Відео

omg...I saw it live..thought I was alone

POA is registered at the Office of the Public Guardian. For a POA to be valid it must be witnessed. This guy seems to be confusing PoA with a Court of Protection order. Seriously, if you want advice, see a lawyer. Don’t take the word of some halfwit on UA-cam.

0:24 wrong. A coroner investigated unnatural and unexpected deaths. Their job is to look for the cause of death. It’s a doctor who pronounces someone dead and looks for signs of life. 1:23 this man is 100% batshit. The only reason someone would want to bypass a coroner is if they were responsible for a death. God, I’m so glad this crackpot has been arrested and jailed.

This man is a cult leader who was jailed for trying to kidnap a coroner and threatening to kill people. He has no qualifications and is a pure nutter.

What a failed education fake victim pseudo law waste of time.

'Banks are not allowed to own land' - a quick Google confirms he's talking ******!

The judge said Mark Christopher, 59 “lay at the very heart of these offences” and jailed him for seven years.

Christopher, of Forest Gate, east London, Martin, of Plaistow, east London, and Shiza and Sean Harper, both of South Benfleet, all denied conspiracy to kidnap and conspiracy to commit false imprisonment, but were all found guilty on both counts following a two-week trial.

Currently in prison. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

One of my favorite country singers and gospel singers of all time

The world is a STAGE.

*TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN* Chris Hauser recently shut down his own youtube channel. He stated this with legalibus website and youtube channel. He also said anyone claiming to be Chris Hauser is a scammer. The current channel is ran by a scammer who is try to get people to give up anywhere from 15,000 USD to 40,000 USD!!! Remember Chris Hauser always said he would never ask anyone for a dime! Be careful and spread the news so others do not get scammed too!

You are welcomed!!!!!! Your post helped me more than you know.😊

I don't recall accusing you of stealing anything.......

Burden of Proof: When jurisdiction is challenged, courts have consistently held that the burden of proving jurisdiction falls on the party asserting it. For example, in cases where federal jurisdiction is invoked, the plaintiff must show that the court has jurisdiction under the relevant federal statute or constitutional provision. Key Cases: - Hertz Corp. v. Friend (2010): The U.S. Supreme Court clarified the "nerve center" test for determining corporate citizenship for jurisdictional purposes, illustrating how jurisdictional challenges are resolved. - Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment (1998): The Supreme Court ruled that a court must establish its jurisdiction before addressing the merits of a case, reaffirming the requirement that jurisdiction must be proven if challenged.

Due Process Clause (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments): Requires that courts exercise jurisdiction only in a manner consistent with fair treatment of the parties, which includes proving jurisdiction when it is disputed.

The body of law that addresses the requirement for courts to prove their jurisdiction once it is challenged is primarily found within jurisdictional law**, which is a subset of **civil procedure. This principle is especially relevant in the context of **federal courts** in the United States, where the authority to hear a case (subject-matter jurisdiction) and the authority over the parties involved (personal jurisdiction) must be established. Key Principles and Relevant Laws: 1. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP): - Rule 12(b)(1) - Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: - This rule allows a defendant to challenge the court's jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. Once such a motion is filed, the court is obligated to assess and prove its jurisdiction. If the court cannot establish its jurisdiction, the case must be dismissed. - Rule 12(b)(2) - Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction: - Similar to subject-matter jurisdiction, a defendant can challenge the court's authority over their person. The court must then establish whether it has personal jurisdiction based on legal standards. 2. Case Law: - Burden of Proof:** When jurisdiction is challenged, courts have consistently held that the burden of proving jurisdiction falls on the party asserting it. For example, in cases where federal jurisdiction is invoked, the plaintiff must show that the court has jurisdiction under the relevant federal statute or constitutional provision. - Key Cases: - Hertz Corp. v. Friend (2010): The U.S. Supreme Court clarified the "nerve center" test for determining corporate citizenship for jurisdictional purposes, illustrating how jurisdictional challenges are resolved. - Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment (1998): The Supreme Court ruled that a court must establish its jurisdiction before addressing the merits of a case, reaffirming the requirement that jurisdiction must be proven if challenged. 3. Constitutional Basis: - Article III of the U.S. Constitution:** Establishes the judicial power of federal courts and outlines the types of cases they can hear, including issues related to federal jurisdiction. - Due Process Clause (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments): Requires that courts exercise jurisdiction only in a manner consistent with fair treatment of the parties, which includes proving jurisdiction when it is disputed. 4. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1332: - These statutes outline the basic jurisdiction of federal courts, including federal question jurisdiction (§ 1331) and diversity jurisdiction (§ 1332). When jurisdiction is challenged under these statutes, courts must demonstrate that the requirements are met to retain the case. Summary: When a court's jurisdiction is challenged, the body of law governing civil procedure, particularly under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, dictates that the court must establish its jurisdiction before proceeding with a case. This includes both subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. The burden of proof typically rests on the party asserting jurisdiction, and courts rely on statutory and constitutional guidelines to determine whether they have the authority to hear the case.

The body of law that addresses the requirement for courts to prove their jurisdiction once it is challenged is primarily found within jurisdictional law**, which is a subset of **civil procedure. This principle is especially relevant in the context of **federal courts** in the United States, where the authority to hear a case (subject-matter jurisdiction) and the authority over the parties involved (personal jurisdiction) must be established. Key Principles and Relevant Laws: 1. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP): - Rule 12(b)(1) - Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: - This rule allows a defendant to challenge the court's jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. Once such a motion is filed, the court is obligated to assess and prove its jurisdiction. If the court cannot establish its jurisdiction, the case must be dismissed. - Rule 12(b)(2) - Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction: - Similar to subject-matter jurisdiction, a defendant can challenge the court's authority over their person. The court must then establish whether it has personal jurisdiction based on legal standards. 2. Case Law: - Burden of Proof:** When jurisdiction is challenged, courts have consistently held that the burden of proving jurisdiction falls on the party asserting it. For example, in cases where federal jurisdiction is invoked, the plaintiff must show that the court has jurisdiction under the relevant federal statute or constitutional provision. - Key Cases: - Hertz Corp. v. Friend (2010): The U.S. Supreme Court clarified the "nerve center" test for determining corporate citizenship for jurisdictional purposes, illustrating how jurisdictional challenges are resolved. - Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment (1998): The Supreme Court ruled that a court must establish its jurisdiction before addressing the merits of a case, reaffirming the requirement that jurisdiction must be proven if challenged. 3. Constitutional Basis: - Article III of the U.S. Constitution:** Establishes the judicial power of federal courts and outlines the types of cases they can hear, including issues related to federal jurisdiction. - Due Process Clause (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments): Requires that courts exercise jurisdiction only in a manner consistent with fair treatment of the parties, which includes proving jurisdiction when it is disputed. 4. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1332: - These statutes outline the basic jurisdiction of federal courts, including federal question jurisdiction (§ 1331) and diversity jurisdiction (§ 1332). When jurisdiction is challenged under these statutes, courts must demonstrate that the requirements are met to retain the case. Summary: When a court's jurisdiction is challenged, the body of law governing civil procedure, particularly under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, dictates that the court must establish its jurisdiction before proceeding with a case. This includes both subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. The burden of proof typically rests on the party asserting jurisdiction, and courts rely on statutory and constitutional guidelines to determine whether they have the authority to hear the case.

Until he’s in the Country music hall of fame they need to close the doors !! Ridiculous

Virginia

Tn suppose to pass bill to stop the spraying. They probably will not my bet.

TN 👍🏼

I mean (90) !

Gosh Vern would be (900)!

Love Vern! The Voice!

These are wasps not bees

Nice video sister

Where did you get this ???? Who ...had it ?

Mr Gosdin and Toby Keith Two of a Kind. Both Gone but not forgotten. Will Always be Missed. I had the Honor to Meet Mr Gosdin in the 80's. Wish I met Toby. Rest Well Mr Gosdin. Thank You

JUDGES POLICE SHERIFF TAKE AN OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE CONSTITUTION NOT THE US CONSTITUTION

Jurisdiction, in broad but simple terms, is determined by the WHO, WHAT and WHERE of an incident. These factors ALONE determine which legal authority has jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is NOT something one must specifically grant to an authority, nor can it be withheld. Within the borders of this country, one can not be outside of one jurisdiction without being under another.

Fact’s to these white folks

5 Tools of Discovery. 1. Request for admissions 2. Trquest for production 3. Interrogatories 4. Depositions 5. Supeona power

By the way, Nash, what evidence exists to support the claim that a man is obligated to have a license or registration in order to use a car on the roads?

The hand movement is called a moodra look it up. It is a mind technique tell you this man is way more intelligent than he ever gets great for. I see what he studies. He is in full control of his mind. Very powerful hand moodra activating his third eye! Lots of videos on UA-cam to learn about this.

33 = The Man... 666 is the beast, the man that is in the mind of God. 18! 18 = 9 and he was the 45 president 4+5 =9 and the 47 4+7=11 ... 9 is the completion of all numbers or the Trump Card and 11 which operates in duality but is a final manifestion, the end... 9/11 This is all q game and we are on to you now BANKSTERS. ALL POLITICAL SHOWS ARE ACTS ON A STAGE. Why the create ACTS! It is written from the book of ACTS! WE can read your codes!

I ain't there yet

What gets me you forgive and these same people go do some more stuff and more stuff

Only my opinion but I heard George Jones and Loretta Lynn saying we must have been out of our minds and again. In my opinion, Verne Gast and saying that song better than George Jones.!!

Thank you for sharing your research and work!!!!!

Are you really a real judge ? Do you have any power in the USA ? I would like to talk to you if you are real and have power in the USA

Hey, what happened to the channel in this video?

I love this man: Mark, by this Michael-Scott: Maxey.

❤

Candiein equivalent please

I love drinking acid it is normal what do you mean? 🤷

It's all banking, so the instrument is the law. The contract is always the law until terms are proven unambiguous or unfair or whatever. If your contract obides by the 4 Corners Rule (Google it instead of thinking you know) and is written in proper grammar and doesn't contradict terms, the court has no say. Trust law. And since proper contract presented and received through USPA Reg. Mail falls under Postal rule. They all obide to the Endenture Trustees act 1939 and the Bill of Exchange act 1934 and the Universal Postal Union treaies. Postal ba king is what's going on in a courtroom aka a foreign ship in dry doc in Maratime law

What are the exact 4 corners of conduct?