Family…When you step into a legal battle, you must Go to War.But hear me clearly: Go to war. Be calm. NOT soft. The recipe is always the same — no matter what response you get from corrupt court officials. Corrupt people do corrupt things. Liars lie. So don’t be shocked when they act like exactly what they are. Their entire strategy is to shake you… to drain you… to make you so depleted that you give up. Don’t give them that satisfaction. Stick to the plan. Go to war. Be calm. NOT soft. When I work with a client, all I do is write down everything they tell me. That’s it. They hire me to do the same thing they could’ve done for themselves. I’m honored to help — but I’m not needed. Because you know what happened to you better than anyone else on this Earth. The only thing truly missing ISN'T: - being new to law...you can learn it - or not knowing court rules...they’re on the courthouse website The REAL missing ingredient is confidence in yourself. When you put these three together: 1. The Law 2. The Court Rules 3. Confidence in Yourself …you become unstoppable and that’s how you win. The corruption is out of control and the need for tools is great. So I put everything I learned in my 7+ years in the trenches in my book, The Law Revolution. Why? Because it is not humanly possible for me to help everyone one on one. This is WHY I wrote it. It is a blueprint written in plain language so that ANYONE at any level from beginner to advanced legal researchers can master their own journey. Get it and read it 25 times. It is literally what I did when I was a beginner, kneehigh to a grasshopper. There were days when I would spend an entire day reading the same paragraph over and over until it "stuck". No shame in being a beginner. Beginners will always have a special place in my heart because it is where we ALL begin any new journey. Alright, let me close with this... If you receive something from a court. They expect you to give into fear and panic.

Detrimental reliance happens when you rely on someone in authority to act fairly and follow the rules — and you get harmed because they didn’t. In law, it means: 👉 You reasonably believed the judge (or authority) would behave according to law, fairness, and due process… 👉 You relied on that belief during your case… 👉 And because the judge violated those standards, you suffered harm, loss, or prejudice. It is rooted in equity — meaning the court must act honorably if it expects YOU to honor its rulings. 🧠 Why It Matters in Judicial Misconduct Cases Most people walk into court believing: - The judge will be neutral - The judge will follow procedure - The judge will listen to evidence - The judge will not insult, bully, or shame them That expectation is reasonable. Judges swear an oath to do exactly that. So when a judge behaves like a wayward, rude, biased, or hostile authority figure, you can argue: “I relied on the court’s duty of fairness and that reliance led to harm because the judge abandoned neutrality.” This is detrimental reliance. ⚖️ How to Use Detrimental Reliance in Your Case...You can raise detrimental reliance in: 1. Judicial Misconduct Complaints Point out that you relied on the judge’s oath and legal duty to conduct themselves with fairness and impartiality — and that the misconduct caused: - Loss of rights - Skewed rulings - Financial harm - Reputation damage - Emotional/psychological injury - Procedural injustice 2. Motions to Vacate or Reconsider Show that the entire ruling is tainted because you relied on a “fair tribunal” that didn’t exist. A biased judge = constitutional defect. 3. Appeals Appeals LOVE this argument.Judges cannot violate your reliance on fundamental fairness. If they do, the ruling is often reversible error. 4. Civil Rights Lawsuits (42 USC § 1983) If the misconduct rises to a constitutional violation, detrimental reliance strengthens your argument that: - You expected due process - You were denied due process - You suffered actual harm because of that denial

How do I make them recognize my revoking implied consent on driver's license trying to get a dwls 3rd

A message of hope for everyone dealing with courts that operate commercially as banks. Corrupt officers of the court that ignore our God-given unalienable rights, attorneys who take advantage of their clients, and law enforcement overreach. There might be hope for all of us on the horizon. I have been pondering the meaning of the rollout of ISO 20022 and how it destroys law enforcement. Here are my thoughts on the matter: 1. Cant generate revenue off you anymore 2. No more: A. converting traffic stops into performance bonds B. Jail time generating municipal securities C. Officer Testimony creating debt obligations without a signed contract D. Fine, fees, forfeitures- won’t settle on international ledgers anymore- the become liabilities- not assets 3. Police without a paycheck or commission= a neutered enforcer 4. their depts. Lose funding A. Law enforcement agencies are funded by 1. fines (tickets, courts 2. forfeiture (asset seizure) 3. Jail contracts (daily rates per inmate) 4. Pretrial programs (tracking, urinalysis compliance) 5. All of the above is based on commercial instruments- bonds, warrants, liens and now those must be ISO compliant A. If they use 1. Expired capias 2. Cant show full disclosure 3. Cant prove proper bonding or standing a. then their paper becomes non-settling junk, and funding dries up 6. They cant hold people without a valid commercial instruments A. If locked up? Supposed to be tied to : 1. Valid indictment 2. A contract or plea 3. a properly executed warrant 7. Cops are arresting people with no lawful instrument, no wet ink signature, no trust disclosure, no bonding 8. ISO says if not disclosed, documented, and traceable- it doesn’t exist 1. Implications A. Holding someone= false imprisonment B. Transporting someone= human trafficking C. Forcing compliance- conversion trespass 9. Their bonds & payroll get flagged A. Officers are: 1. bonded employees of private municipal corporations 2. insured through risk pools (like TML, Gallagjer etc)

Like when you go to court on a criminal case and the only reason they really had jurisdiction is because you didn't know any better and plead not guilty... How do you cancel that unknowning agreement made(after a suspended imposition of sentence that came from a plea deal you made while you were under duress & we're intoxicated when you made it)? Is that possible?