Scribd Logo

Language

Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

CES NOM and Aff in Support of 2nd NOM To Renew and Reargue Service W Exhibits and Supplement To The Complaint 29642-2008

Uploaded by

Christopher Earl Strunk
7K views422 pages
Central Administrative question of law is, do we now have Civilian rather than Martial due process of Law because BHO is not NBC to be the COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OVER THE US MILITARY GOVERNMENT AND EXECUTIVE COURTS? Is BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II A USURPER COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF in the matter of the provision of Martial Due Process of Law under 12 USC 95 and 50 USC App 5(b) as a matter of the Executive Federal and States Courts under a National Emergency or are every one of his Emergency declarations since January 20, 2009 null and void ab initio? Are the US and respective State Constitutions re-established by say January 19, 2010 when the redeclaration by George W,. Bush expired under statute law? Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion To Renew and Reargue Competition of Service NUNC PRO TUNC with New Transactions to Supplement the Complaint with Affidavit in support with exhibits affirmed March 13, 2014; and proposed Supplement to the Complaint annexed affirmed March 13, 2014 IN THE CASE WITH Index no: 29642-2008 AND Petitioner’s Notice of Motion To Renew and Reargue Intervention with Affidavit in support with exhibits affirmed March 10, 2014 IN THE CASE WITH Index no: 29642-2008 Rome’s Coup d’etat over the “Accursed” United States of America (2014) by Eric Jon Phelps with edits by Christopher Earl Strunk On March 4, 1933 Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) assumes the Office of President of the United States (POTUS) and with his Inaugural Address seizes and gives ALL Property and persons as collateral for the debt of the United States in “consecration” to its prime Creditors, the Vatican State and Crown’s City of London, and then on March 9, 1933, as POTUS Commander in chief Roosevelt, were HE the Military Conqueror “Augustus Caesar” of the American Republic, with the doctrine of necessity issues Proclamation 2040, Declaring a State of perpetual National Emergency via War Powers And Based upon the FDR Proclamation 2039 of 6 March 1933, Congress Passes the “Emergency Banking Relief Act” 48 Stat. Law 1 Thereby Amending the notorious World War I Statute “Trading With the Enemy Act” of October 6, 1917, 40 Stat. L 411 (TWEA), Codified as 12 USC 95b and 50 USC App. 5(b) Thereby approving and confirming Proclamation 2040, And Bringing the TWEA Inland, Imposing Military Government • This Amended WWI Statute in fact regards all “PERSONS” “within the United States” as seized property of the federal government to be treated as “enemy” and or “enemy ally” belligerents and rebels by US Army Regulations devised during the Spanish /American War. • These “belligerents” and “rebels” as the enemy and or ally of the enemy are publicly residing in the several States now considered to be “conquered territories.” • By 1939 all American Common Law Civil Process will be gone. In its place will be Roman Civil Law Martial Process Imposed on all “PERSONS” (natural and artificial) subject to the Conqueror’s De facto Equity Jurisdiction of the “United States.” • This Martial Process will apply to all Public “United States Citizens.” This Martial Process cannot apply to Private “Citizens of the United States,” Privately residing on the land at Common Law, while holding Private State Citizenship pursuant to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. “The Emergency Banking Relief Act” This Act accomplished the Design of the Society of Jesus in “the Company’s” Great Conspiracy against the Liberties of the United States set forth in Samuel Morse’s Nineteenth century masterpiece, Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States (1835). Just as the Order had brought the Admiralty (possessing both a criminal and civil jurisdiction unlike American Admiralty with only a civil jurisdiction) inland in the days of Jesuit-ruled King Charles Stuart I of England thereby attempting to do away with the English Common Law on the land, the Jesuits accomplished essentially the same thing here in America with this wicked Act

Original Title

CES NOM and Aff in Support of 2nd NOM to Renew and Reargue Service w Exhibits and Supplement to the Complaint 29642-2008

Copyright

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Available Formats

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Report this Document
7K views422 pages

CES NOM and Aff in Support of 2nd NOM To Renew and Reargue Service W Exhibits and Supplement To The Complaint 29642-2008

Uploaded by

Christopher Earl Strunk
Central Administrative question of law is, do we now have Civilian rather than Martial due process of Law because BHO is not NBC to be the COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OVER THE US MILITARY GOVERNMENT …
Full description
of 422
 
CPLR 2221(f) to renew and reargue the completion of service nunc pro tunc with new transactions and with CPLR 3025(b) to supplement the complaint (COMBINED proposed  Verified Supplement to the Complaint annexed) before the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at the Part 47 Courtroom in the Courthouse at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 10007, on the 28
th
 day of March 2014, at 9:30 O’clock before Noon or at a time designated by the court or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard; and, 2.
 
That Plaintiff in regards to the proposed intervener as a matter of housekeeping resubmits (see
Exhibit 7
 herewith) his then response to the proposed intervener motion of November 4, 2011 attached here as a continuation of his own motion with Exhibits 1 thru 6; 3.
 
Further in regards to Plaintiff’s motion for completion of service motion NUNC PRO TUNC, re-submits herewith my Notice of Motion for leave to file proof of service nunc pro tunc filed with the clerk of the court on November 28, 2011 with support affidavit shown as Exhibit 1 with sub--exhibits A through E, Mr. Van Allen’s affidavit of service of January 13, 2011 for service of the defendants having been completed on December 4, 2008, and as reaffirmed on March 26, 2014 (see
Exhibit 8
)
;
 and 4.
 
Regards to Plaintiffs Reply to the AG’s COMBINED RESPONSE that alleges:
•
 
That this
Court dismissed this case on the merits
 on December 4, 2008 offering
 AG’s COMBINED RESPONSE
 
Exhibit
 A.
•
 
That Plaintiff now seeks to reopen this case but
offers no reason
 for this Court to do so.
•
 
That Proposed Intervener William Van Allen also
seeks to reopen this case
 and to intervene as co-plaintiff, but this Court has already denied his motion to intervene, and
•
 
That Van Allen offers
no reason to revisit
 this Court's denial.
 
STRUNK’s REPLY Affidavit to the AG’s MOL IN OPPOSITION Page 2 of 9
 
5.
 
Plaintiff in REPLY based upon the affidavit and exhibit in support denies that the Court dismissed the case that is why the Court ordered the Hearing on March 28, 2014 at the request of Mr. Van Allen to Judge Prudenti (see
Exhibit 9
) as the fact that the case remains active for more than five years has pre-empted his and my ability to appeal interlocutory orders and barred parties accordingly from seeking remedy elsewhere. 6.
 
Plaintiff in REPLY based upon the affidavit and exhibit in support denies that Plaintiff somehow
offers no reason
 references his Exhibit 4 in which the Appellate Division on 4 March 2014 denied Appellant / Plaintiff provision “for civilian due process of law”, and in that Mr. Pepper is disingenuously because he personally represented the State  Appellees in opposition to Appellant’s motion for guaranteed provision of Civilian Due Process rather than Martial dues process for all Public US Citizens, and as Appellant Plaintiff (notwithstanding Mr. Van Allen who remains the surety for his Public US Citizen) is entitled equal protection of the law under colour of Statute 12 USC 95 and 50 USC App. 5(b) as a duly registered Private Citizen of the United States with the United States Secretary of the Treasury for both his 5
th
 and Section 1 of the 14
th
 Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution and related provisions of the NYS Constitution has been denied. 7.
 
That at the heart of the reason for Plaintiff’s motion in this instant matter is that Mr. Obama by his own admission in his autobiography “Dreams From my Father” (1995) he is not a “Natural-born Citizen” because his legal father was both a British subject and then subject of the Sultanate of Zanzibar, and now appears that Mr. Obama is not a citizen of the United States at all based upon evidence that would be presented at a trial on say June 18, 2014, nevertheless based upon his own admission Mr. Obama is not eligible to be the President of the United States (POTUS) Commander-in-chief with direct authority over the martial law defacto executive Federal and States Court system accordingly; and as such Mr. Obama has been properly served as the POTUS Commander-in-Chief with direct
STRUNK’s REPLY Affidavit to the AG’s MOL IN OPPOSITION Page 3 of 9

Reward Your Curiosity

Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.
No Commitment. Cancel anytime.
576648e32a3d8b82ca71961b7a986505