I have written several articles on postings related to politics. A list of links have been provided at bottom of this article for your convenience. This article will, however address different aspects on these political events.
There has been a lot of information floating around about the United States being a corporation. This supposedly took place in 1871. I will do my best to sort it out and come up with the truth on the matter. A lot of the fuss came about because of the Marshall Report. So, I will start there.
D.C. is fenced off and the President is never going back to the White House. But not for reasons you may be thinking.
Fear not, there will be a new capitol built and an end to income taxes paid to the tax collectors of the Corporation that is now in the hands of a new administration. They went to all the trouble to steal a corporation whose assets are in the process of being seized. Most did not see this coming for they did not even know their nation was a Corporation. But, it is indeed but now, no more are the states subject to it. Please read on to understand the nature of the battle we are in.
In 1871 a seditious act was performed by the Government. A coup was made to rewrite the constitution and put WE THE PEOPLE in all capitals, under a new corporate contract transferring the United States of America into the new Corporation of the United States of America which transferred the power of We The People and the constitution over to the new corporation. When they did that, it placed the citizens in the United States as property of the Corporation which was centered in Washington D.C.. This action made Washington D.C. a FOREIGN ENTITY on American soil of sovereign states. It was established through a loan from the Vatican when D.C. was transferred into a city-state, and this corporate entity then ruled over the people. Citizens rights were taken from them in this process. No one realized this.
When they did the broker deal to get the loan from the Vatican, they did so via the Bank of London. At that time, they transferred all the property in D.C. Columbia over to the Corporate entity of D.C. a foreign corporation.
The forming of this corporation in D.C. is of major importance to understand, for when President Trump signed an executive order in 2018 on Election Interference/Fraud for entities both foreign and domestic, it outlined how assetts would be seized. The President and the people knew and had the proof that a coup transpired out of the Corporation of the United States of America along with other foreign nations and was ignored by the Corporation in D.C.. They continued with their illegal steal, and the military is now in the process of seizing the assets of this foreign country known as THE CORPORATION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It appears that President Trump’s executive order was actually directed at the Washington D.C. corporate swamp/cabal all along. D.C. is now walled in and filled with military guard.
President Donald J. Trump has moved out permanently for he cannot be president over a Sovereign Nation in a Foreign land, which is what the White House and Capitol are. President Trump was voted in by We The People. Not the Corporation.
After Donald J. Trump exits the White House, D.C. will be locked down because it will not be possible for a foreign ruler to rule over a sovereign country, therefore, the foreign ruler must be locked out. In this case, that would be this new administration.
Now you see what is meant by Lin Wood’s shouts that we are in the second revolution.
We are literally watching the reclaiming of the United States of America. What this means for We The People is many things. One of them is no more IRS. Watch and see how this plays out. It is a genius move. God is in charge of this nation and is now leading his elect to restore this great nation called by his name.
The City of London (that is the square mile within Greater London) is not technically part of Greater London or England, just as Vatican City is not part of Rome or Italy. Likewise, Washington DC is not part of the United States that it controls. These three entities have one goal and that is to do away with the old world order of sovereign nations and usher in a new global world order under one government rule under the iron fist of the cabal.
These sovereign, corporate entities have their own laws and their own identities.They also have their own flags. Seen below is the flag of Washington DC. Note the three stars, representing the trinity of these three city-states, also known as the Empire of the City. (There is also high esoteric significance to the number 3.)
The government of the United States, Canada and Britain are all subsidiaries of the crown, as is the Federal Reserve in the U.S.. The ruling Monarch in England is also subordinate to the Crown. The global financial and legal system is controlled from the City of London by the Crown.
The square mile making up the center of Greater London is the global seat of power, at least at the visible level.
Washington DC was established as a city-state in 1871 with the passage of the Act of 1871, which officially established the United States as a corporation under the rule of Washington, which itself is subservient to the City of London.
Corporations are run by presidents, which is why we call the person perceived to hold the highest seat of power in the land “the president.”
The fact is the president is nothing more than a figurehead for the central bankers and transnational corporations (both of which themselves are controlled by High Ecclesiastic Freemasonry) that really control this country and ultimately call the shots.
Washington DC operates under a system of Roman Law and outside of the limitations established by the U.S. Constitution. The Unholy Trinity of Globalist Control: The Vatican, The City of London & Washington D.C.
The Papal States are the territories on the East Coast of the former United States under the sovereign direct rule of the pope, from the fall of the United States around the turn of the twentieth century to the present. The Papal States are one of the regional powers of the Chesapeake Bay, controlling the city of Washington, as well as much of the surrounding area. Several towns, baronies, and other holdings outside Washington are also held by the pope, creating an intricate network of holdings which pay tribute directly to the pope.
The Papal States were born out of the former United States, viewed by the modern world as an ancient empire and continent spawning government. Following a violent coup in Washington, the Papal States were established by Chester Hale Fitzgerald, built on the beliefs of a new religion, which would later become Unionism. The Pope claims however that his power originates from the American Empire, which supposedly granted the first pope complete power over the empire via the Donation of Lincoln, a forged American imperial decree. The document has since been used in support of claims of political authority by the papacy.
So how are these three cities ultimately connected? We must first go back to the Knights Templar and their initial 200-year reign of power.
In Conclusion: The Corporation called Washington D.C. is now a foreign entity on American soil of sovereign states. It was established through a loan from the Vatican when D.C. was transferred into a city state and this corporate entity. It is now under siege for interfering with the elections of We The People of the United States along with the Vatican and the other foreign nations who interfered, such as Germany, Italy, China, et al. They are now an enemy of the state and their assets shall be seized. Our military has already been taking down the giant as we have witnessed while all eyes were set on the voter fraud.
Fact Checked: False
In 1871 a sedious act was performed by the Government. A coup was made to rewrite the constitution and put WE THE PEOPLE in all capitals, under a new corporate contract transferring the United States of America into the new Corporation of the United States of America which transferred the power of We The People and the constitution over to the new corporation. When they did that, it placed the citizens in the United States as property of the Corporation which was centered in Washington D.C.. This action made Washington D.C. a FOREIGN ENTITY on American soil of sovereign states. It was established through a loan from the Vatican when D.C. was transferred into a city-state, and this corporate entity then ruled over the people. Citizens rights were taken from them in this process. No one realized this.
Although the post does not state what act it is referring to, it’s clearly talking about the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, which is a real piece of legislation. The post is wrong on almost everything else.
Let’s start by looking at the actual act, which can be seen here. It opened:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.
The intent of the legislation is clear: it sought to establish a new, unified government for the District of Columbia. Jane Levey, the historian at the DC History Center, explained the act as follows:
In 1871, Washington, D.C., the city, was reorganized, and that’s what an organic act is about. It’s about the organization of an entity.
The city was only “incorporated” in the sense that it became a single entity. It did not become a business. Cities and towns are often incorporated.
Tom Lewis, author of “Washington: A History of Our National City”, wrote about the act in his book, explaining that it united Georgetown, Washington City, and Washington County, and set up a new system of governance. Here’s Lewis:
In 1871, Congress decided to make the District of Columbia into a territory, as it had done with so much of the land in the nation’s western expansion. It was usual for residents of the territories to elect a governor and representatives to a bicameral legislature, as well as a single nonvoting delegate to Congress, and such was the proposed bill for the District. But in a sausage-like approval process, legislators decided to strip Washington’s residents of the limited self-government they had enjoyed since 1802. The resulting Organic Act, as it was called, gave the president the power to appoint a governor, a seventeen-member council, a Board of Health, and a Board of Public Works; the citizens still enjoyed universal suffrage, but could elect only a house of delegates and a nonvoting delegate to the House of Representatives.
Note that the act was just about the District of Columbia. It had nothing to do with the nation as a whole, as the post claimed.
It’s also important to note that subsequent legislation has superseded the structure of government described in the act. The District of Columbia is now governed by an elected mayor and a small council, with oversight by Congress. The experiment of 1871 was short-lived.
Lastly, it’s worth pointing out that one of the sources cited by the post is clearly not credible. The post linked to a page on “Papal States,” which are supposedly the territories on the East Coast under the rule of the pope. The page is on Alternate History Wiki, a website that describes itself as a place where people can imagine what the world would look like if history had unfolded differently. Its timelines are not meant to be taken as real; they are imagined. The post appeared to miss that point.
More information to debunk the 1871 US Corporation
For an entity to become a corporation under federal law,
there must be an Act of Congress creating that corporation.
There are no Acts of Congress expressly incorporating
either the “United States” or the “United States of America”.
In 1871 Congress did expressly incorporate the District
of Columbia, but D.C. and the “United States” are not
one and the same. In that Act of 1871, Congress also
expressly extended the U.S. Constitution into D.C.
In United States v. Cooper Corporation, 312 U.S. 600 (1941),
the Supreme Court wrote:
“We may say in passing that the argument that the
United States may be treated as a corporation
organized under its own laws, that is, under the
Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained
as not to merit serious consideration .”
Some of the confusion rampant on this subject may have
originated in the definition of “UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA” in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary in Paragraph 5 quoted here:
“5. The United States of America are a corporation
endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey
and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181.
But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought
against the United States without authority of law.”
Note that the plural verb “are” was used, providing further
evidence that the “United States of America” are plural,
as implied by the plural term “States”. Also, the author
of that definition switches to “United States” in the second sentence.
However, the decision cited above is Justice Marshall issuing dictum,
and it is NOT an Act of Congress. Here, again,
be very wary of courts attempting to “legislate” in the absence
of a proper Act of Congress. See 1 U.S.C. 101 for the
statute defining the required enacting clause.
And, pay attention to what was said in that definition here:
“no suit can be brought against the United States
without authority of law”. That statement is not only
correct; it also provides another important clue:
Congress has conferred legal standing on the “United States”
to sue and be sued at 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1346, respectively.
Congress has NOT conferred comparable legal standing
upon the “United States of America” to sue, or be sued,
Furthermore, under the Articles of Confederation, the term
“United States of America” is the “stile” or phrase that was used
to describe the Union formed legally by those Articles:
Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States
of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence
Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be
“The United States of America.”
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom,
and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right,
which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated
to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
When they came together the first time to form
a Union of several (plural) States, they decided
to call themselves the “United States of America”.
Note also that those Articles clearly distinguished
“United States of America” from “United States”
in Congress assembled. The States formally
delegated certain powers to the federal government,
which is clearly identified in those Articles as the
Therefore, the “United States of America” now refer to
the 50 States of the Union, and the term “United States”
refers to the federal government.
The term “United States” is the term that is used consistently now
throughout Title 28 to refer to the federal government domiciled
in D.C. There is only ONE PLACE in all of Title 28 where the
term “United States of America” is used, and there it is used
in correct contradistinction to “United States”.
Because Title 28 contains statutes which govern all federal courts,
the consistent use of “United States” to refer to the federal
government carries enormous weight. Title 28 is the latest word
on this subject, as revised, codified and enacted into positive law
on June 25, 1948. Moreover, the Supremacy Clause elevates
Title 28 to the status of supreme Law of the Land.
To make matters worse and to propagate more confusion,
the entity “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”
incorporated twice in the State of Delaware.
The main problem that arises from these questions is that
United States Attorneys are now filing lawsuits and
prosecuting criminal INDICTMENTS in the name of the
“UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” [sic]
but without any powers of attorney to do so. Compare
28 U.S.C. 547 (which confers powers of attorney to represent
the “United States” and its agencies in federal courts).
They are not “United States of America Attorneys”.
First of all, they do not have any powers of attorney
to represent Delaware corporations in federal courts;
Congress never appropriated funds for them to do so
and Congress never conferred any powers of attorney
on them to do so either.
Secondly, the 50 States are already adequately represented
by their respective State Attorneys General; therefore,
U.S. Attorneys have no powers of attorney to represent
any of the 50 States of the Union, or any of their agencies,
They are “U.S. Attorneys” not “U.S.A. Attorneys”.
Accordingly, it is willful misrepresentation for any U.S. Attorney
to attempt to appear in any State or federal court on behalf
of the “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” [sic]. And,
such misrepresentation is actionable under the McDade Act
at 28 U.S.C. 530B.
here are quite a few “activists” running around the Internet
claiming that the “United States” and the “United States of
America” are both corporations. These claims are not correct,
for the reasons already stated above.
A similar error occurs when these so-called “activists” cite
the federal statute at 28 U.S.C. 3002 as their only “proof”
that the “United States” was incorporated by Congress.
Here’s the pertinent text of that statute:
As used in this chapter:
(1)“Counsel for the United States” means—
(A)a United States attorney, an assistant United States attorney designated to act on behalf of the United States attorney, or an attorney with the United States Department of Justice or with a Federal agency who has litigation authority; and
(B)any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection of debts on behalf of the United States.
(2)“Court” means any court created by the Congress of the United States, excluding the United States Tax Court.
(A)an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a direct loan, or loan insured or guaranteed, by the United States; or
(B)an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a fee, duty, lease, rent, service, sale of real or personal property, overpayment, fine, assessment, penalty, restitution, damages, interest, tax, bail bond forfeiture, reimbursement, recovery of a cost incurred by the United States, or other source of indebtedness to the United States, but that is not owing under the terms of a contract originally entered into by only persons other than the United States;and includes any amount owing to the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian, but excludes any amount to which the United States is entitled under section 3011(a).
(4)“Debtor” means a person who is liable for a debt or against whom there is a claim for a debt.
(5)“Disposable earnings” means that part of earnings remaining after all deductions required by law have been withheld.
(6)“Earnings” means compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise, and includes periodic payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program.
(7)“Garnishee” means a person (other than the debtor) who has, or is reasonably thought to have, possession, custody, or control of any property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, including any obligation due the debtor or to become due the debtor, and against whom a garnishment under section 3104 or 3205 is issued by a court.
(8)“Judgment” means a judgment, order, or decree entered in favor of the United States in a court and arising from a civil or criminal proceeding regarding a debt.
(9)“Nonexempt disposable earnings” means 25 percent of disposable earnings, subject to section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act.
(10)“Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe.
(11)“Prejudgment remedy” means the remedy of attachment, receivership, garnishment, or sequestration authorized by this chapter to be granted before judgment on the merits of a claim for a debt.
(12)“Property” includes any present or future interest, whether legal or equitable, in real, personal (including choses in action), or mixed property, tangible or intangible, vested or contingent, wherever located and however held (including community property and property held in trust (including spendthrift and pension trusts)), but excludes—
(A)property held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian; and
(B)Indian lands subject to restrictions against alienation imposed by the United States.
(13)“Security agreement” means an agreement that creates or provides for a lien.
(14)“State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.
(15)“United States” means—
(A)a Federal corporation;
(B)an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C)an instrumentality of the United States.
(16)“United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under section 564.
(Added Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXVI, § 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4933.)
First of all, note well that the stated scope of this definition
is limited to “this chapter” i.e. CHAPTER 176 of Title 28 –
Federal Debt Collection Procedures. Overlooking the
limited scope of such definitions is a very common error
among many, if not all self-styled experts. At best, this section
cannot be used as evidence that the federal government
should be treated as a valid corporation for all other intents
and purposes. It takes a LOT more text than this one limited
definition to create any federal corporation! Compare the
original Statutes at Large that created the Union Pacific
Railroad Company, for example.
Secondly, from the evidence above it should already
be clear that the “United States” (federal government)
is not now, and never has been, a federal corporation.
The statute at 28 U.S.C. 3002 merely defines the
term “United States” to embrace all existing federal
corporations. Because the United States was not
an existing corporation when Congress enacted
section 3002, that statute did not create and could
not have created the United States as a federal
corporation in the first instance.
Thirdly, in Eisner v. Macomber the U.S. Supreme Court
told Congress that it was barred from re-defining
any terms that are used in the federal Constitution.
“United States” occurs in several places, because it is central
to the entire purpose of that Constitution. Therefore,
the legislative attempt to re-define “United States” at
section 3002 is necessarily unconstitutional, because
it violates the Eisner Prohibition.
Fourthly, section 3002 also exhibits 2 subtle tautologies,
which render it null and void for vagueness. Here they are,
in case you missed them:
“United States” means … an agency, department, commission,
board, or other entity of the United States;
“United States” means … an instrumentality of the United States.
It is a fundamental violation of proper English grammar to use
the term being defined in any definition of that term, and such a
violation has clearly happened here. If you don’t yet recognize
the tautologies, then change one part of this definition to read:
The term “United States” here also embraces any instrumentality
of the federal government.
At the very least, this minor change eliminates the tautology and
removes the vagueness. Nevertheless, such an attempt to re-define
the term “United States” still violates the Eisner Prohibition.
Is the United States of America a Corporation?
Despite misconceptions, the United States is not a corporation. This can be confirmed by its lack of incorporating acts, its sovereign immunity, and past court cases, among other things.
And, we’ll also touch on a few other misconceptions about the United States as a corporation.
The important thing to get here is that regions of the United States may or may not be organized and incorporated. Cities, towns, and territories are often incorporated in the United States.
That doesn’t mean “they are corporations,” it means they are “incorporated within the United States.”
TIP: People often point to companies registered under names like “United States Corporation Company” and “United States Inc.” as proof that the country the United States is a corporation. However, be we talking about the United States Corporation company of 1925, or another entity, the answer is generally the same. That is, United States [insert term], stylized anyway including UNITED STATES, is a popular name for companies. There are actually many companies registered under the name United States in, for example, Delaware and Flordia (click those links for lists; with Delaware you have to type in United States and hit search). Although there are many companies named “the United States [insert term],” none are actually the United States of America (the country we live in) itself.
TIP: For those that don’t want to read: When 28 U.S. Code § 3002 says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States (any “federal corporation”), not that the United States is itself a corporation. More specifically, and to use the exact wording of the definition, it means any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United States. Further, that definition doesn’t provide a legal definition for the United States for all time and in every case, it simply defines it that way for that specific chapter on Federal Debt Collection [chapter 176]. Likewise, the Organic Acts organize (give governance rights) to D.C., they do not create another United States. All states and organized territories can self-govern despite being beholden to the Federal Government. Simply put, there is only one United States and all of the aforementioned are simply discussing parts of the one-and-only United States.
TIP: The United States of America consists of 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), 1 incorporated territory, and 15 unincorporated territories. Entities created by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches can also be considered “a part” of the United States regarding issues like sovereign immunity and being beholden to the central government. This means for example federal corporations, agencies, departments, etc of the United States are “a part” of the United States, which can be important to clarify for example in rules, regulations, and laws that are discussing the powers and rights of those entities.
“We may say in passing that the argument that the United States may be treated as a corporation organized under its own laws, that is, under the Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained as not to merit serious consideration .” – United States Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. COOPER CORPORATION, (1941) No. 484 Argued: March 6, 1941 Decided: March 31, 1941
The U.S. Corporation Myth
The reason this page exists is that it is addressing a persistent myth.
Some say, “The United States of America” is different from the “UNITED STATES” [corporation],” and that, “The UNITED STATES was formed in 1871 and controls only the District of Columbia and the territories it purchases or acquires; Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands.” This is not correct (to the best of my knowledge, although feel free to comment below).
Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands are unincorporated and organized territories of the United States (the one and only United States). The District of Columbia is an incorporated and organized district under the direct control of Congress since the passage of its Organic Acts. It was purposefully organized this way to avoid state-level power grabs, not to ensure some banking conspiracy, as is sometimes insinuated.
The lack of statehood for the capital is to be found in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the document reads, “The Congress shall have Power To …exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.” – Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State
TIP: Columbia is a poetically named, historically used to reference the United States that is a reference to Christopher Columbus. The de facto unofficial national anthem used to be “Hail, Columbia!”
Disambiguation: The “incorporation doctrine” refers to the idea that the states are beholden to the Bill of Rights. This is a concept used in the gun debate; it doesn’t apply here.
Organization and Incorporation in the United States
Before we get into debunking the Organic Act of 1871 myth, let’s discuss how organization and incorporation work. You can skip to the next section for the debunking part.
In business law, a corporation is that which is incorporated as a company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law. For regions within the United States, it works much the same way.
Regarding a city, town, territory, or region:
- Being incorporated means being part of the United States proper (AKA being incorporated into the United States). A legal part of the U.S. in terms of rights, not only property of the U.S.
- Being organized means having an organized government authorized by an Organic Act passed by the U.S. Congress. This usually consists of a territorial legislature, territorial governor, and a basic judicial system. Being organized means being able to self-govern, even in the case of an organized unincorporated territory which is owned by the U.S. but can govern itself.
A territory may be neither incorporated or organized, like American Samoa; it may be unincorporated and organized like Puerto Rico; incorporated and unorganized, like Palmyra Atoll; or incorporated and organized like the District of Columbia. D.C. is organized and operates under Article One of the United States Constitution and the District of Columbia Home Rule Act and is incorporated by its Organic Acts.
Meanwhile, being admitted into the Union as a state by Congress is the only way for a region to become an official state of the United States.
Are Any States Corporations? Neither the United States nor its 50 States are corporations. All are incorporated into the union by an act of Congress and get their power from the federal Constitution. State Constitutions govern the individual states.
TIP: Only entities incorporated into the U.S. and its states can enjoy sovereign immunity; only official states enjoy voting rights. This why Puerto Rico and D.C. have no official voting rights in Congress. The United States [corporation] if it did exist, would have fewer rights and less sovereignty than a state. Likewise, if the U.S. were a corporation, it would not have sovereign immunity unless it was otherwise owned by the United States federal government itself.
TIP: In the absence of an organic law, a territory is classified as unorganized; in the absence of being “incorporated” into the United States, a territory is unincorporated. This is why it was vital to pass the Organic Acts including the Organic Act of 1871, which organized and incorporated D.C., “the Seat of the Government of the United States.”
FACT: The United States includes 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), and many territories with different statuses. Those entities, as well as all executive, legislative, and judicial entities on the federal and state level are beholden to the central federal government. In some cases, this is despite them having their own charters and constitutions and having their own “powers.” There are a few exceptions, like the Federal Reserve which is an independent entity within government. Still, even when there are exceptions, all the entities are beholden to the federal government, and thus to Congress as well. Congress is comprised of state-based elected officials who represent “we the people,” and thus are beholden to “the people” to an extent. This is also true for the Treasury, and no U.S. Code › Title 12 › Chapter 3 › Subchapter XII › § 411 12 U.S. Code § 411 – Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption, doesn’t imply otherwise as insinuated here.
Is the Federal Government, states, territories, or people sovereign? The states and commonwealths of the U.S. are sovereign, as are local governments, as are our citizens, as is the Federal Government… even unincorporated territories like Puerto Rico have some degree of sovereignty, but it doesn’t mean the same thing for each entity. Firstly, every entity is beholden the federal government. Meanwhile, the federal government, state governments, and local governments all enjoy sovereignty (regarding governance) and sovereign immunity (regarding being sued) under U.S. law (although the degree of immunity differs by the entity). This may extend to entities doing contract work for the state (see Advanced Software Design v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis), but it doesn’t apply to entities that are unincorporated into the U.S. Puerto Rico does not have the same sovereignty the states do. See Political status of Puerto Rico for a discussion of why it was important for D.C. to not be an unincorporated and unorganized district. In terms of the electoral system and rights, sovereignty refers to the fact that each of our 320 million citizens is 1/320 millionth sovereign and each has human rights and voting rights as ensured by the federal constitution and state constitutions although power is delegated in the Republic. See Sovereign immunity in the United States and compare to popular sovereignty for a better understanding of how this complex philosophical concept and the legal concept is often misused in general debate.
Why Do People Think the United States is a Corporation?
In 1871 Congress incorporated the District of Columbia, and the wording of the Act (along with a few bits of supposed evidence featured below) caused some to speculate that the United States had become a corporation controlled by the international banks.
The simplest rebuttal to this, aside from understanding how things work (as presented above), is pointing out that the Act incorporated and organized D.C., not the United States. D.C. and the “United States” are not the same entity any more than Nashville is the same as Tennessee.
Some otherwise excellent articles that seek to focus on the truth patriotically, like the following article are a misleading, “The United States Isn’t a Country — It’s a Corporation!” Articles like this complex but accurate article and this 2013 article (which I’ll cite liberally here as it proceeded ours chronologically) are correct.
TIP: Some point to America as a type of corporatocracy (a government controlled by corporations). Certainly, cases can be made, if we are talking about the political influence of the corporations of the fortune 500 for example. However, like the incorporation doctrine, or the incorporation of D.C., this topic is only loosely related to the topic on this page.
TIP: Because D.C. is a central hub, in a great country, with a beneficial corporation law, many of the world’s most powerful corporations have the headquarters there. That does include the IMF and other international banks and businesses. Which, you know, is good for the country. What, would you rather their headquarters be somewhere else?
Debunking the Myth that the United States is a Corporation
As noted by the previous correct article back in 2013, the two legal documents used to fuel the myth that the U.S. is a private corporation owned by “the Rothchilds” of which our President is CEO, misunderstand the documents they are citing.
For more on the Rothchilds, see a history lesson about the history of banking (NOTE: I am not proposing that international bankers, be than Rothchilds or Morgans for example, aren’t important parts of western and American history, or that they didn’t have a hand in aspects of the creation of our modern system… in fact, that truism seems fairly clear. I am simply proposing that they do not own a corporation named the UNITED STATES that has somehow replaced the United States of America).
With that said, let’s clarify the documents noted above.
Debunking the U.S. Code Title 28 Myth
The first bit of evidence Presented from U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002 28 U.S. Code § 3002 is:
As used in this chapter:
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
This is used to justify the idea that “United States” means a Federal corporation. The problem is that this isn’t what (15) says (and even if it was, it says “As used in this chapter.”)
To paraphrase in common language the provision says: “United States” includes any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United States.
In other words, when the document says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States, not that the “United States” is a corporation.
Another way to phrase it would be:
[In this document when we say “United States”] “United States” means a Federal corporation of the United States, an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States, or an instrumentality of the United States. I.e. when we say “United States” in this document we are also referencing all federal corporations, agencies, departments, etc.
NOTE: The definition in question here is simply a definition from a sub-section of the U.S. code that is discussing federal debt collection procedures. Here is one example of a sentence from Chapter 176 “The United States may, in a proceeding in conjunction with the complaint or at any time after the filing of a civil action on a claim for a debt, make application under oath to a court to issue any prejudgment remedy..” See how “terms” are used here and how each “term” of importance is clearly defined in for chapter (in this case Chapter 176). This act of providing definitions make it so they can, for example, say “United States” and don’t have to say “any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United State” every time they want to use the term. You can click the links below to see where the definitions lay in the hierarchy of the U.S. Code, and hopefully this will help you understand how they do and don’t relate to the full Code and more broadly the Constitution (a law that over-rides the entire U.S. Code). As you go through the pages you’ll see many common words get defined, “claim,” “debt,” “court,” etc, and in all cases the definitions apply to the chapter on federal debt collection and that nothing in that chapter is discussing the formation of some proxy nation.
Debunking the Organic Act of 1871 Myth
The other part of the claim says that the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates a new Constitution for the United States by inserting wording for “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” in the act that somehow replaced our original “The Constitution for the United States of America.”
So, the first thing to point out is that the act the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates “a Government for D.C.” as it says in the Act. It has nothing to do with creating a Government for the United States.
D.C. was first established by Congress via the Residence Act on July 16, 1790. Then, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, by Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, formally placed D.C. under control of the Congress and organized the unincorporated territories Washington County and Alexandria County within it. Then, the Organic Act of 1871, the one in question, created a territorial government for D.C.
Up to that point, D.C. had been governed as a mixture of municipalities and counties within District boundaries and not by its Government as a state. Later, in 1874, Congress repealed the territorial government to create a single municipal government for the federal district. See Origin and Government of the District of Columbia Judd & Detweiler, 1902.
Today “the name of the Seat of Government of the United States is The District of Columbia,” but that D.C. and the U.S. are not the same just as the Seat of Government of Washington State is Olympia, but Washington State is not Olympia.
TIP: It is a “federal district” because it is directly controlled by the Government. It is not a state and does not control the government.
As one would assume, despite the persistent myths, the United States is not a corporation. I think I have conclusively proven that United States is not a corporation.
federaljack.com, “The Act of 1871: The “United States” Is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions,” By Popeye; fromthetrenchesworldreport.com, “The Act of 1871 – The 2 Constitutions – Corporate America;” thelibertybeacon.com, “THE UNITED STATES BECAME A FOREIGN CORPORATION IN 1871,” By David William; leadstories.com, “Fact Check: ‘Act Of 1871’ Did NOT Establish The United States As A Corporation That Owns Its Residents,” By Dana Ford; themarshalreport.wordpress.com, “TRUMP ODE TO THE CORPORATION!” By Dianne Marshall; supremelaw.org, “United States v. United States of America,” By Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.; foundationforthetruthinlaw.org, “The United States is a corporation;” factmyth.com, “The United States is a Corporation MYTH,” By Thomas DeMichele; wikizer.com, “District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871;”
Additional arguments for the US being a corporation. There is just too much to put in the main portion of the posting.
The United States is a corporation
US is a Corp. Supreme Court confirms Federal Zone (zip codes)
District of Columbia, corporation possession of the Queen of England
1788 Original Constitution for the united states,
original organic, of the people government.
1871 Amended version CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
STATES, US is a private corporation.
The UNITED STATES was formed in 1871, which controls only
the District of Columbia and the territories it purchases or
acquires; Puerto Rico, Guam, Virginia Islands. Many think that
income taxes, and some laws do not effect people in the
sovereign states of the union as they are outside of the control /
jurisdiction of the United States corporation. The United States
of America is different from the “United States” [corporation].
The terms UNITED STATES and/or United States of America
and/ or United States Government are all a private corporation,
even with registered trademark
The US corporation (originally called the District of Columbia)
does not effect or control the 50 sovereign states that are
protected from the federal government by the US Constitution for
the United States adopted in 1788.
There are 2 United States, one formed in 1787, the collection of
the several sovereign states of the union, and another separate
and different one formed in 1871, which only controls the District
of Columbia and it’s territories. Others may can give you specific
references and explain this further. Here is an outline of the
The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First
Congress is in session. I refer you to the “Acts of the
Forty-First Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61
and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress
passed an Act titled: “An Act To Provide A Government
for the District of Columbia.” This is also known as the
“Act of 1871.” What does this mean? Well, it means that
Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so,
created a separate form of government for the District of
Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.
The Constitution for the United States of
America was adopted on September 17, 1787,
by the Constitutional Convention in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and ratified by
conventions in each U.S. state in the name of
The Supreme Court
STOUTENBURGH v. HENNICK, 129 U.S. 141 (1889)
129 U.S. 141
STOUTENBURGH, Intendant of Washington Asylum,
January 14, 1889
Sections 1 and 18 of the act of congress of February 21, 1871,
entitled ‘An act to provide a government for the District of
Columbia,’ (16 St. 419,) are as follows: ‘Section 1. That all that
part of the territory of the United States included within the limits
of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created
into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by
which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for
municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue
and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise
all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with
the constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions
of this act.’ ‘Sec. 18. That the legislative power of the District shall
[129 U.S. 141, 144] extend to all rightful subjects of legislation
within said District, consistent with the constitution of the United
States and the provisions of this act, subject, nevertheless, to all
the restrictions and limitations imposed upon states by the tenth
section of the first article of the constitution of the United States;
but all acts of the legislative assembly shall at all times be subject
to repeal or modification by the congress of the United States,
and nothing herein shall be construed to deprive congress of the
power of legislation over said District in as ample manner as if
this law had not been enacted.’ These sections are carried
forward into the act of congress of June 22, 1874, entitled ‘An act
to revise and consolidate the statutes of the United States,
general and permanent in their nature, relating to the District of
Columbia, in force on the first day of December, in the year of our
Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three,’ as sections
2, 49, 50.
- – – also note:
And Whereas: The Constitution does provide that Congress has
the power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever
over such district not exceeding ten miles square, as may, by
session of particular states and the acceptance of Congress,
become the seat of government of the United States.
And Whereas: On February 21, 1871, the Forty First Congress
passed an act entitled “An Act to Provide a Government for the
District of Columbia,” legislating the organization of a municipal
corporation to run the day to day affairs of the District of
Columbia, the seat of government, which transferred the United
States of America, the Republic, into “a corporate entity”
entitled UNITED STATES, in capital letters, having “no”
jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia.
And Whereas: Congress adopted the text of the federal
constitution as the constitution or charter of this municipal
corporation. This municipal corporation was granted the power to
contract to provide municipal services to the inhabitants of the
District of Columbia and necessarily as an operation of the
privileges and immunity clause of Article Four of the Constitution,
any other person who chooses to contract for its services.
- – Is there fraud in our ranks ?
The Webster’s Dictionary states that Fraud means Deceit,
Trickery, intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another
to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right.
The Blacks Law Dictionary states pretty much what the Webster’s
Dictionary does but adds about two pages full of information. My
favorite part is: A false representation of a matter of fact, whether
by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by
concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which
deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act
upon it to his legal injury.
February 21, 1871 Congress Passes an Act to Provide a
Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act
With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a
separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten
mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first
Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).
The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially
depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move
by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon
gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America.
Congress cut a deal with the international bankers (specifically
Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because
the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation
without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in
the door of the United States.
The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED
STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved
in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act
of 1871, the original Constitution for the united States (1788) was
defaced in effect vandalized and sabotage when the title was
capitalized and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
is the constitution of the INCORPORATED UNITED STATES OF
It operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the
People into thinking it governs the Republic. It does is not !
Capitalization is significant when one is referring to a legal
document. This seemingly “minor” alteration has had a major
impact on every subsequent generation of Americans.
What Congress did by passing the Act of 1871 was create an
entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the
District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government. This
newly altered Constitution was not intended to benefit the
Republic. It benefits only the corporation of the UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA and operates entirely outside the
Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed
under the original Constitution, we the people now have “relative”
rights or privileges. One example is the Sovereign’s right to
travel, which has now been transformed (under corporate
government policy) into a “privilege” that requires citizens to be
By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed TREASON
against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and
decrees of the Declaration of Independence and the original
District of Columbia
On May 3rd, 1802 an Act was passed to incorporate the City
of Washington. (2 Stat. at L. 195.)
In 1871 an important modification was made in the form
of the district government — a Legislature was
established, with all the apparatus of a distinct
government. By the Act of February 21st, of that year,
entitled “An Act to Provide a Government for the
District of Columbia (16 Stat. at L. 419), it was enacted
(sec. 1) that all that territory of the United States included
within the limits of the District of Columbia be created into
a government by the name of the District of Columbia
by which name it was constituted a “a body corporate
for municipal purposes,” with power to make
contracts, sue and be sued, and “to exercise all other
powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with
the Constitution and laws of the United States.
This Constitution lasted until June 20th, 1874, when an Act was
passed entitled “An Act for the Government of the District of
Columbia, and for other purposes.” (18 Stat. at L. 116) By this
Act the government established by the Act of 1871 was
By a subsequent Act, approved June 11th, 1878 (20 Stat. at
L. 102), it was enacted that the District of Columbia should
“remain and continue a municipal corporation,” as provided in
section two of the Revised Statutes relating to said District, and
the appointment of commissioners was provided for, to have
and to exercise similar powers given to the commissioners
appointed under the Act of 1874. All rights of action and suits for
and against the District were expressly preserved in status quo.
All municipal governments are but agencies of the
superior power of the State or government by which they are
constituted, and are invested with only such subordinate
powers of local legislation and control as the superior
Legislature sees fit to confer upon them. p. 234
The people are the recognized source of all authority, state
or municipal, and to this authority it must come at last, whether
immediately or by circuitous route. Barnes v. District of
Columbia, 91 U.S. 540, 545 [23: 440, 441]. p 234
Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for this court, in the case of
Hepburn v. Ellzey, 6 U.S. 2 Cranch, 445 [ 2:332 ], where the
question was whether a citizen of the District could sue in the
circuit courts of the United States as a citizen of a State. The
court did not deny that the District of Columbia is a State in the
sense of being a distinct political community; but held that the
word “State” in the Constitution, where it extends the judicial
power to cases between citizens of the several “States,” refers
to the States of the Union. It is undoubtedly true that the
District of Columbia is a separate political community in a certain
sense, and in that sense may be called a State; but the
sovereign power of this qualified State is not lodged in the
corporation of the District of Columbia, but in the government of
the United States. Its supreme legislative body is Congress.
The subordinate legislative powers of a municipal character
which have been or may lodged in the city corporations, or in
the District of Columbia, do not make those bodies
The United States Isn’t a Country-It’s a Corporation
By Lisa Guiliani
United States – US- U.S.-USA-America ( a possession of
the Queen of England)
Means: (A) a federal corporation . . . Title 28 USC
Section 3002(5) Chapter 176. It is clear that the United
States . . . is a corporation . . . 534 FEDERAL
`It is well settled that “United States” et al is a corporation,
originally incorporated February 21, 1871 under the name
“District of Columbia,” 16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62. It was
reorganized June 11, 1878; a bankrupt organization per
House Joint Resolution 192 on June 5, 1933, Senate
Report 93-549, and Executive Orders 6072, 6102, and
6246; a de facto (define de facto) government, originally
the ten square mile tract ceded by Maryland and Virginia
and comprising Washington D. C., plus the possessions,
territories, forts, and arsenals.
The significance of this is that, as a corporation, the
United States has no more authority to implement its
laws against “We The People” than does Mac Donald
Corporations, except for one thing — the contracts we’ve
signed as surety for our strawman with the United States
and the Creditor Bankers. These contracts binding us
together with the United States and the bankers are
actually not with us, but with our artificial entity, or as
they term it “person”, which appears to be us but spelled
with ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.
All this was done under,
In English Law. Courts established in the queen’s
possessions beyond the seas, with jurisdiction over
maritime causes, including those relating to prize.
The United States of America is lawfully the
possession of the English Crown per original
commercial joint venture agreement between the
colonies and the Crown, and the Constitution, which
brought all the states (only) back under British ownership
and rule. The American people, however, had
sovereign standing in law, independent to any
connection to the states or the Crown. This fact
necessitated that the people be brought back, one at a
time, under British Rule, and the commercial process was
the method of choice in order to accomplish this task.
First, through the 14th Amendment and then through the
registration of our birth certificate and property. All
courts in America are Vice-admiralty courts in the
Crown’s private commerce.
Organic Act of 1871
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a single new district corporation governing the entire federal territory, called the District of Columbia, thus dissolving the three major political subdivisions of the District (Port of Georgetown, the City of Washington, and Washington County) and their governments. By this time the county also contained other small settlements and nascent suburbs of Washington outside its bounded limits, such as Anacostia, which had been incorporated in 1854 as Uniontown; Fort Totten, dating at least to the Civil War; and Barry Farm, a large tract bought by the Freedmen’s Bureau and granted to formerly enslaved and free-born African Americans in 1867.
The newly restructured District government provided for a governor appointed by the President for a 4-year term, with an 11-member council also appointed by the President, a locally elected 22-member assembly, and a five-man Board of Public Works charged with modernizing the city. The first vice-chair of that Board of Public Works was real-estate developer Alexander Robey Shepherd, the architect and proponent of the consolidating legislation. From September 1873 to June 1874 Shepherd would serve as the second, and final, governor of the District.
The Seal of the District of Columbia features the date 1871, recognizing the year the District’s government was incorporated.
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 is an Act of Congress that repealed the individual charters of the cities of Washington and Georgetown and established a new territorial government for the whole District of Columbia. Though Congress repealed the territorial government in 1874, the legislation was the first to create a single municipal government for the federal district.
Evolution of the District’s internal boundaries
The passage of the Residence Act in 1790 created a new federal district that would become the capital of the United States. Formed from land donated by the states of Maryland and Virginia, the capital territory already included two large settlements at its creation: the port of Georgetown, Maryland and the town of Alexandria, Virginia. A new capital city named in honor of President George Washington was founded to the east of Georgetown in 1791.
Shortly after establishing operations in the new capital, Congress passed the Organic Act of 1801, which organized the federal territory. The territory within the federal district east of the Potomac formed the new County of Washington, which was governed by a levy court consisting of seven to eleven Justices of the Peace appointed by the President, and was governed by Maryland law as of 1801. The area west of the river became Alexandria County which was governed by Virginia law. In addition, Congress allowed the cities of Washington, Alexandria and Georgetown to each maintain their own municipal governments. In 1846 Alexandria County was returned by Congress to the state of Virginia.
The outbreak of the American Civil War in 1861 led to notable growth in the capital’s population due to the expansion of the federal government and a large influx of emancipated slaves. By 1870, the District’s population had grown 75% to nearly 132,000 residents. Growth was even more dramatic within the County of Washington, where the population more than doubled as people escaped the crowded city.
The individual local governments within the District were insufficient to handle the population growth. Living conditions were poor throughout the capital, which still had dirt roads and lacked basic sanitation. The situation was so bad that some lawmakers in Congress even suggested moving the capital out further west, but President Ulysses S. Grant refused to consider the proposals.
Instead, Congress passed the Organic Act of 1871, which revoked the individual charters of the cities of Washington and Georgetown and combined them with Washington County to create a unified territorial government for the entire District of Columbia. The new government consisted of an appointed governor and 11-member council, a locally elected 22-member assembly, and a board of public works charged with modernizing the city. The Seal of the District of Columbia features the date 1871, recognizing the year the District’s government was incorporated.
The Act did not establish a new city or city government within the District. Regarding a city of Washington, it stated that “that portion of said District included within the present limits of the city of Washington shall continue to be known as the city of Washington”. In the present day, the name “Washington” is commonly used to refer to the entire District, but DC law continues to use the definition of the city of Washington as given in the Organic Act.
In 1873, President Grant appointed an influential member of the board of public works, Alexander Robey Shepherd, to the post of governor. Shepherd authorized large-scale municipal projects, which greatly modernized Washington. In doing so however, the governor spent three times the money that had been budgeted for capital improvements, bankrupting the city. In 1874, Congress replaced the District’s quasi-elected territorial government with an appointed three-member Board of Commissioners. Direct rule by Congress continued until the passage of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in 1973.
Governmental and Political Posts Both National and International