(Reader: Doug Johnson) Response to Danlboon “Any Steps to Sovereignty?”


Reader Post | By Doug Johnson

I have to admit, you apparently are not aware of the laws, dictation or how the system works. Don’t worry, I will not hold that against you or anyone else, because a lot of people are not aware of the proper steps.

First off, I would like to comment on the part of the DMV service and Drivers License – Let me start by giving the proper meanings to the word ‘Driver’ per the different law dictionaries and encyclopedias:

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, (1914) p. 940.
One employed in driving a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle…”

Black’s Law Dictionary, 3rd Ed
One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car.

See Davis v. Petrinovich, 112 Ala. 654, 21 So. 344, 36 L.R.A. 615; Isaacs v. Railroad Co., 7 Am. Rep. 418, 47 N.Y. 122;

Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Ed, 1951
One employed…

License. The Law Applied To Motor Vehicles. Babbitt §83, @141
In Webster’s Dictionary we find a “license” defined as: Authority or liberty given to do or forbear any act; especially a formal permission from the proper authorities to perform certain acts or to carry on a certain business, which without such permission would be illegal.


Now that we have cleared all of that up, let me go further and show you all of this information:

License. Bouvier’s 3rd Ed., 1984
In Governmental Regulation. Authority to do some act or carry on some trade or business, in it’s nature lawful but prohibited by statute, except with the permission of the civil authority or which would otherwise be unlawful.

Operating Motor Vehicle. Ballentines Law Dictionary, 1969
Exercising control over the vehicle, although not at the time in the drivers seat.

Merriam Webster Ninth Collegiate
1.a. intended for or restricted to the use of a particular person, group or class.
b. belonging to or concerning an individual person, company, or interest.

c.1380, from L. privatus “set apart, belonging to oneself” (not to the state), used in contrast to
publicus, communis; originally pp. stem of privare “to separate, deprive,” from privus “one’s
own, individual,” from Old L. pri “before.” Meaning “not open to the public”.

from L. privilegium “law applying to one person”; from privus “individual” + lex “law.”
A right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage or favor.

Public Road.
A road way existing for the free and unrestricted use of all common people, is a public road.
Heninger v. Peery 47 S.E. 1013, 102 Va. 896


From L. regesta, neuter pl. of regestus, pp. of regerere “to record”, literally, “to carry back,” from
re- “back” + gerere “carry, bear.”

Merriam Webster Ninth Collegiate,
Means “enrollment”.

Blacks 7th ed.
To enter in a public registry

Rev. Code of Washington 63.14.010
…services for which the price charged is required by law to be determined or approved by or to be filed, subject to approval or disapproval, with the United States or any state, or any department, division, agency, officer, or official of either as in the case of transportation services.

Webster’s Unified Dictionary and Encyclopedia
International Illustrated Edition (1960)
1. Business or trade, commerce. 2. Transportation. 3. The movement of vehicles on street or highway…Traffic.

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (1856)
Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money and the like.

Black’s Law Dictionary 3rd
Commerce; trade; sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, and the like. The passing of goods or commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money.

Black’s Law Dictionary 6th
Commerce; trade; sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, and the like. The passing or exchange of goods or commodities from one person to another for an equivalent in goods and money. The subjects of transportation on a route, as persons or goods; the passing to and fro of persons, animals, vegetables, or vessels, along a route of transportation, as along a street, highway, etc.

Webster’s Unified Dictionary and Encyclopedia
International Illustrated Edition (1960)
1. The act or business of moving passengers and goods.

Black’s Law Dictionary 3rd
The removal of goods or persons from one place to another, by a carrier. Under Interstate Commerce Act, (49 USCA sec. 1 et seq.), “transportation” includes the entire body of services rendered by a carrier in connection with the receipt, handling, and delivery of property transported, and includes the furnishing of cars.


The removal of goods or persons from one place to another, by a carrier.
Interstate Commerce Comm. v Brimson 154 US 447, 14 S.Ct.1125

Black’s 6th
The movement of goods or persons from one place to another, by a carrier.

49 USC 5102 (12)

“transports” or “transportation” means the movement of property and loading, unloading, or storage incidental to the movement.

Century Dictionary
To journey or to pass through or over; as a country district, road, etc. To go from one place to another, whether on foot, or horseback, or in any conveyance as a train, an automobile, carriage, ship, or aircraft; Make a journey.”

Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914 ed.
One who passes from place to place, whether for pleasure, instruction, business, or health.”
Locket v State, 47 Ala. 45;USC Title18 §31(6) Motor vehicle.
The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the
highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.

USC Title49 §30301(4)
“motor vehicle” means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semi trailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used on public streets, roads, or highways, but does not
include a vehicle operated only on a rail line.
RCW 46.04.320

“Motor vehicle” means every vehicle that is self-propelled and every vehicle that is propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires, but not operated upon
RCW 81.80.010(9)

“Vehicle” means every device capable of being moved upon a public highway and in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a public
highway, except devices moved by human or animal power or used exclusively upon stationary rail or tracks.
RCW 46.04.670

“Vehicle” includes every device capable of being moved upon a public highway and in, ` upon, or by which any persons or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a
public highway, including bicycles.
RCW 81.04.010(4)


Common carrier” means any person who undertakes to transport property for the general public by motor vehicle for compensation, whether over regular or irregular routes, or
regular or irregular schedules, including motor vehicle operations of other carriers by rail or water and of express or forwarding companies.
RCW 81.04.010(14)

“Transportation of property” includes any service in connection with the receiving, delivery, elevation, transfer in transit, ventilation, refrigeration, icing, storage, and
handling of the property transported, and the transmission of credit.
RCW 81.04.010(15)

“Transportation of persons” includes any service in connection with the receiving, carriage, and delivery of persons transported and their baggage and all facilities used, or
necessary to be used in connection with the safety, comfort, and convenience of persons transported.

The constitutional Right of individuals, in the exercise of their liberty interests, by claiming their Right to travel, as I type this to you today, is a one hundred year old concept, as it relates to the introduction and evolution of the automobile industry, and any individuals necessarily impetuous need to travel the common highways. As indicated herein, the highways were established for the use of the general public. Streets and highways are established and maintained primarily for purposes of travel by the public and incidental uses.

Am Jur 2d Highways, Streets and Bridges §227, citing Birmingham Ry.
Light and Power Company v Smyer 181 Ala 121, 61 So 354
The term travel is a generic and broad term. The phrase “incidental uses” in the above citation means the use of the highways as a means of personal gain, discussed later on. It is now, and has been known, that traveling is of two basic categories: those who travel in a personal capacity for pleasure and those who travel the public highways incident thereto for profit.

… the terms “travel” and” traveler” are usually construed in their broad and general sense where used in this connection, rather than in a narrow and restricted
one, and the duty and consequent liability is extended so as to include all those who rightfully use the highways viatically, and who have occasion to pass over
them for the purpose of business, convenience, or pleasure.
Van Cleef v. Chicago, 240 Ill 318, 88 NE 815,
23 LRA(NS) 636, 130 Am St Rep 275;

Traveling for pleasure connotes the movement from one place to another for one’s own enjoyment, as in the case of visiting friends and relatives. However, it is undisputed that the use of common highways is also for general purposes. Those common purposes may include, but are in no way limited to traveling to or from the following places: doctor, veterinarian, grocer, hardware store, beach picnic, coffee stand, work, movie, funeral, convenience mart, bank, school, families’ homes, dinner out, sporting events, etc.A distinction may also be made between private carriers who transport their own property for compensation and those who transport their own property without
compensation. The use upon the public highways of motor vehicles engaged in transportation for hire may be prohibited, restricted or conditioned by the
controlling public authority. Highways are public avenues for use by the entire public for their private and personal purposes and the use of a highway for profit
and gain may be restricted.
Stephenson v Binford 287 US 251, 53 S Ct 181

“…Based upon the fundamental ground that the sovereign state has the plenary control of the streets and highways in the exercise of its police power may
absolutely prohibit the use of the streets as a place for the prosecution of a private business for gain. They all recognize the fundamental distinction between the
ordinary Right of the Citizen to use the streets in the usual way and the use of the streets as a place of business or a main instrumentality of business for private
gain. The former is a common Right; the latter is an extraordinary use. As to the former, the legislative power is confined to regulation, as to the latter, it is
plenary and extends even to absolute prohibition. Since the use of the streets by a common carrier in the prosecution of its business as such is not a right but a
mere license of privilege.”
Hadfield v Lundin, 98 Wash 657, 168 P. 516

The use of the highways for the purpose of transporting persons or property for hire by the ordinary means is incidental to and consistent with the primary
purpose of their establishment [highways] and is therefore a proper use in the absence of any restricted regulation. Such use is not however one which may be
exercise as of right but is a special or permissive use.

A street is a road or public way in a city, town or village. A way over land set apart for public travel in a town or city is a street no matter what name it
may be called. It is the purpose for which it is laid out and the use made of it that determines its character. As the way is common and free to all people it is a
highway and it is proper to affirm that all streets are highways although not all highways are streets.


Huddy On Automobiles §26Rem. Rev. Stat., §10512 [P. C. §5639], reads in part as follows:
” . . all state and county roads, streets, alleys, avenues, boulevards, parkways, and other public places actually open and in use, or to be opened and used, for travel
by the public,”

“A highway is a way open to the public at large, for travel or transportation, without distinction, discrimination, or restriction, except such as is incident to
regulations calculated to secure to the general public the largest practical benefit there from and enjoyment thereof. Its prime essentials are the right of common
enjoyment on the one hand and the duty of public maintenance on the other. It is the right of travel by all the world, and not the exercise of the right, which
constitutes a public highway, and the actual amount of travel upon it is not material. If it is open to all who desire to use it, it is a public highway although it
may accommodate only a limited portion of the public or even a single family, although it accommodates some individuals more than others.”
[citing] 25 Am. Jur. 339, §2

“Highways are public ways as contra–distinguished to private ways. The distinguishing mark of a highway is that it must be opened generally to public
use, as expressed in the English books, ‘common to all the king’s subjects,’ although it is the right to travel upon a highway by all the world and not the
exercise of the right which makes the way a highway. It’s character is not determined by the number of persons who actually use it for passage; if it is open,
it is immaterial that but few individuals are in a position to make use of it, or that one person is most benefited by it; and its character as a highway is not affected
even by the fact that it furnishes access or egress to by a single property owner.”
[citing] 29 CJS 366, §1

State of Washington, in re Oregon- Washington Railroad& Navigation
Company et al. v. Walla Walla County et al., 5 Wn.2d 95,
To further proliferate the fundamental liberty that is the Right to travel the common highways is the language below. In the first sentence, in italics, the court uses the language
“existence, creates, permits, will”. These words are proof positive as declared by the courts, that one has a constitutional liberty interest in the free uninhibited use of the public highways. To exemplify these words, they become the epitome of divinity. Existence is existential, creates is creation or creator, permits is permission, will is liberty or freedom. The pinnacle summation of the foregoing, in strict text, reads: “existence from creation is existential permission by our creator to the free use”. Remembering that phrase, we understand the dominant introversion of private traveling versus the extroversion of traveling for hire and/or commercial travel.

The existence of a public highway creates a public easement of travel which permits the general traveling public to use the highway at will. All persons have
an equal right to use highways for purposes of travel by proper means, and with due regard for the corresponding rights of others.

Am Jur 2d Highways Streets and Bridges §228, citingTown of Ridgefield v Eppoliti Realty Co, Inc. 71 Conn. App 321,
801 A 2d 902; State v Mayo 106 Me 62, 75 A 295; see also Williamson v Garrigus 228 Ark 705, 310 SW 2d 8.

Hence a traveler as such may occupy and use any part of the highway he or she desires when not needed by another whose rights thereto are superior to his own.
Am Jur 2d Automobiles §10.

The right of locomotion has also been held to be a part of the liberty guaranteed by the due process clauses.
U.S. v Laub 385 US 475, 87 SCT 574.

The United States Supreme Court has held that “the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of
personal liberty.”
Williams v. Fears 179 U.S. 270, 21 S. Ct.128; see Papachristou v.
Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 164, 92 S. Ct. 839; Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S.
116, 126, 78 S. Ct. 1113; see also Johnson v. City of Cincinnati 310 F.3d
484, 6th Cir. 2002 (Constitution protects right to travel locally through public spaces and roadways).

The right of the public to use a street for travel is greater than that of an individual to occupy it for other purposes.
Am Jur 2d Highway Streets and Bridges §230.


The evolution of the highways dates back centuries, but this writing is confined to the 20 th century. The “road” is what our grandfathers’ grandfathers traveled to survey and settle this continent. It was traveled by horse, mule and wagon. Those people were not required to have a driver license to travel the roads, albeit they were drivers, drivers of mule teams, etc. One may choose the method and or mode of transportation which is most prudent to, and for his particular needs, not prohibited by law. Provided the use of said vehicle does not transcend to commerce. It is therefore the adaptation and use rather than the form or kind of contrivance that concerns the courts.
Huddy On Automobiles 6 th Ed., Citing Indiana Springs Company v Brown 165 Ind 465, 74 NE 615

The public easement includes every kind of travel and communication for the movement or transportation of persons or property which is reasonable and proper in the use of a public highway, or of a particular portion thereof, with all means of conveyance which can be introduced with a reasonable regard for the safety and convenience of the public, and without inflicting upon the owner of, the fee, an injury differing in kind from that imposed by use and improvement for ordinary public travel, and embraces all public travel, not prohibited by law, or by dedicatory restriction, on foot, in carriages, omnibuses, stages, sleighs, or other vehicles, including motor vehicles, as the wants and habits of the public’s demand. The public is not confined, to the use of vehicles in use at the time when the streets or highways were established, but may use such other reasonable
means of conveyance as may be discovered in the future, provided they do not exclude the proper use of the highway by other modes or kinds of vehicles, or tend to destroy it as a means of passage and travel common to all.

The use of such new and improved means of locomotion must be deemed to have been contemplated when the highways and streets were laid out or dedicated, whenever it is found that the general benefit requires it, and such new means of locomotion cannot be excluded there from or be deemed unlawful merely because their use may tend to the inconvenience or even to the injury of those who continue to use the highways and streets by former methods.
25 Am Jur Highways §165.

A citizen has an absolute right to choose his mode of conveyance provided he observes all of the laws of the road.
Swift v Topeka 43 Kan 671, 23 P 1075.

One may transport his goods over the highway in wagons, automobiles, or other vehicles, loaded thereon or therein as he may deem best, provided that in transporting them he uses the care that a prudent man would use; care commensurate with the dangers created by his undertaking.
Ryder v. Hayward 98 Vt 106, 126 A 491, 36 ALR 453

“The right of the citizens to travel upon the public highways …. includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and
under the existing modes of travel….”
Thompson v Smith 155 Va 367, 154 SE 579

It has also been recognized that as a village grows, the rights of the public in its streets are correspondingly broadened. The easement of the public highway
is not limited to the particular use in vogue when the easement was acquired but included all methods that are later developed…
Cloverdale Homes v Town of Cloverdale 182 Ala 419, 62 So 712.

Improved methods of locomotion are perfectly admissible… “pubic rights do not depend upon the methods of travel recognized at the time the streets were opened
or such public uses as have been sanctioned by long continued custom and acquiescence. The use of the streets must be extended to meet the new needs of
Huddy On Automobiles 6 th Ed., citing
People v Field & Co. 266 Ill 609, 107 NE 864.

In all human activities the law keeps up with improvement and progress brought about by discovery and invention and in respect to highways, if the introduction
of a new contrivance for transportation purposes is conducted with due care, the contrivance is compatible with the general use and safety of the road.
Huddy on Automobiles 6 th Ed. §31

In the cases of Ryder and Swift supra, the court uses the term “provided”. There is no provision in the statutes discussing a uniform blanket general licensing scheme, applicable to private travel. What is clear is that the primary intended use is for personal travel, consistent with the proviso as to use by the general public, see Birmingham Ry. Light and Power Company v Smyer supra, by the usual and customary mode of transportation not inconsistent with the current status of mobility, which is a legally and lawfully acceptable use.


The state’s duties and obligations with respect to the safety of streets and other public ways are limited to keeping them reasonably safe for the uses for which they are intended, and for those who travel upon them in the ordinary and accustomed modes.
25 Am Jur HIGHWAYS §426, citing Leber v King County, 69 Wash 134, 124 P 397, 42 LRA (NS) 267;
Lorence v Ellensburgh 13 Wash 341, 43 P 20, 52 Am St Rep 42; Sutton v Snohomish, 11 Wash 24, 39 P 273, 48 Am St Rep 847

One of the most informational discussions on traveling, static constitutional issues thereto, and the distinctions of private automobile use, in the latter century, may be found in the following case. [Lutz] The state, by any agency, has not disputed and can not dispute any point of law herein, but will incessantly default to the statutory phrase “drive a motor vehicle” or “operate a motor vehicle”. This default motive claim, without objection, to the personal and private use of an automobile for personal and private purposes, is for all intents and purposes a tacit admission of the distinctions of personal use, without governmental interference, and the “incidental use” for commerce, which is secondary systemic; discussed further herein.

The rights of locomotion, freedom of movement, to go where one pleases and to use the public streets in a way that does not interfere with the personal liberty of
others are basic values “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” protected by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment [citations omitted]. One may
be on the streets even though he is there merely for exercise, recreation, walking, standing, talking, socializing, or any other purpose that does not interfere with
other persons’ rights.

No right is more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the liberty assurance of the due process clause than the right of every citizen to the possession and control
of his own person, free from restraint or interference by the state. The makers of our Constitution conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone —
the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.
Union Pacific Railway Company v. Botsford 141 U.S. 250, 11 S. Ct. 1000; Olmstead v. United States 277 U.S. 438, 48 S. Ct. 564. Uninhibited movement is essential to freedom. Baker v. Bindner, 274 F. Supp. 658, 662 W.D. Ky. 1967;
see Aptheker v. Secretary of State, 1964, 378 U.S. 500, 84 S. Ct. 1659, 12 L. Ed.
2D 992, Id. at 1254-55 (brackets added). See Papachristou, supra.

We recognize that the defendant would distinguish pedestrians strolling and meeting on the sidewalk from persons operating motor vehicles on the streets but we
reject this argument. Motor vehicles are a lawful means of locomotion and plaintiff has the right to drive himself where he pleases – to go where he wants
to go for whatever reason – if he is otherwise obeying the law, including relevant traffic statutes and ordinances. Plaintiff has therefore asserted a valid liberty
interest. …”intrastate travel” as we understand that phrase, encompasses the right to migrate freely within a state.
Lutz v. City of York, Pennsylvania, 692 F. Supp. 457

It should be noted here that the court does not use the phrase “drive a motor vehicle” or “operate a motor vehicle”, both of which have very clear contextual meanings in commerce. The terms motor vehicle and drive are broad terms, and these terms should not be confined to a single definition unless strictly done so by a legislative body. see Huddy and DLLA infra

The term travel is a broad term having two legally distinguishable meanings. One being the statutory definitions listed herein which specifically clarify, that commercial travel is
accomplished when a person undertakes to deliver, using a public highway, that which has been purchased, and accepts a fee for such delivery. The other, being normal everyday use, as discussed above, by way of traveling public roads to connect oneself with the community. As the Eggert court points out, traveling the highways is not based on the commerce clause.

The right to travel is a right applicable to intrastate as well as interstate commerce. In as much as the right to travel is not based on the commerce clause,
it does not depend on the interstate nature of travel. Rights such as the right to travel which involve personal liberty are not dependent on state lines. Both travel
within and between states is protected.
Eggert et al v City of Seattle 81 Wn 2d 840, citing King v New Rochelle
Municipal Housing Authority, 314 F. Supp. 427 (S.D.N.Y. 1979); Karp v
Collins, 310 F. Supp. 627, (D.N.J. 1970); see also Moen v Erlandson

80 Wn 2d 755; Frazer v Shelton 320 Ill. 253 The Washington State Supreme Court understands the private right to use the public roads. It was not unlike that expressed by the United States Supreme Court. The Boyd Court in 1886 stated thus: “It is the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon.”, Boyd v United States 116 U.S. 616, which the Court reiterated again in 1961 in the case of Mapp v Ohio 367 U.S. 643. Justice
Tolman of the Washington Supreme Court termed this language:

“Complete freedom of the highways is so old and well established a blessing that we have forgotten the days of the Robber Barons and toll roads, and yet, under an
act like this, arbitrarily administered, the highways may be completely monopolized, if, through lack of interest, the people submit, then they may look
to see the most sacred of their liberties taken from them one by one, by more or less rapid encroachment.”
Robertson v Department of Public Works 180 Wash 133, 39 P.2d 596


The public roads have been monopolized by a foreign military [state police]. The “most sacred of liberties” of which Justice Tolman spoke is personal liberty. The definition of personal liberty is; “Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a
guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property … and is regarded as inalienable.”
16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, §202

This concept is further amplified by the American Jurisprudence Encyclopedia, 1 st ed.;
“Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion — to go where and when one pleases — only so far restrained as the Rights of others may
make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the commonRight which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s Rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”
11Am.Jur.(1st) Constitutional Law §329

“Personal liberty — consists of the power of locomotion, of changing situations, of removing one’s person to whatever place one’s inclination may direct, without
imprisonment or restraint unless by due process of law.”
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914 ed.;
Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.;
Blackstone’s Commentary 134;
Hare, Constitution, Pg. 777

Whew, I am tired with typing all of that but, I suppose the MAIN message I should have gotten across to you and everyone else that is reading this post if that fact that “Traveling on ANY public road, highway, rail system or whatever is a RIGHT, not a privilege that can be taken away by any means. So with that being said, I suppose I should let you and everyone else know that when you turn 16 years of age and you are hyped up for receiving a learners permit and finally a drivers license, you just gave up your RIGHT just to gain a privilege!!! Why would one be concerned about the fact of having a driver’s license in the first place!? Are you a ‘driver’ or a ‘traveler’ ? As I have pointed out earlier in this post, there is a huge difference between those two words. A ‘Driver’ is the only one required to have any type of license, because they are performing commerce of some form or fashion. A ‘Traveler’ is someone that is someone in their private automobile going from point A to point B,C,D (etc….) and then back to point A again and not receiving payment for doing so. So again, I ask you and everyone else, what would be the purpose of having a ‘Driver’s’ license to begin with!!?

Now, as for your W-2,4, 1040 or whatever tax paperwork that you may file, let me bring to your attention to:

§ 601.602 Tax forms and instructions.

(a) Tax return forms and instructions. The Internal Revenue Service develops forms and instructions that explain the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code and regulations. The Service distributes the forms and instructions to help taxpayers comply with the law. The tax system is based on voluntary compliance, and the taxpayers complete and return the forms with payment of any tax owed.

(b) Other forms and instructions. In addition to tax return forms, the Internal Revenue Service furnishes the public copies of other forms and instructions developed for use in complying with the laws and regulations. These forms and instructions lead the taxpayer step-by-step through data needed to accurately report information required by law.

(c) Where to get forms and instructions. The Internal Revenue Service mails tax return forms to taxpayers who have previously filed returns. However, taxpayers can call or write to district directors or directors of service centers for copies of any forms they need. These forms are described in Publication 676, Catalog of Federal Tax Forms, Form Letters, and Notices, which the public can buy from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402.
[46 FR 26055, May 11, 1981]

– ALL US Codes, CFR Codes and more can be found at the ‘Legal Information Institute’ website:

I would like YOU and everyone else to notice the words ‘based on voluntary compliance’. Is that not an interesting way of wording it?? So, you are VOLUNTEERING to pay all of those taxes that would normally be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!? Correct me if I am wrong but, did we not fight a ‘War of Independence’ to gain our own sovereignty against the British!!? So why are we relying on a BAR system to exercise our laws considering that the BAR association stands for “British Accredited Registry”. So did our forefathers fight that war in vain??

So, instead of complaining about this or that, I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the laws and use them to hold the people accountable that are violating the rights of us all (well, the ones that allow them to.)

Here is a more IMPORTANT message for you and everyone else that is reading this post. What about the fact that back in March of 2020 to the present, our local, state and federal government/s have violated everyone of our rights!!? Let me explain this further:

Back in March of 2020 each state (most, not all) had a MANDATORY lockdown in place for 3 months. If we were considered ‘Non Essential’, we couldn’t even go to work to be able to provide for our families or pay our bills. Yes, I understand that most people received unemployment benefits and an additional $600/wk and I am also aware that MOST people received 2, 3 and even 4 Stimulus checks. Would it surprise you or anyone else reading this to the fact that I did NOT receive ANY of that!!? I was not able to receive unemployment benefits and I have yet to receive a single stimulus check!!

Do you all realize that each Governor of every state involved with any lockdown or mandate has violated at least 10 US Codes!!? Here is a list of them:

18 U.S. Code §241 – Conspiracy against rights

18 U.S. Code §242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law

18 U.S. Code § 245 – Federally protected activities

18 U.S. Code § 1031 – Major fraud against the United States

18 U.S. Code § 1038 – False information and hoaxes

18 U.S. Code § 1341 – Frauds and swindles

18 U.S. Code § 1962 – Prohibited activities

42 U.S. Code §1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights

42 U.S. Code §1985 – Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights

42 U.S. Code § 3617 – Interference, coercion, or intimidation

– Again, these US Codes can be looked up and verified at the “Legal Information Institute’s” website:

NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW and legislators have an obligation under 42 USC § 1986 a duty “to prevent a wrong from being done” and 18 USC § 1621 citing the “neglect to protect” by individuals under oath. 16 American jurisprudence 2d, section 98, “While an emergency cannot create power and no emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution or States Constitutions….” NO EMERGENCY has just cause to suppress the constitution or the People at Large Unalienable rights. From the 16th American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, and Section 177: “The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail.”

Any court, government or government officer who acts in violation of, in opposition to or contradiction of the foregoing, by his, or her, own actions, commits treason and invokes the self-executing Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and vacates his, or her, office.

Abusing their power by shutting down the counties/state (this includes and not limited to, all schools, churches, small businesses, nature centers), mandating sovereign healthy people in the Counties/state Quarantine, to stay at home and issue a mask mandate. County Officials and Governors do not have the legal authority to create laws and mandates. They are administrators of state agencies, not lawmakers.

County Officials mandating masks is providing medical treatment without a medical license and is 100% a violation of the law.

Mandating medical treatment for healthy individuals who do not require treatment is also against the law.

Forcing medical treatment and ignoring the right to refuse medical treatment is against the law.

Civil Citations for fines on violation of the mask mandate are unconstitutional and illegal as the State receives Federal funding and money cannot be made on fines for mandates that are not laws.

Lying about the facts of illness to a patient, fabricating an illness that does not exist within the patient, or giving them false treatment, is against the law.

But MORE importantly, County Commissioners cannot advise, implement treatment or force the people to abide by the specific doctor they are getting their information from because people get second opinions of diagnosis all the time.

It is also a violation of the Constitution and HIPAA to force anyone to publicly disclose their medical history for exemption purposes as it forces the patient to waive doctor/patient confidentiality and their private person. (How many states that required a vax passport!?)

I would like to bring to everyone’s attention to the following:

Fourteenth Amendment
§ Section 3

No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

So as I have said, you all need to familiarize yourselves with the LAWS and use such LAWS to hold each and every individual accountable for violating them. You all know quite well that if WE violated the law in any way, WE would be held accountable! So, why can’t we hold the people that are put in place for enforcing and upholding those laws accountable!!?

The other thing I would like to bring to all of your attention is the fact that once NESARA (US) (GESARA is the rest of the world) is announced PUBLICLY, one of the stipulations in that law is the fact that all government/s have to ‘stand down’ and the Military has ‘up to’ 120 days to establish new government (which will be only 10% the size of what it once was) and will be based on a republican form of government. That means that all POLICE, Judges, Lawyers and all local and state (as well as Federal) government will have the opportunity to be retrained under CONSTITUTIONAL law or they will have to leave the position they once held and will no longer be able to hold any type of governmental position (local, state or federal) ever again.

If you can take the time to read ‘Restored Republic via a GCR’ (which I read faithfully every day), then you can take the time to read this as well. Considering I have taken the time to provide legitimate proof with the source of all information and is undisputed! If you are too lazy to take the time to read it, then you actually have no reason to complain about any of it in the first place!

Thank you…..

Doug Johnson


Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [] and we’ll forward your email to the author.


Guest Posting

If you wish to write and/or publish an article on Operation Disclosure all you need to do is send your entry to [] applying these following rules.

The subject of your email entry should be: “Entry Post | (Title of your post) | Operation Disclosure”

– Must be in text format
– Proper Grammar
– No foul language
– Your signature/name/username at the top



If you wish to receive the daily Operation Disclosure Newsletter, you can subscribe via the PayPal “Subscribe” button located on the site.


Our mission at Operation Disclosure is to get you up-to-date on the latest conspiracies and to provide raw unvetted information from various sources. We are also focused on disclosing extraterrestrial contact and humanity’s lost ancient origins.

Disclaimer: All articles, videos, and images posted on Operation Disclosure were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes. All statements, claims, views and opinions that appear on this site are always presented as unverified and should be discerned by the reader. We do not endorse any opinions expressed on this website and we do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content posted on this website.

Copyright © 2022 Operation Disclosure