Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, June 24, 2010 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#.

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 ******************** Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the following website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth ******************************************************************* When you arent talking please mute your phone!! 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, on October 30th someone left the phone un-muted and coupled television audio into the phone making the conference call conversations very difficult. 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 to everyone (even Howard): 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 ****************************************

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. ************ {00:16:25} [Dave] The summary is that all of these agencies, every single one of these alphabet soup agencies have to have agency promulgated rules and regulations. Thats what they are enforcing on you and I. The problem is theyre leading us to believe wrongly that those regulations are substantive regulations and have the force and effect of law. They do not. The regulations that they are enforcing, these code, title and section number regulations are actually interpretive regulations. They are not substantive. They are interpretive and they are strictly internal to that agency like the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, they have

regulationsthey are only internal administrative interpretive regulations within the Internal Revenue Service for their employees. They have nothing to do with you and I and they have absolutely no force or effect of law because they are not the substantive regulations that would be required for them to have the full force and effect of law because they have failed to comply with the requirements and this has been documented and proven by an Alaska researcher named Ralph Winterrowd. His website is www.jusbelli.com . and thats Ralph Winterowds website and he has an internet radio program on Republic Broadcasting Network on Sunday nights (http://republicbroadcasting.org) . You can listen to it on the internet (on satellite, Telstar 5). I always dial in on the telephone Sunday nights from 6 till 8 p.m., Eastern Time. Ralph Winterowds program is 712-432-7500 and the pin number is 118466# . And then if you want to ask a question you have to dial in to the engineer or producer of the program at the RBN, Republic Broadcasting Network, during the show between 6 and 8 on Sundays. And the number for the engineer is 1-800-313-9443 and then you can ask your questions live, ask your questions of Ralph Winterowd about this knowledge that he has documented. All these agencies are absolutely operating with unenforceable regulations. Theyre not regulations, theyre non-regulations. They have absolutely no force and effect of law because they are strictly interpretative and theyre not substantive regulations. all these years by making us think that their agency regulations apply to us but these interpretive regulations do not apply to people outside of the agency. Like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, BATF, those regulations are strictly within their agency. Theyre internal to that agency, administrative to that agency. They do not apply to people who are not employees of that agency and all that is documented by Ralph. Hes done some excellent research. He deserves a lot of credit for that. We do not need to be afraid of this paper tigeragencies, all of them. All these agencies, theyre all doing the same thing. None of them have substantive enforceable regulations that might have the full force and effect of lawnone of them. Its the same OSHA, environmental protective agency, IRS, all of them. None of them have substantive regulations. So none of them have the enforceability of any that crap on live natural people, only on employees within, internal to their particular agency. Their internal interpretative regulations, not substantive, so they do not have the full force and effect of law and Ralph goes into great detail about this and has every week for the last three or four weeks. Hell probably go into it again some more this coming Sunday. {00:23:45.322} . . . {01:06:43} [Dave] I demand that the prosecutions commercial indemnity bond be produced on the record in the evidence file. They hate that. They dont even want there to be an evidence file. They certainly dont want you to know that theres an evidence file or to create such a thing as an evidence file. Theyll deny there even is such a thing because if there is any evidence in the evidence file, ah shucks, now they have to weigh the evidence. They cannot proceed in administrative because theres evidence that has to be weighed if its in the evidence file. Thats why you discourage you from putting any evidence into an evidence file and the lawyer, the prosecutor, they cannot put any evidence in the evidence file because they do not have any first-hand knowledge. Lawyers have nothing but hearsay. Everything lawyers heard, prosecutors, or any other lawyers, they heard it from somebody

else and thats hearsay. They cannot put that into the evidence file. Maybe an affidavit of the actual person that heard the comment can be put but not the lawyers comments cannot be put in. He did not have first-hand personal knowledge so the no lawyer, no prosecutor can put anything into the evidence file. Youve got evidence in there and they do not have evidence in the evidence file guess who winswhoever has the preponderance of evidence. So if you have some in there and they have none in there you will and the court has to tell the prosecuting attorney that they have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because they do not have any evidence in the evidence file therefore the scales of justice, that blind lady with the scales, the scales of justice lady it tips in your favor and you win and they get told they failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because they did not have enough evidence in the evidence file. Well, thats why they dont even want you to know there is such a thing and they will deny they have such a thing. They have to keep it to make their money and keep you in bondage, they have to keep it in the administrative realm and not in the judicial. They do not make money in the judicial arena so they have to keep it in their administrative code, title and section numbers area to continue to deprive you of your rights and fleece you and for them to make money. . . . {01:35:22} [caller] I had informed you and you told me about sending it to the Secretary {garbled}I made an error and sent it to the State Treasury Department. I just got it back the day before yesterday and Id like.what it said. The State Department Secretarys Office said they had no jurisdiction over the matter. Now, lets see what the Treasury Department said It said the Commonwealth of Virginia State Corporation Commission and they have my name in all capital lettersc/o xxx Edward Avenue, Richmond, Virginia 23232and it says, referenceOrganization.then you have1006214093-6. It says, Dear Customer, we are returning the initial financing statement for the following reason: An amount at least equal to the filing fee was not submitted was 8.8516(d)(2) Code of Virginia you need to provide a check in the amount of $20 payable to the State Corporation. Please return this letter when you re-submit the initial financing statement to the time and date to record, return here would have beenstamped on date {garbled}. If you have any questions please call us. [Dave] [caller] This document was created for you by the Gemini Investmentsright? Right.

[Dave] So you should send your written explanation of your difficulty to Gemini Investments and have them explain to you where you did not read their directions correctly. You did not follow their directions which say to find out what the filing fee is first and then mail it in and they have just sent it back to you with a letter saying, you did not follow Howards directions and find out what the filing fee was first and they just told you the filing fee is $20 but you should have done all that according to Howards directions long ago and avoided all that. You did not follow his directions in the first place but you really

should be discussing that with Gemini Investments, not tying up the conference call with you personal non-reading of instructions. [caller] Well, first of all, I did do that and asked what the amount was for a filing fee and they refused to tell me. [Dave] Well, now you got it in writing, what it is, thats why the guy wanted you to include that letter where he says its $20. Now, you got him on the hook in writing that the fee is $20 so send it in. Isnt that what Howard says to do? Why dont you read Howards instructions and follow them? [caller] Ive read it twenty times.

[Dave] Well, if youre having a problem why dont you contact the Gemini Investments directly. [caller] [Dave] I did contact Gemini Investments. Well then we dont need to take up time on the conference call with it.

[caller] Oh, I was just trying to let you know they came from the State Treasury not the Secretary of the States office. [Dave] Well, thats not where the Code says its supposed to be recorded according to Howards research. So, if you found some new information please refer that on to Howard. Send him a copy and explanation that you think its interesting that a different office sent it back, the Treasury Office instead of the Secretary of States office. That could be some new information that Howard needs to learn. [caller] Right but the Secretary of States office stated they have no jurisdiction over the matter. [Dave] Well, Howard needs to learn that kind of stuff so please make a copy of that letter and send it on to Gemini Investments with an explanation and ask them, do they think this is interesting research and what is the next step that you should do about it? [caller] Ok, thank you for the input.

[Dave] Im not Gemini Investments. I cant tell you what to do with their document or their instructions. . . . [caller] Im out of Virginia and we had Howard research the denying of the security agreement. The fact of the matter is 516(b) that theyre using against you for the financing

statement, you need to research your own laws. There are four steps there and the law that youll find is 516(d) and that is how you do your filing in Virginia. The caller that was on in Richmond. Howard spent a little bit of time with me and that [Dave] Its a Virginia Commercial Code section?

[caller] Yeah, its how to file. Theres four steps on how to file and they give you four different categories, 516(a), (b), (c) and (d). [Dave] Thats why that fellow should write his difficulties to Gemini Investments and then Howard can explain those details to him that you found out being as hes in Virginia. [caller] If hes in Virginia he has to get thisyoull get the documents, you got to look it up. Theyre using 516(b) against you and thats not you. Your reply back in 516 (d) has proven that it is recorded and theyll show you the steps in 516(d) if the caller would go down there and look at it instead of depending upon somebody. He needs to find out the way to go too, but thats the result of Howards research. You got to do it that way and it can be proven. Thats all I got to say, my man. Take care, David, thank you. [Dave] Excellent, thank you. . . . {01:57:10} [Dave] You just say, are you trying to force your political will on me? And they have to say no and then you say, let me understand you correctly, officer, are you discriminating against me based on my race, religion or nationality, which is exactly what theyre doing but they will not admit it because right in their job description they very carefully are told, do not discriminate against anybody, because thats against their own laws. Theyre tripping over their own laws. Thats why when you ask them those two questions they back off and drop you like a hot potato because youre bringing up the basic fundamentals that their own job description says they cannot do and they cannot admit they are doing it so they have to say, no, no theyre not and then they say, well, have a good day, good bye, get off my beat so I can arrest the next sucker coming down the street, get money out of his pocket or send him to jail until he pays. Thats some research that we picked up from one of these grand jury groups, not the Restore America Plan, but one of the other grand jury organizations. Research came up with those three items. Offensive touching is rape and asking the arresting officer, are you attempting to force your political will on me and let me understand this correctly, officer, so I dont make any mistakes, are you conducting or attempting discrimination against me based on my race, religion or nationality? And you can never go wrong asking questions but they sure cannot answer. . . .

[Bill] This is Bill Philips from New Jersey. How you doing? I just wanted to expand on your commercial indemnification bond, what you were saying earlier. I just wanted everybody in the group to know tonight that Ive used it in probably three traffic stops and its worked like a charm. When you go into court and you ask for their commercial indemnification bond they pretty much drop everything and you kind of walk right back out. And I had a friend that used it and he went to court twice. A cop pulled him over for cutting into this gas station and talking on the phone so we went there and he just kept asking for the commercial indemnification bond and they play hot potato. They play good magistrate, bad prosecutor. You keep going back in front of the prosecutor all day and finally he dropped it, the cutting into the gas station so then we came back and hes like, I thought I dropped all the charges. We said, no, you didnt drop talking on the cell phone. So hes like, well, youre going to have to see the judge. So he went down and called the magistrate and the magistrate said, no, you got to go back to the prosecutor. He goes back to the prosecutor. He says, Im not going to drop anything. He says, well, Im just going to ask you for your commercial indemnification bond again in front of everybody in the courtroom. And he says, werent you in another gas station? And he said, no, I was at such-and-such gas station. He says, no, werent you at another gas station, and finally after the third time he realized that he was going to let him off so he says, just go back in the courtroom and Ill take care of this. So, he went back in the courtroom and hes like saying to me, should I trust him?yeah, he wants to get out of this. So he goes in front of the court and callsup and he starts talking to the magistrate, Mr.wasnt even in where the police officer said he was. He was on a private gas station and he had no jurisdiction. He was out of his car. He wasnt out of his car. He was out of his car and he used his phone when he got of his car and when he finished talking on the phone he got back in his car and drove off. So the magistrate tried to talk to my friend and the prosecutor wouldnt even let him talk to my friend. He said, no, its exactly what I told you, your honor. He said, alright, dismissed next. We all ran out of the courtroom laughing. And then he had a son, he had like $800 worth of tickets and he was there all day and he kept saying Im going to ask you for you commercial indemnification bond, so they went back and forth all day. Everybody left the court. So then he pleaded with him. He said, would you take $700. He said, no. He said, how about $600? He said, no. Would you pay $500? He said, no, he kept talking him down so he said, you know what Ill do, Ill take court costs, $33, he said, fine, and he got out of an unregistered vehicle, a car abandoned on his lot, all kinds of stuff. We had another guy that we taught this down in South Jerseyhe went into the courtroom [Dave] principles. But the man still sold out his principles for $33he still sold out his

[Bill] He did but for him that was his contract, he agreed to pay the $33 but he didnt pay any fines, he didnt get any suspensions, so he felt that was good. He was getting really pissed off and he was texting us and we said, do not let them get you mad because thats what theyre trying to do is get emotionally involved in the case. So we said, keep your head and just dont let them get inside your head because thats all theyre trying to do is get youlike you said earlier, theyre trying to get you to emotionally get involved so you lose your head and start saying anything but then they get you in contempt.

So, we had another guy who had a speeding ticket and he asked the magistrate for his commercial indemnification bond so the magistrate lied and said he did not have one. So this guy went to Trenton and he found the magistrates commercial indemnification bond so when he went back in the court he says, your honor, you remember when you told me you didnt have a commercial indemnification bond? He said, yes. He said, well, I called your bonding company and they told me exactly how much your bond was, and he named his bond and the magistrate was livid because there was nothing he could do so he dismissed the case so he left the courtroom. Some of them do have the bond. This guy found it and we were so impressed with him. Its very important when you go in there and start asking those [Dave] I thought New Jersey was one of the states that did have a self-insurance called risk management. Maybe he was stopped by a town cop instead of a state. He went to risk management and they have another place where you can report the magistrate for official misconduct so he went to that place too and he did find his insurance bond and he called the insurance and they told him how much his bond was for and he went into the court and he told the magistrate exactly what his bond was for and he went crazy because he caught him in a lie. [Dave] Well, can you find out from your friend where he got that proof of the magistrates bond and send me an e-mail about that because thats good research. Ill have to relay that on to Howard. Thats only part of disclaimer number six of Howards six disclaimers. Of course we try to teach people to stay out of court in the first place by sending these documents back and avoiding the presumption of acceptance and then when you get dragged into these hearings called a pre-trial hearing or an arraignment Howard teaches to say that they have failed to provide me with enough information of knowledge to form a responsive answer or to enter a plea and not say anything else. But thats before court, but youre saying the guy actually did go in court when and if in court Howard recommends to say these six disclaimers and say nothing else and the first is all rights reserved. The second is I do not consent to these proceedings. And the third is I do not accept this offer. The fourth is I do not, did not in the past, and will not intend to consent or accept, and number five is I do not recognize you, and number six is I demand that the prosecutions commercial indemnity bond be produced on the record in the evidence file. Not just anywhere but in the evidence file. So thats part of your due process and once you demand it they have to comply and that judge tried to not comply but you forced him thats why he dismissed the case evidently. It works, thats goodthank you. Thats a good testimonial. Maybe you could put that testimonial in an e-mail to me. I can relay that on to Howard. He loves when people send him testimonials that confirm that what he has researched is accurate and working. He likes to see things that do in fact work especially when somebody takes the time to put it into writing even though if its e-mail writing its better than no writing at all. Howard appreciates the pat on the back, attaboys. [Bill] We got that from the Americas Bulletin probably like 2003 editionI saved a copy of it so weve been using it. We also had another person who went into Ocean Township, she was driving on the suspended listtwo times got caught and served like ten days.

[Dave] Well, you got to watch that word, driving. The word, driving, means youre charging money. [Bill] Well, they said she was driving but she was traveling.

[Dave] Well, she needs to point out shes not charging money and shes not drivingpresumption. [Bill] Well, they caught her because she challenged them on the state and she said, well, show me where the corporate delecti is and who is the state so the cop grabbed her and lifted her out of the courtroom because the magistrate couldnt talk anymore and they forced her to give fingerprints and all that so she served ten days but like about five years later they pulled her back in court for the fines she never paid and we had this guy named Alle Mohammed. He drew up a cestui trust and we challenged them on that with an affidavit so he went to booker. He said, well, Im going to sentence you to jail time to take up for the money that you didnt pay to this court so she says, well, I have a problem with this. I said, I found a fraud, you guys had a cestui trust set up and you never told me about it so his face turned white and the court clerk had to start whispering in his ear. So a police officer ask her to come out in the hall so I figured they were going to try to arrest her or something so I stood out in the hall with her and the police officer said, why did you embarrass him in front of everybody in the courtroom? He said, you could have asked him to go in the private chambers, and she said, well, he was embarrassing me. So when we moved back into the courtroom he apologized to her and said, I forgot to tell you how to write to a lawyer. I was laughing but she was very nervous because she thought she was going to go to jail. So finally he just released her and just said, make some payments, or something like that. [Dave] You can always remember to tell those people, all they have to say is that they made a mistake. The government or the arresting officer or the magistrate made a mistake because mistake is one of the fundamental underlying principles of law and once you raise that a mistake has been made they have to stop, they cannot proceed on an inaccurate or what Howard calls a falsified record. Once you state that a mistake has been made it doesnt matter who made it or what the mistake is everything stops, they cannot proceed, they cannot pass go, they cannot collect $200 from you or whoever and the mistake, the main mistake is that they presumed, they made a presumption. Pre-anything is prejudice and shes entitled to a neutral unprejudiced unbiased court but by them presuming she intended to have a contract or an agreement with them to pay that money, that was a mistake and she never for them to make a mistake and she never intended for them to presume that she had a contract or agreement to pay that money. Dont get into why, just a mistake. A mistake is listed in your Uniform Commercial Code in the section 1103 under the fundamental underlying principles of law and mistake is one of them so is bankruptcy. Theres a whole list of stuffany validating or invalidating cause. But once youve mentioned theres a mistake been made they have to stop. They cannot proceed on an erroneous record or inaccurate record and once you say theres been a mistake made even if you dont bother to explain what the mistake was that their presumption of your

intention or that you had no intent and they presumed you did. Theres one mistake. All these frauds they do are mistakes, but once you make mention on the record that theres a mistake and the record is inaccurate, theres a mistake on the record, it has to stop. Theyll create some bogus excuse to drop your case. Was the window up or down or some other excuse? No, he got out of his car and talked on the cell phone outside and then got back in the carwhatevers the difference, theyll invent some phony excuse to drop the case because you raised theres a mistake and they cannot proceed on an erroneous or mistaken or inaccurate record. They cannot proceed. [Bill] What was the court case you mentioned?

[Dave] International Shoe Corporation v. State of Washington. And you can find the citation to locate that case by going to your Blacks Law Dictionary, 5th edition. Look up the phrase, minimum contact or minimal contact. Itll tell you about that case in there. If you dont have one Ill put the phone down and go over and pull mine down from the shelf and read you the cite of locating that case if you have a problem. [Bill] My friend has a fifth edition.

[Dave] It should be in there under minimum contact or minimal contact. The fifth edition refers to that case, International Shoe Corporation v. State of Washington. Thats the case where the United States Supreme Court admitted the way they get their jurisdiction is by presumption. Presumption is a violation of your due process right to unbiased, unprejudiced court. Anyway, they admitted they get it by presumption and the presumption is that everybody, you, me, Howard Griswold, everybody is enjoying purposeful, not stupid tricked into and without full disclosure but purposeful intentional, purposeful availment of some benefit, privilege, license, title of nobility like voter of, taxpayer of, citizen of, resident, resident agent of, some title of nobility granted from government or some opportunity offered by government. They presume and all you have to say is, I never intended to be presumed to be enjoying any of these benefits or privileges and its a mistake for them to proceed on their presumptionits a mistake on the record mistaken recordinaccurate falsified record. Now they have to stop. They cannot proceed on an inaccurate or falsified record. They have to trump up some other excuse in front of the audience so they will not know whats going on. Its like Howard tells that story about his friend that got pulled over on some parkway between Baltimore and Washington and he had them caught between a rock and a hard place and so the judge asked the officer, well, was there a battery in the car? And the cop said, oh, I didnt notice, your honor, it was dark out and the hood was up and I saw that the guy was sleeping in his car, or whatever he was being accused of and the judge said, well, youre not very observant if you didnt notice whether the car had a battery in it or not so case dismissed. And, of course, the case had nothing to do with whether there was or was not a battery in the car. That was not the issue. He had gotten ticketed for something else. Howard tells that storyits his story. I cant remember all the details. But the point is they trumped up some excuse to get the case out of there to drop the charges claiming that the officer was not diligent enough or acute vision enough to notice whether there was a battery in the car or not. Well, what the hell does that have to do with whether the window was up or down? It has nothing to do with

the accusation. But they never accuse us of actual crimes. All they do is make wild assertions and outlandish statements {bold assertations and legal assumptions} and get us to react. Were the ones that create the controversy for them. Then they have the jurisdiction to proceed. {02:17:57.673}