(Thanks, C. :)

Reader Charles Miller writes:

=====

Dear Hobie,
In reading Clifs publish today I took it as an invitation to assist in providing information so that more complete choice are made.

CLIF HIGH, COMMENTS ON WASHINGTON LAW SUIT

No Federal Court in any State Holds Judicial Power.

Living in Washington and having long term deep experience with government systemites and courts, its minion attorneys, my experience tells me that the law system in Washington is broken beyond redemption. Then considering the cause of your law suit and the lack of pushback on Delbert Dickweed, otherwise known as Mother WEFfer Inslee, the stage is set for disaster in any Washington Court.

Considering the root cause of the action you plan it might be wise to define the cause or causes and then review the actions or statutes that apply along with the most potent jurisdiction and venue available.

Essentially what you have suffered is a trespass on personal and public rights protected by law. The trespass was two fold. First the trespass on you and second the trespass out of the authorities limiting Delbert Dickweeds actions as a public servant. Both are caused under concept defined as color of law.

The root issue is you have been denied access to and protection of and from the law. Beneficiaries have started a series of articles to address this issue at its roots and show where and how relief and remedy are actually available.

The statutes that captures all causes and facts and law covering your situation are under the Civil Rights federal statutes found at 42 USC, §§ 1986, 1985 as processed under procedure found at 42 USC 1983. Every judge and attorney are familiar with these statutes and their powerful affect. Make sure you read them in the order cited. The full picture is much easier to grasp when done in that order. Secondary reading should be 18 USC §§ 242, 241, again read in that order. Following this path will expose the transition from civil rights actions into criminal complaints based on the facts established civilly. Together these applications will expose and ratify the application of RICO predicates.

Then the fun really begins through SHOW CAUSE orders to local prosecutors, Sheriffs, legislators and judges to show why they failed to reign in Dickweed the Delbert by direct application of the People’s law identified as Washington Constitutions Declaration of Rights,The Sovereigns WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO, by what authority, may also be implicated.

Essentially Delbert Dickweed and all his toady minions exercised a right of ownership over the People’s health choices, by cancelling rights secured by law. That allegation and charge is SLAVERY by criminal negligence covered by color of law.

Surprise of surprises is Wikipedia’s definitions are so clear. “color of law denotes the "mere semblance of legal right," the "pretense or appearance of" right; hence, an action done under color of law adjusts (colors) the law to the circumstance, yet said apparently legal action contravenes the law.[1][2] Under color of authority is a legal phrase used in North America[3] indicating that a person is claiming or implying the acts he or she is committing are related to and legitimized by his or her role as an agent of governmental power.”

1983 Civil Rights actions may be run in either state or federal courts. However the federal courts are particularly geared to these actions in context of federal government duties to serve and protect the People from state actors encroachment on the rights of the People.

The way we Beneficiaries look at these situations is they are dog fights to the death. So, we figured out years ago how to get the the biggest dog possible to piss on the smaller dog in the attempt to avoid the fight by having Dickweed show his lack of balls. See comment sent via this portal and published. https://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=196659

The Constitution as Amended by the Bill of Rights is the source for civil rights required absolutely to be provided by all federal offices which are executed by statutes.

SPECIAL NOTE. No federal court in any state holds any judicial power contemplated by the National Constitution.
Verification of this statement takes less than 30 minuets reading time. More to the point identifying the federal courts with actual judicial power contemplated by the constitution takes 10 minuets reading. After completing this reading perhaps the impression of fraud of a massive proportion will expose its self.

28 United States Code §§ 1 through 144, Supreme, Appeals and District courts, does not identify nor assign either Article III nor inferior Article I judicial power to any of the code courts identified.

Article I inferior judicial power is found in the creation of the United States Court of Federal Claims, § 171, in the same Title 28 USC, and the Court of International Trade § 251.

Creation and Composition of Federal Courts.
§ 171, (a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, sixteen judges who shall constitute a court of record known as the United States Court of Federal Claims. The court is declared to be a court established under article I of the Constitution of the United States.”
§ 251, (a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, nine judges who shall constitute a court of record to be known as the United States Court of International Trade. Not more than five of such judges shall be from the same political party. The court is a court established under article III of the Constitution of the United States.
(b) The offices of the Court of International Trade shall be located in New York, New York.

Compare, § 171 and § 251 with § 132, (a) There shall be in each judicial district a district court which shall be a court of record known as the United States District Court for the district.
(b) Each district court shall consist of the district judge or judges for the district in regular active service. Justices or judges designated or assigned shall be competent to sit as judges of the court.
(c) Except as otherwise provided by law, or rule or order of court, the judicial power of a district court with respect to any action, suit or proceeding may be exercised by a single judge, who may preside alone and hold a regular or special session of court at the same time other sessions are held by other judges.
§ 1, The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum.
§ 41, The thirteen judicial circuits of the United States are constituted as follows: …… citing federal districts in the states.

For perfect clarity on federal courts holding real judicial powers contemplated by the Constitution, District of Columbia Code settles the unfounded conjecture passed out by judges and attorneys in their bogus pontifications concerning judicial power and jurisdiction.
Code of the District of Columbia
§ 11–101. Judicial power.
The judicial power in the District of Columbia is vested in the following courts:
(1) The following Federal Courts established pursuant to article III of the Constitution:
(A) The Supreme Court of the United States.
(B) The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
(C) The United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
(2) The following District of Columbia courts established pursuant to article I of the Constitution:
(A) The District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
(B) The Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

Clear simple direct language from public record clears up a lot of confusions. Public records, particularly code restatement of statutes are conclusive as to fact and law.

Beneficiaries often control judicial and administrative actions by application of one simple statement. “ We have provided copies of the law, rules of court, the Supreme Court Orders and the United States Attorneys Manual defining your powers and duties, are you going to follow the law or not? “ Magic often follows.

Further reading at 4 USC § 72, “All offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised in the District of Columbia, and not elsewhere, except as otherwise expressly provided by law”, exposes limits on venue, the place on the land, set in concrete by Article I section 8, clause 17 and 18, exclusive jurisdiction of Congress.

The Form 61, statute created form, required to be public record, verifying appointment to office does not recognize any federal judge as being appointed to an Article III or I judicial power court.

4 USC § 101. Oath by members of legislatures and officers
Every member of a State legislature, and every executive and judicial officer of a State, shall, before he proceeds to execute the duties of his office, take an oath in the following form, to wit: "I, A B, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States." Perhaps a very good reason to attach federal powers to Dickweed Delbert.

28 § USC 453, Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

The issues exposed above are multi faceted, yet simple to understand if one simply reads the fact of public record and refuses to listen to the systemite purveyors of deception designed to stream and control the People into subject status, SLAVES, to public servants misconstructions.

All government administration of the Peoples powers assigned by Constitution operate through statute. The legislative bodies are the exclusive issuers of statute, called laws. So, the simple way to understand and apply legalized force, that’s the only real job of government created by the People, is to use and apply the statutes that bind government actors. Doing so on the proper venue as defined by Constitution, statutes,

The fundamentals that all law is contract, private between the parties and deal with property and property rights is captured by a contract purchased from the USDC, DC. The Contract purchased is to enforce statutes that binds all the players in the drama causing the application of the Civil Rights Statutes.

The contract with the court as agent for the United States Government selling access to and protection from the laws beginning with the Peoples law of property rights in honest government.
I JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction arises under Title 42 United States Code, § § 1986, 1985, 1983; the contract, Constitution for The United States of America, Article III Original Judicial Power, section 2; Article I section 8, Article 2 section 3; Article 6 section 1; Article 7 and others as may appear hereinafter in particular the Bill of Rights inclusive as appear herein after; Statutory jurisdiction found by reference to United States Code sections; Original jurisdiction under 28 USC § 1331 recognized.

a. Article III original Judicial power as properly delegated from Congress
Assembled found by reference at District of Columbia Code, title 11 § 101;
b. Venue is correct as found by reference at District of Columbia Code title 13
section § 423; Article I section 8 clauses 17 and 18.

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