Mike Parsons

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#126

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun May 26, 2019 2:47 am

Man, that's quite a rogues gallery of Rudy's heroes on that poster.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#127

Post by scirreeve » Mon May 27, 2019 1:02 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun May 26, 2019 2:47 am
Man, that's quite a rogues gallery of Rudy's heroes on that poster.
That is his business card. It has been rejected by at least a couple of prisons which makes him sputter loudly.

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#128

Post by scirreeve » Mon May 27, 2019 1:10 am

Frater I*I wrote:
Sat May 25, 2019 5:29 pm
The Canadian Crazy Cat Lady returns to LoneDummy's channel!!! She calls herself "Victoria" [because a condition of her current probation is that she not have an internet presence] but having listen to her vids enough put out by LoonyStar I recognize her voice and speech pattern, she starts at the 19:55 mark, and goes on for a good while...
For reference to tell it's Holland, here's a vid I posted of her and Mr. & Mrs. Pop-A-Squat discussing their failed "arrest warrants".
The Crazy Cat Lady says the Pop-A-Squat nation is legit, because they wrote documents that say they're legit, and her trillion dollar lawsuit [yes trillion with a T], will have a hearing on the 30th, but the court docket shows that the special seating she's asking for will not happen.
I didn't realize that chief justice Suzanne or Zsuzsanna (whatever) and Brad had been appointing more "ambassadors" like the murderer Hoffman. That'll work as well for them as well as it is working for Mikey.

User avatar
jtmunkus
Posts: 5692
Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm
Location: Cone of Silence

Re: Mike Parsons

#129

Post by jtmunkus » Mon May 27, 2019 9:22 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:43 am
I really do think Rudy toot toot is a felon junky.
I do have to speak up momentarily in Rudy’s defense. After all, he was the sole, single, idiot toad teabag birther who successfully staged a national “Birther Summit”.

He’s a mover and a shaker. Not just a simple bloviator, like the rest.

Still an idiot toad teabag, of course. But Rudy did earn a little extra credit.

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#130

Post by scirreeve » Wed May 29, 2019 1:02 am

Mikey thinks his wolf dogs got killed by the ebil gubmint. I didn't listen to all of this - he is talking to Mr. Lone Idiot.
► Show Spoiler

Jeffrey
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#131

Post by Jeffrey » Wed May 29, 2019 4:06 am

The last mention of the dogs was in a call from his wife where she said she contacted animal control to deal with the dogs (she also made a comment saying that she knew that would make Mike angry which stood out to me). Which makes me think the dogs have probably been put down by now. But going to the farm and shooting the dogs seems completely made up.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#132

Post by Notorial Dissent » Wed May 29, 2019 4:40 am

I may be seriously misremembering, but I thought that at one point there was some mention that some or all of the dogs were wolf hybrids, which I believe are illegal back there. I think it was the dogs running loose and bothering the neighbors that started the original round of problems, and I 'm too lazy to look it back up.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Jeffrey
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#133

Post by Jeffrey » Wed May 29, 2019 8:30 am

Yeah 70 wolf dog hybrids that kept escaping. But I think they’re legal to own and sell. You can also hear them howling in a few phone calls which I suspect is one of the reasons the neighbors hated Mike.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#134

Post by Notorial Dissent » Wed May 29, 2019 1:09 pm

What I thought I remembered. I have nothing against the wolf dogs per se, but they can be dangerous and at the best of times they need special care and handling and I cannot for a minute Parsons is or was capable of giving them that, and if they were getting out and running at large then he obviously wasn't, and 70 is just flat out too many. A pack of dogs running loose, even former house pets can do an incredible amount of damage in a rural agricultural setting. That alone would get him on many of his neighbor's better dead lists.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#135

Post by nbc » Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:22 pm

I noticed that one of the trial transcripts is freely available now. The other two days not so.

Frater is rumored to have access to the documents.

Frater is mentioned in the third day of the trial as hosting a website which reports the latest audio on court hearings. And of course Mike raises the issue, and the judge is not impressed.

Schense does try to enter a lot of documents into the record but they get rejected based on 401, 403, issues of law or attempt to do a collateral attack on a criminal conviction.
The court also observed that the musings by the "Supreme Court of the Chilcotin" has no relevance in the US. Mike believes that because they were submitted and unopposed, they are now legally binding.

He does go off on some sovcit nonsense when he testifies and the Jury may have been surprised about his attitudes towards the law... He denies that he was convicted... He denies that he missed a trial date in TN, he denies removing the GPS locator, claiming that a woman named Penny removed them.
He denies that he needs to be licensed to fly or that the plane needs to be licensed. He insists that the 'nations item' referred to in calls with Sue and Pat do not refer to the gun

But most interestingly, he claims that the person he allegedly gave the gun to, and who died of an aneurysm did not have access to the plane. Even though he now has changed his tune.

Schense did his best, given the unreasonable requests from Michael. He introduced the IRS definition of firearm, but was told the 912 definition is what is important. When testifying he went off on a tangent on most every question.

Such a foolish person, and so convinced that he is 'right'. The jury did not buy it.

Also there was a motion to throw out the charges because of the government having told him that he was not guilty (Chilcotin government) and the court quickly observed that the only time this defense would stand a chance is if the Tennessee government had told Mike so.

They tried... And predictably they failed.

From the transcript
Sekrit Stuffs!
I just want to respond to a couple of points that were raised by Mr. Schense. There's been a lot of noise during this trial about ambassadorships and whether or not somebody had been exonerated. The judge addressed that. If you look at exhibit -- or not exhibit, instruction number 13, theory of the defense, the judge has told you that that's a matter of law for the Court. The Court has determined he's not an ambassador, and there's no court, universal or otherwise, that can overturn a Tennessee conviction.



With regard to the telephone calls, play those. Listen to them. There's just no plausible way you can interpret those to think that he's talking about some blankets in a Walmart bag that he's warning people not to mention or a computer. He actually mentions a computer in the telephone calls. That's clearly not what he was talking about. And I note that there still has been no explanation at all for how a gun that we can trace directly into the defendant's hands that he says wound up in the state of Mississippi ended up in Arapahoe, Nebraska, in the defendant's plane, and that's because there is no explanation for that other than the defendant brought it to Nebraska.
And the depth of his ignorance
Q. And were you in attendance at that trial?
A. I was.
Q. Was there any other person at that trial named Michael Wayne Parsons?
A. No. That's a corporate fiction that they go after -- that all-capital-letter name according to the U.S. printing style manual is a juristic person that -- under Title 28, Section 3002 by definition the United States is a federal corporation, and they can -- a corporation can only sue another corporation unless there's a contract. Without a contract it's a crime
and --
Q. So basically you're saying that you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the court in Tennessee; is that correct?
A. I'm a live man. The answer to that is no.
Q. No. No, you're not subject to the jurisdiction of the court; correct?
Denying the pending charges and trial
Q. Did you have charges pending in Tipton County, Tennessee?
A. No, sir. Those charges have been dismissed six times now.
Q. Did the -- was there some juristic person named Michael Parsons that had charges pending --
A. No, sir.
Total denial of his TN conviction for assault
Q. Before we get to what may or may not have happened to the charges after the fact, you've been convicted of a couple of felony offenses, haven't you?
A. That's not true.
Q. Well, have you been convicted of aggravated assault?
A. No, sir.
Q. You were convicted but you believe later exonerated; is that right?
A. It's not a belief. It's a fact under international law of this state.
So ignorant of the law.

The prosecutor got Mike to admit that
Q. Did you go to trial?
A. Are you familiar with a judicial --
Q. I'm asking you if you went to trial on it.
A. There was a trial, yes.
Q. Did the jury return a verdict of guilty?
A. They did.
LOL

User avatar
GlimDropper
Posts: 1436
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:35 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#136

Post by GlimDropper » Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:51 pm

YouTuber Doazic has been running something of a "Mike Parsons Lied About" series on his channel. [Link]

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#137

Post by nbc » Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:07 pm

THE COURT: And I understand the argument. The Court will take instructions up in just -- when we complete the taking of evidence. The Court will note that the defendant is charged under 18, U.S.C., Section 922, and the definition of a firearm is found at 18, U.S.C., Section 921, and that's the Court -- the Court will instruct appropriately on the law, but I will take up all of those arguments at the time of instruction.
That kills any hope that the IRS definition applies... Another Mike 'defense' gone down the drain

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#138

Post by nbc » Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:12 pm

GlimDropper wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 3:51 pm
YouTuber Doazic has been running something of a "Mike Parsons Lied About" series on his channel. [Link]
Yes, great resource...

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8215
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Mike Parsons

#139

Post by Northland10 » Thu Jun 06, 2019 6:24 pm

nbc wrote:
Thu Jun 06, 2019 4:07 pm
THE COURT: And I understand the argument. The Court will take instructions up in just -- when we complete the taking of evidence. The Court will note that the defendant is charged under 18, U.S.C., Section 922, and the definition of a firearm is found at 18, U.S.C., Section 921, and that's the Court -- the Court will instruct appropriately on the law, but I will take up all of those arguments at the time of instruction.
That kills any hope that the IRS definition applies... Another Mike 'defense' gone down the drain
It is typical SovCit and birther behavior to use some definition they find in the US Code even if that definition is completely out of context with the actual subject matter at hand. They ignore the clear language that says the definition applies only to the specifict section it is in.

Thanks for posting this. Wonderful, as always.
North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#140

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:27 pm

Mikey is a liar. If his mouth is open, he's almost certainly lying.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
scirreeve
Posts: 3291
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 12:51 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#141

Post by scirreeve » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:15 am

Mikey talks to Rudy dumbass. Says something about the difference between "conspiring to kidnap" and "lawful arrest warrants". He is nutz and I didn't listen to much of it.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#142

Post by Notorial Dissent » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:53 am

Yeah, that's right, he's got to finish his state time before he can go do his Fed time, and if he thinks it's rough now, just wait.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#143

Post by nbc » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:15 pm

Mike is making his usual random arguments about the search warrant that led to the discovery of the firearm in the plane. Since he was not charged with any kidnapping or conspiring to kidnap, he seems to suggest that the affidavit used to obtain the search warrant was somehow flawed.

This is getting pretty desperate...
But worse, he insists that this was not kidnapping as they had 'orders' from a 'court' which made this all legal. Mike has no understanding of the fact that a foreign court has no power or jurisdiction over people held in the US.
Worse, Mike insists that the US cannot interfere with the courts in his make-belief nation...
Oh how hard it is for Mike to remain consistent...

Mike is so clueless... And Rudy is lapping it up, of course. After all Rudy is still claiming that the Obama birth certificate was proven to be a fake. And he is now expanding on other foolish claims.

He is not the brightest cookie and wonders why the Lord is not listening and answering his prayers.

Duh... I am sure the Lord is listening... And he has answered the plea for justice... Which is why nothing changed to the circumstances of these prisoners...


scirreeve wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:15 am
Mikey talks to Rudy dumbass. Says something about the difference between "conspiring to kidnap" and "lawful arrest warrants". He is nutz and I didn't listen to much of it.

Jeffrey
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#144

Post by Jeffrey » Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:24 pm

You buried the lede. At minute 13 Mike confirms what has long been speculated. The guy Mike bought the plane from kept Mike's money and re-sold the plane to another guy.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12384
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#145

Post by Notorial Dissent » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:38 am

So one crook cheating another. Kharma.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8215
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Mike Parsons

#146

Post by Northland10 » Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:49 am

nbc wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:15 pm
This is getting pretty desperate...
But worse, he insists that this was not kidnapping as they had 'orders' from a 'court' which made this all legal. Mike has no understanding of the fact that a foreign court has no power or jurisdiction over people held in the US.
Worse, Mike insists that the US cannot interfere with the courts in his make-belief nation...
Oh how hard it is for Mike to remain consistent...
Mike and his elk have decided "sovereign" is whatever they claim it to be. If their made up nation were actually legit, they would need to:

1. Be a member of Interpol.
2. Have Interpol issue a red notice.
3. Hope law enforcement in the US arrested their subject (oops... only US LEO can arrest in the US, and maybe some official bounty hunters working on behalf of a US court, not a foreign court).
4. Have the subject extradited.

Now, since Mikey's fake nation is a fake Indian nation, maybe we should use the laws used for relations with sovereign tribes.

1. Sovereignty for tribal courts does not extend beyond the tribal/trust land.
2. If Mike was arresting for a Major Crime, the feds still have jurisdiction for major crimes.
3. Tribal courts do not have jurisdiction over non-Indians even on the reservation. The most they can do is hold them if arrested on tribal land and wait for the state/federal LEO to come to pick them up.

Following Mike's claim, he was trying to arrest somebody for on offense that did not occur within the territorial jurisdiction of their fake nation. Even the US cannot do that (well, there is the whole picking up terrorists in war zones thing, but that is complicated). We have to ask the sovereign nation where the subject is currently held to extradite him to us.
North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#147

Post by nbc » Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:39 pm

Jeffrey wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:24 pm
You buried the lede. At minute 13 Mike confirms what has long been speculated. The guy Mike bought the plane from kept Mike's money and re-sold the plane to another guy.
Wait, Mike's money? I thought it was Government property... Except the name on the insurance and probably the title)) Will be hard for Mike to file claims when it is a Chilcotin Nation plane, right? They will have to hire a real lawyer))

User avatar
Frater I*I
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu May 24, 2018 5:08 pm
Location: Sixth Circle, City of Dis

Re: Mike Parsons

#148

Post by Frater I*I » Sun Jun 16, 2019 2:03 am

nbc wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:39 pm
Jeffrey wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:24 pm
You buried the lede. At minute 13 Mike confirms what has long been speculated. The guy Mike bought the plane from kept Mike's money and re-sold the plane to another guy.
Wait, Mike's money? I thought it was Government property... Except the name on the insurance and probably the title)) Will be hard for Mike to file claims when it is a Chilcotin Nation plane, right? They will have to hire a real lawyer))
I have the records to the aircraft in question from the FAA, one Steve Sweat of TN co-financed the purchase with Mr. Pop-A-Squat, however because Mr. Pop-A-Squat played SovCit reindeer games and never filed the "Aircraft Change of Registration" & "Aircraft Bill of Sale" paperwork with the FAA, the original owner retained legal ownership of the aircraft, and sold it outright to Sweat in May of last year.
Gazer Into the SovCit Abyss

Jeffrey
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Mike Parsons

#149

Post by Jeffrey » Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:45 am

Oh I thought Sweat sold Mike the plane. Did Sweat know Mike was gonna use the plane to run away to Canada or did Mike scam Sweat to get a free plane?

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4228
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Re: Mike Parsons

#150

Post by nbc » Mon Jun 17, 2019 12:58 pm

So again Mike is blaming others for his failures?

Frater I*I wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 2:03 am
nbc wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:39 pm
Jeffrey wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:24 pm
You buried the lede. At minute 13 Mike confirms what has long been speculated. The guy Mike bought the plane from kept Mike's money and re-sold the plane to another guy.
Wait, Mike's money? I thought it was Government property... Except the name on the insurance and probably the title)) Will be hard for Mike to file claims when it is a Chilcotin Nation plane, right? They will have to hire a real lawyer))
I have the records to the aircraft in question from the FAA, one Steve Sweat of TN co-financed the purchase with Mr. Pop-A-Squat, however because Mr. Pop-A-Squat played SovCit reindeer games and never filed the "Aircraft Change of Registration" & "Aircraft Bill of Sale" paperwork with the FAA, the original owner retained legal ownership of the aircraft, and sold it outright to Sweat in May of last year.

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”