Apologize if it’s been addressed. He’s always said Bigger than you can imagine. Seems like Da Vinci Code level shit.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (27)
sorted by:
If you actually read the Act, which I highly recommend, you will learn a lot about who to listen to, as well as about the Act itself and that entire theory. And you will see why Q did not mention, ever, or ever base anything on that theory.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/41st-congress/session-3/c41s3ch62.pdf
I have never seen anyone touting the theory ever provide a link to the Act. If you read for yourself, it'll be crystal clear why they don't.
Just for reference, the Act of 1871 alone is not what does it. The players that hid in the shadows never make it that obvious. It was done in a series of Acts.
Start with the Organic Act of 1801 and go from there.
These are two sources to help with the information. One of how we got here and another on the legal sleight-of-hand created by it.
http://www.usavsus.info/
https://www.teamlaw.org/Mythology-CorpUS.htm
One key thing from the legal analysis linked above is this: Our historical records and laws clearly show that Corp. U.S. is not merely an incorporated municipality; rather, it is a private Corporation that was lawfully created by our original jurisdiction government
Also, Q in fact did reference this in #2437 - RETURN OLD GLORY TO HER FORMER STATE.
So, what current state is Old Glory in that Q mentions returning to the FORMER state?
The 1871 Act doesn't do it at all. Feel free to try to show where it does anything in reference to anything outside the literal and quite small District of Columbia, setting up that local government not the national. Ditto for the 1801.
Absolutely everyone I have ever seen advancing this theory does so with assertions only and never evidence. Pointing to other people who likewise make assertions with no evidence is not evidence. Not that you pointed to anyone else, I am speaking in general of those advancing this theory.
Anyone who likes may read this Act too and see why those advancing this theory never provide the Act itself or anything from it that supports their claims:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=002/llsl002.db&recNum=140
I understand it being an appealing narrative. But sorry, a magic trick of "The real United States Government and Constitution were dissolved in 1871 (or any year) and replaced with a Corporation, which Trump dissolved all by himself, so Biden is President of nothing and Trump will be or already is the 19th President" is neither the answer nor an argument that will do anything but persuade those who do actual research that the person claiming it does not research for themselves and believes baseless claims.
This theory is a distraction. There are very real things to be paying attention to.
Also stop and think. Replacing the Constitution and changing the form of government is not as simple as passing an Act or any number of acts.
I provided evidence showing clearly they are local government only.
Feel free to provide evidence to support any contrary claim these Acts ever covered national government as opposed to local District of Columbia only. Your links do not.
Q didn't ever reference this one either and any reading for themselves will see why not.
Sorry, posting "Old Glory" does not support it and any whose standard of thinking has it that that proves this theory, we really can't have a meaningful discussion as on that basis, anythinG "proves" anything.
I provided you with two links where there is extensive review of the Acts and how they combined to make this happen.
So I did provide evidence. Feel free to go through it first before responding.
While you are providing links to the Acts, you are failing to see the sleight of hand that comes from the combination of these acts over time.
Furthermore, Q did say returning Old Glory to the FORMER STATE. What is the definition of FORMER? What is our CURRENT state?
I don't know where the US Constitution was dissolved in 1871 comes from. No, the US Constitution was hijacked into USA Inc., which flipped the balance of power the way the original Constitution intended. Up until that time, the Federal Government was subservient to the States. Since 1871, that flipped around.
This is why the 16th and 17th Amendment did not go through the standard ratification process and ONLY went through the 2/3 process.
Also, I want to clarify I don't buy into the Trump dissolved the USA Inc. theory either. What I do believe is he is going to restore the balance of Constitutional Power the way it was BEFORE 1871.
In other words, your position appears that while the Acts which supposedly are the basis for the theory don't say anything remotely proving or supporting the theory, in fact contradict it by clearly being limited to the local government of this small district and having nothing to do with the national government or anywhere outside the physical bounds of the small district, who needs the Acts to agree with the claims?
Nor does a single piece of law or legal decision anywhere back it up (or, provide one if you have one.)
But that's okay, because you had links to assertions, which don't agree with the actual Acts.
There has to be a foundation for claims. And when the claimed foundation not only doesn't say as claimed but contradicts, some will spot the problem while others will hold to their theory regardless.
Anyway, each can read for himself the Acts and see for themselves.
If you think you're going to awaken anyone by arguing Biden was elected President of a US Corporation only, which corporation Trump dissolved by himself, based on Acts you name which don't match up with claims, and therefore Biden is President of nothing and Trump is the 19th President and that is what will soon be revealed, good luck with that. IMO this theory exists as disinfo to appeal to Patriots as the narrative seems great, but as a weapon for them to lose their credibility when touting the literally baseless theory.
I posted the alleged foundations: any can see for themselves the not only zero support but absolute contradiction. I understand you appear to be not processing that so whatever reply you like, have the last word. I know it won't be actual evidence because it never is with this theory.
And no, a law setting out the various ways in which the United States can be a party to a case by defining that this can include whether as a "A) Federal corporation; (B)an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C)an instrumentality of the United States" does not say any more than that. The government comprises not only agencies, departments, etc but also entities which eaxh are a Federal corporation such as for example the Tennessee Valley Authority. Completely different than confirming the government was replaced. Added because I think you may have been sincere with that, but no, it does not support the theory, at all.