The Civil War Fraud

By Anna Von Reitz

— This is a reprint of an article that explains a small but important part of what went on after the Civil War and it places a glaring spotlight on the mis-administration of our country that went on then and which has continued under the auspices of the Territorial and Municipal United States Governments ever since.  ENJOY —- and thanks to Bill Ward: 

The Civil War Fraud 

By Bill Ward

When the War Between the States ended, the victorious Northerners viewed Jefferson Davis, as the former President of the Confederate States of America, much differently than others who had served the Confederacy.

For example, when Robert E. Lee surrendered to U.S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, the meeting between the two generals was amicable. Lee was received and treated with courtesy as a senior officer. The terms were so apparently lenient, with Grant conceding to Lee’s requests on behalf of his soldiers, the surrender was referred to as “a gentleman’s agreement.”

However, even after signing a loyalty oath, Lee and other former Confederate Army officers and members of the CSA government were later disenfranchised and treated as second-class citizens. But in the eyes of the northern public, Jefferson Davis was set apart for still a different kind of treatment.

On May 10, 1865, about a mile from the town of Irwinville, Georgia, Federal troops captured Davis. With his arrest on that spring morning, his government ceased to exist. His wife, Varina, and their children were sent to Savannah, where she was kept under virtual house arrest and forbidden to leave the city. Because the soldiers, carpetbaggers and Union supporters treated the Davis children so badly, Varina arranged for them to go to Canada along with her mother.

Davis had been taken back to Virginia and imprisoned in Fort Monroe, where he would stay for the next two years. At first, he was bound in leg irons. Guards watched him around the clock but were not permitted to speak to him. He was allowed no visitors; a light burned in his cell day and night; and his only reading material was a Bible. His treatment was a clear violation of the Bill of Rights.

Many Northern Congressmen and newspapers were nothing short of vicious in their public attacks of Davis. They wanted to see him tried for treason and hanged. In one article, and in one very long sentence, the New York Times referred to Davis by every insulting comment and offensive name that was fit to print. Rhetoric far outran legal reasoning.

But if Davis was in an unusual legal predicament, so was the United States government. The dilemma faced by Washington was how to handle the Davis case. The government under Lincoln had created its own major obstacles by spending four years proclaiming that secessionists were “traitors and conspirators.” The U.S. military had silenced opposition to the administration by closing down newspapers that dared challenge the party line or to make the slightest suggestion that secession might be legal. Thousands of Northerners had been jailed for exercising their First Amendment rights, and those thousands had friends with long memories in the Northern bar.

Northern lawyers were angry for having their clients locked in prison with no civil rights as guaranteed by the Constitution; having civilians tried by military courts for non-existent crimes; having a government that ignored the Supreme Court, setting itself above the constitutional plan of checks and balances. They didn’t like having to beg the president for justice for clients convicted by phony courts-martial or locked up for long periods without any trial. Under Lincoln, the U.S. government had become tyrannical, and certainly anything but a free and constitutional society.

The best lawyers of the day were willing to volunteer to defend Jefferson Davis, because they were angry at the way Lincoln’s government had trampled the Bill of Rights and the Constitution for four years. Even those who didn’t believe in secession were repulsed by the conduct of the Republican administration and the U.S. military.

Charles O’Connor of New York, one of the most famous trial lawyers of the era and a man of great stature in the legal profession, volunteered to be Davis’s counsel. Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, would be the trial judge.

But interesting things began to happen, and the government’s dilemma became even worse. University of Virginia Law Professor, Albert Bledsoe, published a book, “Is Davis a Traitor?” Bledsoe methodically took apart the case against secession, delivering a solid blow to the prosecutors and dampening their zeal to try Davis. Prosecutors actually began to look for a way to avoid trying him without vindicating the South.

Then another method was decided on for prosecution. The attorney general would bring in outside, independent counsel, as we have seen in modern times, such as in Watergate or the Clinton scandals. The government needed someone of great standing in the legal community to be the lead prosecutor. It chose John J. Clifford. But after reviewing the case, Clifford withdrew citing “grave doubts” about the validity of the case. The government could “end up having fought a successful war, only to have it declared unlawful by a Virginia jury,” where Davis’s “crime” was alleged to have been committed.

President Johnson, Lincoln’s successor, thought the easiest way out would be to pardon Davis, as he had pardoned many other Confederates. But Davis refused, saying, “To ask for a pardon would be a confession of guilt.” He wanted a trial to have the issue of secession decided by a court of law — where it should have been decided to begin with — instead of on battlefields. Most Southerners wanted the same.
Northerners either forgot or were unaware of a great secessionist tradition in America. Southerners were not alone in their view that each state had the right to determine its own destiny in the Union. The procedure for joining the Union also applied to withdrawing from the Union.

That thought harkens back to an editorial by the Cincinnati (Ohio) Daily Inquirer, in the summer of 1861, after the “traitor” label was let loose by the North: “The Republican papers are great on treason. . . . It is treason to circulate petitions for a compromise or peaceful readjustment of our national troubles . . . to question the constitutional powers of the President to increase the standing army without authority of law . . . to object to squads of military visiting private houses, and to make search and seizures. . . to question the infallibility of the President, and treason not to concur with him. . . It is treason to talk of hard times; to say that the war might have been avoided. It is treason to be truthful and faithful to the Constitution.”

A year after John Clifford withdrew, the government appointed another special counsel, Richard Dana of Boston, who had written the novel, “Two Years Before the Mast.” But after reviewing the evidence, he agreed with Clifford; the case was a loser. Dana argued that “a conviction will settle nothing in law or national practice not now settled…as a rule of law by war.” Dana observed that the right to secede from the Union had not been settled by civilized means but by military power and the destruction of much life and property in the South. The North should accept its uncivilized victory, however dirty its hands might be, and not expose the fruits of its carnage to scrutiny by a peaceful court of law.

Now, over two years after Davis’s imprisonment and grand jury indictments for treason, the stage was set for the great public trial of the century. Davis had been released from prison on a $100,000 bond, supported by none other than Horace Greeley, the leading abolitionist writer in the North and a former Lincoln supporter. Greeley and a host of others were outraged at the treatment Davis had received, being locked up in a dungeon for more than two years with no speedy trial.

Since two famous special counsels had told the government its case was a loser, finally, none other than the Chief Justice, in a quirk of Constitutional manipulation, devised an idea to avoid a trial without vindicating the South. His amazing solution was little short of genius.

The Fourteenth Amendment had been adopted, which provided that anyone who had engaged in insurrection against the United States and had at one time taken an oath of allegiance (which Davis had done as a U.S. Senator) could not hold public office. The Bill of Rights prevents double jeopardy, so Davis, who had already been punished once by the Fourteenth Amendment in not being permitted to hold public office, couldn’t be tried and punished again for treason.

Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase secretly passed along his clever argument to Davis’s counsel, Charles O’Connor, who then made the motion to dismiss. The Court took the motion under consideration, passing the matter on to the Supreme Court for determination.

In late December 1867 while the motion was pending, President Johnson granted amnesty to everyone in the South, including Davis. But the Davis case was still on the docket. In February 1868, at a dinner party attended by the Chief Justice and a government attorney, they agreed that on the following day a motion for non-prosecution would be made that would dismiss the case. A guest overheard the conversation and reported what was on the minds of most Southerners: “I did not consider that he [Davis] was any more guilty of treason than I was, and that a trial should be insisted upon, which could properly only result in a complete vindication of our cause, and of the action of the many thousands who had fought and of the many thousands who had died for what they felt to be right.”

And so, the case of United States versus Jefferson Davis came to its end — a case that was to be the trial of the century, a great state trial, perhaps the most significant trial in the history of the nation — that never was.

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

Pernicious Confusion About Milligan Ex Parte

By Anna Von reitz

Pernicious Confusion About Milligan Ex Parte

The Supreme Court decided Milligan Ex Parte in 1866, a year after the creation of quasi-military courts in ten military districts covering eleven Southern States in May of 1865.

These courts were formed by the Rump Congress immediately following Lee’s surrender at Appomattox, Virginia, in April of 1865.

Basically, a General “of at least the rank of a Brigadier” was put in charge of appointing civilians loyal to the North to act as Judges in Southern Courts: carpetbaggers.

These people were all either transported to serve as judges in these new quasi-military courts or they were hated members of their own communities — Yankee Sympathizers — who were given plenary power over their defeated neighbors, to rape, pillage, and plunder whatever property was left in the South.

It caused such an outcry that Milligan Ex Parte was rushed through the United States Supreme Court for remedy just a year later. The Court clearly stated that when civilian courts resumed operations in the military districts, the quasi-military tribunals were to shut down.

Instead, by a process of fraud based on similar names deceit and usurpation, the civilian courts were surreptitiously replaced by these same quasi-military tribunals operating throughout the nation.

That’s where we find ourselves today, still cluelessly wrestling with the unresolved detritus of the so-called Civil War, still putting up with quasi-military courts — which we could replace simply by operating our own civilian courts and invoking Milligan Ex Parte.

Recently, people unaware of this history, have brought forward Milligan Ex Parte and attempted to use this as an argument against President Trump’s proposed use of military tribunals to try civilian criminals —- however this reasoning is based on false assumptions that derive from ignorance about which courts Milligan Ex Parte is talking about, and assumes that it is addressing military courts in general.

As you can see, instead, it is only addressing the quasi-military civilian tribunals created in May 1865, not the actual military courts at all.

In my opinion, President Trump is acting correctly and Milligan Ex Parte has nothing to do with it. The vast majority of the criminals he is dealing with are US Territorial or Municipal citizens and they are subject to military courts as a result.

As for the rest of us, it is long overdue for us to stir our stumps, get our own political status records corrected, form our Jural Assemblies, and shut down the quasi-military courts operated by the Territorial United States using Milligan Ex Parte in its correct place and interpretation to do so.

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.


By Anna Von Reitz

I have lately been assailed by people concerned because they could not get a passport, were issued an incorrect passport, or were being penalized for things like child support debts or IRS liens with not being able to use a passport issued by “the US”.
Passports are issued by the Post Office, not the “government”.
You, as a Post Master (Think about it, you handle the mail — buy, sell, trade, carry, and deliver mail all the time) have the right and ability to send “yourself” anywhere the mail goes.
Technically, your Birth Certificate is sufficient to cross most international borders, so long as you provide reasonable proof of the other elements of a Passport — current picture, nationality (Ohioan, Californian, Wisconsinite, etc.), a current postal address, two Witnesses (or their signed and notarized testimony identifying a photo of you as “the” man or woman whose birth event was registered on the BC and certifying your good character.
There you go. Make your own. The “authorities” will scream, but it is their own darn fault for messing around and not doing their job—and they really have no authority to restrict your travel.
You put all this information on a 5″ X 8.5″ postcard and send it to yourself at your normal address with your normal postal address as the Return Address, too, using a $1.00 “Global” Stamp, which will of course be cancelled to pay the postage.
When this document returns to you, it has been stamped and sealed and is in fact a “Passport” proving your current address and presenting your identity.
They can argue it all day long, but they can’t restrict the movements of a State national. You have your own Post Office and your own Seat of Government and they can go blow.
As for the Passports they do issue that are quasi-correct and issued under color of law, you can correct them and nail down their interpretation by the way you sign them.
Always sign everything with a by-line. By: John Peter Doe.
That claims your copyright. All rights reserved.
Take one of those $1.00 Global stamps and stick it above your
signature, and cancel it by writing your name and the place you are “leaving from” across the stamp in red ink.
The Post Master has now cancelled the Global Stamp and the “cargo”— the Name you have copyrighted and affixed — is ready to be mailed to whatever destination your little heart desires.
The out of control bureau-rats from Washington, DC, can sniff and snort all they like, but it isn’t their business and not in their control.
They say theirs is a passport issued by The United States of America; well, that’s us.
And if they mean some Scottish wannabe commercial fraud organization infringing on our copyright and abusing our Name instead, they need to be grilled about that copyright infringement and be put on the record as attempting to interfere with our ability to contract and our ability to conduct international trade. Both.
$250,000 fine and ten years in jail, international sanctions in 172 countries. See how they like that.
Don’t let these cretins poke their noses into areas where their noses don’t belong. Give them the “Bad dog!” response and if enough of us do this consistently enough, they will get the message even if it has to be reduced to Tarzan-like speech:
Me, Employer.
You, Employee.
And issue your own Passport.
See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:
To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

Public Notary or Notary Public?

By Anna Von Reitz

Had a couple worthy questions today about notary services….

Notaries have been around since the Roman Empire.

A Public Notary acting in the land jurisdiction has more power than a State of State Supreme Court Judge.

A Notary Public is a different private office that the same people can occupy in the international jurisdiction of the sea.

And which office it is depends on your status, your purposes, the capacity in which you are acting and the nature of your paperwork, so you need to be able to figure it out and invoke the proper office of the Notary accordingly.

The people now serving as Notaries are all commissioned by “State of State” franchises and so, they normally function as Notary Publics in the international jurisdiction of the sea.

The jurisdiction invoked is indicated by the “Notary Block” the separate portion of the document reserved for them.

If it is Territorial United States jurisdiction being invoked, the Notary Block will show that the paperwork is taking place — for example, in the “State of Vermont” and “County of Claybourne”.

If it is Municipal United States jurisdiction, the Notary Block will show: “STATE OF VERMONT” and “COUNTY OF CLAYBOURNE”.

But if you want to invoke the land jurisdiction owed to your country, the Notary Block will show: “Vermont State” and “Claybourne County”. And, ideally, the Notary will be identified as a “Public Notary”.

Sometimes we need the Public Notary to act as a Witness to our actions, such as sending a piece of mail, or hearing our testimony about something, which amounts to the same thing as being sworn in, in a court of law, or being deposed as a Witness outside the courtroom.

This is described by the Title of the Notary Block, which says “Public Notary Witness” or “Public Notary Jurat” [for testimony involving verbal utterances and affirmations or oaths] along with our declaration of the jurisdiction. This all serves to explicitly nail down the capacity in which the Notary is acting and what they are being asked to do.

Public Notaries count as two Witnesses.
Notary Publics count as one Witness.

Both capacities are officers of the court(s) they service.

So, yes, there is far more to the humble Notary than most people have ever begun to guess and the range of services that a Notary can perform is also much grander in scale than we typically take advantage of.

Of course, Notaries need to be compensated for their time and effort and as it is a largely volunteer occupation there is no salary and no set fee structure. Most Notaries ask a small fee — $2 to $5 for witnessing a signature or autograph, and more for more involved services, such as mailing services and Notary Due Process Service.

This is just “the Basics” you need to be aware of in working with a Notary or Notarial Service. You choose the jurisdiction and the capacity you wish the Notary to act in, and you invoke it by your description in the Title of the Notary Block, the location described in the Notary Block, and the way the Notary is addressed — either in their Public (land jurisdiction) capacity, or in their private (sea jurisdiction) capacity.

A study of Notarial Powers would take a good six months and is far beyond my capacity to address in a single article, but this gives you a good starting place and allows you to sort out the basic issues.

Land jurisdiction paperwork goes to a land recording office and is handled by a Recorder. Generally speaking, it requires a Public Notary and should be taking place in a land State and County: Ohio State, Lakeland County.

Sea jurisdiction paperwork goes to a registrar or clerk of court and is handled by a Registrar. It requires a Notary Public, and can be taking place in a fictional place such as: State of Ohio, County of Lakeland (Territorial) or STATE OF OHIO, COUNTY OF LAKELAND (Municipal).

You have to be sharp and watch closely and think about what you are doing to insure that you get the results and the services you want, and since you are the one preparing your paperwork, it is all in your hands and your choice, according to your purposes.

All the paperwork that I recommend (other than the Birth Certificate paperwork) will require a Public Notary service, will be a recording not a registration process, will go to and through a Recorder’s Office, and the place will be a land jurisdiction state like: Wisconsin State, and a land jurisdiction County like: Jackson County.

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

One Page Situation Update for August 8, 2018

By Anna Von Reitz

The Current System:

· A Scottish corporation calling itself  “The United States of America, Inc.” and a Delaware corporation calling itself the “United States of America, Inc.” run by the Roman Catholic Church have been usurping upon our Government…. since 1868;
· They have provided the 19 enumerated services required by the original Constitution –and a lot more we never asked for –under fraudulently assumed contracts;
· The labor of the American People and their other assets have been used as tradable commodities to pay for all these services;
· Our legal system was unlawfully converted into a private debt collection service to seize our assets to pay for all this foreign spending on our tickets;
· Bottom line: we have been defrauded and enslaved in gross Breach of Trust.  The purported Trustees have stolen our individual identities and racked up huge bills against our credit— just like any credit card thief.
The Correction to Be Made:

· The original unincorporated Federation of States doing business as The United States of America has organized and objected to the circumstance described above;
· The Federation States and People have been called to Assemble;
· We have the power to restore our lawful government and put an end to the abuses;
· Trump was elected to help restore our lawful republican form of government;
· All Governors have been briefed and the President as Commander-in-Chief is leading an orderly transition.
Where We Are Going:

· The fifty State republics of The United States of America are still alive and functioning;
· These States are not “States of States”;
· Our States are the Priority Creditors of all the bankrupt Federal Territorial and Municipal States of States and are heir to all the assets and property these foreign organizations were holding and managing “for” us;
· We, the People of this country, address the fraud committed against each one of us, get our own records corrected, and assemble our State organizations;
· Our States reclaim and receive back all the assets we are owed and direct control of our property is returned to us;
· Our State Deputies meet “in Congress Assembled” in Philadelphia to take care of long overdue business and chart a way forward;
· The United States of America, the actual federation of our States, helps President Trump “Make America Great Again!”

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

Not an A4V Process — A Substitute Process

By Anna Von Reitz

The A4V process was set up in the 1930’s as part of The Great Fraud.  Its actual technical name is “Mutual Offset Credit Exchange”.  What this involves is an exchange of debts — you owe me ten dollars, but I owe you five, so we “swap debts” and at the end of the day, you only owe me five dollars. 

That system ended except by implied succession contract in 1999 with the settlement of the 1933 bankruptcy. 

That is, the organizations that acquired the underlying assets and stepped in to provide the services still got tagged to honor A4V processes because they had an implied responsibility to continue to provide the same deal as remedy, otherwise the whole situation is patently illegal and inequitable. 

So between 1999 and now, some A4V processes were accepted and worked on a quid pro quo basis, however, all that stopped when both the Municipal and Territorial organizations went bankrupt between 2015-2017 and the Bankruptcy Trustees appointed by the big banks refused to pay up and it all got dumped back on the IMF functioning as the “US Treasury”.  

You can’t bring an A4V against a bankrupt entity, even if they owe you and even if you owe them.  The bankruptcy locks down their assets including their credits and so far as the Bankruptcy Trustees are concerned, you are just a debtor not necessary owed anything.  So when you bring forward a claim against the bankrupts, they say you are acting in contempt and asserting a fraudulent interest against a poor, little, old bankrupt entity that is owed all the protection of the court.

So even though there was sporadic success presenting A4V claims prior to the bankruptcies and somewhat still some success because of the need to provide remedy-or-face-criminal charges, what I have suggested and provided for is not and has never been an A4V process.  

It looks like one, but it is in fact an insurance claim process, not a Mutual Offset Credit Exchange. 

What we did is that we claimed all the assets of the bankrupt “States of States” organizations, including those assets that are being held in trust by these organizations, supposedly “for” us, and we exercised our guarantees under the Lieber Code and Hague Conventions that require that we are indemnified against loss or damage, by establishing a Private Registered Indemnity Bond to cover the actual States and People.  

Think of it as an insurance policy with an insurance policy number that is lodged in their system, and when you make a proper claim against it by “accepting” their Court Order (Bill) and signing off on it, they have to provide the insurance to cover the loss and balance the books. 

It’s really pretty simple, though the process of getting to this point has been anything but simple or straight forward. 

In order to do this properly, the “person” making the claim must be operating as a “Natural Person” and have their ducks in order with a recorded claim to their birthright identity and political status and Testament of two Witnesses proving that they are “the” man or woman born in such and such a place to such and such parents, etc. 

A Lineage Treaty going back to before the Civil War establishes absolute “grandfathered in” status for the claimant, but anyone born on the land and soil of this country or properly Naturalized as a “US citizen” and then adopting State nationality, qualifies. 

It is my understanding that the rats have suspended “Equal Civil Rights” as part of the bankruptcy, which leaves federal employees and federal dependents and people of color in harm’s way, but they won’t want to admit that they have suspended equal rights provisions and I would suspect that if people claim their equal civil rights the Trustees will be hard-pressed not to honor their claims on the same quid pro quo basis that A4V exchanges were honored sporadically after 1999— because these commercial pirates have to offer remedy for their crimes or be recognized as pirates. 

So — the indemnity bond works despite the bankruptcy and hooks the underwriters instead of the bankrupt organizations, which clears up the whole conundrum created by their bankruptcies and gives people remedy that is simpler and easier to enforce. 

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.

Example of My "Claim for the Life – Lineage Treaty"

By Anna Von Reitz
The scanned copy of the actual record will be posted on my website, (see links at the bottom), which shows the stamps, etc. — but here is the text showing the kind of detail and verbiage needed to establish your claim to your inheritance as a Natural Person aka Living-Man or Living-Woman:
For the Notice of the Claim for the Life: Lineage-Treaty
Date: November 16, 2017
Place: Big Lake, Alaska
Action: Claim and Conveyance
Presentment: To All Parties
:From the Living-Soul: Anna Maria Riezinger: Anna Maria Riezinger:Woman, Principal, Vessel with Manifest: Anna Maria Riezinger-Living-Soul, Priority Creditor, Paramount Security Interest Holder as of June 6, 1956 holds this Testament-Claim for the Life of Anna Maria Riezinger for the Public Record with this claim of the Fourth Article of the 1666 Cestui Que Vie Act as and with this claim of the writ of Habeas Corpus &: does form this Testament upon the Public Record of the states of the Union of these United States and the Alaska State:
:From the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger manifest this day alive and well, the living daughter of the Emmett Anthony Riezinger:Father of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger. The Emmett Anthony Riezinger:Father from the Peoria-City, of the Illinois-Land-State, born August 14, 1921 with the Chicago-City-Birthplace of the Illinois-Land-State, is the son of the John George Riezinger:Grandfather of the Living-Woman:Anna Maria Riezinger:
:From the Paternal-Grandfather: John George Riezinger of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger born June 1, 1879, from the Salzburg-City of the nation of Austria and from the Paternal-Grandmother: Emma Elizabeth Helmich, born 1879, of the Spring Lake-City of the Illinois-Land-State:
:From the John George Riezinger, the Paternal-Grandfather of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger, the son of the John George Riezinger:Great-Grandfather of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger, the son of the Mother-Wife:Caroline (Rothaus) Riezinger, born November 2, 1840 from the Salzburg-City, from the nation of Austria, and the Father-Husband:Frank Heinrich Riezinger, born the year of 1855 &: from the nation of Austria:
:From the Emma Elizabeth Helmich, the Paternal-Grandmother of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger, the daughter of the William Helmich, born July 4, 1850, from the Tete Des Morts-City, of the Iowa-Land-State, and the Mary Jane Zimmerman, born February 28, 1859 from the St. Clair-City, of the Pennsylvania-Land-State:
:The Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger is Manifest from the Paternal-Grandparents: John George Riezinger and Emma Elizabeth Helmich: Marriage Covenant from the Public Record, November 25, 1911, of the Chicago-City, Illinois-Land-State:
:From the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger manifest this day alive and well, the living daughter of the LaVera Myrtle Schnur of the Black River Falls-City, of the Wisconsin-Land-State, born March 9, 1920, from the Albion Township, of the Jackson County, of the Wisconsin-Land-State:
:From the Julius Alfred Schnur, the Maternal-Grandfather of the Living Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger, born November 20, 1867, of the Black River Falls-City, of the Jackson County, of the Wisconsin-Land-State, the son of the Julius Alfred Schnur, born December 31, 1832, from the Brunswick-City, of the nation of Germany and the Julius Alfred Schnur:Father’s Marriage Covenant with the Wilhelmina Sitchfield:Mother, from the Public Record of the Beloit-City of the Wisconsin-Land-State:
:From the Anna Wilhelmina Nielson, the Maternal-Grandmother of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger born October 2, 1881, in South Dakota-Territory, the daughter of the Augustinus Frederik Nielson:Father born May 10, 1852, from the nation of Denmark &: the Mary Ann Alexander:Mother born January 13, 1850, from the Watertown-City of the Wisconsin-Land-State:
:From the Maternal-Grandparents: Julius Alfred Schnur’s Marriage Covenant with the Anna Wilhelmina Nielson from the Public Record: June 1, 1905 of the Rochester-City, of the Minnesota-Land-State:
:By the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger-Manifest from the Marriage Covenant of Emmett Anthony Riezinger – LaVera Myrtle Schnur, from the Public Record, of the Day 6 June 1942, from the Kohoka-City, Missouri-Land-State, by and with the Provenance proven as an American-state-vessel with the Sacred-Cargo: Anna Maria Riezinger-Living-Soul.
:With Claim for the Vessel & for the Cargo & for the Manifest of the Estate of the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger: &: with the Estate from this Lineage-Treaty free from encumbrance, free from alien-title, free from charge, free from duty, the Living-Woman: Anna Maria Riezinger is with this Lineage-Treaty-Conveyance home from the sea:
By: ___________________________ :Living-Woman
Right-thumb-print Seal:
This record demonstrates my lineage claim to the land and soil of this country through numerous ancestors who were here before the Civil War and even before the Revolution.
But even if you are not lucky enough to have a similar recitation, if you were born in this country or born to parents who were born in this country or even to parents claiming to be American state nationals through their parents or who are legal immigrants who finished the Naturalization process to become a “US citizen” and then went on to adopt a permanent domicile in one of the States– you can do the same thing.
Why? Because anyone born or naturalized into these Land-States is heir to their kingdom, free and clear.
Your Claim for the Life doesn’t have to be long or ornate. It doesn’t have to involve ancestors who lived in this country, so long as your were born here or naturalized and then expatriated to an adopted State of the Union.
To those who are misleading everyone and telling them that they don’t have to go through all this effort to rebut lies being told about them and record their counter-claims —– there are a lot of crooks that hope you don’t, lots of corporations that don’t want to pay back what they’ve stolen, lots of politicians who don’t want to own up to the facts, lots of insurance underwriters and banks, too.
And if you don’t record your claims because you were lazy or thought you didn’t have to — the rats win.
It’s up to you.

Here are the actual documents filed.

See this article and over 1100 others on Anna’s website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal button on this website.