The Cannibal Clause - Federal Sovereignty

In other articles we go over sovereignty and how it applies to law under the article III precedent law, with there being two halves, government sovereign immunity and civil sovereign immunity, which ever comes first with sovereignty defaulting to the people first and their government second due to recession being more lawful than progress not in caveat for secession's superluminal refederation.

Though there exists extenuation withing the extenuation with respect to recession due to there being two phases of recession that may be identified that affect the law differently. When total national debt is less than half of total assets recession may be classified as stately, when total debt is greater than half of total assets recession may be seen as federal, per democratic principles. The logic would follow that during stately recession the caveat would be aligned in the public through the courts judging toward it by allowing recession to overrule progress not in caveat in civil cases involving torts not specifically explicated, implying intentional torts duly from the logic of recession needing to be occurred against recessive citizens. And so then for civilians citing caveat cases would be ruled in favor of them.

When recession becomes federal though, the cannibal clause comes into play then due to the caveat having become aligned to, at which point it may be seen as ever more just to judge against the civilians indiscriminately in state courts due to the matter being federal and with the caveat able to be ever further inured counter-intuitively through compelling matters to a federal setting. At first this might seem confusing to those going through the state courts and it would also tend to confuse govt employees not fully aware of the matter either, yet all for the better in net as one would expect nature's bottlenecks to exact. In fact, there may not be one case judged in favor of with respect to citation of caveat in stately recession until the caveat being cited is then judged against in federal recession, confusing the matter all the more.

At any rate, below is an excerpt from a case against DPS being petitioned for appeal in the Texas Supreme Court:

"7.6. Be that as it may, stately recession in federal government would requite courts to judge in favor of the caveat against those not in caveat in order to align and then once recession became federal the courts would begin cannibalizing all citizens indiscriminate to the caveat, with it being implicit that even further alignment would occur through extenuated reliefs being granted to those counter-intuitively personally injured who were in caveat...and in fact there may not exist a single case wherein sovereign immunity were cited by citizen litigants in stately recession whereas all of that alignment would have come from the courts' either claiming sovereign immunity against those not in caveat and/or by upholding more recessive parties i.e. larger economic or more influential parties not in caveat.

7.7. Such consideration would of course tend to confuse by the fact that such a government would seem to be judging against their citizens across the board for no apparent reason when and if there had been no case precedents set by any parties in caveat during stately recession, and one may see correlation here between such law being at the root of federation also tending then to serve as a most paramount type of legal test able to determine competency, and in fact competency may indeed come to be defined as the ability to differentiate between what sovereignty is, as covered in section 2.4.4.7 of Exhibit E. The consideration that there could be no case law setting precedents for civil sovereign immunity yet that the caveat would have been engendered by cases of government sovereign immunity anyway, and that there would be those who would cite such case law against civil sovereignty would make no logical sense considering that they are two halves of the same law, leaving only one to assume that they to wit were actually supporting the sovereign caveat through the cannibal federal clause, of course impelling matters to federal court where supplemental complaints could net extra constitution, which it is argued has occurred in this case.

7.8. Even so, besides common sense regarding the hypothesis about the first legal case lacking precedent to even cite alongside there perhaps being no known cases of civil sovereignty to counter via precedent law in kind in our country or even a proper search utility to find one, a court should uphold the logic that cases like these may be processed specifically to create the proper precedent for such, with case law hinging upon debate...for sovereign immunity would have to be for the benefit of the people as a whole ultimately, and so when a civilian presents ample proof that they are not an instrument of recession, with secession being the only federal harmonic against it, they should be judged in favor of to wit under civil sovereign immunity via the same Article III precedent law which allows for progress not in caveat in the people to be judged against the other way regardless of code when the same law defaults as government sovereign immunity, especially when they are also within code...with it well understood that the people are their government moreso and so when a citizen is sovereign the government's right to sovereign immunity is therefore waived, with it being implicit that such being cited by civilians to wit would serve as the authority to do so more specifically.

7.9. We may allege under rules of evidence that federal law would be exploiting superluminal properties of quantum mechanics (known as quantum teleportation) in order to remain lawful in time's constancy. When one draws a line signifying motion from left to right as time's movement of change in progress, the perfect law obviously would rest as a reflection of that in a given people's timeline, and so when recession occurs we can easily show that simply reversing it through the same processes would tend to realign behind the point where progress would have been, able to be seen as less than lawful under civil rule. If our line began at point A, with the imaginary perfect progress of quantum law in freedom hypothetically ending at B and our deviant society's on a different line from A to C at some angle, then turning to re-coalesce back on the line at D behind B, we could easily observe that the additions of the hypotenuses would simply not equate; adding up to more work for less lawfulness. When we imagine that recession would be a natural feature of human cycles, the reality that there would be some sort of mechanism able to transmute error into forward motion becomes apparent through common sense, even if for the processes of learning alone...also supporting mechanism to bar recession from overruling progress via democratic principle under the hypocrisy in recession (meaning that it would be implied that recessive officials should follow logical pathos able to be proven via mathelogical reasoning in being self-destructive in recession, with no other logic to follow, being recessive in recession against recession via progress thereof federal).

7.10. The inherent paradox is quite apparent, and that would be that departing from progress would be unfavorable and yet returning to it having fallen behind would be even less, implying that recession be actually worsened angularly, compounding. Once the magic angle of 90 degrees of recession is reached, the obvious federal legalities would then be able to occur, with it being apparent that the recession in the economy would be major enough and so able to be democratically argued then without retort, implying that democratic principles are a type of integral law which may be exploited as such, if not hinging upon this critical mechanism of secession's mechanism which may actuate at that point in order to rearrange the afflictive matter, in just the same way that our bodies undergo healing processes which involve pain and inflammation though end well (also supporting that this process would be of a natural property of matter).

7.11. At these points, federal societies may circle around in ways which defy normal representation, arriving us at better than where we would have been when and if we even had departed because arriving only where we would have been should be seen as perhaps less than perfect...and so the only logical explanation would be toward some sort of superluminal capability able to place us even further ahead than where we were considering that the universal constant of infinity would normally be the speed of light--being perfectly supported by quantum teleportation of information via quantum entanglement, bound to Article III's mindful ability to adjudge on a case by case basis towards the quantum sovereignty via federal constitution as such (see exhibit E).

7.12. The specter would be efficient enough for anyone to claim that normal government would be perhaps less than lawful moving at the speed of light alone in such respect...though yet another may claim that a government moving faster than the speed of light all the time would also be less than perfect considering that such would not represent the federal shape of time's parent, federally deductive form. Such consideration should leave the only conclusion that a most lawful government would be federal by and through the exploitation of any and all time's mechanisms when and wherever lawful, eschewing all else as prejudice in the face of solid proof circumstantially, with perhaps no way for observed and measured physical laws to be disproven otherwise, cp (in that order of operations may be asserted prima facie). Leaving home without a gun would be dangerous though bringing one without a safety would we worse...just as having a body that could not heal could be seen as worse than being of spirit alone. Secession's healing mechanism would be as important toward governance as recompense would be in relationships, obviously resting upon the matter at some indelible degree, in support.

7.13. The consideration that normal wear and tear will of course occur and even that it should in certain circumstances for the purposes of learning alone should be the final proof for such argument that recession would be a type of occurrence which truly lawful government should not just have the capability to withstand but to complement, implying that such momentum be transmuted towards sovereign progress...and so having laws which incorporate so, able to harness the power of matter superluminally via quantum entanglement towards secession being used as fulcrum towards higher refederations thereby realigning in-with time's flow coming in ahead of normal law for the next cycle allows federal civilians to assuage ancient issues similar to how certain destructive quality control engineers destroy company products in order to better them. Such consideration would be akin to taking our imaginary social progress line further above and just drawing a Fleur de Lis with it...and perhaps then recycling it or using it as tender to start a fire for the night to enjoy, which would be a metaphor much more suited for the actual nature of the law in the courts, beyond mere math though also of it too in federal form...godly greed... "