The present government in D.C. is a government of a corporation. The Act of 1871 established the corporation. There is a separate Constitution, essentially a carbon copy of the organic Constitution with the exception that the physical boundaries of the corporate Constitution are the 10 square miles of the District of Columbia, and the teβ¦
The present government in D.C. is a government of a corporation. The Act of 1871 established the corporation. There is a separate Constitution, essentially a carbon copy of the organic Constitution with the exception that the physical boundaries of the corporate Constitution are the 10 square miles of the District of Columbia, and the territories of the United States (the corporation) designated as such since the Act of 1871 was passed. The country, The People, have been hoodwinked into thinking whatever legislation comes out of that corporation applies to them. --
I know, sounds fantastical, like I'm making it up. ...Wait, I have to adjust my tin foil hat. Ok, that's better... --
A lawyer once admitted to me the veracity of this info. But there was no invitation to follow-up conversation and silence when I inquired. Hm. Must be part of law school curriculum, maybe with a caveat to keep mum -? Just a guess, I don't know. --
A completely different Code, Title 26, the Income Tax Code, Β§7701 also contains definitions that are mind blowing. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7701 Scroll to (c). *Careful to go to lower case "(c)". There you will find a definition of "includes" and "including". If you thought you knew what these **ππππ π mean, well, the Code creates a new legal ***ππππ with a new definition. A **ππππ is not the same thing as a ***ππππ. In the case of Β§7701(c), the definition of the legal term is #1, obfuscated by language: you have to untangle the double negative; and #2, only applied within other definitions in the Code. Meaning, when you read "includes" or "including" within the body of the Code, the **ππππ is what should be applied, not the legal ***ππππ. Once you have untangled Β§7701(c) take a gander at other definitions, applying your new understanding of the meaning of "includes" and "including". For example, Β§7701(a)(9) and (10). Hm. Also, one wonders why the definitions, fundamental to the Code, are buried waaaay back in the text in Β§7701. Why not at the outset? Hm. --
FYI the great untangling of Title 26 has been done exquisitely and in-depth by Peter Eric Hendrickson in his reveal Cracking the Code: The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America (200+ pages). Read for free at his website: https://losthorizons.com/CtC/FrontMatter.htm --
Your suspicion about corporatization is bang on. We've been lied to our whole lives. Everybody in Washington is in on the game. It's achingly slow but some portion the People are waking from their slumber. There is a tipping point. I can't say what that is, but I'm pretty sure we're getting there. THEY (The Hierarchy Exploiting You) are in fear of the sleeping giant. Thank you for every contribution you make to the conversation!
The present government in D.C. is a government of a corporation. The Act of 1871 established the corporation. There is a separate Constitution, essentially a carbon copy of the organic Constitution with the exception that the physical boundaries of the corporate Constitution are the 10 square miles of the District of Columbia, and the territories of the United States (the corporation) designated as such since the Act of 1871 was passed. The country, The People, have been hoodwinked into thinking whatever legislation comes out of that corporation applies to them. --
I know, sounds fantastical, like I'm making it up. ...Wait, I have to adjust my tin foil hat. Ok, that's better... --
Basic info: https://ronaldwederfoort.wordpress.com/2014/10/31/act-of-1871-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america/
Definitions in Title 28 as referred to in above link. Scroll to (15)(A) / (B)/ (C) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002 --
A lawyer once admitted to me the veracity of this info. But there was no invitation to follow-up conversation and silence when I inquired. Hm. Must be part of law school curriculum, maybe with a caveat to keep mum -? Just a guess, I don't know. --
A completely different Code, Title 26, the Income Tax Code, Β§7701 also contains definitions that are mind blowing. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/7701 Scroll to (c). *Careful to go to lower case "(c)". There you will find a definition of "includes" and "including". If you thought you knew what these **ππππ π mean, well, the Code creates a new legal ***ππππ with a new definition. A **ππππ is not the same thing as a ***ππππ. In the case of Β§7701(c), the definition of the legal term is #1, obfuscated by language: you have to untangle the double negative; and #2, only applied within other definitions in the Code. Meaning, when you read "includes" or "including" within the body of the Code, the **ππππ is what should be applied, not the legal ***ππππ. Once you have untangled Β§7701(c) take a gander at other definitions, applying your new understanding of the meaning of "includes" and "including". For example, Β§7701(a)(9) and (10). Hm. Also, one wonders why the definitions, fundamental to the Code, are buried waaaay back in the text in Β§7701. Why not at the outset? Hm. --
FYI the great untangling of Title 26 has been done exquisitely and in-depth by Peter Eric Hendrickson in his reveal Cracking the Code: The Fascinating Truth About Taxation in America (200+ pages). Read for free at his website: https://losthorizons.com/CtC/FrontMatter.htm --
Your suspicion about corporatization is bang on. We've been lied to our whole lives. Everybody in Washington is in on the game. It's achingly slow but some portion the People are waking from their slumber. There is a tipping point. I can't say what that is, but I'm pretty sure we're getting there. THEY (The Hierarchy Exploiting You) are in fear of the sleeping giant. Thank you for every contribution you make to the conversation!