Click link below to watch Zoom. These are the instructions for addressing your bills in pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 411 https://zoom.us/rec/share/-u_1Ee61fxuD3si0kbEFl8z-qie38aR287SyjKQcNOFXW5NHtlC65y822Kti83fC.0QKK3sT06kDLsH9t Passcode: khR2&RN0

Has anyone ever thought about redeeming our receipts for things we purchase?

MoorLife Equity University 🇲🇦🇺🇸 ⬇️⬇️⬇️READ THIS⬇️⬇️⬇️

MoorLife Equity University 🇲🇦🇺🇸 WHAT DOES "NO BOND = NO AUTHORITY" MEAN? It means that any government official - judge, sheriff, prosecutor, city manager, clerk, etc. — who is required by law to be bonded must have that official surety bond in place before they can lawfully act in their public office. If they don't have one: They have no legal standing. Their acts are null and void. They're impersonating a public officer. 1. BONDS = LAWFUL AUTHORITY Under California Government Code §§ 1457, 1501, 1504, and similar laws in other states: Bonds are: A guarantee of faithful performance by the officer. A contract between the officer, the public, and a surety company. Required before assuming or executing any duties. The bond: Protects the public from misconduct or abuse. Allows claims or lawsuits against the bond for injury or damages. Creates a lawful trust relationship between the officer and the people. Without it, the office is essentially empty - and anyone acting under it is a fraud. 2. NO BOND = NO LEGAL STANDING Under California Gov. Code § 1770(i): "An office becomes vacant upon... the neglect or refusal to file an official bond within the time prescribed." Meaning: If an official fails to file the required bond — their office is vacated by law. Their signature, orders, rulings, and enforcement are void for lack of authority. They are operating under color of law, not law itself. Color of law = Pretending to have lawful authority without actually having it. USE THIS IN REAL SITUATIONS If you're dealing with: A judge issuing orders A sheriff threatening eviction A CPS worker pushing child support A city official making demands You can say: "Provide your official oath of office and filed surety bond as required by law. Failure to do so constitutes acting under color of law, and all acts are void ab initio (from the beginning)." If they can't produce it, their authority can be lawfully challenged or abated.

MoorLife Equity University 🇲🇦🇺🇸 Greeting Banking Debtors Title: Exposing Deceptive Banking Practices: A Legal and Constitutional Analysis Introduction Brief overview of the issue: Banks borrowing against individuals' credit and charging them, and corporations using Social Security numbers to access funds. Purpose of the document: To highlight the legal and constitutional violations involved in these practices. 1. Legal Framework 1.1. Anti-Discrimination in Credit Transactions 12 CFR 1002.4(a): Prohibits creditors from discriminating against applicants on a prohibited basis in any aspect of a credit transaction [1]. 1.2. Powers and Duties of Banks 12 USC 1431: Outlines the powers and duties of Federal Home Loan Banks, including borrowing, issuing bonds, and other financial activities [2]. 1.3. Social Security Fraud 42 USC 408: Imposes penalties for fraudulent activities related to Social Security benefits, including false statements and misuse of Social Security numbers [3]. 1.4. Definitions and Rules of Construction 15 USC 1602(g): Defines key terms such as "creditor" and "credit" for the purposes of consumer credit protection laws [4]. 1.5. Negotiable Instruments UCC 3-104: Defines what constitutes a negotiable instrument, including checks, drafts, and notes [5]. 1.6. Gold Clauses and Consent to Sue 31 USC 5118: Addresses the legality of gold clauses in financial obligations and the government's stance on such clauses [6]. 1.7. Constitutional Guarantees Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution: Guarantees a Republican form of government and protection against invasion and domestic violence [7]. 2. Analysis of Deceptive Practices 2.1. Borrowing Against Individual Credit Explanation of how banks use individuals' credit for their own financial gain. Legal implications under the aforementioned statutes. 2.2. Charging Individuals for Their Own Credit Analysis of the unfair and deceptive nature of these charges. Potential violations of consumer protection laws.