I'm entirely uninterested in doxxing myself, particularly on this website. I notice you ignored this part of my post:
Do you have any evidence these trustees exist? Can you direct me to something in the Congressional Record establishing them? After all, were they to exist, they'd either be mentioned in the Constitution, or in the Congressional Record.
Go on. After all, it should be incredibly easy for you to prove that these trustees exist if they in fact do. You presumably believe this on the basis of some actual evidence, right?
No, I don't want you to take my word for it - I want you to interrogate the evidence. Why won't you answer these questions?
Do you have any evidence these trustees exist? Can you direct me to something in the Congressional Record establishing them? After all, were they to exist, they'd either be mentioned in the Constitution, or in the Congressional Record.
Since you're so concerned with proof, you presumably have proof that these trustees exist, right?
Huh? I didn't make the original claim; the original, positive claim is that the United States does have trustees. It needs to be proven that they exist, not that they don't exist.
Do you believe that the United States has trustees? Why have you asked none of the people asserting that it does for proof?
You'd know this if you were an actual attorney and not some fake ass troll who knows more about Mario World and gay porn then they do US law or the Constitution. FAKE
As unhappy as it may make you, I am in fact an actual attorney. The claim that has been advanced is that the United States has trustees. There is no default assumption that it does. Can you provide proof that these trustees exist?
It sounds awfully like you can't. Is that an accurate statement?
I'm entirely uninterested in doxxing myself, particularly on this website. I notice you ignored this part of my post:
Go on. After all, it should be incredibly easy for you to prove that these trustees exist if they in fact do. You presumably believe this on the basis of some actual evidence, right?
No, I don't want you to take my word for it - I want you to interrogate the evidence. Why won't you answer these questions?
Since you're so concerned with proof, you presumably have proof that these trustees exist, right?
Huh? I didn't make the original claim; the original, positive claim is that the United States does have trustees. It needs to be proven that they exist, not that they don't exist.
Do you believe that the United States has trustees? Why have you asked none of the people asserting that it does for proof?
As unhappy as it may make you, I am in fact an actual attorney. The claim that has been advanced is that the United States has trustees. There is no default assumption that it does. Can you provide proof that these trustees exist?
It sounds awfully like you can't. Is that an accurate statement?