What they have not told you about those flock cameras is they have the capability to capture audio, sound tech is so advanced at this point it would blow your mind!

Talk about an invasion of privacy.

I Dispute The Debt and refuse to Discuss The Matter with anyone other than my original creditor.
Isa 52:3 For thus saith the LORD, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.
---- And whereas, The National Banking Act, found in volume thirteen of the Statutes-at-Large page ninety-nine, "legislated" in the Year of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ eighteen hundred sixty-four, by usurpation, establishes an anti-Christian "national" paper currency founded on bankruptcy through the issuance of ten-forty and five-twenty bonds, without regard to any reserves or backing in Lawful money of the united States of America, thereby removing it from its Christian foundation in the states, to rest upon a foundation of debt and war strapped on the backs of those exercising "civil rights." All of this created by ascending above the powers granted to the government of the union of consociated States, thereby endangering their general customs and usages in their respective states, and this state in particular:
And whereas, The National Banking Act, found in volume thirteen of the Statutes-at-Large page ninety-nine, "legislated" in the Year of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ eighteen hundred sixty-four, by usurpation, establishes an anti-Christian "national" paper currency founded on debt backed by the conscripted labor of those persons "emancipated" by the usurpations of Abraham Lincoln on the twenty-second day of the ninth month in the Year of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, eighteen hundred sixty-two, and the first day of the first month in the Year of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, eighteen hundred sixty-three; and continued through said "Congress'" usurpations of record, the National Banking Acts located aforesaid, and as amended; its Civil Rights Act found in volume fourteen of the Statutes-at-Large at page twenty-seven; and the post flagrante bello purported amendments, thereby creating a perpetual funding system, promoting perpetual war non flagrante bello and military rule in the states through a system of national banks and conscripted labor, based in Roman law, which violates the Law of Peace in this state. It is and was a system condemned in the Judgment of Peace rendered by Almighty God, and concurred in by the bondservant of Christ Men in the War for Christian Liberty commenced on the Fourth day of the seventh month in the Year of Our Sovereign Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, seventeen hundred seventy-six: And whereas, it concerns the state or common wealth that things adjudged be not rescinded, interest reipublicae res judicatas non rescindi:
And whereas, all codes, rules, and regulations are evidence of instructions of the principal to his agent in the field:
And whereas, according to Christian Law, a debtor is not presumed to make a gift, debitor non praesumitur donare, so that a bankrupt, or his agents, cannot give Law or competently and Lawfully make engagements, for the agent is not greater than his principal, and agency does not exist without a principal:

T.me/RealChristopherhauser

Contact me

Interested in a grant?
Upfront fees apply.
Disbursement takes 48 hours.

Grant can be filed Twice in a year

Also available: assistance with clearing inheritance bonds.

Cash delivery and tracking available

Direct contact ::: T.me/RealChristopherhauser

Once we prove the COURTS have CUSIPS they lose SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

🚨 SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT vs. PUBLIC CORPORATION — KNOW THE DIFFERENCE. 🚨

No, a government cannot be a publicly traded corporation and a sovereign government at the same time. They are fundamentally incompatible legal and political structures.

A sovereign government may OWN or CONTROL shares in publicly traded corporations, but the government itself does not become publicly traded simply because it uses corporate structures.

1️⃣ AUTHORITY — Sovereign governments answer to constitutional and political authority; publicly traded corporations answer to boards and shareholders.

2️⃣ PURPOSE — Governments exercise public authority and provide public services; corporations conduct business for the benefit of the enterprise and its shareholders.

Know the distinction. Know the structure. Know the jurisdiction. 📚⚖️

NOTICE OF LIABILITY: UNLAWFUL ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PRIVATE AUTOMOBILE USE

GOVERNING STATUTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

* Constitution for the United States of America, Article VI, Clause 2 — Supremacy Clause
* Article I, Section 10 — Prohibition of Bills of Credit
* 18 U.S.C. § 31 — Motor Vehicle Defined in Commercial Terms
* 49 U.S.C. § 31301 — Commercial Driver’s License Definitions
* 34 U.S.C. § 12611 — Voluntary Motor Vehicle Theft Program
* 49 U.S.C. § 14504a — Commercial Vehicle Registration Defined
* U.C.C. § 9-102(23) — Automobiles as Consumer Goods

I. FEDERAL DEFINITIONS LIMIT 'MOTOR VEHICLE' TO COMMERCIAL USE

18 U.S.C. § 31(6), (10):
A "motor vehicle" is defined exclusively as a contrivance used "**for commercial purposes**" in the transport of persons or property for compensation.

Private use, not involving fare, fee, or profit, is excluded from this definition. Therefore, regulation of such property under color of law is a misapplication.

II. 'DRIVER' IS A LEGAL FICTION TO CONVERT CIVILIANS INTO COMMERCIAL OPERATORS

49 CFR § 390.5T:
“Driver” means one who operates a commercial motor vehicle.

49 U.S.C. § 31301(6):
Driver’s license authorizes commercial activity on highways.

Absent voluntary entry into commerce, one is not a 'driver' and enforcement of such presumption is unlawful.

III. REGISTRATION IS LIMITED TO COMMERCIAL VEHICLES

49 U.S.C. § 14504a(10):
Registration applies to vehicles registered under the International Registration Plan, exclusively for commercial motor vehicles.

Private civilian conveyances fall outside this scope by black-letter definition.

IV. PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES ARE 'CONSUMER GOODS' — NOT MOTOR VEHICLES

U.C.C. § 9-102(23):
Automobiles used primarily for personal, household, or family purposes are consumer goods, not subject to commercial enforcement schemes.

Enforcement against such property without consent constitutes unlawful conversion and fraud.

V. THEFT PREVENTION PROGRAM IS VOLUNTARY ONLY

34 U.S.C. § 12611(c):
Program participation is by voluntary consent form only.

Officers or agencies acting without a valid consent form are operating in violation of federal law.

VI. COURTS AFFIRM TRAVEL IS A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE

Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579 (Va. 1930):
Travel is “a common right... not a mere privilege.”

Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906):
The individual “owes no duty to the State” and may stand on their constitutional rights.

Sterling v. Constantin, 287 U.S. 378 (1932):
Constitutional rights “cannot be overthrown or impaired” by state police authority.

No statute or policy may abrogate this without violating the supreme law.

VII. LICENSE = PERMISSION TO DO THE UNLAWFUL

Black’s Law Dictionary (4th Ed.):
A license is permission to do what is otherwise unlawful.

No license is required to do what is already lawful: private travel in one’s own property.

VIII. FEDERAL CONSEQUENCES FOR VIOLATIONS

18 U.S.C. § 242 — Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law:

* Up to 1 year for standard violation
* Up to 10 years for injury
* Life imprisonment or death if death results

18 U.S.C. § 241 — Conspiracy Against Rights:

* Up to 10 years, or life/death if injury results

18 U.S.C. §§ 1652–1653 — Piracy Against the Law of Nations:

* Life imprisonment for acts of piracy including unlawful seizure of property under false authority

42 U.S.C. § 1983 — Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights:

* Unlimited compensatory and punitive damages
* Personal and commercial liability

Willful enforcement of commercial statutes on

I don’t sue. I lien them!

Commercial liens the most powerful weapon.



Because legal and de facto immunities shield government personnel from being sued for committing crimes against the People, the public is legally disarmed, unable to aggressively sue the government or its agents and compel them to obey the Law.



As a result, the public’s legal posture is fundamentally defensive: we try to hide in legal loopholes to defend ourselves against the government and the courts. We try to escape, evade, and avoid, but we seldom counter-attack against our antagonists, largely because we think there are no lawful weapons to do so.



However, it appears that a powerful offensive legal weapon may now have been discovered, tested, and proven for common national or law abiding Citizens — the commercial lien.



We don’t try to sue a government official for failing to perform his lawful duties. Instead, we simply file a lien that encumbers the official’s personal property and credit rating like a ton of bricks until he voluntarily satisfies our demand to perform his lawful duty, and we, in turn, voluntarily agree to excise the lien

Thank you so much for the $20 million. I sincerely appreciate your generosity and the trust you placed in me throughout the grant process.

I’m genuinely grateful that I was able to contribute and help with the application. Your appreciation means a lot to me, and I don’t take it for granted.

May this be the beginning of even greater opportunities and successes for you. Thank you once again I truly appreciate it.

T.me/RealChristopherhauser

Contact me

Congratulations Nina welcome to the Private Banking world

https://youtube.com/@christopherhausera?

Once you start looking at the so-called “government” as Government Service Agencies, you begin to see things differently. These agencies are supposed to provide services to the government—and the government is we, the people.

There are different Government Service Agencies, such as the IRS, municipalities, the Bureau of Land Management, and others. They are separate agencies, each with their own functions and responsibilities.

Once you understand this distinction, you stop automatically giving these agencies power over you. Until you understand the difference, you give them that power simply because you believe they are “the government.”

The Social Security number which is owned by the Social Security administration is attached to the Federal Reserve Bank and used as tracking numerical system to transfer your Estate (i.e. real and personal property) into a trust held by the State, by registration or liens - EXECUTIVE ORDER 9397 NUMBERING SYSTEM FOR FEDERAL ACCOUNTS RELATING TO INDIVIDUAL PERSONS

A case is literally an insurance event from start to finish. Forget the drama you see on camera. Forget the emotions. Forget the back-and-forth. The system is not responding to feelings. It’s responding to bonds. 💯🤷🏽‍♀️

Performance bond
Bid bond
Payment bond

That’s the trinity right there. The entire life of a case runs through those three. SF-24. SF-25. SF-25A. They move in the background like gears in a machine, and by the time you see a judge or a prosecutor or a clerk, the financial architecture behind the case already activated.

A charge is not just “a charge.” It’s a risk assessment. A valuation. A liability posted on the PERSON. And the moment they file it, the case becomes a financial instrument. A bonded event. A transaction that has to reconcile whether you show up or not.

Watch the courtroom long enough and it stops looking like justice and starts looking like an insurance claim being processed with humans standing around pretending it’s personal. They call it arraignment but it’s really underwriting. They call it a plea but it’s really identifying the surety. They call it a judgment but it’s really settlement. They call it sentencing but it’s just the final posting.

Every case is an instrument. Every instrument is bonded. Every bond is insured. And every insured event has to be closed out on the ledger. That’s why it feels like the system keeps moving even when the human life inside the case stops. It’s not mystical. It’s mechanical. But when you understand the structure, it actually becomes mystical because you start seeing how these courts operate like temples of commerce with rituals disguised as procedures.

A case isn’t personal. It’s commercial.
A courtroom isn’t about guilt. It’s about liability.
You’re watching a financial transaction happen on a human stage.

I dive deep af into court cases and court bonding processes because me personally I feel if you understand this everything else is easy af as it correlates and, everything leads to being in court that’s just my way of thinking tho, maybe it’ll help someone figure out what they want to do next.

WHO REALLY OWNS “GOVERNMENT LAND” — AND CAN THE PEOPLE JUST CLAIM IT?

I’ve been asked a good question:



How does the government acquire land and property in the first place?



And if we constantly hear that government property is “public property” or that it “belongs to the people,” does that mean an individual member of the public can simply claim a piece of government land as his own?



This is where we have to separate political slogans from property law.



The Constitution itself expressly recognizes that property may belong to the United States. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2—the Property Clause—provides that Congress has power to dispose of and make rules and regulations concerning territory and other property belonging to the United States.



So right out of the gate, the idea that:



“The federal government cannot legally own property.”



is simply wrong.



The Constitution itself contemplates federal property.



But now comes the much better question:



HOW DOES THE GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY GET THE PROPERTY?

There is no single method.



Depending on the property and the statutory authority involved, the federal government can acquire property through mechanisms such as:



purchase, condemnation, donation, exchange, transfer, or other congressionally authorized means.



For example, 40 U.S.C. § 3304 authorizes the General Services Administration, in the circumstances covered by that statute, to acquire buildings and land through purchase, condemnation, donation, exchange, or otherwise.



That means government ownership does not necessarily begin with somebody simply announcing:



“This belongs to the government now.”



There can be an actual acquisition, an actual conveyance, an actual condemnation proceeding, an actual transfer, and an actual chain of title.



WHAT ABOUT EMINENT DOMAIN?

That is another real method.



The federal government has long exercised eminent-domain authority to acquire private property for public use. When condemnation is used, the Fifth Amendment's Just Compensation Clause becomes critical: private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. DOJ's Land Acquisition Section handles federal condemnation matters and describes this history directly.



Again:



REAL PROCESS.


REAL TITLE.


REAL COMPENSATION REQUIREMENTS.



Not magic words.



But now let's get to the part people online constantly confuse.



“BUT THE PEOPLE OWN THE LAND.”

Okay.



What exactly does “the people own it” mean legally?



Because there is an enormous difference between saying:



“This is public property held by government for public purposes.”



and saying:



“Every individual citizen personally owns an aliquot share of the courthouse, national forest, military installation, or BLM parcel and can convert that share into private title whenever he wants.”



Those are not the same proposition.



Think about your local courthouse.



It's public property.



You're a member of the public.



Can you walk inside tomorrow, pick an office, record a deed and say:



“I'm one of the people, so this room belongs to me now”?



😂



Of course not.



Public ownership is not the same thing as individual private title.



And that distinction becomes extremely important when people start talking about “claiming government land.”



COULD PEOPLE HISTORICALLY ACQUIRE PUBLIC LAND? ABSOLUTELY.

Now we're getting somewhere.



Throughout American history, Congress established actual legal mechanisms through which portions of the public domain could pass into private ownership.



The most famous example was the homestead system.



Those were not people simply declaring:



“I claim this land because I'm sovereign.”



There were statutes.



There were eligibility requirements.



There were applications.



There were land offices.



There were conditions that had to be satisfied.



And ultimately there could be a government-issued patent conveying title.



That is a legal disposition process.



But federal land policy changed dramatically.

With the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976—FLPMA—Congress established a policy generally favoring retention of the remaining public lands in federal ownership. BLM explains that FLPMA significantly reduced the amount of land available for sale or exchange and repealed the Homestead Act, subject to a temporary Alaska exception that ended later.



So somebody finding an empty-looking piece of BLM land today cannot simply announce:



“Nobody's using it. I hereby homestead it.”



The nineteenth-century homesteading framework is not sitting there waiting for someone to rediscover the right combination of paperwork.



CAN FEDERAL LAND STILL BE SOLD?

Sometimes.



And this is where the law gets interesting.



BLM still has authority under particular circumstances to sell or exchange certain lands. But before many such transactions can occur, the land must first be identified through the applicable land-use planning process as potentially available for disposal.

BLM even maintains information regarding lands potentially available for disposal and public-land sales.



Notice the difference:



“I found government land and claimed it.”



versus



“Congress authorized disposal, the agency determined the parcel was available, I satisfied the statutory requirements, participated in the authorized process, and received whatever title or interest the government was empowered to convey.”



Those are worlds apart.



AND NOT EVERY INTEREST IN PUBLIC LAND IS OWNERSHIP.

This is another nugget people miss.



A person might legally obtain some interest involving public land without acquiring fee-simple ownership of the land itself.



Depending on the governing statute and agency, there can be:



leases, rights-of-way, grazing authorizations, mineral interests, mining claims, easements, permits, exchanges, and other interests.



So when someone says:



“I have rights to this federal land.”



the next question should be:



WHAT RIGHTS?



Ownership?



Leasehold?



Permit?



Mining claim?



Easement?



Right-of-way?



Because property law is about identifying the actual interest, not just throwing around the word “claim.”



HERE'S HOW I WOULD RESEARCH ANY CLAIM INVOLVING GOVERNMENT LAND

Don't start with:



“The people own it.”



Start with:



👉 WHO HOLDS TITLE?



Federal government?



State government?



County?



Municipality?



Tribal government?



Private owner?



👉 HOW DID THAT ENTITY ACQUIRE IT?



Purchase?



Patent?



Condemnation?



Treaty?



Cession?



Donation?



Exchange?



Transfer?



👉 WHAT LAW GOVERNS THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY?



Because “government land” is not one universal legal category.



👉 WHAT AUTHORITY ALLOWS IT TO BE DISPOSED OF?



The Property Clause specifically gives Congress authority concerning disposal and regulation of federal property.



👉 HAS THE PROPERTY ACTUALLY BEEN MADE AVAILABLE FOR DISPOSAL?



BLM specifically explains that land generally must be identified as available for disposal through the applicable resource-management planning process before a sale or exchange can proceed.



👉 WHAT PROCESS CREATES THE PRIVATE INTEREST?



Application?



Auction?



Patent?



Deed?



Lease?



Permit?



Mining claim?



Exchange?



And finally:



👉 WHAT EXACTLY DID YOU ACQUIRE?



Because possessing a permit or statutory use right is not necessarily the same thing as owning the land.



HERE IS THE NUGGET

The statement:



“THE PEOPLE are sovereign.”



does not automatically produce the property-law conclusion:



“Therefore EACH PERSON individually owns government property and can claim his portion whenever he chooses.”



Political sovereignty and legal title to real property are different concepts.



If somebody believes there is a lawful process by which an individual can take a specific piece of government-owned land and turn it into private property, I'm open to looking at it.



But bring me the process.



Show me the statute.



Show me the parcel.



Show me who presently holds title.

Show me the government's authority to dispose of it.



Show me the agency procedure.



Show me what instrument actually transfers the interest.



Because there absolutely have been legitimate ways to acquire public lands in American history, and there remain limited ways to acquire interests in or even purchase certain federal lands today.



But this equation does not work:



PUBLIC LAND + “I AM ONE OF THE PEOPLE” = MY PRIVATE PROPERTY.



That's not property law.



FOLLOW THE TITLE.

FOLLOW THE STATUTE.


FOLLOW THE DISPOSITION AUTHORITY.


FOLLOW THE ACTUAL CONVEYANCE.



Then we'll know whether somebody has a real property right or just another declaration.



READ LAW. NOT LORE.