That’s a fucking quarter, bro.
That quarter has as much silver as these people have brain cells
If it was issued 1964 or earlier, the small amount of fine silver content makes it worth about $4.00 for its melt value.
Oh, so definitely worth paying off a house with
Technically about 0.18 troy ounces
If it’s a quarter from before 1965 it actually will be mostly silver. Still not in the ballpark of whatever he owes most likely.
The one in the pic appears to say 2004
Good eyes. I couldn’t see when I zoomed in.
It can’t possibly be a 2004 as the heads side is of different design. Most likely a 1964 which is 90% silver.
I’m guessing he crossed the wires between “.900 fine silver” to get .9 ounce.
Bitch it’s a magical amulet that dispels debt.
Actually true if that debt is less than or equal to 25 cents
Damn you and your accountant magic
Back in the day, that bad boy would get you 5 bees!
As was the style at the time.
This payment is as effective as the redaction in this image.
It’s alright. OP didn’t doxx Jeffrey Bryan the person but JEFFREY BRYAN the commercial trust.
I’d love to know what kind of legislation this living brain donor is misunderstanding to have come up with the idea of using a fucking quarter to settle a (likely significantly greater) debt.
There is no legislation that they’re misunderstanding. They believe that the United States went bankrupt and was sold to pay is debts. And ever since then, the United States has fraudulently entered it’s citizens into contracts with this private entity. Evidence for this includes your name being IN ALL CAPITALS on any official document, thereby indicating that the contract implied by that document is not referring to your “person” but to your “straw man”, a trust set up by the United States for each of it’s citizens so that it can collect their taxes to continue to pay it’s debts.
And this is only the surface level weirdness. Watch Münecat’s video essay about them. It’s fascinating
Don’t they believe they’re paying with their own like $3M account or something?
Like, the government put aside $1,004,744,685,000,000 ($3M per US citizen, 1.04 quadrillion dollars) and they’re using their “allotted” $3M to pay their debts?
Yes, they think they own like .000,000,000,350/100ths of the GDP or of like all the good ij the federal reserve or something. Like they take the value of the country in a liquidation auction, and they get their share.
I gotta say, since reading your comment last night and I went to watch that sovcit Münecat video, I’ve spent my day cleaning my house watching a bunch of her videos (well, like two more. They’re long.) She’s fuckin hilarious. And very informative. But she got quite a few laughs out of me all day. Thanks for the rec. I gotta go back and watch her back catalogue now. Lovin’ a good video essay rabbit hole
the 0.9 Troy ounces of silver contained therein prevents the bank’s undead minions from arguing with anything the piece of paper says
Undead? I don’t think silver has any effect on the undead, it only works against werewolves (or werecreatures if you want to be progressive) and similar mutant creatures in most fantasy settings - unless we assume the world to operate under the rules of The Witcher books, in which silver harms all magical creatures.
Silver has been considered effective against all kinds of supernatural threats by different cultures in different ways. I would imagine the Witcher’s lore was influenced by one of these traditions. As the link indicates, it’s a pretty common trope.
Haha. This is actually true, and they are insatiable.
Not sure about the coin but he’s saying his personhood account which they claim is automated on birth is paying the debt.
I’ve just finished an hour-long wikipedia crawl and found this. It is spectacularly stupid. Whenever I think sovtard intellect has reached rock bottom, they just take out a fucking powerdrill and dig on deeper.
Reading that hurt me
Living brain donor
Living yes, the rest not so much
UCC § 3-311. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION BY USE OF INSTRUMENT.
(a) If a person against whom a claim is asserted proves that (i) that person in good faith tendered an instrument to the claimant as full satisfaction of the claim, (ii) the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute, and (iii) the claimant obtained payment of the instrument, the following subsections apply.
(b) Unless subsection © applies, the claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that the instrument or an accompanying written communication contained a conspicuous statement to the effect that the instrument was tendered as full satisfaction of the claim.
© Subject to subsection (d), a claim is not discharged under subsection (b) if either of the following applies:
(1) The claimant, if an organization, proves that (i) within a reasonable time before the tender, the claimant sent a conspicuous statement to the person against whom the claim is asserted that communications concerning disputed debts, including an instrument tendered as full satisfaction of a debt, are to be sent to a designated person, office, or place, and (ii) the instrument or accompanying communication was not received by that designated person, office, or place.
(2) The claimant, whether or not an organization, proves that within 90 days after payment of the instrument, the claimant tendered repayment of the amount of the instrument to the person against whom the claim is asserted. This paragraph does not apply if the claimant is an organization that that sent a statement complying with paragraph (1)(i).
(d) A claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that within a reasonable time before collection of the instrument was initiated, the claimant, or an agent of the claimant having direct responsibility with respect to the disputed obligation, knew that the instrument was tendered in full satisfaction of the claim.
God job hiding the name, other than the name and address at the top.
It’s alright. OP didn’t doxx Jeffrey Bryan the person but JEFFREY BRYAN the commercial trust.
Comment so good I upvoted it even though ya stole it
I am so gonna make an international treaty with him now.
Too late
So while everyone can see that this is dumb, there is actually precedent for sending bills to companies for services that weren’t rendered. If you can get them to sign for it, they are legally bound. There was a guy who was financing with his bank and he basically altered the contract(that they didn’t expect him to read to begin with) to give him no spending limit, 0% interest, and a bunch of other stuff, and he sent it back for them to sign it. Because they actually didn’t read it but signed it anyways, when it was taken to court he did win.
Although that case is real, it did not happen in the US; I believe it was Russia or some other former Soviet Republic. Under systems of law evolved from British common law, it is generally held as necessary to inform the other party of such a change to the contract.
Sending bills for services not rendered can actually result in payment from large corporations because they are constantly receiving bills, so if it looks right there is a chance someone will just pay it. However, I believe it is also fraud if they notice and can thus get you in trouble; remember, the law is primarily there to protect companies and rich people.
Yeah, if you say you did something for them but didn’t, that’s fraud.
I think you can technically get away with just sending them a letter asking for money, but you have to be careful not to imply that they owe you the money or you did anything you didn’t do.
I do some ordering for work and am confident if someone really wanted they could sneak something by me. You know once for a small amount of money.
It was for a credit card company and was in Europe. In the USA you would end up a convicted felon in prison for that.
That’s altering a contract. If there’s a dispute about added terms (that both parties signed) it’s usually construed against the more sophisticated party, i.e. the bank, not the customer.
What this dude is trying to do is from the UCC chapter 3 on negotiable instruments, which are checks and drafts. What most people know as checks are called drafts.
Accord and satisfaction: it’s funny, because is one of the rare times in law when the magic words have to be exact, and the phrase is “tendered in full satisfaction” or in full satisfaction. If the check says that in the memo line (if check is to you) or under an endorsement (if it was signed over to you), and you cash it after, you have liquidated the debt subject to certain limitations; i.e., if the organization tenders repayment back to you, the underlying promissory obligation is unpaused.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-311
Usually a draft have to be a naked order, directed to your bank, to pay the bearer or assignee, and nothing more. But this is one of the few exceptions to what you can write on a check and have the check still be valid.
§ 3-311. ACCORD AND SATISFACTION BY USE OF INSTRUMENT.
(a) If a person against whom a claim [for payment of the underlying contractual obligation] is asserted proves that; (i) that person in good faith tendered an instrument to** the claimant as full satisfaction of the claim,** (ii) the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute, and (iii) the claimant obtained payment of the instrument, the following subsections apply.
(b) Unless subsection © applies, the claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that the instrument or an accompanying written communication contained a conspicuous statement to the effect that the instrument was tendered as full satisfaction of the claim.
© Subject to subsection (d), a claim is not discharged under subsection (b) if either of the following applies:
(1) The claimant, if an organization, proves that (i) within a reasonable time before the tender, the claimant sent a conspicuous statement to the person against whom the claim is asserted that communications concerning disputed debts, including an instrument tendered as full satisfaction of a debt, are to be sent to a designated person, office, or place, and (ii) the instrument or accompanying communication was not received by that designated person, office, or place.
(2) The claimant, whether or not an organization, proves that within 90 days after payment of the instrument, the claimant tendered repayment of the amount of the instrument to the person against whom the claim is asserted. This paragraph does not apply if the claimant is an organization that that sent a statement complying with paragraph (1)(i).
(d) A claim is discharged if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that within a reasonable time before collection of the instrument was initiated, the claimant, or an agent of the claimant having direct responsibility with respect to the disputed obligation, knew that the instrument was tendered in full satisfaction of the claim.
Unless your debt is 25 cents, I don’t think that it’s going to work…
If it really is 0.9 troy ounce of silver, it’s worth about $20. Still unlikely to be accepted as payment though.
Almost an ounce of silver? Maybe add a decimal point?
Yes. That is what I’m saying. IF a quarter has a few grams of silver in it, its junk silver and worth a few dollars at most.
Quarters used to be mostly silver, it’s why quarters before 1964 are worth more than ones minted afterwards.
they also weighed 0.2oz not 0.9
It’s not even .9 troy ounces of silver. Quarters made before 1965 are 90% silver but the amount of silver is only .18 troy ounces which is worth approximately $4.10 USD keeping in mind that melting US currency is not legal.
I was just about to chime in when I saw the fucking quarter. How do you get to be so bad at being a sov cit that you don’t even know how “real” money (silver and gold) works?
so are telling me all those places that have the penny melters are doing illegal work?
Penny melters? The penny crushing machines?
i guess yeah, applying an incedible amount of pressure to deform the penny (which inherently also increases temperature)
I hope this guy wears a helmet… All the time.
I think that ship has sailed.
