A big reason why sovereign citizens lose is that the term 'sovereign citizen' is contradictory in itself, on its face. If one is a sovereign, he can't be a citizen, because citizens belong to governments, as property (at least to some extent), and aren't sovereign. Somebody using that term has lost by their own ignorance.

This brings up a most important question. The question: "How many persons are you?"

The 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Wait a minute. The word "persons" is plural. How many people are you? Oh, that's right. Persons are the contracts and agreements you make and have signed with your mark or signature. You have and keep copies in your house - which is not necessarily a residence, BTW. It's these copies with your signature on them that are your persons.

So, let's examine the indictment against you. It has your name and address on it, and possibly other information that identifies you. What is the one important thing that it doesn't have? It doesn't have your signature on it. Why not? Because it isn't one of your persons. Rather, it's a made-up person, that simply looks like it is one of your persons.

This brings up a most important question. The question: "How many persons are you?"

The 4th Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Wait a minute. The word "persons" is plural. How many people are you? Oh, that's right. Persons are the contracts and agreements you make and have signed with your mark or signature. You have and keep copies in your house - which is not necessarily a residence, BTW. It's these copies with your signature on them that are your persons.

So, let's examine the indictment against you. It has your name and address on it, and possibly other information that identifies you. What is the one important thing that it doesn't have? It doesn't have your signature on it. Why not? Because it isn't one of your persons. Rather, it's a made-up person, that simply looks like it is one of your persons.

Somebody sneaked into your property, and fraudulently made up a 'person' that looks like it is one of your persons, and tried to claim that it referred to you. They unlawfully 'searched' your property and tried to trick you into accepting that their fictional person is one of your persons, or better (if they can get away with it), that their person IS you, and not just a person belonging to you.

"Acceptance" is a legal term. You do not have to accept their person in any way. Furthermore, since they came onto your property and messed with your persons - as evidenced by the identification information on their indictment - you have a right to sue these perpetrators for breaching their Oath of Office against you (not upholding the Constitution 4th Amendment as they swore to do)... or any other trespass that they have done to you by improperly using your persons without permission from you (your signature does not appear on their indictment accepting it as one of your persons).

But, you don't have to sue them if you don't want. And you are certainly able to accept the indictment, thereby accepting that the person on the indictment is one of your persons. And you can also lie, and say that the indictment person IS you (It isn't. It's simply ink on paper.). They aren't going to charge you with lying or with inappropriate acceptance. That's what they want you to do, lie or accept. Why? Because they are more corrupt than you could ever think of being.

Note that the above was the way things were in America 200 years ago. Over the decades, people have forgotten the difference between 'persons' and 'people'. And that's what the attorneys and judges wanted all along, so that they can rule you as a master rules a slave. One of the greatest promoters of the ignorance of common people was the TV program "Perry Mason."

At the same time, we are free to participate in government laws and policies to the extent that we want. And we are free to change our mind on our previous decisions any time we want.

Granted, Trump doesn't understand the basics of law in the US.

Trump Said to Have Revealed Nuclear Submarine Secrets to Australian Businessman

Shortly after he left office, former President Donald J. Trump shared apparently classified information about American nuclear submarines with an Australian businessman during an evening of conversation at Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida, according to two people familiar with the matter.

The businessman, Anthony Pratt, a billionaire member of Mar-a-Lago who runs one of the world’s largest cardboard companies, went on to share the sensitive details about the submarines with several others, the people said. Mr. Trump’s disclosures, they said, potentially endangered the U.S. nuclear fleet.

Federal prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, learned about Mr. Trump’s disclosures of the secrets to Mr. Pratt, which were first revealed by ABC News, and interviewed him as part of their investigation into the former president’s handling of classified documents, the people said.

According to another person familiar with the matter, Mr. Pratt is now among more than 80 people whom prosecutors have identified as possible witnesses who could testify against Mr. Trump at the classified documents trial, which is scheduled to start in May in Federal District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla.

During his talk with Mr. Pratt, Mr. Trump revealed at least two pieces of critical information about the U.S. submarines’ tactical capacities, according to the people familiar with the matter. Those included how many nuclear warheads the vessels carried and how close they could get to their Russian counterparts without being detected.






Mr. Trump has been known to share classified information verbally on other occasions. During an Oval Office meeting in 2017 shortly after he fired the F.B.I. director James B. Comey, Mr. Trump revealed sensitive classified intelligence to two Russian officials, according to people briefed on the matter.

Well into his presidency, he also posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, a classified photo of an Iranian launch site.

The indictment in the documents case also accused Mr. Trump of showing a classified battle plan to attack Iran to a group of visitors to his club in Bedminster, N.J. Prosecutors claim that a recording of the meeting with the visitors depicts Mr. Trump as describing the document he brandished as “secret.”

Mr. Trump has not had access to more updated U.S. intelligence since leaving the presidency; President Biden cut off the briefings that former presidents traditionally get when Mr. Trump left office in the wake of Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election and the attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob on Jan. 6, 2021.

“I just think that there is no need for him to have the intelligence briefings,” Mr. Biden said at the time.

“What value is giving him an intelligence briefing?” he said. “What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?”

Mr. Trump’s interactions with Mr. Pratt appear to fit a pattern of the former president’s collapsing his public office and its secrets into his private interests.

I didn't know this was bonus abuse. I was earning some pocket money by playing with odds of 1.01. If so, let them take my current accumulated bonus and give me back my current balance. thieves . I constantly write to live support and they ignore me.

While not about the trials, it seems that Forbes does no longer consider Trump as one of the 400 richest persons in the US, mostly due about the massive devaluation of the "Truth" platform that he owns at 90%.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/article/the-definitive-networth-of-donaldtrump/


I wonder if he ever gives a honest figure, but the point is that the penalty of 250 million is not a small thing for Trump, and the removal of the license to do business in NY is probably worth as much as that, I will be following and reporting on the consequences of it.

If Trump is only smart enough to put into play some of the strategies of Kari Lake's team

Her campaign circulated testimonials from supporters who claimed to have been disenfranchised by technical problems with voting machines, but a New York Times review found that most of them had been able to vote. She filed a lawsuit in December alleging deliberate misconduct by election officials — though she did not provide evidence of that, or of any unintentional disenfranchisement. A judge rejected her claims later that month.

In February, when she said she was considering running for Senate, she was still claiming to be the rightful governor and raising money for lawsuits. The Arizona Supreme Court refused to hear her case in March, sending one part of her lawsuit back to a trial court for review. In May, a lower-court judge threw out a challenge she had filed over the verification of signatures for mail-in ballots.

During her campaign, she followed Mr. Trump in both style and substance, using the news media as a foil after working for years as a local television anchor in Phoenix. She repeatedly promoted Mr. Trump’s election lies, won his endorsement and in the Republican primary, defeated Karrin Taylor Robson, a rival supported by the state’s G.O.P. establishment.

A little bit off topic, but stuff like this makes me wonder how the personal relationship between the president and his son is.
I could argue that since Hunter has been nothing but PR problems for the Democrat party and his father, their relationship must be a quite complex one.

The first thing many Republicans did when cocaine was found around the White House was to leverage on the reputation of Hunter to try to further discredit the whole administration.

So if the Republican party showed actual evidence of corruption and wrongdoing (I am quite skeptical of it). When are we supposed to see Joe "Crooked" Biden impeached and thrown into jail?

Because when you come up with such serious allegations against a president, there are no middle grounds. Either he gets empeached or this hearing was one of the biggest shams pulled off by the Republican party and the pro Trump faction in a long time.

So, when is it going to happen? Less than 6 months ?

The topic is really about nothing. By the way, exactly your post in this thread is an offtopic that has nothing to do with the subject of the topic.

Here's a link to the topic in ninjastic https://ninjastic.space/topic/5467560

It seems that Trump himself wanted to get a jury - or that is the official version, because getting jury would mean a much wider spread of news and there is always a chance of getting a massive punitive damage.

250 million is a significant amount. Trump real assets are unknow - which funnily enough is linked to his fraud - but a quarter of a billion is not a slap in the hand, is more like cutting a finger. I wonder if he is going to be able to carry business using a loophole, because he has lost his licence to.


https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-no-jury-bench-trial-ny-fraud-case-paperwork-2023-10?r=US&IR=T#:~:text=Trump%20isn't%20getting%20a,failed%20to%20ask%20for%20one&text=Former%20President%20Donald%20Trump%20was,correctly%20fill%20out%20court%20paperwork.

Yes, I'm pretty sure, too

Also, Stalin was not Russian

Pre-war Russia had double per capita GDP than Ukraine...millions of Ukrainians went to work to Russia to make ends meet, not other way around
IMF, Americans and corruption devastated Ukraine even before war

The narrative is that Putin was "forced" to go to war. However it is still unclear how was that the only option left. That is, what would have been so terrible and devastating for Ruzzia is they had simply continued being a good commercial partner to Europe and an active responsible actor in the world.

My answer is that Ruzzia does not want to grow as other countries by growing the economy, improving productivity, creating markets, technology or specialising ... oh, or plumbing to avoid gonadic freezing injuries.

Ruzzia grows by grabbing. Thus, if they run the risk of not being able to kleptokrat Ukraine... they are "forced" to war. It is a systemic issue, it is far easier to "grab" a mine and get paid for the resources that actually develop anything useful for the world that someone would be happy to pay for. Just look at Ruzzias exports: Weapons, grain, oil, ... nothing that you have to "create".


does people realize that Wagner used to get paid a percent of the income generated from mines they were able to "grab" (in Africa or anywhere else BTW).

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/06/25/where-does-wagner-get-its-money-how-russias-mercenaries-turned-rebels-earned-millions-from-contracts-and-mining-deals/


This is Ruzzias "growth" model.

There are jury trials and there are bench (judge) trials. Varies by jurisdiction but if both options are available (which is not always, e.g. for some minor misdemeanor crimes, or divorce cases, etc you may not even have the jury option) then usually the defendant can choose. I guess in this case Trump or his lawyers thought it would be easier to deal with a judge and chose a bench trial.

Since there are so many people who recognize that there is something fishy in our voting system