Replies

So now that we've established that you lied about me being a "liar," why don't we also visit, say, even ONE of the other bogus things you've said here?

Mmmmm. Let's see.

Let's go with a selection from that same thread, where you claimed:

A) that "the Initial drafts of Article II... was submitted by Alexander Hamilton" and which required that one be merely "born a citizen"

False. Hamilton did not submit "the initial drafts of Article II" to the Convention. He did a presentation in which he submitted some ideas, but no initial draft of Article II. And his presentation, according to the notes, contained no mention of an eligibility requirement at all.

The "born a citizen" language you mention came from Hamilton's notes which he gave to Madison at the END of the Convention, after the discussion was all over. Those notes represent Hamilton's private ideas of what he had decided, during the course of the deliberations, that he wanted in a Constitution. They were never presented to the Convention at all.

B) This (the language "born a citizen") was "voted down in favor of the current language."

False. It wasn't "voted down." There's no evidence any language was ever presented to the Convention except for "natural born citizen."

So there we have two very clear, very specific claims by you, which are absolutely false. In the same thread in which you also FALSELY accused me of "lying."

So that's 3 known falsehoods from you, in just one single thread. You've spun plenty more BS than that, but I think that should do just to illustrate the point.