Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, January 20, 2011 Partial Howard Griswold Conference calls: 218-844-3388 pin 966771#

(6 mutes & un-mutes), Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time. 6 Mutes and un-mutes

Conference Call is simulcast on:

www.TheREALPublicRadio.Net Starting in the first hour at 8 p.m.

Note: there is a hydrate water call Mondays, same time and number and pin #. Howards home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)
Mickeys debt collection call is 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Wednesday night. The number is 712 432 8773 and the pin number is 947975#.

Check out: www.escapeharrassment.com www.escape-tickets-IRS-court.org All correspondence to: Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, Delmar, Del. 19940 (do not address mail to Howard Griswold since Howard has not taken up residence in that mailbox and since hes on good terms with his wife he isnt likely to in the foreseeable future.) "All" Howard's and GEMINI RESEARCH's information through the years, has been gathered, combined and collated into 3 "Home-Study Courses" and "Information packages" listed at www.peoples-rights.com "Mail Order" DONATIONS and/or Toll-Free 1-877-544-4718 (24 Hours F.A.Q. line) Dave DiReamer can be reached at: notaxman@dmv.com Peoples-rights has a new book available from The Informer: Just Who Really Owns the United States, the International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve, World Bank, Your House, Your Car, Everythingthe Myth and the Reality. Hell take $45 for the book to help with ads, but $40 would be ok which includes shipping ($35 barebones minimum) www.peoples-rights.com c/o 1624 Savannah Road, Lewes, Delaware 19958 ********************

Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, Eastern Time. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesdays number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in on Wednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=41875&cmd=tc

Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the following website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth Howard approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting to Howard.

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to Gemini Research rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs.
********************* Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe. When you arent talking please mute your phone!! Especially, dont walk away from your phone while its unmated. If you were near the phone in that situation youd hear the callers screaming at you to mute!!! It would be best if you mute your phone when you first come on, then un-mute it when you want to talk and then re-mute it. You can use the *6 button on your phone or use the phones mute button Speaker phones and cell phones are not desirable as they can chop up the call badly occasionally. If you are recording the call and leave the phone unintended, please mute!!!!!

Note, at various times some people left the phone un-muted and coupled television audio into the phone making the conference call conversations very difficult for all.
When you are not muted be careful of making noise such as breathing hard into the phones microphone or rubbing the mouthpiece or not reducing extraneous noise across the room. Cell phones can pick up wind noise when used outside and also if not in a primary reception zone can couple noise into the call. Excessive echoes and noise will terminate the conference call. Cell phones and speaker phones can cause echoes. Keep the call quiet, dont make Howard climb out of his mailbox and bop you one. ******************************************************************* Note: the telephone lines are usually quite noisy and therefore it would be prudent to slow your speech down otherwise your words and meaning will be lost. Suggestion: Get a phone with a privacy or mute button. This is much more convenient than star-6 and more rapid to use. It can also be used as a cough button since it can be used rapidly. Try it, youll like it. *********************************************************************

Mickeys new call-in number: 1-712-432-8787, pin: 170555# 8 p.m, EST ****************************************

A recording of each Howard Griswold Thursday conference call is available from Dezert Owl upon request for any sized donation. Go to the following link: www.TheRealPublicRadio.Net/Archives.html .
For donations to desert, send them to Free America Radio Network, 121 Seaparc Circle, Suite B, Kingsland, Georgia 31548. Phone number: 912-882-2142. Cell: 304-629-7169. For reference: Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd ) ***************************************************** Start ***************************************************** {01:32:54.135} [Howard] There were two interesting articles there, Dave, that you brought up that lead right into my discussion about government being in a trust position and that government is breaching the trust. The tax to be added on the sale of real estate, for instance, would be a tax on private property if its your private home that youre selling. The trust document that creates this United States government that made this law limits them from taking any benefit or advantage of your private property for their personal use which would be taxation like this without paying just compensation. Naturally, theyre not going to pay you back the $3,200 per $100,000. I think thats what it was that he just read. So theyre taking it without just compensation. That is a dishonest act and such dishonesty is a breach of the public trust by whatever officials that are doing this and by the entire Congress who passed such a law. Im not sure how we would go about doing this. Probably on the internet we could find the names of every congressman and every senator and they should be listed in some kind of a class action lawsuit for breach of the public trust and sued. And we need to get some people together that are beginning to learn a little bit about this trust concept that are willing to do that. I dont want some clown that just wants to sue them arbitrarily and write anything down and just throw it in there just to upset the apple cart because that wont really upset the apple cart. If youre going to do this kind of stuff you got to do it with the knowledge of what the law says and how it works. So youve got to do a little bit of study into this kind of stuff. But theres a perfect example, right there, of breach of the public trust imposing that tax on peoples private homes when they sell them. And, the other thing, I forgot what the other thing was. You brought up so many things one of the other things that you mentioned though caught my thoughts of that too is a government breach of the public trust. There are so many things that they are doing that actually breach the public trust because these things are not honest and theyre not for the

good and the benefit of us, the beneficiary. Theyre for the good and the benefit of the government who is in a trustee position. The trustee is not allowed to benefit from the trust unless the trust spells out some particular benefit for him. The document that creates the rules for this public trust is what we call the Constitution. I dont know of anything in the Constitution that says anything about government personnel being paid in any way, shape or form as trustees. And theyre being paid in all kinds of ways because theyre stealing from the beneficiaries. I almost feel that everything theyre doing could be categorized as a breach of the trust today. Going back in history there were good people in government. They werent breaching the trust in the early years of this country. But slow but sure there were people that worked their way into government, got in there, and manipulated things that became a breach of the trust. The problem today is that none of these morons have enough knowledge to know what a cattle guard is much less to know what the Constitution says, much less do they know that theyre trustees, much less do they even know that they have duties as a trustee to perform honestly and to protect the interest of the American people as the beneficiariesthey dont know this. They are indeed idiots. And I agree with that one e-mail that you just read that were idiots too for electing such idiots. Anyway, let me get into some of this stuff on the duties and liabilities of a trustee: By accepting the trust as a trustee the trustee become bound to administer it or to execute it in accordance with the provisions of the trust instrument. Now, I just told you that the public trustthats the governments trustthis has nothing to do with silly trusts that some moron is peddling to you because most of them are useless. But this is an important trust, the public trust, that government is involved in and the instrument that lays out their abilities and restrictions is the Constitution and, of course, the Bill of Rights that goes with the Constitution. And that is the intent of the settler which is us, the American people. It was done for our benefit, not by us. We are not We the People. We the People in the Preamble to the Constitution meant the people in the government and their posterity which is the people that came into the government later on and they are bound by this just as the law of trusts says. As a trustee they are bound to the trust and the instrument. So, it goes on to say: Unless compliance with the terms of the trust is impossible or illegal, unless there has been such a change of condition that compliance would defeat the substantiality and impair the accomplishment of the purpose of the trust the trustee must do what the trust instrument says. Unless the discretions of the trust instrument are declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction or unless a court of equity decrees otherwise the trustee is bound by the instrument. So, too, after acceptance he must execute the trust without any further request from anybody. We shouldnt have to ask these idiots to do their job and do it properly. Of course, we shouldnt elect such idiots either. We should find out what they know before we start voting for them, {idiots tend to elect idiots} not whether theyre good looking with a cute smile like Jimmy Carter.

And heany further requests from anybody. He can be relieved from all or part of his duties only by the consent of the beneficiaries. Thats us. We can throw this whole damned government out if we want to or just throw out a few of them. I think we ought to throw them all out. I think you ought to elect me dictator and Ill throw them all out and Ill take over and Ill start reinstating the purpose of the Constitution and then reorganizing a congress of people that understands their trust duties and put it all back the way it was supposed to be. Thats not likely because the American people would think that a dictator is not a good idea. But Im going to stir up a hell of a lot of controversy doing it anyway in 2012s elections. Anyway it goes on to say: Or by putting the administration of the trust in the hands of a court of equity. Considering how corrupt the rest of the court function is Im not sure that that would do us much good today. But it goes on to say: In this respect equity will give a trustee reasonable time to perform the duties which he has an obligation himself to perform and the duties of a trustee do not terminate at the prescribed time for termination of the trust if active duties remain to be performed by the trustee. A trustee is bound to know what his own duty is and cannot cast on to the cestui que trust which is the beneficiary the obligation of telling him what such duty is. The rule fixing the duties and responsibilities of a trustee is which is what a trustee is, hes in a fiduciary positionis not based on any statute and needs the sanction of no statute to make it binding and enforceable. In other words, this stuff is not statutory. The trust may be statutory, that doesnt matter. The duties of the trustee are not covered by statutes. They cant be because there are too many possible thingslike this silliness that Dave was just telling you about on that e-mail of being able to confiscate your automobile by interfering with or intercepting the electronic vibrations from your electric key and transmitting them and starting up your car after youve left and driving away with your car. There are all kind of ingenious little things that people could come up with to do like that, that the law cant possibly cover all of them. Thats why it says, under the rules of equity, and the rules of equity require honesty and integritywhich you dont see today very much, do you? Anyway, it goes on to say: In the absence of any additional undertaking the duties of the trustee are only those that the law imposes on him. A trustee will not be condemned for doing without a court order that which a court would have compelled him to do. No, not if the court would compel him to do it and it was proper under equity. It goes on to say: And a trustee is not chargeable with fraud, gross negligence or willful malfeasance because of acting pursuant to a court order. The failure of a fiduciary to indulge in idle gesture does not constitute a breach of his duty. A trustee cannot, before the

relationship is established, have violated the trust duty. And a trustee has been held not liable for fraud committed by two of the beneficiaries. Most of us are so stupid we wouldnt know what a cattle guard was either so we do stupid things and we perpetrate frauds and they just work on those frauds and keeping them going because its beneficial to them and its your fault when these things happen. And I think that something else that was just said tonight in one of those e-mails. After termination of the trust and with which he was not connected Ok, if hes not connected to the fraud or the wrong doing, of course, hes not guilty of breach of the trust. If a trustee fails to perform his duties redress to compel performance may be had through the courts of equity and every omission or violation by the trustee of a duty which equity lays on him whether willful or forgetful is a breach of the trust. I guess Congress forgot that the 5th Amendment says that they cant take private property without just compensation. Thats why they left that statement in there that theyll impose this tax on peoples real estate sales. It doesnt matter if they forgot or if they did it willfully, its still a breach of the trust. They could be sued for it and some other part of this thing that I was reading says that the trustee himself is personally liable for all damages that he causes. Sue them for everything they got. Take their wives and children and put them to work in the kitchen and the garden. In this respect the breach of the trust of a fiduciary while acting in the exercise of a lawful power is as fatal in equity to the resultant act or contract as the absence of that power would be. The court, however, if concluding that injustice will result may in its own discretion refrain from inflicting penalties on a trustee for breach of the trust. A trustees abuse of a trust confers no rights on him or on those claiming in privity with him. Like the tax collector in privity with the major trustees, Congress, and doing it the wrong way. The trustees laxity or negligence does not destroy the trust relationship and he cannot take advantage of his own wrong by setting up his own breach of trust. Obligations arising from the trust relationship are created by law and the rights and duties thereby imposed are not subject to defeasance. (being defeated, thats what that means) at the option of the trustee. The capacity to revoke the designation of a trustee may subject the trust and the trustee to limitations in points of time but it cannot alter the duties and obligations of the relationship as long as the relationship continues to exist. Now, right here, Im going to put something in here that Ive read somewhere else and that is that if it upsets you enough and there is a serious enough breach of the trust that the trust

can be terminated by the beneficiary or by the settler. Well, we happen to be the settlers. Were the posterity of the settlers and we approved it and accepted it. That makes us the settlers and were the beneficiaries so from either position we can approach the concept of terminating the trust which would terminate the Constitution and throw this whole stinking government out of business which might be the best thing we could do today. Now, it should be reinstated in some way or another but it would have to be done by people of honesty, integrity, decency and not greedy selfish people like what we have in there today. And youd have to be damned careful that it wasnt a bunch of Christians that participate in Zionism and not a bunch of the Jewish people that participate in Zionism. You would have to find honest decent Jewish people and honest decent Christians and thats not too damned easy to do. In either group its not too damned easy to do. Anyway, it goes on to say: The obligation of a person in whom confidence is reposed is not fulfilled by reason of the act of a third person neither known to inspired by the person under such obligation. In other words, you cant hand the duties off to somebody else. What Congress has been doing for the last century in this country creating these little private corporations like the Federal Reserve Bank and handing their duty to coin money and regulate the value off to these third person Federal Reserve Banks. That, too, was a breach of their fiduciary duty. Anyway, now it begins to talk about the terms of the trust instrument. In the absence of a statutory provision to the contrary the settler may in the trust instrument fix the duties of the trustee. Thats exactly what was done with the Constitution. It fixed their duties. It said what they had the authority to do. And in such case the duties and liabilities of the trustee are to be ascertained by an inspection of the instrument creating the trust. Did you hear this bull crap in Congress? Last week I think it was. They were going to have a reading of the Constitution before the entire Congress. Most of the people walked out wouldnt even sit there and listen to the reading of the Constitution. {they wouldnt want to spoil a perfect record} Theyre not interested in knowing what the trust instrument gives them the power to do. They know the American people are idiots. They know that they can pass a law and convince most of the people that we got to go along with the law. And as long as they can get majority rule and all of you idiots out here think that the health care bill is a great thing or at least the majority of the idiots think it is then they will enforce the health care bill despite all those who object because the objectors are too small and few and far between and the ones that think its wonderful, oh, governments going to take care of me. Yeah, theyre taking care of you alright. [caller] Howard, they read that Constitution and I kept hearing that on the radio and then the next day what did they do? Shoot that Congresswoman. [Howard] Well, we havent found out what that was all about yet. I dont know if she just happened to get hit and somebody else was the target or if she was the target or if the guy was just a nut and decided hed like to shoot a bunch of these people because hes

pissed off with leadership generally. It was a political meeting of some kind. I wouldnt be a bit surprised to see this happen a lot more frequently. And theyre not going to be able to create enough security to prevent it either because people are ingenious. They can figure out ways of accomplishing something like that without being seen coming in or leaving or found in the act of doing it even. Some people are various ingenious and theyll figure out ways to do it. And because our society has so little knowledge and so little understanding of what can be done through the courts, what should have been done in the past through the courts, what can be done even by popular opinion. If you can just get something into the news media to talk about that will stir popular opinion. As one of those e-mails said, if you tell the truth enough eventually the people will begin to believe the truth. Well, on the radio today one of the commentators said if you tell a lie long enough youll eventually get the people to believe the lie. Theyve been telling lies long enough that theyve got the people believing the lies. If somebody would just put the truth out there frequently enough people would begin to catch on to the truth. But as they do some of these people do not have the decency about them, the sense about them, the common sense and brains to do this in a proper manner through the courts. And they are going to make these attacks. This is not the first time this has happened. What was it, about a year ago some moron flew his airplane into an IRS building down in Texas? We have these kinds of attacks and were going to have them as long as this government is so corrupt. Its become so corrupt because its breaching the trust. It is putting all the liabilities upon us that actually belong to the trustee. [caller] Did you hear the part thatread on the Constitution? It was the 6th Amendment and everything at the end of it too. And thenplaying that, I was in Baltimore. It was on the radio all day and she kept reading that, the 6th Amendment to the Constitution. And that guy [Howard] Well, in the 6th Amendment the right to a jury trial?

[caller] Yeah, all those things in the 6th Amendment of the Constitution. Shes the one who had that part and that happened to her on a weekend. Shes a pro-gunner and shes a staunch border control agent too. She wants the border protected in Arizona and then that happened. [Howard] There could have been something behind this more than just some moron. We dont know and we probably never will know because just like the twin towers incident in New York everything was covered up. The bombing down in Oklahoma, the court office building down there {Murrah Building} everything was covered up. I know firemen that were there and they will tell you that the bombs were inside that building. They were planted there by somebody inside. But thats not what came out in the news. Thats not what the people have been told. They cover this stuff up and they do a damned good job of it. . . . {01:59:47.737}

[Howard] Let me go on with this. Theres another section here thats rather important to go with what I was just reading and that is the terms of the trust instrument. In the absence of statutory provisions to the contrary the settler may in the trust instrument fix the duties of the trustee. And Im telling you, thats exactly what the Constitution did and thats why these people dont even want to read it or hear it. Anyway, it goes on to say: And in such case the duties and liabilities of the trustee are to be ascertained by an inspection of the instrument creating the trust. Ordinarily, the law does not change a trustee of an expressed trust with responsibilities not imposedit says, not charged a trusteeof an expressed trust with the responsibilities not imposed and assumed under the trust instrument. So, restrictions imposed on the trustee by the trustor should be considered in passing on the issue as to whether the trustee properly managed the trust estate. The United States government is the trustee over America. America is an estate of property. Certain duties need not however be expressly embodied in the trust instrument and may be implied and where the settler has created a trust without imposing any specific duties on the trustee his duties are fixed by equitable rules. In other words, two things here to control this. The Constitution controls what government can do and what it cant do. And the rules of equity maintain the obligation of the law And the law, believe it or not and Ive heard many people say this, the Constitution is considered to be the law of the land. Well, thats the law this thing is talking about. The Constitution is not really a statutory document because its not passed by Congress itself. It was accepted by the legislature of the state to allow Congress to exist but it wasnt even passed by the legislature of the states. It was just accepted and they accepted it on behalf of the people of the states. It was good for the state the way it was written if it was embodied in the nature that it was intended and executed in the nature that it was intended. This country would be doing great. We wouldnt have these financial problems. We wouldnt have all these disasters that we have economically. But we do because theyve been breaching the trust for years and nobody stood up and did a thing about it, not even the politicians that weve elected over the years, not even the appointed attorney generals and such who ought to know better but they dont. As a matter of fact, every time I bring this stuff up to a lawyer about a trust, no, no, no, thats not the area we want to get into. Now, Im sure, they dont want to get into it. In a case out in Illinois the other day I wrote a motion up to go into their case that concerns me because Im part of it. Im involved in this action pertaining to this property. My request to the court was to either impose an estate and appoint one of us that are part of the estate as the administrator of the estate or impose a constructive trust and appoint some public lawyer. And, boy, Im telling you when they saw that imposed a constructive trustno, no, we dont want to get involved in that. That puts too many restrictions on them to do something like that. Thats why they didnt want

to get involved in it. Theyre scared of this trust stuff. We need to scare them a whole lot worse by using it and accusing them of breach of the trust. The trust already exists in most cases. In a case like this it was private property. So, a trust didnt exist but because there was a conflict over it a constructive trust should have been imposed on the one holding it because the holder is always in a trust position holding somebody elses property. That imposes a constructive trust. They dont want to get into something like thattoo many restrictions. It ties them down and makes them do things honestly and they dont want to do that today. Theres very little honesty left in this world especially in religious people. If they claim to belong to some religion run away from them. Anyway, this thing goes on to say? But the trustees implied obligation or duty will not be the basis of a liability unless the omitted act was clearly within the intent of the party and does not conflict with the provisions of the instrument under which the trustee is acting. So, see, there are little specific things here. Yeah, there are things that come up and you have to make a decision to do something one way or another. And sometimes the decisions are not always easy to make and maybe everybody doesnt agree with them. But if its for the benefit of the trustees and within the confines of the provisions of the instrument under which the trustee is acting then its alright for him to do it. But he is also required in the application of equitable principles to do it honestly. Any limitation in a trust instrument of a trustees duties which is imposed by public policy Now, were talking about things like the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. or illegal in any way will not be given the effect. Things like the 14th Amendment actually violate the basic concept of the original Constitution. There should be no effect given whatsoever to the 14th Amendment or anything done under the 14th Amendment. Social Security is a 14th Amendment civil rights benefit. Health care is a 14th Amendment civil rights benefit. None of this stuff should be given any effect whatsoever. By giving it effect, by doing it in the first place and then by giving it effect theyre in breach of the trust because it goes against the basic policy of the original trust instrument. And it goes on to say: And the trustee cannot take advantage of liberal provisions of the trust instrument to relieve himself from the legal responsibilities of a fiduciary under the law. The high standards to which a fiduciary is held require that an intention on the settlers part to authorize the trustee in either matter or form to go beyond the ordinary limits prescribed by law must be expressed in language that is correspondingly clear and appropriate. We got to go over to Germany and attack this guy named Hitler because he kills little children. Thats how they sold the 2nd World War to the American people, in case you

dont know it or arent old enough to remember it. I was just a child at the time but my parents talked about it. My grandparents talked about it. And that was the way they sold the American people on the idea of going over to Germany and getting involved in the 2nd World War. {They did something similar in the 1st World War and then later in the 1st Gulf War}. If you read the Constitution carefully, read the preamble to it, it says that We the People of this government called the United States ordain this Constitution for ourselves and our posterity and we promise to do this for the American people. What it goes on to say, they promise to maintain the general welfare and to maintain a common defense. Wheres there any damned defense in going to Germany and starting a war? They had no power whatsoever to do that. Yet look at how many stupid Americans including my father signed up and went to war. He didnt know any better. He thought he was doing the right thing. He didnt understand the words in the Constitution. The government has the right to defend in this country. If they come here and attack us the government needs to muster us together to defend this country. We need to respect this government and support it and help it to defend. We need to bring our guns and point them at the enemy. Thats what it was for. It had nothing to do with attacking Germany in the 1st or 2nd World War or going into Somalia. The United States found out that theyre not competent to fight with people down there. Those people down there outsmarted them. And all this shenanigans going on in the Middle East, what the hell are we doing over there? Theyre not here attacking us. At least I cant find them. I dont see them out on the streets. Theyre not carrying guns shooting at people. Some of our own stupid people are carrying guns and shooting at people like that simple kid down there in Arizonashot randomly {debatabletoo many accurate shots} into a crowd of people. We have no authority to be involved in these wars. Again, Congress is in breach of the trust because they didnt do what the trust document says. It says to defend, to create a defense, to provide for the common defense. It does not say to become an aggressor and attack other countries. We have become an aggressor and attack other countries. No wonder most of the countries of the world dont like us right now. And if we dont stop this foolishness you might see China over here and Russia will be with it and the Middle East will be with it. We will find out that they are no longer our allies but they are the attacker because this country has to be stopped from what its doing. And I have said many times, God bless those people that work in government, if they got any sense theyll quit now because theres going to come a day when its going to be a very damned dangerous place to be. So, if youre decent and you work for government and you realize how improper whats going on in government is get out of there. I prefer this went on in the courts. I prefer we force the courts into a situation of ruling on their breach of trust and stopping the things that theyre trying to do. This bringing the Mexican trucks in, I dont even understand what the hell that is. The Mexican trucks are here already. What are they talking about? They got more trucks or something they want to bring? None of that story makes much sense. But whatever, the Mexican trucks are here. We deal with Mexico all the time. Where do you think a lot of our vegetables on the grocery story shelves come from in the wintertime? They come from South America and Mexico. 02:14:23.779 . . . 02:18:21.969

[caller] We just had a devastating defeat. We did everything. We covered all the bases. She did a great job and they just usurped the rule of law. [Howard] Ok, theyre guilty of breach of the trust so go back and sue them.

[caller] Howard, what do you say to a lawyer and the judge and youre there defending your case and they say, I just dont understand what shes asking me for, a wetink signature. What did she want? And the judge says, the documents that theyre going to submit into evidence. It doesnt matter if you can read them or not and it doesnt matter if it says its a mortgage or a credit card, its irrelevant. What do you say then? [Howard] I would say that the judge is a trustee and he should know that and if you dont follow the rules of evidence then youre in breach of the public trust and Ill bring suit against you and hold you liable. Now, judge, lets proceed on. [caller] The canons of ethics. Thats what happened today. Thats exactly what happened. The lawyer just said, I dont know what she wants, a wet-ink signature on a contract. He didnt even understand what that was. Its like, what is the definition of is. Then you walk out of the courtright? [Howard] [caller] Did you object? Yes, she did. She didnt say, objection, though.

[Howard] She should have said, I object, your honor, hes an idiot, he shouldnt be allowed in the courtroom. [caller] She should have said the word, I object, but we had our own.and that was what it was. Its not a court of record or anything. Its just a bunch of words. The judge denied she said things that she did say and she said, I never said that, and that was the way it was going to be. So, the next time therell be a court reporter and other things. Were going to cover every angle. We did it this time too. The judge is the one who brought this action for us. The judge has ordered this action today and stood there in frontand said she never did it. She brought a motion to dismissmailed it to Dianne and then she said she never did that. Thats what happened today. How about thathuh? [caller] She should have gotten it notarized.

[caller] She notarized it. WE should have had a court reporter We should have notarized what? We notarize everything. They never notarize. They never certified anything. You got the next court up to go to. [caller] And we will appeal if they lose. She doesnt have to testifytheres no plaintiff. They failed to bring contact information from their affiant. Theyve done all these things. Now, the subpoena process, thats what Im looking into next but I keep reading these rules and keep studying.

[Howard] Thats what you got to do. Thats what I keep harping about. People have to do some reading and studying and learn a little bit about that theyre doing. [caller] [Howard] You got to do it every day. You cant go in there blind.

[caller] Theyre worse than they ever were. Theyre worse now. They have a heads up on what other people have been doing, about all these foreclosures. These lawyers are getting worse. Theres federal lawsuits filed against them and theyre still coming at us. And the judges are just ruling for them. Im thinking about judicial complaints. Theres so many questions Ive got. We have to cover all the details. We covered everything before and they still did what they did today to her. standing, everything, wet-ink signature. [Howard] Well, the lawyer showed you that hes an idiot. He doesnt even know what youre talking about. [caller] And Im going to send to him with the court case but I dont even know if this new world government is even listening the case precedences that they used to listen to. Now, people are finding out. I think theyre just smoothing it over for themselves. [Howard] Theres a story in the Bible that if you learn how to read, not just pronounce words but actually read and know what the words mean you can see that this government is the 7th and final Babylonian Empire. And if you had any knowledge of what Babylon was all about, it didnt have the high tech crap that we have today but it did the same thing with instruments, with paper. It created the appearance of values and the appearance of debt and confiscated peoples property under the pretense of a debt and that was picked up by each one of the Babylonian Empires including the Roman Empire and then the English Empire. And now, the United States Empire is doing the same exact identical procedures that started out with ancient Babylon. And that story goes on to say that this will self-destruct from within and because of what theyre doing and the way theyre just letting it all hang out people are beginning to learn how corrupt this whole thing is and the people will stop participating entirely with it in a short period of time and when they do it will crumble from within because from within they have exposed themselves. So, whats happening is whats written to happen. Its supposed to be this way. But we need to push it a little bit with some suits against them for breach of the public trust. Finally, after all these years of study I finally found the answer that weve been looking for, for all these years on how to do something about what theyre doing thats wrong. You dont challenge the constitutionality of the income tax laws because the income tax laws are constitutional. They apply to what Congress was given the authority to apply them to. The IRS and their lawyers are misapplying them. So, its not the really the government thats so bad. Its the people in government that are so bad. And the people in government are the ones that are in the trustee position. So, you dont sue the government. You dont sue the United States of America. You dont sue the state of, and you can fill in the name for any one of the fifty states. You sue the individual as a trustee for breach of the trust and you point out where he

did wrong. In your case what youre talking about is the rules of court. He didnt follow them. The rules of evidence, Rule 901, requires that the original instrument be presented in a case like what youre talking about. Now, what you saw today is a judge who doesnt even know what the rules of evidence are all about. He doesnt even know what a live signature means or he would have called that stupid lawyer down who also admitted that he didnt know what it meant. So, you were dealing with a moron. You were dealing with morons that you had to take the time to teach them what the law said and show them their own laws. [caller] Well, I know theyre too lazy to look at the law but Im telling you they have a conspiracy between these lawyers. Theyve gotten together and theyre not following the law. Theyre lying to the judge. The judge is smoothing over their lies. He said, just produce an affidavit and say you did production of documents and thats good enough. Even though you didnt produce them were going to just go with this. So, today, was a different case. She did a great job. So with anybody else she would have lost but, now, theyre going to move for their arbitration and thats no problem, theres no plaintiff. Theres no contact information and we got five different avenues that were going to do. Im going to call the office of the president of the treasurer of the affiant who made this verification. Im going to get with the other people and find out how to get these other ones from public records of these same guys names that was robo-signed. Its Ruben These copies that they sent for the evidence you really cant read them. Theres no page numbers that are in order andon some of them and she said its irrelevant and I know thats just not the case. Its not the way it is. Is it a mortgage or is it a credit card? But first of all, the court case that we talked about theres no standing, the three elements of standing. There has to be injuries and the defendant actions that caused this injury and thats a remedy it will suffice for what theyre asking for. [Howard] Itll suffice for compensating for the injury.

[caller] Exactly, and we protested another discovery in this court case. Now, if theyre not going to these court case precedents were going to send to the judicial board. Im going to do everything but not without help from the group. [Howard] If you did discovery and you asked for the original mortgage with a live signature in discovery and they didnt bring it in they cant even bring up the mortgage note. [caller] Yeah, I know and she let them do it today.

[Howard] Theyre not supposed to let them bring it up. If they didnt produce it in discovery then theyre not supposed to let them talk about it in the court. [caller] Exactly, and they said they have the wet-ink signature contract but they never produced it to us. And she says, Ill give them anything that she wants. Now, were supposed to not by motionthe bailiff told her this. Not by motion. Just put it in simple sentences because he cant understand what a wet-ink signature is.

[Howard]

Even the bailiff was smarter then the damned dumb lawyer.

[caller] Well do it on the court record and on the court docket. If she cant win this then nobody can win this. Its overin the whole country. I swear to God this case, here {discussion cut off at this point} For the benefit of anyone who wants to try to look this stuff up, what I was reading from was Book 90 of Corpus Juris Secundums, Section 247 under trusts. If you want to look it up youll learn a lot. Theres a lot more to it than what I just read. Next week Ill go onto some other parts of it that are important stating more of the possible actions of the trustees that constitute a breach of the trust. {Donations would be appreciated for typing costs for the Corpus Juris Secundum trust info (non-scanable). Will make it available to anybody on computer} Send donations to Gemini Investments, PO Box 398, Delmar, Delaware 19940. American Jurisprudence is also worthwhile studying.