Good morning (here)
Today we will be talking about child support or alimony. Its important for the reader to understand, this is not advocating not supporting children. Rather, this aims to show the reader child support is really not about children at all.
This article will be for citizens of a state within the United States of America.
When we look at lawfulness or legality or an act or provision we always have to read and comprehend the definitions. I will be defining relevant words, but will be keeping them moderate in volume as this article could very well be hundred of pages long.
Child support states that theyre given authority to garnish wages without any challenge. The jurisdiction of this authority according to legislator is given in the definition of state.
State:
includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
As defined under rules 15 U.S. Code § 1673, source mention 42 USC § 410(h).
So we see that authority has been given to garnish in Federal lands. No where else. There is absolutely no mention of Union States of America (to designate union states).
Scratch your heads for a second and ask why is this? Because, residents of Federal lands are not national citizens. Sounds crazy, but its the truth.
Interestingly enough legislator defines private person as:
private person:
A person whom is sovereign or otherwise private.
This is very interesting isnt it? Whom is sovereign whom is not?
“[dual sovereignty is a defining feature of our nation's
constitutional blueprint.” It doesn't get any plainer than that!
Until the representatives or the agents for the Federal
Government can point to the specific facts in the record that
grant the United States of America with the authority/jurisdiction to prosecute acts and/or conduct committed by a defendant within the territorial boundaries of anyone of the fifty (50) States of the Union in a United States District Court, no such jurisdiction exists and all such prosecutions and judgments are void as a matter of law." - Justice Thomas- Federal Maritime Commission v. South Carolina State Ports Authority, 535 U.S. 743 (U.S. 2002)
So, we see anyone and everyone within the fifty states that are residents are dually sovereign. Meaning, dually private. The federal constitution and state constitutions enumerate the rights given to them.
By now you can see, there is absolutely zero jurisdiction for "Federal Government" over your compensation if you live within the fifty states. This is important to cite and establish, because most of the time in court will be spent squabbling about jurisdiction. So, now the defending party has nothing to say as you took most if not all arguements out of their mouth.
There is this false premonition that child support is to help support children in broken homes. I'm going to just roll out here soon, that this is false (at least when the state is involved). This is important for people to understand, that if the obligee (slave - payer) fails to comply or pay it gets Child Protective Services involved (evil...evil people).
42 USC § 655 states that child support is to replinish TANF (temporary assistance to need families). So, lets say state sticks you for $640 support per month. The state also gets a 66% match from federal government, bringing the total to $1064.40 per month off of one case. Pretty good business deal right?
This is important because it compels performance for an "agent" or "case-manager" to act outside of what is lawful (we will get into this more soon). Under 42 USC § 658(a), we see the "bonus structure" for title IV-D (Child Support/Alimony). Money is enough incentive to commit fraud.
Five revenue streams of Child Support:
The revenue streams are very important to note. Actually its what one would build their case upon. What is actually taking place when individual gets help or initiates child support is... the beginning of a contract.
The upfront fee of $25 is to create the contract, enter into agreement. The $25 recurring annual fee is to keep the contract in effect. This is why it is important to understand the five income streams for child support. Its a contract. Sadly, anymore people just sign, unaware of what theyre doing.
Remember, when I said?:
This is important because it compels performance for an "agent" or "case-manager" to act outside of what is lawful we will get into this more soon.
Here is the reason why I said this. States thirsty for compensation from the Federal Government, at a local level - *** will permit the local child support agency to enter into agreement (create a contract, remember?) With:
So, let me take a second here and forgive me as I'll explain why this is illegal and unlawful/unconstitutional. There is clearly to be very distinct seperations of powers. Legislative (political hacks), judicial (judges) and executive (falling under presidential control). 45 CFR § 302.34
When an executive agency contracts a judicial seat and prosecutor (clerks as well)..this crosses the line of seperation of power. It's unconstitutional for an executive agency to exercise power in two of the three branches.
Another way of looking at it is, Judges swear an oath to uphold and side with constitutional standards. Theyre also prohibited from exercising authority (as a judge) outside of their domain. Someone told me I was rather inexperienced in court, because "judges are corrupt."
I thought it was funny, reason why I'm bringing this up is, you have to deal with corrupt judges, sadly. You have to cite the supremacy clause, you have to tell the judge after all the evidence "i will win an appeal, on its face if you do not side with me." Box them in. I wasnt offended, but regardless I'm not going to be conversing with dopes. (Sorry for digressing).
“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all
treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme
law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or
laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” Article VI clause 2 U.S. Constitution
Due process is enumerated in amendment XIV, of the bill of rights. Some of the extent of deprivation of right(s) is blatantly obvious. Some not so much. So, I will attempt to give some examples as to the extent of the deprivation.
you have to the right to protect your rights
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976). “Parties whose rights are to be affected are entitled to be heard.” Baldwin v. Hale, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 223, 233 (1863).
“a ‘probability of bias’ cannot be defined in any limited way,” “provides no guidance to judges and litigants about when recusal will be constitutionally required,” and “will inevitably lead to an increase in allegations that judges are biased, however groundless those charges may be.”
556 U.S. ___, No. 08–22, slip op. at 14.
failure to recieve notification of a trial or hearing in a timely manner
Lawsuits pertaining to child support in the Federal Handbook of Child Support Enforcement, by its own admission states it rules by provisions (chapter 8-2). This whole "obligation" now falls under 42 USC § 1983, 1985, 1986 and 18 USC § 242. I will explain more in detail, below.
Provision:
form of asseveration which approaches very nearly to an oath. Black's law 2nd edition
Federal Acquisition Regulations define provision as a written term or condition in a solicitation and only applying before contract award FAR 52.101. Solicitation provisions are differentiated from clauses, which are terms and conditions in contracts.
solicitation:
an act or practice or an instance of soliciting, solicitation of a proxy for a shareholder vote
People have laughed before when I bring up solicitation. The agent does solicit the applicant. In return, the state furnishes a "customer service portal." See now?
42 USC § 1983 States:
"Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity..." (emphasis added)
Color of statute/ordinance/law:
The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right.
18 USC 242
"Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death."
So now you should have or see "laws" that relate to most cases (outside of which was ordered in a divorce decree).
The difference between 42 USC 1983, 1985, 1986 and 18 USC 242, is that 42 USC 198x is a remedy it states agency and agent are liable to YOU. 18 USC 242 makes it a criminal act to deprive rights.
18 USC 241 (conspiracy against rights) this happened when initial contract was induced upon you, again when administrative panel convened with a judgement against you.
And lastly but not least fraud. 18 USC 1038.
18 USC 1038:
18 U.S. Code § 1038 - False information and hoaxes
(a) Criminal Violation.—
(1)In general.—Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2, 10, 11B, 39, 40, 44, 111, or 113B of this title....
Fraud occured when:
Well there you have it. If you felt this was useful...please support it by upvoting, or resteeming. Questions or comments please leave those below.
