A Private Member Association – subject to rules and regulations to such entities.

Who is Trinity Freedom Ministries, SSM?

Our ministry and web site members are a private member association. We merely believe in the free right of man to have open discussion and research as to how our system of law works, based on common laws established by God, and to help one another understand how to be more effective in their own law situations through education, and with assistance to private counsel among our association members.

DISCLAIMERS – We are not an Attorneys (Lawyer), financial adviser, Judge, Tax Expert, or claim to be an expert in anything. We do not offer Legal or Tax related legal advice, or any other form of Law. One should always seek “competent counsel” regarding all legal or tax related issues. We do research and share open source information for fun, entertainment, for comparison. All the public or private exchanges between our members and our staff are personal use only, and always under the protection of free speech, and in doing so are we never wilfully committing an unlawful act against another party, statute, or entity by speaking or discussing anything. Even if it were mis-interpreted as giving any form of “advice”, please note the following cases…

A. The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state/State Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239
B. The practice of Law is AN OCCUPATION OF COMMON RIGHT!
Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925) ****

Amendment VI – U.S. Constitution

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

At Trinity Freedom Ministries, SSM we WHOLLY discuss and support the concept of Amendment 6, right to counsel, and free speech and association under the First Amendment, when merely information sharing (vs “legal or tax advice”).  A mere open discussion and sharing among free living men and women cannot be regulated. We do participate in helping people educate themselves and learn how to perform more effectively in their “common” law methods to resolve matters.  Therefore, we do not give “”legal” or tax advice, nor can we be held liable for any outcomes from the actions taken by the user or participant in this website and efforts.  Many contributors add content here. Any such claims of damage shall be considered only as it applies in common law and between a living man/woman who can prove they are a verifiable damaged party willing to testify to that claim.

We do not protest the government or its agencies, all though we do remind the “We The People” are the government, who our servants “serve. We naturally advocate that government obey the law and acts to protect “we the people” from enemies both foreign and domestic, as is their trust fiduciary duty requires.  We do not condone attacks or suing the innocent. We encourage peaceful and proper interaction between government, corporations, and the “people” who the government “serves”.

We also state for the record, we encourage anyone who owes a verified bill, debt, a statutory obligation to file the required forms, or if there is a verified contract obligation – then one should should keep those  commitments. The contract is the law. We suggest merely how to verify the authority of any claim made against you, by anyone or any entity. We want you simply learn how to say – “prove it”, before you presume a claim is true! You’ll be surprised how often they can’t prove it LAWFULLY. The burden of proof is on the accuser.

FURTHER DISCLAIMERS and Belief Regarding Right to Counsel

(as many members might assist other members). Our Ministry merely provides our Members private free speech association, with discussion and research support for common law and self speaking men and women. Many people find themselves protecting their own God given rights pursuant to the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and according to Article 1, Section 22 of the Washington State Constitution (and relevant Oregon Constitution). WE DO NOT PROVIDE ANY KIND OF LEGAL ADVICE, AND WE DO NOT WANT TO GIVE ANY IMPRESSION THAT WE DO. WE APOLOGIZE TO ANYONE WHO MAY HAVE INTERPRETED WHAT WE DO AS ANY SORT OF ADVICE FOR FEE.  It is undisputed that everyone has a Constitutional right to defend themselves and seek any “counsel” of their choosing. It is undisputed that when one is defending themselves in person, they have all the same rights as any Attorney (even more), and one has the right to hire a private para-legal or seek private counsel of one’s choice. Members often deal with needs requiring help in serious civil and sometimes criminal matter research.  Be sure to seek competent professional legal a counsel when needed. Private Members often provide effective private “assistance of counsel” to one another. As contemplated by the Sixth Amendment and the first Judiciary Act of 1789 as was passed on September 24, 1789, which is an Act of Congress, see 1 Stat 73 at section 35 and 28 U.S.C. 1654, we try to help educate people who want to appear and defend in person to handle their own cases [Pro-se] or as a living man or woman, under the concept of right to counsel their choosing (be it an attorney or not if they so choose).


For many, there is confusion between the terms practicing law and private counsel. The following research summary clarifies many points of interest.  Based on substantial research and analysis and legally admissible evidence, we can safely conclude the following:

  1. There is no such thing legally defined anywhere in any enactment of any government that is specifically called a “license to practice law”.
  2. An “Admission to Practice” issued by the U.S. Supreme Court functions as the de facto equivalent of a “license to practice law”.
  3. Individual courts also issue admissions to practice to attorneys who VOLUNTARILY apply for it.
  4. Neither the Constitution nor any legislative act within any state of the Union can or does specifically authorize a justice of the state Supreme Court to issue “Admissions to Practice”.  Therefore, there is no authority and can be no lawful authority to issue such grants of privilege.
  5. The Ninth and Tenth Articles to the United States Constitution specifically reserve all powers not delegated by the Constitution to the People or the States respectively.  Therefore, the Federal government has never been empowered to issue “licenses” or “admissions” to practice law.  Neither can this authority be implied from the “necessary and proper” clauses found anywhere in the Constitution.
  6. The idea of “licenses to practice law” is therefore primarily a “judicial doctrine” that cannot adversely affect the Constitutionally protected rights of any man or woman.
  7. All those persons represented by a licensed attorney are “wards of the court”, incapable of executing their own defense or litigation.  As such, “licensed attorneys” are there to represent them as “incompetents” and the authority of the state to license such attorneys derives from the need to protect such incompetent persons.
  8. It is not a crime to practice law without a license and there can be no adverse consequences for doing so for any person not domiciled on federal territory under exclusive federal jurisdiction, so long as the person doing so identifies themselves NOT as an “attorney”, but as a “Counselor at Law”.
  9. The only case where any judge or public official may mandate or influence one’s choice of counsel is in the case of public traded entities, such as corporations.  Private corporations and private persons may not be controlled or regulated in their choice of legal “counsel” to only those who have been licensed or admitted to practice by the state supreme Court.
  10. The only legitimate purpose for “licensing” of attorneys is to protect the public.  In practice, public servants abuse this regulatory authority delegated to them NOT to protect the public, but to stifle all attorneys from speaking the truth in open court about government and official corruption, especially as it pertains to the judiciary.
    10.2. Establish and further the ends of a legal profession monopoly on the practice of law designed to further their own private economic ends.

The authority to “practice law” conveyed upon “counsel” or a “counselor at law”as a private para-legal (vs paralegal) includes the following:

11.1. Preparing pleadings, discovery, and execute discovery.

11.2. Arguing issues of law before the court.

11.3. Advising the assisted party of his rights and options.

The word “attorney” is not equivalent to “counsel” as used in the Sixth Amendment.  All licensed “attorneys” may also be classified as “counsel”, but not all counsel need be licensed attorneys within the meaning of the Sixth Amendment.  Any claims to the contrary will require proof of a damaged party, as a result of “unlicensed practice of law”, by the living man or woman who is a damaged party due to this mysterious “practice”, who will testify under oath and quote the law and/or contract which applies where someone was practicing law without disclosure of these facts.  Any reader and member of this web site is so noticed.



Interested in Owning and Growing MORE Bitcoin (BTC)?

Get a FAST setup and funding of a Bitcoin Account HERE or HERE


Form Your Own Private Ministry Entity

Develop your not for profit purpose to serve, with full privacy and protections that state controlled non-profit entities may not provide. Not to be used for just asset hiding or tax avoidance, but for a real mission to serve your brother. HERE

The absolute required training tool for all law studying members to succeed
How to Win In Court Without an Attorney DETAILS HERE


2 thoughts on “About

  • October 30, 2014 at 10:42 pm

    Wow, 7806 is what we need to promote across the country. Please tell me who took the time and energy to read all of the boring crap in Title 26? The total twisting of words. The admission of being a slave at the top of the 1040 form, where it says “ARE YOU A U.S. CITIZEN?”. I am not, as I have never set foot on that 61.4 square mile area known as the District of Criminals.
    As mentioned on the call, about signatures, and doing one simple thing. This removes you from any and all liability, placing the liability on the entity named on the bill, contract, or slider they try to get us involved in. The slider I use when filing anything with the court or county recorder. Do this with witnesses (1 or more). Place the document face down on the counter, the moment they pick it up, they have accepted it. This is what they do to us all the time. Your witness will attest to them accepting the document, under oath. Simple enough? There is so much more I would like to share with you TJ, we’ll have to set up some kind of communications device to use for that purpose. I have Skype and gmail, I believe yahoo too, but haven’t used it in a long time. This forum is fine too, and I am simply excited to find someone like you to share information with. Thanks for being there my friend, and helping prove to my students that what I’ve been telling them is NOT BS. Talk to you soon, Chuck…

  • February 20, 2015 at 5:35 pm

    Just for kicks:

    I have a letter from the California Franchise Tax Board.  So I looked up the Revenue and Tax Code.  I can't find anywhere that it states who the Code applies to.  But it did reference the Calfornia Constitution.  And in those first couple of sections,

    A) it recognizes God:

    "We, the People of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitution."

    B) still doesn't tell me who this Constitution aplies to  (before getting in to appointed and elected officials), and

    C) recognizes the distinction between 'people' and 'Man'.  Funny that the first distinction would first be made in ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS:

    "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

    Thank you for your work TJ!  I'll be joining you soon.  Sad to say, as soon as I can scrape together a proper donation.


Comments are closed.

Powered by WishList Member - Membership Software