11.3 and 11.4 references seem plausible to me but the matching of the U.S. code he references for 30+ minutes later on just seems like drawing a line between post to page numbers and calling it a proof.
It doesn't explain why interpreting the posts through the lens of the US code changes anything. Unless I'm missing something?
I was thinking the same. He doesn't even explain his links he just links 2 numbers and some of them don't even seem to be relevant to the Q post at all
11.3 and 11.4 references seem plausible to me but the matching of the U.S. code he references for 30+ minutes later on just seems like drawing a line between post to page numbers and calling it a proof.
It doesn't explain why interpreting the posts through the lens of the US code changes anything. Unless I'm missing something?
I was thinking the same. He doesn't even explain his links he just links 2 numbers and some of them don't even seem to be relevant to the Q post at all