Is America a Corporation?

The United States is a corporation.

Is the United States of America a Corporation?

Despite misconceptions, the United States is not a corporation. This can be confirmed by its lack of incorporating acts, its sovereign immunity, and past court cases, among other things.

Below we explain the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, the Act which many people believe to have turned the United States of America into a global corporation at the hands of international bankers but didn’t.[1]

We’ll also explain U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002 28 U.S. Code § 3002, which has similar claims made about it (and also didn’t “turn American into a corporation”).

And, we’ll also touch on a few other misconceptions about the United States as a corporation.

The important thing to get here is that regions of the United States may or may not be organized and incorporated. Cities, towns, and territories are often incorporated in the United States.

That doesn’t mean “they are corporations,” it means they are “incorporated within the United States.”

TIP: People often point to companies registered under names like “United States Corporation Company” and “United States Inc.” as proof that the country the United States is a corporation. However, be we talking about the United States Corporation company of 1925, or another entity, the answer is generally the same. That is, United States [insert term], stylized anyway including UNITED STATES, is a popular name for companies. There are actually many companies registered under the name United States in, for example, Delaware and Flordia (click those links for lists; with Delaware you have to type in United States and hit search). Although there are many companies named “the United States [insert term],” none are actually the United States of America (the country we live in) itself.

TIP: For those that don’t want to read: When 28 U.S. Code § 3002 says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States (any “federal corporation”), not that the United States is itself a corporation. Likewise, the Organic Acts organize (give governance rights) to D.C. They do not create another United States. All states and organized territories can self-govern despite being beholden to the Federal Government. Simply put, there is only one United States.

TIPThe United States of America consists of 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), 1 incorporated territory, and 15 unincorporated territories. Entities created by the executive, legislative, and judicial branches can also be considered “a part” of the United States regarding issues like sovereign immunity and being beholden to the central government.

“We may say in passing that the argument that the United States may be treated as a corporation organized under its own laws, that is, under the Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained as not to merit serious consideration .” – United States Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. COOPER CORPORATION, (1941) No. 484 Argued: March 6, 1941 Decided: March 31, 1941

The U.S. Corporation Myth

The reason this page exists is that it is addressing a persistent myth.

Some say, “The United States of America” is different from the “UNITED STATES” [corporation],” and that, “The UNITED STATES was formed in 1871 and controls only the District of Columbia and the territories it purchases or acquires; Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands.” This is not correct (to the best of my knowledge, although feel free to comment below).

Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands are unincorporated and organized territories of the United States (the one and only United States). The District of Columbia is an incorporated and organized district under the direct control of Congress since the passage of its Organic Acts. It was purposefully organized this way to avoid state-level power grabs, not to ensure some banking conspiracy, as is sometimes insinuated.

The lack of statehood for the capital is to be found in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the document reads, “The Congress shall have Power To …exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.” – Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State [2]

TIP: Columbia is a poetically named, historically used to reference the United States that is a reference to Christopher Columbus. The de facto unofficial national anthem used to be “Hail, Columbia!”

Disambiguation: The “incorporation doctrine” refers to the idea that the states are beholden to the Bill of Rights. This is a concept used in the gun debate; it doesn’t apply here.

Organization and Incorporation in the United States

Before we get into debunking the Organic Act of 1871 myth, let’s discuss how organization and incorporation work. You can skip to the next section for the debunking part.

In business law, a corporation is that which is incorporated as a company or group of people authorized to act as a single entity (legally a person) and recognized as such in law. For regions within the United States, it works much the same way.

Regarding a city, town, territory, or region:

  • Being incorporated means being part of the United States proper (AKA being incorporated into the United States). A legal part of the U.S. in terms of rights, not only property of the U.S.
  • Being organized means having an organized government authorized by an Organic Act passed by the U.S. Congress. This usually consists of a territorial legislature, territorial governor, and a basic judicial system. Being organized means being able to self-govern, even in the case of an organized unincorporated territory which is owned by the U.S. but can govern itself.

A territory may be neither incorporated or organized, like American Samoa; it may be unincorporated and organized like Puerto Rico; incorporated and unorganized, like Palmyra Atoll; or incorporated and organized like the District of Columbia. D.C. is organized and operates under Article One of the United States Constitution and the District of Columbia Home Rule Act and is incorporated by its Organic Acts.[3]

Meanwhile, being admitted into the Union as a state by Congress is the only way for a region to become an official state of the United States.

Are Any States Corporations? Neither the United States nor its 50 States are corporations. All are incorporated into the union by an act of Congress and get their power from the federal Constitution. State Constitutions govern the individual states.

TIP: Only entities incorporated into the U.S. and its states can enjoy sovereign immunity; only official states enjoy voting rights. This why Puerto Rico and D.C. have no official voting rights in Congress. The United States [corporation] if it did exist, would have fewer rights and less sovereignty than a state. Likewise, if the U.S. were a corporation, it would not have sovereign immunity unless it was otherwise owned by the United States federal government itself.

TIP: In the absence of an organic law, a territory is classified as unorganized; in the absence of being “incorporated” into the United States, a territory is unincorporated. This is why it was vital to pass the Organic Acts including the Organic Act of 1871, which organized and incorporated D.C., “the Seat of the Government of the United States.”[4]

FACT: The United States includes 50 states, 1 federal district (D.C.), and many territories with different statuses. Those entities, as well as all executive, legislative, and judicial entities on the federal and state level are beholden to the central federal government. In some cases, this is despite them having their own charters and constitutions and having their own “powers.” There are a few exceptions, like the Federal Reserve which is an independent entity within government. Still, even when there are exceptions, all the entities are beholden to the federal government, and thus to Congress as well. Congress is comprised of state-based elected officials who represent “we the people,” and thus are beholden to “the people” to an extent. This is also true for the Treasury, and no U.S. Code › Title 12 › Chapter 3 › Subchapter XII › § 411 12 U.S. Code § 411 – Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption, doesn’t imply otherwise as insinuated here.

Is the Federal Government, states, territories, or people sovereign? The states and commonwealths of the U.S. are sovereign, as are local governments, as are our citizens, as is the Federal Government… even unincorporated territories like Puerto Rico have some degree of sovereignty, but it doesn’t mean the same thing for each entity. Firstly, every entity is beholden the federal government. Meanwhile, the federal government, state governments, and local governments all enjoy sovereignty (regarding governance) and sovereign immunity (regarding being sued) under U.S. law (although the degree of immunity differs by the entity). This may extend to entities doing contract work for the state (see Advanced Software Design v. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis), but it doesn’t apply to entities that are unincorporated into the U.S. Puerto Rico does not have the same sovereignty the states do. See Political status of Puerto Rico for a discussion of why it was important for D.C. to not be an unincorporated and unorganized district. In terms of the electoral system and rights, sovereignty refers to the fact that each of our 320 million citizens is 1/320 millionth sovereign and each has human rights and voting rights as ensured by the federal constitution and state constitutions although power is delegated in the Republic. See Sovereign immunity in the United States and compare to popular sovereignty for a better understanding of how this complex philosophical concept and the legal concept is often misused in general debate.

 Why Do People Think the United States is a Corporation?

In 1871 Congress incorporated the District of Columbia, and the wording of the Act (along with a few bits of supposed evidence featured below) caused some to speculate that the United States had become a corporation controlled by the international banks.

The simplest rebuttal to this, aside from understanding how things work (as presented above), is pointing out that the Act incorporated and organized D.C., not the United States. D.C. and the “United States” are not the same entity any more than Nashville is the same as Tennessee.

Some otherwise excellent articles that seek to focus on the truth patriotically, like the following article are a misleading, “The United States Isn’t a Country — It’s a Corporation!” Articles like this complex but accurate article and this 2013 article (which I’ll cite liberally here as it proceeded ours chronologically) are correct.[5][6]

UNITED STATES is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions – Sovereignty. <— No, there are not “two constitutions,” and no, there is no weird sovereignty loophole aside from he well-known Citizens United idea that corporations are people.

TIP: Some point to America as a type of corporatocracy (a government controlled by corporations). Certainly, cases can be made, if we are talking about the corporations of the fortune 500, or are talking about the Federal Reserve and the City of New York and D.C. This is semantics, and that aside, like the incorporation doctrine, this topic is only loosely related.

TIP: Because D.C. is a central hub, in a great country, with a beneficial corporation law, many of the world’s most powerful corporations have the headquarters there. That does include the IMF and other international banks and businesses. Which, you know, is good for the country. What, would you rather their headquarters be somewhere else?

Debunking the Myth that the United States is a Corporation

As noted by the previous correct article back in 2013, the two legal documents used to fuel the myth that the U.S. is a private corporation owned by “the Rothchilds” of which our President is CEO, misunderstand the documents they are citing.

For more on the Rothchilds, see a history lesson about the history of banking (NOTE: I am not proposing that international bankers, be than Rothchilds or Morgans for example, aren’t important parts of western and American history, or that they didn’t have a hand in aspects of the creation of our modern system… in fact, that truism seems fairly clear. I am simply proposing that they do not own a corporation named the UNITED STATES that has somehow replaced the United States of America).

With that said, let’s clarify the documents noted above.

Debunking the U.S. Code Title 28 Myth

The first bit of evidence Presented from U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002 28 U.S. Code § 3002 is:

28 USC § 3002 – Definitions

As used in this chapter:

(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

This is used to justify the idea that “United States” means a Federal corporation. The problem is that this isn’t what (15) says (and even if it was, it says “As used in this chapter.”)

To paraphrase in common language the provision says: “United States” includes any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United States.

In other words, when the document says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States, not that the “United States” is a corporation.

Another way to phrase it would be:

(15) “United States” means A; B; or C —  (A) a Federal corporation of the United States; (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States. I.e. when we say “United States” we mean the property of the country. Get it?

Debunking the Organic Act of 1871 Myth

The other part of the claim says that the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates a new Constitution for the United States by inserting wording for “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” in the act that somehow replaced our original “The Constitution for the United States of America.”

So, the first thing to point out is that the act the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 creates “a Government for D.C.” as it says in the Act. It has nothing to do with creating a Government for the United States.

D.C. was first established by Congress via the Residence Act on July 16, 1790. Then, the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, by Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, formally placed D.C. under control of the Congress and organized the unincorporated territories Washington County and Alexandria County within it. Then, the Organic Act of 1871, the one in question, created a territorial government for D.C.

Up to that point, D.C. had been governed as a mixture of municipalities and counties within District boundaries and not by its Government as a state. Later, in 1874, Congress repealed the territorial government to create a single municipal government for the federal district. See Origin and Government of the District of Columbia Judd & Detweiler, 1902.

Today “the name of the Seat of Government of the United States is The District of Columbia,” but that D.C. and the U.S. are not the same just as the Seat of Government of Washington State is Olympia, but Washington State is not Olympia.

TIP: It is a “federal district” because it is directly controlled by the Government. It is not a state and does not control the government.


As one would assume, despite the persistent myths, the United States is not a corporation.


  1. The Corporation (explains the conspiracy theory in detail)
  2. Here’s Why Washington D.C. Isn’t a State
  3. Government of the District of Columbia
  4. Is the United States of America a Country or a Corporation?
  5. United States Inc.
  6. Supreme Law – is the U.S. a corporation?

"The United States is a Corporation" is tagged with: Liberty, Philosophy of Law, United States of America

Vote Fact or Myth: "The United States is a Corporation"

Your Vote: {{ voteModel || 'no vote' | uppercase }}

Almodovar, Anthony on
Supports this as a Fact.

You are aware that the US industrial revolution began winding down in 1870 after it took off in 1820 right? Also during the industrial revolution the men that built America did so through fear and any means necessary to gain control over industries. What happened during that time is exactly why this country broke away from Britain. Saying these corporate leaders had no hand in the Act of 1871 is a statement lacking knowledge of the time period. You stated that it’s a conspiracy that international bankers were involved. That statement also lacks knowledge. JP Morgan organized a bailout for the US in 1895 through a civil war era loophole. JP Morgans father had ties to the Bank of England and Rothschild. I recommend the book “Lords of Creation” if you’d like a detailed understanding of what was happening during the 19th century in America. Fact- this country was built on a hatred for corporate sovereignty and centralized banking. Fact- banking practices that were perfected in Europe did infiltrate this country. You are aware of the 2 previous central bank failures from this countries early history right? Fact- An entity cannot interact with a living man in the real world without said man also having an entity to claim. That’s where the all caps name argument comes from. The UNITED STATES is an entity doing business with JOHN ADAM DOE. The UNITED STATES entity cannot in anyway do business with Doe, John Adam a living man. Taxation is an example of doing business. The UNITED STATES entity can only tax a living man if he is linked to an entity, in which case we are all linked to an entity by that lovely Social Security number. A birth certificate creates the entity and social security tracks the entity. You voluntarily accept the entity as being you. Hence why the IRS openly admits taxation as being voluntary.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Interesting claims. I’ll research what you state and give my insight below.

Until I can fully research this more I would say this:

1. International banks obviously have an important role in Western history.
2. I have read the Act of 1871 and 28 U.S. Code § 3002 and I really don’t see the legal wording that would turn American into a corporation (from that perspective).
3. What you say is well spoken and smart, but you buzzworded a bit. You said some things like “this country was built on a hatred for corporate sovereignty and centralized banking”… but that isn’t fully true. Some early social conservatives and Jeffersonian classical liberal were anti-bank, just like Jackson, but others like the Adams’ and Hamilton wanted a central bank. Meanwhile, those who were anti-bank were pro slavery, so let’s not go awarding them too many medals. We essentially went to war over this whole thing (the Civil War). After that war these acts were signed, later the Fed was created and the 16th was. Here you can see what I am saying, that is half the country wants an income tax, a global economy, and the world’s top bankers banking our currency, the other side wants to crush the “Secret Societies The Committee of 300, The Jesuits, 13 Illuminati Papal Bloodline Families,The Federal Reserve Bank, Operation Paperclip & MK-Ultra”… right? I mean, one side likes Rachel Maddow and TYT and the other likes Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones. So, I mean, its not like I don’t get the subtext of what you are saying, I do. Also not like I’m advocating the idea that we should offer our country up on a platter alongside our liberty to some international order. I am only suggesting that you are illustrating a somewhat narrow view.

All that aside, to the specific point on this page, I don’t see those documents as literally turning the U.S. into a corporation or creating a corporation UNITED STATES that somehow owns the sentence case republic of state “the United States.”

That said, I take your comments seriously and will read the book you suggest and think on this more in earnest.

I guess i’m just saying, “it is a mistake to think everyone who doesn’t see the world the way you do has some conspiratorial agenda.” If you put enough groups together in a big tent it isn’t a conspiracy, it is like half the human race as the left-wing and the other half as the right-wing. This sort of anti-banker conspiracy is what drove WWII. Hitler was very sure he could “crush” these entities, but one has to wonder if he had all his facts straight… after-all he didn’t succeed in more than spurring on the deaths of tens of millions.

Anyway, rant over. One this is for sure, it is a fascinating subject. Thanks for the insight and comments.

Peter on
Supports this as a Fact.

Thomas: Why did they change the “Constitution for the United States of America” to the ” Constitution of the United States of America”?

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I would have to research this. I wasn’t aware this was a thing. We can see the original Constitution here: //

It clearly says “[we]…establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

It isn’t like that is the title of the document, it doesn’t have a title, it just starts with “we the people…”

Can you clarify what you are getting at so I can help research?

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.

Must look at trading with enemies act of 1917 modified in 1933.

It made all U.S. CITIZENS enemies of the corporation. This is what lead to gold seizure.

This 1933 act was similar to the “patriot” act in that it declared a national emergency. This is still in effect, like they would have the patriot act in 100 years from now and barely remember it or even understand hpw it affected them since they were born into it.

Follow the story of money people.

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.

Usc 28

You are saying things without understanding the full picture, author demichele.

So please tell us, if “UNITED STATES” in this instance includes “a federal corporation” what federal corporation(s) exactly? If you declare all individuals corporate entities the way they do with strawmen, declare all municipalities corporations, give it all justification under the UCC aka the “uniform commercial code” justified (falsely) constitutional through the commerce clause which was only intended to regulate trade, mainly in arms but also economic for taxes and trading fairness, between the governments of the several states. This was done as a reinforcement of the union and prevention of alliances between states and possible economic or outright warefare between states.

The people are not a party to the Constitution. It says “we the people” as a propagandized effort for acceptance as it once said ” we the reps of the states of blah blah….” Also, not every state believed in this convention. Not every attendee wanted the convention. Not everyone agreed with the constitution. It took many years and a power vacuum before the government of the Articles was displaced. I was the first internal coupe of our countrys gov at large.

Back to the main topic, there is no such thing as a “United States Citizen” until created after the reconstruction amendments and the debt laws over the war created to enslave everyone in this Corporation. Before that, no national debt would have been recognized. We fought off central banking twice. You can say all you want that the sellouts had points too but in the end they are inspired by greed and consolidation of power only, many times to wield their wishes over others.

The first 10 amendments were added by the “anti-federalists” because they wanted to restrict the power of the government and guarantee the rights people already had. There were so many they said in the 10th amendment that all rights not delegated by the constitution or prohibited by it still do exist and are innumerable and are reserved to the states or individuals.

These individuals and their rights existed prior to “UNITED STATES CITIZENS” and in fact were people prior to the constitution.

So, you have the creation of strawmen, straw corporations aka “corporate citizens” etc all under control of a “FEDERAL” Corporation which distributes ” social security numbers” or “tax id” information for people who want to be a part of the corporation and use “FEDERAL Reserve Notes. ” The FEDERAL Government is NOT the “United States in Congress Assembled.”

I hope this is starting to make sense.

Your “Social security” number or any tax id comes from the IRS, which is a department of the IMF, of the world bank. We lost this country to bankrupcy over the orchestrated civil war and the resulting laws which ruined the sovereignty of the people over generations.

The income tax is interesting too. It states in the constitution that only the income of the state government can be taxed. Remember, the people are not a party to the constitution. Thomas Jefferson said in his autobiography something noteworthy on this matter. He said that there is no difference to the state between working poor “freemen” and slaves tax wise. He said that if overnight by some extraordinary law all poor were made complete slaves, would it affect the taxes collectable by the state? He said the wealth of the slave master is the same as corporate wealth, with no difference economically to the production or otherwise.

So, you have people hired by federally licensed corporations with id work and to trade in Federal reserve notes. This federal conglomerate of all corporations is an international organization with its own branched control over the United States. This deals with the IMF and Standard Drawing Rights aka SDR aka the great world debt currency. The family lineage of these people has gotten them in hot situations a times.

So you see, the Federal Corporation also known as “The UNITED STATES” is an entity of money. It can be seen in court, which means its not sovereign.

Also noteworthy besides the fact that no reconstruction amendments were properly ratified or willingly accepted is the missing 13th amendment. This is what forbid titles of nobility which also includes creating a superior classed society like lnoghts and squires and lords aka judges, lawyers, district attorneys etc. All trials are supposed to be by a jury of peers, meaning people you know and associate with. All charges are guaranteed a jury trial. Juries decide not only the guiltiness but also the validity of the law itself. There is not supposed to be any people in positions of power over you. If the president themselves told a citizen to do something, the citizen has the freedom to decline or ignore them. Unless the case of treason against countrymen, which would need a jury trial, there is very little the government has power over the individual for.

The United States of the original constitution had no power to restrict citizens rights. You can own any weapon under the constitution, but its USC and UCC codes all in Federal Reserve Notes that prohibit it. Payment of Federal reserve notes to anyone means their within the corporation. The taxes in federal reserve notes of owning a fully auto weapon is what makes it prohibitive. The restriction of sales of manufacture by corporations” aka directly a “federal corporation” is not in the constitution but done by the Corporation solely. No manufacturer regustered under so as to be a part of the Federal Corp can now make fully auto guns for sale, nor sell for anything other than federal reserve notes, nor use materials bought within the corp with notes for materials to sell for anything but Federal Reserve Notes.

Coming together more now?

How about alcohol? Other drugs? Again, its all the corporation, not the Constitution nor the ” United states in Congress Assembled.” All in federal reserve notes .

Constitution says only gold and silver is money. Only slaves arent allowes to use money aka the trading with the enemies act of 1933 and gold confiscation. The corporation is only allowed to use federal reserve notes, not gold or silver. Back in the day railroads, steel companies, logging companies etc all issued their own money for trade between employees. This is simply the unification of that under many corporaions guaranteeing that debt based currency with the work of those people in those corporations.

I hope you read all this. Then reread it. Then look some stuff up and reread.

Look at the whiskey rebellion and how farmers were first forced to pay in foreign unnecessary currency. Its all downhill from there.

Cant find first post so reposting for hope it makes it.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

We do manual approval on the site to filter out spam (all comments that aren’t literal spam are added to the site).

You gave me a ton to think about, so it wouldn’t be fair for me to give a quick response. As you say, I’ll have to read, re-read, and look up to do it justice.

Thanks for the insight, facts, and opinons!

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.


Freudian slip…. by Trump

G20 (g7 g8) companies uhhhh… countries Freudian slip by member speaker televised in 2014 i believe it was but not 100% on the date.

The group if companies…….uhhhh countries…..

Look into the group.

NGORadio on

If you say IT IS NOT A CORPORATION THEN WHY your unqualified judges help the thieves stealing people moneys and properties? People don’t trust your lies any more. Same games of enslavement.

Your top federal political players and local 50-states are coordinating the hidden scheme to steal/ collect our assets by perpetrating Wall Street Multiple Fraud in connection with your mortgage fraud. Then you appointed ignorant judges to help the corporations steal everything. This is not a land of freedom but a stole land of occupied Thieves of England.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

So again, I’ll state this more clearly 1. I am not “them,” I’m just a researcher trying to clarify the idea that the United States was turned into a corporation, and 2. Assuming some do want to continue a sort of global Britain based oligarchy, that is only one of many factions, and there are many factions in America (not to mention the world). The problems with lumping everyone into a category and deciding they are against you are too numerous to state… but at least one is that you alienate potential allies and push them toward whatever other side there is.

I think America’s founders had it right when they agreed to disagree Democratically and created a republic. This idea that a band of nationalists can crush the globalist agenda is like a mirror image of the WW2 ideologies. I can’t imagine that is really going to lead us to peace or anything a well intentioned person would want.

In other words, be skeptical, but think critically. If a loud mouth on the internet or some specific state tv channel tells you “it’s us versus them” try flipping the channel to at least hear the other perspective. But either way, try not to crucify me personally (gotta be a bit selfish here 😀 ).

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

One last thing to think about here. Initially the anti federalist and democrats of the late 1700 early 1800s were anti bank… but then they wanted an independent bank. Meanwhile the federalist, whigs, Republicans wanted a central national bank owned by the US. Likewise in these times the federalist right was protectionist and more for taxation, for debt, pro Britain, and the anti federalist left was more pro France, anti tax, against debt, and pro free trade.

However, after the civil war, and despite the federalist win in that battle what was done was not A or B… it was C. Then, by this time the somewhat changed democrats pushed for an independent within government fed and an income tax by 1916. This is really a mix of both past positions and it led to the us becoming a superpower in many ways (that paired with the wars which we didn’t have to fight on our soil, that was big).

One can’t be the world’s team America (trying to say stabilizing force politiely) without having bankers back them. And side note, Hitler found out you can’t even be a tyrant without a good banker you know.

Now if congress controlled the bank it would make $20 trillion of debt worth less… but having some secret backers who we all kind of can guess the general identities of, that gives that debt more weight and helps stabilize.

Same for the way treasury and the fed and the private banks work to create money. Seems shady if you don’t think about why that mixed system is necessary! What, you want congress in charge? Or just the private banks? There are only so many options here!

The nation is stabilized because of the way it is run…. and that allows the nation to stabilize. That also allows the nation to provide for the general welfare with things like Medicare.

This is really a compromise position between the left and right of old. It is unfair to take this “let’s kick out the Rothschilds” conspiracy minded view toward global finance and think you’ve figured it all out.

In fact, some who don’t like the us take this very position (in ww2 and today).

The world is complex, but it is a mistake to think the founders would not have democratically agreed on the choices we made by today had they lived long enough to see our options.

I didn’t even say half of what I have to say here, but simply put, the world is complex and doesn’t conform to one view that involves evil banks and some dream of agrarian democracy that involves winning some war against “the globalists”. That is to me just a front for those with bad intentions they use to mobilize the far left and right against American interests. The story works because it has merit, but it at the end of the day risks starting global conflict over an oversimplification of a longstanding issue.

Now again, that is my input from a researcher standpoint, not me trying to defend or dismiss and not me reading a script of some organization a conspiratorial person might assume I’m a part of because I disagree or put forth difficult propositions.

Just like, the subtext of the claim I’m debunking is I know rather heavy, so want to address it and qualify my addressing of it so we can all see this from the same frame for discussion (not accusation from high minded places).

Maggie on

I would ask what this Delaware corporation for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. Is? //

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Great question. There is 100% a United States of America, Inc. file number: 2193946.


The problem with this is that it is only one of many things called United States of America registered in the Delaware (and everyone registers everything in Delaware). This however does not imply that we don’t own our country or anything like that. I admit, it is bizarre. Certainly a call for more research. But this finding actually doesn’t even line up with the conspiracy theories….

It for example isn’t founded in 1871. I will research and let you know though.

And, that was fairly easy. There is a long list of corporations called THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I would reckon none are the secret owners of the US and this is just the sort of stuff that gets added to a conspiracy theory. Again, will keep researching though.


Stephanie Best on

Author’s Opinion:

TIP: Because D.C. is a central hub, in a great country, with a beneficial corporation law, many of the world’s most powerful corporations have the headquarters there. That does include the IMF and other international banks and businesses. Which, you know, is good for the country. What, would you rather their headquarters be somewhere else?

My two cents:

“Which, you know, is good for the country.”


This Country? Certainly not for its citizens. The IMF, International Banks, and The Federal Reserve are fleecing this Country AND its Citizens by creating perpetual debt equaling upon slavery for this and future generations.

This opinions based upon the notion that these Banking Entities are “good for the country”.

I realize that this is not the topic, however it stands to reason there is no right answer. It is only a matter of semantics within a legal argument about the definition of a ruling body of persons – corporations or otherwise – that is presided over by itself.

When one rules over another without obeying its own rules, it is called oppression.

Stephanie Best on

Please have a look at subsections 15 and 15(A) in Title 28 U.S. Code § 3002 and you should see this sentence, ““United States” means— (A) a Federal corporation”.

W on

Thomas DeMichele Thank you for approaching this topic with an open mind. Anything controversial worth knowing takes endless hours of research to reach a somewhat firm conclusion. I am glad you have chose to take this time. I don’t have the time to form an opinion yet. I did read this article which comes to the opposite conclusion //
I did just read an article today relevant to your view on WWII that I have had a little more time to investigate, and so lean towards it being true.
I think our concept of war is a lot different that what it actually is. You have read War Is A Racket by Major General Smedley Butler?

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Those are good links, and fully agree that anything worth knowing takes effort and research and an open mind… but on the links, while smart, they miss some of the concept of peace through world trade and enlightenment (it’s what the owl symbolizes essentially). The imagery is purposefully Greek, Egyptian, and Roman and the concept is that of enlightenment. It’s on the back of the dollar bill, and it helps explain everything that Alex jone’s version of the events would call “satanic.”

I’m not saying using the military as a stabilizing force or the international banks as such a force isn’t without its problems(smedely butler does a good job at explaining major sticking points of the military industrial complex for example), I’m only saying it is also misunderstood and likely kept from the public largely on purpose (due to its complexity).

Sure, securing economic interests isn’t always pretty or good, but if peace through trade is the idea, a dictator trying to take over private companies isn’t exactly the ideal. And if a war does occur, backing both sides is the best best bet for someone with a very long view of the future. It’s called hedging. Also, if you have a central bank, there are worse ideas than being accountable to someone other than the treasury that creates the money (third interests and independent within government makes more sense than one entity controlling monetary and fiscal policy). These things aren’t simple, but the logic is there if you look.

I don’t have time to explain my theories on the history of enlightenment and liberalism and it’s relation to banking, the wars, and the modern state. But I will simply point out, the nature of the forces behind the modern state, like the United States is a corporation myth, is being misunderstood. Phew, big subject and I can’t say it all here. But consider checking out the following video where David Rockefeller tries to explain what a new world order is (essentially it’s better than old world chaos and the history of war and oppression, which is the history of the world). You can quip and say, “well isn’t that the history of the new world too!?” But to that I would say, you are asking that question into your smartphone freely, because you live in a liberal country and have money and don’t have a king telling you what you can say. 😉


Walter M Reed on
Supports this as a Fact.

You’re not a very great researcher but I’m going to educate you!,go to the Fox News where representative Allen west of Florida;where he States the president is the Chief Executive Officer of this Corporation Called the United States of America and here in Florida and you can also go to Florida we’re all corporations have to register to do business in this state and its document number 1 0 0 0 0 9 (the United States Corporation company) also here is a case is 55 Supreme Court 50, 293 U.S. 84, h e l v e r i n g vs Stockholm’s enskilda bank United States District Court 1934 page 5 you can read the whole case if you like sir

Walter M Reed on

I’m Walter and if you want to know anything else?also we all havebeen living in the state of emergency for 63 years see senate report 93-549. they also Blended article 3 of The Constitution, art. 111 common law and Equity law in 1938 they blend those two with admiralty&martine in 1966 and made it a morality does call admiralty it statutory jurisdiction is only three jurisdictions in the Constitution they have the fourth one. Feel free to respond back to this message with questions.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Our team Removed some identifying information from this otherwise well intentioned comment.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Thanks for offering your insight. It will take a bit of time to go through each document listed.

In the meantime: I fully agree that entities incorporated in the United States are United States corporations. I fully disagree that the United States is a corporation owned directly by foreign banks. As summarized in the article.

Jason on

Why did your team remove information?
I feel slighted. The removal of information is more dangerous to us all than anything that could have possibly been left in. You have turned a great conversation about Liberty into a set up. Censoring a conversation on this topic can only be seen as a punch line.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I, the author of the site and editor (in many cases), removed identifying personal information from the comment. I didn’t remove anything of substance to the argument.

Does that make sense?

Speak freely. Just don’t post your personal info online 😉

John Barros on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

If it walks like a corporation, talks like a corporation, controlles a bunch of smaller corporations. Then it’s a corporation bottom line. You can justify it any way you like but that doesn’t change the facts. Blacks law dictionary says a corporation is an artificial person or LEGAL ENTITY created by or under the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare instances, of a single person and his successors, being the incumbents of a particular oltice, but ordinarily consisting of an association of NUMEROUS INDIVIDUALS, who subsist as a body POLITIC under a special denomination. it’s clear in the face if it, so why are you trying to convince people that the facts are not the facts? It’s like putting someone’s hand in water and saying “see, I told you it’s not wet”

Law Dictionary: What is CORPORATION? definition of CORPORATION (Black’s Law Dictionary)

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

If the argument is we meet the criteria of a corporation, I would submit that most nations do as well. I’m not rejecting that concept as much as I’m rejecting this idea that the articles that formed D.C. made the U.S. a literal corporation. I can’t find any proof that is the case, and when I read the documents it was clear to me that it was talking about incorporating D.C. and speaking to agencies being incorporated in the U.S.

In legislation definitions are not action items, they simply clarify what terms mean. From the best I can tell, the myth arises from a misreading of legal speak…

I’m helping someone work on legislation right now (as in in recent weeks), and I can tell you that definitions aren’t binding provisions themselves (and to the extent they are, as in the terms would be in the provision, that definition is still being read out of context).

John Barros on

I’m interested to know what you’re motivation is in regards to this topic. What are you attempting to accomplish by telling everyone that the government who has admitted to being a corporation somehow actually isn’t a corporation, they just look, act, and operate in a corporate fashion while literally controlling only other corporations including PEOPLE, which is why they need to print out birth cirtificates to use as collateral for unsecured debt and can only create joinder with its citizens after they have used instruments to convert them into unwitting corporations with all capital public trust names and social insurance numbers? Come on man! Wake up!

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I’m trying to figure out what the truth is.

The country may operate like a corporation in many respects, but it isn’t literally a corporation like the myth circulating around some internet articles suggests.

I feel like truth is important. We have an article on the U.S. as a corporatocracy, so it isn’t like we are being apologists here. It is just important that we don’t go making stuff up Alex Jones style when searching for the truth (where he finds truths and pairs them with pomp to sell supplements.)

Let’s find the truth, but let us not fill our bellies with internet supplements.


Jonnie on

Want proof the UNITED STATES is a Corporation. Just look at your official birth certificate, and back of your social security card. That red number is a bond number. Hence the reason your Certificate of life is printed on bond paper. The United States went bankrupt from the civil war and was in severe debt. They literally had nothing to offer except the citizens of this country. So they sold it to the international bankers who wanted a piece of this country to begin with. Congress as usual covers their own butts by incorporating D.C as its own entity, state, separating themselves from the rest of the states so they would not have to answer to any other country. This is where the changing of the constitition took place. The original constitution is worded and type faced completely different and that is NOT a typo. The original constitution is written: Constitution for the United States of America. The revised version that we are bound by is written as: Constitution of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. As soon as that deal was made, every living and born citizen assumed the debt of this country and our birth certificate is proof of that, its also why the same bond number is stamped on federal reserve notes. The act of 1871 was the largest bailout in history and the assets that were liquidated were you and I. We are still paying that debt today because people don’t know the truth, dont want to know, or simply don’t care.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That is a lot to chew on. Interesting concepts.

We do all owe our share of the national debt. And we didn’t become the most powerful nation on earth without a lending relationship with banks and a trade relationship with other countries. I mean, how can one borrow $20 trillion to support their growth if not for good relationships? And, why lend $20 trillion to a country whose citizen’s won’t pay it back?

Do you demonize your bank for the money you borrowed? I mean, I get the lure of it, but I don’t get the logic of it.

This is a many faceted issue I could discuss all day long… One thing I’ll say though is that I’m really not aware of a new Constitution. We have the old one, I posted a link to it, it is still binding, it still says Constitution for the United States of America. Literally you can read it on the .Gov archives site.

Now, I haven’t researched it, but the idea that a birth certificate is a bond seems not right. And indeed, a Google search tells me over and over its a conspiracy theory. Now, that isn’t good enough, we have to do our own research. But like: //

Kind of makes me feel like you have righteous frustration but are listening to Alex Jones (or someone like that) and not doing your due diligence to sincerely seek the facts. Let us both look a little harder to see if we can find the truth here. You just saying it isn’t good enough, and me just questioning it isn’t good enough. We need to find some proof one way or the other before we speculate further.

Jatom on

“We do all owe our share of the national debt.”

-No, only those who feel they do and that they in fact have a nation. I only owe what I directly pledge to other living souls not what has been pledged for me by strangers or companies with interests. I am not of a nation or company. I am of the world. Born on true land with made up borders and rules. These are not my borders or rules. In fact I find them repulsive. I find most human constructs mostly repulsive and against nature which is beautiful. Nationalism divides our commonality as earthlings and has us pick a superior stance over our equals in other nations. It is the cause of this disaster and those who wish to control will seize on the ignorant practice of team picking as long as there is ignorance. Once we see that these fictions are not “ours” unless we choose them to be we will find freedom. It is yours if you want it. Not mine. I don’t want it. Do not bind those who are free in your ties. Yours, not “ours”.

“And we didn’t become the most powerful nation on earth without a lending relationship with banks and a trade relationship with other countries.”

-Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
You and your like may have become the most powerful nation through organized deceit, fraud, terror and destabilization all by the most covert and overt means necessary to fulfill an agenda of profit and power. I am of no interest in power. Only truth. Anyone who concerns themselves with power is no friend of mine.

“I mean, how can one borrow $20 trillion to support their growth if not for good relationships? And, why lend $20 trillion to a country whose citizen’s won’t pay it back?”

-When one says “lend” do they mean to take something in which they actually have and let another borrow it or do they mean to create something which they do not have and then lend that to the other with interest and under the guise of actually having had the thing? All the while simultaneously creating 10 times the original un-possesed
amount of that which they never had and using this nothingness to perpetuate the scheme infinitely until…?

“Do you demonize your bank for the money you borrowed?”

Again with the assumptions. I have no bank because they operate on fraud. I do not participate with fraud therefore I do not use a bank. Anyone who does is fraudulent whether conscious or otherwise. So yes, I would “demonize” all entities involved with fraud because fraud is a behavior which is contrary to righteousness.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Your answers are well thought out. Remember though, I’m a guy running a website, I’m not the state or a bank. I’m just researching, writing, playing devil’s advocate, and giving people a place to speak their mind. I’m attempting to stay a neutral third party here… while also sharing my research and speaking my mind a little.

Stephen on
Supports this as a Fact.

Please read the Creature from Jekyll Island and all of you who think the United States is not a corporation with begin to get the full picture of how all this took place. Even very recently China; which holds the majority of our debt made a subtle move to declare our creditworthiness just before the historical fall of our stock market… proves that our so-called United States is dependent upon international bankers to stay afloat.

Dr. Wayne R. Hitchener, Ph.D. on

Individual laws, acts or statutes are created by representative assembly….over the decades, since our govt’s inception, many influential representatives have collectively thwarted constitutional restraints by the clever manipulation of court cases and reneged their personal honor and integrity by said actions. This is what has lead to our present millenial crises, not the supposed fact that the Organic Acts of 1801 or 1871 incorporated the United States as an hostile contractor of the states. Poor and deceptive leadership and the willing accomplice of wanton voters has caused our current woes. Attention to detail and scrutiny must begin with strong involvement of the body politic in the legislative process to slowly correct the abominations that we are suffering….we were presented with a Republic, now is the time to find a way to keep it and stop finger pointing.

Tom Kerr on

You must be a shill for the pseudo government to put out such a cruddy blog…if basically all you have to justify the fact the the US is not a corporation because it lacks citations of court cases, you are sadly misguided and are doing others a disservice.

There is a reason we are not taught in any fashion the history establishing the US as a corporation; there is a reason our social security number and each State in America is listed as stock on Dunn and Bradstreet and that registration for birth is not mandated for consensus but to establish persons as fictitious persons/mini corporations so that the big corporation disguised as the US government can interchange and force their corporate rules down our throat….You have a “strawman” (google it) and this strawman is what changes you from a person to a corporation. The US corporation a.k.a. US government does not have to reveal any citations to us the people…A corporation serves itself by its rules…it does not serve the people or feel the need for disclosure…
You have been deceived…We all have….but some of us know better not to mislead others into further ignorance….Get a clue..

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

1. Corporations are people… so even if you are a corporation you are a person. 2. If the U.S. is a corporation then it is a person. 3. If the U.S. is a person then… sorry, bad joke.

To your point though, I’m not “a shill.”

I just saw this idea that the U.S. was a corporation online and after reviewing the documents cited by those articles (cited on the page) realized people didn’t really seem to know what they are talking about. Or, more polity, didn’t understand the legal speak in the documents.

The documents, of which there is more than one, each with a different purpose, are things like articles of incorporation into the united states (where incorporated states and territories are “incorporated into the U.S., towns and cities are generally incorporated too in this way) and they do things like offer definitions of executive agencies and other entities as being part of the United States (in this article when it says THE UNITED STATES it means the US and any incorporated entities or agencies; so a town, the CIA, the EPA, this building the public owns, etc)… that sort of thing.

There may very well be a ton of shady things that happen in this world, but this theory is not one of them as far as I can tell. I am happy to review evidence, feel free to drop a link or to point out an aspect of the documents cited in the page that I missed.

I’m all ears, would love to hear grand theories of corporations and oligarchs using contractual language to turn the U.S. into some strange corporation like MrRobot or something, kind of what go me interested in the first place, it is just that it doesn’t seem to be true.

Not sure why people are so married to this idea? Again though, maybe I’m missing something. Feel free to prove me wrong.

– Not a schill

Anthony T on
Supports this as a Fact.


You never addressed Tom Kerr’s comments regarding the birth certificates and social security. I’d like to know your thoughts. I’d also like you to do as much research as you can on the history of birth certificates, all the way up to their inception. Please share your comments and thoughts on this.


Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I’ll have to research it. Will keep a note to do so and get back to you.

Joseph Ma on
Supports this as a Fact.

Sorry, but you kind of minced words here.. Granted it’s a complex and slightly technical issue. My understanding thus far is that you need to study commercial contract law to really get a handle on what the current U.S. gov. really is.

You also need to check the lesser known and untaught history of what Lincoln did after the civil war with regards to creating a new Corp. called the U.S.A. (confusing because he gave it the same name as the Republic, although some argue that the Republic was called “FOR America” instead of “OF America”.

The biggest proof though is that they are not denying they are a corporation at all, it’s just not spammed in the media or taught in school. You can check source material such as Black’s Law Dictionary (4th ed. is better for this), Government statutes and court case history. There’s also the Dunn and Bradstreet listings as someone else mentioned.

Sorry, but this is an incredibly important fact for people to know – that we have a corporation run out of the District of Columbia masquerading as the original Republic for their own benefit. This also ties in with how the Federal Reserve isn’t actually part of our government and is owned by foreign interests, i.e. we don’t print our own money!

Frankly this article is irresponsible in that it’s poorly researched and only tows the mainstream farce, and thus perpetuates an evolved and sophisticated debt slavery system…

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

The FED is independent within government entity that works with the treasury and banks as a sort of check and balance on the economy. One can make a case for this structure over a state bank, its not a simple issue. These entities are parts of the united states, the semi-public Fed and public treasury more so than private banks.

D.C. is “incorporated” into the United States (but it is not the same thing as being “a corporation.”) It follows some special rules, but they mostly have to do with arguments over voting.

I really don’t think the theories on the U.S. being a corporation are correct. In fact I would love to have someone here who understands commercial contract law help clarify some things. From what I know about legal speak I get the sense that this whole theory is wrong. It seems to me that it is misunderstandings of legal language that are causing the confusion, not expert understandings.

Certainly there is room to better understand everything here though. Glad we have a platform people can chat about it on. There is of course an absolute and truthful answer to be found!

Duncan Farris on
Supports this as a Fact.

The Federal Reserve is not an independent entity within government as you state. It is a privately held banking cartel. Do your research. Former Senator from Oklahoma, Tom Coburn, representing Convention of the States, speaking last year at the Idaho State Capital to members of that legislature and the community stated that members of the US Congress take an Oath to a constitutuon that weighs 73 lbs. and not to the Constitution for the united Sates.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Do you have a citation or something. I can literally go read the Constitution here: // and here: //

If I printed out a double spaced copy with an section on each page and amendment on each page I’d get a thicker document than I normally would… but I don’t see how I would get exactly 73 pounds.

I challenge anyone to show me this mythic imposter Constitution. If it did somehow exist, it would have no power over us, but I doubt its existence.

Troy on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

Thank you that was extremely informative.

Cmac on

I love it. Great exchange. I am researching, trying to figure out what side of the fence I’m on. Its interesting and i search for the truth.

David on
Supports this as a Fact.

” To paraphrase in common language the provision says: “United States” includes any federal corporation, agency, department, or instrument of the United States.” “In other words, when the document says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States, not that the “United States” is a corporation.”

According to the justices of Fed Sup Crt – YOU CANNOT paraphrase in common language what Congress has specifically defined ! YOU ARE NOT allow to ‘freely interpret’ a definition. The definition means what it says it mean – NOT what you think it might mean. The federal legal definition DOES NOT STATE ‘includes’ – it clearly states ‘MEANS’.

So in all JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE (Title 28) in all FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURES ( Chapter 176 ). So if the feds are collecting a tax debt for the United States, the term “United States” MEANS a collection for debt owed to a corporation.

David on

“The United States Government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.” Volume 20: Corpus Juris Secundum, (P 1785: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S.Ct. 1973, 41 L. Ed. 287)

“The laws of Congress in respect to those matters do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia , and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government.” Catha v United States , 152 US , at 215

David on

Oh yeah, one other item;

28 U.S. Code § 1746 – Unsworn declarations under penalty of per­jury [it lists both the United States and United States of America. And remember UNITED STATES has already been defined for Title 28 as a Federal Corporation. ]

Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:

(1)If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(2)If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature)”. U.S. Code § 1746 – Unsworn declarations under penalty of per­jury

#$*#(&$#( Pissed at your Ignorance on

Fine #$#%#$#, “The District Of Columbia”
Is a %#%#$# corporation.
& No It doesn’t have anything to do with Christopher Columbus!
It’s the Goddess “Columbia”

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

May lady Columbia ease your anger my child and show you the light. 😀

Actually what you say is not correct. Lady Columbia is an American made national icon based on figures like Athena and Lady Britannia. There was no Goddess named Columbia until we made her up (or, more specifically took Athena and the other old Gods like her and repurposed and rebranded them).

The name really does come from Columbus, cartographers used his name to refer to the New World because it didn’t have a name yet.

See; // and //

Feel free to offer a citation if I am missing something. The above is though what I found in my research.

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.

Actually “lady liberty” is the harlot of babylon. USA is the new Babylon for some.

Lady liberty is also known as ISIS, Semarimis, Ashtor (Easter), Astarte, etc.

Originally would have held a chalice, but was given the torch by lucifarian freemason intervention aka the light bearer or light bringer. Interesting.

Also, look the the roofs of certain state and federal buildings for interesting statues.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Interesting take.

Philosophically speaking, I think bringing the light is a good thing though for a country founded on the principles of enlightenment

That said, to the extent that a chalice has positive symbolism of bringing wisdom (to phrase it simply), that would have been a cool symbol too.

Light makes more sense though since the Lady Liberty is sort of guiding the way.

I’d always though seen Lady Liberty and Columbia as versions of Athena, Lady Britannia, etc… just a type of national icon for a state.

Ivan bradshaw on
Supports this as a Fact.
Ivan bradshaw on






Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Well yeah, but those are companies registered in Delaware (like so many companies) who have odd names. None of those are the United States.

I think I explained this in another part of the page.

The first one on the list is an LLC from 2008 registered to Spiegel & Utrera, P.A. as a marketing ploy. So not a secret society of European bankers, but some law firm who can help you create LLCs with a crummy website. //

And so it goes.

NOTE: I am not making fun of anyone for getting worried about this, I had to dig through each one to confirm… but if there is a conspiracy, this is not the place to look. It is rather one of the things that made me realize we were all barking up the wrong tree here. Or if we aren’t, we are at least looking at evidence that isn’t the evidence we are looking for.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

D.C., like any city, state, or town is a municipal corporation, not a corporation like Walmart. //

It is INCORPORATED like most cities, towns, states it is not UNINCORPORATED like some cities, towns, and states. See above where I explain people not understanding the meaning of the word incorporated.

NOTE: Again let me stress this, I read the same internet rumors you all did. I just went through their evidence and found that they were presenting the stuff we are discussing as “hard evidence”… but almost all of that, when you really dig, is totally not right and it is like these points we are covering here. I love finding out truth, but for that reason I find it annoying that people present this stuff as evidence without really taking the time to look at it. It sort of feels like they are purposefully manipulating people. And isn’t that what we don’t want, to be lied to and manipulated? Sorry, tangent. Just making a point 🙂

Gene on

The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.


Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I read that as: If I live in the State of New York, federal agencies within the state are considered domestic corporations, but the Federal Government itself is a foreign corporation in respect to my state.

Here again the term corporation is being used in a confusing way. It isn’t, as far as I can tell, implying that a Federal Agency or the Federal Government is a corporation like Walmart, it is implying it is incorporated under a set of laws (one such set of laws being the Constitution).

So its more like a comment on the separation of powers (federalism specifically). The argument being between the rights of the individual in respect to the state of NY and the United States itself (this case is about the rights to the estate of a person named Merriam from what I can tell).

At least that is what I’ve gleaned from the blog and the corresponding document: //

Not saying this is exactly the right interpretation, but am pretty sure this is the gist.

Amure' on

Does Dunn & Bradstreet numbers identify “Commercial Entities” Thomas? (“State of New York”-D&B#041002973)

In all of my efforts, I could never get any prosecuting attorney to give the reference to Z.I.P. Codes identifying a republic, Could you help them please?….

Amure' on

Correction- I meant in the previous post>”Entities within a Republic or associated to a Republic identified via Z.I.P. Codes”(Please give the lawful reference)

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.

A corporation is a corporation is a corporation. Literally there is no difference between your incorporated municipality and walmart.

Dont believe me? How does a city have an entity? How can it hire employees? Does it operate on solely federal reserve notes?

Look at police. They must be trained to state corporate standards. They give up constitutional rights when hired. They are hired to carry out the demands of the corporation only, enforcing the laws of the corporation is their job, not your safety or protection. You must obtain an “order of protection ” to qualify for police protection.

Corporate police only have licensed jurisdiction within their own corporate limits. They do not exist in unincorporated places. They issue fines only to legal strawmen in federal reserve notes.

If you refuse federal reserve notes, and reject the system, no court will have jurisdiction because you must consent to this.

You state you are just learning. You should not be stating what you think you know and contributing to the misinformation. Its like the blind leading the blind in this article.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Interesting. It sounds reasonable that if most towns and states are incorporated in that sense, that we should not make the distinction between a municipal corporation, being incorporated into the United States, and Walmart (meaning there is no point in making a distinction between: //, //, and // If all those are corporations, then the U.S. being a corporation in the same sense seems reasonable.

But these “corporations” are controlled by those we elect directly (and those they appoint and hire). And thus, the idea is that they would carry out the will of the people using the entity. The people have direct and indirect control of both the federal and state governments. No? This then just sounds to me like the technical structure of a federal democratic republic.

This is different than the U.S. is a corporation owned by foreign bankers due to the Organic acts of D.C. (or whatever is implied here: //

I’m happy with the truth, whatever that is, even if it is nuanced and I am partly or wholly wrong.

And you are right, I do not know for sure. This isn’t “a not for sure” site, this is a “take a claim research, find the best answer based on research, discuss, get to the bottom of it, refine the page over time, and get it right” site.

The aim is to make this page the least blind page on the internet, but I can’t more than I can do. I’ll take your ideas and research them and see how and if I can properly amend the page.

Michael Schnitzer on

Isn’t incorporating the process of forming a corporation? so when someone uses inc after thier corporation name, it means thier corporation has been incorporated into a corporation. or am I missing something? I do not know if the us government is a corporation or not but it sure does worship money, greed, power and control.

I saw a website a few years ago where the u.s government, the crown and all the other governments of the world where registered and listed as corporations. I forgot what that website was but I am sure it was a u.s government agency website. I do not remember so I can not say for sure.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Well some worshiping worship money, greed, power and control and literally being a corporation except Walmart owned by shadowy bankers are not the same thing.

The conspiracy theory (if we can call it that, not trying to dismissive) sort of asserts that the Constitution is invalid and bankers took over the United States and turned it into a literal corporation.

That is different from the semantics of can we call “incorporated” under the governing document of the Constitution being a “corporation.”

Amure' on

Do Walmart use/have a commercial identifying Dunn & Bradstreet number as the other “State of’s” in North America Thomas?

Michael Schnitzer on

The Act of 1871 established the District of Columbia and the federal government/corporation. All the people that have their domicile in Washington D.C and whom where born in Washington D.C are U.S citizens. Almost everyone who lives in America today are U.S citizens because The federal government/corporation which
was created by the Act of 1871 expanded its so called jurisdiction in all of the States via lies, fraud and force, for an example telling parents that they need to get a social security number for their kids. When in fact according to the social security act only employees of the government can get a ssn!

It seems to me you are mixing an incorporated City or Town with a Compact (which is a contract). The US constitution is a compact (contract), not a (in)corporation! Washington dc/The federal government was not created / incorporated by the land/homeowners in the area (this is the definition of incorporation). No, Washington dc was created by congress by the Act of 1871. There is no way you can incorporate the federal government like you can incorporate a city or town.

Now there is a compact as I mentioned earlier. A compact is a contract where you consent to follow the compact/contract.

Michael Schnitzer on

on the other, all governments are corporations via charters and the consent of the government’s employees and public officers. The point I was trying to make is that the government dupes everyone into becoming u.s citizens and public officers.

Zeik on

“U.S. Declares Bankruptcy!”
Ten years to the day of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Obama made the announcement to the General Assembly of the United Nations that the United States was filing for bankruptcy and for the protection provided in the Chapter 11 provisions of the United States Bankruptcy Code.

Power to the people. on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

This person misrepresented all facts

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

You mean me the author? I don’t think so. I wrote this page mostly as a response to the pages previously online which I have concluded from research themselves misrepresented the facts. But everyone gets to check out the research and documents and make their own call. I’m not trying to get people to think one way or the other, just sharing what I found.

VDC on

How about them passing off the fact that corporations are people a few years ago?

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Yeah, that is an odd one. That is real. So interesting note, if the United States is a corporation… Then it is a person. What are the implications of that? And, if foreign bankers own the U.S., then is it a slave? Can people truly own corporations if people can’t own people? Lots of interesting things to think about here. If slavery is illegal, then no one can own corporations. Also, should not a corporation therefore pay the ordinary income tax? Hmmm… gotta love how logic is selectively applied.

Stewart of the royal house on
Supports this as a Fact.

Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371 1942:
“Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation, and take
on the characteristics of a mere private citizen. as mere corporations,
private commercial paper, negotiable instruments, bonds, securities, notes,
entities total separate from Government, the fact is, fiat money removed the
government right to be sovereign, STATES contract with U.S.corporation
removed its 11th amendment right, leaving The People the only sovereign
in this Country. Res judicata stare decisis

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I can’t find this excerpt on any credible website.

I’m finding the case, but not the quote. //

It is a Court Case about a check from J.C. Penny. Would be strange if this was the smoking gun. Who knows though?

Stewart on

check congressional records and actual and compleat case law
(1861) congress sine die adjournment, dissolved their political platform
government stoped, and in (1865) resumed in name only, its a shell, only by
virtue of the continuing operations, with the implied power of that shell,
their using any unmasked energy that they get from the People, to turn into
war machines, there by to beckon, to attack back at the People which are
funding the attack against themselves, this is the perfection of the
operation of the act, congress implied power (1871) to turn congress into a
board of directors to promote the bankrupt U.S.service company, the
investors wanted their investment back for the civil-war, in (2018) We The
People are still paying for that war through the 14th amendment which was
only meant for exslaves, immigrants, employees of federal corporate called
government in (1871), today its a unam sanctam corporation passing ACTs.
There are no federal or state laws, what there is today is unam sanctam
agt abilene policies/codes of another country a foreign power. In
(1912-1913) unam sanctam steped-up its game in the middle of the night the
night before christmas the president and a couple congressmen brought in the
federal corporate “federal reserve bank” the FRB is not-federal it has no-
reserves and its not a bank, its subsidiaries the treasury like the FRB and
the IRS are private foreign corporations here to steal are substance and to
continue the fraudulent ACTs/bills.
Be cognitive to the fact that this is not lost on congress or and the
Presidents or senators the fact that congress, money, legal color, land,
banks, deal in or are all fiat, not real its been stolen by foreigners, they
all operate in name only just the way unam sanctam likes it. Its not the
lord that did this, it was the lord governors of london the BAR own by the
Vatican, the Vatican and the Crown are Banks with real money, “ours”. A
morgage is a dead plege to the dead entity called a person/legal person, is
no-loans because theres no-money, only offset and discharge, just another
way to steal Our engery, theres no-money, before FRB (1913) everybody owned
allodial title today no-one has allodial title nobody owns the land the
house sits on they stolen all under a trust and their the trustees “not-Us”
turning all into sharecropper’s

Michael Schnitzer on

Read the definition of person in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a). a person includes corporations!

sdfdsf on
Supports this as a Fact.

(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;

said unequivocally United States is a corporation. It does not imply “United States” consists of corporation(s).
A means a B, implies A is a B; does not imply A consists of B(s)
It is ridiculous to say otherwise.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

It is not ridiculous, as I’ve explained… you are citing a definition that you are interpreting incorrectly. It means “in this legal document when we say United States we are referring to and all of the following.

Ask someone who knows legal speak to interpret this for you and see what they say.

Alex on

I think that you don’t have a fundamental understanding as to the differences between Natural Law and positive law. Also its not Title 28 USC § 3002 its Title 28 USCA § 3002 (15) (a). That statute is not subject to interpretation it states verbatim and unequivocally that “the United States is a Federal Corporation”. It is then again reaffirmed in Volume 19 Corpus Juris Secundum § 843 which states “the Untied States is a Foreign Corporation with respect to a state”. You don’t understand the that there has been created a fictional Federal “State within a state”. See Howard v. Sinking Fund of Lousisville, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S. Ct. 465, 476, 97 L. Ed. 617 (1953); Schwartz v. O’Hara TP. School Dist., 100 A. 2d. 621, 625, 375 Pa. 440. (Compare also 31 C.F.R. Parts 51.2 and 52.2), which also identify a fictional State within a state.) This fictional “State” is identified by the use of two-letter abbreviation like “CA”,”AZ” and “TX”, as distinguished from the authorized abbreviation like “Calif”. Also, the Organic Act of 1871 didn’t change America into a Corporation it merely established a dejure quasi Corporation called the United States. Further, a “Citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT (Public Charitable Trust), the constructive, cestui que trust of the US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc.” Congressional Record, June 13 1967, pp. 15641-15646. “It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 – Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States
Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal
Government exists today in name only” United States Congressional Record Daily March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303. ” The state citizen is immune from any and all government attracts and procedure, absent contract.” see, Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly,”… every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institution formed by his fellowmen without his consent.” CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 2 S.E. 70. In conclusion “The People” does not include U.S Citizens” Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S 243 you cannot use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it Padelford Fay & CO. v. The Mayor and Aldreman of the City of Savannah 14 Goergia 438, 520. I look forward to your responce.

Legal Maxim – The law which governs corporations is the same as that which governs individuals [godless entities]

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I appreciate your response. A lot to look over and research before I would have anything meaningful to say. But I will look and thank you.

David Higgs on

Great topic, thanks for the article.

Wherein lies the confusion is that all law and then the acts, codes, statutes and case that support public policy exist completely in the abstract, as no citizen, state, or idea of a country can ever own or have true ownership (allodium) of land i.e. corporeal hereditaments… IMPOSSIBLE!

All public law only governs those created in fee simple and thus public law can only ever govern incorporeal hereditaments – the abstract.

In fact all governments were created through a split title so to manage the waste created while their fee simple corporations (citizens) extracted resources from the donor’s condition precedent (right to a trust) in the land.

Without the knowledge expressed in Coke upon Littleton, the Maitland papers, Blackstone’s Commentaries, Magna Charta (1925 version ratified common law), Domesday book (1087), Statute of Uses (1525), Bill of Middlesex, (1556 -1608), Ann 6 ch.18 (affidavit to remove from fee simple), Law of Mortmain (1279 & 1290), Judicature Acts of the 1870’s… &c, you will continue to gain your mind exercise on the made-for-public hamster wheel.

You cannot interpret law using the same mind that created the law. Justinian rules were established, Cambridge & York Universities were erected so to understand how to operate (work within) the laws of a corporation.

The criminal act from which all English law evolved was in 1066 and since that time, now time immemorial, no one has ever corrected this initial criminal act and as such English law was created therefrom.

If you think that every person does not operate as a legal person (an artificial entity), created by an act of law, then it is b/c you have yet discovered why public law (policy) was created.

FOR GREATER CERTAINTY everyone who is construed to be a citizen of a country, they are in fee simple therefore bound to pay for the right of use of things. This use, originating through an act of law, created a trust whereby all possessions are placed into a cestui que trust which ONLY gives the right of use & a possession to these things.

The law that governs use is equity. Until a citizen returns to his true status, through reversion, and a writ of release from the corp person, he will remain a slave to his own ignorance which believes that the country he resides (Law of Domicle) or the identification he uses identifies real things. IT DOES NOT… IMPOSSIBLE!

Ayi A'a Re on

Since the Act of 1871 which established the District of Columbia, we have been living under the UNITED STATES CORPORATION which is owned by certain international bankers and aristocracy of Europe and Britain.

In 1871 the Congress changed the name of the original Constitution by changing ONE WORD — and that was very significant as you will read.

Some people do not understand that ONE WORD or TWO WORDS difference in any “legal” document DO make the critical difference. But, Congress has known, and does know, this.

1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.

With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).

The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America.

Michael Schnitzer on

Here is another thing for you to think about:
“A corporation is a citizen, resident, or inhabitant of the
state or country by or under the laws of which it was
created, and of that state or country only.”
[19 Corpus Juris Secundum (C.J.S.), Corporations, §886

Stewart on

The United States is a District of Columbia corporation.
In Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. § 1785 we find
“The United States government is a foreign
corporation with respect to a State”
(see: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441
S. 0.1973, 14 L. Ed. 287).
Since a corporation is a fictitious “person”
(it can not speak, see, touch, smell, etc.),
theres many laws stating us is a corooration
it can not, by itself, function in the real world.
It needs a conduit, a transmitting utility, a
liaison of some sort, to “connect” the fictional person,
& fictional world in which it exists, to the real world.

Michael Schnitzer on

Stewart, I know! citizens, residents, or inhabitants ( our name in all capital letters) of the us corporation/ federal zone that we always hear and which we are always called by the government/law enforcment officers are government created corporations.

Mike on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

I don’t understand people who are so eager to believe conspiracy theories. I guess facts don’t matter. For some reason there has to be some awful conspiracy for everything. It is disruptive and polarizing and harms this country.

Scholar on
Supports this as a Fact.

It is a fact that there is now a United States Corp apart from what was once legal.

You can see this by joining the military for instance. The military is not governed by the constitution, you sign away your freedoms by enlisting, something you do when hired by a corporation. The constitution enshrined god given rights which cannot be taken away, but if you join the current military, you’ll soon see the socialist indoctrination at its face. The constitution says no standing armies. Right now we have multiples and even the state militias are tampered with through the “national guard.”

A sovereign entity like the United States in Congress Assembled, cannot be sued. The fact that the US can be party in any lawsuit is a direct show that they are in fact the corporation and not the sovereign entity. You can not be sued in court without having a social security number or birth certificate. You also cannot be sued for anything other than federal reserve notes.

You simply have to, as with all things, follow the money. Look into what happened after the revolution with gold payments from north Carolina. Look into the actual causes for the Civil war, which is corporate domination, followed by establishing laws about the cost of the Civil war debt being paid back to those several wealthy families, and about the subsequent default of the entire nation to those families, resulting in the gold seizure from citizens to pay them back, and the creation of the federal reserve corporation to run our money. We didn’t have constitutional money again until 1986 with the silver eagles and golden dollars being issued again.

Still you can buy 20 corporate federal reserve notes with 1 true US dollar dominated in 1 ozt silver.


Anywhere that only accepts federal reserve notes is part of the corporation. If they don’t have any plan to accept silver, they’re part of the corporation.

Indeed the US admiralty flag, with gold fringe, is of the corporation. Indeed your vehicle registration and drivers licenses are granted for corporate use, not private. You don’t need a drivers license or registration to travel, only to do so for profit or in conjunction with a corporation.

Its clear that the author of this article has not looked at the facts and points to references distorted by bad interpretation.

The USCC, the United States Commercial Code, was created because of a Comnerce Clause in the Constitution which was only meant to regulate trade between state governments, not private citizens. This commerce clause was a precursor to saying how no states may form their own independent unions or confederations which could subvert power from the newly created “f”ederal goverment (little f emphasized as not yet a corporation).

Basically now at birth because of the great depression and the selling out of our country and its default to those families, we are given corporate fictions at birth, in the form of social security and birth certificates. Those legal strawmen are whats used by the IMF who control the IRS, to determine Standard Drawing Rights aka SDR from the international world bank.

Basically i could write several books before even scratching the surface. No one but you can check the facts and think for yourself. Just follow the money, or the fake money.

Brian Wilkes on
Supports this as a Fact.

Its ironic whether i believe this or not, the system is broken because anytime your 21 trillion dollars in debt who cares if were incorporated or not. The people are not being properly represented. Our elected officals fight to stay in office sometimes for years and for what reasons..Answer that for yourself….

Paschal on

Your interpretation as stated above:

“When 28 U.S. Code § 3002 says “United States” it means all corporations owned by the United States (any “federal corporation”), not that the United States is itself a corporation.”

However, it seams to me, that this definition is clearly stating that the United States is a Federal corporation that is an entity of the United States…

U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part VI › Chapter 176 › Subchapter A › § 3002
28 U.S. Code § 3002 – Definitions
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

John on

Its still a Nazi nation going to sh$#* due to corruption and a few wealth scumbags the sheeple support. Idiot aMErika.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I’d say this, very few things are black and white. There is a lot of negatives to be frustrated with, I mean why do we have this crushing student debt and people in Flint drinking lead on one hand and then tax breaks for those who don’t need them on the other?

Still, there are also a lot of good people trying to do the right thing, and even some people who aren’t doing what we might consider the right thing are doing what they do with what to them is good intentions.

World is a complex place, takes effort to make it better and sometimes you have to squint to see the good things so you can remember what you are fighting for.

John on

My comment is being monitored ? that confirms my first comment and truth.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Everyone’s comment gets checked to see if it is spam. It is the internet, people like to spam websites.

We don’t censor anything and will post anything short pure hate speech and spam.

Keith L Kennedy on

Every time you claim “myth”, the words ‘United States’ are spelled in lower case. NOT ONCE, do you proclaim, “THE UNITED STATES is not a corporation”, because it is. Correctly, The United States is not. Therefore, this is misleading at best; either by omissive deliberation, or outright subversion. It falls into the maligned definition of propaganda – a point of view – but in this case, a Pied Piper’s fable.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

It is not subversion, I am saying that this whole idea is in my opinion a myth. So I’m saying the UNITED STATES, United States, united states, etc is a republic of states bound by a Constitution and not a corporation created in 1880s or whatever.

You can see that people disagree and put forth their own theories. I would read through everything and do your own research. I could be wrong.

Here is my theory on everything: 1. whatever is the case is the case (even if we can’t or don’t know what is the case), 2. we should try to understand what is the case to the best of our ability, 3. it helps to research and share information so we can better understand what is the case.

Marc on
Supports this as a Fact.

Thomas DeMichele,

Good argument, to which I wholeheartedly disagree. USC 28’s comment below has a lot of real valuable information.

Simply enough, the creation of the Federal government is defined as a trust. Though there are many forms of trusts, Corporations are a form of a trust which has Presidents, Secretaries, treasurer, etc. Trusts, the trustees, beneficiaries, etc, need not be made public. We do have a Federal Corporation registry, but all trusts that act like a Corporate trust need not be registered.

The US Supreme Court has stated in numerous cases the several definitions of “United States”
The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign* occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends, or [3] it may be the collective name of the states*** which are united by and under the Constitution.
[Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)]

Also cited by Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, in its definition of “United States”:
“United States. This term has several meanings. [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in family of nations, [2] it may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends, or [3] it may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, U.S. Ohio, 324 U.S. 652, 65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 89 L.Ed. 1252.”

The second definition is the one in which the Congressional power has under Article 1 Sect. 8 the powers to do business as a corporate like trust. It does have all the same pieces of a corporate trust. It can create entities over which it has sovereign power. All UCC entities, all (new after 13th Amendment) US Citizens fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the 2nd definition “United States.” It can enter contracts which affect itself and its owned entities in a manner which is not required to pass Constitutional tests.

As the 2nd definition United States, it cannot enter contracts which effect the PEOPLE of the 50 states who are not an owned entity. They can only do this through Constitutional acts which are a whole different behavior, bringing Constitutional Treaties, or Constitutional Amendments, or Positive Public Law (not just public law). Much of the public law created is done in a manner which affects only owned entities. For example, Obamacare (ACA) passed Constitutional tests because it is only enforced against “persons” who claim to be US Citizens or federal corporations (those who are taxpayers). There are several laws passed which they run through the IRS system in order to stay Constitutionally sound. Taxpayers by definition either are an owned entity of Congress (eg. Registered Corporation, States doing business with the Federal Government, a US Citizen) or consent to be an owned entity (a foreign people like People of one of the states who signs the perjury statement on IRS tax forms, who otherwise is not a US Citizen) for the purposes of paying taxes. The perjury statement on the IRS tax forms is one of two types used by the government. One is for entities who are inside the Federal Jurisdiction “United States” and one which is for those who are without the Federal jurisdiction. This jurisdiction is not a territorial. IRS forms are for those who are within Federal jurisdiction.

The long and the short of it is, the United States government truly acts as a corporate trust much of the time under definition #2, with much of its interaction being commercial in nature. Whether it has a federal EIN or is publicly registered is immaterial as any trust can remain partially or fully private. It can also act as though it is not a corporate trust, as in a government, by the people for the people. Really wish more people knew this information so we could hold them to be the latter.

Greg Riley on

The word “federal” is misleading, obviously. This in turn, creates an allusive nut and shell game.
I would also like to point out that the lost art of critical thinking may have well been hijacked in modern America as conspiracy theory.
I suggest a reaction has been successfully programmed into our psyche. Perhaps reflection prior to casting others with this dismissive tactic could serve useful. Although, I am no scholar by any means. Enlightening article and discussion.
Godspeed in good deeds!

J on
Supports this as a Fact.

This totally blows this aspect of the sovereign citizen argument out of the water. Good work.

STEPHAN C ZUPP (strawman) on

Nice try. But you aint foolin noIbody.
Try reading The Global Soveriegn Handbook

Tim Wiseman on
Supports this as a Fact.

Whomever debunked this so called myth does not have reading comprehension skills needed to weigh in on this article,that’s my opinion .

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Your opinion is noted, it would be stronger if you offered examples. 😉

Yoshi on
Supports this as a Fact.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it must be a ducking truck?

I see you have only supported facts that U.S. means a federal corporation, others have posted other citations on the subject matter. Foreign federal corporation, business is to tax corporations, federal can only deal in commerce, etc. etc.. etc…

Show me the document/code/statute/Act/ or any other paper that IS enacted into their corporate ponzi scheme employee handbook that says U.S. is NOT a corporation.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Asking for evidence of absence is kind of a BS thing. It is like saying “show me proof that the state Connecticut isn’t a transformer.” None exists, as it isn’t and thus there is no official document stating everything the state of Connecticut isn’t.

I am fine with being wrong on this whole issue, I just don’t find any of the proofs I have seen compelling. The most compelling things I have read are some of these comments, but it hasn’t fully changed my mind.

Jay Atkin on

One must point out you are citing Federalism and supremacy of the Federal government over the States. This is simply not truth.
When you create something, you are it’s Creator, it’s Master. We the People are Sovereign, equal to any Sovereign in the world. We created the colonies which then became sovereign Nation/States recognized by King George and his progeny inadfinitum. The States then created the Federal gov to serve them and their needs via the AofC/Constitution. Only the delegated powers in Article 1 Section 8 are allowed to the Federal gov. All else is either expressly forbidden(Article 1 Section 9) or reserved to the States and the People(9th and 10th Amendments).
Thus, the Federal government is NOT above the States. The statutes(which are not defined in Black’s law dictionary as law) are applicable to only Federal employees or Federal assets, which the 14th Amendment turned the slaves and U.S. citizens into.
Common Law/Common Sense
We the People/Kings and Queens of the world
Aof C/Constitution
Laws in pursuance to this Constitution
Federal Gov
Legislative, judicial, executive, citizens grand jury

Post 14th Amendment-
Common Law/Common Sense
Fed gov
Branches of Gov
Statutes/federal laws
We the people(U.S. citizens)

Jay Atkin on
Supports this as a Fact.

Curious if my comment did come through?
And thanks for this article. Good job!! It is through sharing and research that we reawaken our fellow sovereign American Nationals.
It IS quite the “can of worms”.
Research we in the Continental Congress of 2009 have done, does support the attempted theft of our Republic and assets by European powers in the time following the “Civil War”. But remember, NO fraud can stand when the “contracts” are not known or fully understood by ALL parties involved. That makes ANY CONTRACTS citing American national debt void.
International law of the Sea(Maritime Law) MUST reflect Common Law. Hence why the current DoJ uses Statutory as their label. They don’t want people enforcing Common Law in these unjust courts.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Both comments are posted, we approve comments manually to filter out spam. All legitimate comments are welcome regardless of their content.

Robin on
Supports this as a Fact.

Really? Because blacks law dictionary defines it as a corporation.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I think you are referring to this? // AND //

The more I read about this the more sure I am right in my original conclusion and that the rest is like an elaborate flat earth theory.

A United States is a concept that was around before we began to call ourselves the United States of America. It is for example used in the classic that inspired Madsion “the Spirit of the Laws.”

= It is difficult for the united states to be all of equal power and extent. The Lycian* republic was an association of twenty-three towns; the large ones had three votes in the common council, the middling ones two, and the small towns one. The Dutch republic consists of seven princes of different extent of territory, which have each one voice. = //

Also, I’m going to reassert that my position is that the US, United States, America, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, a US citizen, a United States Citizen, a Citizen of a state, etc are all in reference to the same and only United States of America and that the seat of this government is in DC which is not a state but is part of the United States as confirmed by its Organic acts (and that taxes are Constitutional, and that aside from the interest owed to the FED and the general way the system works… bankers don’t own our nation in any meaningful way, etc).

Happy to hear counter arguments, but I think the more I hear the more sure I am that this whole thing is a complex conspiracy theory.

Yusef El on

You do not understand the difference between UNITED STATES and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. UNITED STATES is a legislative democracy that receives it plenary power from Article I Section 8 CLause 17 of the constitution. UNITED STATES CITIZEN is subject to this legislative democracy as is all congressional created instrumentalities.

One need only look at the word “Citizen” before the 14th amendment (Proper Noun) and “citizen” after the 14th amendment “common noun,” to see where the deception lies. The deception is instituted through the use of grammar.

The Supreme Court has officially defined the key term “United States”
to have three separate and distinct meanings:

(1) It may be the name of a sovereign occupying the position of other
sovereigns in the family of nations.

(2) It may designate the limited territory over which the sovereignty
of the federal government extends.

(3) It may be the collective name for the fifty States which are
united by and under the U.S. Constitution.

(1) United States* or U.S.* (first meaning)
The name of the sovereign Nation, occupying the position of other
sovereigns in the family of nations.

(2) United States** or U.S.** (second meaning)
The federal government and the limited territory over which it
exercises exclusive sovereign authority.

(3) United States*** or U.S.*** (third meaning)
The collective name for the States united by and under the
Constitution for the United States of America.

Yusef El on

Before the 14th amendment [sic] in 1868:

… [F]or it is certain, that in the sense in which the word “Citizen” is
used in the federal Constitution, “Citizen of each State,” and “Citizen of
the United States***,” are convertible terms; they mean the same thing; for
“the Citizens of each State are entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of
Citizens in the several States,” and “Citizens of the United States***” are,
of course, Citizens of all the United States***.
[44 Maine 518 (1859), Hathaway, J. dissenting]
[italics in original, underlines & C’s added]

After the 14th amendment [sic] in 1868:
It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States**
and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other and which
depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual.
[Slaughter House Cases, 83 U.S. 36]
[(1873) emphasis added]

The first clause of the fourteenth amendment made negroes citizens of the
United States**, and citizens of the State in which they reside, and thereby
created two classes of citizens, one of the United States** and the other of
the state. [Cory et al. v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327]
[(1874) headnote 8, emphasis added]

We have in our political system a Government of the United States** and a
government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is
distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own ….
[U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542]
[(1875) emphasis added]

One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States.
Thomasson v. State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v. Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R.
738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443.
[McDonel v. State, 90 Ind. 320, 323]
[(1883) underlines added]
The Federal Zone:

A person who is a citizen of the United States** is necessarily a citizen of
the particular state in which he resides. But a person may be a citizen of a
particular state and not a citizen of the United States**. To hold otherwise
would be to deny to the state the highest exercise of its sovereignty, — the
right to declare who are its citizens.
[State v. Fowler, 41 La. Ann. 380]
[6 S. 602 (1889), emphasis added]

The first clause of the fourteenth amendment of the federal Constitution made
negroes citizens of the United States**, and citizens of the state in which
they reside, and thereby created two classes of citizens, one of the United
States** and the other of the state.
[4 Dec. Dig. ’06, p. 1197, sec. 11]
[“Citizens” (1906), emphasis added]
There are, then, under our republican form of government, two classes of
citizens, one of the United States** and one of the state. One class of
citizenship may exist in a person, without the other, as in the case of a
resident of the District of Columbia; but both classes usually exist in the
same person.
[Gardina v. Board of Registrars, 160 Ala. 155]
[48 S. 788, 791 (1909), emphasis added]

There is a distinction between citizenship of the United States** and
citizenship of a particular state, and a person may be the former without
being the latter.
[Alla v. Kornfeld, 84 F.Supp. 823]
[(1949) headnote 5, emphasis added]

A person may be a citizen of the United States** and yet be not identified or
identifiable as a citizen of any particular state.
[Du Vernay v. Ledbetter]
[61 So.2d 573, emphasis added]

… citizens of the District of Columbia were not granted the privilege of
litigating in the federal courts on the ground of diversity of citizenship.
Possibly no better reason for this fact exists than such citizens were not
thought of when the judiciary article [III] of the federal Constitution was
drafted. … citizens of the United States** … were also not thought of;
but in any event a citizen of the United States**, who is not a citizen of
any state, is not within the language of the [federal] Constitution.
[Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914]
[emphasis added]

Marshb on

I actually remember the day that I was studying in the law library, reading through the federal code annotated, and coming upon the portion that declares the “United States of America” to be a corporation and it’s (c)itizens a “franchise there-of.” Of course, as a child fond of explosions I already lost all trust for the media and my government when 9/11 happened and my child eyes that enjoyed watching any recording things blow up recognized controlled demolition without a blink. That distrust was why I was reading the founding documents and code law as pertained to what claimed to be my government and my state.
I read all of it. Every page, every footnote. Some of it I read repeatedly. Some of it gave me joy- the system that had been crafted could be an incredible machine. If lawyers and politicians hadn’t screwed it all up- the founders created something astounding and capable. Words were twisted. Things claimed to mean what they don’t. No amendment was needed to “free the salves” because they are men and created equal- it was already there. And the amendment that supposedly freed those slaves- did nothing of the sort. Instead it just shifted slavery to being something the State could impose on ANYONE at will due to it now being applicable to anyone who has committed any crime… those crimes determined by that same State. Slavery was expanded- not abolished. Equal protection was explicitly pointed out ostensibly for the idiots who needed to be told that “all men are…equal” already did that but really just made everyone equally subject to being a slave of the state for breaking any arbitary law that they arbitrarily create. It effectively ended what those of us old enough to remember as Civics Class were taught to be the good old US of A. When the South left and the North declared war- the country we are taught to be living in is the country before the split. What we actually live in is the thing that came after with modifications to constitutional law and federal code law which effectively negated the “government deriving its JUST powers from consent of the governed” bit. Before this- the Constituion gave the PEOPLE all the power. After this, it said that they had no power.

And it’s been a charade every since- slowly wearing down the populace resistance to various things and distracting them with other things.

Now, we are what amounts to a fascist oligarchy. The police are basically the mafia, we pay them for “protection” that we do not get, and they still break our things. The authorities those police ostensibly “answer two” are at once afraid and /or unwilling to rein them in- some because they make bank off of the for profit prison industrial complex aka slave trade aka police kidnapping and manufactured authority/consent.

Our “government” is a corporation- on paper and in function. It creates its own policies irrespective of its franchises (aka citizens) and said same are responsibility for adhering those policies regardless of failure of corporation to notify its franchises of additions or changes to said policies; also, withholding right to change said policies at will, irrespective of franchise position in regards to said same. This corporation also reserves the right to arbitrary suspend, ignore and/or haphazardly follow said policies itself as pertains to it or franchises, enact policies which directly contradict previous policies even when those policies have provisions enumerated specifically rejecting the corporation doing so; while also maintaining the discretion to allow franchises to take action for remedies against said corporation should franchises be damaged in some regard by the above mentioned policies.

I’m in my 30s.
I’ve paid attention.
My police are a gang.
They rob my friends, my neighbors, the people of our towns.
My politicians are a farce- most people don’t vote. They know it doesn’t matter- they mostly don’t know why it doesn’t matter… it’s quite a lot of reading after all. And we are programmed to be lazy about such things if it isn’t purely to entertain. The popular vote said we wanted term limits and the SCOTUS claimed we can’t do that- tho the president has term limits. And what if by some magic, the brainwashing failed, and NO ONE went to vote? Well the politicians would still vote, of course. Doesn’t matter if the highest vote is 30million or 13. If only a handful vote and 13 is the majority, they won’t the popular vote and the electoral picks what it picks. And what if magically, no one voted for a governor, senator, no political office higher than mayor. What would happen? They’d put whatever mouthpiece overworld they were gonna put there anyway for the most part.

Our choices are a lie. I’ve watched this government lie to me since I started school and didn’t realize it till 9/11- I just wondered why they were teaching at the rate of the dumbest kid. Surely the adults knew what they were doing… surely, some did- but not the ones that wanted bright and inquisitive minds. Not the ones that looked at incorrect narratives patterns and scratched their heads. I was… 4th or 5th grade so around 96 or 97 I’d guess… they stopped doing civics class. Even then- that concerned me. I didn’t like that class when I took it but what kid likes that junk? I realized it was important tho- it was supposedly teaching me how my government worked. We should all know how our government works and what the laws are. But they don’t want you to. And they don’t want you to look back and realize that every time we have invaded another country since the world wars it has been after they lied to the people through the media and evoked outrage and patriotism and freedom to get the emotional populace to feed bodies to the war machine. Nam to Iraq- you name it, they lied to get us there.

I read the laws because I realized that the people who were supposed to be preserving what the founders created had long ago fallen asleep at the wheel. Because everyone I believed was probably paying attention when I was a kid and not worrying as kids shouldn’t worry about politics and the like- they weren’t. Or they’d glimpsed how bonkers it was and knew it was off but hope and laziness kept them complacent as long as they were kept entertained.

Our system is a lie- what we are taught, what is written, and what is actual practice are different things entirely. And the person who wrote this starting thread is a sham- knowingly or not he is aiding the greatest threat to the American people since the Canadians rode down on their majestic moose and burnt down our White/Brown House.

Michael on
Supports this as a Fact.

§ 3002

(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

This does not say the United states IS a federal corporation. It says when we say UNITED STATES in this chapter we mean all entities that are part of the united states including federal corporations and when we say STATES we mean any territory owned by the US including DC, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, New Hampshire (i.e. even things that aren’t the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA or actual STATES are for the purposes of this chapter being called by this name).

It also says “United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under section 564. That doesn’t mean that all Marshals are really owned by shadowy bankers. It means that is the way you should understand this term in the following chapter.

It is legal speak…. and anyone who knows the law should know this. They should know this is not the proof. And I’m slightly annoyed we don’t have a lawyer in the comment section who has fully explained this.

In my opinion everyone is reading into this with conspiratorial minds and thus missing out on all the truths of the world they could be researching and focusing on. Dig, get to the bottom of this, but if you are looking for the Rossetta stone,look elsewhere, because you did not find it with U.S. CODE TITLE 28 PART VI CHAPTER 176 SUBCHAPTER A § 3002. That is one of the main points of the article above. We all know that one page online (in the citations on this page) that weaves together a complex theory and uses this subchapter as proof… but the page above is that other page online that says “NOOOPE”. I might be wrong, but let’s refrain from just posting it again and again without a strong argument.

ALSO, it is from a chapter on Federal Debt collection, but it is in respect to a law that defines how the Court system deals with Federal debts. //

Also, even if you do post this thing again with no argument, let’s post the full thing. (not to pick on you as a poster, just saying in general) 🙂

The short AND FULL quote is:

(15) “United States” means—

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

The full version:


§3002. Definitions
As used in this chapter:

(1) “Counsel for the United States” means—

(A) a United States attorney, an assistant United States attorney designated to act on behalf of the United States attorney, or an attorney with the United States Department of Justice or with a Federal agency who has litigation authority; and

(B) any private attorney authorized by contract made in accordance with section 3718 of title 31 to conduct litigation for collection of debts on behalf of the United States.

(2) “Court” means any court created by the Congress of the United States, excluding the United States Tax Court.

(3) “Debt” means—

(A) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a direct loan, or loan insured or guaranteed, by the United States; or

(B) an amount that is owing to the United States on account of a fee, duty, lease, rent, service, sale of real or personal property, overpayment, fine, assessment, penalty, restitution, damages, interest, tax, bail bond forfeiture, reimbursement, recovery of a cost incurred by the United States, or other source of indebtedness to the United States, but that is not owing under the terms of a contract originally entered into by only persons other than the United States;

and includes any amount owing to the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian, but excludes any amount to which the United States is entitled under section 3011(a).

(4) “Debtor” means a person who is liable for a debt or against whom there is a claim for a debt.

(5) “Disposable earnings” means that part of earnings remaining after all deductions required by law have been withheld.

(6) “Earnings” means compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise, and includes periodic payments pursuant to a pension or retirement program.

(7) “Garnishee” means a person (other than the debtor) who has, or is reasonably thought to have, possession, custody, or control of any property in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest, including any obligation due the debtor or to become due the debtor, and against whom a garnishment under section 3104 or 3205 is issued by a court.

(8) “Judgment” means a judgment, order, or decree entered in favor of the United States in a court and arising from a civil or criminal proceeding regarding a debt.

(9) “Nonexempt disposable earnings” means 25 percent of disposable earnings, subject to section 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

(10) “Person” includes a natural person (including an individual Indian), a corporation, a partnership, an unincorporated association, a trust, or an estate, or any other public or private entity, including a State or local government or an Indian tribe.

(11) “Prejudgment remedy” means the remedy of attachment, receivership, garnishment, or sequestration authorized by this chapter to be granted before judgment on the merits of a claim for a debt.

(12) “Property” includes any present or future interest, whether legal or equitable, in real, personal (including choses in action), or mixed property, tangible or intangible, vested or contingent, wherever located and however held (including community property and property held in trust (including spendthrift and pension trusts)), but excludes—

(A) property held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian tribe or individual Indian; and

(B) Indian lands subject to restrictions against alienation imposed by the United States.

(13) “Security agreement” means an agreement that creates or provides for a lien.

(14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.

(15) “United States” means—

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

(16) “United States marshal” means a United States marshal, a deputy marshal, or an official of the United States Marshals Service designated under section 564.

(Added Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXVI, §3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4933.)

robert francis on
Supports this as a Fact.

It really doesn’t matter whether the U.S. is incorporated. We actually lost the revolutionary war… How do we know? Because the entire legal and banking system that we use in this country originated in London. In fact, since money and legalities influence society the most and are deemed to be privatized institutions, run by a sort of retarded plutocracy that we the sheeple socially agree to accept, then we are nothing more or less than their little DEBTOR slaves. We actually allow ourselves to be ruled over by retarded plutocrats who control infinity as megalomaniacs, and we obviously love it…

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Rhetoric aside, I don’t really agree with this. The wealthy may have a lot of power in the world, and specifically the wealthy of the west have a lot of control in the west (some of it through the control of banking)… but I don’t think it is as simple or nefarious as some bloke in London secretly owning our country. If that were the case we probably would have come to the aid of Britain sooner in WWII (for example).

Skyy on
Supports this as a Fact.

I don’t know where you get your facts but Columbia has nothing to do with Christopher Columbus. Columbia is the deity over America. The way Britannia is the deity over England. That ‘s why in D.C. there are no high rises because of the statue Columbia on top of the Capitol building.

Kalvin on

So because someone is a racist you automatically take away any “medals” they have earned ? America is a corporation look up “season of treason 2” on YouTube and then come back and see if you think we live in the “land of the free “

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

The first part of your comment I don’t understand, but I’m going to assume this is a real comment due to the way it is phrased.

Renaissance Man on
Supports this as a Fact.

If you incorporate into something….you become incorporated..part of..a corporation…all corporations are made up of parts and charters…the same logic you use with the obvious conclusion with Olympia & Washington. So what is the difference in “of” & “for” you failed to make any point. Just a typo? it’s all original 13th ammendment FORBIDDEN TO HOLD ANY OFFICE BRITISH ACCREDITATION REGISTRY Attorneys with FORIEGN titles of nobility and letters of marquee who have orchestrated a scheme using syntax, legal ease & art to extort and control sovereign individuals who’s individual consent is necessary to be ruled over not the majority consent to force an unwanted gov on everyone else mr logic. That would be TYRANY.

Renaissance Man on

You sir are researching inside a vacuum, a bubble. Widen your scope and get to the truth. These are all legal ploys for a purpose and the gov abuses power and disregards the constitution. You are incorrect.

Renaissance Man on
Supports this as a Fact.

The articles of incorporation are not the same thing as the DC organic act. The constitution “of” is the modified almost mirrored copy of the original “for” version less the original 13th amendment and w/addition of the 14th enslaving all as US CITIZENS. These articles were filed I believe in New York and you can find copies of them by researching. It is illegal for the U.S. Gov to deal in FORIEGN currency issued by a FORIEGN entity like IMF which is now our treasury in receivership of sorts, unless they INCORPORATED. KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU DEBUNK ANYTHING. A MILLION OTHERS DISAGREE WITH YOU. MANY ARE LAWYERS.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That theory connects a bunch of things that I’m not sure connect (and don’t fully buy into; for example the “of” and “for” thing I don’t think exists, never seen any evidence)… but I will think on how they might.

Renaissance Man on
Supports this as a Fact.

It seems you research in archives only favorable to your opinions. Hello, the United States is a corporation which was in bankruptcy and all land , buildings, gov owned property and the us citizens were collateral thru liens in order to borrow debt notes after the civil war. What do you think a bond is? Treasury Bonds?. You sir are naive. The Traficant congressional speech is hard to verify as authentic but search for that. Why do you think the gold was confiscated and replaced with private FORIEGN bank notes.???’s simple follow the chronological order of things that actually happened for specific purposes outside the realm of organic constitutional credence, not some theory about federalist and republican, liberal influence. Here’s a math example foe you. Grasp this. Each of us is born with ZERO ( 0 ) authority over anyone else, as we mature we don’t gain any authority over anyone without their contracted consent. To think that a majority adds all their ZERO authority to form any type government to force everyone else in any opposition to comply with their wishes and recognize their collective majority zero authority is ludicrous and an attempt by that majority to force a gov & special interest tainted laws on them they don’t want. The majority doesn’t dilute its ndividul consent nor nullify it. The constitution & Bill of Rights protects the INDIVIDUAL from the gov and preserves INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not group rights. Govern ( control ) ment ( mind) ” mind control…get it? Let me make it simple for you…your theories don’t prove out, let’s use math….350,000,000 people in America….250,000,000 would be a majority…that times (x) ZERO is…..”( 0 )”. Just as the minority of 100,000,000 times (x) ZERO is…..”( 0 )”…. Lookie There…they both have equal authority to tell each other what to do. Governance is by consent of the individual…unless I’m committing a crime defined legally as violating another’s right, doing damage to their person or property, I’m free to do as I FKN please according to natural law. Without any interference nor demand from any government what so ever. If you can’t strive for that, then your a sucker in denial with no balls to claim your unalienable rights, freedom and liberty. No license, no permission, no permit…that’s LIBERTY. Since you site political and philosophical influences of earlier times in shaping gov, consider the fact corporations were only allowed by congress to task public works projects then disbanded and were illegal for a reason, as were central banks under Jackson and why the founders forbade any FORIEGN BAR ASSOCIATION ATTORNEY TO HOLD ANY PUBLIC OFFICE With the original 13th amendment the FORIEGN oath sworn lawyers swept under the rug asap after the British burned the capital buildings and destroyed original records during 1812. Now it’s all lawyers and they have you debating encrypted legal art syntax like nimble sheep. You are either a free man or a slave. Pick one. All else is irrelevant. You are under researched and being lied to. What does your gut tell you? Maybe study the five monkey theory to understand why you think like you do.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

These are all solid points from the point of a staunch libertarian or classical liberal. Arguing that people have rights, but groups of people don’t, is a very specific ideology. Clearly many great thinkers take issue with it.

If groups of people can’t have rights then the family, the church, the state, corporations, the military, etc all start running into issues.

I support the idea that we can organize as a group, tax for the general welfare, create laws, etc… to me the arguments for are found in social contract theory essentially… but that is personal opinion. Opinion aside, it is essentially a philosophical argument on some level.

In practice, in the state the United States, we recognize groups. The constitution is a the recognition of the rights of a group under a representative government. Yes, the core of that is individual rights, but I don’t think you can just say it is ONLY that and expect not to be challenged.

Renaissance Man on
Supports this as a Fact.

Dude after reading all the comments and your apologetic dismissive replies and subverting admitting defeat to a superior fact based point I’ve determined your not a devils advocate your afraid to admit after all your efforts your commentators have overwhelmed you with Congreve evidence that you are WRONG and in denial. You may be correct that the 1871 didn’t incorporate us…but the filed articles of incorporation did..look for those mr. Neutral researcher…try a different search engine…you just like to argue…got a mirror handy? Analyze what I’ve said while looking your pompous ass in the eyes in your own reflection yoyr a FKN debt slave.. Think you own your house? Try not paying property taxes. Think you own your car? Try getting three DUIs… honest opinion? I would waste a minute debating you because your lack of knowledge leaves you to avoid any conference or admittance of being wrong. Frankly I think you think you have some standing intellectually to host a blog debunk site when in fact your armed with misinformation and arguing technicalities that aren’t relative to REALITY THAT YOU ARE A FKN DEBT FREE RANGE SLAVE. if you don’t admit you’ve been checkmated soon by all the superior minds here who have handed you you arse, I’ll add ” ROYAL POMPUS DUMBASS” to your accolades. You’re wasting people’s time, I’m done. Shut the F up close your idiot mouth and listen and learn something Hollywood. You are subtitling your thread with Fake factless misinformation. United States Means Federal Corporation…that means they already file the articles of incorporation previously dumb Neutral researcher….look for those…. You are unbelievably in denial. And will never admit you were wrong. Check your ego man you are doing damage, not enlightenment. Wake up pal.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I appreciate how adamant you are. Any chance you have a link to these supposed articles of incorporation?

The things I would say to that are:

1. I am fine being wrong, just looking to be convinced. If I am wrong because of my own short comings, then that is on me. What can I say? The comments should speak for themselves. If they say to you “commenters are right, researcher is wrong,” then ok.

2. I stand by the idea that the section is question is a list of definitions pertaining to that section and is not meant to be interpreted to mean that the UNITED STATES is a corporation of the United States or that there were prior articles of incorporation to which the definitions are referring. I say this because this is how I read it and I haven’t seen evidence that convinces me otherwise (I’ve heard interesting arguments, but haven’t seen the evidence; above I asked for the evidence, I will continue to look myself using different search engines, including non-mainstream ones).

3. You make some good points about the extent of private property in the state. What do we really own when the government can take things away? I guess my answer is that we live in a society and we are thus bound by the explicit social contracts we agree to by remaining citizens, and thus we sacrifice true state-of-nature quality freedom for the benefits of the state. I can’t break the law, the government has to follow the constitution, I need permits, the state can take away my liberties if I break the law, etc (in theory on all this). It is essentially a trade-off… but there is another deep topic of conversation here. Just because I’m explaining the point of Hobbes and you of Mises after watching V for Vendetta doesn’t mean one of us has to walk away a changed man or that one of us can’t agree in part or understand what the other is putting down.

Clarc King on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

I must say you wrote an excellent piece of scholarship on the Act of 1871. Thank you. Patriot Ideology is dangerous and unpatriotic, employing the faction of useful idiots that exist everywhere, and are actually furthering the destabilization of the United States.

Sean Will Gary Beller on
Supports this as a Fact.

CAN ANYONE ELSE SEE: the United States powers are transferred to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION!
Central government restricted by constitutions with powers constitutionally limited has through bankruptcy dissolved it’s self, it’s people, and the constitutional limits all of which exist only in name with no powers under jurisdiction of the new corporation central military government, the powers of corporation central military government “war powers” are used by the new owners of the new corporation central military government powers which is the U.S. corporation central military government owned and operated by “international bankers” who claim permanent war powers, the same “international bankers” control the value of the type of currency used by the people, the collateral of this currency is movable property “you as a slave labor is the movable property”, creating a permanent tax debt servitude employee of the corporation government! The peoples constitutions limited central government from permanent war powers and trading with the enemy acts amended and enacted by President Roosevelt! The Judicial and congressional branches prohibited permanent debt servitude by employer contract “peonage”, U.S. federal citizenship is employee contract because it has been a corporation government since President Roosevelt 1937-1941 and the very Definition of peonage.

Definition of peonage. 1 a : the use of laborers bound in servitude because of debt. b : a system of convict labor by which convicts are leased to contractors. 2 : the condition of a peon.

The federal Peonage Act of 1867, upheld by the Supreme Court in the 1905 case of Clyatt v. United States, banned such laws.

42 U.S. Code § 1994 – Peonage abolished
US Code
prev | next
The holding of any person to service or labor under the system known as peonage is abolished and forever prohibited in any Territory or State of the United States; and all acts, laws, resolutions, orders, regulations, or usages of any Territory or State, which have heretofore established, maintained, or enforced, or by virtue of which any attempt shall hereafter be made to establish, maintain, or enforce, directly or indirectly, the voluntary or involuntary service or labor of any persons as peons, in liquidation of any debt or obligation, or otherwise, are declared null and void.

(R.S. § 1990.)

Colin on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

Though it may not be a “corporation” it is a corporate Form of government and the Constitution is its charter which all positions are subject to, bound by and those that volunteer to serve by and through such position are required “to swear an oath or affirmation to support this Constitution”. One cannot “support” if you don’t know what it says and believe in it. You can “serve” and “protect” something and not belive or support it!
Further, it matters Not, what “Form of Government ” is instituted, all that matters is that those holding any position use any and all powers of that position “to secure these rights” and “effect their Safety and Happiness”!
Anything else is “giving aid or comfort to the enemy” = treason.
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends (That all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness — That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men) it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and Institute new government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
That is very clear! It mattes not what Form it takes all that matters is that those in any position volunteered to be governed by it and to support it and to use it “to secure these rights” and “to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Anything they do that isin contravention of these “principles” is giving aid or comfort to the enemy.!!# treason.
“This Constitution, and the laws that shall be made in pursuance thereof and all treaties made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding”!!!!!!!
That spells it out doesn’t it?? “any thing in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary NOTWITHSTANDING.
Conclusion, it matters Not what “Form of Government” is in existence so long as it secures these rights and effects (cause, make happen, bring about) our Safety and Happiness”!!

Supports this as a Fact.

If what you say is true, then it explains why so many are guilty of treason for their participation and attempts to fundamentally change our great nation. Going all the way back to presidents after Regan.!! Including majority of Congress and Senant. Not to mention the most high ranks of the military branches.
How and why is it that a nation of 320 million citizens would allow our government to get so out of control.?? Someone in their position of control must have thought it to be so. Enough to make them and others believe that by joining forces with world financiers, it was perfectly within their rights to sell off the USA and it’s citizens for a mass profit and power.!! If what is stated in this article is true, it fails to explain how we could possibly have been over run and taken over by such a large band of crooks and traitors..
Because if the Constitution of the USA is what our governors,(law makers) and Presidents, past, present and future, where is the accountability if they are allowed to change the “rule of law” to fit their personal whims, to the degree they are themselves above the laws as stated…Unless they truly believed that under a corporation they were within their rights to act and do as they so wish.. Which to me sounds like there are more than one Constitution of the USA and the U S.
Bringing us to the double standard and why, if you’re on the “right” you are held to the strictist word of the Constitutional laws. Those on the left are held to the relaxed word of law as stated in the Corporate Constitution of the U S, which is forever being changed and rewritten by those who have the majority of the House and Senant. Which has been predominately the Democrats and their cohorts “Rinos”, who for over forty years have managed to but completely dismantle the very foundation that the United States of America was built upon. As it was proposed by our Founding Fathers.

John on
Supports this as a Fact.

Check again under Delaware Corporations for file number 2193946 which will return

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on


This is just some company who called themselves UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INC. You can start a company called UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

In this case it is some religious non-profit. Has nothing to do with the overarching dialogue, but certainly is confusing 🙂

DocNo on

Let’s not get drowned in word games. Whichever ways you want to put it, the United States is the Ashkenazi Dyansty’s western headquarter period.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I think this idea is 1. racist and 2. not giving the U.S. enough credit.

Stephen C. Dubinsky on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

“Constitution for the United States” vs. “Constitution of the United States” – When the document was first written, it had not yet been ratified by the states. As the Preamble states, the Constitution was written for the United States. Once the states had accepted the document and ratified it, it became theirs. Thus it became the “Constitution of the United States”. Semantics. Learn the rules governing your native language.

charlie on
Supports this as a Fact.

this is nothing more than disinformation, designed to BS the people,

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Not at all. It is me taking a serious look at the issue and thus far concluding that it is a myth. Thus, assuming I am right, it would make those who put out the myth the BS’ers and me the truth teller.

Hitler was not a good person, but he did not have three legs. If I say he did not have three legs after research, I am not taking the side of fascists, I am simply stating what I believe to be the case based on research.

Nothing on this site is meant as propaganda, everything on the site is meant to look for truth. I am not attached to an outcome here, and certainly it would be more interesting to find some secret conspiracy than to not.

Bill the Butcher Poole on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

The major issue seems to be the inability of people to separate the words “incorporated” , “corporation” , and “business”. All these terms have multiple meanings that need context.
Alas, people tend to believe what they have already decided what is true, so honest facts and truth just… fall by the wayside.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Exactly what my research was turning up. If there is any grain of truth, big or small, in here we won’t find it by confusing the meaning of words as they pertain to the incorporation of entities into the United States or by finding some random business who registered themselves as UNITED STATES INC (or whatever).

Joe huber on
Supports this as a Fact.

Whoever wrote this article is full of sh&*#. This is his opinion and everyone is entitled. But to post this article then state different evidence everytime someone has a different outlook. I call bs

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

The article above is my research on the topic. The comment section is just me replying to comments as they come in. I am not re-reading all the comments every time reply. If that is confusing I apologize.

I am not attempting to offer BS, I am just responding and, as needed, researching more.

I don’t have to be right, but the article above is an earnest attempt to look at the claim.

It is easy enough to compare my work to say this article and form your own opinion: //

I still think The Act of 1871 and other evidence back up my conclusion. But as you say, we are all entitled to our opinions and conclusions on the facts.

Think about this though, can you really imagine Congress all agreeing to sell our country to the Brits? The North and South had literally just got done going to war over domestic issues, you think after all that we would bend over for a foreign power? That isn’t my evidence, but that alone doesn’t sound right to me. We tend to fight for liberty historically speaking.

Hank Smalls on
Supports this as a Fact.

D.C consolidated the states that are now beholden to Federal monies that CAN be cut off or denied, so they act as subsidaries to the “government” proper, just like how franchised restaurants are still answerable to the corporate office or the HQ.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Well that is for sure. Federalism in theory and in practice, and even the Constitution, lays out a framework where individuals, states, and the federal government all have an intertwining relationship. A citizen must follow the laws of the state and federal government, a state is beholden to the citizen and federal government, the citizen and a state can hold the federal government accountable. Money flows all these directions too.

The federal government can influence a state via funding, but states can also throw a wrench in federal programs through state law. ObamaCare is a great example of states striking back. States and citizens used state power and the courts to partly dismantle the program while Obama was in office.

Robust conversation to be had here.

John Doe on

I love how I can disprove your fairy tale with one single video. // Please disprove EVERY source document presented in that video. I’ll be waiting.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

So here is the deal, I am not going to nor do I care to go through every document laid out by every version of this theory (for example the ones found here: //

I am acknowledging them, I urge everyone to research these carefully and with an open mind, and I found this same rabbit hole you all did… but when I started looking at some of the claims, like the ones noted above, I started finding gaping holes.

The holes have to do with the gap between what seems to be the case, 1. that D.C. is the Seat of the Government of the United States, that the FED is a private within government institution that directly interfaces with banks but isn’t at the direct whim of congress, and that generally the relationship between money, banks, government, etc is complex…. AND 2. this idea that foreign bankers own the United States due to it being a corporation (as proven by X document).

The gap between that first and second point is everything however. Because 1 is the way it is, and 2 is not the way it is from what i can tell.

The way things are is odd enough, and people like Ron Paul for example have consistently said the way it is isn’t good enough. That is a valid stance.

The problem for me is the conspiracy theory part which sort of leads to this conclusion of hate and fear (based on potentially false information).

Hope that is clear.

In terms of your request, I am happy to debate and discuss one document at a time or continue to discuss what I found, but I will not “disprove every document in a 2 hour youtube video.” Not because it isn’t interesting or that I don’t value honest research and debate, but because it is a giant and vague time sink.

Instead of doing that in the first place, what I did was zoom right to the Act of 1871 to show that there was no UNITED STATES CORPORATION COMPANY (or whatever) formed by that document, and thus I refuted a central premise the argument “the U.S. is a corporation” is based on.

So while ideas like “foreign bankers have control of the U.S. via banks” or “D.C. has special powers” or “the FED has too much power” are interesting and valid for debate (we can agree or disagree), the idea that “and they own the united states which is a corporation and therefore we should be filled with fear and hate” just looks, smells, and sounds like the worst kind of propaganda.

All that said, it is important to note that political factions have butted heads over central banks since day 1. There has always been a heated debate. We sort of settled on the modern FED as a compromise position. It really was also very contested even from that day 1. So contested it is shocking to me that its most outspoken critics didn’t say things like “this is BS, we should not have made America a corporation” Like see here: // This House Rep goes on and on and on against the Reserve and every detail of it, but he never suggests that the U.S. is a corporation. So that is one example of a thing often cited as proof not actually being proof.

Mekashona on

Firstly, I would like to thank you offering the opportunity for debate. I think you conduct yourself well, for the most part, in your responses to important questions and criticisms. One frustration I’ve had, however, is that when you are ignorant about something or cannot disprove a comment, you either ignore it or say “I will do more research,” while continuing along the same line of logic. You seem willfully stuck on some things. Do the research on the issues you cannot explain. If you avoid them to hold onto your opinion then you are not really a researcher and you may, indeed, be irresponsible as some have suggested.

Otherwise, I just want to say that I am Citizen of the Osage Nation which, according to treaty law (supposedly the supreme law of the land), is a sovereign nation entitled to every respect and right of other sovereign nations, such as England, Mexico, Canada etc. This background as an Osage Indian gives me insight into some issues with your argument:

First, you take the stance that the law, as written, is the actual manifestation of the physical reality and action in this country. I can tell you if that were true, then the treaties with Indian Nations would be acknowledged and respected by the government and not consistently broken, without exception. Every time someone has argued examples on how and why the government functions as a corporation, you fall back on the argument that the law (1871) says differently. So what? This government (corporation?) follows laws when it finds it to be convenient. Ask any Indigenous person, they will tell you that is true. Or better yet, study Federal Indian law and its history in this country. The Feds do not have a good track record for acting as they say they will/do in their contracts/laws/paperwork.

Second, you say people are not understanding the legal speak, thus leading to the confusion and manipulation of scare tactics, Alex Jones, etc. I work in the legal sector, specifically with federal law, and one thing I have learned is that every single case is just an argument for an interpretation of already existing laws and arguments. Your interpretation is merely your interpretation. So in using the argument that people just don’t understand legal speak, I would say that you don’t understand the functions of the law, how laws are written, changed and upheld. Legal speak is just that – a lexicon used to argue/interpret as far as you can on different points of view, it does not by necessity hold truth.

In closing my comment, I’d like to say thanks, again, for the discussion. It’s interesting and I’m glad people are looking into things that are largely taken for granted. I’d also like to implore people, if you’re interested in the history of this country and its laws, talk to the Indigenous people in America. It has literally been a life or death consideration for them/us and you might gain some insight. Thanks.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Thanks for the kind words. I have been doing more research on this topic. Will dig deeper and give it another review and update some comments to responses as needed. For now, appreciate the comment though.

Dwayne on

Are you an attorney? If so you should know that, you just gave us your interpretation, not a translation. Also in 1871,English was interpreted differently. Those are facts, what you gave us was a educated guess. A good one too.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Fair enough. I am not an attorney. Just a researcher who has spent some time looking at legal documents while working on various projects over the years. Certainly not an expert however.

James Nicholas Jory Jr on
Doesn't beleive this myth.

Well done. It seems to me that the key fact that the corporation theorists consistently fail to document or prove is the role and intent of the “international banker” from 1860 to 1871. It’s always just bald assertions.

Joe Silva on

I noticed that when you say that the United States is not a corporation that you never write the UNITED STATES of AMERICA in capital letters is not a corporation. Can you give me a explanation because we all know that The United States of America is not a corporation. I ask you again personally and for all the Patriots who stand with me is the UNITED STATES or the UNITED STATES of AMERICA a corporation.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I can clarify that above. I am not trying to be tricky, the United States phrased anyway, in caps or not, is not a corporation is my conclusion. Ie, it is my understanding that this whole idea that some act from the late 1800s made our nation a corporation is false.

Of course this doesn’t mean I am correct, it only means this is what I’ve concluded from research at this point. Lots of interesting theories surrounding this one, so keeping an open mind.

RoninMD on
Supports this as a Fact.

My vote is that the United States is a corporation. In fact, according to Gilens, Page, et al… the united States is no longer a Democracy or a Republic… it’s an oligarchy. //

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

This is a good study, it was read and considered when creating this page. Good share, thank you!

Paul Freedom on
Supports this as a Fact.

Its definitely a Federal Corp and it’s in receivership under a chapter 11. The only commercial energy that it has is from the true sovereigns. The people. That’s not a myth, it’s a fact.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

How would you go about proving that? What might you cite?

Mario Medina on

You all are too late; remember qe1? qe2 qe infinity? The Fed was buying 80 billion a month of ” toxic mortgaged backed securities” In other words the FED was buying up all those properties (sic) real estate i.e., the country allodial titles. Usufruct hegemony; esoteric to the masses. Too late people; (sic) Good luck Amen!

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I mean the job of the FED is to buy government backed assets as part of its stated and public mission to, among other things, help keep the economy stable and prevent inflation.

You have Congress making bad moves with regulation, then businesses making bad moves in real estate, buyers making bad moves in taking loans they couldn’t really afford (I don’t victim shame, but we really do love our credit), the state borrowing too much, then banks making bad moves in lending and mortgage backed securities, and then you have the FED trying to clean up everyone’s mess.

I’m sorry, but the villain of this story is either 1. no one aside from human greed, short sightedness, and incompetency, or 2. essentially everyone in the story aside the FED coming along and trying to clean up the mess.

Or at least, that is another perspective to look at it from.

Its not like the FED is going to say “we own the houses, pay us rent,” they leave that up to private banks, who get the thumbs up from officials, who we elect (for example in the midterms coming up this week). Don’t want the system to go down the tubes, try electing someone who won’t deregulate to the point that we need a bailout and a heavy handed FED.

KJM on

I don’t agree with all your conclusions, however, I wanted to point out that your cordial responses to the contrary opinions here is a breath of fresh air in this era of polarization. I think the ability to discuss an issue politely and with a level head is a very important one, but alas, one that is disappearing quickly. Thus kudos to you for your gentlemanly tone and demeanour!
I wish you all the best in your quest for truth, and hope it brings you enlightenment and fulfilment.
Best regards,

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Thank you for feedback, much appreciated.

Dario Cruz on

I Like this blog here 11/2018, where I found it. day after our Elections
Applause to creator for not deleting and at least trying to answer questions in the comment sections. I having a law degree, find the subject very interesting and am just getting into this research myself…..I see both sides with controversy in their claims
for “Truth” Pro Corporation Arguments:
2. I use legal forms all the time, sometimes its simply not possible to include the entire name in capitals, so many use “Capitals and letters” as an example. also the FCR uses definitions for “United States” not ‘UNITED STATES’ it needs to be consistent for it to be correct that we are governed and enslaved by “OUR NAMES” .
On the other side of the “False/myth” arguments:
1. Why does the government hid the existence of the corporations among the various states why is it not consistent in state registration (why not name board members) and who is actually making the decisions the board members ? these inconsistiencies work both to debunk and strengthen arguments for and against the US as a corporation. Howver, I would argue it favors those arguing the point that it is a corporation. for it were easier and taught in schools, it wouldn’t be hidden for the same reason than Jekyll island coup was also kept secret.
2. Woodfow Wilsons apology
3. I hate corporate meetings they don’t’ accomplish much but allows management to pat themselves on their back for jobs well done contrary to employees and shareholders.
4. there is evidence of actual corporations. Your link to a pdf states as much, after fully reading it, three questions come to mind. Where are the documents required to register the corporation, why do some have IPO offerings who are shareholders, where if any are dividends being paid to.
5. if they were created for purposes of maintaining a more balanced accounting for revenues vs. expenses. Why are so many in the red and why are we trillions in debt, who owes the trillions (corporation, shareholders…i was not invited to any meetings). Even the largest corporations in the world with budgets far beyond some countries they still have a shareholders meeting and publish it and proof of stocks certificates and are on the exchanges.
6. Who are these board members, if they run the corp which we are shareholders of we like should be able to easily find them : like i can look up our school board commission names of members, and other local members.
7. Why such convoluted language. It shouldn’t take $140K in student loans to learn how to read.

Dario Cruz on
Supports this as a Fact.

see previous comment for some reason it defaulted to i mark yes here, as i m still researching..but tend to agree with fact but cancelled by vote by voting 2x for and agaist since i had no option not to vote until fat lady sings

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Thanks for the insight. If you don’t toggle the vote it is supposed to not vote… I’ll look into it.

Will N. on

“The United States is a Corporation” is not a myth. The US government is doing away with regulations because they keep people safe, just so they can stay in power because all the people who are voting for them are ignorant in the fact that regulations save lives and make working conditions humane. The government is basically just one big corporate bigwig that is getting rid of everything that protects us and our rights because all of the politicians just want every single penny that is in our wallets. That is how basically all of the rich people in America are. Both the Democrats and Republicans, and really there is no difference between them, are backed by corporations and don’t want to get funding cut or,even worse, killed, just because they aren’t enacting bills and laws that are going to benefit just the corporations. To me, there are only two political parties, the Corporates and the Progressives.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

Two add my two cents, I think the question “is the us an oligarchy / corportacracy” is a different subject (although there is some relation). Here are my thoughts on that //

Derek Rhodes on
Supports this as a Fact.

You can search it yourself. Delaware’s Secretary of State. “THE UNITED STATES INC.”

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That is just a business who calls itself “THE UNITED STATES INC.”… lots of businesses registered with similar names. Look again.

This part is 100% misunderstanding/misinformation. It is one of the things that makes me skeptical, because people I hear more compelling arguments from also try to lace in arguments like this. That said, 1. I try to take every argument at its own merit, and 2. thanks for bringing it up, no way to fact-check and share information without it being shared.

Harry Baulzak on
Supports this as a Fact.

What are your thoughts regarding this text found in the library of congress stating:

“The United States shall be for ever considered as one Body-corporate and politic in law, and entitled to all the rights, privileges and immunities which to Bodies Corporate do, or ought to appertain.”

// [editor replaced given link with another link to the same text]

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That is an interesting one. It is a proposition put forth by Charles Pinckney (a founding father from South Carolina) at the Constitutional Convention on Tuesday August 20, 1787 (late into the process).

A lot of ideas found their way into the Constitution and later Bill of rights (as you can see browsing through this: //, this one we know did not… at least not with that wording.

I think the idea here is something that we have in practice, that is the sovereign immunity of the state (aka the US) and the power of the state to essentially have the rights and privileges of any other type of body.

Given the other measures Pinckney put forth, I can’t see that the intent was malicious in anyway.

Also, when people muse on the US is a corporation claim, they are generally saying “and then the bankers and foreign titans corrupted the intent of the founders”… well, Pinckney was a founding father and he sat down in a room with the other founders and put this forth, and then the law of the land was written. So the ones who created the foundation can’t also be the ones who corrupted it, if that was the case, then it was always in such a state and there was nothing to corrupt.

mike on

if there wasn’t a major shift in our government after the act of 1871 why then do we have 2 state constitutions? California has an 1849 and an 1879 constitution. Arizona, for example has only one but I’m guessing that is because they were not a state until 1912, long after the act of 1871. I also cant help but wonder why the original 13th amendment was dumped and the change from “for the united states” to “of the united states” was made.

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I’m not 100% on all of those questions, but you have to consider the Civil War ended in 1865 the reconstruction amendments were adopted between 1865 and 1870.

In short, there were major changes in those times.

One change was that an influx of refugees from the Civil War caused a rapid swell in population in what we now know as DC, and this and other factors led to the organizing acts of 1871.

Probably a lot to learn about that time, but I’m not sure any of it is going to lead back to the US being a corporation.

Also, although I’ve heard about the For vs. of argument, but I don’t get it.

The Constitution and the 13th both say “of the United States.”


Did an old version say “for the United States”… and if it did… it really seems like semantics to me.

You can argue anything in the Constitution in the Supreme Court today as written, and they do all the time.

Eric on

please explain title 28 1746 1 and 2
When outside the United States… I declare under penalties of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America the forgoing is true and correct

clearly there are two different entities here????? United States and United States of America

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

I would say, I don’t read it that way at all.

The first part is from the perspective of the document “If executed without the united states,” it is talking to the reader.

The second part in quotes “I declare…” is what a person must say to declare under penalty of perjury in court, it is a person in a formal setting using the full and proper name of the country.

United States and United States of America are the same thing. If you read other sections (// you’ll find that the document always says “United States.”

I honestly think it is just to not have to write out United States of America every time. You don’t want to write this out every time in a long document, but you can sure say it in a formal setting when making a statement under penalty of perjury.

(1) If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

NOTE: Appreciate this, and I could be wrong… but this is one of the things that gets to me. On the surface it seems like evidence of a conspiracy, but approached with a level head and put up against reason… it suddenly seems like disinformation and misinformation. Worse, when I really dig into this (//…. What I start to hear is propaganda that pits me against FDR, Social Security, and the reconstruction amendments. That doesn’t seem like a crusade of truth, that seems like a really smart person coming up with a conspiracy theory to push a right-wing agenda that attacks key progressive legislation AND globalist and bankers at the same time. It makes me question how well meaning the source of this whole theory was. I am not saying the person who wrote this has ill intentions, but whoever started the ball rolling, I really do wonder.

Null on
Supports this as a Fact.

This is not a myth.

28 U.S. Code § 3002
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;

Thomas DeMichele
Thomas DeMichele on

That is one of the items I address above. My answer to that, is in short “no.” Please see above for the full answer.