefits. They’re going to be killed first. And, in between, everything goes into probate. They’re kids aren’t going to get it. If they’ve ever been a divorcee – when you enter into a divorce, you get a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, under ERISA – Employee Retirement Insurance Securities Act – under ERISA, there’s a clause in there. If you have a QADRO, the original trustee over your retirement assets, is abrogated of all of his duties. They have no more duties. Those monies go into the municipal level. They go into the county. There’s a benefit in killing you – by medicine, psychology, legal mechanism – they can criminalize you, they can put you in a mental institution – those assets are never going to be yours. You think they will be. You’re planning on it – some future date and time. And, you will get a small strippen of your retirement or social security, or whatever else, but you will be killed. I know that everybody’s looking forward to this, but you will be killed. Those are the rules of the game. Now, they’re not allowed to do this, under Geneva Convention. They’re not allowed to harm you. They’re not allowed to hold you more than thirty days in a jail. And, yet they are. This is all in the 1929 Geneva Convention. Dave: So, any time it’s over a thirty day period, that’s an automatic violation? Tami: Right – unless you’ve HARMED somebody. Dave: Even if it’s for a statutory crime that you have admitted guilt to? Tami: Absolutely. It’s all in the 1929 Geneva Convention. Dave: So, even that doesn’t fly – okay. And, because of that, then anyone who violates the Geneva Convention must be… executed within ninety days. Tami: Absolutely. Look at the rules of war. Dave: This is what this falls under – the rules of war. Tami: The Geneva Convention IS the rules of war. You’re looking at something like Sadam Hussien did or something…they executed him. You have to look back into the past at what he was doing. He was trying to establish a sovereign state and get off the grid, when they false-flagged him. Dave: Right, because he was trying to trade his oil off the Petro Dollar, and, I don’t know what else he was up to. Tami: Within the internal system. But, he didn’t do those things that they said he did. He was false-flagged and we allowed him to be slaughtered. Dave: Killing the Kurds and whatever else they said he was doing. Tami: That was the U.N. Anybody in the military back then can tell you this. Anything under Haliburton, anything under Blackwater – all of these things. They have this information. They’ve just been threatened and coerced not to – and, those that HAVE spoken out, they are criminalized right away. They are called a pedophile or whatever false-flag they need to do to take them out and their voice away from them. Dave: Exactly. That makes sense.


[6:30] LAND, PATENTS, MORTMAIN, ATTORNEY-WORK-PRODUCT DOCTRINE Dave: You said, you can’t ever put a patent on the land, because you can’t patent the land – you can only patent a new thing. How does anyone ever own it then? Can you ever own it? If not, how do you state your right to USE it? Tami: You DO own it. Everybody owns everything – that’s your domain. What you’ve done is YOU have created an authority over you by entering in to the mortgage state. The mortgage – that is a dead hand. When you enter into the borrower’s covenant, you ARE – you become the dead hand. Dave: You become the mort-main. Tami: Because, you are sitting there, handing off your estate. That includes anything that your heirs would get, and it leaves the property free and clear. And, it says it right in the Borrower’s Covenant. You become the dead hand. You’re giving it to them. Before that, it was already yours – before you bought it from them. I KNOW this is such a hard concept, because every body comes at me next and says, What if I go on somebody else’s property and they have a gun…Human beings don’t harm each other. We share. We don’t do that. There’s enough land for everybody. As long as there’s no perverted, ridiculous law in place that prevents us from having something. We were so mobile – we were migratory, we were nomadic – we never stayed in one place, because we went where the weather was. We didn’t need all of these flashy things, until we were taught that we needed them. There’s nothing in this society that is of necessity. Dave: Well, I think from this idea of land-holding – I mean, it kind of got going with agrarian societies that then cultivated the land. Tami: Right. And so you start owning something and then all of a sudden a government influence comes in and says, Well, you own too much so we’re going to take out a little bit, and that’s the preservation acts, those are the reclamation acts. They’re claiming what is yours, taking it from you, so you can buy it later in a future generation. And, this goes back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. Now, on the flip side of that, you can only fix something if it is broken. So, right now, in the Middle East, what are they doing? Dave: Breaking everything. Tami: They are razing everything, in order to codify it, so they fix it, rebuild it and call it theirs, so you can buy it back from them. They did the same thing here. They DO the same thing here There’s been a Chicago fire, there’s been a San Francisco fire, there’s been earthquake after earthquake after earthquake. Dave: The London fire – that’s a perfect example, because, at1666, right when the CQV trust came along, that was right after the fire, so they said, Whoops, we lost everything – here’s an act to create you as a dead thing and we’ll always protect you and we’ll always take care of your estate for you! Tami: Right, and how many buildings have blown up or, suffered “Acts of God” where your social securities shit is released on accident or… Dave: …or, gold is stolen, like in the case of 9/11. There’s a perfect example. Tami: Each time V.A. records or, social security records are stolen, what do they do for you? They ask you, what do you want? You say: We need more privacy laws. Somebody’s going to go into the Black Market and sell my information. That’s BS. You have just had the application of Clear and Present Danger doctrine put upon you, so that you ask them to put in place something in front of you and your inheritance by Privacy Law.


Dave: Protect me! Protect me! Tami: So, now we come back to attorney work-product doctrine. That only exists because you asked for privacy laws. If you go into court and – say you have a nut-ball ex-wife and you’re fighting for custody of your child, and you’re trying to prove that she’s nuts – the first thing that her attorney does is what? “You cannot have those records because it’s protected by HIPPA.” You cannot have your child’s school records because it’s protected by FERPA. These are privacy laws to ALLOW attorney work-product doctrine and, to keep evidence off the court record. Dave: So, you never get it. Tami: Right. There is NO MORE playing around with this. That’s why we use the Admissions Statements. We lay it down, call it evidence. NOW, you tell me you want to alter it, and you can’t. [11:00] TITLE, STATUS, COURT OF MARSHALCY Dave: Okay, from the standpoint of land then, like I said, to answer my question, if you’re your own King, who’s going to challenge you for your land if you say, “This is my land”? Only another king can challenge you, and he would then have to declare war upon you basically to do that, and nobody’s going to do that anyway now. Tami: No, because, we are all humans. We don’t fight over: This is mine. This is mine.” Because, once you take away the title, there’s no status. You’re not competing with anybody. You don’t want more and more things in order to please somebody or make your self look good. Dave: …to build castles… Tami: Right. And, they only did that to prove that they were a man or, prove that they were a woman, but you’re no longer a man or woman. Why would you do that? Dave: You’re no longer a man or woman? Tami: No. Those are legal creations. Those are legal names. Dave: Man and woman are legal creations as well? Tami: Yeah. It means you are breeding stock. Man and Womb-man. You’re just breeding stock. You don’t need any titles now. I mean, you’ve dropped the ego… Dave: Technically, you’re your own king. Tami: So is everybody else and you realize it. You don’t fight over any thing. Dave: Right. But, you said a king’s court is… Tami: The court of marshalcy. Dave: The court of marshalcy. That’s a king’s court and, you said, it’s twelve miles around you? Tami: Right. Dave: …Is that wherever you happen to be standing? Tami: Right. Dave: Oh, okay! I get you. It doesn’t have to be a physical location then – it’s wherever you are standing at? Tami: Right. Dave: You said that stems from way back somewhere? Tami: Right – I’ll get it out in one second.


[12:44] COURT OF MARSHALCY, COURT STEWARD, MARSHALS Tami: We were talking about stewardship earlier. So, what is a court steward? That would be you, right? Dave: A court steward? Tami: Court of the marshalcy / marshalsea. [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshalsea_Court ] Dave: Court of Marshalcy. History: a court that moved about with the king and had jurisdiction over certain cases arising within twelve miles of the king’s residence, an area known as the verge. Tami: When they converge, they’re coming in on your territory. Dave: Of course! Converge. “The court steward and marshal acted as judges of the court and heard criminal cases and the common pleas of debt, covenant, and certain trespasses. The court’s migratory nature made it inconvenient for litigants and prompted its abolition in 1849, also termed “Court of the Steward and Marshal.” Palace court. Tami: Right. Now, that you are the united states, what are the marshals there for? See, your marshals are the united states marshals service. Dave: Right. The court of the steward and marshal. So, they’re your law enforcement – automatically. Tami: Right. As long as you invoke it. Dave: And, you can invoke it as you did with the… Tami: …by maintaining public law. Dave: …by maintaining public law and telling them, Hey… Tami: …I’m the king. There’s nothing else. Dave: Your presence is…. do you say, “Your presence is wished for” or, “Your presence is requested”? Tami: When you’re summoning them? Dave: Yeah, when you’ve got to bring them to take care of something. Tami: For the marshals? I just demand it. Dave: Isn’t being a king….kings don’t need to demand. They wish for. Right? I mean, technically…. Tami: Well, they can ordain – like William the First, he ordained…proclaimed. Dave: I wasn’t going that far. To your underlings or someone like that, say, I wish your presence to be at so-and-so to deal with such-and-such, instead of saying, I DEMAND you to be there. I mean, it’s just being nice. I don’t think there’s any specifics in it. Tami: Again, it was called a demand and, what I’d done is, when I wanted….”Your presence is required,” is what I said in the demand, but it is a required presence. You’re still demanding. But, the reaction to that was, when the FBI interceded and attempted to thwart the U.S. Marshals. Dave: Get in the way of your process server – that was a funny story. Yeah, your marshals. They’re the only marshals that are around. Tami: The FBI was quaking in their boots. Dave: They must be OURS. OUR marshals, right. Tami: It’s the Court of Marshalcy. It’s our See. Dave: What? Tami: There’s no longer a dio see (diocese). Marshalcy. This is OUR jurisdiction. Dave: The Marshal SEE….!


Tami: It’s OUR see. Dave: It’s our see. It’s no longer the DIO SEE (diocese), or the PHARAOH SEE (Pharisees). Tami: Right. Pharaohs of the See – Kings of the See. Now, it’s our ‘see.’ Dave: Right. Interesting point. After you guys do the process, do you surrender ID’s, and cards, voter cards, passports? Is there a letter that you send with that and, if so, what would be some good wording? Tami: I haven’t felt the need to. Dave: Because, you’re supposed to give those things back, if they request it – because, it says right on the stupid document…you need to give this to them if they request it, because, it’s their document. Tami: Right, which is awesome, because, if they send me any thing in the name of the fiction, they’re in violation of 18 USC 1341. They can request all they want, but, they’re going to be indicted for doing that. Dave: But, don’t you have to notice them first? Tami: Ignorance of the law is no excuse, once it’s on public record, they’re required to know what’s on public record. Dave: And, because it’s been recorded at the county recorder’s office… Tami: Right. They’ve used this against us for how long? “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” That quorum stipulated law. They should know that – it’s their requirement… according to their own law. Dave: Yep. Four is a quorum: Here’s my law. It’s been recorded. Tami: Ignorance of that law is no excuse. Dave: So, basically, after that’s filed, you don’t even worry about it. Tami: No. Dave: The only thing I was worried about with that question was from the standpoint of creating our own passports. [17:55] EXECUTOR DOCUMENT, RECORDING DOCUMENTS Dave: This is the Executor Doc? Tami: [reading from Executor Document]

Notice of Appointment to the Office of Executor for the Estate Named or Known as First Middle Last. Let it now be known and evident to all concerned persons or men worldwide through the Evidence and notice of this perfect free will writing sealed by my own hand - in an offer to bring peace, harmony, and wholeness to all of the world - that I, the living soul manifest, known as Man, Estate Hæres, and Dignitary, who acknowledges all that is the complete Will and Testament of the Estate named, or known as, First Middle Last Name - created, birthed, or delivered on DATE OF BIRTH,

Dave: You spell out the numbers in the birth date… Tami: [continuing to read]


…through the hand or water of my natural born mother or her person – now appoint First, and Middle Name to the Office of Executor, to act, should the need ever arise, within the commercial realm, for all intents and purposes, and with full and complete authority, regarding the Estate named, or known as, First Middle Last Name. Let it also be known to all concerned persons worldwide, through this EVIDENCE and notice that the embossed seal created by my own hand, exclusively for the Estate named, or known as, First Middle Last Name – emanating from the Office of Executor - will be considered as the ONLY valid authorization for any and all commercial or legal action(s) regarding said Estate.

Now, you were asking about process service – if somebody has a warrant out for their arrest. You’re now the Executor of the Estate known as FIRST MIDDLE LAST name. You are only the Proper Name, which is your First and Middle name. That means you’re the Executor office. You can authorize YOU to wear another hat. The Executive office can appoint you the coroner, the process server – anything you need to do, to act upon the commercial realm for the Estate known as the Common Name or, the First Middle Last name. Dave: Okay, that’s right. The common name is the First Middle Last name. Tami: The dead thing. The estate. Dave: The dead thing – the estate – that’s the common name. Tami: When you go in to record your Executor document, you have already authorized YOU to be the Executor of the Estate known as…. Dave: Sure, because, once you seal it and sign it, and you have your quorum witnesses sign it – four of them – it IS law. Tami: It IS law. Dave: So, that’s it. It doesn’t need to be filed for it to be already a Deed Done – Your Will. Tami: Right. Now, 18 USC 1506. There’s two things you need to be aware of when you go to file these documents. As the Executor…

18 USC 1501, Assault on a Process Server. Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs, resists, or opposes any officer of the United States, or other person duly authorized, in serving, or attempting to serve or execute, any legal or judicial writ or process of any court of the United States, or United States magistrate judge; or Whoever assaults, beats, or wounds any officer or other person duly authorized, knowing him to be such officer, or other person so duly authorized, in serving or executing any such writ, rule, order, process, warrant, or other legal or judicial writ or process— Shall, except as otherwise provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

As the Executor, you can appoint yourself, from the Executive Office, to be a process server – ‘one duly authorized. Or, “I’m the Executor for the Estate known as ________ , and I’m serving you process.” Dave: Right. Yeah, because, once you walk in there and, you say, “I’m the Executor of this estate and I’m serving you process…” – by those two statements, if they try to change that document – if they try to resist from taking that document, they have just committed a felony.


Tami: [reading]

18 USC § 1506 - Theft or alteration of record or process; false bail Whoever feloniously steals, takes away, alters, falsifies, or otherwise avoids any record, writ, process, or other proceeding, in any court of the United States, whereby any judgment is reversed, made void, or does not take effect;

Dave: What’s the point of that one? Tami: They’re preventing something from not taking effect. Dave: Ahh! Tami: [reading]

or Whoever acknowledges, or procures to be acknowledged in any such court, any recognizance, bail, or judgment, in the name of any other person not privy or consenting to the same— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Tami: They cannot alter this document. This is already public record – it’s already sealed by you. Once it has your seal on it – the requirement is that, they do NOT seal it. You only get a recording number up here… Dave: And, that has the date of when it was recorded. That’s the name of the recorder on there. Tami: …the county, the amount that was paid. Now, in a court case, you’ll find that, once we’ve sealed documents, normally the clerk stamps them on the back now, because she cannot alter the front, otherwise, she’s altering public record. TRACK 10 – FORGIVENESS DOCUMENT Tami: If they put a seal on the front of your document, it becomes a counter deed. They already know this because, we’ve noticed them 18 USC 1506. Let them stamp with whatever they want to with their seal on the back – that becomes underneath you, or under your reservation, under you, understanding you, under, under, under, under, because, this document – you’re at the top of the page. Dave: I’ve heard something along the line that, if they put something on the back or bottom they have the last word? Tami: No, it doesn’t apply, because your seal is still OVER theirs. Okay, we read the appointment of the Office of Executor... Dave: Yes, and what it does is, takes back your house and you become the executor for the dead thing. They can no longer have any… Tami: …correspondence or interaction with the dead thing. They can no longer administer the dead thing. If they attempt to administer the dead thing, they’re guilty of a crime called Executor de Son Tort, or Executor of Your Own Wrong. They know they cannot administer that estate any longer. That includes foreclosure. That includes everything. Okay, so with the Forgiveness document – “Notice of Absolute Forgiveness and Discharge Forever of all known and unknown


Estate debts, duties, claims and liabilities” – when you’re born, you become the liability. You are liable. Your mother is libeling you – that’s what she’s doing. She’s calling you a bastard by giving you up and assigning you to the state. Dave: By signing the Birth Certificate. Tami: You become liable for everything. [reading from the Forgiveness Document]

Let it now be known and evident to all concerned persons or men worldwide through the announcement and notice of this perfect free will writing sealed by my own hand - in an offer to bring peace, harmony, and wholeness to all of the world - that I, the living soul manifest, known as Man, Estate Hæres, and Dignitary…

Now, if you look up in Black’s or any other dictionary, you’ll find that dignitary is – what? …dignity. You’re in a new state of being, called Dignity.

…who acknowledges all that is the complete Will and Testament of the Estate named, or known as, First Middle Last name - created, birthed, or delivered on Date of Birth, through the hand or water of my natural born mother or her person – NOW AND FOREVER ABSOLUTELY FORGIVE AND DISCHARGE ALL KNOWN AND UNKNOWN ESTATE DEBTS, DUTIES, CLAIMS, AND LIABILITIES. This Absolute Forgiveness and Discharge includes, but is not limited to, any Estate debt, duty…

Which is an obligation – …donation, claim, contract, covenant…

Borrower’s covenant, promise, any kind of writ of covenant that they’ve used to transfer you into the fee…

…or any kind of conveyance, custom… Any custom. You’ve been indoctrinated with a culture – you’ve been indoctrinated that this is ‘normal’ – No. Dave: You’re obliterating even the idea of that? Tami: Right and all ideologies.

…bill, bond, bargain… You will see that if you go into deed – bargain and sale – that’s how they’re transferring it and assigning.

…article… That’s what you’re called – You’re called furniture also.

…interest, obligation… Which goes along with duty. When you read the Constitution – tax, duties and imposts you are…

…franchise… That’s the state you’re in, that’s the share of stock, you become a ‘franchise’ of the United States Incorporated.

…promise… Same thing as covenant…

…pledge… It goes along with the mortgage: Treatise on Mortgage, Hypothecation and Pledges – you’re


taking that away. …novation, encumbrance, mortgage, lien, letter…

Any letter – we have no name. We are simply I AM – state of being… …liability, legacy…

Because, you’ve given up your whole entire legacy – you’ve given up the Estate by signing these things and consenting to these things…

…judgment, order, warranty, attachment, hold… Which is everything you’re doing. You’re enfranchising you by taking on new titles – Doctor So-and-So, Mister So-and-So, Mrs. So-and-So – these are copyholds –

… copy, custody, consideration, information… That’s what your mother did when she gave you up, whether she’s the informant – it might have been the midwife or whatever else…

…reservation, privilege, immunity, suit, prescription, responsibility, administration, management, term, or condition…

This is determining your status – a condition. Like, you’re in the ‘condition’ of pregnancy. The attorneys, for example, maintain that, when a woman is pregnant, she is not pregnant until she is ‘quick with child.’ Well, that means, the minute she feels the child – then it’s alive – according to an attorney. So, there’s no ability for them to determine your condition.

…thus freeing, liberating, and emancipating forever all persons, property, and sureties from any Estate related performance or burden for… I AM.

Additionally, through this Absolute Forgiveness and Discharge, all Estate res, remainder, or reversion, including, but not limited to, any subject, matter, issue,…

…which is the children. …person, character…

You can change your character by putting on a new hat and calling yourself something else. Dave: Or, appointing yourself something else in the Executor doc, like being your own sheriff or, to be your own process server? Tami: Right.

…instrument, deed, will, title, certificate, benefit, insurance, policy, account, security, deposit, pension, fund, or retirement plan - be it dispositive, appointive, nominative, or other, is hereby consolidated, merged, and extinguished…

Dave: AND extinguished – Bye bye! Tami: I’m not taking the benefit. I’m the heir.

… ultimately returning said Estate to its complete original natural whole state of dignity and demesne for… I AM.

It’s all yours. ‘Of mine’ – desmesne. If it’s witnessed by the quorum, it legislates your law – sealed by your hand. These two documents mean now, you’re alive. You’re the judicial branch, the legislative branch, and the executive branch – of your Government, inside of your House. [7:34] Dave: Which is then made known and then, placed it on the public record, that this is legitimate – here I am, I am my own government self-governance. Therefore, they cannot come along and say, You have no government, you are in anarchy or some BS like that. Tami: Right. This is fully allowed everywhere – the Expatriation Act. You are repatriating into your own House – the Geneva Convention – you’re repatriating into your own House. Dave: Yeah, you’re patronizing Your Self!


Tami: Yeah. So, that’s your government. You’re calling it your government. This is your government. Use it wisely. Do what you need to do. You have the authority to maintain Executive Orders – Administrative Orders. You need to start administering the Estate appropriately. You’ve been moved around – taken through commerce. It never stops you from… Dave: …being in commerce. Tami: Well, you’re never being in commerce. You’re walking on water, just like Jesus. He was never in commerce. He’s up there and you can make the administrative orders so that the dead thing can act in commerce, but YOU, the Being are not acting in commerce. This is beautiful. Dave: Would you ever wish to continue to use the dead thing in any way, shape, or form? Tami: You can, because you’re merging – like, your retirement funds and your social security funds and everything else. Those are benefits until YOU become the trustee – right? As the Executor, you’re the trustee – you’re the holder of those benefits. Do you need them? Maybe. If so, why aren’t you making an administrative order? Because, the Social Security Administration is for what purpose? Dave: To administer that benefit – to the dead thing. Tami: …AS the trustee. The Executor is now your trustee. You’ve been appointed as the trustee. Dave: Was the dead thing always the trustee? Tami: No. You have administration that you allow to be the trustee by accepting the benefit. NOW you can accept the benefit, but YOU are the executive that ORDERS that benefit be known. YOU are the trustee of that benefit now. Dave: And, you appoint yourself the trustee, which means you then act for the beneficiary, which is the dead thing. Tami: Right. So, you become the middle man. You’re not accepting the benefit now, because, you’re the trustee. There’s no benefit. There’s an inheritance. So, within that inheritance, you HAVE social security. You HAVE welfare. But, you don’t want to touch it and call yourself the beneficiary because, as the beneficium, you’re abstaining your right to be the heir. But now, YOU the EXECUTOR are going to be administering those affairs. You’re the trustee. You’re everything. Dave: But, you just don’t want to ever call yourself the beneficiary again. Tami: Ever again – because, you’re not. You can take whatever you want out of your inheritance. Dave: Just come in and say, I’m the Executor – give me this. Tami: Right. Dave: Go put it into this bank account under this name, or give me a check in this amount or… Tami: Right. Why not? [11:05] EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL Dave: When do you have to do the Equitable Estoppel? That’s usually dealing with children, or is it dealing with any thing that’s IN their system at the moment, that they’ve got to be estopped from? Tami: It’s dealing with ANY thing. Dave: …anything that they’re trying to administer improperly.


Tami: The Equitable Estoppel is founded on the premise that, somebody’s brought you into court, or another action, based on some false language or conduct. So, they’ve convinced the court or another entity to ACT on that false language and conduct and come up against you to IN JURE you or, put you into law. And, you’re saying that the court does not have any jurisdiction to determine such matters, because, they are false and fraudulent from inception. Dave: And, that’s what the Estoppel is doing. It’s saying, from inception you guys have been… Tami: Right. The court does not have any jurisdiction. What are we doing here? Dave: Right. And, of course, Equitable Estoppels are something you can only do after you’ve properly filed your Executive document… Tami: No! No – even before that. When we indicted the IRS in Illinois, that client did not file anything. He did not file anything, because the Equitable Estoppel is ALWAYS there. Dave: Oh, yeah, I suppose you’re right, because you’re still stating that, you’re not the dead thing and that’s still a fiction… Tami: Well, no, we’re saying that, somebody invited me into court – without a cause. There’s no cause here, so what are we doing? Somebody invited me here because of false language and conduct. Why are we here? There’s no cause. So this becomes vexatious litigation. Stop taking it. You don’t ever want to play into implied color. Implied color is where YOU give the case the nature. You create the nature of the case by defending it. So, if somebody brings you into court and says you abrogated on a contract for foreclosure, or whatever – but, they don’t have a contract. You’ve already demanded the wet-ink signature contract. They haven’t come and shown you the wet ink. “Why are we here? You’re suing me for default on a contract and you didn’t bring in the contract. Why are we here?” Instead of saying, “I don’t have a contract with you” -- don’t defend! Why are we here? Equitable Estoppel. “You’re suing me for default on a contract. Where’s the contract?” That’s Equitable Estoppel. This court does not have jurisdiction to determine anything, because, this is false language and conduct. IF they happen to produce the wet-ink signature contract, go in there, go into the Borrower’s Covenant. Again – Equitable Estoppel. Can you sell your body? Absolutely not! Dave: Right, because, you’re always the thing being hypothecated. In the mortgage, it’s YOUR BODY – not the house, or the land that’s being put up for value. Tami: The ESTATE has been seized. That means that, you signed a contract, giving your estate AND the estate of your heirs – to their successors. Is that a legal contract? Absolutely not. You cannot SELL anything on behalf of me. Dave: Exactly. Right. Tami: So, there’s two functions there. Obliterate it! Equitable Estoppel. “This court does not have jurisdiction because, this is an unenforceable contract.” It was illegal when we signed it. You’re always taken advantage of. Just stop the whole thing. Don’t defend yourself. “I didn’t do it.” Or “I don’t have a contract with you.” You lay the millstone around THEIR neck. That’s what Jesus kept saying. Wrap the millstone and toss THEM into the sea of commerce. Do NOT enter into that sea of commerce. [15:05] FEE SCHEDULE Tami: Estoppel by Election – I use that one when we’re dealing with code enforcement. It’s “intentional exercise of a choice between inconsistent alternatives that bars the person making the choice from the benefits of the one not selected.” Okay. They give you two inconsistent alternatives.


Dave: Guilty or Not Guilty. Tami: You’re going to come in with the third: “What the hell are we doing here? What the hell are YOU doing? What did I injure? Where’s the injured party?” Whatever else. You’re now electing NOT to take their two inconsistent alternatives. For YEARS, I’ve heard people take ‘the lesser of two evils.’ “Well, he’s not as bad as the other guy.” You want to be given a choice. That’s Stockholm Syndrome. Patriotism is patronizing something in exchange for protection. Religion is patronizing something in exchange for protection. Democratic theory is patronizing something in exchange for protection. Stockholm Syndrom is patronizing a captor in exchange for protection. Within Stockholm Syndrom, you KNOW who your captor is. Dave: Well, actually I DIDN’T, until you explained it very clearly who was the ‘hostile party’ – is that how it’s stated in the Geneva Convention? Tami: Right. Or, hostile government, or any… Dave: The hostile party is the BAR. You’ve been captured by the BAR and that’s why you get put underneath that (bar line) in the heading. Tami: The caption in the case means you’ve been captured. You have to step out of the box. That’s the box. You’re under a bar. Step out of the box. Dave: And, with those two documents, you’re saying, you never get a chance to put me back in there, and if you do, that’s where the fee schedule comes in. Tami: Right. NOW try to administer me. Dave: And, the fee schedule – we should just record it on the public record, at the county recorder. Hang it on the door at home. I would suggest keeping one in your car as well. It’s one of the best things to give to any officer. Also, on the Fee Schedule, we should put, This Fee Schedule has been recorded per record number at [County] so that they know that it’s already been recorded. Tami: …and, not objected to. Dave: Right, precisely. So, there it is, and if they want to go against it, then you hand them a bill for the amount you have on the fee schedule for whatever they have decided to … Tami: Right. And, we spoke about this before. We’re giving them free will. We’re saying, You can do those things upon me… Dave: We’re being God to them. We’re giving them free will. Tami: You can do these things upon me, but this is the amount you’re going to pay for doing them. For your privilege of doing these things to me, this is my fee schedule, because, we’re not violent. We don’t have to do anything … just start billing them and hitting them where it hurts. Dave: Would you bill them in their corporate capacity or in their personal capacity? Tami: Both. Dave: So, you write out two bills. Tami: In their corporate capacity, if they stop you, the minute they receive that fee schedule, they have knowledge in their person as well. So, now you bill them twice – one for the municipality that hired them and one for their personal capacity. Dave: Okay, that makes sense. [19:00] EXECUTOR DE SON TORT Tami: It’s a French word – Executor of his own wrong. “A person, who, without legal authority, takes on responsibility to act, is an executor or is an executor of a decedent’s property, usually to the detriment of the estate’s beneficiaries or creditors.”


Dave: …usually to the DETRIMENT of… Tami: Yeah, and you’re the creditor. You’re also the beneficiary. The creditor asks them to protect YOU the creditor, and that’s where the debt comes in….patronizing something in exchange for protection. You’re paying them, to protect you, from you, over and over again. Dave: [laughs] Tami: So, you’re the creditor and the debtor, and that’s what you’re doing with the Forgiveness Doc. You’re merging the creditor and the debtor together, and zeroing everything out. “I no longer require anything from you. You’re not any longer obligated to me. We’re parting ways here. Get out. I no longer want you to represent me in any way. I am no longer going to pay you.” There IS no taxation without representation. I clean my hands… Dave: I’m no longer taxable. Tami: Right. You’re free to go wherever you go. I’m free to go where I go. This is my government. I’m no longer a part of you. I’m no longer asking you to represent me. And, just for your knowledge, I’m going to record the fee schedule and, if you attempt upon me again, this is the amount you’re going to pay…each and every time. Dave: Yeah, then you’re free to wander wherever you feel like wandering. It doesn’t matter geographically, it still applies. Something you said about the Executor doc – you always keep the originals? Because, if THEY have the originals, they can impeach you as the executor. Tami: Right. The Senate can. Dave: What about the Motion to Show Cause. That’s from the standpoint when THEY do something, you’re basically stating to them – it’s basically a default type of document. You’re saying, “Unless you tell me why you SHOULDN’T be indicted…you already are and you’re getting a default judgment on you.” Tami: That’s what INDICT means. It means, written within. In dict – it’s already written. Okay, so when you look up the crimes we’re doing – the Motion to Show Cause, Re: Larceny by Trick. Dave: Oh yeah, that’s another good one. Because, that’s what they do with the birth certificate, right? Tami: Well, the whole court process is... Dave: The court process is Larceny by Trick. Tami: Right. They’re taking something by trick and deception – without changing the title. Because, your title stays the same. Your name is First Middle Last. They’re not changing the title of the estate. “Larceny in which the taker misleads the rightful possessor by misrepresentation of fact into giving up possession of – but not title to – the goods.” Okay? So, when you go into court, and, your wife takes you into court and she’s fraudulently assigned parental ability on to the state, and you go in there and say, You don’t have subject matter jurisdiction and this is over. IF they start moving from that period on, they’re misrepresenting the facts, and making you believe that they can possess your child, although they never have that ability under parens patraie. So, you come in with Equitable Estoppel of the Void Ab Initio – If YOU file the case, it’s Void Ab Initio – you just want to void it back to its inception. If somebody else brought you into court based on false language or conduct, it’s Equitable Estoppel – you void it all the way BEFORE it began, because it was fraud on its face.


[23:25] LARCENY OF PROPERTY LOST, MISLAID OR DELIVERED BY MISTAKE Tami: This is one of my favorites. Larceny of Property Lost, Mislaid, or Delivered by Mistake. Larceny by which one obtains control of property the person knows to be lost… Dave: …knows to be lost because of the Cestui que vie act – that says that you have to go find them. You have to send out a search party three times to go find them because you know they’re lost. Tami: Right. …mislaid or delivered by mistake… DELIVERED… by mistake. Dave: Delivered – the baby, delivered, by mistake. Tami: And, Mom didn’t know what she was doing. “…especially in the amount of property or the recipient fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to the rightful owner.” Dave: They never bother to go looking for you – they never go bother to right the property to where it should be. Tami: And, they found you in an action of Treasure Trove. You cannot claim Treasure Trove ability unless you’re not looking for the thing. So, all of this time, when you’re birthed, and you dock here, they pick you up and FIND you in a foundling hospital, they’re claiming and maintaining Treasure Trove, but the requirement was already in the Cestui que vie act to go look for you. How can they do both? They can’t. It’s always going to be Larceny of Property Lost, Mislaid, or Delivered by Mistake. And everybody needs to start acting accordingly: They’ve STOLEN you. They stole your baby. Now, in this, for a father – you’re a dad. Okay, tell me what this means? “…and, fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to the rightful owner.” Were you notified that you needed to claim your child? Dave: Right. I never Tami: When the other father found it? It was lost at sea. Were you notified that you needed to go in and claim your child? Dave: Absolutely not! There’s NEVER notice. There’s never notice at any point in time. Tami: Absolutely not. And, you weren’t aware NOW how the child was hypothecated by announcement of the stock in the newspaper. When Mommy – she’s so excited – she announces the stock: A baby boy… A baby girl is born. She announces the creation of the legal name of the stock of the United States Incorporated, using the letter “A”. Dave: Really? Tami: What’s the first definition of the letter ‘A’. Dave: Are you kidding me? There’s actually a definition in Black’s of the letter ‘A’? “A hypothetical person.” Tami: ‘A baby boy… A baby girl… is born of ______ on this date.’ That announcement – you’re announcing in the newspaper, the creation of that stock. Dave: Oh, that’s number four here. “A letter used in a newspaper stock transaction table to indicate that a cash payment, in addition to regular dividends, was paid during the year.” And, this is number six: Securities – a letter used in a newspaper, mutual fund, transaction table, to indicate a yield that may include capital gains and losses as well as current interest.” Tami: Interest. Right. Where was the child born at? In the county. In the city. In this hospital. Who has interest? The church – in that hypothetical person – the letter ‘A’. And then later, after you sign the birth certificate, there’s a waiting period before they accept that legal name to be the stock. Dave: Is it three days…?


Tami: I don’t know how long. When they did that with those people out there in New Hampshire – they named all of their kids after Adolf Hitler, Eva Braun – well, CPS came in to take their kids, because, the United States, Inc. didn’t like them using that names for their share of stock. So, they can bitch about it, without invoking parens patraie. They were pissed because, those were already what? Dave: Stock names. Tami: Right. It’s sick. Those people are still fighting that – to get their kids back. I think that happened in 2007 or 2008. Dave: Obviously they haven’t talked to you yet. Tami: Right. Well, it’s hard to take on such a case. You know, I don’t like racism, and the connotation is there. But, if they did come, I’m sure that I would help them, just on the principal of the thing. Dave: Who knows why people do silly things like that. It could have been in jest – who knows? TRACK 11 -- QUORUM Dave: Where does the quorum come from? Tami: “Quorum is defined as a minimum number of people that must be present to pass a law, make a judgment or conduct business. Quorum requirements are typically found in court, legislative assembly, or a corporation.” Dave: Okay, that makes sense. That’s funny – to do business? It’s almost like it means you have to have four people around to do business. Tami: Right. This is our authority. We’re legislating. We’re conducting court in any variant. In Black’s Law: “The minimum number of directors that must be present at a directors’ meeting, or shares of stock that must be represented at a stockholders’ meeting in order to do business or take action. Used substantively, quorum signifies the number of persons belonging to a legislative assembly, a corporation, society, or other body required to transact business. There’s a difference between that done by a definite number of persons and one performed by an indefinite number. In the first case, a majority is required to constitute a quorum, unless the law expressly directs that another number may make one. In the latter case, any number who may be present may act, the majority of those present having, as in other cases the right to act.” Rights are always granted to you, except for absolute rights. You don’t want to have anybody over you granting you rights. You ARE the authority, so you’re making your rights known. You’re in the Absolute. Dave: “Your deed done” – makes sense. Tami: “When an authority is confided to several persons for a private purpose, ALL must join the act, unless otherwise authorized.” Dave: Oh…. Tami: So, what’s happening under Uniform Commercial Code? What’s happening under the United States, Inc.? What’s happening under their acts of enablement? Some of them didn’t ratify. That’s not the entire amount. ALL must join in the Act unless otherwise authorized. So, either the United States, Inc. IS or it IS NOT. Dave: Acting in a quorum? Tami: No – It either IS or it IS NOT.


Dave: Oh. IS or IS NOT – period! Tami: “When an authority is confided in several persons for a private purpose, ALL must join in the act.” So, even when one state decides to adhere to public law, it disbands the rest of them. Dave: Oh. What a thought that is! Tami: So, doesn’t that just obliterate everything? Dave: From that standpoint of logic? Sure! Tami: So, if there is one court – adhering to public law – anywhere, didn’t that just obliterate the United States, Incorporated – because, they’re not acting in concert. Dave: Yeah. They ALL must join in the act. Tami: “…unless otherwise authorized.” They’ve never been authorized. Dave: Maybe they willed it in there somewhere, but who knows. Tami: I’ve never seen it. [3:20] THE FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT, DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY, OBLIGATIONS, TITLE 18 USC 1341: FRAUDS AND SWINDLES Dave: After you do the process, should that – would that create diplomatic immunity for you? Tami: Absolutely. What it says in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act AND the Restrictive Principle of Sovereign Immunity is that, if you are adhering to Public Law, you are sovereign. You ARE immune. They can no longer IN jure you again, because you’re NOT doing anything wrong. There’s no more ILLEGAL – which is determined by the Doctrine of Necessity. Whatever is not lawful, will become so by necessity. That’s what that doctrine is. So, the attorneys played on this and said, I want this, I want this, so make it legal. An attorney told you that life begins at – what? Dave: Conception. Tami: No, it doesn’t, because they said earlier, that’s what “quick with child” means. Dave: Oh! Life begins at…. Tami: …when an attorney says so. They’ve made abortion legal, based on the attorney-definition of life. How the hell did an attorney begin to determine life? They said when a woman is quick with child – that’s when life begins – that’s when first movements were felt. WHY is an attorney determining life …and when it begins or ends? What the hell are we consenting to? Dave: Exactly. Another time you said that, we are all felons….that every time you claim a title through the mail and you are accepting that title, that’s creating you as a felon. And then, they’re holding you as a felon. Are there other things that we end up doing unknowingly, that automatically makes us felons as well? Tami: Absolutely. Any fiction – we read through 18 USC 1342 the other day. 18 USC 1341 is Frauds and Swindles: Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, represents, or promises, or to sell, dispose of, loan, exchange, alter, give away, distribute, supply, or furnish or procure for unlawful use any counterfeit or spurious coin, obligation, security… Dave: Okay, what’s the obligation? Tami: Obligation – to become a tax, you have to be obligated. Dave: Oh, right. That’s true.


Tami: You are given DUTIES. This is what the Constitution says – Duties, Taxes, and Imposts – all of these things. These are obligations that you create by chivalry or whatever you FEEL you need to be, rather than BE/ing. You’re becoming a felon. Now this one: “such person shall be fined not more than one million dollars or imprisoned not more than thirty years” under 18 USC 1341, Frauds and Swindles. Now, you’re using a fictional name – the First Middle Last name. You’re not using the Proper Name. TRACK 12 – THE PUBLIC TRUST, HEIR NOT BENEFICIARY Dave: I’ve heard peoples tell that they’ll go in and say, “I waive all benefits from the public trust” type of thing. What would that actually be construed as being? Would you be waiving all your benefits as the beneficiary from whatever they want to give you – whatever snippets they want to give you, including sending you to jail? Tami: Who’s public? Who are the people? Dave: The people are Congress. Tami: The Public Trust is the People’s Trust. So, those are the Ecclesiastical goods, because, when they established that, it was a REpublic. You have that side is public – which is the Ecclesiastical goods, and then, you have the Private Trusts, which are the stock markets and everything else. So, if you waive your right to what Congress is allowed, then that’s fine, because you’re not – you weren’t the legislator before that. So, even if they could say that applied to you – if you ever stated that in the past – “I waive my right to the public trust” – can YOU enter into an illegal contract, and at the time that you – or anybody – spoke those words, they were still in an administrative court… Dave: …and dead. Tami: …and, dead. You could not be HEARD at that time. So, it doesn’t – either way… Dave: …it’s still irrelevant.. Tami: Right. That’s an irrelevancy. You could never enter into an illegal contract. You really can’t give up your right to your inheritance. They MAINTAIN that you can by accepting the benefit, but what you’ve done is, you’ve consented to a Trustee over you, and the Estate, but it’s all under fraud. It’s Larceny by Trick. It’s all under fraud itself. [1:50] NOTICE, UNACCEPTABLE MAIL, ABJURATION OF THE REALM Dave: How do you send back mail that has the name of the trust on it? And, is there a specific letter that you’ve ever seen anybody use – is there any way to do it that….? You know – like Barclay’s Bank sent to you: “No such person exists.” Tami: Right. “No such person at this address.” They were refusing service saying, “We don’t live here anymore” – which is so funny. The best thing to do is to Notice your private entities, like the electric company or the water company or the municipality, and you ‘Notice’ them that you are BE/living now, and this what they will refer to you as – the Proper Name – and maintain that they are in violation of 18 USC 1342 if they continue to mail you anything, and they probably are in violation of 18 USC 1341, because, they want money!


Dave: Yeah, because, they’re trying to create constructive fraud through the use of that in the postal service. Tami: Right. So, you Notice them and if they continue to mail you mail, when you receive those things, write on the envelope: UN ACCEPTABLE MAIL AS PER 18 USC 1342. You cannot ASSUME or USE the fiction. They cannot fault you on that. They cannot force you to commit a crime. Dave: Right. As long as you just write that directly on the letter. You could just leave them in your mailbox and put the flag back up. Tami: Why? You might be consenting. Under Bouvier’s… Dave: But, how do they then get the stupid envelope that says, Not appropriate mail according to US Code? Tami: You’d want to Notice them because, the next time they send you something, what are you going to do? You can indict them, now that they have knowledge, you can just start indicting them. Dave: Okay, so I give them the Notice as per US Code and then, they are not going to do that again anyway. Tami: Right. Take a copy of the envelope – copy it – and then, Notice the return address on there, and do what you need to do to nail them, but, start indicting them for trying to Post you. Dave: I remember, last time, you had a story where, you said you had acquired a pretty big piece of property down in Chicago. What was the story behind that? How’d you end up doing that? Did you say the Daley Center? Tami: Right. By abjuration of the realm. David Horowitz signed off. We gave him Motion to Compel Judicial Boundaries, and he denied he’s a judge. We told him in Motion to Compel or Abjuration of the Realm, he is to act ONLY AS A JUDGE according to judicial canon. He could not practice law, he could not aver, he could not maintain anything other than a judge, and he denied it. He signed off. That’s an oath to leave the realm forever. Dave: And, in doing so, he did WHAT exactly? Tami: He left the realm forever! Dave: Now, the realm – explain what you mean by the realm? Tami: Any realm that is created, is created by a king, okay? By ordinance. The BAR owns everything – EVERYTHING. They give these judges full-on authority to act on their behalf. That judge acted on behalf of the BAR to abjure the realm forever. I don’t care if he didn’t know what that meant. I plainly wrote it in there. All he has to do is go look in Black’s Law Dictionary. It’s written clearly, in his law. He is REQUIRED – as an judge – as a former ATTORNEY – to know the law. Dave: Good point. Tami: He did that with WILL and of his own VOLITION. Dave: So, when he did that, what was the Center? Was it the Courthouse? Tami: Yes! That’s the Daley Center. But, I believe he abjured the realm forever on behalf of the BAR ALL OVER the globe. The realm that the BAR holds – is what? Everything across the globe. They gave him that authority… he used his authority – as that judge, or administrator, or whatever he was acting as that day, but he has authority of the BAR to do that. He abjured the realm on behalf of everybody. Dave: And, you have a copy of that document? Or, you have the original document? Tami: Absolutely. It’s in the docket. Dave: So, this is public record – anybody can go look it up.


Tami: It’s the Bambek case, and the Bambek case is listed on my scribd. It’s listed on the dropbox. It’s all over the place. Just go search the case number. Go search Bambek’s name. You will find that he denied the ‘Motion to Compel Judicial Boundaries or Abjuration of the Realm.’ Dave: Wow. Well, that would be an interesting case for people to go look up, to say, Hey, guys, you don’t have any more control here at all. Tami: Right. Nothing. Dave: Yeah. [7:10] TRAFFIC STOPS, FEE SCHEDULE Dave: One of the times I got pulled over, I stated from the initial arrest that anything that I would end up signing would be signed under protest and duress. Would that cover someone from anything they make you sign or try to hold against you if you did sign it, saying that you signed it under duress? Tami: Absolutely. And the action itself – okay, you’re on the road… a corporation – let’s say it’s Walmart decides to pull you over. They come to your car and they’re forcing you to sign a document. These police stations are all corporate entities. Sheriffs are all corporate entities, counties are all corporate entities. This is WALMART pulling you over, except for this time, Walmart has a gun on their hip. It is always, always, always duress – duress per mines, duress of goods if they’re threatening to take your car or your license plate off of your car – it’s always duress. It’s always an action of criminally coercing you. Dave: Okay. So, it’s a good idea for people to always state, “Anything that I sign will be signed under duress.” and then actually sign it, “Under Duress” on the line too? Tami: No, but, once you have the Forgiveness doc and the Executor doc, they no longer have any authority over you to tell you to do that. You need to be billing them… from your fee schedule. Dave: Right, sure, sure, after you get stuff filed, that’s for sure. Tami: So, the minute they come to the window, you tell them, “It’s okay for you to be here, but it’s up to you whether or not you want to pay these fees. This fee goes with this. If you ask for my identification, if you ask for my name, if you ask for my social security number or registration or otherwise, these are the fees you’re going to encounter.” Dave: And, if you keep me….I think I’m going to put in my fee schedule that, if they keep me over five minutes, because, five minutes is enough time for them to do whatever they want to do or call whoever they want to call and that’s it. That’s all I’m giving them – five minutes. “You’ve got five minutes. After that, the time starts.” Because, then you’re being…you give them a little bit of leeway. Okay, that makes sense to me. [9:30] POSTERITY, UNITED STATES IN REM ET AL LIBERTAS Dave: I’ve heard that, anything – like from Roman law – anything that is not in the Roman ‘register,’ is not truly owned by the person. Is that true, and if so, can you remove all your property from their jurisdiction and have it protected some other way. But, of course, I think we know that – from the standpoint – that’s what the Executor doc does, right?


Tami: Before Congress came in – as an agency by estoppel – and created another agency by estoppel called, the United States of America, and then went bankrupt and created the United States, Inc., you are not the Person. The Person is the 14th-amendment-created individual which is a corporate body. The United States owns EVERYTHING. Dave: The united states – as us – the united states in rem – of being – et al libertas… Tami: …owns everything. The only reason that they can put those things in there is because, you’re consenting to it. Dave: …when you register your car, you register your children, you register your house, you register…. Tami: And, you’re asking them, “Please give me my rights.” Rights are granted. Power is vested. DIVEST the power that YOU put in them. Stop asking for your rights and take UPON your authority. Dave: That brings me to another question, as far as the constitutional thing….Who or What is the posterity spoken of in the Constitution? Is that the offspring of Congress then, or Congress itself? Tami: Posterity is the closest you ever come to BEING under the law. POST HEIR – ‘in the action of.’ You are never living since the Declaration of IN DE PENDENCE. Dave: You are POST HEIR ITY. Okay, I get it. So, they put that in there from the standpoint that – “to us and our posterity…” Tami: And, that’s from interpleading ability through the Westminster Statutes. They can always interplead between you and your inheritance. Jesus said to them, “You have shut up the Kingdom of Heaven.” That’s how they’ve been doing it – interpleading ability. [11:50] TYPES OF UNITED STATES Dave: What’s the document that shows we have the capacity to all BE free states – say, for example, of the United States, and, if it’s in the Constitution, where in it does it state that? …as far as…obviously it didn’t have all three different types of the United States at the time of the Constitution to begin with. It only would have had… Tami: The United States of America, and the United States. Dave: The united states of being – being us – and, the ‘United States of America’ being the thirteen colonies under control of Congress. Tami: Right – BECAUSE you vested power. Dave: Because, you vested power. So, the third one – the corporation – obviously, isn’t going to be in the Constitution, but… because we are the united states of being – all of us being kings – we’re all our own state, and we’re united, and, here we are. Tami: Article 4 Section 3: “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State…” Dave: What are they saying there? Tami: They don’t have jurisdiction over YOU – the State of Being: “…nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as that of Congress.” Listen again. “…without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned” – you and I – “as well as that of Congress.” Dave: They can’t do it without US and THEM doing it together.


Tami: …in tandem. You have to consent. You’re making your own law by asking them to maintain it for you – give it to you – hand you your rights. Dave: I see. That makes more sense because, the States that they speak of there are ‘us.’ [14:27] IN DEPENDENCE, BILL OF RIGHTS, LIBERTY FRANCHISE Dave: I know we talked before about...but, can you go over – from the standpoint of ‘Independence’ and explain, IN DEPENDENCE – what exactly that means from an etymology standpoint? Tami: IN means ‘in’ DE means ‘of’ PENDENCE means a ‘pending state.’ You are always INSIDE OF a pending state. Congress declared you always pending – not alive, not dead – but you need to be administered, because, they have no clue where you are. You’re just ‘pending.’ Dave: And, that’s what the Declaration of Independence was? It was a rewrite of…? Tami: …the Cestui que vie act. It revived it. And then, the Bill of Rights – if you look at Blacks Law – it’s a bill in the nature of a Bill of Revivor – reviving the Cestui que vie act. So, they can hold you attaint, just by address to the holder of the Great Seal. Remember, we were talking about the Inaugural Address, Address to Senate, Address to Congress. These things – nobody wants to listen to them but if you listen carefully, they’re changing the way that you can be held ‘detaint’ – or held attaint. Dave: …as the dead thing. Tami: Absolutely. Dave: That makes sense. And, of course, we went over Liberty before – that liberty is a franchise, and when we do it this way, we’re granting the franchise of Liberty to ourselves, instead of THEM deciding whether or not they’re going to grant it to us. Tami: Right. That’s the absolute. [16:07] CHARTER OF FORESTS AND CHASES, FATHERS CLAIMING THEIR CHILDREN, SHOW CAUSE, USEFUL IDIOTS & WHISTLE-BLOWERS Tami: In the Forests and Chases at Charter, liberty is also – this is the definition inside of the Charter [reading from http://info.sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests/glossary.htm#L ]

also known as ‘franchise’, the exemption by royal decree from general provisions or regulations, whether judicial, commercial, or ecclesiastical, by which powers could be exercised and appointments made locally, (e.g., within manors), by lords, burgesses, clerics, or corporations, or regionally, (e.g., within honors); exemption might also be claimed as prescriptive, i.e., existing from time memorial…

Dave: And, that’s where we come in. Tami: Right, that’s where we come in. Dave: We just take it back to time memorial… Tami: Nunc pro tunc – without using the dead language. Once you’re alive, you don’t want to speak the dead language.


Dave: Ohhhh. Tami: All we’re doing – when we’re directing them – is, directing them in their language, so that they can understand us. And then, after that, there’s no need for that. Jesus maintains that again in 1st Corinthians 13. He says, “When that which is perfect is come, that which is in part is done away.” And he speaks specifically about language – all prophecy will end, all tongues will cease. We no longer require the use of Babylonian Theory of Babylonian Doctrine. Dave: For those fathers that are going to do this and wish to reclaim their first-born sons, of course, do you think there’s going to be any requirement, one way or the other, for the fathers to have to get a blood test, in any way shape or form, and place that on evidence that it is your… Tami: Absolutely not. Because, by presumptive measures, by putative measures, they have delineated and drawn a line where that doesn’t matter. In Canada they’ve done research and, specifically to single moms, married moms, eighty percent of the children born today are not the father that she’s married to – are not the person that she claims to be the father. This is what society/ politics has designed so that that infant can be claimed, it can be abandoned. It can have another father easily. Dave: Isn’t that wonderful. Tami: A lot of the time, the child is not likely yours, but you have putatively agreed and consented to the child being yours, or presumptively agreed by marriage that the child is yours. It’s your instinct to protect these children regardless. And, it’s our requirement to do so. Dave: In a proper manner. Tami: And, you’re going to anyway. I know so many fathers that are raising their step-children. It doesn’t matter. The state designed this. We’re not going to leave the children. Our whole purpose of getting out of the system is to protect the children. We’re obligated to do that. It doesn’t matter if it’s your progeny or not. You’re still bringing it forward into the future and maintaining our future. Dave: And, yeah, when you bring the child – when you claim him…and bring him into your House… Tami: Then that child becomes safe, and protected by the House. That’s such a requirement, because, if you went in and you said, Maybe this isn’t right – it’s not a possibility first of all, most people are already attached to the children, they’ve raised the children, but if you let them go on to the state, it cannot stop this whole thing. It cannot stop the system, because those children are going to be raised by the state. They’re going to grow up and BE psychopaths. You can’t drop the ball here. We have an OBLIGATION to the children. Dave: Do you think we could write a Writ of Seizure for the child? Tami: I believe we need to filing and recording and documenting the Writ of Replevin and Cepit – you’re repossessing something… Dave: …that’s been stolen! Tami: ….that’s been taken unlawfully and is detained unlawfully – by assignment. Dave: Are we going to have go through and do that for every single thing that they’ve ever stolen from us? Tami: You can do it across the board. Why aren’t you doing it across the board? Dave: Do you think we can just set it up in language and just do that…? Tami: I believe we did with the Forgiveness doc. Dave: Do you think? …making my whole inheritance whole again? Tami: Right. Because, that’s your estate. Making the estate whole again INCLUDES your progeny.


Dave: That’s true. Yeah, it is one big fell swoop thing. I guess some people might get hung up on the idea that – particularly, property that the state might have taken… I know of people that had their grandfather’s land taken for a park or something like that, so for them to go back and get it – it’s claimed – you do that in the Forgiveness doc – you make your Estate whole, but, for you to properly enforce that, you probably want to at least give whatever entity that stole it a Notice, saying, Hey, notice that I have this doc – I have my full estate now, I WILL be taking this back in so many days and I’m going to put a fence around it, or I’m going to start putting cattle on it or, I’m going to go plant some trees on it….whatever. Tami: You don’t have to ever maintain your intent after that point in time. You never want to threaten them – okay? Dave: What’s the difference between maintaining your intent, like saying, “I’m going to go out there and I’m going to take some lumber – not even tell them what I’m going to do… Tami: Right. You don’t have to. This is mine. All you need to do is, Notice them that, this is mine. It is to be returned to me now. It is to be RECOVERED. If it’s a child, you have to recover the ‘fees.’ The children are the ‘fees’ – held attaint. Now, when it comes to – and, you have to be very careful here – in my process, we indict based on the evidence at hand already. The indictment is already written. All we’re doing is revealing it. David Myrland has been sitting in prison now for a very long time. He went in to the mayor and he told her of his intent to go perform a citizen’s arrest on her. They got him for stalking and harassment, or whatever else it was, but he did not indict. The definition of ‘criminal coercion’ – part of it – is ‘threatening to charge with a crime’ – okay? You don’t threaten! You just simply indict them. Dave: Right. On public record – here’s the indictment – done! Because, here’s the facts… Tami: Here’s the EVIDENCE – with the evidence, you are already indicted. This is what will be. But, no threatening, because you can be accused of criminal coercion, or intimidation or threatening. Dave: A Motion to Show Cause is not intimidation. Tami: Absolutely not. Dave: Because, you’re giving them a chance to respond and say, “Tell me why you shouldn’t be indicted.” Tami: Right. Was this a mistake? Were you directed from another source? Dave: Yeah. Are you going to feed to some one else? Tami: Perhaps the judge ordered you to do this? Perhaps the local corporate counsel directed you to do this, which is the most likely thing that occurred – that these attorneys are directed by the corporate counsel, are directed by the puppeteers – the puppet masters – so therefore, they have the right to get out of that situation. If you show cause, or whatever… come in and say, “Hey, I was innocent. This is what happened. I was used as a Useful Idiot, therefore I cannot be held accountable for this.” Part of my process is allowing them leeway. We cannot indict the innocent. Dave: Right. You don’t want to! Tami: We don’t want to launch false allegations. That’s the whole game. That’s how they’re holding us. So, we need to make sure. And, they do have the opportunity to now come clean and say, “Look, I was used as the Useful Idiot…” And, then it’s over. [24:54] Dave: …respond to that Motion to Show Cause and say, No, no. Wait, Whoa! Then, we say, as good sovereigns say, we say, “Now you’ve pointed me in the right direction….no problem.”


Tami: They need to understand, and everybody that’s listening needs to understand that, if you need to whistle-blow – if you feel the requirement to do this, if you are honestly innocent of these things, come to us and we will give you shelter. We will offer you our assistance. I will help you write the indictments for whoever pushed or puppeted you or used you, or used you for a Useful Idiot. We are to protect human beings, and if you’re acting only on directives from someone else, and you really didn’t intend to harm or injure anybody, then you need to come to us and we will do our damnedest to get you out. Dave: Yeah, because intent is everything. Tami: Absolutely. That’s the line. You’re either innocent or you have intent. Aristotle said this. Jesus said this. You’re a child, until you do something with intent, according to Aristotle. You’re innocent unless you do something with intent according to Jesus. You need to forgive yourself, and drop the ego, and come to us. If you’ve been used as a Useful Idiot, I’m more than willing to work with you and help you indict whoever we need to indict, But, this has to end now. Dave: Yeah, right, quickly. [26:36] WRITS, WRITING DOCUMENTS, DEMESNE Dave: When you do a Writ, do you put the quorum on it? Do you put four people on it? Tami: Absolutely. You don’t have to – it’s not a requirement. Dave: Oh, it’s NOT a requirement. Oh sure, because, you’re acting in your sovereign capacity. You need your seal though. Tami: Right. Dave: What’s the criteria that you use when you’re picking your words for your paperwork? Is it all what they use in their treatises and their dictionaries in the past? Do you take usage from Black’s now? Tami: The requirement for me always is, first and foremost, public law, second, is Ocum’s Razor – the simplest form of all things. You know, I could write twenty pages describing what you do, however, I can simplify and use just very few words to say the very same thing. Dave: And, less is always better from that standpoint, I’ve always thought. I’ve seen people write out a two-page rant and what good is that going to do? Nothing! Tami: Right and that’s we’ve been taught with the use of English – is to describe our emotions, feelings, and to use as many words as possible. That’s founded in confusion. It’s founded in Babylonian Doctrine. And, I can read these documents and simplify in a few paragraphs. That’s not THEIR fault. It’s just the indoctrination process of education – to be patriotic to this language or that, or whatever it is. Dave: And, when you see these lawyers come up with these single 2,000-page motions… It just blows me away! Tami: Absolutely! How much are you paying? You’re paying eighty cents a page on average for an attorney to write these things. The more pages, the better income they have. Three hundred dollars an hour you’re paying your attorney to write those pages, and, when he hands you a book, you really think you’re being represented nicely. You have no idea that, he’s re- presenting you through these 2,000 pages. ---------


Dave: Thinking about the history of things, what are some of the ways to look into the history of one’s estate and, where it may have been taken in the past? I’m thinking the County Recorder’s office, the Vital Records. Are there some other places to start? Tami: Originally, this was your dominion, this is your demesne – my domain, it was all yours before you started purchasing it from these attorneys, from these pharacees, from these lords, from these landlords. It’s all yours. Dave: That’s a hard thing for people to get past: “Wait! This is your planet. This is your Domain – all of it.” Tami: This is your domain. You consented to them owning it by entering into a mortgage contract. You asked to BUY what was already yours. That’s why it could not be used, in that sense. I was never a loan – it states that in the mortgage. It’s never a loan. You’re buying something that was already yours, and that’s how they’re able to securitize it and trade it later – as a stock and all of these other things… put itin these tranches and trade it on a private/ public level. This is yours already. You don’t have to look back at where it came from, or wherever else, because it’s all yours. I think that’s probably one of the hardest concepts for people to wrap their mind around: It was YOURS before you bought it from them. The minute you bought it from them, you consented that they owned it. Okay? And, it’s the same thing. If you accept a benefit from them, you’re making them the trustee. However, prior to accepting that benefit, you were already the heir. There was no trustee. Dave: Right. And it makes me thing about that discussion we were talking about before. The BAR Association is trying to go into Australia and create legislation, so that the aboriginal people can come back and CLAIM their land, but in the contracts themselves, it specifically states in there, that, the Crown has possession of it to begin with. They’re signing possession over to the Crown so they can buy it back, because, right now, these guys don’t have any contracts out there. They can wander around wherever they want to go and set up shop and no one can stop them. Tami: And, remember that, the AB originals is ‘away from’ the originals, so when they claim their inheritance, they need to go to India and claim India. That’s where they were stolen from originally – to be AB originals. Dave: Because, the East India Company shuffled them around all over the place. Tami: Australia started out as a penal colony. Dave: Yeah, exactly. TRACK 13 – HOW IT WAS SET UP, THE CESTUI QUE VIE ACT, INDOCTRINATION, CONSTITUTION, UCC & THE TWELVE TABLES Dave: I was just thinking that… that I never asked you about time-line-wise. When did you find out about the Cestui que vie act and kind of put everything together and then, realize, that’s what you had to do – or we have to do? Tami: Well, what happened was, there’s all these laws specifying that you’re dead, so I had to go look for where you died at, and, I came up with the Cestui que vie act. That was where … and, before that, William the First, but, I didn’t HEAR about the Cestui que vie act or anything, what happened was I going through and studying, studying, studying, studying and… Dave: Okay, you know we’re dead….


Tami: …there’s something wrong here, because, the closest you ever get to Living or BEing is posterity within the law. And, you know, I was curious, as to how is that possible? What the heck – where did this occur? So, you go back and back and back and back until you find it. When I say, “Go to the physics of the thing,” that’s what I mean. Where was this concept created? Where was it first thought of? Who thought of it and why – what was their purpose? Because, you can see the resulting reaction to that action – constantly – within every aspect of society. And, you know, when YOU start going backwards…in prior or preceding action…you go all the way back, well, how do you modify human behavior? You see a behavior – how do you change it? You implicate a doctrine. You teach it three times to be something else. It’s THAT simple. So, here you are – indoctrinated throughout our whole lives, we’re taught: we are this, we are this, we are this, and even with philosophy, you go back to the doctrine of ________, why are you NAMED down to the smallest iota? You know, these questions you need to answer, because these are things that make you or allow you to be realizant of the self. Dave: … yeah, and it makes you realize just how many times they chopped you up, and then you start realizing WHY they chopped you up. Tami: …parting you out. Dave: Yeah. So, you actually – you just found the Act and just read it and said, Oh my gosh…? Or, somebody actually said, “Hey, could you read this for me?” …and said, “Hey, I think you should…” Tami: I ended up hitting upon the Act…. Dave: Because, it’s buried in English law – in 1666 – how do you just come across that? Tami: You research. I mean, with the way that my mind works, you find the answer to a question. You know, here’s your reaction and, you’re like, looking at everybody dead, written throughout time – dead things and things that are being moved from here to there and administered and everything else, so you look for the foundational cause of that. Dave: Did you search for – like – a state? – stuff that had a state in it? Tami: No, because I already knew – once you get back to a certain point in the constitution –you realize what a constitution is, that’s the thing that fills you up. You CONSIST of a constitution. Who DIRECTS that? Who maintains what you consist of? Dave: Yeah, the CON GRESS. Tami: You keep going backwards. Who – what was congress before? What was the United Nations before it was the United Nations? Dave: What was the transgression before WE knew what the transgression was named… Tami: Right. …why there is patriotism. You go back and hit on several things – Plato’s apology of Socrates – you know, I’ve spoken about that several times, because it’s so patriotic. Here’s a guy facing execution for a supposed crime, or whatever happened back then. He’s just touting nothing but patriotism. Dave: Oh_____ of Athens. Tami: What has that to do with human history? Why is that there in our history? Here’s a guy that’s not defending himself. He’s just patriotic. Dave: He’s basically just purely laying down… on the mercy of the court, which is exactly what they want you to do. Tami: Or, not doing that at all because, it wasn’t the court back in that day – it was 100 of your peers – that’s just absolute patriotism. And, then you look at Plato’s ‘The Republic’ and things like that. It’s all repeating history. All you have to do is learn the history. Dave: Yeah, history always repeats…


Tami: And, then I ended up – once you read the ‘Uniform Commercial Code’ act itself, then it becomes apparent. If you KNOW any prior history – like the Charter of Urso and everything else – you start putting everything else together – how it flows and, how many times that they’ve created UCC without naming it that. That was the first… Dave: Oh, that’s an interesting thought. Tami: That was the Twelve Tables. Dave: Oh, the Twelve Tables is the original UCC? Tami: It states in there – Table 1, 2 , 3 , 4. You have Title 1, 2, 3, 4 – going backwards until you find the inception or the place that it began at. [5:35] USUFRUCT, DERIVATIVES, U.S. PATENT ACT, ‘WE ARE ALL ONE BODY’ Dave: When I came across the understanding of the term ‘usufruct’. That was one of the things that… Tami: Blew your mind? Dave: Yeah. Tami: To be the ‘use’ and then the derivative off of the use – the fruit of the use? Dave: Yeah, because, Dean Clifford stated that word, but he didn’t go into it very much. He just said, “Ask them who the usufruct is – who the usufructuary is. That will piss them off.” Tami: Right. And, then you go back all the way to the Biblical connotations. ‘After God created everything that creepeth and called it good, the Lord God came in and said, what? That, man and wo man were supposed to do? Be fruitful. What’s the usufruct? ‘Fruct’ means ‘fruit.’ The fruit of the use – that’s the derivatives of the human being. You find where it steps from and go from there. Then you find the cure because, once you find the inception, you could do the opposite of what it is. That is secure. The physics of the thing is always secure in everything. That stems from the Four Humours – Aristotle’s Four Humours Dave: Oh, that’s another thing. Are there any other documents anywhere – other than when we got indemnified – that are really, really clear as to our position as the united states? Tami: Naming the united states? Dave: Yeah, “us” as the united states. Is there any other document that shows the three United States….I know there’s a few court cases that bring it up. Tami: What is this referring to, in ‘The First United States Patent Statute’? Dave: Oh, yeah, we read that not too long ago. Tami: That was the Patent Act of 1790 that congress passed. What does the title say? Dave: ‘The First United States Patent Statute.’ Tami: How many then are there? If that’s the first, how many are there? Dave: Why is there more than one also. Yeah. Tami: Read it again. [reading from http://www.ipmall.info/hosted_resources/lipa/patents/Patent_Act_of_1790.pdf ]

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America and Congress assembled. That upon the petition of any person or persons to the Secretary of State, the Secretary for the department of war, and the Attorney General of the United States…

Tami: There’s two right there.


…setting forth, that he, she, or they, hath or have invented or discovered any useful art, manufacture, engine, machine, or device, or any improvement therein not before known or used, and praying that a patent may be granted therefor, it shall and may be lawful to and for the Secretary of State, the Secretary for the department of war, and the Attorney General, or any two of them, if they shall deem the invention or discovery sufficiently useful and important, to cause letters patent to be made out in the name of the United States…

Dave: That’s us again. Tami: That’s us again.

…to bear teste by the President of the United States… Tami: There’s another one.

…reciting the allegations and suggestions of the said petition, and describing the said invention or discovery, clearly, truly and fully, and thereupon granting to such petitioner or petitioners, his, her or their heirs…

Tami: Now, that doesn’t refer to a corporation. That is you the living being. ….administrators or assigns…

Tami: That’s the assignment …for any term not exceeding fourteen years, the sole and exclusive right and liberty of making, constructing, using and vending to others to be used, the said invention or discovery; which letters patent shall be delivered to the Attorney General of the United States to be examined, who shall, within fifteen days next after the delivery to him…

Dave: You’re talking about the children, right? …if he shall find the same conformable to this act, certify it to be so at the foot thereof…

Dave: The print on the… …and present the letters patent so certified to the President, who shall cause the seal of the United States to be thereto affixed…

Tami: On your birth certificate, there’s a seal – correct? Dave: Right. Tami: That hypothecated something, didn’t it? What’s a counter-deed? Dave: It counters the thing done, like the notary. Tami: Right. So, if it’s their seal, who owns it? Dave: Ah! Whoever’s seal counter-deeded it, which would be the church because, that’s a church position.

…and the same shall be good and available to the grantee or grantees by force of this act, to all and every intent and purpose herein contained, and shall be recorded in a book to be kept for that purpose in the office of the Secretary of State…

TAMI: Right? Vital statistics? …and delivered to the patentee or his agent, and the delivery thereof shall be entered on the record and endorsed on the patent by the said Secretary at the time of granting the same.

Tami: So, the endorsement comes from that birth certificate – or, back then, it was done with the church. You would enter your children’s names into the Bible and give it to the priest or whoever. Dave: And, even then, that’s how you were considered to be found or captured. Tami: Yeah, you’d been delivered.


Dave: Delivered. I had a thought last night. It’s my understanding, the Mormons keep the best records for lineage – on the planet. I was thinking, if we’re going to go all the way back to 1666, and people don’t have a very good idea who there family is back then, perhaps we could reference their lineage charts...you know how they baptize everyone, even after they’re dead? So, they keep these unbelievably massive files in Utah of the entire planet. So, if somebody doesn’t know their lineage, we could use them… Tami: Right. We want to do that automatically because, we’re patriotic to the name. However, when we got the last name – see – we’re only a description. So, they created a new species of human. The family of _________. The family of________. The family of ______. That was just a means to make us more secular and separate us. We’re all from the same place. Dave: I was thinking in reference to…. your whole estate, and taking land back into… your estate and then, using it from the standpoint of….positive ways. Tami: Right. And, remember, we were going through the Cestui que use – Cestui que vie yesterday? Cestui que vie is for the other life… you determine mine, I determine yours – the trust itself – I hold yours, you hold mine. If we never come together as one, we don’t get anything. The title has to be re-vested as it is, which is I AM. We can’t subscribe to the familiar uses of names or the new species that was created out of the last name. This is 1 Corinthians 12…

1 Corinthians 12 4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. 6And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. 7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10To another faith by the same spirit, to another the gifts of healing by the same spirit, to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. 12For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. 13For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 14For the body is not one member, but many. 15If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 16And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? 18But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. 19And if they were all one member, where were the body? 20But now are they many members, yet but one body. 21And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22And, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: 23And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. 24For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: 25And there should be no schism in the


body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. 26And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.

Tami: You know, we’re just one. We’re one. You’re part of me, I’m part of you. We’re just one ‘I AM’ vessel. Dave: Makes me think about BODIES, when they talk about the body politic – the idea that, they’re all one. Tami: Right. And, we went from BEING a bank as the united states, to now what? Adopted member banks – member banks. Dave: Adopted member-banks, yeah. Tami: The ‘adopted’ statutes. ‘Adopted’ united states. The United States, Inc. is adopted by statute – that’s your sibling. They’re presenting to you, something – a mirror image of you that’s not you. It’s a corporation and that was DEFINED by the 14th-amendment-created-person. TRACK 14 – CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER DOCTRINE Dave: The Clear and Present Danger Doctrine – I’ve heard you say that a few times and we haven’t really gone over it yet. Tami: What happens is, you’re presented every single day, through the media, with the Clear and Present Danger doctrine – and, with those around you who watch the media. I don’t watch the media. I don’t watch the news. I don’t like indoctrination. Dave: So, Clear and Present Danger doctrine is an indoctrination process, for the most part? Tami: Absolutely. Dave: I’d never heard the term before, until you brought it up. I thought, okay, what is the doctrine? And, it’s to say, Hey… Tami: What if. This will kind of simplify things… So, here I am. I’m doing the indictments and, I’m doing fine. I’m as safe as I’m going to be – as safe as anyone else out there. Why am I more important than anyone else? And, somebody came to me and stated that I was a danger to them, because they were in a state of fear. Well then, they went on and implicated Clear and Present Danger doctrine to those around me. And, it was like: What if she gets charged? What if…?” Okay, this is Clear and Present Danger doctrine. This allows you to what? … you come into a state of fear. And, then what happens? You need to ask somebody to come and protect you., because, you’re not able to protect yourself. Why aren’t you able to protect yourself? Dave: …and come to the understanding of where your fear is coming from and rationalize it a little bit: “This is irrational. There’s no reason to think this way. Back off.” Now, you’re telling your own mind to calm down. Tami: Right, and the first implication of this that I’m aware of is with the use of the Bible. You separate human beings by the doctrine of atomist. You name all things down to their smallest iota. And then, the next step in Democratic Theory is to make them fear each other and themselves. So, you set a judge up on the top of a hill, the judge comes down, he tells you, “Every one of you is stealing each other’s wives and asses and you’re killing yourselves and each other.” Guess what he does next? He offers you protection for a tax. So, in the concept of breaking the human being, you have a-biogenesis – away from life, mind and soul. You have


Clear and Present Danger doctrine implicated in Exodus. The next step is what? Leviticus. What is Levi? Dave: To levy. Tami: To levy – to tax in exchange for protection. So, they told you to fear each other. They separated you first, told you to fear each other, then offered you democratic theory. The word Deuteronomy means, ‘second word – second Torah.’ That’s the second repeat in the three-repeat indoctrination process. Dave: What is about the significance of the ‘three’? Tami: To indoctrinate you three times. It’s based on consensus reality, so if you hear – you’ll see this in the media all the time – “a male, so-and-so is arrested today” – period. So, he’s already been arrested. “His wife has suffered assault and injury” – period. “This guy has been arrested three times before” – period. There is no link between any one of those, except for, in your mind, you’re weighing it out and you’re going, “Oh my gosh, domestic violence. They should just hang him.” He never did anything wrong. The three prior arrests were probably for unpaid speeding tickets or whatever else, but he never did anything wrong. However, the media – they’re telling you, he’s a repeat. She was abused – that’s morality, he’s been arrested before – that’s law, okay? He was arrested today – here’s another law. So, you go out to the psychology of it. So-and-so has a history of depression. So, there you go, you go – into psychology. And, not one of those has a link to the other, although in your mind, you’re weighing it out. You’re coming to the conclusion based on consensus reality that he’s actually abused somebody. They didn’t tell you that she had her head beat in by a female, which is the most likely occurrence. Dave: Or, she fell down the stairs, or someone else beat her up – not her husband, because they’re trying to get the husband. Tami: Males and females are assaulted and abused by other females. If you go in to the actual statistics, the Department of Justice says that 800,000 females and 800,000 males are abused each year by domestic violence. Now, the research on the female side says it’s Intimate Partner Violence. It’s not spousal abuse. She’s being beat on by lesbian partners. But, the male – he’s the one that’s married to the female. It’s NOT intimate partner violence. She’s beating his head in too. Dave: And, that’s how you explained before, that’s how they pull the male out. The female can still go get the benefits of all the stuff that Daddy-State can provide, but she can still have someone to snuggle with because, they’re not in a…. Tami: …relationship. She can be a welfare….because, it’s not considered a relationship, and that’s what the policy is intended to be. If you put a dyke female with another female – that dyke female is VIEWING the female as an object. Dave: Yeah – use. Tami: Right. So, how do heterosexual people get together? Based on the want / need to reproduce and they have instinct to be with each other. It’s not as visual as a dyke relationship. I know a few homosexuals that actually love each other and they don’t view each other as objects, but there’s a complete distinct separation between homosexual relationship and a dyke relationship. And, most people KNOW of at least one dyke female. Dave: Yeah. Totally possessive and off the wall… Tami: She only views human beings as objects, and on the flip side, you have dyke males too. The female mind is in the male body and he’s the same. He only views human beings as objects. That’s psychopathy.


Dave: We were talking the other day is, we need to take more time to legislate. I think a good start of the legislation should be things that everyone seems to worry about – that causes the most fear…for the most basic and simple things in life, like, the traveling issue. We HAVE to get over the top of this traveling issue because, if people don’t feel they can travel about and interact… Tami: And, we have that taken care of. “If you want to come upon my vessel, that’s okay. You’re going to pay this much …AND … I’m going to nail you for piracy under 18 USC 81.” Dave: In a Notice and a Fee Schedule? Tami: Right. That’s on our Administrative Orders to Travel and Convey Property and Cargo. Dave: Oh, the little ID thing that you showed me. Tami: We have no licensing. We have no registration. Dave: As long as everybody has one of those. That’s their notice right there when they say, “Give me your driver’s license and registration.” You show them that. Tami: This is my authorization to travel and convey property and cargo. “Well, who did it?” The executive office. “There it is. If you come up against me in any way, if you try to injure me, you’re going to be nailed for piracy. Now, you’re stealing off of my vessel. Dave: Yeah. Land pirates. I love that term! Tami: That’s what they are. Dave: Legislation as far as that’s concerned…. [8:38] PIRACY, BAIL, BA’ALISM Tami: Bail today is taught to be everything…when you’re arrested or you’re captured, or somebody’s pirating your vessel and you’re offered bail and you’re like, “Oh my gosh.” And, everybody else sees that as a good thing. Well, that means that they didn’t leave the country or they didn’t hold them in some kind of bondage. They all used to be called ransom. That’s all it is – it’s ransom. Dave: From a pirate, yeah Tami: From a pirate. Ba’alism is piracy. You go into court, you pay bail, you have a bailiff in the back of the courtroom. This is all piracy. It has its foundation in piracy. It’s just been taught that it’s something better or something good, because we’ve been taught that we’re bad in the first place. You know – you’re born in sin. No, you’re not. A psychopath is ‘without.’ A human being is not ‘without.’ In Latin it means ‘without.’ [9:40] CASES BEFORE FORGIVENESS AND EXECUTOR DOCUMENTS FILED Dave: I thought of another question…. If you have a case going but you not yet filed your forgiveness and executor documents, you could still go through and get a good outcome by Motion to Show Cause: Life and Equitable Estoppel, for the most part? Tami: The Admission Statements – not just Equitable Estoppel. The Equitable Estoppel is when somebody brings YOU into court, based on false language or conduct. If YOU’ve started the court case, like a divorce – and a lot of people require this process in a divorce proceeding because, they need to get away from their ex or, whatever is happening – you need to use a Void Ab Initio to the point where THEY perpetrate a fraud against you – in ANY divorce action.


You’ll find that your own attorney tells you not to show up at one of the first hearings, and you’ll have a default order. Dave: Right. Tami: So, then, you’re fighting the whole time, based on implied color and you don’t even realize it. He’ll say, “Well, that hearing’s been postponed.” He’ll show up. Her attorney will show up. And, then he’ll send you a letter saying, “Sorry, I didn’t know the court case was ongoing. I did show up on your behalf and we entered into this kind of stipulation.” And, you go, “That’s my attorney. I guess he knows best.” Right? That was a tactic. Why was he at the courthouse to accidentally show up for a hearing that wasn’t going to occur? I tell everybody: Show up at the hearing. Don’t listen to your attorney. Either that or, just nail them for fraud from the inception. Dave: Well, the whole point is to just fire them and do it right anyway. Tami: Right. Dave: I think we’ve all learned that. There’s the Equitable Estoppel, the Void Ab Initio. Tami: There’s everything that you need. It’s founded in the physics of the thing. If somebody’s perpetrated fraud before a case gets started, instead of going in and arguing subject matter jurisdiction, before the matter is created you nail them with an Equitable Estoppel. “This court doesn’t have jurisdiction to determine anything.” Dave: Right. Because, I’m alive. And, these courts are for the dead, so… Tami: Right. There’s no subject matter. I’m just alive – the Equitable Estoppel says, Somebody brought me in to court on false language or conduct. There’s NOTHING here. This court does not have jurisdiction absolutely. Therefore, they can’t proceed. Dave: Yeah, because, a lot of people have been going through and trying to get them on subject matter jurisdiction – which I understand, but it’s better to just cut it off from the beginning. Tami: Right. Why am I in court in the first place? This is vexatious litigation. They already know that this did not occur. Otherwise, I’d have been charged with a crime. Therefore, this is to be estopped. This court is estopped, that attorney’s estopped, AND it’s vexatious litigation, criminal contempt of court, fraud upon the court. Just lay them all down. “No, I’m not going to be the defendant – YOU are.” Bring the millstone around THEIR neck. Dave: And, let THEM drown in the sea of commerce. Tami: Let them have the burden. Shift the burden off of your shoulders on to them. Dave: Yeah, because with your process you never… Tami: You’re never the defendant. Dave: Yeah, and with doing that, you never have to be in court because everything is by default if they don’t respond…because, we’re not supposed to be in there anyway. Tami: Based on the foundation of implied color, you go in, they offer you color, and by implication, you answer to their color and create the nature of the case. That’s what implied color is. So, a case does not exist. This is all color: the appearance or guise of something. Instead of allowing it to have a nature by becoming a defendant, stop it – right there. And say, “No. You’re the defendant. I’m not playing your game any more. I’m not creating any nature. This is a false case. This is all a fiction. I’m not coming into your Church of Ba’al.” Dave: Yeah, and that’s done by making the judge be a judge. Tami: Absolutely. And, making the court operate as a court. And, these are their rules. These are their laws. These are our laws as well – the majority. They have no other option than to adhere to them, otherwise, the court is condemned by their action. If a judge is allowing criminal


contempt of court, or impeding the ability of the court to function, and the court is not functioning, what are you there for? What is HE there for? Dave: Yeah, what the hell is he doing? [14:40] BIBLE PASSAGES Dave: What are some of the passages of the Bible that you feel are most important for the student to hear – for their understanding, of what… we’re doing… can be learned from that aspect, as well. We’ve said so many of them. But, I think it would be good to have a list. Tami: And, the most important thing for people to do now – for any being to do now – once you’ve realized who you are – what you are – now that you realize you are not a ‘thing’ is, to read Revelations from start to finish, and you will realize that that does not apply to us. TRACK 15 – PATENT INFRINGEMENT, VESSEL, PIRACY Tami: Okay now, this is the Patent Infringement….

Motion to Show Cause Re: Patent Infringement Comes now, First, and Middle name as the united states, in rem, et al, libertas, Upon Motion for Injunctive Relief, whereby the United States of America (bankrupt, and dissolved by enfranchisement, Constituting Fraudulent Conveyance) the STATE OF ___________, a Corporate Franchise of the United States Incorporated, COUNTY OF ___________, a Corporate Franchise of the United States Incorporated, has maintained under Private Acts (executive orders) and Acts of Commerce, in jurious to the united states. The United States District Court maintains Jurisdiction as per 28 USC § 1330, 28 USC § 1338 (a) A “foreign state”, except as used in section 1608 of this title, includes a political subdivision of a foreign state or an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state as defined in subsection (b). (b) An “agency or instrumentality of a foreign state” means any entity— (1) which is a separate legal person,

Dave: All the judges acting in their corporate capacity. Tami: That IS the 14th amendment-created-person,

corporate or otherwise, and (2) which is an organ of a foreign state or political subdivision thereof,

Which is counties, schools, subdivision of the county, all these political subdivisions.


or a majority of whose shares or other ownership interest is owned by a foreign state or political subdivision thereof, and (3) which is neither a citizen of a State of the United States as defined in section 1332 (c) and (e) of this title, nor created under the laws of any third country.

Okay, so you’re coming right up against the United States, Inc.

(c) The “United States” includes all territory and waters, continental or insular, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

Tami: Remember, yesterday, we were reading Article IV of the U. S. Constitution, where no state can be within the jurisdiction of another state? As long as you’re claiming – and, acting as the united states of being – no other state has jurisdictional ability over you. Dave: Yeah, that’s when you’re finally truly governing yourself, and USING – from the standpoint of the founding of this country – to do so, which is exactly what everybody wants to get back to. Tami: Right. Now, this is very important, and it gets back to the restrictive principal of sovereign immunity.

(d) A “commercial activity” means either a regular course of commercial conduct or a particular commercial transaction or act. The commercial character of an activity shall be determined by reference to the nature of the course of conduct or particular transaction or act, rather than by reference to its purpose. (e) A “commercial activity carried on in the United States by a foreign state” means commercial activity carried on by such state and having substantial contact with the United States.

Tami: Now, the restrictive principal of sovereign immunity and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act says that they do not have ANY immunity. They do not have any sovereignty if they are acting under Acts of Commerce and Private Acts. Uniform Commercial Code is one, big, huge set of private acts – Executive Orders, Private Acts and Acts of Commerce. Dave: And, when they do that, that’s when you go after them, because, we’re saying, Look, you’re using these Private Acts – these Acts of Commerce against us – a sovereign state – and, we’re acting on the public side of things. Tami: You’re acting on the Private, or state of Commerce whereby, you don’t have any immunity, and you have no sovereignty. Dave: Yeah, that’s what THEY’re doing. Tami: So, now YOU are going to finally collapse. You were supposed to collapse. You decided that, instead of dissolving, that you would puff everything up, and put ME as a share of stock in your corporation. That is not going to any longer happen. This is the Patent Infringement doc. You have maintained Patent Infringement against ME, a human being, to maintain me as a share of stock. Dave: Yeah. As a share of stock in the United States, Inc.

By Private Acts and Acts of Commerce, the United States of America has maintained criminal Action to fraudulently occupy aforementioned lands,


Dave: Because, you’re the lands. Tami: Absolutely. So, you realize what that is, right? You are the land. The aforementioned land is the Proper Name.

suffering Patent Infringement as per Public Law, whereby the creator has been subverted, where a Franchise has been created under Private Acts

Tami: …which are Executive Orders. and Acts of Commerce,

Tami: …which are, various Patent and Copyright Acts, contrary to Public Acts. want of Creation as per 18 USC 1498, Actions of Commerce, 27 CFR 72.11, Commercial Crimes, any of the following types of crimes, federal or state: offenses against revenue laws, burglary, counterfeiting, forgery, kidnapping, larceny, robbery, illegal sale or possession of deadly weapons, prostitution including soliciting, pandering white slave, keeping house of ill fame, and like offenses…

Dave: Keeping house of ill fame? What is that? Tami: That is what the court is doing. Dave: Keeping a house of ill fame? Tami: Yes, they are prostituting you. They are pretending to be the trustee, they are pretending to be the executor. They are hooking you, they are a pimp. Dave: Right, because it’s human trafficking. Tami: Absolutely.

extortion, swindling and confidence games and attempts to commit or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes, addiction to narcotic drugs and use of marijuana will be treated as though it were a commercial crime.

Dave: So the vast majority of the people that are sitting in the prison-industrial complex… Tami: Absolutely. These are Acts of Commerce.

That the United States of America, a foreign state, STATE, a foreign state, and COUNTY, a foreign state, has maintained under such Private Acts, and Acts of Commerce Constituting Conflict of Authority through Color of Law, and Implied Color maintained by Agency by Estoppel, United States of America implicating such private acts, and acts of commerce on behalf of U.S.A., and U.S. Inc, whereby Patent Infringement with direct, continuing, continual, in fact, and irreparable injury upon the united states has and continues to occur unless Injunction is maintained.

Dave: …and COUNTY – a foreign state. What I want people to understand is … your County is acting in Private Acts, they are a Foreign State to YOU… Tami: …and a foreign nation under the United Nations charter – you can take this both ways.


Dave: And, that’s the opposite of us, the united states operating in public law, staying in public law, not crossing back over and reclaiming our actual inheritance. Tami: [reading]

Claim of relief United States Ship Owner’s Address – Judicial Notice - to the COURT

The Action before this Court is to resolve a service Charge… …the charges against you – that’s a service Charge.

…as a lien against a united state’s Ship/Vessel [(but as the court I am sure is aware that per 46 USC 313-42 a united state’s public Vessel cannot have a lien placed upon it)] and the United States Incorporated Ship Master is under requirement to volunteer to assume the charge.

Dave: That’s what it says in there? Wow. They are required to volunteer to assume the charge.

…As the united state’s Ship/vessel, United States Incorporated Ship Master… Tami: …which is the Attorney General, Governor Generals, Governors.

…and United States Incorporated Headquarters are insured by a Guarantor… …which is us.

… carrier, per a Ship Servicing Contract that was issued under the following STATE Commercial corporation document known as the [BIRTH CERTIFICATE #]__________________., The GUARANTOR of that U.S. Ship Commercial Servicing Contract is therefore the one who is required to pay out the required funds to obliterate the charge.

The holder of that birth certificate, which is the United States, Inc. They are required to pay out the required funds to obliterate the charge against you, because, they’re maintaining a lien against the united states.

As I am, the United States, the Preferred Maritime Lien holder of record, I am also the superior Preferred Mortgagee over the United States Incorporated Ship/Vessel involved in the addressed charged. Therefore I am giving my Consent to have the Funds dispensed by the Guarantor to facilitate discharge.

I’m telling you, go ahead, release the funds. Dispense. … Per 46 USC 313-22

The Guarantor (represented by the prosecutor) is now CALLED UPON as the representative for the contract Issuer/Warrantor][ WARRANT] to honor their Warranting of the Commercial Servicing Contract, as the carrier of protective bonded insurance, they are now compelled to pay the funds to discharge.

Per 46 USC 307-07 and 313-25 UCC § 8-108, 201, 306.

Informant / Injured Party


#1 When the Ship Master has been Called Upon the Guarantor to fulfill the United States’ Ship Commercial Servicing Contract, then any Court action now requires the Guarantor to Indemnify the United States Incorporated Ship Owner, Headquarters, and Ship Master for all of their expenses and the Guarantor funds paid to discharge as a profit of harm.

Dave: Now, what precisely are you telling them to do there? Tami: We just now INDEMNIFIED the United States, Inc. – the ship owner, which is the BAR… Dave: Oh, ship owner is the BAR because they’re the hostile power.

Tami: …headquarters, which is Delaware, and Ship Master which is the governing power – the Attorney General, the Governor, anyone who came up against you.

Action for Deprivation 18 USC 13 242, Terminating and recalling all securities 28 USC 3002, 28 USC 3304

So, you’re recalling every one of those securities.

U.S. District Court is not a court of equity Article IV. Section 3 “new states may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected with the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the legislature of the States concerned…

That’s YOU now. You’re facilitating your quorum. Dave: Sure, when you’ve got four people to sign – your quorum.

…as well as Congress, the Congress shall have the Power… Tami: Power is always, always, always vested. When you see the word ‘power’ you assume, “Oh my gosh, they have power.” No. Power is always vested. Look in Black’s Law Dictionary. Power only occurs if it’s vested. YOU vest power into Congress. Later on, we divest.

The Congress shall have the power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any claims of the United States, or any particular State.” Equitable relief is not found.

We’re not asking for equity. I want EVERYTHING. I don’t want a strippend.

The united states is to be made whole as to all divested Interest, Dave: That means everything goes back.


whereby Absolute Title is to be revested without ability of Patent Infringement via Copyright, or Copyhold, to be kept, or let or other enfranchised State, contrary to the united states, stemming from acts of Enablement.

Tami: That is when they took our land. Acts of Enablement ALLOWED 200,000 acres per college, per church, that’s what the incorporation-state did. That’s when they started incorporating into the United States, Inc. – not at the Bankruptcy. It was in 1802. Dave: During the indemnification process. Tami: Right. Now, we’re telling them about the power…

Vested Power The foundation and ability of Color, and Implied Color rests upon Vested Power, this now having evidence in dissent.

Dave: You are DISSENTING and removing their power over you. Tami: Absolutely. Bouvier’s Law Dictionary maintains that you consent unless you expressly dissent. That is adapted to the United States Constitution the second time around. That’s one of their laws and our laws as well.

Article IV. “The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States…

Tami: …you and I again.

…shall call a Convention THIS is a Convention. It’s right here in this document.

…for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution…

Dave: Part of THIS Constitution? Tami: Absolutely. Every time we convene – now, you see what the indemnification convention was. Congress maintained you were indemnified and that becomes part of the Constitution. It’s just not written in the Constitution and it’s not seen as an amendment, but it’s still there.

…when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States… That’s us. Now, if five of us got together, we have five-fifths that agree on the same thing. Dave: And, it only matters that the amount of people that you have WITH you at the time. Tami: And, when you’re maintaining a quorum of four, and everybody’s witnessing, it’s four-fourths. At least three-fourths have to agree and you can only have a quorum of four people.

…or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be given


prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner effect the first and fourth Clauses of the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent,

Dave: OUR consent.

…shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.” Article I. Section 9 Clause one; “The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing…

Tami: You are being called a bird. You are now a bird, they require that you be preserved – pre served.

…shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.”

Tami: Now, here’s your mortgage conveyance. Ten dollars is the consideration on a mortgage. Ten dollars is the consideration on each and every assignment. You’re being pre served. Dave: What’s ‘every’ assignment? What’s an assignment? Tami: Have you seen a Bloomberg forensic audit on a mortgage account? There’s so many assignments. You have assignments throughout your mortgage document – you’re assigning it to MERS, you’re assigning it to… whoever. If one bank goes bankrupt, there’s an assignment made. And, in family law, the assignment is made when somebody makes false allegations, the assignment is made at the Birth Certificate. Each time an assignment is made on YOU the human being, there’s ten dollars in consideration being exchanged there. Dave: Okay. And, how does that affect US then, working it on the other side…? Tami: It doesn’t any longer, and I’ll show you why in a minute. The reason we’re quoting Article I. Section 9 Clause four:

“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” (Article I. Section 9 Clause one)

Tami: Which is Article 1 Section 9 Clause one. You were just directed to take this – nothing. You cannot add anything exceeding ten dollars per person. Right? So, it hasn’t been laid upon you as a tax/tax. They’ve been saying ‘the Internal Revenue Service’ – this is revenue-generation. You are told this in the word. Is that a taxing authority? No – that’s why it’s volunteer. You signed this voluntarily. But, the minute you enter into that contract – like when you’re eighteen – you want to go out and you want to be a good citizen – you enter into that contract, you’re consenting and you’re volunteering to pay tax. Dave: And, you do it under the name of the Dead Thing and that makes it even worse…because, you don’t even realize what you’re doing. Tami: Which is the ‘closing statement’ – that is the end of it.

This Cause now divesting Power of any and all Delegated Authority and Revests Title as the united states.


Tami: So, instead of being called a bird, I’m telling you: NO MORE. NOW that I’m out, I’ve re-vested title, I’m telling you once again – although, I told you in the Forgiveness doc, and I told you in the Executor doc – I no longer require your services. You are not going to represent me any longer. Dave: Which means I’m not taxable. Tami: I’m not a bird. I did not migrate here. I’m not imported here. I AM. You no longer have the ability to find me and claim treasure trove. Dave: Because, I’m not a ‘thing.’ Tami: This is my name now. You never had any access or the right to take that name. We’re done here. Dave: “Comes now, First Middle name” – proper name. Tami: We’ve re-vested title. Dave: And, that’s how you revest title. That’s how you…tell them what they’ve been up to, as far as being land pirates. Tami: Again, we’re revesting title. It’s a Motion to Show Cause: Plundering and Privateering. Dave: And, in a Motion to Show Cause, what you’re doing is – you’re putting a motion in, for their side to respond to, why they shouldn’t be indicted for….and then, whatever this is. And, in this case, it’s Plundering and Privateering. Tami: Most of the time we want to use this to extricate somebody who’s already in prison or in jail, “…whereby, First and Middle name” – of the person incarcerated, “I AM, of the united states in rem at al libertas, has been plundered and be-spoiled from the United States.” Now, if you get arrested, they’re stealing you off of me. I’m the vessel of ‘I AM.’ Dave: …of the united states in rem. Tami: …of the united states in rem. I’m the vessel, you’re the vessel. If I’m taken off of you, they’re plundering ME. They’re plundering YOU. Okay, so we have to work TOGETHER on this.

…plundered, and despoiled from the united states, and maintained on the vessel, foreign state known as COUNTY, a Franchise of the United States Incorporated within the vessel, foreign state known as STATE a Franchise of the United States Incorporated This court, maintains jurisdiction as per 18 USC 81 Piracy and Privateering, as the foreign vessel, foreign state, known as ____COUNTY___, as Incorporated is currently in the action of plundering, and despoiling by way of document,

Tami: …the warrant that they used…

…and Color of Law, maintained within Private Acts, and Acts of Commerce. 18 USC § 1659 - Attack to plunder vessel “Whoever, upon the high seas or other waters within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States…

Tami: …that’s us…


…by surprise or open force, maliciously attacks or sets upon any vessel belonging to another, with an intent unlawfully to plunder the same, or to despoil any owner thereof of any moneys, goods, or merchandise laden on board thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”

TRACK 16 – ESPIONAGE, ADMISSION TO SHOW CAUSE LIFE, SPREADSHEET Dave: Okay, that’s tantamount to being your Piracy doc – but, filed as, Motion to Show Cause. What was the other one? Tami: That’s a Motion for Injunction, because, they’re to be restrained from using your name any further. Dave: When do you file that one? Tami: Anytime they’re using your name – the Name – without your knowledge. From the Birth Certificate on. This is using YOUR name. You’re revesting the original title now. Dave: And, just for clarification, the Motions to Show Cause and everything else are done after you file your Forgiveness and Executor doc. Tami: Right. Dave: And, preferably, after you’ve done an action in court Proof of Life Admission Statement – the Cestui que vie act. And, then you’re solid. Then, I can’t see anywhere else that there’s any possibility for them to do anything. Because, once you’ve done this, you’ve then placed yourself back into a sovereign state and, anything that they continue to do to try to collect information is Espionage. Tami: Absolutely. The Admission Statements for Proof of Life – you admit Article I of the Cestui que Vie Act…

Comes now , [Proper Name] to Admit onto Evidence, as Per [State] Rules of Evidence part I of the Cestui que vie act of 1666, whereby there is maintained a Motion to Show Cause re: Life.

Then, you want to include the Article I of the Cestui que vie act. The second Admission Statement proves your life.

Comes now , [Proper Name] to Admit onto Evidence, as per [State] Rules of Evidence, part IV of the Cestui que vie act of 1666, whereby there is maintained the Remedy on the Show Cause Motion, whereby [Proper Name], herein, as Evidence, makes an Appearance, before this Court as to Be Life/Living, and has henceforth shown Cause, rendering this Court to be Condemned, and, as a Fictional entity (agency by estoppel) not necessary to Life, or the Living, but of the dead.

Tami: We’re making an Appearance – as Evidence – we’re not entering in to their court of Ba’al…. Makes an appearance BEFORE this court. Dave: Before the court existed Tami: Then, you enter Article IV of the Cestui que vie act.


IV. Provided alwayes That if any person or [X3person or] persons shall be evicted out of any Lands or Tenements by vertue of this Act, and afterwards if such person or persons upon whose life or lives such Estate or Estates depend shall returne againe from beyond the Seas, or shall on proofe in any Action…

Dave: That’s where you have to do it. Because, you have to bring it IN an action -- “proof in any Action.

… to be brought for recovery of the same [to] be made appeare to be liveing;

Dave: Right! That’s why you have to put that in there – Evidence – APPEAR. …or to have beene liveing at the time of the Eviction.

Tami: You are: BE/living….BE life….always existed Dave: Before the time of the eviction. Tami: Right. It always did. So, you’re claiming your title – you’re re-vesting title all the way back to 1666, and you’re repossessing your land. It doesn’t matter what they’ve done against you. You’re repossessing it. Dave: Including, all of your previous family. Everything they’ve taken from your family back to 1666 – as a whole. They have to give all the way back AND they have to give it back WITH INTEREST. Tami: WITH INTEREST. They come in ‘with interest’ – it means, they’re taking the derivatives off of the estate. They have to return everything they’ve ever stolen off of you. Now, the only way to do that – IF you’re not trading them – and you have to realize this – if you’re not indicting them, where does the interest come from? Where does anything come from? Dave: From YOU because they’re taking it off of YOU. Tami: Right. So, you HAVE TO replace THEM on that spread sheet – where YOU were, in order to facilitate YOU GARNERING what is yours. You have to kill them as they killed us, by the Cestui que vie act. Dave: And, place their Dead Thing – from the standpoint of their commercial capacity – Tami: …the judge as the trustee, or executor of the estate or, whatever else… Dave: In their commercial capacity… Tami: And, if you don’t throw them in there – I know that people don’t want to indict – they’re scared to indict – our requirement – our obligation is to indict them, because, otherwise, if you pull yourself out – where is the revenue stemming from? Nowhere. Nothing happens – so, everything fails – so, if you put THEM in there, you’re extrapolating THEM – those financial resources go to YOU now. That’s an attorney in hell. You’re throwing them into the sea. And, what’s an attorney fee according to the physical body? The lifetime of that Estate – now made an estate of that judge or whatever – that’s their eternity in hell. Until they die, THEY are going to be producing – just like they did to US. So, you ARE throwing them into that sea – pits of hell, or whatever else. But, that’s your obligation. If you do not want to indict them, that’s fine. You don’t get anything. How are you going to get anything? It’s a requirement to stand up and protect the rest of humanity – protect the children – get the children out.

TRACK 17 – TRAVEL AND CONVEYANCE


Dave: Now you’re saying, you want to make an address – or you want to appoint the warden first? …First, let’s start with the premise– what are we doing here? What’s our goal? Tami: Each and every time – the colonies started out as prison colonies – penal colonies. Dave: Under rules of war… Tami: Before the rules of war, even before the rules of war, you came over here as a penal colony – that’s what the original colonies were – under the House of Representatives. Dave: From England? Tami: Right. Right. The House of Lords. And, then they re-established the same situation and called it Representatives, so that they could re present you in the same manner. So, the premise is, in order to state a claim or, to get in to their game, then we have to proclaim our status – we do the proclamations. Dave: Stake a claim in what? Tami: Us. Dave: Stake a claim in our Estates? Tami: The united States itself…. Yeah, I don’t want that idea… it doesn’t work. But in order to do many of these things in commerce, the executive office may have to, at times, travel and convey their property as if it was a ward of the executor, okay?. Yesterday, what I was thinking about with passports… Dave: But, when you’re acting in commerce, in your sovereign capacity, no one has any authority to regulate that commerce. Tami: Absolutely, but in order to cross over their points of entry – the idea behind the passport is to cross through their ports. Dave: Right, but the reason that they have the passports is because the entities that they’re checking to cross… Tami: …are taxes… Dave: …are taxes and are still considered to be their product. When you’re no longer their product… Tami: Wait….still considered to be their product. So, as the executor, the First Middle and Last name is my product. I am going to pass port through YOUR port… Dave: The First Middle and Last thing is still considered their product… Tami: No, no, no. It’s NOT their product. It’s MY product. I’m the executor. I have full-on authority, but I need to pass through their port. As the executor, I don’t have any contracts with you to pay taxes. I have no treaty. I have nothing with you to pay taxes. This is just my product. I am moving my product through your port freely – by executive order. So, you need to carry your First Middle and Last name at some point. Dave: Why? Tami: Because, you’re IN their system. If you want to fly or travel internationally, I believe that you have to, as the executor, transport the First Middle and Last name by executive order. That gives you diplomatic status. The Executive ORDERS that the First Middle and Last name is a dignitary, or a diplomat. It has to come from the executive branch of your government. Dave: Okay, I follow that. Tami: So, you’re going to have to authorize the travel again through their ports. Dave: But, the Proper Name is the only thing that’s in dignity – not the First Middle and Last. Tami: But, that’s what I’m saying. The Proper Name is the one that’s authorizing the property and cargo to travel through their ports. You’re not seeing the different realms.


Dave: I kind of am. Tami: But, out here, we’re not entering into commerce. If you REQUIRE international travel – do NOT use the word ‘transportation’ – if you require international travel of the physical body, the executor is going to have to maintain that thing – as a ward, of it’s country – of its fiefdom. Dave: It’s not making the body a citizen of your own state, it’s maintaining control – just like citizens are controlled. Tami: Right, so we take our control and we authorize the travel of the body, without being able to be taxed by a port – okay? Dave: Without encumbrance. Tami: Right. “I have no contracts with you whatsoever. You need to talk to my executive office. You need to speak to the executive office.” We need to draw this up so that we can travel and convey the First Middle and Last name.” Dave: Are all the airports considered ports? …from the standpoint of the House of Saud controlling them? Yes or no? Tami: Yes. Dave: Okay. Then, all you need to do then, is to have one correspondence with the House of Saud – that’s it. Then, you have world-wide travel -- period…unless they don’t own all the ports across the planet – just over here. If it’s just over here and in England – wait, they wouldn’t be in control of the English ports. Tami: They control all the ports. It’s a big mall. You’re in a big mall. The globe is a big mall, so each business or incorporation is just part of the mall. They rent space from whoever owns the land and whoever owns the water…. So, nobody owns a patent on the ground. They do on the water and on the roads… things that are built: bridges, tunnels, turnpikes. Dave: The water isn’t built. Tami: No, but the ports are. France claimed all the water years ago. Dave: Through what? Tami: Versailles. Dave: Of the planet? Tami: Of the planet. That’s what the nature of rent is. You rent whatever sits on the water. The United States of America – the geographical place, sits on water. It’s surrounded by water. Dave: That’s the premise of rent? How interesting. I never thought about it in that way. Tami: Africa sits on water. Australia sits on water. Dave: Yeah, I get you. EVERYTHING’S on water. That’s their whole concept from commerce? And, why UCC can control the world? Tami: And, that’s the symbology of the Statue of Liberty, which is an island. [8:20] Dave: Okay, let’s get back to the solution here. Let’s go down the line. First, we have to do what? Appoint….If you want to do it your way – take the vessel in commerce? Tami: Right. Wherever you want to take it… Dave: …in control… of us, as our own warden… Tami: Right, at ALL times. And, you’re saying that in the executor doc. The executor can maintain control of the First Middle and Last name through commerce, but YOU have to make sure that, anywhere you go, you have the authority to do so. You have to authorize the travel and conveyance of the First Middle and Last name and make sure it’s protected. Otherwise, it can be taken. So, if you need to move around the United States, Inc. you need your documentation – your authority. So, you need to proclaim. You need to ordain. You need to do whatever you


need to do to make sure the First Middle and Last name is protected, and YOU are the warden of your ward. You need to protect the body, as the executor. No more leaving it with a bare ass. Now, I believe this also applies to the children. You have to maintain them as YOUR chattel…as your being, because they’re not protected if you’re not their warden. If they’re not your ward, then they have to come to YOU and offer you a contract in order to maintain or take that ward. Once you stake a claim on that baby, they have to come to the executor in order to do anything with that ward again. There is no more ABILITY of the female to assign it. Dave: I have a strange funny concept that I need to solidify in my head real quick. I thought that, once you file your docs, your First and Middle name is the name of your body. Tami: No, it’s the living. The living being – the First and Middle – the Proper Name – is the executor of the Estate known as the First Middle and Last name. The First Middle Last is the body. Dave: Always? Tami: Always. Dave: Okay, I have to have that understanding, because, I was thinking, after the Executor doc is recorded, you’re basically stating…. Okay. The body is ALWAYS the First Middle and Last name. Tami: ALWAYS, because, Be/Living is a state of being. It’s not with a form. Only the form can be owned. So, as the Be/Living Executor, you have to maintain control over the body at all times. That means, YOU make it your prisoner. YOU make it your ward. YOU make it your shadow. Whatever you need to do to prevent THEM from having the ability to come in and contract with the dead thing. There’s no longer that ability as long as you’re acting as the government of that body. That is your land. That is everything. So, you need to control that property – absolutely – not as much as you can – absolutely. Do I have a contract with you? I am the executor of this estate. What issue do you have? Do you have a contract with the executor? Then, I’m free to go. Dave: Yeah, because they wouldn’t have any contracts with the First and Middle name, which is now the proper executor. Tami: Right. The state of being. Dave: Because, all other false executors have been… Tami: They go away because they’re a fiction. Dave: Right…have been removed. Tami: Condemned. They condemn themselves. The executor IS the administrator. Dave: I have a problem with this train of thought – not necessarily that it is incorrect from the standpoint of law, but I have a problem with it. Is that not still the ability of William the First to separate the spiritual and the temporal? I don’t like that. That pissed me off. You can’t split me from me. I am inside me! I am inside this body! Tami: And, that’s what you’re saying: “I” control this. When you said – and, you said it – the statement that you said is actually what we are working on now: Govern Your SELF Accordingly. Split that up, because, your SELF is a possession. It is the body. Dave: It is the body. Govern your SELF – Govern YOUR self – this self that the body you’re stuck in. This is the self that you better govern correctly – that your “I AM” better control correctly. Tami: And now, you brought God into it – God is above you. And now, God is possessing that thing. Dave: I AM.


Tami: Right. Dave: And, properly so…right. Tami: You’re still God. I guess if you look at it from a psychological standpoint, God is now the aura of the body. It’s the energy of the body. So, you’re not separated. You’re just surrounding the self now…..surrounding your self and governing your self. Dave: As you govern everything else, because you’ve taken every thing back. Tami: Right. Nothing else can penetrate now, to get inside of that body. INTERpleading. INdict. INTERrception. INscribe. Now, with God surrounding you, how can they pre scribe anything? They can’t push you from the backside. God’s going to say, “No – do I have a contract with you?” SUBscribe. Can anyone get below you? …in order to push you anywhere? SUPERscribe – is from above. There’s PREscription, INscription, SUPERscription, SUBscription. And then, after that, you have statute, which is a statement of compulsion. So, if somebody gets in front of you – like a little tugboat – that’s a metaphor of pilot. What’s a pilot do around the lighthouse when he’s pulling in the boats? Or, the ships? He’s the statute. Dave: He’s guiding them by statute. Tami: Statement of compulsion. He’s pulling them. No more of this. God says, “No, do I have a contract with you?” This is MY prisoner. This is MY ward. This is MY thing. This is MY self. Demesne – of mine. Dave: You become your own shepherd. Tami: Absolutely. And, there’s no other ability now. Do I have a contract with you? And, if your self is pirated, you NEED to make sure you have requirement that the entity attempting to pirate you CONTACTS the Executor – DEALS with the Executor. Dave: Of course. So, to answer my own question, what we’re actually doing is, REPLACING the spirit back into the body – where it should be. Tami: Absolutely. And, surrounding the body. Now, you’re surrounded by YOUR fence. Not theirs. But, you do need to govern yourself accordingly so, move the body where YOU want it. Authorize its travel. Proclaim its direction. Address its detained state. You can take it and put it into a detained state if you need to move it through commerce. Especially how we were contemplating a passport ability and everything else. If you need to pass through ports, take the body as a prisoner of the executor. It’s your ward. If it’s your prisoner, it can’t be another prisoner of something else. If it’s your ward, it can’t be a ward of something else. So, you need to MOVE it, as it’s your ward. Dave: Now we got the concept – we got the understanding. We know why we do this. And, we know it’s okay – mentally. We’ve walked through that path. And, now we’re feeling good about it. Okay, what do we have to do? Do you think appointing a warden is the best way to go? Do you think it’s NECESSARY? Tami: Not just a warden – you need to proclaim it. You need to appoint a warden. You’re a warden – put on a warden’s hat. “Here I am, I’m taking this prisoner. Here’s the authorization. This prisoner is to go here – from Point A to Point B by authorization of the Executive office. It’s government. It’s governor. Dave: Are we restricting travel – by stating, from Point A to Point B? Is there a better way to state that? Because that sounds like – after they get there, they’re like…. Tami: Absolutely not. Then you take out your other proclamation. “This is my land again. Wow, I just landed on my other property.” Where did you go when you got to Point B? …the rest of your domain. “So, I’m free to go. I just need to pass through your ports.” I only requir to pass through those ports. Now, you start governing yourself accordingly wherever you went just


now. Now, the body is protected again, under the authorization of travel and conveying property and cargo from the executive office, here’s my travel and conveyance card….whatever else. TRACK 18 – PROTECTING THE DEAD THING Tami: I think the hardest thing for people to REALIZE is that they’re God, but once it clicks and they realize they’re God and that God is not only inside of them, but, around them, surrounding the body – the physical state – that they’ll start moving the Estate accordingly. They need to move about in commerce. They need to do whatever they need to do with the body, but it’s outside of commerce. There’s always that bubble around them. They need to always maintain that bubble. They need to always maintain that protection. And, it’s so beautiful. This goes back to Ephesians 6: “Put on the whole armor of God.” Now, you’re wearing that, right? So, that bubble cannot be penetrated as long as you realize what you’re doing. If you need to go somewhere in commerce, you authorize that travel and conveyance of property and cargo. You need to travel through any ports. Do NOT let the body touch commerce. Keep it surrounded by that bubble. Authorize its travel. Authorize its use. If you need to use it for work-related purposes, if you have a requirement of FRNs, authorize its work release. Dave: What’s an FRN? Tami: Federal Reserve Notes. So, if you need the body to work – if you require that – then you have to keep the bubble around it. You can authorize its use. It’s only authorized for this, this, this, and this, or just this. There is no tax. There is no any thing. There is no contract otherwise. Dave: That IS essentially done with the Executor document, because you take it all back. The only reason we’re wrapping our heads around this is for two reasons: One, to give the port… Tami: Not just the port. You know, there’s a lot of people asking me, Can I still work? So, if the Executor stays at home, and the body goes off to work without being covered by Executive order, things can happen to the body. They still have a claim on it, because, the body is entering into commerce. What if the Executor goes with the body to work and says, “This is all the body can do. I’m authorizing THIS USE for the body, it’s going to work 40 hours a week and it’s going to be paid this much. It’s not going to be taxed. It’s not going to be charged with anything. Now, if you have any questions, contact the Executor.” Then, when the body comes home again, then it’s safe again in that little bubble. But, you have to make sure that it’s safe from the house – the House of your last name – out into commerce, through commerce, wherever it’s going, and back again. Dave: It’s always IN the House of your last name. There’s never a time when it leaves again – goes off and leaves again, once the Executor doc and Forgiveness doc is filed. And, you as a king have your twelve-mile court all around you, and the court is always in session. Tami: However, you’re still entering into commerce. When you go out and you’re working for Walmart, or whatever else, you’re still entering into their rules. I prefer that everybody start trading and bartering but they don’t want to do that yet. They still need the human needs. So, you’re going to have to protect the body from any and all influences upon it while it’s out in the action of commerce. Dave: So, basically, what you’re doing – so would it then have to be a contract that’s written up by you, the executor, and given to someone who has authority delegated to them from the corporation you wish to have commerce with, and then, they have to sign it.


Tami: No. No. It’s just going to be a proclamation from the executive office – either a proclamation on our employment, or an address – whatever else you need to do. It depends on where the body is working at or whatever, but it has to be protected by the executor at all times. Dave: That, the body shall enter into commerce WITH said corporation, doing said work… Tami: Well, it has to be an authorization, right? …because you’re the author now. So, you’re going to authorize the body to enter into commerce in order for it to work its forty hours a week. Dave: For X-Y-Z Corporation. Tami: But, this does NOT allow that corporation to hold the body attaint. Because, that’s how you’re a prisoner of war. Remember, you’re accepting the benefits. You’re accepting all of this in the corporate governance, so… Dave: What if they come back and say, You can’t have any benefits from us unless you allow us to hold you attaint? Now, they would have the right to do that, so… Tami: Right. Now, at that point, I’m a government. I’ve just said… Dave: Oh, they’re not… Tami: I’ve repatriated… Dave: That’s right. THEY’RE NOT a government, because they’re not ACTING under PUBLIC Acts. They’re acting under PRIVATE Acts. Tami: “Now, would you like to go through a suit in U.S. District Court, because you, the Foreign state, just came up against me, the Sovereign state. Are you sure you want to play this game?” Because, the body only needs to work – whatever it requires. I mean, I don’t like the body entering into commerce. But, if the body is going to, then it needs to be protected, so it can’t be grabbed, or plundered, or despoiled in any way. If you have God’s armor around that body, nothing can come in and grab it. You have to make sure you authorize that it can do whatever it needs to do until it gets out of their realm again. I mean, it’s almost like putting the body on house arrest – is what we’re doing. So, we’re saying, it has this long of a chain, the body can only go this far into your system, and then it returns to me after eight hours work, or whatever, but it’s not yours in that interim. We have to make sure that we’re protecting that body at all costs. Dave: After the Executor doc… Tami: After the Executor doc, the premise is that, you’re not entering into commerce on purpose, but so many people are asking me, How do I still work? How do I still do this? I still require FRNs. Well, in Revelations, the angel stood on the land – the earth – and the sea at the same time. So, when I interpret this, I’m wondering if that means that we CAN enter into commerce, but you have to be protected if you’re in commerce. I do NOT like the idea of YOU entering that body into commerce. However, if somebody REQUIRES this for their survival, I want to make sure that we HAVE that body protected and it CANNOT be seized anymore. It cannot be taken. It cannot be leased, or let, or rented, or used for any other purpose, other than the purpose that I’m authorizing – as the executor of that body. Dave: Aren’t there really two different modes of commerce? Theirs and ours? Tami: No, because, we don’t ACT in commerce. The body that the executor owns or possesses is not a thing of use. I mean, how are you going to use yourself? Are you going to rent yourself out? Dave: Is that not what you were just talking about? That’s what it sounds like. Tami: That’s what I’m saying. I do not WANT the body leased out, so that’s the whole crux of everything because, if somebody feels the requirement to work, you need to authorize only a very specific USE of the body.


Dave: We’re taking it from the standpoint that, THEY’RE offering us Federal Reserve Notes… Tami: …in exchange for the use of the body.. Dave: …for eight hours… or, twelve hours – whatever they’re doing. Because, any time they offer and we accept FRNs – from that standpoint – it’s not lawful money, and is that what you’re talking about? …having to be in THEIR commerce realm? Tami: Right, because that pushes you in debt, right? …when you’re using FRNs? They’re loaning those to you for a specific amount of time – in exchange for your time. So, I will allow you use of the body for X amount of hours. That’s it. It is not to be taxed. It is not to be charged. It is not to be held attaint otherwise. And, I think we might have to convey it as the warden. That’s where we come back to appointing a warden to control that body. That’s MY prisoner. Dave: Perhaps, we could say to anyone – we could send a notice to one’s company, and we could send it directly to the principle – the principle corporation would have notice that it is not possible for them to hold the body attaint for the exchange of federal reserve notes, for this period of time any longer. Give them the reference to the Executor doc record number at the county recorder’s office. And, just state in there, that these are the only things that changed. So you’re telling them that, Hey guys, nothing else has changed, other than the fact that… Tami: …you’re no longer the government. Dave: …you’re no longer the government over me while the body’s working here. The body has a different government… Tami: It’s been repatriated, according to the Geneva convention, and along with that repatriation, it says in there that it can still maintain within Acts of Commerce, as long as it’s authorized. Right? Let me go look at 97 again. [reading from http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva02.asp#art97 …also see http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/geneva02.asp for complete list of Articles]

Annex I. A. There shall be repatriated directly: 3. Cured sick and wounded whose mental or physical fitness appears to have suffered considerable diminution.

It’s been diminished… do we need to be a hospital?

Annex I. B. Hospitalization in a neutral country. There shall be placed in hospitals…

….in the neutral country.

Oh, we just need to offer ourselves hospitality. Dave: So, are we going to have to do this covering of the thing like this with all five Ephors, for the most part? Tami: I think so. Dave: I think so too. It seems that’s the direction we’re headed. But, we’re really doing it from a standpoint of recovering ourselves. I still don’t find it a necessity. Because, if you’re


working…in a corporation…they’re not going to know, nor is it any of their business that you have divested the power back to yourself….have control over yourself. Tami: We’ve never been involved. “Moral or such denunciation shall not take effect during a war in which the denouncing power is involved.” We’re not involved. We’re not the power. We vested power in the congress. “In this case, the present Convention shall continue in effect beyond the period of one year until the conclusion of peace, and, in any event, until the process of repatriation are completed.” We’ve already done that. We’ve divested power out of congress and re-vested title. Dave: “Notice to principle corporation that the body has been repatriated as per [record no. of Exec doc and where it’s filed], so that it now can no longer be held attaint by your company.” Tami: Right. No corporate governance. It needs to maintain – not just corporate governance… Article 2: Prisoners of war are in the power of the hostile power but not of the individual or corps who have captured them. Dave: Oh, so they’re never in the power of the corps. So, what are we worrying about? Tami: Right. We’re already out of congress so we already divested power out of congress, so it should nullify the rules of war. Dave: Yeah, we’re a peaceful state. TRACK 19 – PRISONER EXTRACTION Tami: Okay, now for the prisoner extractions. “I, as a warden, have been appointed by the Executor, to go into a prison state, pick up the ward that has been given to me… Dave: …which is also the infant – the First Middle Last name… Tami: …the First Middle Last name, and I am required now to return him to the court, or the Executor office.” We need to work on writing this one, because, it shouldn’t be that hard. Now, the Executor office appoints the warden. The word ‘ward’ and ‘en’ mean ‘to GIVE a ward.’ Okay, so the executive office – which is YOU of course – is allowing ME the charge of the dead thing for just a slight amount of time, until I can enter into the prison setting and remove the ward from the prison setting, in order to bring it back to your court – to the executive court. THAT court is wherever you want the dead thing to be – wherever you want to be. But, I believe that that is the way that we’re going to be able to extricate the prisoners, which is what we’ve been working on all this time. Dave: What will be the….we might need two different ….there might NEED to be two different processes – because, obviously, those that are already IN – we also want to get the ones that are already IN that have not yet filed their Executor doc and Forgiveness doc… Tami: Now, as the united states in rem et al libertas – if something has been plundered off of me, I, from the executive office of I AM whoever – as long as I’m a part of I AM – I can make an executive order appointing a warden to go and retrieve something that’s been plundered off of the vessel. Dave: And, because, we’re ALL IN the vessel of the United States…. Tami: …and, we can all work together and do this as ONE. I do not see any limitations. As long as people are willing to stand up for each other, once we’ve been plundered off a vessel, then I don’t see any failure in that. Dave: Yeah, I don’t either. Because we can go in, we can state this has been taken under…


Tami: …executive order, and…I need to… the First Middle and Last names are required to appear in court. Dave: That’s right! Tami: They are REQUIRED. Dave: And, they are required to have an executor, and they’re required to have a WARDEN. Tami: Absolutely. And as a warden, I need to return the First Middle Last name TO the Executor and the court…and YOUR court. That’s YOUR court. Dave: Well, it IS when they’ve filed the docs. I’m thinking from the standpoint if they haven’t filed their docs yet. Tami: Well, THE court. THE court. Anyone of us who’s filed the Executor doc can facilitate the court. We don’t harm each other. What are they going to do? Come in and sue me for getting them out of commerce? Dave: No, of course not. Because, you’re just…you’re ordering them to come to YOUR court. Tami: Absolutely. And, I’m maintaining them as MY prisoner, or one of us is maintaining them as MY prisoner, or OUR prisoner and it’s only for the time it takes to get them extricated from the prison. Dave: Right, so then, they can file their docs. Tami: Or, do anything they want to do, as long as they realize that they cannot ALLOW further administration by the monster. I’ll DIE for each and every one of the people that are sitting in prison. Well, I could care less 1) if they do sue me for doing something that is good for them, and not harmful to them – to get them out of commerce, because I could care less. But, on the flip side, the gain outweighs a civil BS lawsuit. The gain of having that entity removed from the bounds of prison – removed from the false/fraudulent bounds of prison – whatever they’re going to do, they’re going to do. We all have free will. It is not very likely that somebody’s going to sue me for helping them get out of prison – from that state of being. Dave: Highly unlikely. Tami: And, at some point in time, the executor after that… facilitating that type of court, may have to lay down an order finding that the original charges are not to stand – or whatever else…but you need to follow through on each and every thing and make sure that these fraudulent charges and, just BS, are taken care of – you need to smooth the way. Dave: WE are operating in public law – as a sovereign state. Everything underneath that is a LESSER form of law. Tami: Absolutely. And, the Executor can appoint – like a warden – to operate in commerce long enough to get the Thing out. Dave: So, you as a king are ordering that, that ward be brought to you, before YOUR court – in a higher court. Tami: Right. And, the warden works IF the First Middle Last name needs to transfer itself –travel through ports of entry – like an airport or whatever – the Executor would order the warden to do that on behalf of the First Middle Last name. So, the estate is actually your prisoner, until you pass through those ports, so that it can safely travel and be conveyed appropriately without being pirated by the land pirates. Dave: And then, you re-vest yourself in liberty whenever you land, because then, you’re landing back on your land…and, off you go. Tami: Right. You’re back out of commerce. Dave: Because, you grant yourself liberty.


Tami: Right. And, you only need the Executor or warden – sometimes you might need the coroner or, whatever you need to do – the Executor would appoint those positions and move the estate throughout commerce. Dave: And, you just pick up that hat, put it on for as long as you need to wear it, and then, off you go. Tami: As long as you need it. Right. Then, that allows First Middle Last name safe travels where they can’t be pirated any further. We don’t WANT to be plundered any more. We don’t NEED administration. We don’t want the First Middle Last name picked up as an infant and ‘found’ again, so once it’s in our possession… Dave: …it needs to be protected… Tami: …fully, so if it needs to be in a prison state for a short amount of time, APPOINT the warden – your self as the warden – and then do the administrative order from the warden to travel – whatever you need to do through their ports, and then, as soon as you’re back in your house – or whatever else – you’re safe again. Just make sure that you always keep that bubble around the First Middle Last name. Do NOT let it go out naked into commerce. TRACK – ‘HUMAN TRAFFICKING’ IOLTA, COURT PROFITING, LEGAL PROCESS, LEGAL MACHINE, LET THE DEAD EAT THE DEAD Dave: …these trusts. What was the name of them again? Tami: The IOLTA trust is the ‘Interest On Lawyers’ Trust Accounts.’ Dave: IOLTA is just an acronym? Tami: Right. So, when you indict them – throughout the life of a case, they’re drawing interest off of the principal balance, which is your value, right? So, when you start indicting them, they have to put all those amounts back, plus the principle disappears. Dave: And, because when you indicted the IRS – what was the name of the IRS? Tami: Northern Holdings and Trust. That’s why Dewey & LeBoeuf went bankrupt, because they went, “No, I’m out of here. I don’t want any part of this. I’m going to cut my losses now.” [http://www.deweyleboeuf.com] Dave: They declared themselves bankrupt now, because they realized they would have to bring back all of the principle…and, all the interest Tami: Absolutely, and more than that, look at the failure of the whole entire system. Okay, you’re in a court that SAYS it’s called ‘legal process.’ What is it that’s being processed? Dave: Well, YOU. Tami: YOU. So, the court – legal process – is a machine, processing you. What if you take out a whole bunch of parts of the machine? You’re not just throwing wrenches in the works… Dave: You’re dismantling the whole thing. Tami: Right, you’re dismantling the whole machine. So, how is that doing for you? You look around and, it’s like…they can’t juggle all things at the same time. We’re hitting them from every side – every angle – and, we’re taking parts of the machine right out of there, especially from the roots of the machine – going back to the physics of the thing. You’re taking out very,


very integral parts of the machine… that aren’t being replaced. Even though you’re replacing THEM with themselves… But, still… Dave: The system still stops though, because they don’t have lineage because, you indict them in their corporate capacity. Tami: Right, and a corporation doesn’t have any heirs – it has successors, but who’s going to touch that? Dave: Right. No one. Tami: You know, especially when I indict you, and seize all your assets, you’re a bad egg now. You’re going down the garbage chute. I’m not standing with you. You just got called out as a pedophile, even though I’m a pedophile too, which is what they’re doing, because, the whole court process preys on children. So, they’re not going to stand next to a pedophile. They’re going to let that guy take the fall. ‘Taking it for the team.’ “It’s so sad that you got caught, but –you know – I don’t know you any longer. I’ve never seen you before in my life.” …whatever they need to say. Larry Craig was one of them that got politically cannibalized. When he stood up and he was going to start talking about everything that he knew. Do you remember what happened to Larry Craig? Dave: I never heard that name before. Tami: He was the former senator that got caught in the airport bathroom wiggling his hand under the door of the bathroom stall, waiting for perverted sex? Dave: Oh, I do remember that story. Tami: When you call a man a pervert, what happens? It takes away his voice. “Oh my god – how horrifying – he’s just sick.” He didn’t do anything like that. He was about to turn on his peers, so they took him out first. Let them eat each other. Jesus said, “Let the dead bury their own dead.” It’s always like that. They walk through landfills naked and tip over the dead. These are some of the funniest ones. What was that one in the Clinton administration? He stabbed himself forty times in the back to commit suicide. C’mon! This is funny. It’s politics. I have no compassion. I have no remorse or whatever…. I HAVE compassion – it’s called compassionate justice. They are to remove themselves from the community. Dave: Because, we are supposed to remove ALL harm from our community. Tami: Absolutely. We don’t want it preying on our children any longer. Let them have at each other. Don’t have remorse or regrets, as long as they’re not innocent, then we don’t have any concern for them. Dave: And, the amount of stories that you’ve told me about what’s happened, I no longer have any question in my mind as far as how the entire system works, nor do I have any question in my mind about the importance of indictment – the necessity to change that cell on the spread sheet from US to THEIR DEAD THING and continue to remove all of these cogs out of the system, so that the whole entire thing just, finally, is out of here. Tami: It eats itself. It’s required. Otherwise, how do you get out of it? If you’re not from the inside letting it cannibalize itself, there’s no other way. Everybody’s been telling me, “They have the guns.” Yes, they have the guns. But, if you let them take each other out, what do we have to do? Dave: Their guns automatically get focused on the others… Tami: …each other… Dave: …because, that’s the indictment. They can’t get out of that. Tami: Not at all. They can’t wiggle out of it.


Dave: And, there is no benefit for them to come around and shoot YOU. There’s no benefit in that for them. None! Tami: Absolutely not. What are they going to get, now that you’re the Executor? They can’t administer that estate if you’re the Executor. So, they have to leave it and let your shit just sit there now, until your heirs come in and claim it – for however long, until they can actually put a claim on that estate, now that you’re the Executor. Seven years is a long time to wait for those benefits. They can’t derive any more death derivatives based on your death, because you’re the Executor. There’s NO administration of that estate any longer. So, then what happens? How’s that doing you for? I mean, you look at the benefit, I mean, their eyes are wide. These are large amounts. Especially when you hand them to somebody like Rick Perry. Rick Perry is one of the number one pedophiles in the country. Take him out. What are you doing protecting him? I’ve taken him out three times and they keep protecting him. Dave: Really? Perry? Tami: Why do they protect him? He’s got a lot of information on other people. Dave: Oh. Of course. Tami: They need to take him out first. If you’re worried about getting caught – things that you’ve done – take out the guy that knows your secrets and holds it against you. That’s the name of the game. Rick Perry dropped out of the run for the presidential election last year because, I went up against him again with a pedophile case I had in Plano, Texas last year. We busted open a Plano ISD which is a school district and the police department that was allowing sexual abuse of two six-year-old children. Those babies were being abused by a teacher in high school. She had actually written in to one of the reports that, the male twin – while she was undressing him and taking pictures – ran from her, so she penalized him for this. This is in her own handwriting. She was taking pictures…undressing him, and then he got in trouble for running from her. We exposed this. The school district came in – on the directives of the police department to investigate these claims. The police department cleaned their hands and left it up to the school – to do law enforcement job? Dave: The school principal… Tami: Absolutely. This is how it works. Dave: That’s a good example of them eating each other and trying to wash their hands, just like Judas did. Tami: Absolutely. This is how it works. Then, as we wrapped them in, we went all the way up to Rick Perry’s office. He’s the head of the head of the Department of Health and Human Services down there. Rick Perry is traded as the General Counsel. Rick Perry is traded as the Department of Transportation. Who is transporting your children as they go through these sex trades? Dave: And, that’s all the fun stuff you can find by looking at Dun and Bradstreet just for a day and going through all of it. I think that was the one thing that finally really snapped my mind open. When I – this was years ago – and somebody had said, “They’re all traded.” And, I said, “Really?” Then, I looked on Dun and Bradstreet and, sure enough, there was the District Attorney’s name being traded on Dun and Bradstreet as the ‘County of whatever.’ And, that was it to me! Now, I know what’s going on. But, I didn’t know that, they’re stupid enough to run them up that high, from the standpoint of being traded as the Department of Transportation. Tami: Trans port. In between ports.


TRACK – ‘RECONSTRUCTION TALK’ Dave: Okay, so this is the deal. The Roman Houses all the way back… Tami: It’s not Roman. It’s English. This goes back…. I don’t know where to start with you now. I was trying to explain that…. Go to the House of Lombardy – the Lombardy Charters and just start digging around. Dave: What shall I find? …This should not be that difficult! Why is a story through history that difficult!? It goes: this, this, this and that. Tami: It’s not. Dave: Right, that’s all I want. So, the Charter of Urso did what? Tami: It took the land for a House. Dave: Okay. And, Lombardy did that? One House, or many Houses did this? Tami: One House. And now it’s under the House of Representatives. Now, representatives USED TO BE the original Houses, now merged…. What happened at the Reconstruction? All of a sudden, they had a requirement for successors. Dave: And not heirs? Tami: Right. Because, there were none. So, they couldn’t claim it. Dave: So, the posterity spoken of is automatically wiped out. Tami: Right. Dave: Where the hell did they go? Tami: I don’t know. Dave: You DON’T know? Tami: Because, now you have your adopted siblings that appear to be you – as the United States, Inc. Dave: Well then, this is what I think. I think what had happened is, after they did exactly what they needed to do from the standpoint of creating law in a way that created a corporation as a PERSON, they could then expand out and take over the rest of the entire planet THROUGH the corporation. It’s an explosion of their power. Tami: Or, an implosion, because the United Nations charters originally were designed to maintain and keep peace. And, it appeared as if it was going to enter into communism – not through the use of case law but the social structure. But, it looks like they’re being redistributed. I think that might have been extension, maybe. Then all of a sudden you have retraction. So, the theory of “Out of chaos comes order” or, “Out of order comes chaos,” you know? It shouldn’t have failed. I mean it was just so precise, up to that moment in time. I’m not ever, ever agreeing with it. It’s horrifying. But, the precision was just absolutely ingenious. But, what happened at the Reconstruction? Because, all of a sudden, you lose all that precision…and, it’s something else. Dave: And, you’re sure of this? This isn’t something that’s up for debate? Tami: No. Dave: Okay, HOW do you know this? Just for my own – humor me, will you? Tami: There’s no heirs left. You have to go back and read all these things, because, it’s right there. Dave: So, the posterity spoken of in the Constitution is nullified at Reconstruction? Tami: Right, because the original charters – they can’t maintain – charter after charter, constitution after constitution – agrarian dynamic after agrarian dynamic …precise cycle and all of a sudden, it looks like there was a wrench thrown in there during the Reconstruction. I mean,


I don’t know if they got too cocky. It looks like they got really cocky. Maybe they made some missteps, but not that far away from the original. I don’t know. Dave: Do you think, perhaps, they were so afraid of the people here being so educated and really, really getting the grist and finally understanding… Tami: No, because they had just now taken care of – the Vienna Circle was all bought off – you had – Nietzsche was part of that. There were other actual human beings that were enlightening people, and then they were all bought off. So, they had ultimate silence at that moment in time. And, the sheeple would never have woken up. I don’t think I would have woken up without that major hiccup after Reconstruction. Something has been absolutely wrong since then. You know – somebody got money-hungry or whatever happened. They took a sideways step and they couldn’t rectify and, it hasn’t been on the same path. Why? Dave: I don’t know, but I always did know it was off at that point. Tami: Everybody does. And, it’s the oddest thing – you know – was it intentional? I don’t know. Dave: If it was intentional, the most significant change that I can see, after Reconstruction, would be, the creation of the Corporation as a Person and giving it civil rights, more or less. I mean, if that’s what eventually they were working to. Because, before, the corporations had limited charters and, okay, you’re here for a little while… this is the thing that you go do, and when you’re done your charter is done. Now, they’re just… Tami: Or, it is a means to redistribute the corporation. If a corporation is a person, it can be injured. Dave: Right. Tami: So, it was all to the benefit of the attorneys. It wasn’t to the benefit of the corporation. Dave: The “quote” – “unquote”? Tami: Right. It’s a means of….like, they own you and your productive value. By turning the corporation into a person, the attorneys own that person as well. They’re the landlord as well, for whatever person that is. Dave: But, those corporations were the successors from the Houses. So, was it a… Tami: Originally, they were passed down from heir to heir to heir. You look at Lloyds, and Dun and Bradstreet – those are passed down from heir to heir. Then, all of a sudden, what happened? Dave: They have successors and not heirs anymore. Tami: Mm-hm. Dave: But, those successors ARE the corporation, right? Tami: Kind of. Whoever can take them over. I mean, you can come in and do a corporate takeover or hostile takeover or whatever else, but you can become the successor by election, appointment. That’s what you see now with MERS and all these bankrupt banks, so somebody’s appointed as a successor. But, it looks so – at the Reconstruction there was such a huge set of mistakes that it was completely unbound and broken, from the… Dave: …the lineage House from all the way back. Tami: Right. Because, it was absolute precision throughout time. You had such patriotic patriots, there’s no mistake. There was never a mistake as there is now. I don’t know. I mean, it looks like it’s ass-backwards, what they’d done around the Reconstruction. I don’t know – maybe they were devolving – the administration, and you can see it – that compartmentalism where they’ve just retarded themselves by specialty, and that could have been what happened. Because, throughout time, you know, you had – back in Aristotle and Socrates – everybody was


just – they knew everything all at the same time. They never limited themselves in their knowledge. It could have been just something that simple, but it’s such an egregious mistake, it can’t go unnoticed. Dave: And, from such a long time ago. Inbreeding, I think, is part and parcel of – a good part of screwing it up. “You’re just so dumb! You don’t know the ritual anymore. You don’t know what you were passed down. And, you messed it up.” Tami: Yeah, something really happened. I mean, I’m thankful for it. It’s just so… Dave: Well, now, how does that help us? Because of that, that really doesn’t change anything we’re doing, does it? Tami: Yes, it does. Because, we’re obliterating that House and it’s easier, because the original contracts aren’t standing. You know, YOU tell ME where we came from. You tell me now where YOU came from. We have no hold here. Lineage is what I have. I’m a human being. I have blood in me and I can prove to YOU that, every one of us are related to the Rothschilds, and everything else. A corporation can never be related to the Rothschilds. So, if you want to play with lineage and inheritance, we’re all related to the same people. We all came from the same exact place. A corporation could never… Dave: You can’t do that. Tami: No. Absolutely not. --------- Tami: I’ve read some beautiful, beautiful, amazing works. Some of them are sick as hell. But, they’re written with such precision that you… And I marvel at the minds that can write something like that. You and I were discussing David Hume awhile back, and he has such precision. It’s mathematical precision that I consider him sick as phuk…and twisted. The precision in his work, which is amazing. I mean, his work – David Hume is comparable to what – Nash. We just…. If you’re going to control a society – or farm – you better have a really good way to do that, or your farm animals are going to raise up and tear your head off. Throughout history, it was so precise, absolutely precise. Dave: They never caught it. Tami: No. Dave: They never knew. Tami: No… Dave: And, the control structure was so more absolute then too. Tami: Absolutely, because, what you do is, teach your farm animals to be patriotic. I mean it’s simple… Dave: You didn’t question your lord and you didn’t question your king or anything like that. Tami: No, because, you got the benefits of being on a fiefdom. We’re always patriotic. You fought wars against your brother and wars against your sister and everything else. But, at the Reconstruction, what the hell happened? It’s absolutely ass-backwards from what it was. Who did that? Are they intending for it to fail? Is it time now for it to fail? Is it time now for cannibalism? Is this a design of some kind now – because, you can see, part of it was planned, based on what Lincoln had done. You know, Lincoln sat there and he did the 14th amendment and he established the corporation-person – the corporate person. You know? Before that, with Andrew Jackson, you had the perfection of – don’t argue with statute, don’t argue with legislation. The weirdest thing is where you have a working machine, and then all of a sudden… what happened? It was insane.


Dave: What are some of the other things that just went absolutely bat-shit crazy then? I mean I know some of them… Tami: You can see the precision up until, like, Wilson and Roosevelt – he was an ass just like Wilson and then, everything just started falling apart for them. EVERYTHING started falling apart. Dave: How? Tami: Here we are. What do you think? Dave: They had World War I and made a bunch of money off of it, killed a bunch of people and then they did the same thing with World War II. Tami: Right, but within patriotism. It goes along… and so, Hitler does his Nationalization Act in ’33. That was a corporate act. So, we FOLLOW – we FOLLOW with the 1947 National Security Act. We’d already been implementing acts of enablement all the way back to 1802. Dave: Indemnification Act? Tami: Right, and all the acts of enablement that followed and then… I don’t know….I lost my train of thought. TRACK – ‘UNDERSTANDING THE HOUSE AND THE ESTATE’ Dave: The thing is…What’s the dead thing? You’re calling the dead thing your body. WHY? Tami: That IS the dead thing – the decedent – always pending – never alive – never dead – always pending. A house, or a thing – a table – is not hypothecated. The dead thing is hypothecated. When a child is con ceived – in this society – conception means ‘to think of,’ ‘with thought.’ Hypothesis – you become an idea – hypothecated. YOU are the negotiable instrument, commercial paper, bearer paper, bond paper, series of numbers on notes, federal reserve notes… Dave: That’s how they trade you, and everything else. Tami: Yes. Dave: Right. Great. That’s in their dead world. When you remove yourself from their dead world, how and/or why do you wish to continue to call the BODY the dead thing, and not call it part of your estate, which is protected by the Executor? Tami: The Estate is ONLY the dead thing. Dave: Is only your body? Tami: Yes. The rest wraps up into your House. Dave: Okay, so, the two of those could be interchangeable at any time, for the most part, but you want to stick with ‘dead thing’ so that THEY understand… Tami: …so that YOU understand they are not going to negotiate it any more. YOU are the Executor of that Estate. They will NOT touch it. You have the obligation to protect your dead thing. Dave: Okay, so the dead thing’s the body, and the Estate is the body – it’s exactly the same thing. Both can be used to describe it. So, now, let’s define the difference between the Estate, which is JUST the body, and the House…..and stuff. So, your stuff – your property – is protected under your House. Tami: Absolutely. Now, on the Forgiveness doc, you legislated and made YOUR House a law. That law – picture it as a circle. It’s a bubble. Anything inside of the House is untouchable.


YOU – YOU ONLY determine what is in that House. At this moment in time, I’m in another House and I’m wrapped up in that bubble. My HOST determines that, and allows me to be in this House. In another place, I can determine that they’re in MY House. Dave: Okay. Is your ESTATE in your House? Tami: My Estate is in this House right now. And, my Estate is protected by the Executor of THIS Estate and House. Dave: Got it. Okay, that makes sense. The Estate is protected by…well, whosever House it is being protected by at the time. Tami: …the Executor of…that is the administration of – the Executive Branch of the government. Dave: Ah! Right. The Estate / body is being protect by the Executor of the House which you are in. Tami: Now, this bubble is untouchable – absolutely untouchable. It cannot be penetrated. There is no re presentation of the House. There is no other legislative ability of this House. There is no other administration of this House. There is no other law of this House. It has already been legislated in the Forgiveness doc. It IS a sovereign state. It only adheres to public law. Now, the House administrator can administrate whatever is in this House. My Estate is in this House. I don’t fear anything. We don’t do anything to each other. So, while I am in this House, I am vesting power in the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch of this House. Because, I know there is no re presentation. And, all is safe. Dave: And, that makes sense, because you can see the mirror image from the government’s side. Tami: Now, that’s the funniest part. And, I keep saying this, but it’s hard to conceptualize. The United States Inc. is your adopted sibling. They’re a mirror image of you. They are life re created. “Let us make man in our image.” The United States Inc. is a mirror image of the united states, except that they’re made by document. The united states of being is us so the mirror image that looks like us is a re presentation of us, but is NOT us. That’s what the United States Inc. is. That’s what the United States of America was supposed to be – the re creating. “Let us make man in our image.” Here’s the first image and now, the United States Inc. appears like us, but it’s in a different way. The funniest part is that, the original contracts way back at the Charter of Urso – were with actual heirs – our heirs. We’re all from the same place. It went House to House to House to House to House to House. And then, all of a sudden, when the United States of America went bankrupt, what happened? They adopted – by statute – successors. They abrogated the original contracts at that time. Who could be that stupid? Everything – from the Charter of Urso all the way forward until the Reconstruction – it was precise. It was absolutely perfect. Nobody SAW what was going on, because of the precision. It went from House to House to House to House. Now, everybody’s talking to me all this shit about the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. They’re NOT there. Dave: They’ve never been in that House. Tami: No. The House of Representatives was created and adopted by statute at the United States, Inc. again, but where are the original heirs? They had to abrogate that contract and adopt new successors. Nobody EXISTS from the original lineage. Otherwise, it would have just kept going on with precision. It was passing down to heir after heir after heir after heir. WHY at the Reconstruction, did they have to adopt siblings? Dave: And, create U.S., Inc.? Tami: Why? Dave: Because, they went bankrupt…?


Tami: No, because, they’ve done that throughout time. They’ve risen and fallen and risen and fallen, but the HEIR – something happened with the heirs. Dave: …to control the Houses from all the way back…? Tami: Absolutely. The Houses just passed down to each other. What HAPPENED at the Reconstruction? Dave: I don’t know, because the House of Windsor was still controlling the Colonies at the time, so what happened to them then? Tami: What happened to them? Because, for some reason, Congress came in and adopted siblings. They adopted successors. Dave: YOU as a little corporation with your piece of stock and your birth certificate… Tami: No. We’re the franchise of the successors. The United States, Inc. and its SUCCESSORS is created by adoption. Why did they have to adopt those heirs? Dave: I don’t even know who the successors are, now that you’re telling me that it’s not the mirror image from the standpoint of the piece of stock. What are you talking about? Tami: Because, you have, from the Charter of Urso, House to House to House to House. Each HEIR took over, right? Dave: Okay. Tami: All of a sudden at the Reconstruction, there’s no more presentation of any heirs. Rockefeller’s not there, Rothschild’s not there, none of them are there, because, all of a sudden they ADOPTED successors – by statute. They penciled them in there. Dave: They adopted… Tami: …by statute – that’s what statutory provision does, it adopts something. They adopted successors at that moment in time. What happened to the heirs? Dave: …that weren’t heirs of the House originally? Tami: Right. Dave: Did they all DIE? Tami: I don’t think so. I think somebody wrestled it away from them. You see how odd that is? Dave: What is the lineage? WHERE is this lineage that you speak of? Tami: It can’t. The successor has no lineage. Dave: Now, yeah, if you’re talking they adopted them in – what was the line before then? How does it come down the Houses? Tami: It was all over. There was the Kapicinin Dynasty follow the Kapicin Line. You have – not just the House of Windsor – you have the Rothschilds. You had Warburgs. But WHY at the Reconstruction, all of a sudden, they adopted successors? Where are the heirs? All of a sudden, they’re gone. Dave: Well, perhaps they were getting wary of the fact that their game was going to be up and they didn’t want their name on there any longer. Tami: Okay, so they went into an enfranchised state. Therefore, it still abrogated the contract. The heirs are not maintaining the contract. You cannot change…. Okay, if way back when, you and I – we shook hands and do a contract, right? Whatever we agree to passes down to our heirs – heir after heir after heir. And then, all of a sudden you have a Dick-heir that comes in and says, “I think I want to bring in that other family, that other family and that other family.” And, your family says, “No. You cannot abrogate that contract now.” Right? Dave: You’re saying, he wants to get out of it or change it, and you say, “No, I’m going to hold your feet to the fire.” Tami: So, what HAPPENED at the Reconstruction?


Dave: You’re saying that a change of contract happened in some way, shape or form, of which the heirs no longer held… Tami: …no longer held anything. Dave: No longer hold the House any longer. Tami: And now, we’re just dealing with statutorially-adopted successors. They’re not heirs. Dave: And, who are all those successors… out of curiosity? Tami: The United States Inc. and all of its franchises. Dave: Just the corporations that…? Tami: Right. Now you have incorporated franchises of Rockefeller Institute and all this shit, but there’s no – what happened to the lineage? Dave: Well, it’s not like they don’t still own it and control it through the corporations anyway? Tami: Right. Dave: They’re just pulling themselves one level back further, I think. Tami: But, how does that contract stand, if the original contracts have been abrogated? You can never, ever, ever enter a contract and then abrogate it later when you’re dead. That original contract is all done. It’s over. There is no contract now. The original parties aren’t there. How can it be changed? It can’t. That original contract went all the way down from Urso to the Reconstruction…and then, all of a sudden, boom, it’s done – there’s nothing there. Everybody’s just left holding empty bags. And, now, they’re called successors. What happened? Dave: I don’t know. Why would the families that were in the line, what? …give it up? Tami: That’s what I’m asking you guys. Everybody wants to go back to that point in time and say, Well, let’s adhere to the bankruptcy. No, let’s not, because, their whole entire contract was abrogated. There’s nothing there. There’s no binding right there – there’s nothing. What are we doing here? Dave: Did they just get up and – would they get up and walk away willingly? Tami: No, I think some have money in acts of commerce and private acts and they enfranchised – cashed in on it – within corporate governance but, they phked themselves out of their inheritance too. There’re no heirs standing at the Reconstruction.

--------0-------

transcript audios all tami dave

Documents

guardian ad litem

intimate partner violence

views human beings

void ab initio

philip earl jonassen

appointments made locally

exceeding ten dollars

compel judicial boundaries