search by William Cooper (Veritas Magazine, POB 3390 St. Truth About Trusts, this issue), readers may find this article inco- herent. Without some knowl- roll tax increases on all Americans or (2) withdraw Medicare benefits from many who need them. . . . If Johns, Arizona 85936) indicates edge of the various patriot the hospitalization trust fund the Internal Revenue Service is theories (which try to make goes broke as scheduled in 2001, really Puerto Rican Trust #62. sense of our loss of Constitu- the average American household Ah HA! we shout. Thats tional rights and freedoms), this will be forced to pay $4,000 in the key! Those dastardly IRS bu- article may seem absurd. new taxes over the next four reaucrats are not true represen- However, with a little knowl- years to bail it out. . . . If nothing tatives of our lawful government edge (dangerous though it may is done, the total cost of Medi- -- they are foreign agents be- be) of trusts and patriot law, a care Part B to the average house- cause they operate out of Puerto few of you might find this article hold will be [another] $10,000 in Rico! (I shouldve known; the infectious. You, too, may be taxes between 1996 and 2005. pointy shoes, the slicked back struck down with a dose of trust [emph. add.] hair . . . .) fever. The prospect of being But maybe the real signifi- forced to pay another $14,000 cance of Coopers research is not that the IRS is located in Puerto Rico, but that the IRS is a trust. T he word trust is so in nocent-sounding and commonly used, that we read or in taxes to support Medicare over the next nine years is hardly in- triguing. However, I am fasci- The majority of this article is hear it daily without noticing or nated by the realization that pure speculation and broad, attaching any significance to the Medicare (like the IRS) is not only unsubstantiated speculation at term. For example, Robert Moffit a trust, but also an entity which that. At times, it leaps from hunch reported in Medicare Reform we may be forced to support. Is to conclusion like a mountain (Dallas Morning News; 11/24/96): it possible that trust relationships goat on LSD, but its purpose is The Medicare trust fund . . . include an inherent power to only to explore an insight I find will post a $2 billion deficit this somehow force Americans to intriguing, exciting and quite year. . . . [T]he longer we wait to meet certain performance obliga- possibly wrong. save Medicare from bankruptcy tions (paying taxes?) not other- Further, this article is incom- which will arrive for the hospital- wise justified or allowed by our plete in that it presumes the ization trust fund by 2001, ac- Constitution? reader has some personal knowl- cording to the Medicare trustees Social Security is also de- edge of both trusts and patriot the worse the options become. scribed as a Trust Fund, and Ive law. Without some background Eventually, they will narrow down seen references to the National information on trusts (see The to two: (1) impose huge new pay- Highway Trust. How many gov-
ernment trusts are there? Does argument to fend off government, cause most Americans are sel- government use trusts (like but was his success based on the dom solvent let alone rich, we Medicare or perhaps the IRS) as strength of his legal argument? understand trusts about as much a fundamental strategy to bypass Or was his success based or his as we understand horse polo. As constitutional law? Is it possible personal determination to cause a result of this class un-con- that the same trust structures we such endless, expensive litigation sciousness, most Americans are can use to protect our property that the system declined to as collectively blind to trusts as from government can also be prosecute because he was more the Hindus were to elephants. used by government to ensnare trouble than he was worth? The But like the elephant, unseen our persons? same questions apply to the citi- trusts may be much larger, pow- zenship arguments and all the erful, and fantastic than anything Patriot hypotheses rest. They all sound like they most Americans can normally The patriot/ constitutionalist should work, and all seem to work see or imagine. movement is full of theories which some of the time, but none of try to explain the glaring contra- em works all the time. And so Improbable, but . . . . dictions between the Rights and the patriot search for silver bul- Yes, it sounds farfetched to Freedoms we are guaranteed by lets continues -- often amid the suppose government uses trusts our Constitution, and the privi- smirks and guffaws of licensed in a sinister manner to deprive us leges and obligations we in fact lawyers, judges, and even other of our rights. However, there are receive. Like college girls whove patriot researchers who view pet patriot rumors of Supreme been drugged on their dates and theories other than their own Court cases which declare that abused, we know weve been with contempt. any individual who is merely in a had we just dont know exactly While Ive yet to understand position to accept a benefit is how. a patriot law theory thats com- thereby obligated to meet cer- Some students of pletely right, Ive yet to see one tain performance criteria regard- governments unconstitutional that doesnt contain at least a less of whether that individual behavior have determined the kernel of truth. Maybe the prob- ever actually received a dimes cause of our lament lies in the lem isnt that patriot theories are worth of tangible benefit.1 If Social Security Number (SSN) wrong so much as incomplete. those rumors are true, it would some say its the Uniform Com- Maybe the patriot community is mean anyone who has been des- mercial Code (UCC) or the Birth analyzing the legal system much ignated as a trust beneficiary Certificate. FOOLS! shouts the like that a bunch of blind Hindus even if he has no idea hes been fellow from Ohio, its admiralty once analyzed an elephant: the designated and has never re- law! You stupid sons of . . . mut- blind man who felt the elephants ceived a single tangible trust ters the West Coast guru, its nose declared elephants were like benefit is still obligated to meet martial law imposed at the end of hoses; the blind man who felt the whatever performance criteria the Civil War. Nahh, say others tail declared elephants were like were mandated by the grantor They got us with adhesion con- ropes; the blind man who felt a and trustees who created the tracts! Still more insist the prob- leg declared elephants were like trust. lem stems from the national bank- posts. The problem wasnt that For example, suppose the ruptcy declared in the 1930s any one blind man was exactly rules of the Social Security Trust which makes us all, always, oper- wrong; the problem was that Fund specify that all beneficiaries ate under bankruptcy law. And each blind man was trying to fit must file and pay income tax. of course, theres always the his evidence of elephants into his Then once you applied for a So- time-honored 14th Amendment own limited knowledge of life. cial Security Number, youd be- citizenship (or is it Citizenship?) Having never seen the big pic- come a beneficiary of the Social and upper case (JOHN W. DOE) ture of elephants, the blind men Security Trust Fund and thereby versus capitalized (John William reached amusing but inaccurate obligate yourself to pay income Doe) name arguments to explain conclusions. tax -- even though you may never how weve been constitutionally Perhaps patriots do the same. receive one dimes worth of So- deflowered by the randy corpo- I suspect the big picture in cial Security payments. rate state. legal reform may be trusts. Most My suspicions are strength- All of these arguments and Americans dimly understand that ened by Glen Hallidays assertion explanations have value, but trusts are some sort of boring (The Truth About Trusts; previ- none finally satisfy. One man may accounting device used by the ous article) that: successfully use the martial law rich to protect their assets. Be- 1) In 1993, the IRS received
know these trusts exist or that your status as a beneficiary com- $100,000.00+ Opportunity! pels you to obey the rules of the Bales, Robert 101PAID trust. 1/6 5K Product sold only through Doctors for 16 years. Those potential benefits International company sends out could include money, a welfare check, Social Security disability, FREE sponsoring packet for you. medical insurance, or use of the states automobile all depend- C.E.O. has taken two other companies to ing on the particular trust in- $1 Billion in sales. volved and the property it con- tained. For information call 888-493-8024 Because beneficiaries can be included in charitable trusts 1.5 million tax returns from part- such in Article 1, Sect. 10 of the without their knowledge, trusts nerships, 2.5 million from trusts, Constitution (No State shall . . . sound like a potentially danger- and 4 million from corporations; pass any . . . law impairing the Ob- ous device for seducing Ameri- but, ligation of Contracts). Given that cans into compelled performance 2) There are almost no trust common law trusts can be supe- and obedience to the state/ trust- classes conducted in our rior to the Constitution, they are ees. nations law schools or modern in some regards above the law. Divided title. The essential classroom textbooks on trusts. As such, trusts are not only pow- feature of trusts is the division of In other words, although erful but potentially dangerous. a trust propertys full title into le- theres an enormous number of Three parties. Another es- gal and equitable (possessory) law school classes and texts on sential feature of trusts is that titles. For example, by placing partnerships and corporations they always involve at least three your business in trust, the legal trusts (which are comparable in parties: grantors, trustees, and title to the business (ownership) number, hold much wealth, and beneficiaries. The contracting will belong to the trust, but the should therefore be the lawyers parties who create the trust are equitable title to the use, ben- natural prey) are virtually ignored. typically the grantors and/or efits, and profits of the business I find this institutionalized igno- trustees. They sign a contract will belong to the beneficiaries rance suspicious and more rea- (called an indenture) under (perhaps your children). By divid- son to suspect you and I may be which the grantor conveys legal ing title, certain tax and legal li- the unwitting beneficiaries (we title to some property into the abilities are reduced or even elimi- enjoy all those government ben- trust which the trustees agree to nated. For example, if the trust- efits, remember?) of government manage for the benefit of the ees or trust property damage trusts which entangle us in ad- beneficiaries (children, for ex- another party or property, only ministrative law without constitu- ample). Hence the essence of a the trust property can be sued; tional recourse. trust is that a mature grantor the grantors, trustees, and ben- trusts his trustees to manage eficiaries are virtually immune Trust features property for the best interests from personal legal liability. Contracts. Trusts created of the relatively incompetent ben- Curiously, the divided title as- with forms according to statutes eficiaries. pect of trusts is very similar to the are subject to government regu- Again, note that beneficiaries patriots divided title theory con- lation. However, common law need not sign or enter into a chari- cerning ownership of automo- trusts can also be formed by pri- table trust contract as active par- biles. According to that theory, vate contracts and as such are ticipants. In fact, beneficiaries the Certificate of Title to your car largely exempt from government who have equitable title (use) of is not the Title, its merely an of- regulation. the property (money, cars, ben- ficial document that certifies Contracts are examples of efits, whatever) owned by the (hence, the term Certificate) that private law in which We The trust and managed by the trust- a title exists . . . somewhere People make our own (limited) ees need not even know of the but you dont have it.2 laws to govern you, me, or who- trusts existence. Therefore, you Sounds nuts, no? After all, ever signs our contracts. This could be a designated benefi- why would anyone (even govern- contractual power is superior to ciary of several trusts (Medicare? ment) be dumb enough to give the Constitution and protected as Social Security?) and not even you possession of an expensive
automobile but keep the mere or all of the nations highways trust, no? scrap of paper called title for have been granted into that trust Consider your personal bank- themselves? Perhaps the as trust property. ruptcy. Isnt that formed by a answers implied in a quote attrib- Hmm. contract (petition) to the bank- uted to one of the Rockefellers: Then those of us who use the ruptcy court? Dont the bank- Own nothing, control every- nations highway could be con- ruptcy judges wield unparalleled thing. strued as beneficiaries of the Na- judicial and administrative author- It appears that the state holds tional Highway Trust. As benefi- ity? Isnt that consistent with legal title to your car while you ciaries, we might be compelled to trustee status? much like a teenager uses his obey the rules of the National What about the national dads Ford for a Saturday night Highway Trust as a condition of bankruptcy? Generally speaking, date merely enjoy the benefit enjoying the benefits (driving on the patriot analysis runs like this: of equitable (possessory) title the highway). Those rules might the government was legally bank- under certain conditions. I.e., just include having a drivers license, rupt about 1933, President as a teenager must have the car insurance, obeying speed limits Franklin Roosevelt surreptitiously back in the garage with a full tank that would otherwise apply only declared the bankruptcy, seized of gas, undamaged, by midnight to commercial vehicles, etc. the publics gold (real money), (and rake the leaves on Sunday) if Theres no doubt that the and shifted the nation to a he wants to use the car again Social Security Administration (largely) paper (debt-based) you may also use your car, but operates a Trust Fund. Presum- money system. Since then, the only under certain conditions. Al- ably, your Social Security Number courts have operated as admin- though you dont have to rake (SSN) makes you a card-carrying istrators of the national bank- leaves to continue using the ben- beneficiary and therefore subject ruptcy and without real allegiance efit of the states car, you are re- to certain obligations (filing in- to the Constitution except as quired to pay a modest rent (an- come tax returns?) mandated by public policy. (Note that the nual registration and licensing the rules of that trust. bankruptcy hypothesis fits com- fees) and agree to use the states If these car title, highway or fortably within the larger trust hy- car only according to the state/ SSN trust theories are valid, then pothesis.) owners terms (you must have a trusts form an unnoticed but criti- Federal Reserve Is it a drivers license, auto insurance, cal aspect of our lives. Once you trust? I dont know, but we do wear your seatbelt, and dont ex- volunteer into a trust as a ben- receive the benefit of using Fed- ceed the speed limits, etc.). In this eficiary you have contracted to eral Reserve Notes (debt-instru- way, the state owns your car, but obey certain unspecified rules, ments) instead of real money controls you. even if those rules are unsup- (gold, silver, asset-instruments) to My point is that the apparent ported by the Constitution. discharge our debts. Where division of legal and equitable title theres a benefit, I suspect for automobiles is so similar to More rabbit trails youll usually find a trust. the divided title feature of trusts, Bankruptcy Whats a Property Patriot law recog- that I cant avoid the suspicion bankruptcy? It administers prop- nizes a serious problem with that government is using the Cer- erty. It has trustees. It works property rights -- we dont truly tificate of Title as evidence of a for the best interests of benefi- own anything anymore. Patriots trust that converts us from auto ciaries (creditors). Sounds like a generally seek to correct this owners to mere beneficiaries sub- ject to the government/trustees administrative powers to tax and 100% TAX AUDIT PROTECTION regulate our driving habits in ways that seem unconstitutional. – GUARANTEED – How bout the National High- Legally cut your taxes by up to 50% or more and way Trust? Ive heard that term become Audit Proof! Keep more of your hard-earned money bandied about on the news re- instead of “donating” it to the IRS. cently. Other than the name, I Approved by the U.S. Congress and the IRS. dont have a clue to what the Interested??? Then call 24 Hr. toll free: 1–888–302–9737 National Highway Trust is, but and visit our Web Site: www .TheTaxPeople. net obviously its a trust . . . and since Then call me for more information: trusts contain property, it seems Maggie Kimball at 1–888–492–6368 reasonable to suppose that some
problem with allodial titles, com- As a result, Congressmen who mon law liens, or purchase with real money (gold, silver). Could are not Social Security beneficia- ries can legally serve as trustees The Great the problem be that we have somehow placed our property for the Social Security Trust Fund. This may be a critical insight. American Gulleckson, Ken 101PAID 1/6 5k into a government trust in which we have equitable title (use) and For example, if the beneficiaries of the National Highway Trust are Income Tax government/trust has lawful title?3 defined as U.S. citizens, the ad- ministrators of that trust must be Ripoff Banks Is your bank account something other than U.S. citi- by Ken Gullekson a trust? Does this explain why, zens since the administrators/ Affordable, Reader- once the money is deposited, it trustees cant also be beneficia- friendly, paints the is legally the banks? Then the ries of the same trust. Big Picture so you can bank allows you to withdraw and Could a traffic cop be con- Clearly See why... use its money as a beneficiary? strued as a trustee? Probably not. You Are Not You have equitable use, but no le- Traffic cops might be trust em- Legally Liable gal right to the money once its ployees or even quasi-trustees, been deposited? Is this why the but not full trustees. But judges For The IRS can seize money from your and U.S. Marshals are probably Income Tax! bank/trust account without going trustees, and if so, cant adminis- $10 (postpaid) to court because the rules of ter the trust (enforce the law) if per copy to: your bank account/trust allow it? they are still beneficiaries (pre- Heisenberg Press (Again, the bank account mystery sumably, U.S. citizens). Does c/o P.O. Box 1178, Glendale, seems to fit within the structure this explain the rumors that the California, Postal Zone 91209 of the trust hypothesis.) Secretary of the Treasury and 818-507-7174 Governor of the International hp-kg@pacbell.net Trustees cant benefit Monetary Fund (IMF) must re- http://home.pacbell.net/hp-kg/ Perhaps the last essential fea- nounce his U.S. citizenship to ture of trusts is that, while a per- hold those offices or that many tinction between upper case son can be a grantor and a government agents are report- (JOHN DOE) and capitalized (John trustee of the same trust, no one edly operating as foreign Doe) names remains unclear. can be a trustee and a beneficiary agents? So far, the patriot com- Is the upper case name (JOHN in the same trust. Theres an ob- munity has viewed these official DOE) an artificial entity and/or le- vious conflict of interest and the revocations of citizenship as evi- gal title to the flesh and blood opportunity for self-dealing, etc. dence of some foreign plot by the John Doe? And once that titles Therefore, if government is im- U.N. or bankers or New World been surrendered to the state in posing various trusts on us, gov- Order to take over the USA. But the form of a birth certificate and/ ernment officials (and perhaps maybe the revocation of citizen- or SSN, does the state own the employees) who serve as trust- ship is less a foreign conspiracy artificial entity JOHN DOE? Based ees cannot also be beneficiaries than a legal requirement to ad- on that ownership, is the state in the same trust. minister a trust on behalf of ben- enabled to compel or deceive the Again, there is circumstantial eficiaries designated as U.S. citi- flesh and blood John Doe into ac- evidence to support this govern- zens. (Again, a cherished patriot cepting certain obligations of per- ment-imposed trust theory: Do theory seems compatible with formance? If so, whenever JOHN government employees contrib- the trust hypothesis.) DOE appeared in court, could he ute to Social Security? Here in be managed by the judge/ Texas they dont. Texas govern- Whats in a name? trustee as an object just like any ment employees, cops, judges, Many patriots suspect that other form of property (in rem?) etc., have their own state-based the upper case name (JOHN DOE) for the best interests of trust? retirement fund and do not nor- creates or implies a serious legal Pretty bizarre notions, hmm? mally contribute to Social Secu- liability for the flesh and blood But I can leap to stranger conclu- rity. Likewise, our U.S. Senators John Doe, and exposes him to sions than that. and Congressmen (presumably a degree of government control For example, using this trust trustees for various federal which might not otherwise exist. hypothesis, I can imagine a sce- trusts) have their own retirement However, the mechanism that ex- nario whereby you unwittingly program other than Social Security. plains the significance of the dis- entered (created?) one or more
trusts through use of your mar- there is the moment of allocu- that by making a motion or plea, riage license, childrens birth cer- tion. Here, the judge asks the you apply for the courts ser- tificates, and/or Social Security defendant if there is any reason vices (benefits) and thereby verify applications. Depending on the why he should not pass judge- your status as a beneficiary sub- documents used (contracts or ment. The defendant dutifully ject to the court/trustees admin- applications for benefits), you replies No sir (hoping if he co- istrative powers. mightve contracted with the operates the judge might go state to create/join a trust, de- easy), sacrifices his last chance to Hard to believe clared your children to be that argue for his freedom and is ac- I frankly dont believe all trusts unknowing beneficiaries, cordingly given the maximum sen- these patriot/ trust scenarios and thereby condemned your tence. they seem too risky, too far out. own children to obey govern- There is a patriot argument I cant believe the courts would ment regulations to receive trust that, at the moment of allocution, dare go that far. . . . And yet, like benefits. you can refuse the conviction and most patriot theories, these trust Worse, you mightve un- any potential penalty by claiming scenarios seem to fit. The knowingly contracted your chil- the flesh and blood John Doe whole idea of a trust is limited li- dren into the trust as property to was not tried. Instead, the law- ability based on the division of full managed by the state/ trustees yer who represented you in title into Legal and Equitable for you, the beneficiary. This, of court (or the upper case JOHN titles. The trust/ artificial entity course, would give the state/ DOE) was really on trial and you, that is numbered or perhaps trustees the legal right to revoke John Doe, refuse to accept his named JOHN DOE (with a par- your equitable title to your kids punishment. Its another notion ticular Date of Birth and Mothers and take em away from you any that sounds nuts but has report- Maiden Name to distinguish it time the trustees thought it edly worked. from other similarly named trusts) served the best interests of the If theres any truth to the al- that has legal title to the prop- state/ trust to do so.4 These hy- locution strategy, it sounds sus- erty JOHN DOE is responsible pothetical trusts might even allow piciously similar to divided title for trust errors. As beneficiary, the state to administer your kids feature of trusts. Perhaps the the flesh and blood John Doe is in courts as property (in rem) or JOHN DOE artificial entity is tried; immune to legal liability for errors as artificial entities (requiring rep- but the John Doe flesh and committed by the trust.6 resentation by licensed ad litum blood entity is jailed. The trust is However, under the sonam lawyers) instead of as flesh and tried; the beneficiary unwittingly idems rule for similar sounding blood people with constitution- accepts the sentence. . . . names, the court is allowed to pre- ally-guaranteed, God-given rights. It is also alleged that you cant sume JOHN DOE and John Doe The childhood disability im- be jailed without an attorney. are the same entity. Therefore, posed by the birth certificate/ But why? Since the lawyer is an the court may prosecute the arti- trust might have to be affirmed officer (trust officer?) of the ficial entity JOHN DOE, and then by the child himself when he be- court, when you give him a jail the flesh and blood John Doe came an adult (probably by ap- power of attorney, have you as if he were JOHN DOE unless plying for a SSN). Upon volun- contracted to grant or convey John Doe specifically objects. tarily requesting those SSN ben- some aspect of your self as Whats his objection? Misno- efits, that disability would follow property into the body of the mer (wrong name) on the charg- the child into adult life. As a re- court trust (i.e., belly of the ing instrument. Misnomer has sult, if JOHN DOE is property of beast)?5 been a central element of the a particular trust (maybe the trust Could a similar conveyance of abatement defense strategies is identified by a number like the your person be achieved if you that have enjoyed recent popu- SSN or the certificate number on file a petition, pleading, form, larity in the patriot community. a birth certificate), then JOHN whatever, as a plaintiff with the However if theres any validity DOE can be tried as inanimate court in a civil trial? Do you be- to the idea of that we are being trust property (in rem) and with- come a beneficiary of the court/ tried as trust property (JOHN DOE) out the rights we assume are trust by filing a pleading and ask- a better defense might be sim- guaranteed to all John Does. ing for the court/trusts services? ply to say, Sorry, I am not the trust Patriots have long argued that (or property of the trust) named Criminal Trials making a motion surrenders ju- J-O-H-N D-O-E; I am J-o-h-n D-o- After a judge or jury reaches risdiction to the courts. Perhaps e, the beneficiary of that trust and a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, the more accurate explanation, is therefore immune from prosecu-
tion or legal liability for any crimi- date our status as property. you and your spouse were the nal or civil offence committed by For example, if your birth certifi- childs only trustees? its trustees or trust property. cate created some kind of trust, I dont think so. If you formed After all -- hard and fast rule -- ben- perhaps you cant revoke it but the first trust to include your child eficiaries cant be trustees. your parents (who were the origi- as property, no subsequent nal grantors) could. But what if government trust should be able Unlikely remedies your folks have died? Who can to claim the child as government Suppose my trust fever is revoke the original grant? Maybe property and thereby obligate more than delusional and actually you cant revoke the grant, but that child to a lifetime of com- grounded in some degree of fact. you might be able to perform a pelled performance rather than Then how could we escape the quiet title action on yourself to personal freedom. Therefore, grips of government trusts? regain full ownership of your le- with the proper understanding 1) Develop a solid under- gal and equitable titles. (Again, and application of trusts, you standing of trust principles and the quiet title strategy has been might be able to free your own strategies. advocated and used successfully child at birth from compelled gov- 2) Confirm whether the gov- by the patriot community and ernment servitude. ernment trust hypothesis pre- seems to fit within the structure Of course, the idea that a sented here is valid. of trusts.) child could be granted into a 3) Identify all the government And if Social Security is a trust as property may be legally trusts to which we are bound. trust, did you grant yourself into absurd. OK. But how bout 4) Determine our status rela- it? If so, perhaps its a revocable merely creating a trust which tive to each trust (status might trust and you can therefore re- owned the upper case name (and vary: in some trusts we might be voke that trust by removing your all variations) of your childs flesh beneficiaries; in others, property artificial self (JOHN DOE) from the and blood, capitalized name? I.e., or trustees; in some we might trusts inventory of property and suppose Mr. and Mrs. Doe have enjoy a dual status like grantor- your flesh and blood self (John a daughter which they name beneficiary). Doe) from the trusts list of ben- Cynthia Joyce Doe. Suppose 5) Discover the legal proce- eficiaries. they form a trust and somehow dure for ending our legal relation- grant the names CYNTHIA JOYCE ship to each trust (we might re- Freeing children DOE and CYNTHIA J. DOE into sign as trustees, revoke our Suppose you and your their trust (and make it clear that status as beneficiaries, cease spouse contract to form a trust these upper case names refer to making contributions as grantors, when your child is born (perhaps the flesh and blood child with the or file a quiet title action to eman- even conceived) and place that capitalized name born to those cipate ourselves from the status child into your trust as property particular parents on the particu- of trust property). to be administered by you and lar date of birth) -- and then make 6) Publish official notices of your spouse (trustees). Could it clear that those names in refer- our separation from government any subsequent government ence to this particular child are trusts. Create and carry official trust (birth certificate, SSN, etc. the exclusive property of their documents confirming that sepa- created before your child turns trust and no one can use those ration. 18 years old) alter the fact that names without a copyright in- 7) Prepare to sue any en- your trust owned your child and fringement . . . or maybe . . . . forcement agency and officer and especially the background trust(s) they operate under For theotto most accurate skinner information 1/6 10K 101 should you be officially harassed based on the mistaken notion on the so-called income tax that you were still associated with and the 16th Amendment, see: a particular trust. http://www.ottoskinner.com If were trapped in trusts, can we escape? In some cases, or write to otto@ottoskinner.com maybe not. That is, perhaps only Dont be fooled by those who claim that the the grantor(s) who created the trust and entered us as property 16th Amendment authorized a direct tax. can revoke the trust and liqui- See web site for free articles.
OK, you get the idea. By claim- judge administers) has been di- beneficiary and therefore bound ing ownership of the upper case minished by the judges unrea- to accept the administrative au- name of your child (or perhaps the sonable acts. thority of the judge/trustee. child herself) before the state did, I was pleased to hear that the you might be able to preempt the Silver Linings judges questions implicitly sup- state from ever using her upper The Constitutions prohibition port my notions on trusts, but I case name to gain unconstitu- against impairing the obligation was also shocked to realize the tional authority over your daugh- of contracts not only empowers extent of the beneficial interests ter without the specific approval government to seduce us into we enjoy. Its not just Social Se- of the trustees (you and your trusts contrary to our interests, curity that establishes our status spouse). If the state tried, it might it also prevents Congress from as beneficiaries; its using the be liable for impairing the obliga- passing a law that prohibits or nul- highways, buying groceries, and tion of contracts between your- lifies existing trusts. No generic probably using any product or ser- self and your spouse. laws could be passed by Con- vice (public transportation and gress to free us all at once from utilities?) that are subsidized by Suing judges a contract-based trust. As a re- the government. If the courts are functioning sult, the only way 250 million It appears that government in some trust capacity, the Americans trapped in trusts can has constructed a web of ben- judges may be the trustees who free themselves is one by one. efits so detailed and extensive, sit in an administrative capacity Personally. Pretty diabolical, that no living American can es- with the sole objective of oper- hmm? These trusts may not be cape the status of beneficiary and ating in the best interests of the easily escaped. the obligations thereby imposed. trust. If so, the judge/trustees Worse, a friend of mine (Mosie Does this render any attempt to can exercise virtually unlimited Clark) was recently in court, escape trusts pointless? Are we power, decide cases any way bumping heads with the IRS. hopelessly mired in trusts? they please without regard for Mosie challenged the courts ju- Should we therefore learn to the Constitution, stare decisis, risdiction. The judge responded enjoy it? etc., so long as they promote the by asking Mosie if hed ever re- Only extensive study will tell, best interests of their trust.7 ceived any Social Security ben- but for now, my answer is, If this were true, the key to efits. Mosie is retired, his wife is Maybe not. suing a judge would be to allege an invalid, so he answered, Yes - Maybe the solution to our he violated his fiduciary duties as - but I paid for all that with my con- problem is not to escape the a trustee and committed acts con- tributions when I was working. many trusts that bind us. After trary to public policy and/or the The judge asked if Mosie had ever all, who can live without grocer- best interests of the trust. For enjoyed the benefit of driving on ies, utilities, transportation, etc.? example, if the judge committed the highways. Again, Mosie an- Maybe our deliverance is sug- an act that caused a significant swered, Yes -- but I paid for that gested in the Biblical query, By number of beneficiaries (not just with my gasoline and tire taxes. what authority do you act? the defendant) to lose confi- The judge smiled and asked if Maybe we need to inquire at dence in his administration of the Mosie ever bought food in the the very beginning of any trial or trust, then that judge might be li- grocery store. Mosie though a confrontation with government if able for some breach of his fidu- minute, then agreed that he had, they are acting as trustees, and if ciary obligations (probably but couldnt see the relevance. so, do they receive Social Secu- spelled out in the Judicial Code The judge explained: Much or all rity benefits, do they enjoy the of Ethics). This notion is consis- of that food was grown by farm- benefit of driving on the high- tent with the observation that the ers receiving the benefit of gov- ways, do they benefit from any of only thing this system seems to ernment subsidies, which meant the various government subsi- fear is public exposure (the ad- Mosie had received a benefit. dies for food, transportation, or verse opinion of large numbers The case remains to be re- utilities. As weve seen, it may of people/ beneficiaries). There- solved, but the point seems to be virtually impossible for any fore, the key to suing a judge be that it doesnt matter if you mortal man -- even judges -- to might be the presence of a multi- paid into social security, or paid escape governments beneficial tude of court watchers (benefi- gasoline taxes, or even purchased web. And given that fundamen- ciaries) who could testify that your food with gold and silver. If tal trust rule that beneficiaries can- their confidence in the judicial you enjoyed a benefit provided not also be trustees in a particu- system (or whatever trust the by the government, you were a lar trust, if the judge has received
any benefits, then he may be in- Constitutional trust eligible to exercise the trustees ad- A number of analysts have ministrative powers. This doesnt claimed the Constitution for the necessarily mean a beneficiary/ United States of America is a judge would be recused, but if he trust. I.e., We The People granted 1 Voluntary acceptance of continued to try you, it might be certain of our sovereign powers benefit of transaction is equiva- only according to judicial/consti- (property) to our government of- lent to consent to all obligations tutional law -- not trust/ adminis- ficials (trustees) for the purpose arising from it, so far as facts are known, or ought to be known, to trative procedure. of supporting the general wel- person accepting. Norther fare of our Founders (grantors/ Assurance Co. v. Stout (1911), 16 Bind the rascals down beneficiaries) and their posterity C.A. 548, 117 p. 617. Theres another, even a more (beneficiaries) provided the 2 I.e., just as our paper Silver fantastic possibility. The essence trustees (government officials Certificates were not silver (real of trust fever is the possibility and employees) operate only ac- money), but merely certified that that trusts can be created by gov- cording to the rules of the trust a certain sum of silver (real money) ernment which bind us without (Articles I to VII of the Constitu- was in the bank, waiting to be our active participation or knowl- tion plus the Amendments). claimed by holder of the Silver edge. Is it also possible that we If the Constitution is a trust, Certificate so a Certificate of Title is not a title but merely might create our trusts to bind did our trustees (government of- certifies a real title exists. government? ficials etc.) turn the tables on us 3 Do title search companies Suppose each of us set up (probably around the Civil War) by reveal if their search is for full, our own charitable trust and creating their own trusts which legal, or equitable title? Do they named all officers and employees then bound We The People to declare you have full title, or of the various branches of gov- obey the governments rules? Is merely that no conflicting claims ernment (federal, state, local) as that how they did it? Is that how were found? beneficiaries. Suppose we struc- our government evaded the Con- 4 Anyone whos experienced tured our charity to donate a stitution and turned this nation a child custody battle can recall certain amount of money each from a Republic into a benign dic- the courts use of the undefined term best interests of the child year maybe $500, maybe $5 to, tatorship (trust) ruled by admin- was that slim clue evidence that umm, say the IRS or the state and istrative law? custody battles are somehow national Treasuries (not Federal Again, I emphasize Im only tangled up in trusts? Reserve accounts), or the local guessing, but I cant avoid the 5 Or is it true that the lawyers government employees retire- powerful suspicion that trusts are are property of the court trust, ment fund for dispersal and ben- being used by government as the and the lawyers are in fact tried, efit of all government employees fundamental device for convert- and you (a foreign entity to the and officers. And suppose that ing unwitting Americans into ben- trust) then volunteer to accept we wrote the rules of our trust eficiaries, indentured servants, the lawyers penalty? such that all beneficiaries (govern- and virtual slaves. If so, its time 6 However, hes not immune to administrative action by the ment officials and employees) of to stop trusting our lives and trustees of the trust. Question: our trust were compelled to relate our childrens lives to govern- while trustees might lawfully to our trusts grantors and trust- ment and instead start trusting deprive a beneficiary of the use of ees (us), perhaps even to all fel- our lives to God and/or our- trust property, by what authority low beneficiaries (other govern- selves. can they extort a fine from the ment workers) only according to If my speculations are wrong beneficiary or worse, jail him? the rules laid out in the Constitu- and trusts are universally benign Probably none. The only way you tion for the United States of and lawful, well, great no harm can be fined or jailed by trustees America (or maybe your state con- done. In the process of search- is if you voluntarily accept their stitution . . . or even the Bible). ing for a possibly malignant appli- punishment. 7 What limit could there be on If they cashed our check as cation of trusts, well also learn the trustees general obligation to beneficiaries, could we thereby enough to use trusts to minimize seek the best interests of the bind government in our trusts just our taxes and protect our prop- trust? Only that they act reason- as government may now bind us? erty from legal liability. On the ably? Who knows? Even if this strategy other hand, if trusts are being doesnt work, Ill bet it would slow used to exploit the American prosecutors and give em fits. people, a solid understanding might set us free.