My take:
Alito and Thomas - true patriots. Thomas should be chief justice.
Gorsuch - follows the law, even if the outcome is bad. Would vote in favor if there is legal precedent. Decent and good person.
Coney Barrett - appears to follow the law. Seems like a good person. TBD.
Kavanaugh - idk. I really don't like how long he served in the DC circuit and in general with the swamp. I hope after their treatment of him he remembers and does the right thing.
John Roberts - judicial activist shithead. Coward. Will change sides to be on the winning team.
Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor - judicial activist shitheads. The law only applies when it suits their agenda. Democrats through and through, even though judges should be neutral.
Thank you for this. That is where I am coming from. There is a lot of verifiably false stuff circulated as a part of this theory that I did not address. I addressed the two cites I saw. I have not seen one pro theorist cite in here besides the two I already addressed, but in fairness I have to review the longer comments. I think this is a time sink meant to waste resources like time and focus. I think I will try to prove it, if I can.
I was really hopeful on this one. On one of the beginning pages he offers a free download for Blacks Law 4th edition, which is awesome. Then i read this:
Common Law is the law of the LAND. Statutory/corporate/commerce law is the law of the SEA. And there is actually one more jurisdiction of the AIR, which is governed by God and the Bible. The Air jurisdiction is expressed in law by Trust Law (which has its own rules) and Canon Law.
Look at the first sentence. The constitution is the supreme law of the land. Period.
If he doesn't believe in the constitution, I am not reading further.
Is there something on there in particular that you liked? I will check it out.
I sourced this to 3 different websites that look like they were made in the early 2000s. They all describe it as being said in a private meeting with him and Woodrow Wilson. If it was private, who heard it?
Can you provide a source?
Agreed, but I see this floated on the site and it seems suspect to say the least. We don't have infinite time and it seems like a time sink for researchers. Some of the responses here have been to refer to the act in 1871, which I addressed above. It doesn't say what they think it says. I think a followup is in order to respond to the more lengthy responses I received which also don't look promising and seem to miss the mark. I hope to learn something!
Thank you for this. All this corporation stuff is trash. They never provide sources other than the 1871 stuff, which shows nothing. This is right up there with flat earth bullshit.