The Confused and Possessed (12-27-06)

Dorean followed the self-help remedy of an aggrieved party to the letter. Even if the bank thought they had a legitimate claim they failed to assert it in a timely manner. In a world of credit promises are assets. In a real monetary world promises are obligations. You see many on this site using monetary definitions in credit scenarios. If you draw it like line scale where zero is the fulcrum and negative is to the left and positive to the right it is easy to figure out. A promise to pay in a real money world goes left but in a credit fiat world it goes right. Fiction is strange to us in money matters because there is exchange and commerce always putting real products in our hand. Though the results appear the same they are not. In a real money scenario you would obtain the product with an absolute title. In the credit world you only obtain possession and use by privilege. Only because the real title holders are not asserting their claim do you get the milieu to remain confused. The UCC binds all fictional actors to the fictional commerce. When Dorean executed it upon the bank they were bound to it. Funny how obedience became a crime. What’s even more hilarious is comparing my two criminal cases. My first case said a promissory note was a security to be convicted this time it must not be. Oh to live in a world where coins have heads on both sides. That of course is American De facto Jurisprudence. Why would anyone want to argue in a venue of rhetoric like this. It only took me once to comprehend the insanity of the idea. Why should I not accept everything they say a true. Though all they speak is lies they are telling the truth. That is what is so bizarre about dealing with these knuckleheads. Let me use the BOP dopes for a moment’s example. They interfered with my case by the assertion of their statutory policy. Inherent in this act is legal determination that I had liability to their statute. No one anywhere swore out my liability. No one ever will yet they presume it exist. Without liability they accept charges on my behalf. This is a fiduciary obligation with liability attached. I demand damages and they claim foul. Now they testify in court that they are not my counsel and that all the terms of the contract have been fulfilled. They claim they have no liability while proving they do under their own oath. What is gained by getting every detail perfectly correct when the mass makes the point clearly. This is the microcosm. Out of 60,000 documents probably dozens of witnesses, 7 judges, about the same in prosecutors and not one testimony under oath that I have any liability to USC 18, 1341, 1343, 1344, etc. Without that every opinion is a lie without meaning. Until liability is a fact argument is unnecessary. It makes for good blog fodder but nothing judicious is happening. A trial is a farce. Does that mean they’ll stop it? No probably not but guilty or acquittal are no different and meaningless without liability. Think about it. I’m guilty of no liability. I accept! You’re acquitted of liability. I agree! See any room to argue? I don’t! This is the fine art of using the UCC. It takes a certain kind of wisdom stolen from the masses.