Kevin and Donnabella Realworldfare have lawfully changed their names, creating a new family dynasty with a name never before used in recorded history. Their children, Adonis and Zoiya Realworldfare, become the first heirs to carry forward this sovereign legacy. The Realworldfare name represents authorship, truth, and freedom from inherited fiction. This name change marks the foundation of a private, self-governed bloodline rooted in purpose and lawful inheritance.
When a politician accepts public office, they operate under a different legal capacity — no longer as a private State Citizen with unalienable rights, but as a U.S. citizen bound to statutory obligations. Their oath of office contracts them into fiduciary duty, placing them under administrative and commercial law, not common law. This transition subordinates natural rights in favor of public trust obligations. Under doctrines like Clearfield Trust and UCC § 1-201(27), politicians act as agents of the corporate UNITED STATES and are subject to public policy, not sovereign authority. In essence, holding office means operating as a trustee of the public, not a free individual.
This exposé reveals a coordinated RICO enterprise operating within Riverside County’s justice system, naming Sheriff Chad Bianco, DA Michael Hestrin, Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner, and others for systemic fraud, extortion, and deprivation of rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It further exposes U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal for judicial obstruction and record concealment, constituting willful interference in violation of federal due process. Backed by an active federal RICO lawsuit under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 before Judge Wesley Hsu, the article outlines a pattern of racketeering, forged instruments, false filings, and unlawful evictions. Officials including Pam Bondi, Rob Bonta, Kash Patel, and the FBI have been formally notified but remain silent. This is not isolated misconduct—it is organized crime under color of law. The piece stands as both public notice and evidentiary documentation for further federal action.
Charles Rogers (Bar #64530) and Jeremiah D. Raxter (Bar #276811) are engaged in an ongoing scheme of judicial fraud and racketeering in Riverside County, California. Both individuals are inactive members of the California State Bar and have no lawful authority to act as judges or commissioners. Their acts — including issuing bench warrants, signing orders, and presiding over court matters — are void ab initio and constitute federal felonies under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1962. Their actions represent a criminal enterprise under color of law, demanding immediate investigation, disbarment, and prosecution. Public notice is hereby given that all their proceedings are fraudulent and without legal force.
Charles Rogers, Jeremiah D. Raxter, and Monika Vermani have engaged in a criminal racketeering enterprise in Riverside County, California, committing fraud, extortion, and deprivation of rights under color of law. Rogers and Raxter, both inactive and unauthorized to practice law, unlawfully acted as judicial officers, issuing void orders and illegal warrants. Vermani knowingly pursued fraudulent prosecutions despite clear constitutional violations, further implicating her under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and RICO 18 U.S.C. § 1962. Their coordinated acts constitute felonies and establish a pattern of racketeering activity subject to immediate federal civil rights and criminal actions. All fraudulent obligations have been assigned to the Treasury under UCC 1-308 and 31 U.S.C. § 3123, and full prosecution and sanctions are being pursued.
Tamara L. Wagner (CA Bar #188613), a licensed attorney acting as a judicial officer in Riverside County, is now at the center of a federal removal action citing judicial fraud, civil rights violations, and RICO conspiracy. Defendants allege she is unlawfully practicing law from the bench without constitutional authority, advancing proceedings in open dishonor. Verified affidavits, UCC filings, and summary judgment demands were ignored, leading to claims of railroading and systemic court corruption. The case, removed under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1443, and 1446, is now pending in federal court.
Learn how establishing yourself or your private trust as the Secured Party gives you legal control over property, proceeds, and financial rights. Under UCC § 9-315, a perfected security interest continues in collateral even after it’s sold — and automatically attaches to identifiable proceeds. Whether it’s a foreclosed home, sold vehicle, or reassigned note, your claim survives and shifts to the new form of value. UCC § 9-607 empowers the Secured Party to collect, enforce, and demand payment or possession of those proceeds. This is how you secure standing in equity and law — and why understanding secured party status is essential for true remedy and asset protection.
In the American republic, no man or woman can be lawfully punished for a victimless crime where no injury, harm, or contract exists. This article breaks down how statutes and administrative codes are often used to presume jurisdiction without consent, violating fundamental rights. It discusses the right not to contract, the doctrine of corpus delicti, and the legal consequences of color of law enforcement.
Many individuals are unaware that a W-2 form may function as an implied gift contract, classifying wages as voluntary transfers under IRS gift and estate tax rules. By signing a W-4, employees unknowingly authorize their earnings to be withheld and presumed as taxable income, potentially falling under estate and wealth transfer taxation per 26 U.S.C. § 2501 and § 2511. This article explores how W-2 wages align with Class 2 and Class 5 gift tax classifications, the silent trust relationship created by voluntary withholding, and how to rebut the presumption that earnings were gifted into the tax system. Understanding this hidden legal framework is essential for asserting proper tax classification and protecting your income.
"Under the color of law" refers to actions taken by government Officials or Agents that appear to be within the bounds of their lawful authority but are, in fact, abuses of power or violations of an private citizen/non-citizen national‘s constitutional rights. This phrase is often used in legal contexts to describe situations where "law enforcement Officers" or other public officials misuse their positions to commit unlawful acts of injustice and/or or discrimination, such as unlawful arrests, excessive force, unlawful and illegal foreclosures (since all foreclosures are fraud since Executive Order 6102 and House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5, 1933, public law 73-10), unlawful repossessions/thefts, or illegal searches and seizures.
In the realm of financial obligations, there is a fundamental principle that separates the tangible from the intangible, the government-created […]