Abraham Lincoln on trial

[konradv]

There is no such thing as a contract that you aren't allowed to break, moron. Check the Supreme Court rulings on that subject if you don't believe it.

See: Texas v White.

You can get started with this:

"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body.
And it was final.

The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."

Texas-v-White, 74 U.S.

I've seen Texas v. White. That's the decision that tried to justify the Civil War by claiming the confederate states were ALWAYS part of the union. Right, they had no representation in Congress, they couldn't vote, but they were part of the union? It takes an incredible gullibility to swallow that line of "reasoning."

Furthermore, when that decision was handed down, 5 Lincoln appointees were on the court. Yeah, what are the odds that they would have ruled against the federal government?

They had representation, whether they chose to use it or not. Andrew Johnson, Senator from TN, never gave up his seat and continued to represent his state.

 

[bripat9643]

Side note:

All the former Slave States implemented post War Black Codes. Them rebellious Southerners still were not ready to see the Black man vote, or carry weapons, or be on juries, or have free speech, and they had to sign contracts to work on the plantation, or be jailed and hired out to highest bidder. They could even have their children hired out without the consent of the parents. Slavery light.

Black Codes

So? Black codes existed in the Union states before the war.

 

[bripat9643]

They had representation, whether they chose to use it or not. Andrew Johnson, Senator from TN, never gave up his seat and continued to represent his state.

TN never seceded, moron.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Whoops? Meaning you posted this stupidity?

Show us in the Constitution where it says that states can be forced to agree to amendments as a condition of enjoying their Constitutional rights. Show where it says anyone who hasn't had a trial and due process can be barred from voting.

Can't do that either. Brainwashed drones like you have been wandering around with a head full of government propaganda and when you spout it you come off as complete ignorant morons.

You guys kill me.

Guy, you can go on all day about how YOUR interpretation of the constitution trumps what was actually done.

Bottom line. A lot of dumb crackers fought a war against their government so a few rich assholes could keep raping their slaves. If the average Southerner said, "Meh, fuck this, I don't own slaves, I don't care Lincoln got elected!" there would have been no war.

And those states wouldn't have had to suck up to get back into the union.

Frankly, I think they were let off too easy. They were let back in far too quickly.

 

[bripat9643]

The only mistake made in the Civil War was not having a Nuremburg Trial for Lee, Davis and every other traitor, followed by hanging them and burning their bodies so one one could make a shrine out of hteir graves.

The reason the federal government never held such trials is the fact that it knew it would lose and the whole reason for the war would have been discredited. You see, the federal government would have had to prove that the Constitution barred secession, and that's a case it knew it couldn't make.

 

[konradv]

They had representation, whether they chose to use it or not. Andrew Johnson, Senator from TN, never gave up his seat and continued to represent his state.

TN never seceded, moron.

Please study some history before posting.

In February 1861, secessionists in Tennessee's state government—led by Governor Isham Harris—sought voter approval for a convention to sever ties with the United States, but Tennessee voters rejected the referendum by a 54–46% margin. The strongest opposition to secession came from East Tennessee (which later tried to form a separate Union-aligned state). Following the Confederate attack upon Fort Sumter in April and Lincoln's call for troops from Tennessee and other states in response, Governor Isham Harris began military mobilization, submitted an ordinance of secession to the General Assembly, and made direct overtures to the Confederate government. The Tennessee legislature ratified an agreement to enter a military league with the Confederate States on May 7, 1861. On June 8, 1861, with people in Middle Tennessee having significantly changed their position, voters approved a second referendum calling for secession, becoming the last state to do so.

Tennessee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[paperview]

They had representation, whether they chose to use it or not. Andrew Johnson, Senator from TN, never gave up his seat and continued to represent his state.

TN never seceded, moron.

Yes they did.

Wow. Who's the fucking moron?

 

[konradv]

They had representation, whether they chose to use it or not. Andrew Johnson, Senator from TN, never gave up his seat and continued to represent his state.

TN never seceded, moron.

Yes they did.

Wow. Who's the fucking moron?

We always suspected it, but now we have proof.

 

[JoeB131]

The only mistake made in the Civil War was not having a Nuremburg Trial for Lee, Davis and every other traitor, followed by hanging them and burning their bodies so one one could make a shrine out of hteir graves.

The reason the federal government never held such trials is the fact that it knew it would lose and the whole reason for the war would have been discredited. You see, the federal government would have had to prove that the Constitution barred secession, and that's a case it knew it couldn't make.

You don't think they could have gotten EXACTLY the result they wanted.

A jury of 12 people who lost loved ones in the war. They'd have hanged.

The real reason this wasn't done was Andrew Johnson wanted to restore the pre-war status quo as quickly as possible. It's why he's listed at the bottom of PResiential rankings while Lincoln is usually at the top.

 

[del]

I thought this a good time to start this thread, seeing that Hollywood is about to come out with a movie about Lincoln and all this talk about states wanting to secede. Also, Thanksgiving is upon us and Lincoln was the one who declared it a national holiday. For you see, Lincoln thought that creating a national holiday, that was only celebrated by the North, would help bring the nation together if we all celebrated it together.

Most of us have been spoon fed an image of Lincoln. For most of us, he stands out as one of America's greatest presidents, if not the best of the best. However, there are opposing view on this.

What Caused the Civil War Slavery States Rights Secession

President Licoln believed or thought that secession was illegal and strongly opposed it and obstructed the US Supreme Court convening and rendering a decision regarding whether or not any state had the right to secede. His opponent was none other than Cheif Justice Roger B. Taney who swore Lincoln into office. Tany ruled that Lilncoln's actions were illegal, criminal, and unconstitutional in his pursuit to prevent states from leaving the union.

Here are the charges.

1. Violation of the Constitution and his oath of office by invading and waging war against states that had legally and democratically withdrawn their consent from his government, inaugurating one of the cruelest wars in recent history.
2. Subverting the duly constituted governments of states that had not left the Union, thereby subverting their constitutional right to "republican form of government".
3. Raising troops without approval from Congress and expending funds without appropriation.
4. Suspending the writ of habeas Corpus and interfering with the press without due process, imprisoning thousands of citizens without charge or trial, and closing courts by military force where no hostilities were ocurring.
5. Corrupting the currency by manipulations and paper swindles unheard of in US history.
6. Fraud and corruption by appointees and contractors with his knowledge and connivance.
7. Continuing the war by raising ever larger bodies of troops by conscription and hiring of foreign merceneries and refusing to negotiate in good faith for an end to hostilities.
8. Confiscation of millions of dollars of civilian property by his agents in the South, esecially cotton, wihtout legal proceedings.
9. Waging war against women, children, civilians, and civilian property as the matter of policy, e.g. Sherman's March.


Funny how we were never taught this stuff in school, isn't it?

To begin the debate, I will debunk the notion that Licoln faught the war just to render slavery a thing of the past. After all, Licoln supported the Corwin Amendment to be added to the Constitution. It had passed Congress and it protected slavery in those states where it already existed. A few weeks before the war, Licoln went so far as to pen a letter to every governor in the South asking for their support in ratifying the Corwin Amendment as a means to avoid seccession. Licoln was obviously willing to allow slavery to continue, just to keep the union together. If so, why then did the South proceed in their plans to secede?

In short, was the Civil war really about slavery? It seems to me that the power and wealth that the South had to offer the northern states was enough to warrant a war that cost the union about 3% of it's population as dead, but why then was the South so determined to leave the union, especially in light of the fact that they apparently did not need to end slavery as a price for staying in the union?

As for today, the question is still being asked. Is it illegal to secede? If so, bring your best arugments to defend your position. More importantly, however, if it is illegal then should SCOTUS not be included on determing the Constitutionality of such an act?

we didn't spend a lot of time on the easter bunny either, cletus.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat is a babbling fool.

 

[Pinocchio]

Corwin is unimportant other than a side note.

It was never passed but is still pending.

It was a real concession for abolitionist Lincoln since it would have protected slavery in the existing southern states and forbid future attempts to rescind in the constitution. The south said it was boxing them in.

This could have been an episode on the old tv series "Sliders".

Maybe it was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corwin_Amendment

 

[paperview]

Side note:

All the former Slave States implemented post War Black Codes. Them rebellious Southerners still were not ready to see the Black man vote, or carry weapons, or be on juries, or have free speech, and they had to sign contracts to work on the plantation, or be jailed and hired out to highest bidder. They could even have their children hired out without the consent of the parents. Slavery light.

Black Codes

So? Black codes existed in the Union states before the war.

Before the war Southerners owned folks too.

The Black Codes were generally a Southern thing, another attempt to implement slavery light on Black folk.

After the War, The Civil Rights Act took effect, but them Southerners pissed all over them in their attempts to subjugate and enslave.

Another reason why the stupid notion that slavery would have died of it's accord anyway is just a huge pile ofcrap.

 

[paperview]

Corwin is unimportant other than a side note.

It was never passed, but it was a real concession for abolitionist Lincoln since it would have protected slavery in the existing southern states, in the constitution. The south said it was boxing them in.

This could have been an episode on the old tv series "Sliders".

Maybe it was.

Lincoln had nothing to do with its passage. By the time he addressed it, most states had already seceded.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lincoln was not (1) an abolitionist and (2) would never have permitted slavery in the territories.

Corwin is unimportant other than a device for Lincoln to gain time to manipulate public opinion to his side.

Corwin is unimportant other than a side note.

It was never passed, but it was a real concession for abolitionist Lincoln since it would have protected slavery in the existing southern states, in the constitution. The south said it was boxing them in.

This could have been an episode on the old tv series "Sliders".

Maybe it was.

Lincoln had nothing to do with its passage. By the time he addressed it, most states had already seceded.

 

[bripat9643]

You're actually correct. The 13th amendment appears to have been ratified by the states. That is, if you can deem a state under military occupation to have a legitimate election.

However, in 1866 Congress passed the reconstruction act that disenfranchised the Confederate states, so the 14th Amendment was only ratified by the Northern states.

True, but- to be fair- BritPat's argument that the ratification of the 13th Amendment was invalid because Southern States hadn't agreed to them is sort of silly. In fact, most of them did, fairly quickly after the war was over.

 

[jwoodie]

Side note:

All the former Slave States implemented post War Black Codes. Them rebellious Southerners still were not ready to see the Black man vote, or carry weapons, or be on juries, or have free speech, and they had to sign contracts to work on the plantation, or be jailed and hired out to highest bidder. They could even have their children hired out without the consent of the parents. Slavery light.

Black Codes

So? Black codes existed in the Union states before the war.

Before the war Southerners owned folks too.

The Black Codes were generally a Southern thing, another attempt to implement slavery light on Black folk.

After the War, The Civil Rights Act took effect, but them Southerners pissed all over them in their attempts to subjugate and enslave.

Another reason why the stupid notion that slavery would have died of it's accord anyway is just a huge pile ofcrap.

Brazil was the last Western Hemisphere nation to outlaw slavery, in 1888. It is doubtful that slavery would have existed longer than that in North America, particularly with the advent of mechanized agriculture. On the other hand, it is doubtful that the Northern States would have willingly accepted millions of freed slaves from the South.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm really trying to get what your point here is? Are you saying the 13th Amendment (No Slavery) and the 14th (No discrimination on the basis of race) are bad things because a few of the Southern moron states were coerced into ratifying them?

Frankly, the South should be praying every day they didn't do to them what happens to MOST factions that lose civil wars.

You're actually correct. The 13th amendment appears to have been ratified by the states. That is, if you can deem a state under military occupation to have a legitimate election.

However, in 1866 Congress passed the reconstruction act that disenfranchised the Confederate states, so the 14th Amendment was only ratified by the Northern states.

True, but- to be fair- BritPat's argument that the ratification of the 13th Amendment was invalid because Southern States hadn't agreed to them is sort of silly. In fact, most of them did, fairly quickly after the war was over.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Arkansas (April 6, 1868, after having rejected it on December 17, 1866)
Florida (June 9, 1868, after having rejected it on December 6, 1866)
North Carolina (July 4, 1868, after having rejected it on December 14, 1866)
Louisiana (July 9, 1868, after having rejected it on February 6, 1867)
South Carolina (July 9, 1868, after having rejected it on December 20, 1866)

bripat, you are stupid in that your stupidity is emotional: you can learn but refuse to, the worst sort of stupidity. You are a prisoner of yourself.

You're actually correct. The 13th amendment appears to have been ratified by the states. That is, if you can deem a state under military occupation to have a legitimate election.

However, in 1866 Congress passed the reconstruction act that disenfranchised the Confederate states, so the 14th Amendment was only ratified by the Northern states.

True, but- to be fair- BritPat's argument that the ratification of the 13th Amendment was invalid because Southern States hadn't agreed to them is sort of silly. In fact, most of them did, fairly quickly after the war was over.

 

[paperview]

So? Black codes existed in the Union states before the war.

Before the war Southerners owned folks too.

The Black Codes were generally a Southern thing, another attempt to implement slavery light on Black folk.

After the War, The Civil Rights Act took effect, but them Southerners pissed all over them in their attempts to subjugate and enslave.

Another reason why the stupid notion that slavery would have died of it's accord anyway is just a huge pile ofcrap.

Brazil was the last Western Hemisphere nation to outlaw slavery, in 1888. It is doubtful that slavery would have existed longer than that in North America, particularly with the advent of mechanized agriculture. On the other hand, it is doubtful that the Northern States would have willingly accepted millions of freed slaves from the South.

The South would have not freed them on their own. People do not on their own give away high ticket property, least of all men who had saw fit to keep humans in bondage.

When someone can give me a good answer to what would have been done with these folks...in the second column, below, then I'll believe slavery might have had a chance to 'die out' on its own.

State ---Free Population ---Slave Population (1860)
Alabama --519,121 ----435,080
Georgia ---505,088 ----462,198
Louisiana --376,276 ----331,726
Mississippi -354,674 ----436,631
South Carolina-- 301,302 ---402,406
Texas ---421,649 ----182,566
Arkansas --324,335--- 111,115
North Carolina -661,563 ---331,099
Tennessee--- 834,082--- 275,719
Florida ---78,679 ----61,745
Kentucky --930,201 ---225,483
Virginia --1,105,453 ---490,865