Winston Shrout: 'New' Republic headed by Interim President Paul Ryan & V.P. Gen. Dunford Winston Shrout: 'New' Republic headed by Interim President Paul Ryan & V.P. Gen. Dunford
Winston Shrout: 'New' Republic heade... 
turiya
8 y
3,055
This intelligence report was hosted by Tad's Talkshoe on March 29, 2016. Winston Shrout gives a 15 minute intel update regarding the new Republic now headed by [Interim] President Paul Ryan and Vice President General Dunford. Winston updates everyone that sometime after May 1, 2016 that major events will take place in the United States that we'll see America transition from the USA Corporation to a reinstated Republic. The transition will bring in NESARA and a new area of peace and prosperity to the world. You know how this goes, rumors now until proven as facts. Keep questioning everything until humanity finally awakens to its full potential.You can listen to the full 2 hour unedited call at: http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-46256/TS-1065997.mp3
New Republic Update & History
by Winston Shrout
(March 29, 2016)
A Military Correction
1st A National Currency had to be created
April 2015: Chinese Lease Gold to create a new currencies a Trade Free Reserve Notes (as Currency for governments) & United States Notes (as currency for you & me), which is already in the banks.
General Dumford was selected to be Interim Vice-President
Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, is presently lined-up to be the Interim President
Nesara will begin to be executed with this 'New' government
IRS will no longer be a problem
New Currency will be the same variety that's been used, except no interest is attached to it.
The New U.S. Treasury is located on an Indian Reservation in Nevada, as Indian Reservations are Free Trade ZonesJust to complete the video posted above... Its part of the same Talkshoe from where the 1st video above came from. This video I would call it the part 1, and the other one (above) would be a part 2
Winston Shrout:"Bill Clinton came out and said, "Hey, I'm the last United States President." ...and that's the only time that boy ever told the truth that I know of. And it was true. The bankruptcy of the UNITED STATES was over in 1999. So, Bill was telling the truth, we'll give him credit for that."
Winston Shrout: "Transition To a New Paradigm & Interim Government"
______________________________Now the recent Jake Tapper interview with Speaker of the House (Interim President), Paul Ryan, makes much better sense.
In that Interview Transcript Ryan is found to be quite concerned about Donald Trump's understanding regarding the limitations of the Office of President within the context of a Constitutional form of government. This, he says he needs to know before he would support the GOP presumptive nominee.Jake Tapper (CNN) Interview w/ Paul Ryan Part 1 & 2
Ryan Pulls Out Pocket Constitution at 5:15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20KG0uvYwvo#t=4m25s
This, Just in...
Paul Ryan Meets w/ Donald Trump:
Emphasis on Restoring Constitutional Principles
Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3U-M9UU2zU
Re: Winston Shrout: 'New' Republic h... turiya
8 y
3,763
Winston Shrout's Document (below) Link
Other Docs: https://www.unitedstatescourts.org/f...4748/13-1.html
-First page is the Cover page
-Second is Notice to Cease and Desist, which describes THE HONORABLE WINSTON SHROUT, Notary Exequatur, as an Internationally Protected person under sovereign immunity.
-Third to Seventh pages is Letter to the U.S. Department of Justice from Office of International Treasury Control by Ray C Dam, which describes the Acts of Fraud by the major banks (through mortgages) against the American People, the Treasury and the Office of International Treasury Control.
Page 1 & 2 of 7
Page 3 of 7
Page 4 of 7
Page 5 of 7
Page 6 of 7
Page 7 of 7
Why Two Oaths of Office for Presiden... turiya
8 y
2,794
Another point of interest Winston notes in that May 04, 2012 David Wilcock interview: The 1788-89 Constitution Article II Oath of Office has always been used by the U.S. elected presidents since the very beginning with the very 1st president of America - George Washington. This is in regard to the particular Oath of Office that he chose to make his allegiance to. As opposed to the Article VI Oath of Office, Winston explains: the Article II Oath is for employees.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, Professor of Law & Government also agrees:
“[George] Washington took an oath of personal employment to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," for a government employer. Washington could have taken the Article VI Oath specifically provided for "all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States." Instead, Washington set the secret precedent that he and future Presidents would work for the Congress of the United States as its employees.
Note: The significant verbiage to be noted is pointed out by Dr Eduardo M. Rivera. Specifically, the Article II Oath of Office (taken by every president since the time of Washington) lacks the notion that the president is sworn to "support" the Constitution.
On the contrary, the Article VI Oath says:
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]"
So, this adds more support to this notion that Paul Ryan is positioned as an "interim president" for the upcoming establishment of a Republic form government, as he has taken the Article VI Oath of Office - in support of the Constitution, rather than taking the Article II Oath of Office to act as just another 'employee' of the de facto corporate government.
Just have to keep watching this to see if this will actually unfold.
Re: Why Two Oaths of Office for Pres... turiya
8 y
2,755
Chaz - I initially have found the similar results that you have come up with. But with a deeper search, I found Dr Eduardo Rivera's explanation below. Note, during my earlier studies of income tax research, Rivera's name I am previously familiar with. He was somewhat connected to Otto Skinner's work - "The Biggest Tax Loophole of All". If you click on the 'Source Link' it will take you to the full article where he explains the precedence that George Washington had set in place with his taking the Article II Oath of Office - it was for employees of the government - check it out.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera, Professor of Law & Government also agrees:
“[George] Washington took an oath of personal employment to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," for a government employer. Washington could have taken the Article VI Oath specifically provided for "all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States." Instead, Washington set the secret precedent that he and future Presidents would work for the Congress of the United States as its employees.
Note: The significant verbiage to be noted is pointed out by Dr Eduardo M. Rivera. Specifically, the Article II Oath of Office (taken by every president since the time of Washington) lacks the notion that the president is sworn to "support" the Constitution.
On the contrary, the Article VI Oath says:
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]"
