The Index started registering new Executive Orders this morning. Peculiarly the EO #13722 has been skipped.
In the United States there is a lack of bonding by the Colorado and federal judges affecting the judicial system. I have brought the evidence forth mainly through two trust evidence repositories. Since I have uncovered a criminal syndicalism, where any one judge will protect other judges by falsely declaring sovereign and judicial immunity I have finally reached the Office of the President for billing.
Here is an Article I just posted on LinkedIn.
An interesting development was when chief (recused) "judge" Robert BRYAN out of Olympia, Washington decided to publish the true bill from chambers. My experience up there was that the clerk of court would not touch it and I can think of no reason BRYAN would publish it other than he agrees, there is a big problem and somebody should be doing something about it.
Interestingly too is that I found a subsequent Executive Order published in the Federal Register Wednesday Morning and posted about it on www.savingtosuitorsclub.net . A few hours later it was removed. I regret not getting a screen shot, that would be much more convincing than me telling you it was so. My Directive to the President arrived on the morning of 1/30/17 and that is the last EO published in the Federal Register. Prior to that we had about one per day as you see.
https://www.federalregister.gov/executive-orders/donald-trump/2017TRUMP's EO's on the Federal Register.
This rendition is published on PACER. It is similar to the rendition Jim Bishop accepted in late 2014 when he changed Bishop Castle to CASTLE CHURCH - For the Redemption of the Office BISHOP.
To read my commentary and reference bibliography:
This image might be easier to read than above.
This is a sample of some of the things to learn around Lawful Money Trust - www.lawfulmoneytrust.com]www.lawfulmoneytrust.com
This explanation may help:
Remedy is for any “Federal reserve agent” more commonly known as a state bank. In the tier of living and legal persons, that is pretty low. I think that is restating what Michael Joseph said above. The law is not respecter of persons. When people start presuming that they are the subhuman in the trustee/government’s eyes they project that and get it back. When as you are alive, you are simply seen as the trustee/beneficiary and we teach here how to be responsible.
This might help clarify what Michael Joseph said:
Look at the first few paragraphs of the Federal Reserve Act – 1913.
I feel that a lot of confusion is caused by projection. Like in front of a judge, if you think that he is viewing you as a US or subject citizen of some type, then that is what you will perceive as a reflection of your projection. He sees the living man alright – but he is doing business with the OFFICE of trustee and is presuming that you have been benefiting from the corpus (value) of the trust through property rights.
So take that to the TRUST as it was arranged under the Trading with the Enemy Act in 1933:
“…which will be held in trust and kept in one of the new forms…”
You might envision yourself being treated like the trustee for the state bank called FIRST MIDDLE LAST. Read from the bottom and top of Page 1066 – March 30, 1933.
I may be making Michael Joseph’s explanation labored here. So I am simply saying that you are alive and the remedy will apply to whatever entity or person you create around you. Or better yet, if remedy applies to a legal person attached to you, then that is your remedy.
If you make your demand for lawful money then you can no longer be presumed to be a state bank because that is how state banks dissolved between 1913 and 1933, by redeeming their Federal Reserve notes in gold. In 1933 FDR was so determined to save the Fed, he illegally applied the Trading with the Enemy Act naming people the enemy, fighting a foe called The Great Depression.
This may help too:
In short, “In order to facilitate membership in the Federal Reserve System of any State bank… the Governors of the Federal Reserve System may waive in whole or in part the requirements of this section…”
Now I think that I have described this too well.
Once you get your head around it, unless you have been behaving expressly as a state bank, you will not become one in the eyes of any court or judge. Interestingly as I came into this heritage, true balances shall we call it, the judges around Colorado began changing their oaths of office so to avoid bonding.