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.
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.
Feel free to provide evidence. I did.
Q didn't ever reference this one either and any reading for themselves will see why not.
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.
Feel free to provide evidence. I did.
Q didn't ever reference this one either and any reading for themselves will see why not.
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.
Feel free to provide evidence. I did.
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.
Feel free to provide evidence. I did.
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 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