Congress has the control of specific stipulations on making a State, not the President....
Constitution does Not Allow for a State to be made inside a State, or from part of a State or parts of States, meaning it has to be an Original State made from a Territory....
I could see making only confederate states not hold slaves while allowing all the neutral states to keep them would be considered unconstitutional. Since it's clearly applied to a political rival and not speak equally through the states
States that were in rebellion, we're in rebellion and could be treated by the federal government differently. Slaves were freed in the rebelling states, as a war measure, to deprive rebels of their "property" as punishment for their rebellion. That's what they get for trying to claim that people were their property.
Yankees were doing the very same thing up until a few years before the war. The fact that the Emancipation Proclamation had so many "exceptions" proves that Lincoln didn't give a damn about the slaves and just wanted to punish people who dared defy him by trading with England without using Yankee trading companies. Slavery was going to be gone in the South by the 1880s anyway. It was not the real issue.
Doing the very same thing? What are you smoking? Slavery was outlawed in the northern states. They went even further, exercising their states' rights to protect inhabitants within their jurisdiction from being illegally kidnapped and trafficked to the slave states to be enslaved.
There were no "exceptions" in the EP. Some solid sophistry there. The EP only applied to areas in rebellion, because they were in rebellion. Don't want to be punished? Don't engage in unlawful rebellion against the legitimate federal government and Constitution.
Slavery was literally growing exponentially and reached a PEAK in 1860. Slavers spent decades doing everything they could to expand slave territory west, south, and even north (see Lincoln's House Divided speech and the conspiracy he described... that's the real meaning behind how he applied the house divided analogy). Why? Because they needed more fertile land. Why? Because they refused to implement crop rotation but instead damaged their land by only planting cash crops so they could get rich off other counties while trying to avoid export (and import) taxes. It was outsourcing to Europeans because the aristocratic, plantation owning Europhiles would do anything to keep their slaves, keep their luxurous lives, and keep their power (over poor white people too).
Slavery was THE political issue from which every other political issue spawned during the antebellum period in 19th Century America. It literally caused the creation of a new political party whose platform was to prevent the expansion of slavery. Hell, the issue even caused national church bodies to split along geographic lines.
Please step away from the Lost Cause propaganda. That koolaid is a cancer to republican conservatism... yoking yourself to the defenders of an evil institution will only make you look like an ignorant redneck and gives our real enemy ammo.
I know plenty when it comes to American and US history. I know many people are wrong on this. I know there are multiple sides to every story.
The confederate states' stated reason for leaving the union was to self-govern and protect their own interests, which is a reasonable and understandable desire. However, the underlying reason for their decision to secede was their desire to maintain and expand the practice of slavery, which is morally reprehensible and completely unacceptable.
However, the underlying reason for their decision to secede was their desire to maintain and expand the practice of slavery, which is morally reprehensible and completely unacceptable.
There we go, throw out the LIE, so that people think it's a Moral High Ground taken by the Aggressor....
Sounds exactly like something some Clown from ANTIFA would say, IF they were living back then....
the Truth is that Under States Rights, the STATE has the Responsibility to Allow or Make Unlawful certain things, Drugs, Murder, Property Damage, Rape, Slavery, Stealing, etc....
And the southern Slave owners had already seen that they were actually losing money because of the Ownership of Slaves, and because of the New Machines that were being invented, such as the Cotton gin, The Sewing Machine, the Vacuum Milker, so they were looking for ways to get rid of the Slaves, and move in the Machines in order to improve their Plantations and be prosperous....
Slavery was on the way OUT,and the Northern States knew it, so did the Rothschilds in Europe, so they got Busy planning and implementing the destruction of the Southern States....
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
So according to the constitution, this will never happen. And plus, West Virginia will be just Virginia again…if this gets pushed. Unless I’m reading that incorrectly.
You are reading it correctly but Virginia was seceded from the US at the time and WV broke away to rejoin the US, thus, most are looking at the WV / VA situation wrongly: it is not the same as New California trying to breakaway from a California that is still a part of the US
I was also pointing out that your statement "Constitution does Not Allow for a State to be made inside a State, or from part of a State or parts of States, meaning it has to be an Original State made from a Territory...." was untrue. It is conditional.
As for Lincoln, he was put in a tough situation where he had to either let the Cabal win or break the constitution. They are experts in cooking up such situations.
The only question I am interested in is whether, if he had allowed the South to secede, it would have hastened the enslavement by the Cabal or not. I strongly believe it would have.
Trump definitely learnt from this, and while people hate him for wanting to do everything by the book, this is exactly what he is trying to avoid.
Every breath we exhale should be a gratitude for the past mistakes that helps us avoid them in future.
Either the Republic is Voluntary or it is forced....
If it is Voluntary, it is a True Republic, if it is Forced, it is Not a Republic, but something else....
Call it a Democracy, or anything else, but not a Republic, as it implies True Freedom to Self Govern....
IF it is a Voluntary Republic, then States have Sovereignty, and Sovereign Rights, and in those is the Right to LEAVE the Union without encumbrances....
If they Don't, then we have Feudalism under a Sovereign, and the states have nearly no Rights, as they ALL equally lost Lincolns war....
Lincoln had way better Choices, and more choices than to simply STEAL Congress's powers, and Declare War....
But he chose POORLY, and not only did he violate the U.S. Constitution, he Violated the Law of Nations, mentioned in U.S. Constitution Article I. Legislative Branch. Section VIII. Clause X. To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
Controversial,yes, but not Unconstitutional....
Congress has the control of specific stipulations on making a State, not the President....
Constitution does Not Allow for a State to be made inside a State, or from part of a State or parts of States, meaning it has to be an Original State made from a Territory....
I could see making only confederate states not hold slaves while allowing all the neutral states to keep them would be considered unconstitutional. Since it's clearly applied to a political rival and not speak equally through the states
States that were in rebellion, we're in rebellion and could be treated by the federal government differently. Slaves were freed in the rebelling states, as a war measure, to deprive rebels of their "property" as punishment for their rebellion. That's what they get for trying to claim that people were their property.
Yankees were doing the very same thing up until a few years before the war. The fact that the Emancipation Proclamation had so many "exceptions" proves that Lincoln didn't give a damn about the slaves and just wanted to punish people who dared defy him by trading with England without using Yankee trading companies. Slavery was going to be gone in the South by the 1880s anyway. It was not the real issue.
Doing the very same thing? What are you smoking? Slavery was outlawed in the northern states. They went even further, exercising their states' rights to protect inhabitants within their jurisdiction from being illegally kidnapped and trafficked to the slave states to be enslaved.
There were no "exceptions" in the EP. Some solid sophistry there. The EP only applied to areas in rebellion, because they were in rebellion. Don't want to be punished? Don't engage in unlawful rebellion against the legitimate federal government and Constitution.
Slavery was literally growing exponentially and reached a PEAK in 1860. Slavers spent decades doing everything they could to expand slave territory west, south, and even north (see Lincoln's House Divided speech and the conspiracy he described... that's the real meaning behind how he applied the house divided analogy). Why? Because they needed more fertile land. Why? Because they refused to implement crop rotation but instead damaged their land by only planting cash crops so they could get rich off other counties while trying to avoid export (and import) taxes. It was outsourcing to Europeans because the aristocratic, plantation owning Europhiles would do anything to keep their slaves, keep their luxurous lives, and keep their power (over poor white people too).
Slavery was THE political issue from which every other political issue spawned during the antebellum period in 19th Century America. It literally caused the creation of a new political party whose platform was to prevent the expansion of slavery. Hell, the issue even caused national church bodies to split along geographic lines.
Please step away from the Lost Cause propaganda. That koolaid is a cancer to republican conservatism... yoking yourself to the defenders of an evil institution will only make you look like an ignorant redneck and gives our real enemy ammo.
Please read this::
The South was right, by S. A. Steel - Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/southwasrightbys00stee
I read that before
I know plenty when it comes to American and US history. I know many people are wrong on this. I know there are multiple sides to every story.
The confederate states' stated reason for leaving the union was to self-govern and protect their own interests, which is a reasonable and understandable desire. However, the underlying reason for their decision to secede was their desire to maintain and expand the practice of slavery, which is morally reprehensible and completely unacceptable.
There we go, throw out the LIE, so that people think it's a Moral High Ground taken by the Aggressor....
Sounds exactly like something some Clown from ANTIFA would say, IF they were living back then....
the Truth is that Under States Rights, the STATE has the Responsibility to Allow or Make Unlawful certain things, Drugs, Murder, Property Damage, Rape, Slavery, Stealing, etc....
And the southern Slave owners had already seen that they were actually losing money because of the Ownership of Slaves, and because of the New Machines that were being invented, such as the Cotton gin, The Sewing Machine, the Vacuum Milker, so they were looking for ways to get rid of the Slaves, and move in the Machines in order to improve their Plantations and be prosperous....
Slavery was on the way OUT,and the Northern States knew it, so did the Rothschilds in Europe, so they got Busy planning and implementing the destruction of the Southern States....
Article IV, section 3:
So according to the constitution, this will never happen. And plus, West Virginia will be just Virginia again…if this gets pushed. Unless I’m reading that incorrectly.
There is a scenario. If CA election fraud breaks wide open ...
You are reading it correctly but Virginia was seceded from the US at the time and WV broke away to rejoin the US, thus, most are looking at the WV / VA situation wrongly: it is not the same as New California trying to breakaway from a California that is still a part of the US
Here is the case that settled the question over the constitutionality of WV's creation
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_v._West_Virginia
And that is just another piece of the Federal Constitution that Lincoln directly Violated....
He has a long list of actual Constitutional Violations, and I do believe the Founders would have had him Shot with Cannons for Treasonous Acts....
Maybe this will help add to the Convo::
The South was right, by S. A. Steel - Internet Archive https://archive.org/details/southwasrightbys00stee
I was also pointing out that your statement "Constitution does Not Allow for a State to be made inside a State, or from part of a State or parts of States, meaning it has to be an Original State made from a Territory...." was untrue. It is conditional.
As for Lincoln, he was put in a tough situation where he had to either let the Cabal win or break the constitution. They are experts in cooking up such situations.
The only question I am interested in is whether, if he had allowed the South to secede, it would have hastened the enslavement by the Cabal or not. I strongly believe it would have.
Trump definitely learnt from this, and while people hate him for wanting to do everything by the book, this is exactly what he is trying to avoid.
Every breath we exhale should be a gratitude for the past mistakes that helps us avoid them in future.
Is the United States a Republic or is it not??
Either the Republic is Voluntary or it is forced....
If it is Voluntary, it is a True Republic, if it is Forced, it is Not a Republic, but something else....
Call it a Democracy, or anything else, but not a Republic, as it implies True Freedom to Self Govern....
IF it is a Voluntary Republic, then States have Sovereignty, and Sovereign Rights, and in those is the Right to LEAVE the Union without encumbrances....
If they Don't, then we have Feudalism under a Sovereign, and the states have nearly no Rights, as they ALL equally lost Lincolns war....
Lincoln had way better Choices, and more choices than to simply STEAL Congress's powers, and Declare War....
But he chose POORLY, and not only did he violate the U.S. Constitution, he Violated the Law of Nations, mentioned in U.S. Constitution Article I. Legislative Branch. Section VIII. Clause X. To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;