[Music] [Music] [Music] and we are live for the very first really live we we really live for the very first time cool welcome everybody fa of frauds and Juan G hey everybody now Juan we want to do this live stream because it hasn't really been touched on with the facts behind these gur yeah I um I've been wanting to do something like this for a while and I really appreciate you uh joining in with me on this because the the foundational stuff on this right to drive no driver's license all that kind of stuff really hasn't been talked about that much from the standpoint that uh the softs sets have their crazy arguments the judges just reject them and US anti saw sits just yell 10th Amendment and nobody really gets into why the Supreme Court said the 10th Amendment can do what the states are doing so that's kind what we're going to get into tonight that's right and hello to everybody in the in the comments watching right now did we lose him so let's say hello to to some folks here I see uh raisin hello dubus SP line Shelly J Ray [Music] Frankie great good to see you my friend and are we cut cool clear water yes and I Juan do you want to say that name a dollar sign in chica is that what it is I don't know sign in chica I believe J Ray confused philosopher Alon L hello my friend fellow Pauline like to Jeri Bay stir the pot upper ah Stony good to see you my friend confused philosopher Alicia good to see you I hope you all are doing well and I hope you enjoy and learn from what one and I are putting together for this evening before we start all this Juan you know we we've talked a billion times and this has been the number one question that I always wanted to ask on a live stream with you and that's because you were one of the ogs of the posy kamtis which became the Sovereign citizen movement correct uh yeah that's correct in the late 1960s okay I'm probably I'm probably the only I'm probably the only living one yeah we're giving our age out here but yes Juan and I figured out technology okay we're were Boomers okay well get it past that so you were the start of the soft movement came from posi katus right uh right uh that's uh that's basically where it started uh they were anti-government or at least small government um kind of the Freeman type uh ideology and uh very devout constitutionalist um they had some things that I didn't agree with they were kind of bigoted and uh they became violent after I got out of it I was in it in college for uh couple of couple of years and uh that's where we got into this right to tribal driver's license stuff that's right and thank you West Side girl reacts for being a member for 11 months I appreciate that now you helped form that whole right to travel argument correct yeah we uh oh we were sitting around talking one day as you do in college and U yeah we kind we kind of we got on this uh right to travel um and we had a couple of cases uh that were round back then there's been more since but back then there was like Kent V douas and uh AER versus Secretary of State and those were basically based uh they were communist and they were being uh disallowed to having passports and uh so the uh Court said that was against the right to travel and in those cases they went into quite a history of what con institutes the right to travel as far as the rights and how they're found been foundational rights since going back to the Magna Carta and then we also went with the Ninth Amendment which says that there's you know certain rights that aren't enumerated in the Constitution so we figured well that's probably some of our rights as well and then of course we started cherry-picking um dictive from Court decisions that had to do with you know you can't tax a right you can't license a a right you can't turn a right into a privilege so that's where we got on to well you know the driving must be a right because you have the right to travel and move about freely and they can't uh they can't turn it into a privilege so that was the basis of where we started and there has been a lot added on to it throughout the the years with the uh cherry pick definitions of course uh the usage of the UCC using irrelevant case citations and just you know their their their arguments about well it's either Commerce or it's I'm in my private automobile and an automobile is not a vehic motor vehicle and there's no contract household it's a household item right exactly it's my conveyance I I don't owe any money on it it's the main thing is it's my private automobile they make a big deal about the term automobile if you'll you'll notice in a lot of the videos and I'm going to cover that uh as well and of course no consent and then the biggie the right to travel and no driver's license is needed so that's kind of the history of it and yes I was a sset before I became an attorney and that's when you figured out oh I actually don't know the law that's right I I tell you what I talked and acted just like these gurus you hear because I thought I knew the secret stuff I thought that they all the legal profession knew it and but now I knew it and I was going to use it against them because they couldn't put it past me and uh I I had an there was an organization we had of about 5,000 people that uh you know would do this and um the thing is is the challenges people started challenging them and this is in the 70s now and so by the 8S there started being uh precedent being sending and these these uh uh arguments were being now heard in court so that's where a lot of the case law has come from and we'll get into that and I'll show you that as well all right now so everybody in chat I know we're broadcast casting on both Juan's Channel and the faxer Fraud's channel so it's a dual live stream so if you have any questions and no Anastasia we don't have wan to blame for all this it's it's good but no no no he he he was just one of the members that thought hey I can do that too so he he's not totally to blame so let's kick it off and then we'll ask some no and I was I was I I was a Youngster too and I was in college you know and the Vietnam War was going on a lot of protesting and everybody was against the big government and I wasn't a Marxist but I fell into this this type group so I'm Healed now all right so if anybody has any qu if anybody has any questions don't don't hesitate to put them in the chat and uh uh Sean will uh you know tell me about it yep I I I will look at the comments because in streamyards it shows both streams comments which is kind of cool so I can see people commenting in your channel and on the factor FRS channel so and you can do the same because you're a co-host in the streamyards so we'll be able to cover everybody's questions but first let's get to the videos and get to the bottom of this part of this right to travel nonsense you know right now I'm traveling you're trying to give me a violation for driving and I'm not driving I'm traveling I have this traveling as a private man in my private property uh I'm actually just traveling I'm using my rights to travel ah we were traveling sir you're traveling you were driving a vehicle in no we weren't driving we were actually traveling I was actually uh not driving I was traveling in my uh automobile okay is there a reason why there's not lightplay on the vehicle as well uh it's a uh it's a personal vehicle I'm traveling okay do you have a driver's license insurance please uh I'm traveling why would I need my license I'm exercising my constitutional rights my rights that are protected by the Constitution to travel freely I'm not driving a v vehicle ma'am I'm traveling in my private property um uh person faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license or prerequisite to exercise right we can do this uh right to travel is an unconditional personal right uh whose exercise may not be conditioned now one what do you got to say about that well uh yeah there uh there sticking to the script I'm traveling but uh what is the right to travel everybody talks about it what is it well Supreme Court in this H case we have on the screen right now defines and describes it very nicely now a lot of the right to travel cases none of them have to do with any mode of transportation they don't even talk about how you travel the whole thing most of the cases are uh like I said in the beginning of the cases most of them were um about communist uh party members and they were denied passports uh some of the newer cases now have been people moving from one state to another and that are on welfare and their new state is not going to pay them as much or it's what everybody else in the state gets for a year so they uh that that type of thing was challenged and in this case right here there are three different people that went from different states and they moved to California California paid almost twice as much in welfare as their their other states but when they moved to California California said no we're just going to pay you what your other state did for a year and then you get the uh the bump well that Court said no that that does not work so that would violating the uh right to travel of these people to go from one state to the other so I'm just going to kind of scroll through here you can slow it down in the uh replay if you want to read all this it's kind of interesting they really get into it as they noticed here the word travel is not found in the text of the Constitution yet the constitutional right to travel from one state to another is firmly embedded so yeah we all know that but here's the here's the really important part that you got to take away from it here is how they describe what is this right to travel and they say the right to travel discussed in our cases Embraces at least three different components number one it protects the right of a citizen of one state to enter and to leave another state two the right to be treated as a welcome visitor rather than an unfriendly alien when temporarily present in the second state and three for those and three for those Travelers who elect to become permanent residents the right to be treated like other citizens of that state and this third part here is what this case was about because they weren't being treated like the other citizens of the state so that right there is your right to travel nothing doesn't say you have the right to how you travel it just says you have the right to travel yes and there's a difference between traveling and driving but we'll get to that yeah exactly and these are the right to travel cases and for a and as it says here for a statute to impermissibly burden the right to travel it must affect one of the three components that we just talked about and now does requiring a driver's license impermissibly burden the right to travel well that a lot of softs that was their thing is that I don't need a license because I have a right to travel and it would burden and turn it into a privilege so they're looking at this right to travel as the right to drive so let's see how they say the first one here is the regulation and exercise of the right to drive a what private automobile so there you goate right off the bat private yeah automobile so anytime you hear a soft it say I'm in my private automobile or my private conveyance or my auto automobile it's not a motor vehicle there you go but I'm living in the private one well that's a whole another issue we can make a live stream about this public versus private that is going around that's for sure continue please okay and that is of course the old Thompson V Smith that a lot of sopt sits use because they don't uh quote that section of it then we've got the right to drive a motor vehicle on the pl public highways of this state is not a fundamental right it shows you have you have the enable right to make use of the public highways and you can go from one place to the other but limitations can be placed upon this inherent right because it's based upon a proper exercise of the police power now if you people don't understand police power been around forever it's just basically the the right of a community to decide what kind of behaviors they want to regulate among themselves and that that goes back you know thousands of years probably since we were in tribes so that's the thing that I want you to remember this police power because we're going to get into that and then of course you can read the Highlight here when it meets this when a citizen meets the standards thus defined in a proper exercise of the police power he has a right to continue the full enjoyment of that right until by due PR process of law it has been established that by reason of abuse of the right or other just cause is reasonably necessary in the interest of what Public Safety remember that and that's what the court here is looking at that this is that once you get the uh the license and and you're granted that privilege you you can maintain that privilege and it can only be taken away after some due process of law however that uh administrative process is gone with do you have something to say Sean no I I'm I'm just loving every bit of this and I'm catching up on chat all right and here's another one uh from 77 and this hadn't got into the Sovereign citizen bit yet but uh it did have a uh a fundamental right of travel that the guy used because I think it was his underage son was caught driving and he tried to say well it's you know a right to travel but anyway the court basically said that the op the right to operate a motor vehicle is fundamental because of its relationship to the fundamental right of travel is wrong it's actually utterly frivolous so uh that's a that's a very good one to keep in mind as well oh frivolously hear a lot of that yeah that's a favorite of the courts that's for sure but but these are at least what some of the judge you know we don't hear the judges in these YouTube videos go through their rationale of why you're losing your traffic case you know and this kind of gives you an idea of the basis that it's all Rel related on yeah we've got the case law they get wrong all the time because they think there's no such that that case law is actually common law and that's just UHA case law is actually common law case law is judg made law common law is judg law so it basically is yeah from that standpoint but it's not the common law they think it is yeah I don't know what the hell kind of common law they think it's it's weird it's weird to me yeah natural okay sure but but keep on going I'm I'm loving these cases because every single one of these cases judges that we see in the court videos every day don't quote these cases and they I think they should because maybe it'll get this nonsense to little swell a little down well we've got this next one here which is going to get into it there is no constitutional right to a particular mode of travel there you go the right to travel is not being denied the defendants are being prohibited from using a particular mode of travel in a particular way in order to protect the public at large remember that key which we find to be reasonable under the circumstances so the uh the prohibition from you know not being able to have a drive not having to have a driver's license or having a driver's license is not unreasonable it doesn't overly burden this right to travel this is we're seeing this here in this case being mentioned and here's another one that just as the right to speak cannot conceivably imply the right to speak whenever wherever and however one pleases even in a public Forest specifically used for public speech so two the right to travel cannot conceivably imply the right to travel Whenever Wherever and however one pleases even on roads specifically designed for public travel how much clearer can can one get on that and this is like a 1990 case right on hey good to see you now I do notice that there was a a lapse in time where this right to travel stuff uh kind of went away but I noticed in the mid 90s it kind of popped its head back up and I think that had to do with the uh aan Bundy and his case or something back in the 70s uh when it was fighting the federal government yeah and here's another one also that individual enjoys the fundamental right to engage in travel no fundamental right to drive without a license or tags exist that's 1999 circuit court case and an 11 circuit court case so I mean this every Court in every state in in in the nation I believe has at one time uh a case and has case law on it I've got I don't know how many cases of this stuff but I I'm sure I don't have all of them and it amazes me that it still goes on yeah yeah that's that's just blows my mind after how many years never winning a case based on the merits because we know dismissals happen cops don't show up whatever the you the prosecutor has too many cases don't want to argue pseudo law over $150 ticket things get dismissed but it's not a win on the sofits side in any manner and I don't know if you're really even seeing that much anymore in uh on what we're seeing in the zoom courts I mean right five six seven years ago there were some videos where you know the uh the cases were getting dismissed but now it seems like I guess most of the judges have seen sopit argument like these at one point in time because they're certainly not putting up with it as much yeah yeah well today's oh this afternoon's video that I that I released of uh Mr McLoud in Michigan he thought it it was over and then they had pre-trial he didn't show up bench warant he gets arrested the very next day then he's brought into court and his bond is revoked until October rock on sofits rock on yeah you'd think one once bit Twice Shy but some of these people they just don't learn right and here's another one that that goes to it that however the denial of only one mode of transportation does not violate the right to Interstate travel and that word Interstate travel is used a lot I've noticed in some of these cases when most of us would think they're talking about interstate commerce and so sometimes they use the words interstate commerce to reflect Interstate travel in these real real early cases we'll we'll cover but anyway I just thought I'd throw that out there it's some of the the trivia that you kind of run across when you're researching all these old cases now here's another one that I thought was real good I always liked he has at all times remained free from State regulation and constraint able to leave this state and travel as he pleases he was free to get on a plane and fly to New York free to take a bus back to Wyoming he existed free of any state interference of this right to travel this notion of the right to travel remains wholly separate from the right or privilege to operate a motor vehicle on the public highways on Montana as was recently stated a assertion that the right to travel encompasses the unrestrained use to the highway is wrong and here's another one wrong yep the plaintiff's argument that the right to operate a motor vehicle is fundamental because of its relation to the fundamental right of Interstate travel is utterly free frivolous the 2000 case got another one here that Miller contends the DMV violated his fundamental right to Interstate travel by depriving him of the use of his primary means of travel driving an automobile and nope he provides no precedent supporting his contention and as they went further to say a rich man can choose to drive a limine a poor man may have to walk the poor man's lack of choice in his mode of travel may be unfortunate but is not unconstitutional o now I don't know how clear you can make it so any of you run across these soft sets in these comment sections remember some of this stuff in some Miller does not have a fundamental right to drive a motor vehicle and the DMV did not unconstitutionally imped his right to Interstate travel by denying him a driver's license then another one all you gurus are you listening please feel free to comment Jay lovea where you at where's your comments and questions buddy keep on going my friend here's another one Tennessee thought his right to travel was being infringed upon and the court just B say this whole is wholly separate from the right to travel and that is having to have a driver's license that's 97 case one from uh 8 6 like I said 85 you're going to see a lot of these from the 80s early 90s that's when they started getting in the higher courts and making uh some precedent here's another one app pellet also argues that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel there you go without approval or restriction I don't know what common law that is it is well settled that the legislature has the power and duty to promote the public health safety and general welfare of all citizens that ladies and gentlemen they just defined what police power is that's what is is considered the police power is the state's power and duty to promote the public health safety and general Ware of all citizens and we'll get into that even further here's another one from uh Utah same thing right to travel does not include the ability to ignore laws governing the use of public roadways so you can use the roadways you have a right to use the roadways you just have to use them according to the regulations it's just that simple here's another one common law right to travel he he says that the contends that operating an unregistered vehicle charge should have been dismissed because it was brought in violation of the people's common law right to travel and that an American citizen does indeed have the inable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging are violating property or rights of another you know you hear him that say that where's the victim where's the victim see yeah where's the victim KAS is wrong how could it be yes exactly and here again is another one from uh 2015 he's trying it in 2015 because he has a fundamental right to travel guaranteed by the US Constitution no Supreme Court settled his point 1915 from hendrik V Maryland and they say this is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the states and essential to the preservation of the health safety and comfort of their citizens this hendrik case is the simal case regarding the constitutionality of a state's requirements and we'll get into that a deep dive into that nice so here's some more cases and here's a a lot of like I said I got a bunch of cases but there's a bunch of them this state veg ganel here this guy gets in there and uh Sean this is the one you you know about shout out to Kevin how you doing Kevin Mr L and he uses the old you know uh artificial person all cap stuff and that's not me that's all caps and and uh you you you got to go against my trust because the UCC and all that and this is just something under admiralty you've heard it all you're starting to hear up more and more but this case here um back in 2013 from Ohio uh really sets it out where he just says no the courts just say no that's about as much BS as you can get the all cap straw name doesn't mean anything uh petitioners Act of writing his name in all cap letters did not changing from a human natural person to a legal entity that can't be any clear that's from uh 2013 rejecting defendants claim that the use of capital letters means that the defendant is an artificial or fictitious person we hear that there's more and then otherwise here the UCC has no bearing on criminal subject matter jurisdiction there you go that's just as simple as it can be so that kind of gets us into what the right to travel is all about all right so we got that part out of the way saying hey I got the right to travel but and I'm sure broken system broken trust I I see you I know you love Zoom Court you're still running from your warrant I got you good for you but what about this hey I'm not driving for Commerce so yeah I'm not in Commerce yeah yeah um I kind of got that from your placeat or what but um I also turned into the right paperwork and then set um um that I um um that I'm not um involved in in Commerce nothing that's in that's in here how's it going hey pretty good hey sted for a couple reasons uh first off uh you don't have your front plate mounted right as required cuz I don't believe I'm required to is that stay statute says you are statutes aren't laws yeah they are technically you have expired registration okay and you have a obvious window 10 violation that's cool you're uh I you with you I don't if I haven't committed a crime I'd rather not provide my identifications if you want to write me a ticket for the infractions I'm okay totally happy to find it out in court man I'm not I'm not here to be a jerk I understand you have your your thoughts way it think and you see that don't tread on me on the front and I feel like you want to tread on me so okay I'm not here appreciate a take be on my way okay but you are required to provide an ID am I you are yes by law uh with all caps corporate identification I'm not one of your employees I'm a man traveling in my private property I'm not doing Commerce on the roadways and if you call for backup you're conspiring against my rights can you send me a backup could you get me a supervisor as well too hello sir think you know why I pulled you over yeah I I got an idea do you have any uh registration or anything for this vehicle no I don't no registration no driver's license no driver's license driver's license I'm not operating commercially okay you must have a driver's license registration Insurance here I'm not operating I'm not operation operating commercially you guys might have my fee schedule I alrighty then Juan what do you think about that the whole Commerce a yeah the old I'm not incomer yes I'm not driv I'm not incomer well so just because you're drive not driving commercially you're the public safety doesn't have to worry about you I see only only people driving commercially are a to Public Safety drunk driver guy interesting uh logic they use there well let's get started here now here's First cases from 2019 and the plain alleges that the state cannot require her to register or Ure her vehicle because she's not using the vehicle in commercial capacity specifically she contends that the government cannot require require private citizens not engaged in commercial activity to register or Ure their vehicles because to do so would infringe upon those individual constitutional right to travel and the United States motor vehicle program uh she lost and here's another one from 2019 we first addressed Covington's argument supporting his third point of error which is that he was a traveler not an operator because he was not using the road as a place of business nor was he using the road for personal economic gain as the state points out however the no fa Insurance statute requires that all vehicles commercial private or otherwise must be ured Covington cites no authority to the contrary and we find none because there is none and here's another one from 2019 and this is this one covers a lot of ground because they some of them will site to federal laws and trying to say and use federal definitions of uh uh motor vehicle or commercial vehicle and stuff like that and this guy did it defendant has argued throughout this matter that he was not required to register his automobile because title 39 only applies to motor vehicles used for commercial purposes for the conveyance of persons For Hire it is Undisputed that the defendant vehicle was not registered as a commercial vehicle and he used it for pleasure not for commercial purposes or forther con advance of persons For Hire but the term motor vehicle includes all vehicles propelled otherwise than by muscular power and that the court underlined not me thus all motor vehicles used for the conveyance of persons For Hire pleasure or business must be registered if driven by a resident or non-resident of this state this here's from New Jersey and uh it's just like every other case we're going to see Commerce plays no part in it whatsoever for approximately 100 years the Supreme Court has recognized that states may require all those operating Motor Vehicles for pleasure business on the public ways to obtain licenses and to register their vehicles that's from 2016 another one here got something no that's good oh well I I I get going so you need to stop me if somebody has a question or you want to address a point nope I was just starring the questions in the comment section so if any of you guys got got questions we're gonna get to that after one breaks down these cases because this stuff isn't what the gurus teach you and Josh yes you still have a warrant out for you in Taylor Michigan continue on well here's another one he says you only need a license for commercial gain and he uh quotes to uh exp parte dicki and a lot of them do but uh it doesn't support his his contention uh that a valid license to drive a vehicle is required only for business purposes as we explained briefly in Masters there's no need to regulate Motor Vehicles for both businesses and pleasure per oh excuse me there is a need to regulate Motor Vehicles for both businesses and pleasure purposes so I mean they these get real specific about a driver's license and registering and no Commerce and whoever's on the road just being on the road does it you know they're very specific but none of the cases these soft cets ever quote are specific at all to to what they're trying to say they don't cover the court addressing whether a driver's license is required or not they don't cover whether uh the court doesn't cover whether or not the uh uh car has to be registered they they have something completely to do with nothing about requiring a driver's license and that's why they just kind of Cobble all these misquotes together and make it sound like uh hey you don't need a driver's license you can't get any clearer than what these courts say that was the Virginia Supreme Court by the way here's another one from Texas 2009 uh Sean you said you got a Texas guy that just he just knows you got you don't need a license is that right well yeah our friend Rebel as you many folks have seen in the beginning of some videos likes to go on his little Rants and he's gotten two trucks impounded and our good friend Shaggy hippie which listen I will give him this he went and registered his truck got insurance and got his driver's license he doesn't agree still but he did it so good for you man I'm proud of you well here's I've got some Texas ones here this guy here Dorman suggests that the legislature intended to regulate Only commercial common carers but the actually the lack the legislative intent is clear a person other than a person expressly Exempted may not operate a motor vehicle on the highway in this state for pleasure business unless the person holds a driver's license issued under this chapter and the term motor vehicle means a self-propelled vehicle and that definition is not confined to Vehicles being driven For Hire so you can tell him that next time you can stop this and write that down right right and here's another one from 2002 from Wisconsin same thing his theory the right to travel may be regulated only if he's hauling for hire but uh to the contrary Court says Noe sorry here's another one from uh 2000 he contends the same thing now here he gets into to wanting to use his definitions of Transport Transportation carrier driver chauffeur and he he appears to argue that because his automobile is a commercial vehicle he should not have been convicted for the charge so there again no nope wrong we disagree the court says here's another one from uh Tennessee same thing he's saying non-commercial use of his automobile see they use that automobile instead of Motor Vehicle these issues are without Merit another one here so long as they do not trans person or property sorry neither the united state supreme court nor the California Supreme Court has ever held that 199 5 see every state has almost every state has had at least one of these cases that was appealed and we got somewhere with it here's another one traffic statutes involve only apply to businesses and state Vehicles not to a sovereign individual like himself who utilizes his vehicle for personal needs he maintains that if the statutes do not apply do apply to him then they would violate his right to travel and that of course was found that he was wrong so you know you know and here they get into you know they try to redefine terms here they are uh this gal far argued that the state failed to D Define driving and operating and the courts just say these terms are synonymous there is no error here again see 89 it's we in the 80s and that's Texas by the way Sean this guy's claim was uh uh reject Ed and he he also said because I own nothing on my car it's my private property and it's not engaged in commercial travel I don't need to be stopped and I don't need a driver's license and uh of course Court said we will not entertain it further another one from 85 as you see this goes back a long way that's why I can't believe when I got back on the internet that this BS was still being prop founded yeah on the internet and you know I thought it died back in the 80s well you know what I think that whole Miley Cyrus virus we talked about this I think increased the numbers even more because people were stuck at home just looking at YouTube videos thinking now I don't have to get a driver's license and here's another guy same thing who owns nothing on his vehicle they think that it's a private paid for household good or whatever the hell they want to call it you know just just to play with the words here's another one from uh Washington um she said the same thing commercial vehicles only I'm not commercial and it wasn't I wasn't in a vehicle because that's commercial and the court said well you were in actual physical control of your vehicle so uh the laws apply to you states don't depend on the Commerce Clause for their Authority to regulate private Behavior so it's irrelevant whether drivers are traveling for business purposes or across state lines that's 2016 so like I say there's there's many of them here uh here's here's a an L so I guess he probably has some more uh Tendencies uh but the same thing uh and then we get here to U this one here that no Authority Under the United States constition to re regulate the conduct of private citizens driving motor vehicles on the public Highway unless they are engaged inate Commerce no court said that it's been long established that under its police power and here they have hendrik V Maryland again and that's what I'm going to cover next will be hendri v hendrik v Maryland and here's a whole bunch other cases that I didn't cover and you can just stop that and look at that sometimes so there you go replay crew put it on pause rewind slowly and read those so what more do we what do you what do you think what what more do we know about this whole Sovereign citizen movement it's growing larger as we see and I we talked about a couple reasons for it but they're still not taking this seriously and I see broken system broken trust still denying courts that have any jurisdiction obviously they do Josh because you showed up and guess what they got a warrant for you and if you like jackford is a chief justice and she'd like to know where you are bud that's all where you are well just show you jurisdiction Josh does Josh does not know what jurisdiction is that's his problem yeah you know it's like telling somebody to go get me telling your little kid to go get a crescent wrench and he didn't know what the hell that is is yeah so any any comments any need to respond to or any questions okay I I see some here let me see here okay hope this becomes a regular thing and that very well could be I hinted in some of the community posts that we plan to make some changes and this may be one of them so if you like it let me know and first question how did the whole admiralty law garbage show up and that's by confused philosopher all right the way it the way we interpreted back in my day you know in the soft CET day was that since there is no money and we would say that gold and silver is the only money there is so since we don't have that anymore nobody can really pay off their debts everybody just operates on credit so everything becomes a credit transaction or a business transaction and that brings the law Merchant of the sea international law Merchant and and the admiralty jurisdiction because everybody is in business and uh not paying their their money so it can't be anything uh constitutional so they must be trying us under admiralty yeah and that whole gold Fringe just just no no no yeah that's something that's was added you know like I said since I was involved in it through the you know rest of the 70s and 80s up to today a lot of gurus or whatever added their little spin to it that they would throw in because yeah the the gold friends i' had never heard of that till I got back on the internet all right and Deacon fatal says I do have a question what is the avoidance with having insurance on the vehicle Deacon I don't I don't get the avoidance of the insurance on the vehicle you'll have to be just a little bit clear there be happy to answer all right Alicia says why does this nonsense persist and that's what we've been asking um it is you know failed time and time again for decades now so I just don't get it follow-up question do we need to do we need the courts to come down on the guys harder because the you know you see some judges like Judge Wolf in Tennessee judge slaven there there's a judge Shackleford definitely and there's a few judges in states that just don't tolerate sof suit on nonsense yeah especially judges that aren't used to them maybe it's their first one and all they know is they have a prosay litigant and a lot of times through my experience judges will bend over backwards uh many of them for a prosay litigant just to ensure that you know all their rights are being protected and there's you know there's no appealable error happening and such as that so that has kind of a lot to do with it I think but like you said I I've been happy to see a lot of Judges just not putting up with it and you know sometimes put him in h time out for a while for contempt and it's happening more what one there there's a few judges that I'm sure we all could say the names of we wish they'd use that whole contemp thing even more there's one state in particular it's over on the west coast there I'm talking about Washington Yu I don't understand why your state has an issue with sofits Oregon to for love of and they just we saw what Christopher Walker did you know with killing that passenger in that vehicle he had head on and he gets a little sentence I think he gets out in two years they're not coming down hard enough on the west coast well I think that has a lot to do with the you know liberalism that they have as far as you know enforcing the laws iess guess it it has to it has to fall into their political ideology somehow or there their social justice ideology somehow is the only thing I can figure because Washington's got good case LW you know where they they look at yeah you know requiring a driver's license and registration just like everybody else so I don't know yeah I I I I've read through the you know the laws in the the motor vehicle laws in Washington because I mean obviously we're going to cover the cases I'm going to do make sure I'm GNA know what each statute and code and yes statutes and codes are laws before we get to the next question yes statutes and codes are laws correct one yeah actually if you really want to get uh banic about it statutes are written laws by a legislative body codes are a set of books that have these all the laws statutes uh in them arranged you know in alphabetical order by subject matter to where you can find them real quick so when they say codes they're just really talking about a book of of laws yeah the codified laws it's not difficult that you learn how to read people but I digress next question confused philosopher asked are sofits considered cultish there is an element to that for some of them I don't know if all of them who ascribe to one particular Guru uh have the cultish mentality but there're certainly are many of them that do yeah there's many especially the sopite Morris and we're goingon to get to them and anothers live stream I promise you that's a totally separate live stream but many of those are very cultish and oh yeah then then you have the you know I can see the cultish with the David windmiller people I can see that David straight people yeah I don't I don't I don't see how or not you know well that's what I saw with the the mark Steven followers he's the first one I really attacked as a you know a pseudo lawyer Guru and uh a lot of his uh stuff still lingers on in some areas actually uh broken system broken trust whether he realizes or not uh tries to use those tired old scenarios that Mark Stevens would promote and of course he's no longer around um but there were a lot of people in there had a very cultish mentality I mean bsbt is perfect example he's still spouting from 20 years ago that has proven to be you know in Incorrect and wrong and frivolous and without Merit for for years but he's still you know he still culted mindset that it's the way and he thinks he knows all this secret stuff and he puts judges on the spot he's he's manipulating this and manipulating that yeah he just got some judges that were real easy on him and some judges that didn't put up with his I love the fact that he was arguing with it with judge slaven and judge slav is a constitutional rights teacher in law school it's he's a professor of constitutional rights come on why I like the one that told him you're I like the one that I like the one that told him you're crazy talking you're talking crazy yeah yeah that's the one he referred to as a mob dude so whatever man you do you I I don't want be you because you have a warrant and that's just whatever uh Linux guy so the fact that one judge dismissed is supposed to mean all would but they don't yeah yeah well if you're saying one judge May dismiss something he may you know usually it'll be the prosecutor that that moves for dismissal but you know if cases dismissed it's it could be for any number reason but like Sean you said and everybody else says there's been no case that's been decided on the merits that you don't need a driver's license or all this other BS exactly that and that's what I've looked at I'm like yeah but you didn't win really maybe it got dismissed because of whatever you know stupid reason like I said uh this morning there was a s the police officer didn't show up because he doesn't no longer work for the police station anymore he lives he works for a different police station in a different area he didn't want to drive all the way to the other court so they let they this dismissed the case because they didn't have their witness that doesn't mean you won buddy just no well it's it is a it is a win I mean I I won't take that away from him if you get a case dismiss you won because you haven't been pun because you didn't lose I guess and you're not being punished so I get that but that doesn't mean like I said that you didn't set any precedent all this precedent that I've covered so far tonight is still valid you know so it's it's you haven't gained anything but but you know here again you get these cult mentalities and they think the magic works oh my God the magic works but anyway when we get when we get when we get to the point let me know because I want to cover the uh HRI case but uh we got more questions let's keep going all right and of course BBT says so a traffic ticket is proof of jurisdiction are you are you sure is that your final answer no I've never said a I said I've always said a traffic ticket contains enough information on it to estab with primacia evidence to establish a rebuttable presumption that jurisdiction has been established very nice and I've said that a bazillion times to you Josh yeah he has selective hearing and for instance the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that the uniform traffic citation form which many states use the same form is Prim AAS evidence it contains primeras evidence and that is all that's needed to establish jurisdiction to have an arraignment right and Gary right all this Jazz about being commercial activity goes back to the misinterpretation of the word employed in Black's Law Dictionary yeah yeah employed just means making use of it doesn't have anything to do with working it just making so you're saying you're useless is that what you're saying to each other I'm not employed so you're useless thanks put that on your bumper sticker please I'm useless all right next question during the uh yeah Miley Cyrus virus while crossing state lines was the stop for the request for a for the jab Fair okay so the stop for the request to get vaccinated was that fair was that legal in order to cross the border leave the state or go to work and you know you know how what happened I don't that has nothing to do with rights travel but it's close well here here again that was an exceptional situation and I I'm surprised and I maybe it did happen that people coming into a state had to prove that they had been vaccinated a state can I guess quarantine under their police power for the health safety and Welfare of their public that they can uh request certain things such as that I I don't know of any case law on it it would be interesting to see uh because that may be considered uh not an unreasonable um requirement or burden uh for you to go into the state but I I don't know that's a very good question I appreciate that yeah I had the same question when they made us you know stay home and you know but you can't go anywhere and I'm like Hey listen I I'm I'm between countries all the time so you can't tell me I can't go anywhere and they tried to and then until they open back the Border again for everybody else I you know dual residency you can do that but they denied a lot of people and I'm like wouldn't that break the right to travel well you got to remember now the Border situ situation you get out of the realm of um the state police power and you're under the federal power I'm just talk I'm just talking like like just say from New York to Vermont they wouldn't let you leave the state they wouldn't let you leave your home during this time and they you you actually had to sit in your home I mean I I was never in any area where people weren't driving around but yeah only essential workers were allowed out at that time and I'm like yeah this might be a problem we'll find out so you're saying you couldn't even you couldn't you couldn't get in your car and go to the grocery store to get some milk well as long as you wear a heavily space suit in your car and in the store and only Essentials uh yeah I I just didn't but if you went across state lines and say a New York state trooper saw New Jersey plate they pulled you over and said what are you doing you're not supposed to be out and about unless you're an essential worker which I thought was kind of odd but hey we're past that now but I just still still think that was a question of you know are we are we you know leaning on those rights parts all right Double D I want to know what I want to know the parts of the Constitution these SIDS bastardize that makes them claim they refuse to contract with the government why would they be required to uh I don't know where they get the idea that uh you have to contract with the government for something uh I I have a feeling that's come from a guru somewhere who tries to say that all laws are commercial and since they're commercial you have to have a contract uh for them to apply to you now that's the only thing I can think of because I don't think there's anything in the Constitution uh so much that they they do bastardize some of it but I don't know that they D bastardize that part of it all right and you don't have to be you don't have to have a uh sign a contract your driver's license is not a contract uh your privilege to drive is not a contract oh but they is well they can say yeah they say all sorts of things but it's not because uh it doesn't matter who you are the courts say it's the act of driving on the public roads that your implied consent to the traffic laws so it doesn't matter where you're from what your status is whether you're a martian that just landed you get on the public roads uh operating some kind of vehicle and uh the laws apply to you it's just that simple all right and we have one more before we go to hendrik and that's do or should the vehicles be towed if there's no driver's license insurance and registration I know I think so but every yeah every State's different but I can tell you in Canada yeah it's towed yeah there's you can't even smoke in a vehicle with a child in the vehicle if there's a child in the vehicle and you have a cigarette you get a ticket so yeah I'm that's all I'm saying yeah it's much different the states there's differences I see you know officers have discretion whether they can tow it or not and I think that's just kind of interesting well you know usually a cop a cop can run your license and know whe you know your tag and see whether you have insurance at least some states are that way but no driver's license I wouldn't think the car would have to be towed no insurance I would prefer that it was because I don't want people out there unless they just say I just don't have it proof of it with me I I'll prove it in court um so you know I I don't think they should be towed in every instance but uh that's where the cops discretion comes in I guess yeah yeah and that and like I said that and you looked at Michigan's traffic laws and they wrote them perfectly all the states have pretty much yeah but but every state varies a little bit in their language but it's the same thing and this is what the svets try to argue about and I just I shake my head at these so while I'm going to Star some more questions and if there is anybody you can see the bottom ticker going all you have to do is prove to wangal that he's wrong prove to him he is wrong and what would they win one 10,000 bucks cash Federal Reserve noes whatever you want to call them cash not delirium are you ready for uh yeah let's head to hendrik there all right let me get my screen going here oh and also whatever happened to Mark Stevens somebody asked uh Mark Stevens uh gave it up because uh a lot of people weren't U buying into his BS anymore and then some attorney out of Kansas wrote to the Arizona bar and told him that this guy's practicing law without a license and the Arizona bar charged him with uh practicing law without a license and uh told him if told him if he didn't quit or if he would quit take everything off the internet that they would uh not go forward with the charges and that's what he did and he's no longer on YouTube he's there for about 20 years I think selling that stuff yeah and Josh yes the warrant is still valid for you so that proves the court hase jurisdiction because they can take you in soon as they see you clink clink but on to hendrik versus Maryland now this is the case that decided for all times that the states could constitutionally require driver's license and registration for all who Ed the public roads that's what this case is this guy uh hendrik he uh went into Maryland uh from DC and he didn't have his registration according to their law and he was arrested and fined and he fought it all the way up to the Supreme Court and it specifically addresses the requirements of a driver's license and car registration and the one thing you got to take away from this the court said that the states had the Constitutional power under their police power to regulate it didn't tell them they had to as a matter of fact some states didn't require driver's license until the 1950s I think it was South Dakota was one of the last ones to require a driver's license and that was like in 1954 some 19 years or whatever a after or 39 years after this case right here but this case right here hold up one second one second Juan thank you everybody from coming over live from Biggins welcome we're going over the whole subset argument one is right now now going over hendrik versus Maryland which is the case but thank you bigan for sending everybody over and hello everybody hey good to see all those people so we'll get back to hendrik here and like I said this is this is the case that specifically addressed it so uh this is what we're going to look at right here and hendrik said that he had a motion that to quash the warrant because of the conflict between the statute and the Constitution of the United States which was denied he was found guilty and fine well he came up with four defenses for this U this case but there's some things I want to show you here that was interesting like I said he was he lived in DC and uh on this particular day he left his office in Washington in his own Auto mobile see that there and drove it over into Maryland we don't know why he went there but uh we know he was in his own automobile and he was arrested on the charge of operating it upon the highways without having procured the certificate of registration required by Section 133 of the what the motor vehicle law well look at that an automobile is a motor vehicle oh my goodness and this is this is the meat of what that statute that that he was challenging was it's before any motor vehicle is operated upon the highways the owner shall make a statement to the commissioner and procure a certificate of registration and thereafter it shall bear a numbered plate the reason why I have this here though I want you to see they they use the term motor vehicle machine automobile all to mean the same thing all means the same thing to the courts so no yeah really I promise oh my goodness and that's writing too right you can people can read this case right yeah and if if you if you really look at it they don't talk about Commerce at all because this this fee is based on horsepower of the vehicle it's not based on how you use it whether pleasure or Commerce it's based on horsepower there's no mention of Commerce in the law now here's here's his four different uh um defenses he said it discriminated against the residents of District of Columbia it attempted to regulate interstate commerce which to me back in this day would have meant really Interstate um travel but it could mean Commerce as well it violates the rights of citizens of the United States to pass into and through the state which is right to travel and it exacts a tax for Revenue Not Mere compensation for the use of the facilities according to arbitrary classification and thereby deprived citizens of the United States of the equal protection of the laws those were his four defenses against why the state couldn't require you to have a driver's license or a registration and uh it it goes through and it really explains in detail uh you know the Discrimination part here and now this is the meat this is why the states can regulate and it's even more important today it they don't talk about the the 10th Amendment they don't talk about Commerce they don't talk about anything they talk about this that the movement of Motor Vehicles over the highways is attended by constant and serious dangers to the public remember me telling you to remember about the safety of the public yeah and it is also abnormally destructive to the ways themselves so in other words these these big machines that are full of flammable liquids like glass gas gas and battery acid and everything else that travel at a high rate of speed and that are heavy they can kill people they can injure people they can damage property and therefore for the health safety and Welfare of the public the states can regulate this inherently dangerous activity States under their police power can regulate any inherent dangerous activity such as making of explosives or making of chemicals and things those people have to you know those businesses and industries usually have to be away from you know the the public and places like that where they could damage it so the whole thing is that is it and the fact that these these these big machines also tear up the roads that are going to have to be resurfaced and repaired and bridges and everything so for these two purposes to raise the revenue to maintain the roads and meet the public demand for roads and for the health safety and Welfare of the people states can constitutionally regulate all who use their roads this is the meat this is why nobody can win my $110,000 because you would have to prove to me that Hendrick V Maryland has been overturned and it has not and never will be nope and how many cases have I been tried and never Hendrix has probably been cited 300 times or something I don't know how many hundreds of cases site back to this case even today in 2024 when somebody challenges the constitutionality of the uh traffic laws somewhere I guarantee you in a decision the court will quote hendrik V Maryland even aund what n years after the fact because it's still good and here's what it say here's what it says the state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for Public Safety and order in respect to the operation upon its highways of all Motor Vehicles those moving in interstate commerce as well as others and to this end it may require the registration of such vehicles and the licensing of their drivers charging thereof for reasonable fees and here it was graduated horsepower and measure of speed difficulty to control this is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the states and essential to the preservation of the health safety and comfort of their citizens and it does not constitute a direct and material burden on interstate commerce or Interstate travel so there you go that's the biggie right there yes and feel free to look this up and check me out and see if I'm wrong or if I've read this wrong somehow but I don't think I have so I'm done with that all righty now we have a few more comments and questions and then if anybody I I see bigin in in in the uh in the chat we can open the uh stream up for any panel guests if we want to take some panel guests to yeah anybody want to come up okay so let's see here the next one that I had where we where we left off okay okay that was just brok okay okay all right here you go how is there not who is Juan G merchandise yet well I do have a hat and I do have some I do have some sticky notes that say that on [Laughter] yeah ju and I actually talked about this because I was pestered by YouTube to attach a store to my channel and I'm not huge fan of that stuff but I'm like all right fine if you'll if you'll stop bothering me I'll attach a store that puts whatever on it I don't make any money off that merchandise and I don't know their charges or whatever their charges is what I did do on the fax or frauds merchandise is I made it so there's free shipping forever just use the code at the top of the screen when you get to the store you don't have to pay shipping anymore it's done so that makes it even cheaper for y'all all right I'm gonna I'm going to guess Linux guys probably uh is familiar with Atlas Shrugged I'm just going to guess I'm guessing as well uh Pedro Wago says isn't a driver's license a contract you voluntarily sign an agreement of the conditions no it doesn't have all the uh elements of a contract all right like I said you don't have to have it for the laws to apply to you now R zerik says where does that whole fee schedule idea come from that's a good question there because I really don't know there's some Guru somewhere like I said since I was in it 50 some odd years ago uh there's been a lot of added on to it that is pretty silly and I think that's one of the silliest ones actually yeah definitely that was the one that I looked at okay yes Penny P yes Penny Pik let let me say to Penny Pike you're right the state owns the license you're correct all right yeah I I was going to say yeah well there's there's a little bit of an issue with some of some of that but because yeah you do have to sign and and it's that it actually is property of the state yeah it's an ID look look at it more like an ID than a uh or receipt proving that you paid for the you know the privilege to be on that road driving yeah just like passports are property of that country same thing driver's license a property of that state my tribal ID that's property of the the res and Council that just has my picture and name on it that's all that is but now we got that done do you want to invite some folks up yeah anybody don't be don't be scared come on up all right I'm going to see if I can post it here there I'm G to star that there we go there you go I highlighted the streamyard link if anybody has any questions for one or I wow that just sounds like a bad alcoholic drink W to [Laughter] eyy Meanwhile thanks the thunderstorms have passed now so no more lightning we're good did you get your electricity back oh of course oh good of course that was a that was just a brief few minutes of O now we don't have any p hour good thing we had those long cases for you to read but other than that I I see a guest here waiting and it would be Wonder Woman God is of Truth hello there hello hello there how are you doing can you hear me we can hear you beautiful I'm loving this format I think it's fantastic thank you for doing it Juan um oh well thank you so much oh my God you you are just like a breath of fresh air uh I do have a curious question for you who was your Guru when you fell down the rabbit hole well I I really didn't have a guru so to speak uh because the py comatus was at the time I was in it was very sparse throughout the country there was some on the west coast some down around Texas uh I think up north a little bit um I was in Oklahoma and uh you know some of the guys that was in in the dorm or that I got to meet from Texas they were started talking about you know we'd sit around at night and maybe get high with a little marijuana and just kind of talk about stuff you know and that's where we got on to this uh licensing and do you really have to have it and it was more or less just us kind of talking about it and we just I I kind of got uh excited about looking it up and learning how to go to the lob Library there on campus and uh that's what I did so it kind of just started that way no real Guru yeah because there was no social media back then for you was there no we would do uh we would tape V videotape VHS tape uh seminars uh and disseminate sell those uh pamphlets uh there were some books that had that had come out uh so it was yeah it was very sparse but way to take off by the way Josh brookens Sy brooken trust Shameless is a Billy Joel song not a g Brooks I know he covered it but it's a Billy Joel song get it right buddy continue Wonder Woman go ahead did you ever do the no license no registration have the fake plates on your car uh no now some of the people in the small towns uh that that tried it at the time Whose license was suspended are are not some either suspended or expired and they didn't go back and they'd get stopped and they would start you know spewing all the script type stuff and the cops would just let them go and because back then you know nobody had ever heard of it or anything like that it it befuddled cops and even befuddled some small town Das and U uh so it kind of got people thinking they were on a uh a no contact list I was in it long enough uh like I said about not quite two years and uh my driver's license was still good during that time so I didn't resend it or anything like that yeah because if you had gotten pulled over for any of that and and arrested you wouldn't be able to be an attorney would you well yeah you can I mean you have to confess if you'd ever been arrested for anything like that when I was a kid I I got arrested for shoplifting so but that didn't you know anything that's not of moral turpitude uh sometimes is excusable understandable you know because uh you know attorneys have to be above and beyond what regular people you know are responsible for being yeah get uh one one of the one one area where they really get you is if you co-mingle funds or your fiduciary responsibilities if you violate that in some way your client's money they really come down hard on oh yeah I remember Steve leato I don't know if you've heard of him um he uh is a um he does lemon law in Michigan and he has his own channel he was talking about that uh one time on one of his uh videos yeah I like that guy oh yeah he's fantastic um question where do they get the concept that um the United States is a corporation and that we went bankrupt well they get the corporation from the organic Act of 1871 and what that did uh is basically just set up a a local government for DC because the Constitution says that Congress is the one that runs DC you know makes all their laws and does all that kind of stuff in 1871 they decided that they would allow uh DC to have their own local government and that's what that case is and so what the sopit say is that uh since that act came out then the only United States only exist in DC because that set up a whole new constitution and that uh uh DC and the Federal Government Can Only regulate the people who either live in DC or who work for the federal government and that's kind of where that came from the bankruptcy deal came with the um um seizure of gold HR 192 I think or something like that back in 1933 where the government recall all the and made it a crime to own gold so in their minds gold and silver is the only money real money in the United States don't know where they get that idea I kind of think I do but it's not true and so they say since we can't don't have real money to pay off debts then they went on a credit system because United States went bankrupt and that's why we don't have gold and silver so the very active of them recalling the gold and silver is where they think we went bankrupt in other words well in the in the gold actually I mean we still had you could still have silver but you couldn't even own any gold it was illegal uh you know except in jewelry or maybe collector coins or something like that you could you know that went on till 1975 when Nixon uh and they made it legal to where we could own own gold again uh as people oh that's interesting all right Brook and assistant brooken Josh listen to me you have not proven one G wrong anytime and in fact you probably owe him $10,000 for the advice he's given you well that's a fact that's what the Channel's called facts or FR Josh guess what guess which one you're on it's not the fact side buddy yeah you know what makes me laugh people that believe all their rhetoric uh and think they're not wrong and they run away from standing up for it when they are put to the test that's just hilarious and that's just cowardice I mean Lamar da from Fall of the morons is still on the run all right well we're not going to discuss the and stuff no I know but it's just a concept you know either you believe it and you stand up for it or you don't believe it yeah thank you very much for having me on I will let the next person bounce on up all right thank you thank you for coming yeah oh and by the way uh two things first off I love the new uh format with this I'd love to see more of it and number two suggestion maybe in the description or somewhere you can post lists of the cases that you cover in case people want to um look them up themselves read them later or reread them later um because I know I'd love to do that and I'd love to include them in the library that I keep okay here's an easy answer to that we can do that but also you can always replay it pause look at the case the number the year Juan has it all on the screen beautiful okay have a good night people I'm going back to listening all right thank you thank you thank you okay and now yeah yeah and now Josh is saying nope that was my impostor it was yes Josh it was your straw man that said that you're correct all right one yes sir we've been here for about an hour and 40 minutes we still got 100 84 watching us would you challes come on anything you want to know people if I can answer it about that about this nonsense I'd be happy to you got me right here now yeah any questions I mean bring them bring them out No No No Holds Barred this is what this is for we wanted to get the facts out that it's not just the 10th Amendment as an answer because that's every video we've seen always says well here's your answer 10th Amendment no a little bit more than that and want prove that yes it's the inherently dangerous activity that the police power is there to regulate and that's that's I'd love to see in comment sections more people saying that to the these [Music] dumbasses okay Linux guy has uh asked what do you think about all these lawsuits over hurt feelings this year well well you know almost 100% of lawsuits and at least 50% of the people involved in them have hurt feelings of some kind so I don't know in particular which one you're talking about unless you're talking about the Trump stuff okay here okay Mor why do they fixate on the all caps thing oh yes there you go is it they Belling or why the conspiracy complication there okay what they have been taught is that these Guru has come up with the idea that an all caps name is not really you it's your straw man because anytime you see an all caps name it means a corporation or illegal fiction they believe that 100% because they say well all you got to do is look at your birth certificate get your name is on all caps all you got to do is look at your driver's license your name is on caps your utility bills your name is all caps that's because there is no money and this they're charging your your straw man they're not charging you as a human being they're charging this straw man and you can't be charged you're not a battery and and these fools actually believe it they believe that an all caps name you know means exactly what these gurus mean and so they operate off this confirmation bias they gravitate to people that that support that idea so they get in these Echo Chambers and everybody just knows that an all Cap's names means it's an artificial legal fiction and just like the court cases I went to through tonight I showed you that the courts reject that as having no legal significance at all an all caps name the bottom line is the reason the reason why everything's in all caps because my birth certificate from 1949 is not in all caps and my mother and father did not sign it they say that your mother and father signs it to enroll you in the government whatever you know mine wasn't signed and wasn't in in all caps but the reason everything's in all caps now is because everything's computer generated very yeah okay now and Linux guy cleared up his question he was talking about the many claimed defamation lawsuits like Janet Brawn and such and such I have not followed those I have I I it's all news to me yeah I we we talked about this on the other day and yeah I I I don't really pay attention to the news very much not politics not news no thank you I'm I'm good okay I I wan to I want to address Matthew Inman he came up with a good question about does the sixth amendment limit jurisdiction or simply extend it maritime law uh it does neither jurisdiction is not even talked about in the sixth amendment it just talks about uh your rights in a criminal proceeding so jurisdiction is not even mentioned has nothing to do with jurisdiction alrighty yep I I was actually about to highlight that when you said that too that was good and I'm going through and seeing if the okay so sofits think we all should have been called it very good Benny okay butcher bird what's the deal with s bring on about the federal government being a corporation and with it being just com comprised of Washington DC yeah that goes back to like I said the organic Act of 1871 that established a uh municipal government for uh DC and that's where they get that it it turned the whole the federal government into a corporation and there is under title 28 section 3002 I believe it is where it's that particular section of law deals with the the federal government uh trying to collect the debt and it has to follow the fair debt collection act uh stuff and uh so in their definitions which apply only to that chapter the United States is defined as a corporation but it only means that for the purposes of collecting a debt the federal government is restrained just like any Corporation would be restrained so it's not a univer and that's what they hang their hat on is that definition yeah and there you go you have a thank you from La Petit saying thank you for the conc nice explanation I appreciate it metal yellow first red you are very welcome and I I I really that's what I try to do I try to break down really complex legal issues but and there's a lot of nuance I live leave out but I try to get it to for somebody who's never been to law school never thought about it doesn't know anything and I I want to try to connect it to them to where they can understand it so I I hope I succeed to some degree in that endeavor all right okay well that's I think that's all the questions don't and then yeah that that would be all the questions we got I don't see love thought I'd say hi to spy love there aha I see that oh there you go you think you would ever do a session with Team skeptic I'm sure team I would if he yeah yeah I I'm I'm in contact with uh skeptic a lot every now and then so I I would sure all right very cool and I'm going down and going down and that's that is all what is what is OSI MOSI ocean Moshi trying to say here I'm trying to get this figured out article 3 section two Clause to in all cases affecting ambassadors other public minist ERS and consules and those in which a state shall be a party the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction I think ocean Moshi is answering broken system broken trusts jurisdiction question okay good with that he doesn't understand much yeah that that warrant that warrant this jurisdiction on it just take a step in the Sheriff's Office say hi my my name is Josh see what happens see if you can go home afterwards please yes yes the Supreme Court on in some issues has original jurisdiction in some issues it has exclusive jurisdiction and some and some issues it has a pellet jurisdiction very cool and sunny says I can't wait for you to put up your next live stream education entertainment winwin thank you very much Sunny yes thanks for that oh Double D has a question let me get to that one too because that one's actually a very good question and Double D's are you the one from that I was talking to in Reddit that's a hard question Double D that that's really hard because it you know you got to know the parties involved and the you know the Dynamics of the relationship and everything else I agree with you when the kids are involved and they get traumatized by policemen doing their job and their their parents are screaming like they're stuck pigs yeah I just I can't imagine what impact that's having on those little kids that I agree with you so much there okay well Double D's right there's a streamyard link you said you asked if you if you can come up on the stream to ask any questions so there's the streamyard link and Juan we're streaming live on Juan's Channel too so if you want to ask one a question from his Channel or you want to ask a question from here a fact we're live both places and we got somebody Alex give me one second Alex we have to be careful because of stuff something that we don't trust you we just have to be careful what's happened to my friend can you hear me we can hear you oh great yeah um I realized my question is kind of multifaceted because what really kills me is seeing the windows breaking their parents being dragged out of the car and these children are just traumatized in the backseat the other things the other things we don't see are the IRS function performing their functions and now here's a spouse that knows nothing about this suddenly saddled with debt because the innocent spouse part only goes so far and yeah that's a question I've been wondering about for a long time is how can they protect themselves from this when they themselves don't even really know that much about it well they you know they always say knowledge is power and it it's hard to protect oneself against a a government process like taxation or something like that if they really don't know where they stand in that process uh yeah you've got a common if this is your problem I won't say it is or isn't but no it is a common problem is a common problem sometimes when a um a wife for instance who you know really doesn't know the family business as far as doing the tax stuff the husband does that and all kinds of that she doesn't know what she's getting saddled with because she loves him trusts him or whatever and signs on the 1040 form and so when you do a joint form like that uh you know you're both both equally liable uh I I haven't been in the income tax arena for decades so I don't know how it works so much to day but I would think one step of protection would be to file you know uh separate returns to begin with now the husband won't like that husband won't like that because he wants to take you know wife's deduction off off his taxes so you know yeah yeah yeah I just uh because I I just have nightmares of like the children being torn away from their mother because of what the husband does or something like that because people automatically assume that all these guys are violent yeah that's why you really have to CH you have to choose a partner just like you're going into business with that partner you know uh unfortunately that the society we modern society we live in it's kind of almost come to that you got to got to figure out who you're hooking your star to you know yeah I'm Lucky in that respect because mine is but the uh relationship is much more important and that was all I needed to hear all right very good thank you well thank you for coming upk you all right and that and that reminded me when I asked if if she was the same person I was talking to on Reddit because there was somebody on Reddit that said um and it was that and was talking to me that their brother is a heavy soft sit and they're filing for a restraining order tomorrow and moved in with their mother and all of a sudden the wills changed the mother's elderly and not all faculties are working and it's a very sad situation because this this this is exactly what savits do they pray on folks like that so this member of the family has to go and try to battle out this ssit who has a lot of money and friends in the ssit area you know from taking away his mother's home and anybody else's inheritance whatever it's horrible well do you think there's been some some undue influence uh that has subjected this uh diminished capacity lady yeah the the I guess the the brother is a guru for the anavon rights Spiel of sof sitness and it's just it's sad yeah you can't think of much about a human being that would do that to their mother or any any relative let alone a stranger um you know that's just one of those things that the his siblings are going to have to take him to task and challenge him on I guess in court for maybe undo influence uh looking at Penny P looking at Penny Pike here uh yep I would I would hope penny that uh 10 days would snap him out of it uh I don't want to go 30 days on somebody who's just uh a dumbass and can realize it in a shorter period of time um so I only whatever works that would get them to straighten up I would be fine with I guess yeah yeah it's uh well we just saw the guy in Michigan Mr McLoud today like I said didn't show up for his pre-trial what happens well warrant obviously and after he gets brought in on the warrant the very next day are you listening Josh he gets brought in the very next day the judge revoked his bond trials not until October guess where Mr McLoud sitting till October yeah he's in County Jail that's couple months away that's more than 30 days okay Josh yes it is a waste of time to ask about getting a fair and meaningful hearing when you go to court and learning the charges that's called an arraignment it's not a hearing it's not an evidentiary hearing it's it's not a a hearing other than here's the charges how do you plead so yeah it is uh a waste of time yes Penny said thank you one they need time in the tank to contemplate their uh future yeah and and and that's what uh judge gothier said today or is it goet he said uh in Michigan today to Mr McLoud it's really sad that you have to learn Civics at this age and the hard way but that's what you chose take some hints Josh take some hints I told you chief justice Shackleford and Taylor you got a warrant bud you think they're just going to drop it it's ain't going to happen that's jurisdiction all over it any other questions we have well the goddess of Truth here um I don't think it would be a legal for judges to tell them that be honest I mean they don't have to follow through with it but any uh threats or coercion as they call it should should I mean he's given them a fair warning so that should be enough yeah right yeah listen you're not under duress and we've all seen that that uh that Court clip where the judge makes the sset sign his next court hearing paper for the date so it just shows he got notified of the next date and the ssite writes under duress judge prints out another another form sign it again here wrotes it again under duress charge prints out another Form says you do it again you're in contempt Jackson 68 is that the question for us here I'll answer it for you the cause is the action that you that you took that is an alleged violation the nature of it will be whether it's criminal or civil um that would be the nature of the charge there you go all right friends we we're breaking on almost two hours and about 50 seconds here I think this was great I had a good time I hope uh you all did I do too I hope everybody enjoyed it yeah and and and I hope Jay love wherever you are you started out in the beginning of the stream all full of vigor and you wanted your questions answered and you just disappeared bud sorry oh the truth the truth scares away the ultra crepidarian that's my favorite word I call them Ultra crepidarian my favorite word it means somebody who talks out their ass on a subject they know nothing about pretty thank you Linux guy thank you guys thank you everybody thank you Juan for joining me thank you Sean we have had a great time today and we will do it again no question about it we have much more subjects to cover on this whole sofit movement thing we just wanted to get out the whole write the travel nonsense and it's not just the 10th Amendment remember as Juan said what it's an inherently dangerous activity that can be regulated that's the bottom line that the Supreme Court said didn't say the states had to do it and it's Hendrick V Maryland that's right Henrik B Maryland better than the 10th Amendment till next time Juan thank you thank you Sean thank everybody for showing up I really really appreciate your time yes thank you guys appreciate you all make sure you hit the like button on each of our channels and uh share the stream out get the word out that actually there's facts in here see you next [Music] time I like country when it I like country when it's or when it's for the school the hardest knocks not through man I like country when it's l rain I like country it's real [Music] I play Little Johnny make feel it down when no Wheeling on the back de honey he sounds better [Music] St through night I'm seeing so play and a play I want to I like country when it R I like country when it's but when it's song through Hest my man be on when [Music] it's a little something with a like they used to do the on you GL to it because you knew that it was true I like the sound of Ste guitar I like to be a little I only listen to the stars who know what I go through