"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>
>>> No it isn't.
>>
>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store personally.
>
> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>
> Here is the definition of private property:
>
> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
> person or company, rather than to a government.
>
> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
> Is this definition correct?
>
> [ ] Yes
> [ ] No
>
> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
> dictionary which refutes this definition.

klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at least a
dozen time's.

I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE. And I even mentioned at
least once that even if it WAS, it would still be ireevelent becouse this is
AMERICA, not England.

Do you understand what I'm trying to tell you?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>
>>>> No it isn't.
>>>
>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store personally.
>>
>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>
>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>
>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>
>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>> Is this definition correct?
>>
>> [ ] Yes
>> [ ] No
>>
>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>
>
>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at least a
>dozen time's.

Liar. You have NEVER answered it.

>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.

Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
definition.

Now, again.

Here is the definition of private property:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
person or company, rather than to a government.

Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
Is this definition correct?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
dictionary which refutes this definition.

If you don't, we'll assume none exists, and you now admit that
restaurants are NOT owned by the government and are, therefore,
private property.

Put your verifiable cite here ----->

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>
>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store personally.
>>>
>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>
>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>
>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>
>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>
>>> [ ] Yes
>>> [ ] No
>>>
>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>
>>
>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at least
>>a
>>dozen time's.
>
> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>
>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>
> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
> definition.

And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message
>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store personally.
>>>>
>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>
>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>
>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>
>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>
>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>> [ ] No
>>>>
>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>>
>>>
>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at least
>>>a
>>>dozen time's.
>>
>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>
>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>
>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>> definition.
>
>
>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>

For the HUNDRERTH[sic] time now, you are lying.

You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
that says "Property the public goes on."

I have already taught you what the LEGAL definition is.

I have given you the SOURCE of that definition.

I will do it again.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/public_property#:~:text=Property%20owned%20by%20the%20government,CIVICS
public property
Property owned by the government (or its agency), rather than by a
private individual.
Examples include: parks, streets, sidewalks, libraries.

You will -- For the HUNDRERTH[sic] time-- run away from providing a
legal definition from ANY source on the Internet.

[crickets]

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>message
>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>
>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>
>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>least
>>>>a
>>>>dozen time's.
>>>
>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>
>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>
>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>> definition.
>>
>>
>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
> that says "Property the public goes on."

What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
LINES!!!!

On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:48:59 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message
>>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>message
>>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.

[crickets]

>>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>>least
>>>>>a
>>>>>dozen time's.
>>>>
>>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>>
>>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>>
>>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>>> definition.
>>>
>>>
>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>
>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>LINES!!!!

That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
logic.

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mcs6chp4n4eesf6uoc15id0r1cuntl41hj@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:48:59 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>message
>>>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>message
>>>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a
>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>
> [crickets]
>
>
>>>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>>>least
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>dozen time's.
>>>>>
>>>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>>>
>>>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>>>> definition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>
>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>LINES!!!!
>
> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
> logic.

IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.

On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 00:03:03 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:mcs6chp4n4eesf6uoc15id0r1cuntl41hj@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:48:59 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message
>>>news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>message
>>>>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a
>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>
>> [crickets]
>>
>>
>>>>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>>>>least
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>dozen time's.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>>>>> definition.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>
>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>LINES!!!!
>>
>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>> logic.
>
>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>

If it were a fact, it would be legally defined. You could find someone
else that agrees with you.

You can't. Because you're wrong.

And since I've TAUGHT you the legal definition of public property and
private property, you're lying when you claim otherwise.

Once again, your faulty argument is shot down in flames.
------------------------------------------

When will Jenny confess that he lied when he made this claim?

:JENNY_LIE: Many week's [sic] ago, he [Kwills] personally
:JENNY_LIE: emailed me after I refused his re-admission,
:JENNY_LIE: and he admitted he was in teh [sic] wrong and
:JENNY_LIE: that he is just a troll. He also suggested
:JENNY_LIE: I killfile [sic] Klous [sic] as well, which prove's
:JENNY_LIE: [sic] how much respect for the killfiling [sic] program.

On Mon, 08 Aug 2022 01:57:11 -0700, KWills <a@b.c> wrote:

>On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 00:03:03 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>>
>>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>>LINES!!!!
>>>
>>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>>> logic.
>>
>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>
> You LIED and claimed, "... the official, LEGAL defination [sic]
>of Public property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
> It's not the legal definition, of course. one of your MANY
>pathological lies. Nothing more.
>

Jenny can't even keep track of his own lies.
------------------------------------------

When will Jenny confess that he lied when he made this claim?

:JENNY_LIE: Many week's [sic] ago, he [Kwills] personally
:JENNY_LIE: emailed me after I refused his re-admission,
:JENNY_LIE: and he admitted he was in teh [sic] wrong and
:JENNY_LIE: that he is just a troll. He also suggested
:JENNY_LIE: I killfile [sic] Klous [sic] as well, which prove's
:JENNY_LIE: [sic] how much respect for the killfiling [sic] program.

On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
will you?

Here are some sources, or you may choose you own:

https://dictionary.law.com/
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/
https://libguides.nyls.edu/lowcostlegalresearch/freedict
https://lawlib.nyls.edu/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=316037
https://law-campbell.libguides.com/legal_dictionaries/online

Failure on your part to provide a SINGLE verifiable citation
supporting your claim will result in the following:

o You will be ridiculed as the liar we all know you are.
o Nothing you say in the future will be accepted as truthful until
you back it up with a verifiable source other than your screeching.
o You will be forever revealed to all of Usenet as being a
fabricating prevaricator.

Oh. Wait.

That's already happened.

LOL

------------------------------------------

When will Jenny confess that he lied when he made this claim?

:JENNY_LIE: Many week's [sic] ago, he [Kwills] personally
:JENNY_LIE: emailed me after I refused his re-admission,
:JENNY_LIE: and he admitted he was in teh [sic] wrong and
:JENNY_LIE: that he is just a troll. He also suggested
:JENNY_LIE: I killfile [sic] Klous [sic] as well, which prove's
:JENNY_LIE: [sic] how much respect for the killfiling [sic] program.

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6it1fh555dsnrf9o5uksitlec893edks6e@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 00:03:03 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:mcs6chp4n4eesf6uoc15id0r1cuntl41hj@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:48:59 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>message
>>>>news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>message
>>>>>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a
>>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>>
>>> [crickets]
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>>>>>least
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>dozen time's.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>>>>>> definition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of
>>>>>>Public
>>>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>>
>>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>>LINES!!!!
>>>
>>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>>> logic.
>>
>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>
>
> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.

Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2lm4fh154tr1cd9o3ecb0ji7t9p2poagde@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
> will you?

Absolutey not. I will cite, THE LAW.

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:09:31 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:6it1fh555dsnrf9o5uksitlec893edks6e@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 8 Aug 2022 00:03:03 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message
>>>news:mcs6chp4n4eesf6uoc15id0r1cuntl41hj@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 17:48:59 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>message
>>>>>news:eavc9h92gefg4hhcpl3ll10i410itiv2b9@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>news:vtls6hlv8ckdg92uurg45a7hngpnkjod0i@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 22:09:15 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>>>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>message
>>>>>>>>>news:c06o4h5ddpvnjv5gn8oaqkacu7orcc16sc@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Taco Bell IS public property. Any 6 year old knows that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Yes it is. This can be proven by simply entering the store
>>>>>>>>>>>personally.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You're entering private property. Easily explained.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Here is the definition of private property:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>>>>>>>>> something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a
>>>>>>>>>> particular
>>>>>>>>>> person or company, rather than to a government.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>>>>>>>>> Is this definition correct?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] Yes
>>>>>>>>>> [ ] No
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>>>>>>>>> dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>>>
>>>> [crickets]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>klous, I have already asnwered your stupid, repetetitve question at
>>>>>>>>>least
>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>dozen time's.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Liar. You have NEVER answered it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I keep telling you, the asnwer isa INCOMPLETE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your answers ARE incomplete, because you NEVER supply a verifiable
>>>>>>>> definition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of
>>>>>>>Public
>>>>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>>>
>>>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>>>LINES!!!!
>>>>
>>>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>>>> logic.
>>>
>>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>>
>>
>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>
>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.

Yes there is, and I have posted it several times.

You, on the other hand, can't post *ANY* definition supporting your
false belief that public property is "property the public goes on."

You are a liar.

Again.

Here is the definition of private property:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
person or company, rather than to a government.

Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
Is this definition correct?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
dictionary which refutes this definition.

If you don't, we'll assume none exists, and you now admit that
restaurants are NOT owned by the government and are, therefore,
private property.

Put your verifiable cite here ----->

<crickets>

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:16:43 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2lm4fh154tr1cd9o3ecb0ji7t9p2poagde@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
>>will you?
>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>>Here are some sources, or you may choose you own:
>>
>>https://dictionary.law.com/
>>https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/
>>https://libguides.nyls.edu/lowcostlegalresearch/freedict
>>https://lawlib.nyls.edu/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=316037
>>https://law-campbell.libguides.com/legal_dictionaries/online
>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>>Failure on your part to provide a SINGLE verifiable citation
>>supporting your claim will result in the following:
>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>>o You will be ridiculed as the liar we all know you are.>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>>o Nothing you say in the future will be accepted as truthful until
>>you back it up with a verifiable source other than your screeching.
>
>
>
[crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>
>>o You will be forever revealed to all of Usenet as being a
>>fabricating prevaricator.
>>
>>Oh. Wait.
>>
>>That's already happened.
>>
>>LOL

>Absolutey not. I will cite, THE LAW.

>
>
>
[thousands_of_crickets.wav] (© 2022 All Rights Reserved)
>
>
>

Looks like Jenny couldn't cite the law, and now agrees that he was
been wrong about the definition of private property, and fully accepts
the real and accurate definition I have provided hundreds of times for
him.

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:09:31 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>>
>>
>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>
>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.

Everyone knows private property is property NOT owned by the
government.

Why don't you know this?

On Sun, 02 Oct 2022 07:38:54 -0700, KWills <a@b.c> wrote:

>On Sun, 02 Oct 2022 03:35:29 -0700, Ketchup Packet
><ketchup@packet.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:09:31 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>>>
>>>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>>>
>>>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>>>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.
>>
>>Everyone knows private property is property NOT owned by the
>>government.
>>
>>Why don't you know this?
>
> He does. Jenny has a mental health issue in which he NEEDS to
>lie. Some evidence of this TRUTH can be seen here:
>
>http://jerrylies.byethost22.com/

Good Lord.

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:16:43 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2lm4fh154tr1cd9o3ecb0ji7t9p2poagde@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
>> will you?
>
>
>Absolutey not. I will cite, THE LAW.
>

Perhaps my newsreader isn't working, but I didn't see your cite of the
law.

Is that because it doesn't exist?

"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:12jhjh1c0vhbrt29gta6m5a14qp038n8u8@4ax.com...

>>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>>
>>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.
>
> Yes there is, and I have posted it several times.

BWAHAHAHahAHAHAHAHA!!!

Go right ahead klous, post a cite to the LEGAL DEFINATION OF THE FACT THAT
THE SUN RISES EVERY MORNING.

Or better yet, post a MID to one of the many postings you already claimed
to have posted it.

On Thu, 31 Aug 2023 02:55:25 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:12jhjh1c0vhbrt29gta6m5a14qp038n8u8@4ax.com...
>
>>>>>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of
>>>>>>>>>Public property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>>>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>>>>>LINES!!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>>>>>> logic.
>>>>>
>>>>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>>>
>>>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>>>
>>>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>>>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.
>>
>>Yes there is, and I have posted it several times.
>>
>>You, on the other hand, can't post *ANY* definition supporting your
>>false belief that public property is "property the public goes on."
>>
>>You are a liar.
>>
>>Again.
>>
>>Here is the definition of private property:
>>
>>http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
>>something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
>>person or company, rather than to a government.
>>
>>Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
>>Is this definition correct?
>>
>>[ ] Yes
>>[ ] No
>>
>>If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
>>dictionary which refutes this definition.
>>
>>If you don't, we'll assume none exists, and you now admit that
>>restaurants are NOT owned by the government and are, therefore,
>>private property.
>>
>>Put your verifiable cite here ----->
>>
>><crickets>
>
>BWAHAHAHahAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
>Go right ahead klous, post a cite to the LEGAL DEFINATION OF THE FACT THAT
>THE SUN RISES EVERY MORNING.
>
> Or better yet, post a MID to one of the many postings you already claimed
>to have posted it.

No mention of the sun can be found in the post you replied to.
Once again you PROVE you actually NEED to lie.
Please get professional mental health care for your very real
NEED to lie. I am being very serious.

--
Only one shopping day left until tomorrow!

"K Wills" <fun@home.new> wrote in message
news:c5j0fids8ii06j6de2cl0ts35d11dnsj32@4ax.com...

"Jerry Sauk" <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:F1KdnYYVYf9p2m35nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@supernews.com...
>
> "KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
> message
> news:12jhjh1c0vhbrt29gta6m5a14qp038n8u8@4ax.com...
>
>>>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>>>
>>>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>>>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.
>>
>> Yes there is, and I have posted it several times.
>
> BWAHAHAHahAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
> Go right ahead klous, post a cite to the LEGAL DEFINATION OF THE FACT THAT
> THE SUN RISES EVERY MORNING.
>
>
> No mention of the sun can be found in the post you replied to.
> Once again you PROVE you actually NEED to lie.

SCROLL THE FUCK UP AND READ IT AGAIN, YES THERE IS A MENTION OF THE SUN.
And yes, I re-ininserted the qoute that YOU SNIPPED

On Sat, 01 Oct 2022 16:26:43 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>> You can't find a SINGLE, SOLITARY legal definition of Public property
>>>>>>> that says "Property the public goes on."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What do you mean I can't find one, I JUST POSTED IT!!!! SCROLL UP 6
>>>>>>LINES!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> That is not a legal definition. That is your sick, twisted, and faulty
>>>>> logic.
>>>>
>>>>IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A LEGAL DEFINATION, BECOUSE IT IS A FACT.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If it were a fact, it would be legally defined.
>>
>>Bullshit. Not a ll fact's are legally defined. Such as teh fact the sun
>>rises every morning, there is NO LEGAL defination of that FACT.
>
>Yes there is, and I have posted it several times.

Yes, Jenny, I have posted the LEGAL DEFINITION of public property many
times.

Stop lying.

On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:34:57 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

> SCROLL THE FUCK UP AND READ IT AGAIN, YES THERE IS A MENTION OF THE SUN.

Poor Jenny is STILL lying when he claims to have posted a definition
of either public property or private property.

On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 03:39:20 -0700, KlausSchadenfreude
<klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:34:57 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
><jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> SCROLL THE FUCK UP AND READ IT AGAIN, YES THERE IS A MENTION OF THE SUN.
>
>Poor Jenny is STILL lying when he claims to have posted a definition
>of either public property or private property.

What options does he have? His mental health is such that he
cannot be honest intentionally, except if he thinks honesty will help
one, or more, of his MANY lies.

--
If Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.
If Daddy ain't happy, don't nobody care!

"Ketchup Packet" <ketchup@packet.com> wrote in message
news:a0djjht8rv8nk5s018f1jkdv1ujnqs6np4@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:16:43 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>message
>>news:2lm4fh154tr1cd9o3ecb0ji7t9p2poagde@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
>>> will you?
>>
>>
>>Absolutey not. I will cite, THE LAW.
>>
>
> Perhaps my newsreader isn't working, but I didn't see your cite of the
> law.
>
> Is that because it doesn't exist?

All laws, including the one I'm citing, can be looked up on the Internet.

On Sat, 14 Oct 2023 21:06:02 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Ketchup Packet" <ketchup@packet.com> wrote in message
>news:a0djjht8rv8nk5s018f1jkdv1ujnqs6np4@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 17:16:43 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>"KlausSchadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreudeREMOVE@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>message news:2lm4fh154tr1cd9o3ecb0ji7t9p2poagde@4ax.com...
>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2022 14:40:10 -0500, "Jerry Sauk"
>>>> <jerrysauk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>And for the HUNDRERTH TIME NOW, the official, LEGAL defination of Public
>>>>>property is PROPERTY THE PUBLIC GOES ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>>
>>>> Then you will have NO PROBLEM citing a source for this definition,
>>>> will you?
>>>
>>>Absolutey not. I will cite, THE LAW.
>>
>> Perhaps my newsreader isn't working, but I didn't see your cite of the
>> law.
>>
>> Is that because it doesn't exist?
>
>All laws, including the one I'm citing, can be looked up on the Internet.
>

You wrote, as seen above, "I will cite, THE LAW." Since there is
no such law, you couldn't offer the cite you stated you would offer.
By way of contrast, the actual legal definition for both public
and private property have been cited several times. You've run away
from each and every post wherein they cites were offered.

--
A small number of the documented lies of Jerry "Jenny" Sauk.
http://jerrylies.byethost22.com/?i=2