Post 158: 2027 “White House” Budget Priorities - 4.15.2026

2027 “White House” Budget Priorities - 4.15.2026

The first matter to which to attend is the “status” of this “budget.” Following a declaration of “strike” on March 12, 2025, I have continued to “act” as IF there was “SUPPOSED TO BE” a legitimate federal budget process, including in what “would have been” the third of an anticipated four-year term. Before three days before the March 15, 2025 deadline, however, I understood that actions by others comporting themselves as if they were government officials – on both the state and federal level – had been commenced in a “Constitutional void.” This included the fact that BY THAT TIME there was NO “Constitution of the United States” available for OVER 60 days at any “public facility” about which I knew or could enter. It was FOR OVER 60 days by that time. As one knows, a 60-day period at the level of the “Chief Executive” is considerable as a concern perhaps unique to any other office. I had already made public declarations about this factor, as well as the fact that official electronic government records were being conditionally and “temporarily” altered from the original form, in violation of federal laws concerning “electronic government records” as OFFICIAL government records. Even the President of the United States lacks the “authority” to create counterfeits and forgeries of official government documents, either through an executive agency, the legislative record, or the courts. 

At this time, however, in what manner would one “receive” this budget proposal? In line with the last three years, “control factors” demonstrate it “could have been successful” to certain points with accounting for material factors that prevent certain implementation. Those will be identified below. On the other hand, if one goes on “strike” then one understands that the accounting for what would be done during the strike provides a material consideration of the “value” of the “work or worker” that is NOT available to the “manager” or the “owner” of the “corporation” and is assessed in subsequent negotiations. It has now been more than a year. It was ON Sept. 12, 2025 that I was “banned” from being able to get online at the locations wherein I had been performing my “work.” That means the “ban” ended on March 12, 2026. It is now 34 days since the end of the “ban” and it is what “would be” the deadline for the President to present his/her/zher budget priorities to the federal Congress for consideration in the appropriations cycle. I have accounted based upon what has been available to me and in line what was already presented publicly. 

The “distinction” between “state” and “federal” jurisdiction considerations was already presented FORMALLY before a state court in 2017. By October of 2017, that presentation was “appealed” to the “federal court” along with another original formal petition specific to legislative concerns going back to 2010. The “jurisdiction” as I understood it and have maintained until this time was federal and via the Supreme Court of the United States. I followed up in October of 2018 with a second petition to the Supreme Court of the United States. By January of 2020, another third petition was sent to the Supreme Court of the United States regarding the manners in which I contended the lack of appropriate and legally REQUIRED Constitutional consideration had “infected” the federal Legislature. In the meantime, as least three times I submitted request for New Trial or a follow-up to that request at the level of local federal court and yet have not “repudiated” my relationship with the “state” in which I have been in the time frame I have been subject to material conditions that are neither my “choice” nor in comportment with “Constitutional rights” I contend are not allowed to be suspended or denied ANYONE, including myself. 

To begin

[10:42 am CST

April 15, 2026

/s/: Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse]