Lingua franca

A lingua franca (/ˌlɪŋɡwə ˈfræŋkə/ (listen); lit. ’Frankish tongue’; for plurals see § Usage notes),[1] also known as a bridge language, common language, trade language, auxiliary language, vehicular language, or link language, is a language or dialect systematically used to make communication possible between groups of people who do not share a native language or dialect, particularly when it is a third language that is distinct from both of the speakers’ native languages.[2]

Lingua francas have developed around the world throughout human history, sometimes for commercial reasons (so-called “trade languages” facilitated trade), but also for cultural, religious, diplomatic and administrative convenience, and as a means of exchanging information between scientists and other scholars of different nationalities.[3][4] The term is taken from the medieval Mediterranean Lingua Franca, an Italian-based pidgin language used especially by traders in the Mediterranean Basin from the 11th to the 19th centuries.[5] A world language – a language spoken internationally and by many people – is a language that may function as a global lingua franca.

arrears (n.)

“balance due, that which is behind in payment,” early 15c., plural noun from Middle English arrere (adv.) “in or to the rear; in the past; at a disadvantage” (c. 1300), from Anglo-French arrere, Old French ariere “behind, backward” (12c., Modern French arrière), from Vulgar Latin *ad retro, from Latin ad “to” (see ad-) + retro “behind” (see retro-).

It generally implies that part of the money already has been paid. Arrearage (early 14c.) was the earlier noun. Phrase in arrears first recorded 1610s, but in arrearages is from late 14c.

epigraph (n.)

1620s, “inscription on a building, statue, etc.,” from Greek epigraphē “an inscription,” from epigraphein “to mark the surface, just pierce; write on, inscribe; to register; inscribe one’s name, endorse,” from epi “on” (see epi-) + graphein “to write” (see -graphy). Sense of “motto; short, pithy sentence at the head of a book or chapter” first recorded in English 1844. Related: Epigraphic; epigraphical.

Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship

In December 1777, the Moroccan Sultan Muhammad III included the United States in a list of countries to which Morocco’s ports were open. Morocco thus became the first country whose head of state publicly recognized the newly independent United States.[1][2]

Relations were formalized with the Moroccan–American Treaty of Friendship [3] negotiated by Thomas Barclay in Marrakesh, and signed by American diplomats in Europe, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams with Sultan Muhammad III in 1786.[4][5]

Muhammad III, or Sidi Muhammad ibn Abdallah, came to power in 1757 and ruled until his death in 1790. Prior to his reign, Morocco had experienced 30 years of internecine battles, instability and turmoil. During the 33 years Sidi Muhammad ruled he transformed the politics, the economy and the society, putting development of international trade high on his agenda and restoring power to the sultanate. This served to quickly bring respect to Morocco on the international scene.[6] Central to his pursuit of international trade was the negotiation of agreements with foreign commercial powers. He began seeking one with the United States before the war with Great Britain was settled in 1783, and welcomed Thomas Barclay’s arrival to negotiate in 1786. The treaty signed by Barclay and the sultan, then by Jefferson and Adams, was ratified by the Confederation Congress in July 1787.[7] It was reaffirmed by the sultan in 1803 when the USS Constitution, Nautilus, New York, and Adams engaged in gunboat diplomacy as part of the First Barbary War. (At the time, independent corsairs and pirates were using Morocco’s ports as safe harbors between raids on American and European shipping.) The treaty has withstood transatlantic stresses and strains for more than 234 years, making it the longest unbroken treaty relationship in United States history.[8]

Things to include in Trust

Trust Indenture for an Irrevocable Trust and operating all three positions would technically be a violation of the Arm’s length principle however by leveraging the Treaty of Peace and Friendship 1836 as well as:

Library of Congress, Congressional Records on the 14th Amendment

American Jurisprudence Volume 16, Second Edition Subsection 195

Constitutional Law Reprinted from Case Law Volume 6 Subsection 117

Public Law 97-280

Us Statutes at Large 96 Stat 1211

as you outlined here: https://youtu.be/LAp2-6zjEvc?t=3859

And be it, they’ve violated Articles 2, 3, 22 of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1836, defacto, civilitus mortuus, 14th amendment citizens and insolvent, is it fair to assume these facts would render them unfit to rule on the matter.

All of this would need to be included into the trust indenture/corpus of the trust.

When challenged by the court or whomever is construing the trust to be an ‘association’, I would enter the indenture/documents into evidence which would mum the prosecutor and dismiss the accusation.