Turning DC into the 51st will NEVER happen I agree with what is written
below....in addition to this......
I had the opportunity to talk with a woman who works at the DC post office and
lives in DC. Very nice lady and we got around to talking about taxes and land
ownership ... the one thing she told me that stuck with me is that the Govt
owns ALL land whether a private home sits on it or a commercial building or a
govt building. At no time does a human ever own their own land so, no...we as
Americans have the right to own land and to keep all others OFF of it as stated
in a recent USSC case. But in DC it is flipped....you own only what you can
take with you.....no more, no less....in DC you are truly a "tenant" on their
land.
________________________________
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of John
Schiavone <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2021 6:57 PM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: Public Building Library
videotaping freedoms
I found this in an article from epochtimes about why D.C. cannoli become a
state. They did the research so they get the credit. John
Here are the key paragraphs. It supports my claim that the District is in this
state, meaning Maryland.
The terms of Maryland’s 1788 offer of cession also present objections to D.C.
statehood. The Constitution authorizes Congress to assume jurisdiction over a
portion of a state only if the state cedes it. As another part of the Enclave
Clause makes clear, cession represents the consent of the state to loss of some
of its territory.
But Maryland’s consent to cession, as well as Congress’s acceptance, was
clearly based on the land being used as a national capital. The 1788 Maryland
law provides that cession is to be of a “district in this State not exceeding
ten miles square, which Congress may fix upon and accept for the seat of
Government of the United States.” Maryland did not consent to the creation of
another state out of its territory. Doing so would have required action under
an entirely different part of the Constitution (Article IV, Section 3).
In other words, Maryland’s consent was effective for creating a federal
“enclave” to be used as a national capital, but not effective for creating a
new state. Turning all or part of D.C. into a state would require either a new
agreement with Maryland, or a constitutional amendment.
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 19, 2021, at 6:50 PM, Ray Greninger <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
As I said in so many words the District of Columbia is a creation of the people
through their representatives that created the document that set aside that 10
square miles for the federal gov to “ inhabit.” The fed jurisdiction comes from
that document. It has plenary power within that area but it cannot supersede
the authority of its creators. “It’s” property is our property.
On Jul 19, 2021, at 4:28 PM, NELSON DICE
<nelsondice@xxxxxxxx<mailto:nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Ray,
With all due respect, I believe those that stormed the capitol are guilty
because,
The original Constitution authorized a District not exceeding 10 miles square.
One could maybe even state correctly that any part of 63 sq miles of Maryland
today that is “Washington, D.C. overlay zone is legitimate Federal Property
So, I think those that insurrected hadn’t learned about the jurisdiction of
Washington D.C.
Like Storming Ft. McHerry rtc, a military facility etc established prior to 1860
From: Ray Greninger<mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2021 6:16 PM
To:
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: Public Building Library
videotaping freedoms
Hmmm, those buildings are public property. The schmucks just occupy them.
Nancy, the old bag, was beside herself (for the cameras) when the people
“stormed” into their own property on the day of the “ insurrection.” We cant
have the peasants entering their own capitol building, now can we?
The corporation doesn’t own anything when all is said and done. If any entity
can be said to own that stuff (entities can’t really own anything regardless of
what they claim) it would be The United States of America. That is the original
entity that administers the public property, including The United States, the
United States and UNITED STATES etc.
On Jul 19, 2021, at 3:25 PM, Charley Dan
<charleydan@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
They own the building so have authority but the Constitution states their
limited to what they own. Fine line
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 12:31 PM NELSON DICE
<nelsondice@xxxxxxxx<mailto:nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Charley,
if my local library is a subsidiary of the City of Ocean City, and a state
statute says i cannot film people or employees while i am there, and yet, the
city has surveillance cameras, does 1.8.17 preclude them from successfully
charging me with a statute violation if i videotape my interactions with
employees?
i have video of one fabricating evidence against me and now the library is
possibly looking to trespass me.
thnaks
nelson
--
Life in one word--LOVE
