A Startling Contradiction at the Heart of 'Our' Legal System

If the Law Doesn’t Belong to the People, Then What Is It For?

Badlands Media will always put out our content for free, but you can support us by becoming a paid subscriber to this newsletter. Help our collective of citizen journalists take back the narrative from the MSM. We are the news now.

---

(Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.)

To begin today’s article, let us start with a simple question: why do we need lawyers?

We ask this question not to cast shade on those within the legal profession who are sympathetic to Americans and true American values (and in case anyone is wondering what “true American values” are, the preamble to the Declaration of Independence spells it out quite clearly), but simply to pose the question itself. We are told, on the one hand, that the “commonfolk” do not possess the competence to interpret the law, hence the need for qualified legal professionals to intervene on our behalf. And yet, at the same time, we are expected to obey this very same “law”, despite the presumption that we aren’t qualified to read or interpret.

In other words, we are faced with two diametrically-opposing assumptions, and are expected to live under both simultaneously. We need professionals to “handle” matters of law on our behalf, and yet we are beholden to abide by it voluntarily and competently—lest we be punished for transgressing it. Obviously, these two assumptions cannot co-exist. If we’re sufficiently competent to abide by the law on our own, then we shouldn’t need legal professionals to handle our matters for us; conversely, if we necessarily require interpreters to intervene on our behalf to operate lawfully, then we shouldn’t be held liable for knowing how to abide by it ourselves.

You cannot have a free society if the very rules that govern that society are indecipherable by the citizens of that society. Everyone—lawyers and judges included—have likely breached at least a couple laws (or codes) in their day, without any knowledge about it whatsoever. Frankly, is it even remotely possible for anyone, professional or otherwise, to know the “law”, as it is written today, in its entirety? Do IRS agents, for example, have the entire revenue code (Title 26 of the US Codes) memorized? And if not, then how can they possibly enforce it in real-time situations? It would be just as absurd to try to play a game of chess without knowing how all the pieces move.

Until the law becomes both decipherable and accessible to the very people who are obligated to follow it, it remains like a twisted game of Russian roulette—anything a man or woman may do (or refrain from doing) could, for all we know, be “illegal”… Or could at least be argued as such by a sufficiently weaselly “legal professional”.

(For what it’s worth, genuine, clinical psychopaths account for about 4% of the population. We don’t mean to convey the impression that it’s somehow completely impossible for common sense or humane outcomes to occur from time to time in our legal system. But the point remains that no such guarantee exists, and the opportunities for morality to prevail are dwindling by the minute.)

A Quick Caveat

With the above having been said, we salute those men and women who signed up to be a part of the legal profession for the right reasons, not knowing the true nature of the game. The system, as it currently stands, punishes those who wish to do good in the world—nonetheless, good and moral people, both inside and outside of the system, are the only barrier we have against absolute chaos. Throughout history unto the present day, the fact that we have any “rights” whatsoever is due to the sacrifice of thousands upon thousands of heroes whose names we’ll never know.

Good people inside the system are vitally needed—without them, we cannot hope to fix any of the problems we face as a society. The system could not survive if it did not at least superficially appear to deliver order and justice, and the fact that it can do so at all is made possible by men and women of good conscience who find themselves working within it.

Our problem is the system itself—not necessarily the individuals “inside” of it (except for those who knowingly and intentionally misuse it to cause harm).

True Rule of Law

The rule of law does not exist when the citizens are unable to articulate the very laws under which they are required to operate. To restore America—and all nations—a renaissance in civic awareness is required. When the purpose of the law becomes subverted to serve any aim other than the defense of legitimate rights, then the law itself becomes the greatest source of tyranny.

There is nothing sane or fair about the current arrangement. Ordinary people—even those of extreme intelligence, good faith, and work ethic—cannot possibly stay updated on the tens of thousands of pages of new “law” being enacted on a regular basis. But it does not have to be this way. While individual men and women may not be able to solve the riddle of the legal system all on their own, we can nonetheless collectively build a database of knowledge regarding the system’s most blatant absurdities—and therefrom make it impossible for anyone of sound mind to be able to agree any longer that the present situation is valid or tenable.

Think about it this way: it is as though we were all trapped on a boat with many holes in it—if we can locate the holes and coordinate to “plug” them up, then together we may stay afloat. Identifying absurdities in our legal system is exactly like this. The leakage is real, but widespread knowledge can act as a safeguard against us from sinking to the bottom of the ocean.

The Deep State requires our collective ignorance to operate unopposed. And so, with that in mind, let’s appraise ourselves of some startling facts of our legal system.

---

---

The United States is a Federal Corporation

In case anyone believes that there’s anything valid whatsoever about the “government” as we know it today, let us ask the following question: do we even know the true form of our own government? We are told we live in a democracy; we are also told that we live in a republic; but how does one legitimately prove this? Is there a citation somewhere that affirms this? Perhaps one might look to the United States Codes?

Well, according to said Codes, in Title 28 of the Code, section 3002(15)(a), we discover that the United States is defined as a federal corporation. If one scours the remainder of the code, one cannot find any other definition of the nature of the United States—other sections will tell you how the United States is to be geographically defined, but that’s immaterial to the present discussion.

In the absence of any counter-citation taken from the US Codes, what are we forced to conclude? At present, the answer to that question is unclear.

Of course, you can’t have federal corporations without a federal government, can you? At the end of the day, there NEEDS to be a “chain of authority” (according to the Declaration of Independence, the authority of the government of America ultimately comes from God. To learn more about that, read God and the Declaration of Independence). You cannot have corporations before you have nations (or “body politics”).

Alas, the plot thickens…

From the People, to the States, to the United States, to the Corporation …

No governmental body, nor agency, nor any other kind of entity—whether governmental or commercial—can exceed the authority of that which created it. Based on the above, one might be inclined to think that the entire picture regarding civic authority we were taught in school was a lie … but it turns out, it’s not so simple. At some point, a corporate “United States” was installed, but that doesn’t negate the entire chain of authority that has always existed above it.

The fact remains that the authority of the federal government is sourced from the authority of the states, which, in turn, derive their authority from the people. We will quote Supreme Court Case Law to demonstrate this.

From the Supreme Court Case Chisholm. Ex’r v. Georgia, (Feb. 1794) we read:

“A State does not owe its origin to the Government of the [federal] United States, in the highest or in any of its branches. It was in existence before it. It derives its authority from the same pure and sacred source as itself: The voluntary and deliberate choice of the people ... A State is altogether exempt from the jurisdiction of the Courts of the United States, or from any other exterior authority, unless in the special instances where the general Government has power derived from the Constitution itself ...”

Isn’t it remarkable? The voluntary and deliberate choice of the people is the source of state authority, from which all else flows. The fact that a corporate “United States” was installed against the knowledge or consent of the people means that an extraordinary act of maladministration has not only occurred, but it has been covered up almost completely.

We do not yet know the full details of how all this works—the detective work into these matters remains ongoing. (On that note, Badlands has some of the most well-read and astute commenters out there, and it is highly recommended that readers peruse the comment sections for more information.)

Fixing Things at the Top and the Bottom—An Informed Population Will Help Trump Complete the Job

The fact of the matter is that there are multiple entities that call themselves “the United States”; the system is playing linguistic shell games—aka, games wherein the meanings of words are surreptitiously redefined in such a way as to attach “hidden” meanings in familiar words. This, in essence, creates a “dual” language where one may think that the words they speak mean one thing, and yet the system will presume (often without telling you!) that they mean something else.

In any event, there is a corporate United States, as well as a federal United States … and somehow, some way, all of these entities ultimately derive their “authority” from the people and from God.

If you were to remove the foundation of law—being God and the people—then none of the rest of it could stand. Perhaps it’s time the people learn their true role in all of this, and demand a once and final halt to these “shell games”. Just because such games are being played does not negate the eternal truths upon which true law rests.

While Trump and the Q team fix things “upstairs”, we the people can be of tremendous assistance on the ground level by appraising ourselves of the truth of our legal system, and by stepping into our true position as the de jure civilian authority (DISCLAIMER: we are not recommending any specific action in saying this). This is an “all hands on deck” situation. No matter what your sphere of influence may be, when we learn and speak the truth, we make a greater impact than most could possibly realize.

Conclusion, For Now

Plenty of readers by now are well appraised of the fact that the United States is a corporation (but don’t sweat it if that wasn’t you—we all start somewhere!). Nonetheless, it is hoped that the above article frames the problem in sufficiently persuasive terms to assist readers in talking to friends and family about these matters. The divergence between the “law” and the “narrative” is so profound that merely sharing the above citation may be sufficient to help a lot of “sleeping” people wake up. (It did that for the American Hypnotist, who was a hardcore “lefty” until his late twenties, when these and related facts were first brought to his attention.)

The law belongs to the people—but only through knowledge and vigilance can the people hope to keep it.

Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.

---

If you enjoyed this contribution to Badlands Media, please consider checking out more of my work for free at American Hypnotist.