Clients…Citizens no more.

On 7/25/2014 8:01 AM, Arnie wrote:

Client Langford also vacates the fraudulent de facto! You too have such choices!

On Jul 25, 2014, at 8:41 AM, Steve Langford <slangford@theriver.com> wrote:
Thanks, Arnie. Have yet to hear back from F. ANN RODRIGUEZ or fully to appreciate what this means to my future.  But why do you call me a “Client”? I thought I was working in colleagueship with Anna Von Reitz. :-)

Earlier today I wrote this…
Just wondering (important or not?) whether I am actually your “client”. Searched (not far)  and found which seems to apply until I wonder whether you have ever been paid directly for such professional services as you have offered to me. And I thought of us as colleagues, despite your far greater knowledge of corporate law and related issues.

to Anna. Now, I am prompted to pursue the matter in my physical copy of Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed. (1990), which I am very pleased to find online at

https://archive.org/stream/BlacksLaw6th/Blacks%20Law%206th#page/n0/mode/2up

It takes some getting used to, in order to discover how neatly to flip pages, and the page I finally land on is shown as a right-hand page, whereas it is a left-hand page in my physical book. But I eventually land on what I wanted to share:
abijefjg

which clearly sets out that a client employs a professional. I have not employed Anna and I am not sure whether she considers herself to be a professional, within the context of Black’s Law, but I readily find:ajjgjbfc
which definition avoids the common definition I have had, that a professional must be paid!  So I guess it is appropriate that you call me Anna’s “client”, after all! :-)
Thanks for the English lesson, Arnie.

Now, how did you link my unregistering (yet to hear back from RODRIGUEZ) to Gov. Brewer’s pounding sand?  And to what vindictive retaliations have I opened myself up? How do I defend myself? We’ll see, I guess…

-Steve-

Arnie writes…

Thank you Steve for this opportunity to expand on my use of the word “client.”  Please consider the use of “client,” in this context that We the People, are “clients,” of the corporation enjoined to provide certain specific and lawfully definable and restrictive services.  That is Clients…as opposed to “citizens,” of a government, who by the nature of such a relationship, where both parties might be compelled to comply with some sort of implied allegiance.   Whereas, the services due the “Clients,” are based upon more direct terms of the contract called the Constitution of the untied States of America.

Out of my ignorance, as I have made it clear I am not of the law, and as just a reasonable uneducated man, I choose to use the word “Client,” as opposed to the word, “citizen,” to designate “clarity,” because:

  1. As it is already apparent, you have already become an unknowing and beguiled victim of the clever deception executed with not even a modicum of apologies, of the intended fraud for which its very creation exposes. And
  2. You are already providing more legitimization to this fraud by making a citation out of one of the many versions of Black’s Law Dictionary, which in my view is no more a valid law dictionary than the story of Harry Potter. And
  3. In fact by its very existence, it, “Black’s Law Dictionary,” belies the nefarious purpose for which it is used as a “pretend,” authority to promote fraud itself on those who unsuspectingly, consider it to be any type of lawful authority on its own.

Permit me to don my tinfoil hat and challenge the existence of Black’s Law dictionary as a bona fide authority using my reasonable man’s approach.

An ode to the authenticity and legal veracity of Black’s Law Dictionary.

So you send this guy to Washington where he is expected to assume a role as a respected and trusted member of society, replete with unimpeachable credentials to act ethically and morally, and with the best of intentions.

But instead adopts a corporate role, for the purposes of employing a protective of immunity which permits him to dismiss any responsibility or accountability and places him in a position of unbridled power by which to exploit the authority and the positions of trust and fiduciary privilege for his own personal gain.

So… You’re telling me…that a person, you elected in good faith to represent you, is now in office and operating in a corporate capacity and misrepresenting to you, who and what he is when operating in that corporate capacity,  is creating an fashioning what is supposed to be a lawful legislation, when in fact his allegiance and loyalty, at the time of his performance, is to a foreign power, and in the performance of his pretended fiduciary responsibilities to you, he is actually, in the service of this foreign power, crafting subversive, and misleading legislation designed to entrap and deceive you, all under the guise of his sworn performance to act as your fiduciary, to protect the public trust and to serve to always protect and defend and support the Constitution of the United States of America.

And to cover his fraud and deceit, he called incidentally drafts content to be cleverly embedded in an accompanying lexicon to support his deception, using the name, Blacks Law Dictionary.   and this is the same black’s Law dictionary from which you cite with legal authority?

No offense intended, Steve,   but did I get this right?

Oh yes…this explains the importance of it all.  Please click here.

 

Arnie

Keeping American Patriots informed of the “truth” has become a full-time job!
Available 24/7 -
arnie@arnierosner.com

Http://scannedretina.com

714-964-4056
714-501-8247 – mobile

| Leave a comment

The facts in summary.

The facts in summary.

A further proposal to the sovereigns of America.

Thanks to the brilliant research and work of Mr. Bruce Ray Riggs we now have a very clear picture of the unlawful series of acts orchestrated by various part of government, to subvert the organic Constitution provided by our founders.

The fraud, the extent of the conspiracy and the complicity of those in Washington, D.C  is hereby established!  Let there be no further doubt.

Speaking as just one of the people, the following suggestions are made for your consideration.  Each sovereign American must speak for themselves.

Thanks to Steve Curry for this link.

This is an edited version for the sake of brevity.

Full version link here.

Independent information by which to confirm and expand the scope of this data can be found at the following link:

Is it possible to go beyond treason? With link to related documents

Further…the complicity of all sworn public officers also seems to be confirmed.  All efforts on an individual basis must be made to determine the de jure status on an individual basis.

As sovereigns, the people have duties and responsibilities.  Now that we are informed of the existence of the fraud, the relationships within the various levels of corporate government, we the people have obligations to fulfill to begin to resolve individual opportunities.

Let us also be clear that as the people and as sovereigns, it is we who by nature of our natural birthright and relationship with our creator, are the supreme authority.  Any and all types of government creature created to serve the needs of the people are subservient. We need no permission to fulfill our rightful authority and responsibilities.

The formation of jural assemblies and common law grand juries provide the lawful platforms by which to begin to establish a friendly and cooperative interface by which to encourage current de facto operations to return to the proper de jure status under the proper supervision of the people.

Naturally all such such decisions and actions are the responsibility of the local population.

| Leave a comment

Paul Andrew Mitchell – Issues Citizens Arrest Warrant – 13 June 2013

http://beforeitsnews.com/the-law/2013/06/private-attorney-general-issues-citizens-arrest-warrant-for-eric-holder-2451322.html

Private Attorney General Issues Citizens Arrest Warrant For Eric Holder

Saturday, June 15, 2013 14:32

Private Attorney General, Paul Andrew Mitchell has issued a citizens arrest warrant for Attorney General Eric Holder.

Mitchell has filed the warrant with the US Marshal Service in Washington DC.

Mitchell asserts that probable cause exists to arrest Eric H. Holder, Jr. on several charges including:

1) failure to execute a valid Office of Pesonnel Management (OPM) Standard Form 61 APPOINTMENTS AFFADAIVIT.

2) That Holder has engaged in a pattern of racketeering activities in repeated violaions of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) and

3) that Holder continued to aid and abet in the existence of similar missing and/or defective credentials required by Law of numerous employees of the United States, including but not limited to past and present personnel claiming to occupy the offices of U.S. Attorney, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, U.S. District Judge, U.S. Magistrate Judge, Federal Clerk of Court and Deputy Clerk of Court, in multiple violations of United States criminal statutes including but not limited to 18 U.S.C. 2, 3, 4, 912, 1001, 1510, 1512, 1513, 1951, 1958 and 2381.

Full text of the warrant and supporting Documentation here :

PUBLIC LEGAL NOTICE

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/arrest.warrant.htm  (HTML)
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/arrest.warrant.doc  (MS WORD)

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affidavit.refused.JPG
http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/affidavit.GIF

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-06-09/page01.GIF

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page01.GIF

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/letter.2010-04-28/page02.GIF

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.doc

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.opm.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/sebelius/holder/foia.request.holder.opm.doc

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/United.States.Notice.htm

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/United.States.Notice.doc

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/letter.2012-08-06/

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/letter.2012-08-06/page01.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/
http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/page01.gif
http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/page02.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/page03.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2013-01-25/
http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2013-01-25/page01.gif

http://supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2013-01-25/page02.gif


Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964 and now
Acting United States Attorney General in Fact

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

| Leave a comment

Client Langford also vacates the fraudulent de facto! You too have such choices!

25 July 2014

F. Ann Rodriguez
Pima County Recorder
115 North Church Avenue
Tucson, AZ 85701-1199
and
P. O. Box 3145
Tucson, AZ 85702-3145

Tel. 724-4330
Fax. 623-1785

Subject: Instruction to remove STEPHEN ARTHUR LANGFORD from PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, Voter-Registration Records.

Dear Ms. Rodriguez:

I hereby instruct that the voter registration depicted on this
imageVoila_Capture 2014-07-25_07-49-14_AM

be here, now, and hereafter declared null and void and be removed from your records.
For your convenience, the image above is also attached as file

In witness whereto, this email is being copied to the following American People:
Anna Von Reitz <avannavon@gmail.com>
Thomas Dowling <thomdd1959@yahoo.com>
Sheila Lepley <noelani65@comcast.net>
Joann K Nakagawa <joeykiomi@gmail.com>
Arnie <arnie@arnierosner.com>
Dave Robinson <drobin88@myfairpoint.net>

Your soonest possible performance is expected and will be appreciated.
You are invited to contact me for verification, either by by return email or by calling me at the phone number provided below.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Sincerely,

-stephen arthur langford-
stephen arthur langford, self
[9140] n shadow mountain drive
oro valley, arizona [85704-6742], u.S.A.
Tel. 520/297-1245
s@theriver.com

| Leave a comment

Is it possible to go beyond treason? Related Documents.

 

USA Corp Delaware FINAL JUDGMENT AND CIVIL ORDERS signed with Finalized Addendums FINAL 

Final Notice to Parnell et alia.

General Civil Orders 1 Complete

Open Letter to Karen Hudes

Nothing to discuss here

Transcript of Writ of Assistance — June 3, 2014

Treaty of Westminster 1794

UN UCC PDF

(1) UN UCC PDF (2)

UN UCC PDF Certification

| 1 Comment

Box Butte County, NE – Common Law Grand Jury Meets

 

Voila_Capture 2014-07-24_10-00-06_PM

Voila_Capture 2014-07-24_10-01-07_PM

| Leave a comment

Client Langford of Arizona – Bills the United Nations for the Imigration Abuse Costs

 

Cover Letter Jan Brewer sl20140721

Cover Letter Jerry Brown sl20140721

Cover Letter Rick Perry sl20140721

Cover Letter Susana Martinez sl20140721

 

Voila_Capture 2014-07-24_03-28-01_PM

 

 

Voila_Capture 2014-07-24_03-23-48_PM

UCC FINANCING STATEMENT– IMMIGRATION VIOLATION EXPENSES 1 sl20140721 UCC FINANCING STATEMENT-- IMMIGRATION VIOLATION EXPENSES 1 sl20140721 _Page_1 UCC FINANCING STATEMENT-- IMMIGRATION VIOLATION EXPENSES 1 sl20140721 _Page_2 UCC FINANCING STATEMENT-- IMMIGRATION VIOLATION EXPENSES 1 sl20140721 _Page_3

 

 

| Leave a comment