By your definition. It's interesting to note that the founders found the need to constantly state that congressional approval was needed for this and that legislation was needed for that all through Article I. Why is that. Do you suppose that they didn't realize that Article I, Section 1 governed all clauses? At least, according to you and your 'logical presumptions'.
Your arguments on habeas corpus are of the exact same character as the "meaning of is" and the "definition of what constitutes sex" in a Clinton deposition...
Are you suggesting my arguements are similar to your definition of tu quoque? That it means whatever I want it to mean at the time?
Really? Cause I just looked at section 8 and only see congress specifically stated once - in the first clause. The next 17 outline various powers of Congress, yet not one of them specifically reads "Congress shall..." like the first. By watching your judicial theater of the absurd one could conclude off of that fact that Congress does not have the sole power "To establish Post Offices and post Roads" or "To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas" since the constitution is "silent" on whether or not each individually belongs to Congress. Do you suppose that they didn't realize that Article I, Section 1 governed all clauses?
Actually, it would seem that they did considering that 17 out of 18 enumerated powers are listed without specific mention of Congress, only the first reading "Congress shall..."