ChristendomEmergencyFree people vs. police stateInterpositionPanic 2020

Facts in state’s case vs. Lee in overthrow of TN law, order

Protesters from the Chattanooga area line a boulevard in Fort Oglethorpe, Ga., to support Memorial hospital nurses being fired for refusal to give consent to a often lethal experimental shot.
Protests in the Chattanooga area against the CV-19 fraudulent emergency show sympathy for Memorial hospital nurses being fired for refusal to take a disastrous experimental jab demanded by their corporate overlords.

State of Tennessee on relation files suit against respondents when their fraudulent acts purporting to “fight” a virus irreparably harm him, the state of Tennessee, and consequently, 6.8 million other people in Tennessee without evidence of any lawful warrant, nonfraudulent exigency, or consequent  authority.

[This summary of facts in the Tulis case vs. Gov. Bill Lee and Becky Barnes in Hamilton County is short enough in the case that was 201 days in chancery court under the strangulative grip of Judge Pamela Fleenor. Party harmed by state of emergency, launched without the equivalent of “probable cause,” an he is in court demanding remedy and relief. The case is in the court of appeals in Knoxville, with Mrs. Barnes’ lawyer having obtained 30 days extra in which to open a PDF she’s been unable to open for 103 days. — DJT]

Even if jurisdiction could have been shown, the authority vested by that jurisdiction claimed by respondents exceeds lawful limits, adversely affecting relator without due process requiring they adhere to the legislative will. 

How relator Tulis was harmed

Relator’s unrebutted facts and testimony  include these: He was threatened July 31, 2020, with arrest on the spot in violation of T.C.A. § 40-7-103, arrest by officer without warrant, for being in the Hamilton County courts building in Chattanooga with a bare face. He was forced under this threat to exit the building, and was denied his rights as a member of the public and of the press to fulfill a fundamental liberty interest in being present, violating his right of freedom of association, and freedom from association with threatening officers (p. 42).

Separately, on or about April 12, 2020, he was ordered into his car after he had stepped out of it in the parking lot of Metro Tabernacle church. The order by Chattanooga police officers on private property injured relator in the free exercise of his religious tenets and convictions (p. 44). In a third harm, relator was denied the rights of ingress and egress at his church, North Shore Fellowship in Chattanooga, the government of which was so deceived and bullied by respondents and their agents that its officers closed the church, which they would not have done but for actions of respondents (p. 43). Fourthly, people everywhere are “unwilling to meeting with [relator] at every part of life in local economy *** People have shut their businesses and won’t sell to him, refusing also to buy from him in the ordinary course of business” (p. 46). A fifth harm: relator’s right to honest government services, denial of which “wrongfully infringed and prohibited affian’s right of free association or being free of interference with innumerable fellow residents of Hamilton County” (p. 45). And that these are the direct or indirect cause evidenced in the petition.

 Relator has rights fixed in the constitution and in the Tennessee Code’s claims upon those elected or hired to serve in public office. Respondents are, duly, government officials who work and breathe together to oppress the people in Tennessee while refusing to obey state law. 

The unrebutted facts and testimony of record, the petition and affidiavit, claim and show respondent cannot demonstrate a nonfraudulent exigency for the emergency declared under color of authority and causing irreparable harm to relator. For instance, respondents have no determination of an agent of contagion as required by the communicable disease code,  T.C.A. § 68-5-104, no isolate for an unsubstantiated communicable agent called SARS-CoV-2, rather relying only upon so-called Covid-19, merely a set of flulike symptoms, called a disease.

‘Not demonstrated requisite nonfraudulent exigency’

The facts are that respondents lack any jurisdiction whatsoever for the authority to administer the public health crisis, having not demonstrated the requisite nonfraudulent exigency for their pretentious emergency.

The widely reported respondent Lee-caused economic meltdown of starting March 2020 and the vast social cost of converting the state into a penal colony is attributable to fraud by respondents, acts outside of authority, under color of law, without warrant or cause, acts that are arbitrary and capricious, done in their persons, without cloak or coverture of their offices, and so subject to chancery court, which acts upon the person.

Chancery has authority to compel respondents to show cause through issuance of a writ of mandamus for a return demonstrating the nonfraudulent exigency warranting the declared emergency and, based upon that return, bring any other equity relief within the power of chancery to bear, or as offered in demand of the petition to stop the irreparable harm caused today and into the future.


Time to fight


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.