Kid thinks that the constitution was instituted in 1776, when it was instituted in 1789, and that the founding fathers were alive after the civil war (!). Also this weird crap about DC being owned by the Vatican and London.
Huh? The Vatican is a city-state, if you like, but neither the City of London or DC are; the City of London is under British jurisdiction, while DC is under US jurisdiction. None of the three "own" each other.
A source for what? The claim that DC is under US jurisdiction and that London is under British jurisdiction? Sure; see the incorporation documents for DC here, and observe the ongoing state of affairs in which US law is enforced in DC in US courts.
Prove him wrong about what? Do you think that the constitution was instituted in 1776, and not 1789, then? That's embarrassing.
Washington DC is a municipal corporation under the sovereignty of the United States, which is blindingly obvious from the fact that it's under US jurisdiction - hence the enforcement of US laws within its confines, by US courts, and not the British or Vatican ones. The idea that the British or Vatican "own" Washington DC is also, frankly, embarrassing, since, y'know, municipal corporations don't have owners.
Why on earth are you asking me for proof that he's wrong, as opposed to proof that any of these ridiculous claims he's making are true? Like, it's not controversial that the constitution was instituted in 1789. It's a basic fact of American history. Nor does anyone think that the British courts are hearing cases that take place in DC, or that people in DC obey British laws, etc. Do you believe otherwise? If so, why?
These beliefs are embarrassing.
Incorporation is always subject to the law of the incorporating jurisdiction. There's nothing strange about DC in that regard; it's a perfectly standard US municipal corporation that happens to be set up as a federal district.
This would be nice until you read the full history of Lincoln and you then understand how and why he was assassinated. I'd look up Charles Chiniquy and his relationship with the Vatican and Lincoln and how their entire story entwines and sadly involves the assassination of the most prolific and Godly president we've ever had at that point.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You need to prove the claims, not just believe them out of faith and tell everyone else to prove you wrong.
Kid thinks that the constitution was instituted in 1776, when it was instituted in 1789, and that the founding fathers were alive after the civil war (!). Also this weird crap about DC being owned by the Vatican and London.
These are not signs of intelligence.
What you don't understand city states? The Vatican, City of London and DC?
Huh? The Vatican is a city-state, if you like, but neither the City of London or DC are; the City of London is under British jurisdiction, while DC is under US jurisdiction. None of the three "own" each other.
You have sauce for that?
A source for what? The claim that DC is under US jurisdiction and that London is under British jurisdiction? Sure; see the incorporation documents for DC here, and observe the ongoing state of affairs in which US law is enforced in DC in US courts.
Prove him wrong......................................... get back to us will ya!!
Prove him wrong about what? Do you think that the constitution was instituted in 1776, and not 1789, then? That's embarrassing. Washington DC is a municipal corporation under the sovereignty of the United States, which is blindingly obvious from the fact that it's under US jurisdiction - hence the enforcement of US laws within its confines, by US courts, and not the British or Vatican ones. The idea that the British or Vatican "own" Washington DC is also, frankly, embarrassing, since, y'know, municipal corporations don't have owners. Why on earth are you asking me for proof that he's wrong, as opposed to proof that any of these ridiculous claims he's making are true? Like, it's not controversial that the constitution was instituted in 1789. It's a basic fact of American history. Nor does anyone think that the British courts are hearing cases that take place in DC, or that people in DC obey British laws, etc. Do you believe otherwise? If so, why? These beliefs are embarrassing.
Why couldn't the corporation charter itself to obey sovereign US law with the right to revoke such election?
Incorporation is always subject to the law of the incorporating jurisdiction. There's nothing strange about DC in that regard; it's a perfectly standard US municipal corporation that happens to be set up as a federal district.
This would be nice until you read the full history of Lincoln and you then understand how and why he was assassinated. I'd look up Charles Chiniquy and his relationship with the Vatican and Lincoln and how their entire story entwines and sadly involves the assassination of the most prolific and Godly president we've ever had at that point.
That’s not how it works.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You need to prove the claims, not just believe them out of faith and tell everyone else to prove you wrong.
Are you 14?