Skip to content

Accessing Your Cestui Que Vie Trust Account: Uncovering the Truth about the US Government

A provocative YouTube video making the rounds online features a fiery lecture by constitutional scholar John Smith (an alias) titled "How to access your Cestui Que Vie Trust account." Smith weaves a startling narrative implicating the US government in a scheme to secretly collateralize and monetize American citizens for profit without consent. These sensational claims warrant thorough investigation, yet unconditional acceptance or outright dismissal without evidence-based analysis would be premature. By peering deeper into the shadows of America’s byzantine legal history and financial workings, this article seeks to shed more light than heat on Smith’s eye-opening assertions.

The Lecture’s Core Claims

Smith’s 2-hour viral diatribe layers allegation upon allegation against the US government’s legitimacy at a breakneck pace. But three primary accusations by the erudite orator coagulate around the theme of clandestine profiteering:

  1. The United States government is actually a foreign-owned corporation disguising itself as America’s lawful constitutional government.

  2. Most U.S. laws and agencies today lack valid jurisdiction over free American state citizens.

  3. All birth certificate records entitle citizens to secret “Cestui Que Vie Trust” accounts holding vast sums of money they can claim by discharging contracts with the illegitimate corporate government.

To appraise these assertions and their profound implications, examining the arguments Smith deploys to advance them proves informative before weighing them against other evidence and perspectives.

Decoding the Lecture: Key Arguments and Origins

While articulating his broadside against entrenched institutions, Smith interweaves dense legalese with rhetorical flair. But three key interrelated claims comprise the substratum upholding his entire conceptual edifice:

  1. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 secretly supplanted legitimate constitutional government with a private foreign-owned corporation merely posing as official government.

  2. The 14th Amendment’s original intent was perverted to convert living Americans into corporate fictions the government could monetize as securities.

  3. Today’s statutes and agencies only apply to the fictional corporate personas of U.S. citizens rather than actual flesh-and-blood people.

The 1871 D.C. Corporation Act

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 incorporated Washington D.C. under Congress’ exclusive legislative control per Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. Smith insists this Act surreptitiously transmogrified the original constitutional republic into a private municipal corporation owned by shadowy foreign shareholders.

As evidence, he notes the U.S. government is listed as a corporation on Dun & Bradstreet. He further argues that the presence of an American flag with gold fringe in courtrooms quietly signifies Admiralty jurisdiction under commercial corporate maritime law. Under this interpretation, the Organic Act created a separate corporate government that secretly usurped power while maintaining the trappings of authentic constitutional process as political cover.

The 14th Amendment Citizenship Bait-and-Switch

Ratified after the Civil War in 1868, the 14th Amendment declares all persons born in the U.S. full citizens entitled to due process under the law. Smith asserts the Amendment’s original aim was insidiously inverted to strip rights from American state nationals by conflating their sovereign natural persons with mere corporate U.S citizens devoid of constitutional protections against government overreach.

This alleged legal bait-and-switch provides justification to monetize birth certificates as chattel without consent. It also enables applying commercial statutes to living Americans that only intend to regulate legal fictions like corporations or trusts. Smith cites as smoking gun evidence requirements to obtain commercial licenses for activities like driving on public roads paid for through taxes.

U.S. Codes and Agencies Govern Only Fictional Entities

Building on the above assertions, Smith pronounces virtually all current U.S. legislation and government agencies constitutionally invalid or fiscally fraudulent. He buttresses this attack by claiming their jurisdiction only lawfully applies to the fictional corporate personas attached to American citizens rather than the people themselves.

As support, Smith notes the uppercase lettering of people’s names on official documents like driver’s licenses and court summons distinguishes legal fictions subject to commercial statutory codes from living men and women shielded by common law and constitutional rights even if unaware of this status. Hence most Americans face prosecution under false pretenses augmenting corporate profits.

Fundamental Background Context

Before evaluating Smith’s intricate arguments tying America’s democratic institutions to orchestrated debt slavery, foundational context around the evolution of Western governance and economic structures merits highlighting given the lecturer’s rapid-fire delivery.

From Common Law to Commercial Code

Far from fixed or perfect, balancing authority, rights, and responsibilities through law remains an imperfect work in progress. In medieval England, common law built incrementally through court decisions over disputes between subjects. Commerce grew in tandem with feudalism’s decline, necessitating commercial codes eventually adopted by parliament and monarchs alongside common law’s evolution.

This hybrid Anglo-American legal heritage prioritizing both staunch individual rights and contractual obligations sowed confusion American jurists still grapple to reconcile today. U.S. constitutional and statutory law thus channel the centuries-old struggle for equitable balance between personal sovereignty, commercial flexibility, and collective order across vastly divergent situational contexts.

From Land to Liquidity: The Ascent of Finance Capital

Transitioning from agriculture to industry sparked the ascendancy of merchant classes with concentrated capital. Monarchs and governments obliged merchant financing of expensive wars and colonial expansion. Global trade fueled liquid markets abstracting future harvest yields into derivative contracts used to hedge risk, access credit for growth, and securitize debt itself.

Coffee houses pooled resources into proto-insurance firms like Lloyd’s to mitigate catastrophic losses from maritime mishaps. Stock trading proliferated ownership claims on profitable enterprises once reserved for nobility. Debt instruments gave contractual rights cash value that multiplied through compounding interest long iconic of patient capital’s amoral hunger.

So the polemical notion of illegitimately rendering human lives into financialized property has precedent in Western history. Yet crucially, earlier examples like feudal labor obligations, indentured servitude contacts, and even formal enslavement involved at least nominal consent rooted in explicit legal status, in dramatic contrast to Smith’s involuntary collateralization through birth certificate claims.

Scholarly Legal Analysis and Government Perspectives

With context established, assessing the strengths and limits of Smith’s legal assertions against scholarly wisdom around governance and precedent can guide conclusions.

The 1871 D.C. Organic Act Red Herring

While the 1871 Act did incorporate Washington D.C. as an independent municipal entity, designating its government as a corporation hardly equates it to a sinister private enterprise. Respected legal scholars emphasize how vastly inflated inferring constitutional authority transferred from official branches to this new corporate doppelganger contradicts both facts and logic.

They explain the Act simply enabled Congress to govern D.C. inhabitants lacking voting representation. The suggestion of covert foreign shareholders stealthily usurping power from American citizens directly contradicts obvious reality.

Yes, the United States government holds a corporate entity designation for mundane reasons – just as all governments do in the modern world for internal coordination across a sprawling bureaucracy. But maintaining this scarcely proves deliberate malfeasance against citizen interests or fundamental sovereignty.

Misconstruing the 14th Amendment’s Intent

Legal experts similarly rebuff accusations of the 14th Amendment enabling Americans’ covert financialization as legally and historically false. They pinpoint the landmark Amendment’s cardinal purpose as extending civil rights protections to emancipated slaves national citizenship hitherto failed to provide as evidence of progressive intent, not clandestine scheming.

Respected scholars further clarify corporate personhood in law predated the era and held no relation to the 14th Amendment’s drafting. If monetary gain was the covert objective, the period’s robber barons possessed infinitely more direct methods of accumulating capital than elaborate generational conspiracies reliant upon arms length bureaucracy for implementation.

U.S. Laws Do Not Distinguish Legal Status by Name Case

The contention that identifying people on government documentation and legal rulings in FULL CAPS signifies reduced rights or commercial jurisdiction as corporate entities is simply untrue according to undisputed legal authorities. Supreme Court precedent firmly establishes that designation style in no way modifies rights or responsibilities.

Capitalization merely signals referring to a legal person’s name, regardless of natural or juristic status. All reputable guides to American law and jurisprudence bluntly identify NO special meaning or validity to this common belief central to sovereign citizen arguments.

Income Taxes Are Constitutional Despite Claims Otherwise

Smith further justifies his overall claims by pronouncing income taxes patently unconstitutional, insisting government expropriation of private wealth began illegally in 1913 to profit the false corporate regime. Here again however, both tax scholars and the Supreme Court itself soundly repudiate this familiar tax protestor refrain.

Chief Justice White‘s unanimous opinion in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co (1916) ruled the 16th Amendment authorizing Federal income tax completely constitutional a century ago. That the tax code since ballooned ever-more byzantine scarcely nullifies White‘s opinion, however ripe for targeted reforms the system may now be.

Cestui Que Vie Trusts Lack Evidence As Hidden Slush Funds

If Smith‘s foundational legal assertions appear dubious under rigid scrutiny, his sensational claims about discoverable personal slush funds from Birth Certificate accounts require momentary indulgence given their alluring nature.

Contract Law Respects Both Individual Autonomy and Collective Order

Anglo-American contract law balances competing goods – preserving individual autonomy while protecting mutual obligations freely chosen. This flexible spectrum spanning arms-length commercial exchange down to intimate personal trust sees federal and state judges weigh situational specifics more than imposing rigid doctrines when mediating disputes.

In particular, equity courts can summon creative discretion when upholding agreements reflecting earnest good faith instead of craven exploitation. So contracts themselves draw legitimacy from the integrity of purpose and process underlying their negotiated terms.

Public Vital Records Serve Administrative Needs, Not Financial Ones

Civil registrars first standardized vital statistics collection in 19th century America to furnish census data after earlier attempts atundedocumented estimation repeatedly proven unreliable. This enshrined objective third party birth ledgers over subjective family bibles. The 14th Amendment later tied citizenship rights to birth records, with Social Security accounts much later tethering government services to documented identity.

While these cumulative layers of bureaucracy can‘t exclude possibilities of financial misconduct, they originated for grounded public policy priorities rather than surreptitious profiteering motives.

Redeeming Funds From Alleged Secret Trust Accounts Looks Legally Dubious

Smith‘s sensational invitation for listeners to redeem vast secret funds owed them via locating an individual trust account attached to their birth certificate seems the most perilous proposition examined here, as it risks potential fraud charges or tax liabilities.

He claims the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) allows discharging contracts established by governments without individuals’ meaningful consent as innate creditors owed troves of money earned from monetizing people as collateral without permission. But contract law scholars see no such provisions for unilateral license to rescind agreements, especially when evidence of existing valid agreements is wholly absent rather than disputed.

Nor do probate experts identify fertile grounds for individuals declaring executorship over conveyances of vast hidden trust funds accumulating interest for decades awaiting passively duped beneficiaries to one day discover randomly.

Birth certificates enabling access to undisclosed treasuries sounds like the financial analogue to self-appointed diplomats issuing homemade diplomatic license plates expecting to nullify parking tickets. While frustration over inequality and dysfunction in modern institutions resonates with millions, legal solutions still require substantive standing and evidence tested carefully in courts.

Social Consequences: Truth Seeking Vs Gaslighting

Beyond legal and financial questions, theories condemning整个 governance institutions also carry profound social implications in their spread. By undermining foundational legitimacy, those leveraging such notions to advance partisan agendas often untether them from factual moorings.

The Risks of Delegitimizing Civic Institutions

When politics calcifies into zero-sum bloodsport, urgent issues hide in plain sight. Gambits to tear down opposing groups often use rhetorical camouflage. But even superficially noble aims of revealing hidden injustices risk unintended consequences.

Trampling collective norms like payable taxes owed from income absent any specific complaint may feel satisfying. Yet across history, the vacuum of legitimacy and stability such erosion yields frequently fosters worse evils like demagogic strongmen arising from disorder offering even crueler raw deals.

So while peaceful civil disobedience upheld luminaries like Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi against manifest injustice, refuses to sustainably progress when rejecting basic social contracts others respect. Even strictly law-abiding financial protest strategies often just create tax headaches, rather than reforming underlying issues.

Mental Health Dimensions Manifest Across Ideological Borders

Sincere belief in fringe theories correlate with underlying emotional vulnerabilities more commonly transcending surface politics. Trauma, isolation, income instability, information siloes, and self-medication all represent known factors.

So outrage over perceptions (or realities) of unfairness merits healing support for rehabilitation rather than knee-jerk condemnation without context. Just as radicalization transports some citizens towards domestic extremism, parallel vulnerabilities likewise drive others toward fantastic conspiracies offering secret escapes from distress in desperation.

Solutions Call for Open Inquiry Over Ridicule

Dismissing all dissent from prevailing policy as rash ignorance or madness often misses nuance and catalyzes backfire effect resentment. Wise leaders understand voicing opposition signals people expect better and desire positive change, even if methods appear counterproductive or confused.

Meetings of minds find success through principled compromise seeking win-win enrichment rather thanWinner-take-all scorekeeping. With inequities and dysfunction so visible even at upscale strata now, addressing root causes of once fringe anxieties gaining mainstream lift stands paramount.

Owning voices deserve dignity, while also accepting grounded refutations. Growth happens in open forums allowing organic consensus aligned with empirical reality. Prizing civil liberties moderates violence. If systems seem rigged against everyday participants by unaccountable titans, reforming them into truly representative order renews public trust.

Conclusion: Question Claims But Also Strengthen Justice

In assessing anti-authoritarian critiques and conspiracy claims against establishment institutions, the tempering wisdom of history is to respect dissent while requiring extraordinary proof before accepting extraordinary accusations against entire systems.

Responsible analysis judges specific policies and actors fairly, not whole populations sharing demographic traits. Just as foreign attacks once scapegoated ethnic groups like Japanese-Americans, today’s domestic unrest alternatively blames political parties, classes, or age groups for collective guilt without individual cause.

Their times cast towering figures like Abraham Lincoln as treasonous tyrants stripping rights and puppeteering international bankers to citizens once embracing those slurs. Similarly, a Muslim community center in Lower Manhattan still suffers bigoted vitriol for inviting terror by simple virtue of location and faith lineage.

Prejudice always obscures truth through superficial associations blind to reality. Looking deeper with empathy for all helps powerful and dispossessed alike find justice.