Banks & State Courts = Corruption

Banks & State Courts = Corruption Galore!

Even when you have irrefutable proof that a bank has sold your note, and you make claims, the state courts are never going to find in your favor.

Your private rights are only respected in an Article III Common Law court.

So where do you find that?
You don't go on Google.

You have to know HOW to demand that type of REAL court in Federal Court.

Essentially, certain judges are trained in Article III and change their hats from Article I upon your demand.

But where there is government, there is corruption.

They don't like it.

They will fight like hell to use their statutory trap doors that if you don't know what you're doing, they will bring you back into statutory.

You have to learn this and you're not learning it from Google or even Law School.

You learn it from trial and error.
That's how Scott became an expert on it.

Where does Article I vs Article III come from?
The Constitution!

Article I:
"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

It does not say that political subdivisions can create private for profit corporations acting and pretending to be government trampoline on our rights as "courts".

All administrative tribunals require your consent.

Judge Gorsuch issued a scathing Supreme Court ruing in the SEC v Jarkesy, that the British attempted to evade American cries by siphoning adjudication to jury-less admiralty, vice admiralty, and chancery courts.

Do you see juries in traffic court, divorce court, small claims court?

Read Article I of the Constitution with fresh eyes and compare it to what you see going on in the so called government today.

Article III:
"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish."

Let's assess that.

No matter what the claim is being made against you, to exercise your rights, you must be in Article III.

The Supreme Court in Jarkesy reaffirmed that actions involving private rights, such as common-law fraud, must be heard by an Article III court: "Congress cannot 'conjure away the Seventh Amendment by mandating that traditional legal claims be... taken to an administrative tribunal." SEC v. Jarkesy, 603 U.S. (2024)

But when you hire a BAR CARD attorney, they cannot re-present you by speaking for you.

Have you EVER seen any conversation about demanding your seventh amendment right to a common law jury?

Trump.
Bannon
Navarro.
Giuliani.
O'Keefe
Any J-6ers?

Not a peep.

No BAR CARD tool of the state would ever go against their masters because they cannot bring your rights into an Article I administrative court...EVER.

They can only re-present the LEGAL ENTITY which has no rights.

They tell tales and weave narratives.
But mostly they work with the state to make deals.

When I was faced in traffic court situations with such vultures fresh out of law school, and they made me "offers", I would say....

"Did you really go to law school for three years to become a f-ing car salesman?" 🤣🤣🤣

You should have seen the look on their faces.

These are coddled people who were sold a very false dream about graduating from law school.

They shut up and they gave me my day in court.

My learning has excelled that I do not ever go to an administrative court because now I now how to inform them they have no jurisdiction over me.

I have no contracts with them.

An Article I jury will be instructed as per the STATUTES being used by the administrative court against a LEGAL ENTITY.

For instance...
If it's illegal to eat jelly beans on Sunday, and you are caught by a cop doing so, arrested, and brought to trial, the judge will instruct the jury to find you guilty via the statute so you will be found GUILTY.

But did you harm anyone?
Is the statute REASONABLE?
Is it anybody's business that you ate jellybeans on Sunday?

No.

Like Trump's cases.
Where are the victims?
But his BAR CARD tool of the state lead him right into Article I courts weaving a tale and HOPING they win instead of standing upon his rights.

Did you ever hear his attorneys speak of that?
Nope.

In an Article III Common Law jury, THEY WILL DECIDE using COMMON SENSE that you did not harm anyone and no government can tell you that you can't eat jellybeans on Sunday and will find you NOT GUILTY.

So which society do you wish to live in?
Article I or Article III?

Want to learn what we know?

Join the Inalienable University to learn how to exercise your rights and remove the contracts that obligate you to the fake government agencies.