I believe all Patriots involved here are offering a space of info to grow and
understand better who we are. Negatively judging one's contributions, or lack
of value in such a way is not contributing to the whole positively. I don’t
understand where the value of inhibiting anyone's process or contribution is in
this sort of way.
Is it really hard to just pass by something if you aren’t interested in it?
Can it be the fault of the author to why anyone’s comments would illicit anger
in another, when no malice is intended?
I have asked and gotten no answers from anyone with some of my basic questions,
likely because most people already know the answer, and have already visited
the issue too many times in prior posts to be interested. I think that new
people offer the greatest pathway to greater change, and helping them
understand who they are would be the best use of anyone's time. Most of these
deep conversations around what is lawful or not, sounds many times to me,
people fluffing their egos with their legal prowess, rather than breaking it
down a bit so that a layman can understand the lessons being shared.
At this point I gain something from everything I read here. I read all of the
posts.
On Oct 2, 2021, at 9:43 AM, nrcwinner@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
NELSON:
We all Know you are existing and alive.
No need to shout on this site ALL THE TIME with defragmented, multiple
emails of some unconcerned information ir take it to private individuals (
R. Paris? ).
Publuc v. Private: know the difference, lack of good judgment?
Presuming we all got nothing better to do ?
You will drive all good, resourceful people away....
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>
On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 9:20, Mike P
<mike_p_5@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mike_p_5@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
They are talking about "lawful money" of the country you are in...and you're
NOT in peso land....
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 6:43 AM
To: Administrating-Your-Public-Servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] McCullagh v Maryland. Glenn
and others quote many times, pay in pesos etc...., noticed this in the OPINION
Upon the issue of stock, bonds, bills, or notes of the United States, the
states are deprived of their power of taxation to the extent of the property
invested by individuals in such obligations, and the burden of state taxation
upon other private property is correspondingly increased. The 10 per cent.
tax, imposed by congress on notes of state banks and of private bankers, not
only lessens the value of such notes, but tends to drive them, and all state
banks of issue, out of existence. The priority given to debts due to the
United States over the private debts of an insolvent debtor diminishes the
value of these debts, and the amount which their holders may receive out of
the debtor's estate. So, under the power to coin money and to regulate its
value, congress may (as it did with regard to gold by the act of June 28,
1834, c. 95, and with regard to silver by the act of February 28, 1878, c.
20) issue coins of the same denominations as those already current by law,
but of less intrinsic value than those, by reason of containing a less weight
of the precious metals, and thereby enable debtors to discharge their debts
by the payment of coins of the less real value. A contract to pay a certain
sum in money, without any stipulation as to the kind of money in which it
shall be paid, may always be satisfied by payment of that sum in any currency
which is lawful money at the place and time at which payment is to be made. 1
Hale, P. C. 192-194; Bac. Abr. 'Tender, B. 2;' Poth. Cont. No. 416; Pardessus
Droit Commercial, Nos. 204, 205; Searight v. Calbraith, 4 Dall. 325. As
observed by Mr. Justice STRONG, in delivering the opinion of the court in the
Legal-tender Cases, 'Every contract for the payment of money, simply, is
necessarily subject to the constitutional power of the government over the
currency, whatever that power may be, and the obligation of the parties is,
therefore, assumed with reference to that power.' 12 Wall. 549.
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows
