[capitan_refugio #543] The "White" in Texas v White was George W. White. I do not find his name associated with White v Hart or White v Cannon. Correct me if I'm wrong.
[nc #547] You must be correct. You do not find the name George in the Supreme Court decisions re Hart or Cannon. Of course, you do not find any other first name in those decisions either. Correct me if I am wrong.
[capitan_refugio #559] On the contrary, liar. You made the association that the "White" in the three cases was the same. I made a very simple observation (so that you and the other crackers could understand it): "George W. White" was the White in Texas v White. That name does not register any hits when associated with either of the other two cases; nor does "George White," nor does "G. White." I made no search for who the "Whites" were in the other cases. If you know who they were, then post it. Otherwise, stand accused of misrepresentation - again.
[nc #663] I'm not being coy, I am merely rubbing your nose in your do-do. I am demonstrating that, yet again, the lying sack of s--- called capitan_refugio went on and on and on about a court opinion he has neither seen nor read.
[cr #669] You made a boast. You can't or won't back it up. And you act like an insufferable pr*ck when you're called on it. That's nolu coward all over!
[cr #669] If you have the proof, post it. Argument over. Instead you want to play little games. Okay, smart a$$ - show post where I said I had read the decisions. I never said anything like that, liar. I said, I found no association of the name George W. White (or its derivations) with the other two cases. That's not "going on and on." It is stating a simple fact that your pea brain is incapable of understanding.
In your #559, you called me a "liar."
In my #502 I said, "It appears that the ubiquitous White made a living by losing secession cases to the Federal government."
And so it does appear.
In response to your #507, I said, "You must be correct. You do not find the name George in the Supreme Court decisions re Hart or Cannon. Of course, you do not find any other first name in those decisions either. Correct me if I am wrong."
My statement is 100% correct.
You are still being the same dirtbag as ever, calling me a liar about court opinions you have not bothered to obtain or read.
Not only did your lame Google search not find a relationship between the parties in the cases, you did not even find the cases. You found nothing, and based on the nothing your incompetent search provided, you rendered your incompetent opinion.
In STATE OF TEXAS v. WHITE, 74 U.S. 700 (1868) at 717 and in WHITE v. HART, 80 US 646 (1871) at 647, the opinions clearly show that the SAME ATTORNEY argued for Mr. White in both cases.
His office was at the corner of C St. and Louisiana Avenue in Washington, D.C.
I do appreciate the way you are trying to weasel out, though. Or so it appears.