Replies

No, the problem is that I DIDN'T decide beforehand what I wanted it to mean, but simply went with the evidence. Which there's plenty of, in spite of your unrelenting attempts to mischaracterize and obfuscate it.

And all of it you can find comes from YEARS LATER, even DECADES LATER, and written by people who DON'T KNOW WHAT THE **** THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

No, he didn't. As you well know, the SOLE REASON given by the Madison Administration for McClure's being an American citizen was that he was BORN IN CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.

Still trying to lie Jeff. The article is here for anyone who wishes to read the whole thing. It was explicitly noted that being BORN IN CHARLESTON was insufficient proof. That's why it took a Congressman and a Supreme Court justice to round up sufficient proof and present it to James Monroe before they would intercede on behalf of James McClure.

Only then did the Madison administration act. Prior to that, they had left James McClure IN FRENCH CUSTODY FOR A YEAR AND SEVEN MONTHS!

There's not the slightest evidence that "Publius" was James Madison, and you know it. "Publius" could've been anybody in America, and "Publius" himself expressed doubt about whether he was correct. And you know it.

No, it's pretty certain that whomever Publius was, he certainly put forth the position held by the James Madison Administration, complete with knowledge unobtainable by any other source. How do you suppose that "Publius" knew more about the case than did James McClure's lawyer? Where would he have garnered this information? You do recall that all the pertinent details were only know to the US And French Governments? If it wasn't Madison himself, it was definitely an agent acting on his behalf and at his direction.

Figure it out.

Ah, except for the nearly HALF of the Signers of the Constitution who declared in 1790 that the children born to US citizen abroad were to be considered as "natural born citizens," directly contradicting the birther BS.

And still you are so dense as to not comprehend the difference between the words "are" and "Shall be considered as."

You can keep posting your repeated known, verified false claims and other BS for as long as Jim will tolerate you.

I believe that of the two of us, it is YOU who has been told to "back off" by Jim Robinson.

Still trying to lie Jeff. The article is here for anyone who wishes to read the whole thing. It was explicitly noted that being BORN IN CHARLESTON was insufficient proof.

Noted by the anonymous writer of the letter, who admitted himself that he wasn't certain he was correct.

NOT noted by the Madison Administration.

So once again you are twisting the matter.

That's why it took a Congressman and a Supreme Court justice to round up sufficient proof and present it to James Monroe before they would intercede on behalf of James McClure.

And what did that proof consist of? Documents proving that James McClure was BORN IN CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.

Only then did the Madison administration act. Prior to that, they had left James McClure IN FRENCH CUSTODY FOR A YEAR AND SEVEN MONTHS!

I looked at the time line on this. It took weeks for communication across the Atlantic Ocean, and the Madison Administration acted pretty promptly once the matter became well known.

No, it's pretty certain that whomever Publius was, he certainly put forth the position held by the James Madison Administration, complete with knowledge unobtainable by any other source.

No, he didn't. Publius' position was that James McClure was not a US citizen. The Madison Administration's position was that James McClure WAS a US citizen, because he had been born in South Carolina.

The two positions are, in fact, opposite.

This is what you do. You take black, and proclaim it to be white. You take white, and proclaim it to be black. Why? Because DiogenesLamp wants it to be that way.

How do you suppose that "Publius" knew more about the case than did James McClure's lawyer? Where would he have garnered this information?

He didn't.

And the details of the case were public knowledge. Publius' own letter begins: "The case of this man has made a good deal of stir in the U. States..."

and the common law and such of the statute laws of England, as have heretofore been in force in the said province, except as hereafter excepted.

Once again, guess what got excepted? Pennsylvania's own constitution of 1776 (Benjamin Franklin Presiding, James Wilson Delegate) Specifies the voting Franchise to be applicable to a naturalized resident or the Son of a Citizen.

Both editions 1817 and 1847 explicitly state that the United States does not follow English Common law on this issue. You reckon the ENTIRE LEGAL SYSTEM OF PENNSYLVANIA might not have noticed it was wrong?

Keep dreaming.

I'm not bothering with the rest of your "Wall of text."