Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, April 14, 2011

Partial

Howard Griswold Conference calls:

218-844-3388 pin 966771# (6 mutes & un-mutes),
Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.
6 Mutes and un-mutes

Conference Call is simulcast on:

www.TheREALPublicRadio.Net
Starting in the first hour at 8 p.m.

Note: there is a hydrate water call Mondays, same time and number and pin #.
Howards home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.)
Mickeys debt collection call is 8:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Wednesday night. The number is 712 432
8773 and the pin number is 947975#.
Mickey Paolettas cell number is 717-979-3061

Check out: www.escapeharrassment.com

www.escape-tickets-IRS-court.org

All correspondence to:

Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, Delmar, Del. 19940
(do not address mail to Howard Griswold since Howard has not taken up residence in that
mailbox and since hes on good terms with his wife he isnt likely to in the foreseeable future.)

"All" Howard's and GEMINI RESEARCH's information through the years, has
been gathered, combined and collated into 3 "Home-Study Courses" and
"Information packages" listed at
www.peoples-rights.com "Mail Order" DONATIONS
and/or Toll-Free 1-877-544-4718 (24 Hours F.A.Q. line)
Dave DiReamer can be reached at: notaxman@dmv.com

Peoples-rights has a new book available from The Informer:

Just Who Really Owns the United States, the International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve,
World Bank, Your House, Your Car, Everythingthe Myth and the Reality.
Hell take $45 for the book to help with ads, but $40 would be ok which includes shipping
($35 barebones minimum)
www.peoples-rights.com c/o 1624 Savannah Road, Lewes, Delaware 19958

********************
Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, Eastern
Time. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesdays
number is 1-724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in on
Wednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?
masterId=41875&cmd=tc
Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the following website:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth
Howard approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting to
Howard.

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably

typed, to Gemini Research rather than fielded on the call live. It would
be desirable to send a couple of bucks for mailing, copying and printing
costs.
*********************
Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

When you arent talking please mute your phone!!

Especially, dont walk away from your phone while its unmated. If you were near the phone in
that situation youd hear the callers screaming at you to mute!!!
It would be best if you mute your phone when you first come on, then un-mute it when you want
to talk and then re-mute it.
You can use the *6 button on your phone or use the phones mute button
Speaker phones and cell phones are not desirable as they can chop up the call badly occasionally.
If you are recording the call and leave the phone unintended, please mute!!!!!
Note, at various times some people left the phone un-muted and coupled
television audio into the phone making the conference call conversations
very difficult for all.
When you are not muted be careful of making noise such as breathing hard into the phones
microphone or rubbing the mouthpiece or not reducing extraneous noise across the room. Cell
phones can pick up wind noise when used outside and also if not in a primary reception zone can
couple noise into the call.
Excessive echoes and noise will terminate the conference call.
Cell phones and speaker phones can cause echoes.
Keep the call quiet, dont make Howard climb out of his mailbox and bop you one.

*******************************************************************
Note: the telephone lines are usually quite noisy and therefore it would be prudent to slow your
speech down otherwise your words and meaning will be lost.

Suggestion:
Get a phone with a privacy or mute button. This is much more convenient than star-6 and more
rapid to use. It can also be used as a cough button since it can be used rapidly. Try it, youll like
it.
*********************************************************************
Mickeys new call-in number:
1-712-432-8787, pin: 170555#
8 p.m, EST
Check out Citizens Reform Center.
****************************************
A recording of each Howard Griswold Thursday conference call
is available from Dezert Owl upon request for any sized
donation. Go to the following link:
www.TheRealPublicRadio.Net/Archives.html .
For donations to desert, send them to Free America Radio Network, 121 Seaparc Circle, Suite B,
Kingsland, Georgia 31548. Phone number: 912-882-2142. Cell: 304-629-7169.

For reference:
Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd )
*****************************************************
Start
*****************************************************
{ 02:04:11.004}
[Howard] Ive been thinking about things that have happened in the past recently. When we
were talking in the last couple of years about the Constitution of the United States establishing a
right of people in America to have and own and self-regulate their private property it was
amazing to me how many people called or wrote to us and asked us what do you mean by private
propertyanother reason why I have no use for education. If you have your children in school
you should take them out right now because the longer they stay there the dumber theyre going
to get. You mean to tell me that people in America in this day and age with all this phenomenal
amount of education that we have, have no realization of what private property is. You dont
even know what that means? I got to say that theres not too much that amazes me anymore.
Theres not too much that upsets me anymore for that, indeed, did upset me. So as I thinking
about that I was thinking weve been talking about breach of the trust and breach of fiduciary
duty of the government as trustees and, geez, I wonder if people even realize what the word,
breach, means, what breach of the trust means. Maybe we should go over this. Its very possible
that thanks to the education we have that didnt teach us much of anything that we really should
know that people would not understand the real meaning of these kinds of words. So maybe I
should just take one night and go back to the law dictionary and read the definitions of these
words because whatever it may have meant in the past they have a meaning for it today that
theyre applying and that is what they respect in law when its brought up and if you cant
explain to a judge what it means when he A judge may say to you, ok, you filed this suit for
breach of trust against the government official, what do you mean breach and if you cant explain
what a breach is the judge is going to say, ok, I can see you dont know what youre doingthis
case is dismissed, and youre going to lose the case because these people are very tricky and
very dirty and they will use little things like that to get around you. So maybe its important that
we discern a meaning that they apply. So let me go into this. Im going to quote right from
Blacks 5th edition law dictionary. The word, breach, it says, the breaking or violating of a law,
right, obligation, engagement or duty. Now, the word, duty, is a very broad term. As I
commented earlier when one of those e-mails was talking about Title 18 of the United States
Code, a number of the different code around the country that cover criminal acts have a criminal
punishment as a criminal violation that can be punished for as breach of duty and that maybe the
only one youll find in some states criminal codes for breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust.
It may not spell it out in all those terms. It may be just one simple little criminal act of breach of
duty. Dutys an important word and a very broad term which covers things like violation of the
law, violation of a particular right that is guaranteed, violation of an obligation which would be
what the law says and somebody did not do what the law said, violation of an engagement which
means the violation of a contract or an agreement of any kind. And every one of them established
a duty but it is the breaking or violating of laws, rights, obligations, engagements or duty either
by a commission or some act or by the omission of something that by law they should have done.
It exists where one party to any kind of a contract fails to carry out the terms, promise or
condition of the contract. Now, lets talk about the word, contract, for a minute. A trust is a
contract. Any kind of a trust, at all, is a contract. Any kind of an agreement that one person will
do something for another person is in the form of a contract. Now, in order to be a full-fledged
contract there has to be an offer, an acceptance, and a consideration on the part of both parties.
Somebodys got to give something of value in return for something of value that was offered but
that is not necessary that there be a consideration in order for there to be an agreement which is
similar to a contract. If theres an offer and acceptance then it constitutes a contract and its
called a quasi-contract which means an artificial or phony contract but the law will enforce a
quasi-contract as though it were real. So, isnt that interesting? Even though its not real they will
enforce it as though it is real. So, any form a contractwell, a trust is always in the form of a
contract. The Constitution of the United States constitutes a contract between the government
and the American people that they will establish a government and they will do certain things in
that government and it was all spelled out in the Constitution and that established a trust situation
for the government. They are in a trustee position to look out for us and protect us because of the
words in the Constitution that established that contract between the government and the
American people. And when they dont do it, it is a breach of their trust duty. The word, breach,
as Ive just said to you is the breaking or violating of the law or the right of an obligation or an
engagement or a duty either by the commission or the omission. If they dont do what theyre
supposed to do they omitted and are guilty of the breach. If they do something that theyre not
supposed to do which would be the commission then that might well be the commission of a
crime and as was well brought out in that one e-mail, tonight, about Title 18 there are criminal
acts in there that relate to breach of the trust. They can be brought or they can be used as an
exhibit in a case of breach of the trust that is a civil issue. They dont have to be brought in a
criminal arena because you probably wont get the attorney generals office to do anything for
you. Theyre there to protect the government and their profit making rackets. Theyre not there to
protect the American people like theyre supposed to be. None of government, today, is seems to
be doing what its supposed to be doing and protecting the interest and rights and property of the
American people from our body right on down to every last little thing that we own that theyre
supposed to protect and our right to acquire more things and theyre not protecting it, theyre
getting in the way of it. Theyre breaching their fiduciary duty as trustees to protect us under the
contract that they have through the Constitution of the United States. And the state governments
are doing the same thing because their constitutions are written in very similar manner and form
to the way the United States Constitution is written and guaranteeing the same protection to the
people. So it matters not whether its a state officer that breaches the trust or a federal officer
that breaches the trust. Theyre either doing it by the commission of their acts or by the omission
of the things that theyre supposed to do. And its the breaking or violating of the law, the right,
the obligations, the engagements or most important the duties and the duties are spelled out in
the state and federal constitutions. This is what theyre breaching. The term, breach, exists where
one party to a contract fails to carry out the terms or the promise or the conditions of that
contract. Well, the promise is the most important part because in every contract there has to be a
promise to do something. Thats where the offer comes in. I promise to run a government for you
that will be in a constitutional manner. If I breach that promise then Im in breach of that duty
and I should be removed from office. I would think that if Im going to take that office then Id
best know what that contract means. Well, I dont know how many times I have heard said by
politicians, lawyers and judges that we dont use the Constitution anymore. Every one of those
scum should be sued for breach of their fiduciary duty. Every time they say it, if you can have a
witness with you when they say something like that to you, youve really got a good case
because you got it backed up by a witness that heard it, not one that you told it to. Thats not
proper under the rules of evidence. Thats hearsay evidence when you told somebody else that
somebody said something, that somebody else cannot repeat it and verify it because its hearsay
when they heard it from you. You need a witness with you any time youre confronted by
government people and it wouldnt hurt you a bit to ask them if they understand the Constitution
and apply your rights under something like the 4th and 5th amendment to protect my houses, my
papers, and my chattels and my rights of property that government will not infringe upon them
by taking them without just compensation. And these idiots will tell you, no, we dont pay any
attention to the Constitution, that doesnt mean anything anymore. Boy, have you got them.
Lead them into the trap by asking them the right questions and having a witness to verify that
they answered you the way they will. Anyway, thats what the word, breach, means. Its a very
short little definition, four lines and one extra word and it doesnt take much to comprehend what
it said. I just explained it to you. Now, the word, breach of trust, is a little bit longer definition
but its right in line with what I just told you the word, breach, meansbreaking the law, not
fulfilling their duty. Breach of trust is any act done by a trustee contrary to the terms of his trust
or in excess of his authority. Boy, oh boy, the health care bill is in excess of their authority. They
have no authority to get involved in the private peoples health at all. Anyway, thats just one
interesting little comment. Anyway, its any act done by a trustee that is contrary to the terms of
his trust or in excess of his authority and to the detriment of the trust or the wrongful omission by
a trustee of any act required by him by the terms of the trust, also, the wrongful misappropriation
by the trustee of any funds or property which had been lawfully committed to him in a fiduciary
character. See how fiduciary duty and breach of the trust go hand in glovethey go right
together. Every violation by a trustee of a duty which equity lays upon him Now, by golly,
equity is a big and I mean big area of law to study and I havent covered it all. Now, I keep
finding more and more stuff on equity. People are sending me some more information recently
on equity, things that I didnt even know about that relate equity and how equity controls the law.
It is really up to us to try to learn how some of this applies so specifically to what theyre doing.
But every violation by a trustee of his duty which equity lays upon him whether willful or
fraudulent or done through negligence or arising through a mere oversight and forgetfulness is a
breach of the trust. In other words, its not easy for these people in a trustee position to get
around a claim that they have breached their trust position especially government and things that
theyve been doing here in the last 100 years, I guess, or more. It goes on to say, the term
therefore includes every omission and commission in the carrying out of the trust according to its
terms of the care and diligence in protecting and investing the trust property and of using perfect
good faith. Remember some of the cases that weve read parts of. They brought those very words
up and said that the trustee breached his fiduciary duty simply because he did not act with
honesty and good faith. Anyway, it goes on to say, a violation by the trustee of any duty which he
owes to the beneficiary Now, theres the most important statement in the whole thing. A
violation by the trustee of any dutyremember, going back to the definition of the word, breach,
any duty that he owes to us, the American people who are the beneficiaries of this public trust.
There seems to be a concept among these educated morons we have, lawyers, judges and
politicians Any act by any of these government officials that proposes to give you benefits, to
make things nicer to you or provide you with things that the Constitution did not authorize
government to provide or to become involved in at all. According to these politicians theyre just
looking out for us, the beneficiaries. Well, Im not sure which one of us are the beneficiaries that
theyre talking about. It is as one of those e-mails that Dave was reading today about the lazy
people who wont get off their duffs and go out and earn their own way in life? Theyre going to
look out for them but theyre going to takeand this was a big thing this weektheyre going to
tax the rich. Theres not enough tax money there to run the government for 141 days if they tax
the rich 100% of their income and they couldnt get away with taxing the rich 100% of their
income. So, no matter what kind of a tax they increase on the rich all it is, is a taking from one
group of people that work and giving it to another group of people who are lazy and wont work.
That is a breach of their fiduciary duty and their trust duty to look out for all of us. Every one of
us has a right to get out here and work, to increase our wealth, to accomplish things. You have
these rights. These are sometimes referred to as God-given rights. I never found anything in the
Bible where God gave us any rights but thats up to your beliefs. If you believe thats what God
did then ok but it is a natural right that exists in mankind. I dont know that God gave it to us but
in the creation that God made of mankind He gave us the ability to accomplish things if that can
be converted to a right. Thats sort of stretch of the imagination, I think, but, yeah, you have in
nature the right to go out there and produce and there is law that says that you have a right to
your own production, that it cant be interfered with and yet we have all kinds of taxation that
does interfere with it. Now, weve talked about this before. The taxation is limited in authority.
Its limited to people who receive a privilege from government. That privilege has to be one that
is authorized by government. By the way, social security is not an authorized privilege that
government can create so they cant use that as an excuse. Thats not a governmental authority
that gives them the right to tax as a privilege. So anything based on the fact that youre using a
social security number is not good enough to create the privilege that government has the right to
tax. So any taxation of an individual in his private capacity that has not asked for a particular
privilege that government does have the right to give out and to tax is another breach of the
fiduciary duty. The definition of breach of trust ends up by citing a case, Brun v. Hanson, 103 F.
Rptr 2d, p. 685 and this specific statement that I just read is from page 699. But 103 F. Rptr 2d,
page 685 is where you find the case. That was a very interesting case.

[caller] Howard, before you close the show today, I had the Howard Griswold chuckle
moment. I had something for you and with your permission Id like to read that.
[Howard] Well, go ahead, lets find another chuckle because some of the stuff I talk about is
so serious that if we didnt stop once in a while and make a chuckle out of things wed probably
go a little batty.

[caller] And this one moves along to the moving violation. A teenager was stopped for
speeding. As the cop approached his car the boy rolled down his window. Ive been waiting for
you all day, the cop said. Yeah, well, I got here as fast as I could, the teen replied. When the
cop stopped laughing he sent the youngster driver on his way without a ticket.
Theres just one more and know how you feel so lovingly about pastors and all that and this
ones the last one for the night here. A little boy was waiting for his mother to come out of the
grocery store. As he waited he was approached by a new pastor who asked, can you tell me
where the post office is? Sure, the boy replied, just go straight down the street a couple of
blocks and turn to your right. The pastor thanked him and said, Id like you to come to church
on SundayIll show you how to get to heaven. The little boy replied with a chuckle, ah come
on, you dont even know how to get to the post office. Ok, well thats the Howard Griswold
chuckle moment.

[Howard] Ill add a little chuckle to that with a bit of vulgarity. There was a young lady up
in Pennsylvania who was pulled over by the Pennsylvania state police and they wrote her a ticket
for speeding. And they came up to the window of her car, handed the ticket to her and she said,
oh, thank you, is this a ticket to the policemans ball? And the officer replied, the Pennsylvania
State Police dont have any balls. I said, a little bit funny but a little bit of vulgarity. Anyway,
back to the seriousness for just a minute.
This case that was cited here, Brun v. Hanson, I pulled that many years ago and read it. It started
me in the right direction but it didnt enlighten me enough to recognize how to apply it to all
kinds of things, especially to government. But it was a couple of lawyers who engaged in the
stealing of the estate from the heirs that they were handling and they were in breach of their trust.
They were found guilty of it and they had to pay everything back to the heirs with penalties. The
stole the property. Does that sound familiar? If it isnt government stealing the property then its
private attorneys that are working for you stealing your property and it goes on constantly in this
country. Anyway, its Brun v. Hanson. That is an interesting case to readnot very long. Its 103
F. Rptr 2d, page 685. The next one is breach of trust with fraudulent intent which is larceny after
trust. Larceny means theft, stealing, after trust. And theres only one sentence to that, larceny
after trust and a case cited, State v. Owings, and that is 31 SE Rptr, 2d., page 906. The original
case was 205 South Carolina at 314 and then the appeal case that stated that its larcenybreach
of trust with fraudulent intent is larceny after trustis in the court of appeals which is 31 SE
Rptr, 2d edition, page 906. I dont have that case, I never pulled it. I have Brun v. Hanson. And
the definition of breach did not cite any cases. Isnt that interesting, a law dictionary that does not
cite anything to back up their definition is a worthless law dictionary and the 7th, 8th and 9th
editions of Blacks Law Dictionary do not cite any cases to back anything up so theyre worthless
dictionaries. Blacks 4th, 5th and 6th did cite something on a lot of the definitions but not every one
of them. They dont want to go far enough to clarify some of these things, specifically enough
that even lawyers could find out what it means much less could the general public ever get a hold
of it. But breach of trust with fraudulent intent which is larceny after trust was discussed in the
State v. Owings in 31 SE Rptr 2d, p. 906 and breach of trust was discussed at length in Brun v.
Hanson, 103 F. Rptr 2d, page 685. Now, some people can get into those cites and pull those
things and some people have a terrible time getting a hold of some of these cases. Call me if
youre having trouble, if youre interested enough to try to learn, but I really think we need to
start, if nothing else, talking about this a lot and threatening to bring these cases against people
even if you dont have the gumption to do it. Bring it up and upset them. Talk to the news media
about this. Get on some of these talk radio programs and bring it up and talk about it. But talk
about it intelligently. Dont just run off at the mouth. Get copies of things like what Im telling
you about. If you dont have Blacks Law Dictionary and you cant find it on the internet and it is
there somewhere, then just write to Gemini Investments or call me and well send you a copy of
this page if thats what you need. Well send you a copy of Brun v. Hanson. Like I said, I dont
have State v. Owings. I never even noticed that one here in the law dictionary beforedidnt
read that far down. See, even I dont read far enough sometimes. And most people dont read far
enough and thats why they have a piece of the story and not enough to be real strong. Well, this
gets stronger as we get into this because these little bits of information led us to that Jersey City
v. Hague case which led us to that couple of dozen cases that Ive been telling you about that we
found in Am Jur on breach of public trust and government officials doing the wrong things and
being in breach of the trust. And there are so many things that we can recognize today that
government is doing wrong. Now, Im sure youre going to get a lot of opposition from a lot of
people if you start going all the way back to the 14th Amendment and declaring that that was
indeed a breach of the trust because it altered the purpose and intent of the original Constitution
because Im sure theres a lot of people that think the 14th Amendment has been great because it
established civil rights and we need civil rights and all kinds of other garbage youll get from
some people. But the fact is it still remains a fact that that amendment was indeed a breach of the
organic Constitutions intent by the framers of it and the people who are carrying it through
today in Congress and in the states are co-conspirators to that breach. Theyre party to it. A lot of
the problems that we have today are based on the presumptions created by that 14th Amendment
of governments right to control and regulate the residents of the state and the accusation by
government that we are all residents within the state which puts us under their control which, in
fact, is a breach of their fiduciary duty. They have a duty to protect us, not control us.

[Ed] The breach of trust is in private as well as in government contractscorrect?

[Howard] Yes, definitely. Any dealing with a lawyer who cheats you in any way, shape or
formnow, charging you for what he does thats not cheating you. If he does something and he
actually provides a service that benefits you thats not cheating you. If he bills you a whole
bunch of money and never went to court and never accomplished a thing then hes cheating you.
Thats a breach of trust. But if he accomplishes something youwell, weve all got the attitude
or opinion that a man is entitled to his just deserts for his efforts. And if a lawyer actually goes to
court and accomplishes something for you and you get a benefit out of it he is entitled to be paid
for thatnow, maybe not as much as he billed. Theres a funny story about that. This lawyer was
49 years old and he died and he went up to the pearly gates and he saw Saint Peter and, of
course, you know how lawyers start running their mouth and talking right away. He hollered at
Saint Peter, he said, this is utterly impossible, its ridiculous, I couldnt be dead, Im only 49
years old. Saint Peter said, well, settle down just a minute, let me check the books here. Two
seconds later he says, according to the book your billing record shows that youre 89 years old.
[Ed] Now, thats a breach of trust, Howard. I wont ask any more questions, Howard.
Youve answered my question. Thank you, Howard.

[Howard] Ok. In private dealings in such a thing as a contract with a lawyer to go to court
and represent you, if he does not do it properly then its a breach of the trust and lawyers have
been sued for that. There are a number of cases on it including Brun v. Hanson. They engaged in
stealing the estate and putting it up for auction and then going to the auction and bidding a low
price and making sure nobody else went there so that they could buy it at the cheap price and get
it for themselves. They stole the estate for way less than what the value was worth. Thats what
that story was all about in Brun v. Hanson. The American people are taken advantage of that way
by lawyers all the time. They do not go into court and argue the law properly at all. And the little
boy was absolutely correct, the preacher didnt even know his way to the post office, how the
hell hes going to tell me how to get to heaven?

[caller] You had, once upon a time a few weeks back, had mentioned that you needed
some trust forms for breach of trust and removal of trustees out of the American Jurisprudence
forms books.

[Howard] I did.

[caller] Did you get all of those forms?

[Howard] I havent gotten them yetno.

[caller] I did find out on EBay here not long ago an American Jurisprudence legal forms
for trusts and there are some things in here that look like it might work.

[Howard] Is it for sale?

[caller] Yeah, I bought it.

[Howard] Oh, you bought it?

[caller] I got it in my hand right nowyeah.

[Howard] Call me. Ill tell you which pages I need a photocopy of. Thats what Ive been
looking forthat book. Thank you, dear.

[caller] Yeah, I mean, here a couple of weeks ago they had put all kinds of different forms
books on American Jurisprudence. There were about $25 a book. I picked up on the trust one
and I was going to buy another one and they were all gone. Somebody bought them all up. Ok,
Ill give you a call tomorrow.

[Howard] Do you have my number?

[caller] Yes. If you want, if nothing else, I can mail out the book to you and you can pull
out the forms that you want and mail the book back to me too.

[Howard] Id be glad to do that. Yeah. And I would mail it back to you.

[caller] Which ever way we want to do it. Well talk about it tomorrow.

[Howard] Ok, give me a call. If you dont get me when you first call try again an hour or
two later. I was busy all day today. Its the first nice day weve had in three weeks that I could
get out there in my fields and do some mowing down of the weeds and starting to plow and turn
the fields up so Ive been busy out there working all day today. And at the rate I go I got about
two hours work done and I worked all day to get it done.
Who is the gentleman that started to ask a question?

[caller] That was me. Thank you. Ok, Mr. Griswold, how about on a deed of trust
attacking that trustee for breaching his fiduciary duty.

[Howard] Oh, yes, definitely, but you got to carefully read that deed of trust because, first of
all, the deed of trust put the bank in the beneficiary position and you in the trustee position
holding the property for the bank which is a fraud in the first place. Theyre actually holding
your property as collateral in trust for you and theyve reversed it in the wording so that they
could use it against you in the future. Then they appoint atrustee. And they appoint him as this
collection agent, is what he really is. And he proceeds to use the improper paperwork to steal
your property from you. So hes definitely in breach of the trust because he has a trust position as
the appointed trustee to protect your interest in the property that theyre holding as collateral. So,
yeah, theres all kinds of ways thatsee, this would be to answer Ed, this would be one of the
private situations where a breach of trust would apply in addition to breach of the public trust by
government officials. Yes, they do this all the time and they should be getting sued for it but we
dont know enough and youll never get a lawyer to help you do this because the lawyers are part
of the scam.

[caller] So, Howard, that means the judges are in on the scam and theyre breaching the
public trust.

[Howard] Well, youve got to put the judge in a position where he admits that he knows
before you can prove that he breached the public trust because a judges duty as a judge is to
judge whats been put into the court and if there wasnt anything put into the court to defend your
side by you or to create a counter-complaint by you that he can review then he can only rule on
what was put in by the other side. And, of course, if you bring in a bunch of patriot stupid
arguments about your constitutional rights or something like that, that is irrelevant. He does not
breach the public duty by telling you that you dont have any constitutional rights because you
dont. I had a terrible time with some gentleman up in Maine quite a number of years ago. He
really got frustrated with me. I was up there doing a seminar and one of the first things I said
was, before were done tonight Im going to teach you that the Constitution does not apply to
the American people. It is the governments document. It is for them, not for us. And I started to
go into the preamble and explain the English language and the preamble says, We the People of
the United States do ordain this Constitution for ourselves and our posterity. Did it say, we the
people of America? No, it didnt. It said, We the People of this corporation called the United
States of America did it for themselves. It applies to them. It does not apply to us. Well, this guy
got terribly upset with me, thats our Constitutionwe did itits ours I said, no, its not.
These people who put it together to establish a business called government did it for themselves
but in it they set up certain restrictions on the things that they could do and certain duties that
they had to protect us. And thats their duty. When they dont do their duty they breach it. They
violate it. Oh, he was so frustrated he actually walked out of the seminar and on his way out I
said to him, sir, if you can go to the library and prove that Im wrong Id be more than happy to
talk to you about it. He gave me a dirty look and he walked out of the meeting. A couple of
weeks later

[caller] Why do they keep on insisting that we read the Constitution and understand it.

[Howard] Well, we should. George Washington made that statement that everybody must
understand the law and the law starts with the Constitution and if we dont well not be able to
retain our republican form of government. Well, the republican form of government is gone. Its
vanished because the people have cooperated with government and joined in with government
benefits and services. So we have destroyed it ourselves but anyway, let me finish that story
about this gentleman. A couple of weeks later he called me up, he says, I apologize. I said, you
dont have to apologize to meI never got angry. I dont get mad about what people say and do.
You dont have to apologize. He says, well, I went to the library and I tried my best to prove
that youre wrong, and he said, you got to look up this case called Barron v. the City of
Baltimore. The Supreme Court said that the Constitution applies to the government that it created
and to no one else. He said, you were right. By golly, thats exactly what the Supreme Court
said in 1833, I believe, was the Barron v. Baltimore case. And the Supreme Court justices
reiterated that with no dissemination {dissention?} of any kind about it that absolutely the
Constitution applied only to the government that it created and to no one else. It didnt apply to
the American people. It applied to the government but the government has a duty under it to
protect us. This is why you need to understand the Constitution. When they dont do what the
Constitution says then theyre breaching it and theyre liable for it. According to the law of trusts
a trustee is personally liable over any wrong at all the trustee does. All government personnel are
in a trustee position. They are to be looking out for us, the beneficiaries, of this public trust called
the Constitution and the government. Theyre breaching it right and left. This deficit that they
created that spending of money without having it coming in from the right sources, the
implication of taxes to get it from the people that they have no right to get it from, these are all
breaches of their public trust. So, indeed, you do need to understand the Constitution and its a
lot more to it than just reading it. Geez, I read the thing about twenty-five years ago or better,
maybe thirty, must be thirty years ago I read it and Im going to tell you, sweetheart, I didnt
understand what it said. I could pronounce the words but I had no idea of the meaning and intent
and purpose of it until I studied and studied and studied over the years different aspects of it,
different parts of itlooked up court cases resolving constitutional issues, looked up books on
the Constitution written by professors of law explaining the meaning of certain parts of the
Constitution. Its taken me years to digest all of it and recognize as much as I recognize today. It
wasnt easy. Of course, if education never taught us anything worth knowing, we would be much
more enlightened about these things but education does not teach us things that we should know.
It should teach us at least where to find the post office if not how to get to heaven but I dont
think they know how to find the post office or get to heaven.

[caller] Well, they actually perpetuate the myth that the Constitution was written for the
people.

[Howard] Yeah, indeed they do. As a matter of fact, Dave DeReamer started an organization
called We the People and he didnt realize when he started that, that We the People did not mean
us, the people in America. Hes learned it since, he realizes it but he still calls one of his
websites, We the People and theres another website out there by another organization called We
the People and we really believe that were the people because we cant even read English.

[Dave] This dumb jerk actually had an organization called Voter Protection League. Heck
of a dumb Voter Protection League?

[Howard] One of the silly little things that I came upon in my studies over the years was in
the Maryland laws for the State of Maryland. It says that the right to vote is an enfranchised right
granted to you by the government. An enfranchised right, what do I want an enfranchised right
from government for unless Im willing to be subservient to the government in return for that
franchised right? Many, many timesyeah its a privilegemany, many times Ive said if you
dont work for the General Motors Corporation would you bother to go all the way up to
Michigan to Detroit to the meeting that they have to elect a new president for the General Motors
Corporation? You dont care, do you, because you dont work for them? It doesnt matter who
the president is to you. It only matters to the people who work for General Motors Corporation
who gets elected president. They should all show up and vote for their president of their
corporation. Well, theres no difference between that and the United States or the state
government because if you dont work for it nothing they do really applies to you in your private
capacity unless you stick your stupid nose in there and try to tell them what to do by becoming a
voter. Then youve accepted the franchised right from them and made yourself liable under their
laws. Why would you do that? The American people have no purpose whatsoever in voting for
anything related to government. The only people that have a purpose would be the people in
government becausenow, theres a court case that weve quoted many times in our discussions,
Chicago Railroad Company v. Yakima School District in Colorado. Colorado Supreme Court
ruled on this case and stated that the codes, rules, statutes, regulations of government apply to the
juristic society and when you look up the word, juristic society in the law dictionary the
definition is one word, government. It applies to the government. All of their codes, rules and
regulations apply to government. If youre not part of government or the property is not owned
by the government the laws, rules, regulations, taxation and everything else the government can
do cannot be applied to your private property even if you gave it to them to hold for you in trust
by registration they have a trust duty in the form of a constructive trust then to hold your
property for your benefit, you as the beneficiary and them as the trustees to protect your property
and instead they tax you and then take your property away when you dont pay the taxes and
steal it from you. Fits right under Brun v. Hanson, breach of trust. It is important that we
understand the Constitution, we understand what government has a power and a right to do and
what government has no power and no right to do. It is very important that we understand this
and it is not taught. I remember back in Catholic elementary school when I was a little kid that
the nuns, the sisters of St. Joseph, wonderful ladies but very, very strict and very good teachers
but they taught us what they were taught to teach us. And they taught us that it was a government
of the people, by the people and for the people. Well, that sure leads me to believe that theyre
talking about us, doesnt it? Thats certainly deceptive but the fact is its a government of the
people of the government, by the people of the government, for the people of the government,
and the hell with you stupid people in America.

[caller] I thought the people created the government.

[Howard] Thats exactly what Ive just told you. The teaching was that its a government of
the People, by the People and for the People. That makes you think that we created it, doesnt it?
Thats not true. Certain select people got together and created it for themselves. It was by them,
for them, not for us. We are not a party to the government. It is not our government. I hear a lot
of people say that our government did this. No, its not your government. They stand by
themselves. They are a completely different nation than we are. The doors are open at all times.
The doors to government are open. What was that case? The grain elevator, thats the one, the
grain elevator case where the guy put his corn in the grain elevator and was dealing with
government who owned the grain elevator and he argued with them about the price that they paid
him or something like that or that they didnt give him the benefits he was supposed to get and it
went all the way to the Supreme Court. Part of what the court said was he didnt have to deal
with the government. That government was open at all times for people to come in and do
business with them but they didnt have to. And at any time that you were doing business you
could withdraw from doing business with the government. Munn v. Illinois.

[Dave] And the same principle as in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence that
government obtains its just powers with the consent of the governed. They have to get your
consent otherwise its involuntary servitude and unlawful, unconstitutional. It has to be
voluntary. Even Internal Revenue admits they collect the income tax under voluntary
compliance. Once they trick you into volunteering into the regulated enterprise by contract now
you must comply with the terms of the contract that you just volunteered into.

[Howard] Well, it comes right back to the law of contracts. Once you make a contract youre
bound by the contract but you didnt have to contract but we did. We got duped into all this stuff.
Ive talked about the relationship of this to a story in the Bible. In the Book of Daniel theres a
story about King Nebuchadnezzar having a dream about a statue. It had a head of gold (Babylon)
and a neck of silver (Meado Persians) and chest of bronze (Greeks) and [iron legs] (Romans)
down to the feet of iron and clay (Holy Roman Empire). Each one of these different minerals,
valuable ores, represented a different empire during the course of history. And this was written
many centuries ago (prophesy of Daniel which came true and is unfolding today) long before
there was a United States. The United States is a dual system of government according to the
framers and their explanation of it. And the dual system was that the government is a democracy,
self-regulating, and the people in their private capacity are self-regulating. Thats where the
concept of a republican form of government comes from. The people are self-regulating. They
regulate their own lives and they have no right to stick their nose in what business the
government does and the government likewise regulates itself and has no right to stick its nose
into the business of private people. Thats the difference that emanates from the concept of a
republican form of government but thats not going to work and it didnt work. And that story of
the statue of the iron and clay in the feet says that the clay eventually pulls away from supporting
the iron feet and the statue became unstable and collapsed and Babylon was destroyed (as well as
the Medo-Persians, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire and the now the EU is starting to break
up) never to rise again. Well, the feet of iron and clay represents the government being the iron
and the clay was the people in their private capacity who have been supporting it out of stupidity.
But were starting to wake up, were beginning to overcome our stupidity. We have the capability
within the brain to do that. We just cannotto put out the effort. But slowly were being forced
to put out the effort in recent years and learn more and understand it and many, many, many of
the masses of this country are pulling away and not supporting government and, boy, is it
upsetting governmenttheyre losing control they used to have. As the clay, the people, pull
away from supporting the government which is represented by the iron it will become unstable
and eventually it will collapse. I just told you about how it will end up collapsing.

[caller] That caseis that Boyd v. US ?

[Howard] Thats right in line with Boyd v. United Statesyes.

[caller] Howard, if you file a complaint for breach of trust does the judge automatically
recognize in the case that that forms a constructive trust and if he does not what recourse do you
have beyond that?

[Howard] Well now, wait a minute, a constructive trust arises when one person gives another
person property to hold for them. Thats where a constructive trust comes from. The government
under this constitutional authority is a trust. It has nothing to do with a constructive trust.
Anything that the government does that breaches the authorities that were setup in the
Constitution would be a breach of trust. It would have nothing to do with a constructive trust.
Now, the registration of your property such as your puppy dog or your land or your childrens
body through birth certificate registration is the giving of the property to another to hold for you
and that would establish a constructive trust and allow you to sue for the recovery of the property
under a constructive trust. Do you understand the difference.

[caller] Yeah, I see itthank you.

[Howard] Ok. S

[caller] How do we tie in the breach of trust, if possible that is, to the oaths of office of
our elected officials?

[Howard] Well, thats exactly where it fits. You have no authority to do anything about a
breach of the oath of office because if you look in the law books the authority to prosecute a
public official for breach of his oath rests with the attorney generals office. The attorney general
breaches the oath all the time. Do you think hes going to go prosecute some other government
scum for doing it? Not likely. Thats why we dont get anywhere with this oath of office stuff.
But the oath was to uphold the Constitution and if hes not upholding it then hes breaching the
trust. And as I read to you out of that New Jersey court case, Driscol v. Burlington Bristol Bridge
Company the court said that a well aroused population can do something about these problems
by bringing the case in their own name against government officials that do wrong. Well, were
finally learning this stuff. Its way too late. I dont think well save this government. I think its
going to collapse and I really dont want to see that. The purpose of this government under the
Constitution was phenomenal. This is a great government. I am not anti-government at all. Im
anti the corruption of the people that are in there. But I think its too late. I think that the Biblical
story of the collapse of the final Babylon being the United States will come about. We cant stop
it, it is going to collapse. But in the meanwhile we can sure stop them from harassing each and
every one of you by you realizing how easy it is to put together a breach of the public trust case
against them. Now, the hard thing is that youre not going to get very good results if you try to do
this in forma pauper, without paying for it. You got to scrape up the two or three hundred dollars
that the court wants for a filing fee. But somebody told me about something very interesting the
other day and this really fits the law of contract. This fellow had a case going on in the court and
the opposing party which was government put in a motion to dismiss his case against this
government official and he went to the bank that he deals with and he got the bank to give him a
photocopy of the front and back of the check that he wrote to the court for the filing fee to file
this case and he took it with him to the court anticipating that the judge was going to rule in favor
of the State because the judge is part of the State and hes going to try to protect the State from
you and I making these suits as much as he possibly can. And what this fellow did was when the
judge started to talking about the motion to dismiss he said, you cant do that. And the judge
said, what do you mean I cant to that? Im the judge. Ill decide what can be done. He said,
no, you wont. And he gave him a copy. He handed it to the bailiff and said, take this up there
and show the judge. So the bailiff took it up and showed the judge both front and back of the
check and he said to the judge, now, I paid a fee and you accepted my fee which constitutes a
contract. Now, you have to hear this case all the way to the end. You cannot dismiss it because
we have a contract between us to resolve this complaint. The judge didnt dismiss the case. He
let it go to trial and proceeded. Now, I havent heard the results of what happened in the trial. I
dont even know if it all worked out yet. But he did prevent them from dismissing the case
because he showed that they created a contract with him by accepting his money and accepting
the complaint to hear the complaint. We can stop these motions to dismiss very quickly with that
kind of knowledge.

[Dave] Then there is a case that proves that you can sue public officials. Do you
remember Mitchell v. United States, the Tucker Act? 03:13:01.602. The officials are able to be
sued for money damages now.

[Howard] And they have been for years. Thats an old act. That act goes all the way back to
not long after the Civil War. And theres another case, Petition for Redress. T.O.M.E. v. the
District Court, 677 Pacific Rptr 2d., a 1984 case. It resolved the issue that a lawsuit is a petition
for redress of a grievance. And United States v. Hylton , 710 F Rptr 2d, page 1106 again said the
same thing. The filing of a lawsuit is a petition for redress so they cant come back at you for
filing a lawsuit and say that you threatened them in any way and thats some bull crap that some
of these lawyers and judges have been coming off, oh, he threatened me. What do you think
youre above a lawsuit, you morons? No, a lawsuit is a petition for redress of a grievance. Its not
a threat. Now, some people can do it and watch out for some of this patriot information. If you
use some of that information it will look like a terrorist threat. You got to be careful. You got to
study things like what were talking about here about breach of trust and the fact that government
is a trust and study the information Ive been putting out of the cases that say that government is
in a trust position and back your case up with a little short brief in support in support of it that
shows a couple of those cases. They cant come after you for doing anything wrong or accuse
you of anything because you stopped them dead with things like United States v. Hylton. The
filing of a lawsuit is a petition for a redress. It is not a threat of any kind against the judge or the
lawyer or a politician or anybody else.

[Dave] The threat is their own guilt in their own mind.

[Howard] I agree, Dave, youre 100% right. I think some of them are decent enough to
recognize that their activity is very criminal. They have that much decency because theres
always positive and negative in everything, all of us. Our creation by our Creator was all based
on positive and negative charges. Everything that physically exists including the energy of the
mind and the thoughts of the mind are all based on positive and negative energy. And to some
extent in order to physically exist we all have to have both positive and negative charges. Its just
that some of us have more negative and some of us have more positive. And the ones who have
more negative, they will do the criminal acts, they will do the evil wrongful things to people but
they know in their heart, they know in the back of their mind that its not right but they think
they can get away with it. And by golly because positive people like you people out here who are
interested in learning about this have done nothing about it. Indeed they are getting away with it.
The Tucker Act goes way back into the late 1800s, sometime right after the Civil War some time
right after the Civil War between 1860 and 1889 or somewhere in there and there were a couple
of amendments to it but it was based on the fact that government had no right to injure the people
and it waived their sovereign immunity as they normally try to stand on against lawsuits for
damages by the United States against the people. So we have the right to sue them including all
of their officials and we should be suing the official in his private capacity. Its the official who is
the trustee who has breached the trust. Its not the government. The government doesnt do
anything. The government is a corporation, its a fiction, it doesnt move unless it is moved by
people. All corporations work that way. Thats why government is labeled as a perfect
corporation in Corpus Juris Secundum in the explanation of government. It says theyre a perfect
corporation simply because theyre a fiction, theyre inert. The government can do nothing. The
people have to move the government to make it accomplish anything and its the corruption of
the people that causes the problems. Honesty and decency in government we would have
probably the most wonderful country in the entire world. We used to and we still would if we
didnt have so much corruption in there.

[Ed] Howard, how do you get into private capacity?

[Howard] You sue them that way. You sue the individual in government in his private
capacity for his breach of the public trust from his duty that he had as a public servant. Hes the
one that did the wrong. The government didnt do it. Now, he might be able to plead stupidity, he
didnt know any better. But I just read something to you about under breach of trustit doesnt
matter. What was it? It doesnt matter if it was through negligence or arising through a mere
oversight or forgetfulness, its still a breach of the trust. I didnt know is not a good enough
excuse. This is what I was told. Well, so what, you should have studied further and found out
whether you were told right. Weve been told a lot, havent we? But is it right? How do we really
know whats right unless we start studying and finding out what the purpose and intent was of
things? Like the Bible lays out the purpose and intent of Gods but theres a whole bunch of
stories in there that were corrupted by the writings that were done by man that are in there and it
corrupted the purpose. But the purpose is laid out and spelled out in the Bible of what Gods
creation was all about and what was intended. And were not doing it, were not following the
purpose. Were definitely going in the wrong direction as far as Our Creator and having to face
the Creator one day and answer to Him for what weve done or havent done correctly and the
same thing applies to governments. Governments write these things up and usually its some
decent people that put it together because theyre reorganizing the last corruption and getting rid
of a lot of the corruption that occurred in the last government which is what happened here in
this country. They got rid of the corruption of the English kings {and substituted their own, not a
great deal later} and they set it up for the protection of peoples private property and private
liberty. And government was supposed to be self-regulating and they arent. Theyre regulating
us, its the Harry Reids {and a huge gallery before him}. So theyve corrupted the intent and
purpose of this government or quite a few of the other ones, Barack Obama. {see logocracy,
government by huge lies}. I dont know if he knows any better or not but if he does hes going
against what he knows and going along with the system and helping to continue the corruption
{and destruction} {see the Frankish Khazarian program in Sign of the Scorpion} and it doesnt
matter whether he intends to do it or hes doing it by negligence or forgetfulness, hes still guilty
of breach of the public trust. {The Frankish Khazarians arent too much into trustsee history.}
Boy, that speech he gave yesterday, if somebody recorded that speech they could use it as
evidence to prove that hes in breach of the public trust and have him removed from office but no
lawyers going to do that. Remember, the President gets the privilege of appointing new officers
under his four-year tender as president and one of the officers he gets to appoint is the attorney
general which means he owes a favor back in return for the appointment. So do you think the
attorney general is going to bring charges against the President that appointed him? We are such
believers and day dreamers that we actually believe some guy in a sleigh with a big white beard
comes around on Christmas time (Nimrods birthday) and brings all kinds of gifts from Jesus yet.
And we believe that, I think, its the 24th of this month is Easter (Ishtar) and we actually believe
that theres an Easter bunny that comes around and lays eggs and theyre all different colors
(anything to hide the real meaning of the resurrection).

[Dave] No, thats the great pumpkin.

[caller] If youre ever in a case, you dont go in therelike say, for instance, a cop
th
violates the 4 Amendment, .thats what we dont haverights. When you go to court you
dont say to that judgehe breached the public trust by violating the 4th Amendment. You
wouldnt phrase it like that. You would just say he breached the public trust with his actions?

[Howard] You know what, I think that would be mighty scary if you did bring that up in a
traffic case. It would be mighty scary to them that you even know or understand any of this but I
dont think it would do you any good. They would go on and impose the fine against you anyway
and hope to hell you didnt know enough to bring the case against them. If youre going to do
something what weve been thinking aboutand see, I cant do all this by myself. Im one
person. I dont have the money to pay a staff to help put all this stuff together. But over time
what Id like to do is put together a breach of trust case for a traffic case against the cop that
brought the case and sue him. Ill bet you that if you do that he isnt going to show up in court.
But the problem is that it costs you $250 to $350 today to file cases in these different courts
around the country. The traffic ticket might have only been for $75. Are you going to spend $250
to $350 to file a case against the cop who is only going to cost you $75 if you go to court and
lose?

[Dave] The answer is go to the new website, www.escape-tickets-irs-court.org . If thats

too many dashes for you go to www.escapeharassment.com and go for strategy #1 to start.
Thatll take care of your tickets or your IRS or your court invitations.

[Howard] Itll help you to learn what you can do when you do have to go into court. That
website is based on years of the research that our group has done and not just Howard Griswold.
Theres no way I could have read and researched all this stuff that we know about. Other people
have helped me to find this stuffnot all my work. I dont deserve all the credit for it.

[Dave] Contract law that Howards been teaching.

[Howard] Dont forget the Monday night call on health and water (same phone number and
pin number, 218-844-3388 pin 966771# (6 mutes & un-mutes),
Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time.)