Replies

No, you misunderstand Jefferson's words.

No, you're intentionally misrepresenting Jefferson's words to justify your weak, and growing weaker, position.

The US Constitution allows for temporary suspension of certain liberties -- i.e., habeas corpus -- in the event of rebellion or invasion public safety requires it. So my question to you is: do you believe in the US Constitution?

You're dodging again, professor. My question to you was, and is, do you believe that maintaining the union is more important than the constitutional guarantee of individual liberty?

the old Articles of Confederation, and they were not satisfactory

You do realize that 9 of the original states seceded from the union under the Articles of Confederation, don't you?

Original Intent is a conservative position. Misrepresenting the facts and deliberate revisionism by you False Causers is not.

cowboyway: "No, you're intentionally misrepresenting Jefferson's words to justify your weak, and growing weaker, position."

More rubbish.

cowboyway: "My question to you was, and is, do you believe that maintaining the union is more important than the constitutional guarantee of individual liberty?"

Your problem is, you insist on misunderstanding the correct answers.
So read carefully, I'll say it yet again: Our Founders' Original Intent, as confirmed in Texas v White, was that secession is lawful under two conditions:

Mutual consent, which is what your quotes from Jefferson expressed.
In effect, a major breach of contract, such as "usurpations" or "abuses of power" which absolutely match your question here.

cowboyway: "Original Intent is a conservative position.
Misrepresenting the facts and deliberate revisionism by you False Causers is not."

Then you, FRiend, should stop misrepresenting & deliberately revising the real facts of history.

Starting right now.

cowboyway: "A general amnesty was issued by Johnson but Davis was still under indictment. The Supreme Court just let it die without issuing a formal order of dismissal."

That is an inaccurate statement by you. The proof that it is inaccurate is found in a link that you provided.

Please re-read the closing paragraph from your Yale Law link in post#467.

"Thus ended the case of The United States vs Jefferson Davis. It was dismissed from the docket of the Supreme Court at Washington at the motion of the Attorney General of the United States on the 19th of February, 1869. But no formal order was made dismissing the case in the federal court at Richmond, Virginia. So far as that court was concerned, it simply died.

Didn't you find it fascinating that Robert E. Lee was listed among the witnesses upon whose testimony the new 21 page indictment (against Davis) was found?

Your credibility is very suspect in my humble estimation. Could you provide a link that backs up your oft repeated assertion that Honest Abe would have been found out to be a War Criminal had the Supreme Court not dismissed the Davis case? And that his corpse, then a'mouldering in the grave would have been "embarrassed"?