Monthly Archives: April 2009

Notice Pleading Notes

I’ve been trying to make sense of our legal system for 26 years. So, I was much surprised when I recently learned that “notice pleading” is America’s “dominant form of pleading”. Up until a couple of weeks ago, I’d never even heard the term “notice pleading,” and now I find out that it’s the “dominant form” of pleading. As is often the case, I’m a little humiliated to learn that after a quarter century of studying this legal system, I had no clue to our “dominant form” of pleading.

However, I don’t feel too embarrassed because I’ll bet that you, too, haven’t previously heard of “notice pleading”. In fact, I’ll bet that 99.9% of Americans have not previously heard of “notice pleading”. If I won that bet, it would be evidence that something important might be concealed in the concept of “notice pleading”. After all, how can the “dominant form” of courtroom pleading be “accidentally” unknown to virtually all of the American people unless “the powers that be” were trying to hide something?

Read the rest of this entry »


Posted by on April 27, 2009 in Argument, Due Process, Notice


Free Market vs. Slave Market

Suppose someone started the “SS Titanic Investment Corporation”. Suppose you could get in now at the ground floor (or perhaps I should say at the “ocean floor”) by investing $10,000 for a 1% interest in the S.S. Titanic. True, that ship is currently “wet docked” at the bottom of the North Atlantic. But—technologically speaking—it may soon be possible for us to “raise the Titanic” and if that happens, all we’d have to do is knock off a few barnacles, patch the hole in the side, give it a fresh coat of paint, and—Presto Changeo!—we’d have a huge ocean liner that a virtually brand-new! (After all, it hadn’t even completed a single trip across the Atlantic.) The idea, of course, is that if you invest today in the S.S. Titanic, YOU COULD SOMEDAY GET RICH! Read the rest of this entry »


Posted by on April 19, 2009 in Economy, Money, Treason


Legal Tender Treason

Article 3 Section 3 Clause 1 of The Constitution of the United States declares in part,

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

Surprisingly, to understand the meaning of “treason” we must first understand the meaning of the term “United States”.

Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment

Posted by on April 19, 2009 in Economy, Gold & Silver Coin, Money, Treason


Indictment of Former Illinois Governor Blagojevich

It would be hard to chose the five most illuminating documents I’ve read in the past decade.  But if I had to make that choice, the Indictment of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagovich would be one of the “Chosen Five”.  That indictment has given me more insight and understanding than almost any other document I’ve ever seen.

Read the rest of this entry »


Posted by on April 11, 2009 in "Man or Other Animals", Money, RICO, Trusts


2008 USA v Benson permanent injunction

In A.D. 1985, Bill Benson and Red Beckman co-authored “The Law that Never Was”–a 2-volume book that presented extensive and convincing evidence that the 16th Amendment (which presumably created constitutional authority for the income tax) was never lawfully ratified.  More recently, Bill Benson used that book as part of a package which helped people to stop filing income tax returns.  The IRS, of course, which never welcomes tax resistance activities, filed suit against Mr. Benson.

Attached is a copy of an A.D. 2008 injunction against Mr. Benson ordered by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The file is in PDF format.  I’ve included my comments in the original court order.  The court order offers a lot of possible insight into how the income tax system might work.  If you’re curious about the IRS or how “this state” operates, you might find the attached file fascinating.  To download a copy click on the following link:   090406-benson-injunction


Posted by on April 9, 2009 in Income Tax, Money, Trusts, U.S. vs The U.S.A.


Ohio Foreclosure Stopped by “Real Party in Interest” Objection

Here’s an A.D. 2008 Ohio case that offers an almost spectacular degree of insight into Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a), the concept of standing, and why many of the mortgages in this country can’t be legally foreclosed. As usual, my comments are [bold, bracketed blue]. “You can follow the links to a pristine copy of the case.)

Read the rest of this entry »


FRCP 17(a), Ratification of Commencement & Real Party In Interest

This last week, an email briefly banged around the internet concerning “ratification of commencement,” “real party in interest” and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCPs) # 17. That email alleged that the “ratification of commencement” was “vitally important info,” “the missing link to our processes,” and caused the email’s author to be “stunned by the revelation of this rule 17 and its impact on EVERY CASE in this country.”

Read the rest of this entry »