| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/13/2005 10:44:44 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Endless complaints. |
Posted on 12/31/2004 2:21:30 PM PST by Caipirabob
Sometimes that is all the response your nonsense deserves.
I been TRYING to explain that EXACT point to NS for several threads....I've been knockin , but NOBODY's home! :)
"Sometimes that is all the response your 'chan' nonsense deserves"
I don't have Lexus/Nexus. I had read "Democracy in America" and knew that asinine 'stink of black' quote was totally out of character with the rest of the book. Therefore I knew that you were lying. Again.
The "Stink" comment (which dovetails with de Tocqueville) came from Raphael Semmes memoirs, where the first seven chapters he does one of the best arguments for secession of all.
Sure. Semmes, de Tocqueville. It's easy for someone like you to mix the two up. But are you sure Semmes wasn't talking about the south?
I posted the quotes that supported the point that the North was more racist than the South, in fact de Tocqueville said exactly that.
But you didn't point out the fact that de Tocqueville called southern slave legislation barbaric, or that southern racism was just as ingrained as Northern racism was. You didn't mention that, did you. You want us to believe that it was all sunshine and cotton candy for blacks in the south. Nonsense.
In that narrow little mind of your's, a neo-bolshevik is anyone who doesn't drink the confederate kool-aid. I suppose you're right.
That's because your arguements are nonsense, as I've pointed out on a number of threads.
But Davis' counsel moved to drop the charges on 14th Amendment grounds weeks before Johnson issued his pardon. They were not anxious to take the case to court because they saw no reason to participate in Davis' quest for martyrdom. They knew better than Davis did that a trial could result in years in prison.
[M. Espinola #1370 to Non-Sequitur] "Sometimes that is all the response your 'chan' nonsense deserves"
[Non-Sequitur #1373 to TexConfederate1861] That's because your arguements are nonsense, as I've pointed out on a number of threads.
You must learn to recognize what the Brigade Minister of Propaganda uses as a CONCESSION SPEECH when he is losing so badly that he goes into his mode of BAGHDAD BOB.
Now it is just a competition to see who can toss Non-Sequitur the furthest.
The 14th Amendment fig leaf, created by and proffered to the defense by Chief Justice Chase, would have terminated all possible prosecution of all Confederate officers, not just Jefferson Davis. It had been made known that President Johnson would view favorably a request for a pardon, but Jefferson Davis refused to request such a pardon. Eventually President Johnson issued an unconditional pardon at his own initiative.
"On the thirteenth day of May, 1867, Jefferson Davis sat in the United States court-room at Richmond accompanied by his counsel, Charles O'Conor and George Shea. After two years' captivity as a prisoner of war, he had been brought from Fort Monroe in obedience to a writ of habeas corpus and surrendered to the civil authorities for trial on an indictment for treason. ... O'Conor announces that the defendant is ready for trial on the indictment, William M. Evarts announces that the United States are not." (David Miller DeWitt, The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson, 1903, p. 232-3)
Had the Government wanted to proceed to trial, all they needed to do was announce, as did counsel for Jefferson Davis, that they were ready for trial. However, the Government, as is made clear by their deeds, did not dare to proceed to trial.
"The House appointed a committee to investigate the complicity of Davis and others in the assassination, and in July 1866, through its chairman, Mr. Boutwell, made a report followed by a resolution, 'that it is the duty of the executive department of the Government to proceed with the investigation of the facts connected with the assassination of the late President without unnecessary delay, that Jefferson Davis and others names in the proclamation of President Johnson of May 2d, 1865, may be put upon trial,' which was adopted nem. con." David Miller DeWitt, The Judicial Murder of Mary E. Surratt, 1895, p. 154.
Once they were unable to persuade Chief Justice Chase to prostitute himself and the Supreme Court to participate in another of their kangaroo courts under martial law, the radical whackos never successfully prosecuted anybody. They were practically forced to try John H. Surratt and that resulted in disaster.
The Government had offered a reward of $100,000 for the arrest of Jefferson Davis; $25,000 each for Clement C. Clay; Jacob Thompson, George N. Sanders, and Beverley Tucker. According to the Military Commission, they were all guilty as being members of a conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson, William Seward, and Ulysses S. Grant.
"[Clement C.] Clay had been let go on parole as long before as April 19th, 1866; his property was restored to him in February, 1867; and proceedings under an indictment found against him for treason and consipracy, indefinitely suspended on the 26th of March of the same year. [Jacob] Thompson and [George N.] Sanders and [Beverley] Tucker returned to their country and appeared unmolested amongst us. Jefferson Davis died recently full of years and honors. At the death of Thompson, the flags of the Interior Department were lowered half-mast. Tucker was appointed to office not long ago by President Harrision. And all this, notwithstanding the Judge-Advocate had assured the Military Commission that the guilt of these men was as clear as the built of Booth or of Surratt, notwithstanding the Military Commission under his guidance so found, and, had these men been present before that tribunal, would doubtless have hung them on the same scaffold with Mrs. Surratt." David Miller DeWitt, The Judicial Murder of Mary E. Surratt, 1895, pp. 158-9.
Last time I heard about dwarf tossing, they were trying to outlaw it in Florida(?IIRC?). The vertically challenged were trying to overturn the law as unconstitutional, because it was apparently rather lucritive.
Anyone know if it's still practiced?
Anybody who disagrees with your ranting is nonsense by YOUR book. Aren't you late for your appointment at the Temple of Abe the Conqueror?
Personally I feel like "tossing" up the contents of my stomach anytime I read his rantings! :)
Not everyone. But definitely you.
Aren't you late for your appointment at the Temple of Abe the Conqueror?
No, we're pretty open as to start times.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.