Serving Two Masters

Operation Disclosure Official

By Thinker2, Contributing Writer
Submitted on December 9, 2025

Serving two Masters

No one can serve two masters. (but they can lie about it.)

Objection, your honor, Assumes fact not in evidence, Assumes you are not complicit in Constructive Fraud.

“That which you are aware of, you are in control of. That which you are unaware of, is in control of you.” – Tony de Mello

A Corporation is a Legal Fiction / Legal Person.

No soul to save, no body to incarcerate, a P********h.

People are living.

Persons are Fictional, Commodity, Slave, Dead, Fraud.

The Corporation (2003)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v8e7dUwq_Q

When Benito Mussolini (WW2 Italian Dictator) was asked; “What is Fascism?” He replied; “Corporatism.”

Fascism aka Corporatism is an Protection & Extortion Racket & Pyramid Scheme (RICO). The way it works is a business incorporates with the State (up link). The business receives Limited Liability from the State. However the business must obey all policies of the State some of which violate the Constitution including Income Tax. Any deviation from State Policy by the business and the State takes the business to British Admiralty Court on a Pirate ship in Dry-dock, complete with a Pirate flag (Gold Fringe) and Pirate captain in Black S*****c Robes. If the business, say Lemonade Stand run by a 11yo fails to register with the Government, the police are expected to issue a citation to the parents.

Cop Arrests Kid for Selling Lemonade
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/fv7I6P7H3Ac

Shut Down Of Boys’ Lemonade Stand Serves As Lesson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nR9mim_jQQ

Who needs Terrorists on the streets when we have cops and courts?

There are only two forms of Government:

1. Top Down
2. Bottom Up

Top Down:

• Fascism
• Corporatism
• Satanism
• Communism
• Bolshevism
• Socialism
• Progressive
• Libertarian
• Democracy
• Monarchy
• Theocracy
• Dictatorship

Bottom Up:

• We the People (Of the People, By the People, and For the People…)

No one can serve two Masters:

Top Down or Bottom up? CHOOSE!

Judy Byington Report (12-9-2025, Article; “R”):

Fraudulent Claim That the United States Is Not Operating as a Corporate Entity or Under Commercial Administration Failure To Distinguish De Jure from De Facto Government. …Joseph Anthony Lodato III

The argument presented conflates the de jure constitutional republic with the de facto corporate governance overlay that emerged post-1871. While United States v. Maurice, 26 F. Cas. 1211 (1823), and United States v. Perkins, 163 U.S. 625 (1896), affirm that the constitutional United States is a sovereign body politic, they do not rebut the claim that a parallel system was constructed to operate under commercial principles. De Facto Incorporation: District Of Columbia Act Of 1871 The Act of 1871, 16 Stat. 419, created a municipal corporate entity under the name “Government of the District of Columbia.”

This was the legal gateway for reorganizing federal operations under corporate governance. No case cited above addresses the 1871 Act or its consequence: the overlay of municipal corporate structure upon federal administration.

Commercial Registration as Evidence of Function D-U-N-S Numbers, CAGE Codes, and SAM registrations are not legal nullities. They are commercial identifiers assigned to entities capable of entering contracts under the Uniform Commercial Code.

A sovereign government has no requirement to register as a vendor for profit. Yet the following entities are registered with D-U-N-S Numbers:

• UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT — 052714196
• WHITE HOUSE — 037404123
• DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE — 040535809
• FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION — 039256165
• UNIFIED JUDICIAL SYSTEM, SOUTH DAKOTA — 627496318

These entries are prima facie evidence of corporate function. 

Judicial Precedent: Clearfield Trust Doctrine Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 U.S. 363 (1943) establishes: “When the United States enters into commercial business, it abandons its sovereign capacity and takes on the character of a private corporation.”

This controlling precedent affirms that when the United States issues negotiable instruments (e.g., Federal Reserve Notes, court bonds, tax obligations), it acts not as a sovereign but as a private party under commercial law. Sovereigns do not issue negotiable instruments subject to UCC claims. The Erie Doctrine and Destruction of General Common Law Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) abolished the recognition of federal general common law.

This ruling created a procedural vacuum that was filled by administrative codes and commercial rules.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1938), the Uniform Commercial Code (1952), and the Model Penal Code (1962) replaced common law remedies with statutory presumptions.

Court Securitization: CRIS and CUSIP Mechanisms Court dockets are monetized through the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS).

Bonds are assigned CUSIP numbers and sold on the secondary market.

This is not speculative; it is documented in Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports (ACFRs).

Such mechanisms do not exist in a common law judiciary. They exist only in commercial enforcement systems.

False Distinction Between “United States” And “Federal Corporation” 28 U.S.C. 3002(15)(A) defines “United States” as a “federal corporation” for purposes of debt collection.

This is a narrow admission of the true nature of its financial character. Courts claiming that this is “limited in scope” fail to reconcile the government’s commercial enforcement of civil penalties, tax collection, and performance bonds under the same structure.

Bar Members as Foreign Agents Under 22 U.S.C. § 611, agents of foreign principals must register. BAR associations derive their lineage from the Inns of Court under the British Crown.

The use of “Esquire” is a prohibited title of nobility under Article I, Section 9, Clause 8. Every judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney holding a BAR card operates under a private guild not recognized in the Constitution.

Administrative Procedure vs. Constitutional Law The federal judiciary no longer operates under Article III principles. Modern courts are Article I legislative tribunals applying
administrative law.

The use of summary judgment, docket bonding, and statute-only enforcement shows departure from judicial due process and entry into commercial enforcement.

Bankruptcy Claims — Misstated No case number is needed to affirm national insolvency. The Emergency Banking Act of March 9, 1933, amended §5(b) of the Trading with the Enemy Act and granted extraordinary powers to the Executive.

Proclamation 2039 and 2040 declared a banking emergency and suspended gold redemption.

Congress enacted House Joint Resolution 192 (June 5, 1933), abrogating the gold clause. These actions constitute acts in bankruptcy in equity, not through Title 11.

All attempts to rebut these claims by invoking outdated dicta or mischaracterizing them as “sovereign citizen” arguments are intellectually dishonest.

The current system does not resemble the organic Constitution. It functions as a commercial trust administration governed by international and corporate standards.

The existence of foreign influence, commercial registration, administrative law, and judicial monetization are beyond dispute. To deny these facts is to either operate in ignorance, willful blindness, or complicity.

One cannot serve two masters: the Constitution and the Corporation. Fraud vitiates everything. See United States v. Throckmorton, 98 U.S. 61 (1878).

Exposing the Corporate Veil: Operational Evidence of Foreign Administrative Overlay Disguised as Government.

It is a principle of law that one cannot serve two masters, and no lawful government may operate in duality—claiming both sovereign immunity and foreign commercial registration. Yet the present regime that purports to act as the United States Government functions not as a de jure constitutional body politic, but as a registered commercial enterprise operating under international commercial law, banking treaties, and foreign-controlled bonding systems.

The record shows that every major federal agency, including the White House, DOJ, IRS, DOD, and Judicial Branches, are registered in the DUNS® system, identified by Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Codes, and subject to the financial oversight of foreign-controlledinterests such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Bank for International Settlements.

These registrations are not symbolic—they are instruments of contractual jurisdiction, whereby presumed commercial entities consent to binding foreign administrative rules for the purposes of procurement, indemnity, and financial operation.

Through the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS), court cases are securitized, assigned CUSIP numbers, and traded as bonded instruments. Every appearance in court initiates a presumption that the man or woman has consented to being treated as a legal person (trust res), and is subject to performance bonds, bid bonds, and payment bonds—with proceeds deposited into pooled revenue streams recorded in Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports (ACFRs).

These are not hypothetical or theoretical constructs—they are present in the internal ledgers of federal, state, and municipal entities.

Furthermore, the BAR Association monopoly is a foreign guild structure, with lineage tied to the Inns of Court under ecclesiastical Crown authority.

No member of the BAR has proven lawful delegation of constitutional power to interpret or enforce the organic Constitution.

Under 22 U.S.C. § 611, any person acting on behalf of a foreign principal is a foreign agent and must be registered. No BAR member adjudicating matters in court presents proof of such registration or rebuttal to the presumption of foreign allegiance.

The merger of law and equity in 1938, via the Supreme Court’s ruling in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, and the implementation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, destroyed the separation of common law and chancery.

Courts ceased operating under constitutional authority and began applying commercial codes and statutory equity, converting tribunals of law into administrative enforcement venues. This administrative switch created a presumption that all parties appearing are either decedents, wards, or incompetent sureties—as in the construct of the Cestui Que Vie trust, historically derived from Roman Civil Law and Canon Law under the Vatican system.

When a court, judge, or attorney engages in this framework without full disclosure, they commit constructive fraud. When they conceal the existence of fiduciary bonds, commercial trading of case instruments, and the use of foreign commercial law in place of constitutional due process, they participate in misprision of treason under 18 U.S.C. § 2382.

This entire system operates on presumptions—that the man or woman voluntarily consented to be treated as a commercial entity, that the NAME in all caps signifies the living being, and that jurisdiction is proper.

None of these presumptions have been proven, and their enforcement without disclosure constitutes fraud, ultra vires action, and violation of the organic Constitution. Judicial Denial, Willful Ignorance, and the Fraud of Legal Excuses.

A pattern emerges wherein agents of the current legal-industrial complex rely upon outdated judicial opinions, disjointed statutory interpretations, and categorical dismissals of lawful inquiry under the rhetorical branding of “frivolous,” “sovereign citizen,” or “baseless
conspiracy.”

This tactic serves not only to discredit lawful investigation into structural fraud, but also to insulate a privatized administrative apparatus from legitimate challenge.

The judicial citations commonly relied upon—United States v. Maurice (1823), United States v. Perkins (1896), Tingey (1831), and others—predate the Commercial and Financial Reconstruction of the federal government following the Act of 1871, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933, and the United Nations Charter of 1945.

These transformative events implemented wholesale structural overlays and cannot be rebutted by case law that precedes their legislative enactment. Further, the disingenuous invocation of 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15), while simultaneously denying its relevance, is itself a legal contradiction.

The statute clearly defines “United States” as including a “federal corporation”—a statutory definition crafted within the context of commercial debt enforcement. To suggest that this classification has no bearing on the operational nature of federal agencies—many of which operate as bonded corporations for procurement under UCC Titles—is to willfully ignore the construct of functional jurisprudence, where conduct outweighs label.

The claim that “there are no articles of incorporation” is both misleading and misdirected. Sovereign governments do not require articles of incorporation under private corporate law; however, incorporated municipal entities, such as the “UNITED STATES” as defined post-1871, do operate as legal persons under corporate charters passed through congressional acts.

The government of the District of Columbia, which now serves as the federal seat, is a corporate entity per statute.

The U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), the Department of Treasury, and other departments publish registration identifiers and DUNS® information clearly affirming corporate capacity to contract.

The claim that “no bankruptcy court or trustee exists” ignores the construct of reorganization via emergency powers, wherein the President of the United States, through the Treasury and Federal Reserve, assumed commercial trusteeship over all citizens and assets via the Trading with the Enemy Act (1917) and the Emergency Banking Relief Act (1933).

No formal Chapter 11-style bankruptcy is required when reorganization occurs by proclamation, executive order, and statutory debt instruments.

Ignorance of these facts—intentional or negligent—is not an excuse. To cite modern court opinions that mock, dismiss, or label such analysis as “frivolous” is not legal refutation, but circular logic and judicial gaslighting.

Courts, as commercial venues monetizing securitized proceedings, hold a vested interest in denying the existence of the construct that sustains them. To serve this system while denying its existence is to commit fraud by silence.

The BAR-controlled judiciary, the bonded fiduciary officers, and foreign-aligned agencies are not immunized by habit or legacy. They are subject to the rule of law, and that law includes the maxim that fraud vitiates everything it touches.

To say that a government which bonds its officers, securitizes its cases, contracts via foreign identifiers, operates under international treaties, trains its enforcers through guild-based associations, and treats its people as trust property is “sovereign” — is a mockery of language, law, and logic.

Fundamental Breach of Constitutional Trust and the Return to Principle: A lawful government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, not from secret financialinstruments, foreign registration schemes, or adhesion contracts buried within administrative codes.

The transition from de jure constitutional governance to de facto commercial administration has never been lawfully ratified by the people, nor publicly disclosed. It is thus
null, void, and ultra vires.

The Constitution’s Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 forbids any “title of nobility”, yet all judges, attorneys, and officers bearing the title “Esquire” operate under a Crown-derived guild that was never authorized by the people.

The 10th Amendment preserves all powers not delegated to the federal government to the states and the people, yet the administrative overlays imposed by the Uniform Commercial Code, International Monetary Fund, United Nations, and Federal Reserve System have supplanted constitutional delegation with foreign-derived contract law.

Article VI states that treaties are “the supreme Law of the Land,” but this clause does not authorize treaties that contradict or override the Constitution’s protections.

Treaties cannot create foreign fiduciary obligations or debt pledges that strip the people of unalienable rights, nor can they place public offices under control of non-republican, supranational entities.

The International Organization Immunities Act (1945) unlawfully extended privileges, immunities, and foreign status to organizations never ratified as sovereign authorities over the American people.

The Vatican-based trust model, through Roman Civil Law, Canon Law, and the Cestui Que Vie construct, treats all individuals as missing, presumed dead, or legally incompetent, thereby enabling the seizure and management of their estates via commercial instruments and administrative courts.

This juridical conversion, combined with the post-Erie merger of equity and law, enables a silent transfer of sovereignty from the people to the corporate state.

These facts are not theories—they are operational realities, confirmed through audit trails, public financial reports, agency registrations, and statutory code.

That the courts ignore, judges conceal, and BAR associations profit from these mechanisms does not change their legal character. The maxim remains: “You cannot serve two masters.”

One cannot swear allegiance to a constitutional republic while simultaneously administering foreign commercial law for private gain. Officers who do so breach fiduciary duty, violate their oaths, and operate as de facto agents of a corporate cartel.

The man or woman who rebuts the presumption of being a decedent, debtor, or trust res reclaims their lawful status as a living principal, entitled to the protections of natural law, common law, and the organic Constitution.

This rebuttal must be honored, not mocked. It must be heard, not dismissed. To remain silent in the face of this structure is to become complicit in treason. To deny it without investigation is to live in fraud. To defend it is to serve a foreign power.

Joseph Anthony Lodato III

Source PDF: (Article; “R”)
https://operationdisclosureofficial.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Restored-Republic-via-a-GCR-12-9-2025.pdf

Source VIDEO: (Skip to 29:20)
https://rumble.com/v72sjki-restored-republic-via-a-gcr-update-as-of-december-9-2025.html

District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 (Corporatism)
https://ia902306.us.archive.org/13/items/act-of-1871/Act_of_1871_text.pdf

Court of Fraud
https://operationdisclosureofficial.com/2025/04/05/court-of-fraud/

Peace, love, and blessings,

Thinker2 – https://operationdisclosureofficial.com/tag/Thinker2/

______________________________________________________

Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [voyagesoflight@gmail.com] 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 [voyagesoflight@gmail.com] 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
______________________________________________________

Newsletter

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

Our mission at Operation Disclosure is to get you up-to-date on the latest conspiracies and geopolitics. We also aim to provide raw unvetted information about world events from various sources and user submitted research on topics such as exopolitics, extraterrestrial and UFO/UAP sightings, secret space programs, and the lost or ancient origins and history of humanity.

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 © Operation Disclosure