[WhiskeyPapa]

And I don't see any language there equivalent to: "The Executive Power herein granted, in which the the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus may be suspended in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it, shall be vested in the President of the United States."

That's right. There is no language in the Constitution to prevent the president from suspending the --privilge-- of Habeas Corpus.

Your present day attack on something accepted 140 years ago will only continue to fall flat.

Walt

[GOPcapitalist]

That's right. There is no language in the Constitution to prevent the president from suspending the --privilge-- of Habeas Corpus.

Sure there is. Article I, Section 1 vests that power in the legislature. It does not vest that power in the president. It is therefore absurd to conclude that the president has that power and on this point, every court that's ruled on the matter has agreed with me. Try again if you must, Walt. You're grasping at straws and it is obvious.

[H.Akston]

The Constitution is a grant of powers, not a restriction of existing powers. If it doesn't grant the power to the President, he doesn't have it. You can't show where it grants the power to the president. I and GOP Capitalist can show where it grants the power to suspend WHC to Congress, in certain times.

Your concept of "reality" is upside down - you think this is a country in which the Federal Government created the States, and in which the Constitution limits the pre-existing powers of the Federal Government, rather than enumerating and ceding a limited amount of powers from the States and the People.

You are thoroughly, and shamefully, reconstructed.