Subject: breaking presumptions of citizenship

Subject: breaking presumptions of citizenship

These court cases were passed on to me to validate the important of breaking presumptions of citizenship and how important it is to break any presumption that one may have regarding your status.  Also read Rule 902 of Federal Rules of Civil Procedures.

Think about where you have confirmed and signed a document that you are a U.S. citizen:

ü      Voter registration

ü      Driver license

ü      Signature card for a bank account

ü      Social Security Card

ü      Your last tax return

Citizenship may be voluntarily relinquished or abandoned either expressly or by conduct. Kennedy v Mendoza- Martin ez, 372 US 144, 83 S Ct 554, 9 L Ed 2d 644

Unless the defendant can establish that he is not a citizen of the United States , the IRS possesses authority to attempt to determine his federal tax liability. United States of America v. William M. Slater, (D. Delaware) 545 F.Supp 179, 182 (1982)

“Thus the dual character of our citizenship is made plainly apparent. That is to say, a citizen of the United States is ipso facto and at the same time a citizen of the state in which he resides. And while the Fourteenth Amendment does not create a national citizenship, it has the effect of making that citizenship “paramount and dominant” instead of “derivative and dependant” upon state citizenship.” Supreme Court case Colgate v. Harvey , 296 US 404, 427 (1935)

The term “citizen” as understood in our law, is precisely analogous to the term “subject” in the common law. Hennessy v Richardson Drug Co. 189 US 25, 23 S Ct 532, 47 L Ed 697

Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state.” Crosse v. Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966)

“The term resident and citizen of the United States is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress.” U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873)

"The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, which are protected by the 14th Amendment, against abridgment by the states, are those which arise out of the essential nature and characteristics of the national government, the federal Constitution, treaties, or acts of Congress, as distinguished from those belonging to the Citizens of a state;. . . . "  Gardner v. Ray, 157 S. W. 1147, 1150; Hammer v. State, 89 N. E. 850, 851, 173 Ind. 199, 24 L. R. A., N. S., 795, 140 Am. St. Rep. 248, 21 Ann. Cas. 1034.

The power of Congress to regulate naturalization under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution does not include the power to restrict the effect of birth to constitute a sufficient and complete right of citizenship as declared by the Constitution. United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 US 649, 18 S Ct 456, 42

It is possible to be where you want to be if you are willing to do what you need to do.

Christopher Chapman

321-636-9949
25-6

When you read all the emails about what the Congress is doing and what Obama and the Obamanations are doing it only really affects the people who argue it, US citizens and the legislative territories, in which the several States its not one of them.

Are you a U.S. citizen?

Are you a US person?

Are you a statutory person?

Are you the citizen as defined in Title 26 §§§3121(e), 1402(b), 3306(j) and elsewhere.

If not, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO BREAK THE PRESUMPTIONS?

If you don’t know any of the answers then someone will answer them for you, and you will not like the answers.

To break and clear up any false presumptions that you are a operating as a Trade or Business and not connected to the federal government have you NUNC PRO TUNC to set the record straight?

I can help, as well as the Joinder to David Myrland’s Criminal Complaint I have documents to help those who are in the fight, and to set the record straight.

ü      Declaration of Domicile

“…The legal Domicile of a person is important since it, rather than the actual residence, often controls the jurisdiction of the taxing authorities and determines where a person may exercise the privilege of voting and other legal rights and privileges.” Blk’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed.

ü      Affidavit 29 pages to set the record straight and a promise to pay all taxes owed if they can successfully rebut just one averment.

ü      Nunc Pro Tunc for the people who want not to be tied in the Social Security Number as the law shows you are see the following:

Executive Order 9397, which provides, in part as follows:

WHEREAS certain Federal agencies from time to time require in the administration of their activities a system of numerical identification of accounts on individual persons; and;

WHEREAS it is desirable in the interest of economy and orderly administration that the Federal Government move towards the use of a single, unduplicated numerical identification system of accounts and avoid the unnecessary establishment of additional systems;

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered as follows:

1.                    Hereinafter any Federal department, establishment, or agency shall, whenever the head thereof finds it advisable to establish a new system of permanent account numbers pertaining to individual persons, utilize exclusively the Social Security Act account numbers.

Now let us move up to 1974, with the increasing demands being placed on individuals to furnish a social security number in circumstances when use of the number is not required by Federal Law or regulation, the Congress in 1974 passed the Privacy Act of 1974 (Pub. Law 93-579, 88 Stat. 1896; as amended). Section 7 of Pub. Law 93-579 provides:

(a)(1) It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State. Or local governmental agency to deny to any right, benefit, or privilege provided by law because of such individual’s refusal to disclose his social security account number.

THERE IS NO LAW REQUIRING THE PEOPLE OF THE SEVERAL STATES TO OBTAIN, HAVE OR USE A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER.

“The Social Security Act does not require a person to have a Social Security number to live and work in the United States , nor does it require an SSN simply for the purpose of having one. However, if someone works without an SSN, we cannot properly credit the earning for the work performed.”   SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION