Why Its Pointless To Argue With Global Warming Believers 2036
You don't?
I can accept that he *can* be guilty without a trial... I just don't believe that the argument you parroted showed he was. What's so difficult about that? It's obvious that you're too attached to your faulty, parroted argument. Hell, I can provide you with a much better argument for Bush's guilt.
You're confused. I said he can't be "legally" guilty if there is no proof. Apparently you are forgetting you kept referring to your argument as a "legal argument": "So far, however, nobody...
You're so delusional that you can't differentiate between when someone is offering concrete proof and when a fool like yourself offers evidence even he admits offers no proof. Gee, I wonder who will be surprised by this;)
Again with this crap. Hey, remember this?
d?dmode=source&hl=en
I buttume you're referring to Article 6 Clause 2, which reads:
"This Consbreastution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Consbreastution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."
...Article 1 Sec 10 obviously is more clear than that... as evidenced by the fact that there are people like you that think a treaty can override other portions of the U.S. Consbreastution.
Now... what's really interesting here is that if you take the verbiage from Article 6 and combine it with that of Article 1, you'll have a situation where a Consbreastutional amendment will be necessary to create legislature letting 'States' make something other than gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt. It is here where Znu would have to begin his counter argument... the very same place his argument will be stymied because no such amendment exists.
ZnU It kept the tax and spend bureaucrats in check. Now they can just print up...
A part... but not a part that can override what I just cited. Forget that you have been shown case law to the contrary... does that idea even make any sense to you? The irony is that even Znu pointed this fact out to you at least once;)
Gee, no countering? No telling me that my proof here doesn't prove anything for you? LOL!
ZnU We're not trying to pick on you this time, Znu. Just trying to get your paradigm focused on what matters. In the past, all governments that have gone off the gold standard has...
-- "Heck, OS X is not even partially based on FreeBSD" - Snit "Sandman and Carroll are running around trying to crucify trolls like myself" - Snit