The dangerous misinformation about civil law, jurisdiction, and traffic law that gets people arrested
These "gurus" are giving advice that will get you arrested, fined, and worse. They mix civil law concepts into criminal matters, encourage vexatious behavior, and spread complete lies about traffic law and jurisdiction.
Based on 12+ years of study and real court testing since 2023 - I've seen these tactics fail spectacularly.
This is the most ridiculous advice ever given. Let me break down the stupidity.
Step 1: "You need to rebut jurisdiction - don't let the state control you!"
Step 2: "Get a DOT number to prove you're in commerce!"
Step 3: "Now you're outside their jurisdiction!"
DOT = Department of Transportation - A FEDERAL AGENCY!
Getting a DOT number means:
IF YOU'RE TRYING TO AVOID JURISDICTION, WHY ARE YOU REGISTERING WITH THE GOVERNMENT?! 🤣
They fundamentally misunderstand what subject matter jurisdiction means
They believe you can "rebut jurisdiction" by not consenting or by using magic words.
They think driving regulations only apply to commercial vehicles.
They believe "private" travel is somehow exempt from state laws.
Definition: The court's authority to hear a particular type of case. Traffic courts have jurisdiction over traffic violations - period.
Constitutional Authority: States have the power to regulate motor vehicle operation for public safety under the 10th Amendment.
Legal Fact: Operating a motor vehicle on public roads is a regulated activity regardless of purpose.
"Powers not delegated to the United States... are reserved to the States"
States have the authority to regulate activities within their borders for public safety.
States have inherent police powers to protect public health, safety, and welfare.
Motor vehicle regulation clearly falls under public safety.
How their own logic destroys their argument - they prove they're IN the trust
Claim: "Your birth certificate created a trust, and you're not part of that trust."
Strategy: "Make the judge or prosecutor the trustee of your trust."
Expected Result: "They'll have to dismiss because of trust law conflicts."
Only parties to a trust can give directives about that trust.
If you're NOT part of the trust (as you claim), then:
The dangerous misinformation about administrative courts and the 14th Amendment
If courts are "administrative" and that makes them illegitimate...
Why don't these gurus teach you to use ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURAL RULES?
Why do they tell you to void out the very STATUTORY CODES that govern the process?
Answer: Because they don't understand constitutional law!
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857): Declared Black Americans could never be citizens
14th Amendment (1868): "All persons born or naturalized in the United States...are citizens"
The Power: Equal Protection Clause protects ALL citizens from state AND federal overreach
The Reality: It's protection FROM government, not subjection TO government!
YouTube University teaches you to reject the very constitutional protections designed to shield you from government abuse.
The 14th Amendment doesn't make you government property - it makes the government accountable to YOU!
Don't throw away your constitutional shield because gurus don't understand history!
YouTube gurus tell you to avoid "pro se" and use archaic Latin terms from the 1800s.
Result: You sound like you're cosplaying as a colonial-era lawyer while everyone else speaks modern English.
DEFENDANT: "I appear in propria persona, sui juris, without the United States..."
JUDGE: "Are you representing yourself?"
DEFENDANT: "I am here sui juris, in my proper person..."
JUDGE: "Sir, are you pro se or do you have an attorney? Simple question."
DEFENDANT: "Your Honor, I'm appointing you as trustee of the JOHN DOE trust..."
JUDGE: "Counselor, if the defendant claims he's not part of this alleged trust, how does he have standing to make appointments regarding it?"
PROSECUTOR: "Exactly, Your Honor. Under trust law, only beneficiaries or settlors have standing to direct trust matters. By making these claims, defendant has just admitted he IS a party to the trust."
JUDGE: "The defendant has contradicted his own argument. Motion denied. Guilty as charged."
RESULT: Their own logic destroys their argument! 🎭
What happens when you follow their advice to be "defiant" and "challenge the court"
While you're sitting in jail for contempt, they're at home making more YouTube videos and selling more eBooks to the next victim.
THEY MAKE MONEY FROM YOUR FAILURE!
Real strategies that can actually help - based on legitimate law
Learn the difference between pseudolegal nonsense and constitutional law that actually works in court.