When I recently made a conscious decision to withdraw from the general media hype about "terrorist attacks" and just keep looking at what's interesting in the English-speaking world, I noticed this pearl. Trustees, beneficiaries, asset managers, judges, prosecutors ... a very inspiring read summarized by David E. Robinson.
Perhaps a lot more makes sense when you read politicians urging corporations to set up trust funds.
Check it out if I have not chosen one or the other term correctly, because I have no legal background. When in doubt, I have put the choice of words from the original in brackets after it.
The Truth About Trust Funds…. and courts
Basically, courts encumber the capitalized NAME, which is a TRUST FORTUNE. They hope that you will identify with the trust assets - and give them access to the assets with your signature.
In the corporate matrix, everything is held in a public trust, and the way the elite get access to the trust is to CHARGE the TRUST and then get yourself to be the TRUST / NAME spent.
Foreigners who do not comply with the regulations are usually not charged - unless it is a common law violation - because they are not associated with any TRUST ASSETS. So it is not worth burdening them.
Look at the three "forms" of judgment. Remember what Jean Keating said about “substance and form”. You are the "substance" and applications and files are the "form".
Asking the judge / asset manager “Is this about substance or form?” Is usually a trick that leads to you being thrown OUT of the court and leading to a dismissal of the action.
Our position has always been never to go to court voluntarily. Living men and women are not intended to be in a place designated for the business of fictional entities.
When we appear in court we are considered dead; they can only handle legal fictions ... trust assets.
The court is a place for "registered persons" - judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, bailiffs, clerks, police officers and lawyers. Living men and women are not recognized in court; they are not "persons" (companies).
Lawyers do not know how the system works because of their indoctrination. If you can find a lawyer to do what you tell them to do, then you will have your way, but most lawyers would rather keep their BAR cards than act honorably.
The only thing dead, fictional entities want from us is our life energy, and they can only get it with our consent. You cannot function without us. So they want to take us to court so that we can pay off the debts they created by encumbering our trust / name.
There are no longer any common law courts. A case in court has nothing to do with living men and women or "facts". So anyone who testifies (speaks) about the facts of a case will lose the case.
ALL courts apply antitrust law (trust law), which is based on ecclesiastical canon law and reveals itself as commercial law. We will lose in court if they can get us to give them our consent.
To do this, they dig deep into their bag of tricks - intimidation, fear, threats, ridicule, anger are used, and even adjournment to change the law when they are about to lose, only to get us to admit that Name of the trust - to be the trustee - who is responsible for managing the trust.
So it has been a waste of time and energy until now to go to a place where we are quite likely to get caught up in that responsibility.
We were told during indocrination in our public schools that judges were impartial and swore an oath on it; that they prefer neither accused nor accused. But the experience is different - namely that the judge is on the side of the plaintiff - a blatant conflict of interests.
Prosecutor, judge, and clerk (clerk) all work for the state - the owner and licensor of the CQV trust assets (Cestui Que Vie).
It's not about "fairness" - it's about running a trust.
You represent a trust property owned by the state and if we are the beneficiaries there are only two positions left, executor and trustee.
So if you can show a judge's bias - although I doubt it will come to that - you can let them know that you are aware of those roles.
Under antitrust law, you cannot be the executor or trustee of a trust and at the same time the beneficiary, as this would be in conflict with each other, as the beneficiary cannot act in his favor.
I recommend getting represented so you don't get confused and then inadvertently agree to be the trust / trustee.
The worst that can happen to your agent is that he can prove that he is NOT the trust / trustee. The position of the beneficiary may not have that much influence, but the other positions can be held liable.
The only way civil servants can be the beneficiaries of the trust is if they transfer the liability they hold onto us because they cannot be both the asset manager and the beneficiary of the trust.
The trusteeship and the office of the asset manager (executorship) are hot potatoes that you want to get rid of so that you can be the beneficiary of the assets.
When we were born, a trust fund - a Cestui Que Vie Fund (CQV) - was set up in our favor.
Proof of this is the birth certificate. But what was the value put into this trust fund to create it? The value was our right to property through our birth into this world, our body through the live birth record, and our soul through the baptismal certificate.
The state that registered this trust fund is the owner and trustee ... the trustee of the trust.
Since the state wants to be the beneficiary of the property, it has to get us (the actual beneficiary) to allow it to encumber the trust assets by means of our signature on a document (a subpoena, an application, etc.) in order to put the trusteeship on us to be transferred if he wants to be the beneficiary of a particular "constructive" trust.
A trust fund can be set up anywhere and the parties to the fund can be deployed at any time.
And since the beneficiary cannot encumber the trust assets (only a trustee can do that), it is the state, as the trustee, who encumbles the assets - but it does this for its benefit, not ours.
So, under antitrust law, the only way for the state to benefit from its burden on the trust assets is to get us to switch roles - from beneficiary to trustee (the one responsible for netting) while exiting the role of The trustee slips into that of the beneficiary (because neither side can play both roles at the same time in the same constructive trust).
Under antitrust law, the only way for him to encumber the trust assets is to obtain our - the beneficiary - approval.
Why should we agree to switch roles when the trust is for our good?
And how do you manage to do this?
Well, the best course of action is to drag ourselves to court and trick us into unknowingly letting us do just that. But if we know the context before we appear there, we know what to say to prevent this from happening.
The court clerk is the key figure, even if the judge seems to be the key figure. The clerk is the trustee for the CQV trust assets, which are owned by the state. He or she is responsible for appointing the trustee and executor for the constructive trust in this particular court case.
In a “last will and testament” trust, the opposite is the case - here the administrator of the estate determines the trustee.
So the clerk designates the judge as trustee (who manages the assets) and he designates the public prosecutor as executor of the trust fund (who executes the trust assets) (the one to execute the trust).
The executor is ultimately responsible for the set-off because he or she brought the case to court on behalf of the state (which in turn created the trust relationship), which encumbered the CQV trust assets.
Only an asset manager / prosecutor can create / initiate a fiduciary relationship, and whoever creates something else is liable and must provide the remedy.
This is why all prosecutors are required to bring their checkbook to court because if they fail to transfer their liability to the alleged defendant (the accused) or the alleged defendant (the accused) declines the offer of the state to assume liability, someone must discharge the trust fund the appropriate amount to offset the debt. And that "someone" is the prosecutor.
Since the prosecutor is the one who settles the trust assets, the prosecutor / executor (PE) must pay the burden.
When the judge / administrator / trustee (JAT) calls out the name of the trust, MAX MUSTERMANN, we can stand up and ask, “For the record, this is to be understood as the trust, you manage now that is MAX MUSTERMANN trust assets? "
This is to state that we know the name is a trust, not a living man.
What is usually the judge / administrator / trustee's first question, "What's your name?" Or "Put your name on the record".
We must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust, for in doing so we will switch roles and make ourselves the trustee and the judge the beneficiary.
If we know from the start that the judge is the trustee, then we know that the judge's name is in that constructive trust.
Remember all the times the judge is upset about the refusal to admit the name to be, where he issues an arrest warrant for the "defendant absent" and as soon as the man leaves the courtroom he is arrested. How idiotic is that? You would feel ridiculous if you say, "Max Mustermann didn't appear in court, so I'm going to issue an arrest warrant for him," and the man you just admitted was not there is being arrested for being there is.
Their desperation drives them crazy, so they project their madness onto us and arrange psychological measures for us for their own madness !!!
This is where we can ask, “Are you implying that you don't know what I'm talking about? Are you admitting your incompetence? Shall we send someone in who KNOWS what I'm talking about? "
They have to get us to admit to being The Name, otherwise they'll have to foot the bill - and we can't accept their coercion or we'll pay.
Because the judge is the trustee - a precarious position - the best in this case would be to say ...
"MAX MUSTERMANN is indeed before this court!" And to point to the judge. “With all due respect, that's you! As a trustee, you are MAX MUSTERMANN today, aren't you? !!! "
We have to be respectful and kind, otherwise we will fall to their level. If the judge is frustrated that we are not admitting to being the name of the trust - that is, the trustee / administrator of the property - we should ask who he is.
"Before we go any further, Your Honor, I need to know who YOU are."
Go to the clerk of the court and ask him - the trustee of the CQV state trust fund, “Are you the trustee who appointed the judge to be the administrator / trustee in Trust No. 12345? Did you appoint the prosecutor to be the executor in this fiduciary relationship? "
Then points to the judge with the words, “So you are the trustee” and pointed to the prosecutor, “and you are the executor - and I am the beneficiary. So I instruct you to dissolve and relieve this trust relationship (constructive trust). "
“I'm claiming my body here, so I'm going to liquidate the CQV trust fund that you charged because there is no value there. You have broken all laws! "
Most likely it will not come to that, as the judge will order “lawsuit dismissed” ... or more likely the prosecutor will shout “We're withdrawing the lawsuit”.
We uncovered their fraud with the CQV trust, which exists only on the basis of guesswork. The CQV trust fund has no body, no property ... so no value. Trust funds are only created with transfer of ownership and can only exist as long as there is value in that trust fund.
There is no value in the CQV trust fund and yet they continue to encumber that trust assets. That's cheating!
The alleged wealth is us men and women, the ones who find them incompetent, dead, abandoned, lost, bankrupt or worthless - but that is an illusion. So when we strain our bodies, we break the assumption that there is value in this trust fund.
They act fraudulently - something we always knew - but now we know how they do it. Now that we've exposed them, you only have three options:
You can dismiss the lawsuit before you risk your fraud being discovered.
Or they can clear the debt and leave us alone.
You can liquidate this one case of the CQV Trust Fund - but you cannot liquidate the CQV Trust Fund yourself - otherwise the global system would collapse. Because they cannot exist without our energy, which they draw from the CQV Trust Fund, and they do not want the CQV Trust Fund resources to go to the beneficiaries that we are.
Now that they know we recognized their fraud, every time they go to court to clear the trust fund they will not know if we are the ones to send them to jail. The trustee / judge is the liable figure who will go to jail and the executor / prosecutor must enforce this.
That is why they want us to accept both titles, Executor / Trustee, because then not only do we go to jail, but by signing their documents we become the executor enforcing our own sentence.
They cannot afford to violate the Church's canon law for fear of losing their careers. So they are trapped without any leeway.
So what's a clerk's job? !! In the near future none of these gangsters will accept such cases because the risk is too great. That will be the end of the judiciary. About time too, isn't it? Knowing - not knowing the procedure - is power.
Under commercial law - since the Ur-Nammu Code (circa 2100 BC) - appropriating someone else's property without their consent brings shame on one and makes them liable for any debts incurred.
So our use of UCC forms, bills of exchange, AFV or bonds, Federal Reserve Notes and other documents of the Roman system can result in penalties for dealing in and using property that is not ours as the " Name “on the birth certificate is owned by the company that created it. We can fill out our papers neatly, but in the end they'll say "Sorry, you don't belong with us because you are real and we are not - we are a fiction."
But now we can scare them instead. When we are dragged into court knowing that the judge is the trustee and the prosecutor is the executor of the CQV trust fund, it is very empowering.
That gives us two options:
We can expose the fraud based on suspicions that the CQV trust fund exists - and then ask them to liquidate it, since the trustee is the judge sitting in the bank. To dissolve a CQV trust means to dissolve all of them.
If we know that whatever the judge says - even if it sounds like orders, orders, or punishment - is an “offer”, we can decline that by saying, “I disagree - I accept you Offer not ".
This is the key principle of testamentary trusts - the beneficiary can accept or decline the trustee's offers.
I haven't found any other solution on the market because those who claim they have solutions still insist on treating the symptoms rather than eliminating the cause…. the fraudulent CQV trust fund.
Which: found at http://revealthetruth.net/2015/01/14/die-wahrheit-uber-treuhandfonds-und-gerichte/
##########################
If you like you can leave us a coffee for the effort and the time invested,
Thank you very much
As a precaution, the editors distance themselves from each article. The articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editors, rather they only serve to free opinion. Nobody is perfect and error is possible. In addition: it is only information and does not necessarily have the attention of the editors.
As an Amazon partner, the blog operator earns qualified sales via the Amazon links inserted in the blog. Almost all of this earnings are converted into animal feed.
To comment on posts or to rate them with stars, you have to registered and logged in be. Not registered yet?
forest power
☘️ Kills all kinds of disease-causing germs through oxidation
☘️ Eliminates and drains heavy metals and environmental toxins
☘️ Increases performance...
"Chlorine dioxide is the most effective bacteria killer known to man."
Follow us on Telegram
