Here is a guy who claims to know a lot about common law but does not even know what a "legal fiction" is....

Richard Michael is a common law advocate. He conducts teleconferences and presentations covering subjects related to sovereignty, common law, constitutions, case law, and government institutions, particularly with relation to grand juries, lawyers, judges, and voting. Richard also runs Grassroots PhoneBank™, a voter contact system, to help candidates win elections without breaking the bank. Patriot groups or individuals or candidates may contact Richard at (909) 274-0813.

Richard Michael? He is someone with a last name as a first name, or he has adopted that culty Christian identity thing which uses given name only. Perhaps I should call him to clarify... However I have better things to do aside wasting time attempting to straightening him out on his misbeliefs settled by his ego... In such regard...

Read his paper, Snake Oil for Sale - Whatever You've Got, We've Got The Cure! - USA vs. US.
Yes, he covered everything in the title. LOL. Download the blather here : www.pacinlaw.us/pdf/mcs/SnakeOil_Richard_Michael.pdf

Although what he is addressing are pertinent points of contention I have with "the movement", the paper is very poorly written and does not really prove much of anything. The problem and sad thing is, people that are not learned will lump the blather into some kind of final say on the issues. The real sad or questionable part is, G. Edward Griffin posted this sad article. Makes one think who really has any sense in this movement. It seems that the writer is part of G's "Freedom Force" so I guess he is "okay" in G's book. Afterall, it is all about sucking-up and not truth, right?

By the way, his misunderstanding of what a legal fiction* is was noted in his scholarly paper posted above.
That should tell you what the rest of his opinions and writings are worth.

Round and round the confusion goes, where it stops nobody knows.

---

* His rendition of a "legal fiction" is a legal entity. Sorry, that is wrong. A 'legal fiction' is a presumption made by a court (or other source) due to the lack of evidence to the contrary of which the court (or other) formulates its belief.