Anna von Reitz
I Don’t Know April LaJeune / Controversy about A4V
I don’t know April. I couldn’t recognize her in a crowded room. I wouldn’t recognize her voice on the phone. I have spoken to her once on the phone, when I called her up and asked what she was doing distributing material published on my website.
She said she was using “some of it” as part of a larger process she was recommending herself. She also said that she and her staff were charging fees to help fill out paperwork for those who felt the need for hand-holding assistance.
I reiterated that I only take responsibility for the use of material published on my website when it is used for the purposes I recommend. I agreed it was no sin for her to use materials I made freely available for the purposes I stipulated, and it was also no sin to charge a hand-holding fee for hours of labor related to processing such paperwork. She didn’t offer to give me any percentage and I didn’t ask for one.
April and I don’t agree about the A4V process or the TDA process. She says I am old and I don’t get it. She may be right. She isn’t the only one to say that. I can’t “prove” otherwise, because neither the Treasury nor the Bureau of Public Debt are forthcoming about either subject.
What I remember — because I am old — is that the A4V process was buried in the records as “Public Policy” remedy for the swindles and unlawful conversion of our assets back in the 1930 debacle per HJR 192. What I also remember is that the bankruptcy that all that referred to was settled in 1999, so that it became illegal to continue presenting those claims as of November 7, 1999.
There was a presumption of continuance of that remedy when the UNITED STATES went bankrupt in 2015, at least for actual Federal Citizens— because the Federal Code was still on the books and their franchises were being bankrupted.
There is a logic to that, but those of us who hauled rump out of the possession of the Muni Government and placed our “vessels” in a permanent domicile on the land jurisdiction wouldn’t be eligible for that. The whole point of our action was to avoid bankruptcy and to properly, explicitly define our “vessels” — our NAMES — as private vessels engaged in international trade— not commerce.
Bankruptcy is a “privilege” only available to incorporated entities (franchises) engaged in commerce, so once you redefine your vessels — all these NAMES — as private vessels and you move them to a permanent domicile in a different jurisdiction, you are no longer eligible for — or in need of — bankruptcy protection.
I think it is pretty obvious that (1) it is illegal to present claims against a bankrupt entity once the bankruptcy has been discharged; (2) it is also illegal to claim bankruptcy protection if you aren’t eligible for bankruptcy protection; and (3) it is dishonest to claim remedy for a bankruptcy if you aren’t subject to a bankruptcy.
So for all those reasons I told people who are not actually Federal Employees or Dependents to steer clear of A4V processes and TDA’s.
Could I be wrong about A4V and TDAs? Yes. I could be, but I don’t think I am.
It’s possible that at some point in the future everyone including those who claim back their original birthright political status will get restitution via an organized pay-out system like the TDA’s. For all I know, the present TDA’s may be reconfigured to do exactly that. But until that is explicitly understood and put in writing and admitted to by the Federales, I have to assume that it is a Federal program for Federal employees and dependents—- and that those of us who aren’t actually Federal employees and dependents and who have, moreover, taken explicit action to recoup our birthright political status — aren’t eligible by definition.
Just like we aren’t really eligible to join Social Security and aren’t really eligible to be “taxpayers”—-same schtick. You can trespass into their system and be granted Dual Citizenship, if you want to, but 100% of the time in my experience of their operations, it is never to your advantage if you do. You are always giving up something far more valuable than anything you get in return.
There was a sliver of time during the Muni bankruptcy where anyone in possession of a Federal PERSON still at sea could discharge the debts of that PERSON without penalty or confusion, but that time is past and those who have since opted out of that system and established their permanent domicile on the land of one of the states are no longer operating in that jurisdiction, so — the logic of it is — no A4V’s and no TDA’s unless you really are a Federal employee or dependent and really are operating in the jurisdiction of international commerce.
There are also people pointing at the Unidroit Treaty of Rome, saying that that is the basis of the TDA and A4V process, but, that Treaty was overturned in 2003 and the funds backing it were locked up again.
A different kind of removal of debt via insurance indemnity claim is possible for those of us who are permanently domiciled on the land jurisdiction, but that has yet to be announced, and so far as I know those claims go against the Trustees and Underwriters of the UNITED STATES and USA, Inc. — the Holy See and the British Crown, because the local entities are all bankrupt.
Perhaps I can be blamed here for not being more avidly interested and up to date about individual relief, but everyone reading this should understand that I have been kept busy defending American claims on a much, much larger scale — so that we all have a country and a land jurisdiction to come home to and so that everyone knows and has Notice of the fact that we haven’t “abandoned” any of our assets and haven’t left our lawful government to languish in any “abeyance”.
These much larger issues have to be addressed before sensible individual relief can be assured, so I have been plodding along with my cart behind my horse. And there’s a logic to that, too.