Reasons why I cannot bring this before the Federal Courts

I want to thank those who held my head up during this time.
This letter came to me from a friend.
-------------
I know, I know. They tried all this stuff back in the thirties. It didn't go over because everyone still knew how the Constitution operated on the government. Today people assume that the constitution operates on the people. It operates on the people in government first. 

You lose several ways. Yes, they purview your rights through the "14th amendment."  But the initial hurdle is YOUR standing before the "Court." You have to characterize yourself as an heir to the founders of the Constitution. Since the Federal Constitution was "written" by the "representatives" of the "states," your standing has to be as an heir to the people of one of the states. A challenge such as this is called a challenge to the jurisdiction of the court. It amounts to recusal of the judge. They won't like you. 

 Everything is very convoluted. If they challenge your claim that you have standing "that you are one of the people of one of the states," then you challenge their claim that they can hold office, since they haven't proven that they have standing to hold the office! (They are just as much a 14th amendment "person" as anyone else.) 

(Person) is defined in the 14th amendment. The original Constitution assumed the "people" to be constituted of Men, as in "mankind," which would include man and woman. The new definition includes a new being that is possibly, a former slave, a current slave, or a corporation. All corporations are fictions of the "government:" that is, "given permission to exist" by the government. Therefore, they are "dead" to their rights. They have none. The government treats you as a corporation. They address you in all caps, "JOE BLOW," whereas your proper noun name is "Joe Blow."


---------
So I lose and become moot. Sad