LEGITIMATE v ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT

Charles Miller

 

President Trump gave us the key to know who we are dealing with anytime we deal with government or its franchised entities such as corporations. This was done in the inauguration acceptance of the Office of President. Trump gave his word to all of us that he was there to serve 'We the People',  and promised that was his highest duty. Try and recall any other president, or for that matter, 'public servant', who has ever given us the same kind of promise.

 

That promise is our key to understand whether we are dealing with a legitimate or an illegitimate government actor.

 

First some common sense applied to the foundational documents, then the simple method to qualify legitimate government actors.

 

The fundamentals of this monograph are very simple, clear, direct and fully provable by simple review of the Declaration in 1776, the original state constitutions, the Articles of Confederation, and the Treaty of Peace 1783. The declaration was created in the Name and by the Authority of the good People as were the original state constitutions and the Articles of Confederation. The confederation document is very specific as to what the authorities are, "in the name and in behalf of our respective constituents".

 

When King George was dealing with the Confederated country -- The United States of America -- through representatives, he was actually dealing with each one of us as his equal. No King at that time was authorized to enter a treaty with his subjects, his property. "The King in that time could only enter a treaty with parties of equal capacity, in short, other Sovereigns." The states that king George was entering a treaty with and recognizing were the direct agents of the People. The states received all their powers from the people and are mere trustees over the People’s authority and power. Sovereignty never resides in any artificial person such as the state yet always resides with the King as a man. The states that We created only administer our individual Sovereignty they do not own it and have no sovereignty of their own because we did not give them that power or position.

 

If God granted King George his sovereignty like the monarchy claims, and we were his subjects and property under that same God, are we Sovereign under the same God when King George released us from being his property? "I cannot recall that God, at any time, recognizing any artificial person as sovereign." Remember King George was the direct agent of the Vatican, it’s prince elector , and arch-treasurer. This is the same Vatican that claimed ownership over the planet and all of the souls on it, and then went on to enfranchise the various kings and queens of royalty holding us as subjects and chattel property.

 

When 'We The People', individually granted the power for our own self-protection, property, and property rights, entered into a set of contracts between us for the purpose of creating a government to serve and protect Us, it was done with the understanding that 'We The People' could become grantors, bailors and beneficiaries having a property right in the ownership of government." "Note: The word 'could' in this statement exposes the subject for another monograph." It is not possible legally, commercially, or politically, for we the people as individuals, not to have an ownership position in government because we are its creators. The creator is always the owner unless we sell our position and are paid for it and actually transfer it with some kind of record of the transfer existing.

 

Article 6 of the federal Constitution recognizes each of the above statements in a very clear and precise manner. In order to understand this more thoroughly, any American need simply review the foundational documents listed above and identify who created what and by what authority. "Natures God is a pretty good source."

 

Mr. Trump became President and Chief Magistrate upon taking the loyalty oath. Yet, he went further and declared his personal loyalty to serve 'We the People'. This was his pledge to recognize and serve the principles of the American experiment in self governance. "Restated, and moreover, we are the principals of government because we created it, and Trump pledged to serve our foundational documents the way we wrote them".

 

The lesson President Trump gave us is how to qualify each and every government actor, or those claiming to operate under any government authority or franchise, so that we know who and what they serve, whereby what authority they actually hold over 'We the People'.

 

The word franchise above is the set up for another monograph on how to hold corporations of any nature or kind accountable. Oxford Dictionary of the English Language; franchise; 1. An authorization granted by a government or company to an individual or group enabling them to carry out specified commercial activities .... . All franchises carry with it only the powers and or limits of its grantor. Thus franchised corporations are never authorized to harm, injure, take unfair advantage or damage the People.

 

There is one assumption that opens a door for all of the corruption currently being exposed to operate upon us throughout the land. Oxford Dictionary of the English Language; assumption; 1. A thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

 

 

QUALIFY LEGITIMATE SERVANTS and Identify Usurping Slavers

 

A few questions qualifies anyone claiming any government authorities as either legitimate government office who are serving the people, or usurpers holding you to their service for their own private gain and benefit. Oxford Dictionary of the English Language; slavery; 1. (especially in the past) a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.

 

1. Mr. or Mz. Government actor do you work for the state or federal government created by 'We the People' beginning 1776, which exists exclusively to serve and protect the People who are the source and authority for all governments operating in the United States? This is a yes or no question!

 

Yes, means a legitimate government office and employee answered. No, means that individual has some other loyalty and is working for someone or some other entity posing as legitimate government. Consequently, circumvention of a yes or no answer exposes either confusion or lack of knowledge which exposes either incompetence in public office or corruption for private gain at your expense. Hello slavery!

 

2. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, if you deny me access to the political jurisdictions created by the People beginning 1776, are you denying me the protection of the law of the land and holding me subject to some other power?

 

3. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, if you fail or refuse to recognize the original political state created by the People and recognize me as Beneficiary, are you personally liable to me to the full extent of all your assets for holding me subject to powers I never consented to?

 

4. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, are you holding me accountable to a hidden power or authority?

 

5. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, is it legally, politically or commercially possible to be held to a set of obligations I was never informed of and never agreed to?

 

6. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, if you deny me protection of the law of the political jurisdiction I hold loyalty to while claiming to serve the government of that venue, are you making a public record of your own felony?

 

7. Mr. or Mz. Government actor, under what circumstance or authority are government servants in the United States authorized the power to ignore, circumvent or in any manner whatsoever, alter the fundamental duty of the Peoples government to serve and protect the People first, last and always?

 

This simple process tells us who we are really dealing with.

 

When We the People allow usurpers to claim to be government officers or employees, we get what we deserve.

It is our duty to make sure those we employ and pay actually serve us.

When we assume that those operating our offices, and our property, are legitimate honest functionaries with out proof upon request, we abandoned our political, moral, legal, contractual and commercial duties to not only ourselves, but to our neighbors as well.

 

WHY?

 

The why question is one we must each answer for ourselves.

The real question is WHY NOT demand our servants tell us who they serve?

 

BUT THEY

 

The "but they crowd" would have all of us believe that we cannot challenge our servants because they will do something to us. The simple fact is they’ve already done it, and we all have to live with it until we as a collective people join together and act like responsible citizens demanding the benefits of the governments we created. "The but they" mindset is the admission to one’s self that you are a happy slave, which more often than not, goes hand-in-glove with a habitual behavior to convince anyone perceived as standing up, to join into Their slave mentality. We, those of us that have chosen to stand up and express are own liberty, are called crazy, conspiracy theorist, and all sorts of other labels in order to make those that are self identified slaves feel comfortable with themselves.

 

The "but they crowd", claiming that all these secret agreements, and a bunch of crooked men can change the intent of what 'We the People' actually did, ergo alter or delete the fundamental foundation documents of our country, attest to one thing, and that is, the refusal to exercise their own liberty and inviting me to join them in recognizing that corruption is of more value than the liberty of self governance. "To me that's an inducement to voluntary servitude."

 

Remember, the law only bars involuntary servitude not voluntary. So, when those who refuse to demand their public servants prove that they are loyal they become voluntary subjects, surfs, serving their master or owner.

 

This simple process of making the demands to know which government servants are actually loyal to the People, changes the very nature of all of their administration of our powers, and this is so simply because when they answer they create a public record of personal felonies to wit at that point we can challenge them to show us why they are not holding us as slaves. "Remember, slavery is against the law everywhere and when that issue was raised those that are charged as slavers always run."

 

Changing the nature of our dialogs with our public servants is the beginning of resolution. Only we can do that.

 

My questions to all the readers is; do you choose to live in chains on your knees, or stand like a real American? And, what are you willing to pay for your own freedom and liberty?

 

I made my choice 30 years ago and refused to live on my knees. The phrase that fits is “stand up, or bend over, it’s your choice”.

 

Charles Miller

 

Sent by rod@disroot.org