Joe Sixpack
666 Styx Way
Cucamonga, California, united States
650-999-9999//YukFut@gmail.com 

To: 	Your Governor --  Office of Your State (territorial) Governor
In Re:  Location of State judicial Courts to remove Mortgage foreclosure cases

	On advice of Counsel, who might well be appearing in the instant case as an expert witness on the Constitution, history and laws of the united States, this letter is addressed to you as per to your SWORN duty pursuant to the equivalent of  Article V, Section 7 of the California Constitution of 1849,  which the official record in any ensuing action will prove, just as in California, has NOT (!) been repealed, which states, about the Governor: “He shall see that the laws are faithfully executed”.

	The issue here is finding a court of common law general jurisdiction exercising the judicial power of your State, admitted as a sovereign, independent State into “this Union” as a common law State (like California; see e.g. Report on the Civil & Common Law 1 Cal. Rpts 588 et seq.) and/or the judicial power of the united States (see e.g. Claflin v Houseman 93 US 130).

	This seems to be a simple enough request, especially since Article VI, Section 1 of the California Constitution of 1849 , as an exemplar, ordains and establishes the California District Court as a constitutional, common law Court, one contemporaneously recognized as such by the California supreme Court in Ex Parte Knowles 5 Cal. 300, with Article VI, Section 7 naming the County Clerk as “ex officio clerk of the California District Court”., or the equivalent agent in your jurisdiction.

	These judicial Courts are required to exist, at least one in every County, since Counsel advises that otherwise ALL allegedly applicable statutory schemes on the books would be NULL and VOID nunc pro tunc ab initio as at least Bills of Attaimder, pursuant to Article I, Section 9 or 10, as the case may be, of and/or the 9th & 10th Articles of Amendment to, the Constitution for the united States {1787-1791} (CuS).

	In my case, what with, in effect a summary, ex parte mortgage foreclosure, for which I am in immediate need of at least redress of grievance, if not a summary removal of the administrative proceeding in the instant case, one in which I was NEVER knowingly in a judicial Court, and one in which Counsel advises that  I was fraudulently induced to enter a non-existent agreement, in large part by reason of the MORTgage Bank$ter’$ failure to make a FULL disclosure of the terms of the agreement, which they knew, or SHOULD have known, was lawfully  required.

	Not only have I learned that this fact alone is an AFFIRMATIVE defense to any such summary foreclosure, let alone in a State court of general jurisdiction exercising the judicial power of Your State, but I know now that the UNDEFINED (?!?) dollars used as “consideration” by the Bank$ter are defined, IF at all, by the President, apparently acting as Commander-in-Fief of the Armed Forces, with “emergency powers” emanating from what the record will establish is the non-existent Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

	Even more revealing, is that FDR conceded, in his summary of the “Bank holiday” of 1933, was the fact that he also invoked, on who knows WHAT provision(s) of the CuS, the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, with, as the record will also establish, is good reason to believe, especially with the RATification of the equally non-existent 14th war “amendment” (NEFWA), that at least lawful, de jure, jus sanguinis State Citizens have somehow ‘morphed’ into undocumented enemy aliens.

Indeed, Counsel advises that NEFWA has NEVER existed at all, having effectively, not to mention contemporaneously, been ruled unconstitutional by the US supreme Court in Ex Parte McCardle 7 Wall. 506, an opinion that the Justices were prevented (?!?) from announcing by yet another WAR act of the 39th radical, runaway, renegade CONgress.

This seems to explain why the MORTgage Bank$ter did NOT, for all apparent intents and purposes, have ANY burden of proof to sustain in the summary foreclosure, when in a common law proceeding it would, very arguably, have had proof by at least clear and convincing evidence, on the lawfulness of the “agreement” AND the evidentiary DUTY to establish a “voluntary, knowing and intelligent” waiver of Rights secured by the CuS, THE reference standard of the US supreme Court (Johnson v Zerbst 304 US 458).

All of this is true a fortiori, when one learns that these UNDEFINED dollars ‘circulate’, as it were, pursuant to the commerce clause powers of CONgress, which the US supreme Court has ruled, in NJ Steam v Merchants Bank 6 How. 344,  are “closely associated with the admiralty jurisdiction /aka/ to the Framers of the Constitution as a “jurisdiction FOREIGN to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws”, which ALL State courts are Constitutionally BARRED from exercising (Article III, Section 2).

Such a waiver most particularly applies to the Right to Trial by Jury according to the course of the common law, a Right still available to “inhabitants of territories” pursuant to Article II of the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, as reenacted by the 1st Congress, yet nowhere in sight in Your State.

	Yet the record in any ensuing action will forcefully establish, by a daunting amount of relevant, admissible documentary evidence, in concert with Counsel’s a cappella expert witness testimony, among other things, that even ‘official’ actors in positions of “honor, profit and trust”, albeit in the de facto government do not even agree that California is a State at all, very possibly true in your State as well. 

On the one hand, the office of the (territorial) Secretary of State, the office which one assumes would officially know, has stated, correctly in my view, that the California Constitution of 1849 has not been repealed.

On the other the “judicial” department,  has not only stated exactly the opposite, when properly understood, the record WILL establish, to an inflamed (Grand) Jury, that at least that UNOPPOSED Non-statutory federal Writs of Habeas Corpus /aka/ since Magna Charta in 1215 as the “Great Writ of Liberty” have suffered many summary, ex parte “FRCP 12(b)(6) denials”.

This has occurred when not only have the Writs been UNOPPOSED, they arise from records in trial “courts” /aka/ administrative tribunals, which are also UNOPPOSED, yet with a persistent “erroneous confusion” by purportedly neutral magistrates (Tumey v Ohio 273 US 510), with a statutory Writ as per 28 USC 2455, which goes back only as far as the Habeas Corpus Act of 1867 and the multiple WAR acts of the 39th CONgress.

Indeed, the ‘Great Writ’ does NOT need any statutory authority at all, although Section 14 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, 1 Statutes at Large 73 et seq., a provision adopted consistent with the CuS and NOT in outright contravention of it, is conspicuously cited in ALL of the Petitions Counsel has prepared.

This includes the 18 page hand printed Writ of Habeas Corpus which Counsel sent to the US supreme Court while ALONE in a S.C. jail cell during a 7 month ‘vacation’ as a POLITICAL prisoner, which included 40 case law decisions and NO errors.

To be sure, no ‘official’ action was taken on this Petition, but charges were dropped, this in a jurisdiction in which Counsel had NEVER set foot, and he returned home, this in a situation when he was then, as now, making a DIRECT challenge to, among other things, the malignant, malevolent monopoly on the “practice of law” by ‘state’ BAR ASSociation attorneys /aka/ unregistered foreign agents of at least the City of London).

Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the CuS cannot be any simpler: “The Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, except in (declared) states of rebellion or invasion” (NOT (!) Covid Plandemic !!) see e.g. Ex Parte Merryman 17 Fed. Cases 144.

Bottom line here is that there are no KNOWN remedies in any department of the de facto government, from which it necessarily follows that such ‘official’ actors seem to think that multiple provisions of the CuS have somehow been repealed, especially Article I, Sections 9 and 10, Article III, Section 2, Article IV, Sections 2,3 and 4, and/or the 9th and 10th Articles of Amendment.

And all of these, and perhaps ALL 6 Articles of the CuS, to be effectively replaced by the NON-existent 14th war “amendment” (NEFWA), the CAREFULLY concealed intent of which was to ‘create’, as it were, a SUBORDINATE corporate body politic, members of which ‘have NO rights which the de facto national socialist government is bound to respect’.

This explains, in graphic detail, the transition of the united States from a federative, republican form of government of defined and limited powers, to the currently much ballyhooed “democrazy” /aka/ 3 Wolves and 2 sheep voting on what’s for dinner, noting that the same government exists in Pyongyang, North Korea, only they have a MUCH higher “voter” turnout, 99% in the last “election”.

And speaking of this exact situation, the record, yet again in any ensuing action, will establish by at least clear and convincing evidence that at least the ‘judicial’ victims of the “Ju$t u$ $y$tem” (Ju$), if not all of us, not only have NO way to know IF we are wrong on any of the issues we present, and, more importantly, WHY (!).

Accordingly, even assuming arguendo that CONgress, one without anything remotely resembling a Quorum to do business, let alone a ratio of representation, has ANY power to provide for elections in what bear a striking resemblance to federal (insular ?) territorial possessions, for President (Electoral College, anyone ??), VOTING members of the House and/or united States Senator, which remains an appointed position by State legislatures pursuant to the original intent of the Framers, the essential question then arises:

And this is short and sweet’, as it were: if NO members of this electorate have a $@#$!% clue WHY they are wrong, how can they invoke the Right to instruct their (??) representatives and/or nominate and elect those who WILL make the desired changes ???

Of course none of this seems to be of any concern where the members of the SUBORDINATE body politic are presumed, albeit on who knows what factual foundation and legal basis consistent with the CuS, to be incompetent, PARTICULARLY in the “judicial” department of government, this from day ONE, but this does raise some insuperable objections to the Ju$.

These include as to how “voters”, ALL of whom are required to fill out a Voter registration form and declare, under penalty of perjury, that they ARE members of a SUBORDINATE body politic, as to how they magically seem to regain “competence” on “election day”, a stunt seemingly beyond the abilities of even Erich Weiss ! 

And now comes the magic four words: where can any neutral investigator find even one iota of the “CONSENT of the governed” to the Ju$ ????

Thus our demand to know forthwith where we can find, and use, State judicial Courts to invoke all of our Creator endowed inalienable Rights  secured by the Constitution for the united States {1787-1791} , most especially the Right to Trial by Jury according to the course of the common law, the ULTIMATE check and balance on ALL out of control government actors, or, in the alternative, be advised that there is NO Constitution and NO sovereign, independent States remaining, so that any and all appropriate action in defense of liberty can be taken

 Your VERY prompt attention to this matter, which looks a LOT like a discretionless ministerial duty to inform a subordinate government officer to do HIS discretionless ministerial duty to FILE all documents presented promptly, WITHOUT any filing fees (notably calculated in UNDEFINED (?!?) dollars, and WITHOUT any BS ‘required forms’ will be expected.

Constitutionally,

_________________________________________
Joe Sixpack