Subject: Idaho Observer: Freedom County, Washington and the trial of the corporate state
From: <Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 8>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:57:59 -0700

From the November 2000 Idaho Observer:

Freedom County, Washington and the trial of the corporate state

We all know government isn't what it is supposed to be. The power to tax is
the power to destroy. Modern day government at all levels, is destroying what
little is left of our lives, liberties and property. Government has become the
entity that takes $100 and returns $10 of it to solve a $20 dollar problem. How?
By taking $100 of every $200 you earn.

If the power to tax is the power to destroy, then the power to regulate is
the power to devastate. The administrative agents in the “STATE OF WASHINGTON”
provide ample evidence of such destruction and devastation. Fed up with taxation
and regulation by unaccountable agents of the administrative corporation known
as the STATE OF WASHINGTON, the people in what is now known as Freedom County,
Washington, have done something about it. Over 13,000 Freedom county citizens
withdrew their consent to be governed by Snohomish County on April 23, 1995.
Freedom County has about 60,000 people living in it and Snohomish County
retained several hundred thousand citizens after the new County formed.

compiled by Hari Heath

Under the provisions of the 1889 Washington Constitution in Article I Sec. 1,
“all political power is inherent in the people, governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed and are established to protect and
maintain individual rights.”

Article I Sec. 29 provides, “that the provisions of this constitution are
mandatory, unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise.”

Article XI Sec. 3 provides that counties may only be created by petition of a
majority of the voters living in the area, and the change cannot leave the old
county with fewer then 4,000 people, and the new county can have no less then
2,000 people.

Article XI Sec. 4 mandates that the legislature SHALL establish a system of
County government, which SHALL be uniform throughout the State. The Secretary of
State certified the Freedom County petitioners had more than a majority of the
voters signatures, around 72 percent. The legislature acted by omission to deny
the people government to which they consent. So the People, by the “Law of
Necessity,” and the reserved power under Article II Sec. 1, enacted legislation
independent of the legislature to correct the legislature's unconstitutional
omission of duty.

Freedom County, Washington, is establishing its government and at this point
asserting limited jurisdiction over private property rights, land use, zoning
and planning. Professional politicians of course do not want the people to
realize that the power really belongs to the people and not the professional
politicians.

On October 23, 2000, the Freedom County organizers met in Arlington,
Washington, at the Rome Restaurant to take their official oaths of office for
the newest county in Washington State.

An update of developments with the new county was explained by Freedom County
Commissioner Thom Satterlee. The new interim sheriff, Fnu Lnu; Auditor, Bob
Westphal, and coroner, Duane Felix became officers of the new county while 60-80
people, plus reporters for radio, TV and print media overflowed the meeting
room.

After the brief ceremony, a few questions were fielded. One questioner was
Daniel Anderson, a city councilman of Arlington, formerly in Snohomish County
but now made part of Freedom County, who wore a shirt with “Freedom County” in a
red circle with a line through it. He was trying to attack the credibility of
the new county, but Commissioner Satterlee answered each point of his questions,
which gave Commissioner Satterlee the forum to crystallize just what Freedom
County and its officials have done, are doing and can do.

Commissioner Satterlee did very well, as Councilman Anderson did not appear
to know much of what he was talking about, except as he had read about it in the
Everett Herald newspaper that morning. It seemed that his status of councilman
was threatened by this new uninvited county holding a meeting in his town.
Anderson swore that he knew and loved the Constitutions, but he couldn't answer
simple questions about them. He made a rather quick exit.

In the spirit of freedom a new county, with consent from the governed, has
become a lawful reality. But now it begins to get interesting. As Snohomish
county, and the news media claim that Freedom County does not lawfully exist,
recent discoveries present an entirely new question:

Within which “State” is this new county?

An interesting thing happened on the way to the archives. A legal research
team has uncovered ample evidence that the “1889” State Constitution published
in the state's publication, the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), may be the
wrong constitution! Researchers found a different constitution in the State
Archives. No small detail when you consider that the Constitution is the basis
for the existence of government.

According to the state archivist, a lawful Constitution created in Walla
Walla, was voted on and accepted by the people of Washington Territory November
5, 1878, and was lawfully submitted to Congress as the Constitution of the
Washington republic as it applied to Congress for membership in the union (Art
IV Sections 3 and 4 - U.S. Const.). A review of the Congressional Record
confirmed that the 1878 Constitution is in fact the one submitted to Congress
for membership in the union. This 1878 Constitution was published by the Senate
of the United States of America as the Constitution of the Washington republic
that applied for membership in the union, and was subsequently admitted as the
42nd member of the United States through the Enabling Act upon execution of the
directions of the act by President Benjamin Harrison.

Will the real constitution please stand up?

The problem with the 1889 Constitution has now surfaced from another source
-- the archives in Washington D.C. Several people have requested, and finally
received, a certified copy of the Constitution of the State of Washington that
is on record as being the official Constitution for the acceptance of Washington
into the Union. It is NOT the Constitution for 1889. It appears that here is NO
record of that 1889 Constitution anywhere in the archives in D.C., nor does
there appear to be any evidence that the Constitution of 1889, bearing the
territorial seal, was ever submitted to Congress for consideration. The 1889
Constitution has never had any legal authority to serve any function in the
Union. What is on file in D.C. is a certified true complete and correct copy of
the Congressionally published Constitution of the State of Washington ordained
in Walla Walla, 1878. This 1878 Constitution was lawfully written into a
pre-bound numbered journal, signed, ratified, voted on (by a 2-1 margin) and
accepted by the people of the State of Washington in 1878. It was lawfully
submitted, with territorial seal attached, published in the Congressional record
and lawfully accepted by Congress under Article 4, Section 3, of the U.S.
Constitution.

The research team has copies of congressional documents which unequivocally
state that the “legislature” of a state and any actions of the “legislature are
held in abeyance as having NO force and effect of law, until that state's
constitution is presented to and published by Congress and subsequently the
state is accepted into the union of states. It now appears that only the Walla
Walla 1878 Constitution meets all of these criteria.

And what legislative actions are therefore void? Anything passed by a
government formed under the “so-called” 1889 Constitution, i.e., the laws of the
STATE OF WASHINGTON.

The 1889 Constitution -- Fact or Fiction?

There is an obvious problem with the 1889 Constitution. The four pages of
signatures -- pp. 74 -77 -- are not connected to the document. There is a blank
page in between the certificate page (73) where it says, “We the undersigned”
and the page (74) with NO heading where signatures begin! It is like the
signatories signed a guest book, and then someone wrote a Constitution in front
of the names.

Another obvious problem occurs in the certified original official Journal of
the 1889 Constitutional Convention in Olympia (July 4 - August 23, 1889). It is
some 520 large pages of journaling of all the minutes of the convention in a
pre-bound, pre-numbered lined-pages journal book. Six of the final certificate
entries for minutes were not even made to the journal until 1898 -- nine years
later.

In the back of the archived journal is the first final draft of the
Constitution all together. At the end of this is the certificate where it
begins, “We the undersigned” and the names are properly attached on that same
page. However, all the 75 undersigned names are entered into the official
document journal BY THE SAME PERSON! Yes -- the same handwriting for everyone.

What it means

If the 1878 Constitution is determined to be the actual Constitution for
Washington, the state, or the STATE, as the case may be, will have a significant
dilemma in how to bring the current administration of the state into compliance
with the 'new' (original) Constitution. This leaves many issues to be resolved,
not the least of which is the fact that since none of the “offices” of current
government were created by a lawful Constitution, then none of the laws passed
by the unconstituted STATE OF WASHINGTON are valid, either.

All of the administrative agencies which cling to the executive branch of
modern day government may find they have nowhere to attach themselves under the
1878 Constitution. The jurisdiction of the courts and the legal procedures
necessary for civil and criminal court actions will have to be reviewed and
brought into compliance with the 'new' Constitution. Determinations will have to
be made as to reviews of prior cases for defects that do not comply with the
1878 Constitution. This could substantially alter case law which was based upon
court decisions made by courts which did not lawfully exist.

Under the distribution of powers clause found in the 1878 Constitution, but
not the 1889 Constitution currently used, attorneys, who are sworn officers of
the court, may be prohibited from also holding office as legislators or
executive officers.

Imagine a legislature without lawyers. This could provide a prime opportunity
to restart a state government and bring it back to operate under constitutional
mandates. Washingtonians who would like to participate in helping our
“officials” work through this dilemma should call the governor, attorney
general, and local representatives and offer to serve on the committees and
workshops which will be necessary to accomplish this monumental task. Or start
new counties, as Freedom County has done, so government by consent and according
to constitutional mandates will again be the rule not the exception.

The Corporate STATE OF WASHINGTON?

As recently as the July, 1999 version of the STATE OF WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), Governor Locke, in his
introduction, acknowledges that STATE of WASHINGTON is a corporation,
established by the UNITED STATES, a federal corporation, within Washington, D.C.
Diagrams included in this report show the “branches” of the corporation to be
“combined” and operating as corporate divisions, instead of separated, as
required by the lawful Constitution of this state, 1878. This would seem to
evidence that the STATE OF WASHINGTON is some form of corporate/administrative
overlay on the geographical boundaries of Washington state. The STATE OF
WASHINGTON, according to its own CAFR, is a corporation under UNITED STATES
control. The 1889 Constitutional basis of its existence was fraudulently and
deceptively constructed. It is not lawfully signed or recorded. The
Constitutional papers were kept under wraps for some 10 years after Washington
was declared to be a State. Therefore, all the laws ever written for the
corporate STATE OF WASHINGTON are just that -- written for the corporate STATE
OF WASHINGTON.

The quest for truth

The research team has published public notices of the facts they have found
in the Daily Olympian newspaper and have made public records requests to get
“officials” in the STATE OF WASHINGTON to provide copies of public records to
which would controvert the published evidence, specifically: court admissible
evidence of any kind which would tend to prove 1) that a Constitutional
Convention could lawfully have been called after the legislative session had
ended, and prior to October 1, 1889; 2) that a Constitutional Convention was
actually called during 1889, and completed a constitution prior to October 1,
1889; 3) that any constitution for Washington was actually submitted to Congress
for admission of Washington to the union other than the constitution approved by
the People for the Washington republic November 5, 1878; 4) that the
Constitution voted upon in 1889 was any other constitution than the constitution
initially adopted November 5, 1878; 5) that the constitution (excluding
amendments) published in Volume 0, Revised Code of Washington, was in existence
and published prior to 1898; 6) that the “signatures” appearing on the State
Archivist's records of the purported “1889 Constitutional Convention”
constitution, all of which appear to be written by only two people, are not
forgeries; 7) that Congress accepted the “1889 Constitution” into its records
for action on the bills providing for the admission of Washington to the union;
and 8) court admissible evidence of any kind which would tend to controvert the
published evidence that the People of Washington's application to congress for
membership in the union was related to any constitution other than that
constitution approved by the People on November 5, 1878.

This public records request was sent to many “public officials” in the “STATE
OF WASHINGTON.” One member of the research team received a response back from
Governor GARY LOCKE, stating “We have no documents responsive to your public
records request dated October 17, 2000.”

Certified Documents from the National Archives of Washington D.C. showing the
only and the real Constitution of the State of Washington (1878) seems to
provide evidence that even the governor cannot controvert, that the current
STATE OF WASHINGTON government does not lawfully exist. Who's got the
substantive evidence of origin?

Will this newly discovered constitutional republic of Washington replace the
corporate STATE OF WASHINGTON? Or will it fall to the same fate as many other
“discoveries” in the great fraud of government. Like the provably ratified,
original 13th “titles of nobility” Amendment, which was never repealed but
somehow has all but vanished save for a few traces in various state archives. Or
the 16th and 17th Amendments which certifiably have never been ratified, yet are
published as part of the current federal Constitution. Or the Republic of Texas,
where similar research in their “state” archives discovered that Texas has never
been admitted to the union as one of the United States.

Without a meaningful opportunity to present the proof, the corporate overlays
of modern administrative government keep rolling along, the truth be damned. And
then there is the political challenge of getting the people to accept the fact
that they have been defrauded for 111 years. That wont be easy.

The evidence regarding the two Constitutions has been published in the Pierce
county records, Auditor's file #200009130560. Copies may be obtained from the
Auditor's Office by calling 253-798-7427 for copy information.

For more info on the 1878 Constitution discoveries, contact Don Braun at:
206-440-1938 mailto:[email-masked]%22

For more info on Freedom County, contact Commissioner Thom Saterlee at:
360-435-5979 mailto:[email-masked]%22

***

Mr. Heath is a regular columinst for The Idaho Observer who has mastered the
art of wrestling complex subject matter into a format that ordinary people can
understand.