[Jeff Winston]

You are sh*ting me.

Although Henry may have conquered some land in France, and although he may have claimed to be the "REAL King of France," he never was in actuality, never ruled over two separate countries in the same way, and his conquests on the continent didn't really even stick.

So my point stands.

In a Kingdom, the King gets the laws he wants. I'm surprised he had two hold-outs, and that it wasn't unanimous.

Yeah, I get it. Every legal authority in history who says your cockamamie theory is BS is incompetent or tainted, and every legal authority in history who doesn't agree with your nonsense is an Obot shill.

[DiogenesLamp]

Although Henry may have conquered some land in France, and although he may have claimed to be the "REAL King of France," he never was in actuality, never ruled over two separate countries in the same way, and his conquests on the continent didn't really even stick.

So my point stands.

So no English Subjects whatsoever were created when Henry ruled France, eh? Do you really enjoy altering history for the sake of your theories? The point is not worth the trouble to look up examples with which to prove you wrong. You'll just say you were correct anyway.

Yeah, I get it. Every legal authority in history who says your cockamamie theory is BS is incompetent or tainted, and every legal authority in history who doesn't agree with your nonsense is an Obot shill.

Seriously? You are telling me that the Judges of England won't give the King what he has made abundantly clear that he wants?

Of COURSE they found the law to be in compliance with the King's wishes! Had the law been otherwise, they would have absolutely ruled against the King!