I think deleting documents or changing their titles to make them impossible to find would be grounds for termination and a ban from any future government employment.
Pension for Federal Workers, really isn't anything to crow about. 1.1% of your top 3 years average, for each year worked.
So, if you worked for 15 years and were making $80k, that's 16.5% of your top 3 years, or $13,200 /year. It's nothing like it use to be, where people were looking at 80% for life. So, while it's not insignificant, it's not where may people think it is.
My son's MIL retired from the IRS with full pension. It's a considerable amount yearly - I believe she told me she made around 100k while working and bringing in on pension 60k-70k a year. That's not small potatoes.
She retired right as the fed jab mandate was set to go into effect.
This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. [foreigners and aliens are by definition NOT "subject to their jurisdiction"]
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.
Mr. Howard's quote is shown on page 41 of the above PDF. This may be what just got removed from the National Archives/LoC. [See page 15 for first significant comments from Mr. Howard].
In other words, "by natural law" if your parent is a citizen of the USA, then you inherit that citizenship, and by national law, if you are born in the USA.
Nothing was JUST removed. The original tweet is 7 YEARS OLD. And if you look at that Twitter thread. The issue was fixed. 7 YEARS AGO. it was most likely a bad weblink and some Twitter user made a mountain out of a molehill.
To the bigger point. Mr. Howard's interpretation was rejected and his exception was not added to the Constitution. And it has been rejected by Supreme Court decisions since the 1800s.
And you, handshake, are missing the point entirely (likely on purpose).
It doesn't make a damn bit of difference whether it happened in 2018 and was discovered by others later and returned to its original condition, or whether it was done yesterday. In either case, the person(s) who did it committed a crime and should be fired, lose their government pension, be banned from future government employment, and be prosecuted and receive jail time. It was a crime regardless of when they did it, and whether or not someone else discovered it later and fixed it.
My comment had nothing to do with whether or not someone "deleted" history. But it seems that you don't argue with the fact that someone actually DID delete historical information from the archives and/or fuck with the titles/tags to make it harder to find that information during a search, you just think that because someone else returned it to normal later, then no history was actually deleted. You can't have it both ways. It certainly would appear that history may have been deleted, and then it was put back later by other people.
I think deleting documents or changing their titles to make them impossible to find would be grounds for termination and a ban from any future government employment.
And also prosecution and jail time.
No pension!
Pension for Federal Workers, really isn't anything to crow about. 1.1% of your top 3 years average, for each year worked.
So, if you worked for 15 years and were making $80k, that's 16.5% of your top 3 years, or $13,200 /year. It's nothing like it use to be, where people were looking at 80% for life. So, while it's not insignificant, it's not where may people think it is.
My son's MIL retired from the IRS with full pension. It's a considerable amount yearly - I believe she told me she made around 100k while working and bringing in on pension 60k-70k a year. That's not small potatoes.
She retired right as the fed jab mandate was set to go into effect.
Treason already has penalties assigned...
PDF of "Congressional Debates of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution", 1866, 440 pgs: https://ia601508.us.archive.org/26/items/DebatesThatLedToTheCreationOfTheFourteenthAmendment/Debates%20that%20led%20to%20the%20creation%20of%20the%20Fourteenth%20Amendment.pdf ; Official Congressional Record from the 39th Congress (1866)
Mr. Howard's quote is shown on page 41 of the above PDF. This may be what just got removed from the National Archives/LoC. [See page 15 for first significant comments from Mr. Howard].
Wonder what the definitions of “foreigners” and “aliens” were at the time.
First edition of Black’s Law was 1891.
Was anything used before that?
Here’s version 2. http://thelawdictionary.org/
Giles Law Dictionary might have been it
https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_a-new-law-dictionary-co_jacob-giles_1729
Has “Alien”, but not “Foreigner”
https://files.catbox.moe/a80u5m.jpeg
https://files.catbox.moe/9ny35n.jpeg
That law dictionary is hot. Too bad it’s not our jurisdiction.
Noah Webster 1828 1st Edition has much language defined as Founders were using. You can get reproductions on ebay.
Alien n. A foreigner; one born in, or belonging to, another country; one who is not a denizen, or entitled to the privileges of a citizen.
In other words, "by natural law" if your parent is a citizen of the USA, then you inherit that citizenship, and by national law, if you are born in the USA.
Natural Born Citizen Explained!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9PxdDvgQks
best explanation of this issue I have seen
Nothing was JUST removed. The original tweet is 7 YEARS OLD. And if you look at that Twitter thread. The issue was fixed. 7 YEARS AGO. it was most likely a bad weblink and some Twitter user made a mountain out of a molehill.
All of the records of these early Congresses were moved to a different website. See the note here https://www.loc.gov/collections/century-of-lawmaking/articles-and-essays/debates-of-congress/congressional-globe/
No history was deleted.
To the bigger point. Mr. Howard's interpretation was rejected and his exception was not added to the Constitution. And it has been rejected by Supreme Court decisions since the 1800s.
And you, handshake, are missing the point entirely (likely on purpose).
It doesn't make a damn bit of difference whether it happened in 2018 and was discovered by others later and returned to its original condition, or whether it was done yesterday. In either case, the person(s) who did it committed a crime and should be fired, lose their government pension, be banned from future government employment, and be prosecuted and receive jail time. It was a crime regardless of when they did it, and whether or not someone else discovered it later and fixed it.
My comment had nothing to do with whether or not someone "deleted" history. But it seems that you don't argue with the fact that someone actually DID delete historical information from the archives and/or fuck with the titles/tags to make it harder to find that information during a search, you just think that because someone else returned it to normal later, then no history was actually deleted. You can't have it both ways. It certainly would appear that history may have been deleted, and then it was put back later by other people.
Sadly we don’t know how much they have deleted or changed. They have had their had their hands in the cookie jar too damned long.
Uh, how 'bout criminal and civil prosecution and heavy fines?
But like FOR REAL THOUGH; not just threats!
Very🌽
Should be