Biden admin signs off on scrubbing 'names and displays' from military bases
-
I’m sure the Libtards will want to name something after their martyr George Floyd.
-
I’m sure the Libtards will want to name something after their martyr George Floyd.
I’m sure the Libtards will want to name something after their martyr George Floyd.
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
-
I’m sure the Libtards will want to name something after their martyr George Floyd.
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
I just knew when I clicked on this something stupid would pop up.
I'm pretty sure it was explained to you simpletons once already the reasons why the Confederates were not considered traitors.
-
I’m sure the Libtards will want to name something after their martyr George Floyd.
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
Actually it's you assholes that named shit after him. Makes sense though since he's the base of your party. Confederate soldiers were no better or worse than American revolutionaries.
WSS
-
Well at least Floyd wasn't a traitor. Maybe if he killed a bunch of US soldiers you guys would want to name something after him?
I just knew when I clicked on this something stupid would pop up.
I'm pretty sure it was explained to you simpletons once already the reasons why the Confederates were not considered traitors.
I just knew when I clicked on this something stupid would pop up.
I'm pretty sure it was explained to you simpletons once already the reasons why the Confederates were not considered traitors.
They were traitors FY. That is why they needed pardons for treason. The reason you don't consider them traitors is because you were taught to honor them. Lost Cause propaganda.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Which words are you confused by?
Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof. -ANDREW JOHNSON.
Who needs a pardons for treason? Traitors.
-
I just knew when I clicked on this something stupid would pop up.
I'm pretty sure it was explained to you simpletons once already the reasons why the Confederates were not considered traitors.
They were traitors FY. That is why they needed pardons for treason. The reason you don't consider them traitors is because you were taught to honor them. Lost Cause propaganda.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Which words are you confused by?
Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof. -ANDREW JOHNSON.
Who needs a pardons for treason? Traitors.
-
I just knew when I clicked on this something stupid would pop up.
I'm pretty sure it was explained to you simpletons once already the reasons why the Confederates were not considered traitors.
They were traitors FY. That is why they needed pardons for treason. The reason you don't consider them traitors is because you were taught to honor them. Lost Cause propaganda.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Which words are you confused by?
Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof. -ANDREW JOHNSON.
Who needs a pardons for treason? Traitors.
They were traitors FY. That is why they needed pardons for treason. The reason you don't consider them traitors is because you were taught to honor them. Lost Cause propaganda.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Which words are you confused by?
Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof. -ANDREW JOHNSON.
Who needs a pardons for treason? Traitors.
Yawn. Yes of course, Johnson's pardon, your go to. Everyone I'm sure is aware of Johnsons pardon.
There were a several reasons for the pardon. One being that treason would be nearly impossible to prove. Typically, pardons are granted for those already tried and convicted. Not one confederate was ever tried or convicted of treason, which makes Johnson's "pardon" an empty one.
The Souths aim was to succeed. Succession was not illegal or unconstitutional. Unlike people like you, Southerners believed in this nation's founding and the Constitution and were not anti-American in the least. The founders did not establish an all-powerful centralized government, but a confederation of sovereign states...states that make their own laws and elect their own leaders.
Traitors you say?
Aldrich Ames spied for the Russians, Benedict Arnold for the British. What foreign power did Lee work for?
But Senator Garrett Davis of Kentucky was quick to argue that treason, strictly speaking, was a crime involving “adherence to a foreign enemy with which the United States are at war…and that adherence to a domestic enemy was not an adherence to an enemy within the meaning of the Constitution.” It only confused matters more that the Confederacy had been accorded belligerent rights “in exchanges of prisoners and other acts,” and that concession could imply that Confederate officers had been the servants, not of treason, but of a separate, sovereign nation. [30]
As regards the secondary argument that Southern secession may have been legal, even some of the historians most hostile to Confederate heritage admit the possibility. Allen Guelzo, for example, recently conceded in his analysis of a hypothetical treason case against Robert E. Lee that the constitutional question of whether a citizen’s primary relationship was to his state, or the Union of states, was unclear:
Nowhere in the Constitution, as it was written in 1787, is the concept of citizenship actually defined. In the five places where the Constitution refers to citizenship, it speaks of citizens of the states, and citizens of the United States. But the Constitution made no effort to sort out the relationship between the two, leaving the strange sense that Americans possessed a kind of dual citizenship, in their native State . . . and in the Union.
[U]ntil the Civil War settled matters, there was a plausible vagueness in the Constitution about the loyalty owed by citizens of states and the Union, and so long as it could be argued that Lee was simply functioning within the latitude of that vagueness by following his Virginia citizenship, it would be extraordinarily difficult to persuade a civilian jury that he had knowingly committed treason.Some argue that Confederate generals were “treasonous” since they took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States when they joined the military. At the time before the ratification of the 14th Amendment, people were citizens of the individual states that were members of the United States. Once a state declared itself free of the United States, the people were no longer affiliated with the United States. The Electoral College, the Bill of Rights, the original election of the Senate and the Tenth Amendment all prove that the Constitution did not establish an all-powerful national democracy, but a confederation of sovereign states. At the time of the Civil War, the notion of secession was still a topic of heated debate, unlike today. Furthermore, the oath taken after the Civil War specified they swore to uphold the Constitution and the Union. This, coupled with the 14th Amendment which was ratified after the Civil War, cleared up the ambiguity of loyalties to states versus the Union.
-
They were traitors FY. That is why they needed pardons for treason. The reason you don't consider them traitors is because you were taught to honor them. Lost Cause propaganda.
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Which words are you confused by?
Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson President of the United States, by virtue of the power and authority in me vested by the Constitution and in the name of the sovereign people of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare unconditionally and without reservation, to all and to every person who, directly or indirectly, participated in the late insurrection or rebellion a full pardon and amnesty for the offense of treason against the United States or of adhering to their enemies during the late civil war, with restoration of all rights, privileges, and immunities under the Constitution and the laws which have been made in pursuance thereof. -ANDREW JOHNSON.
Who needs a pardons for treason? Traitors.
Yawn. Yes of course, Johnson's pardon, your go to. Everyone I'm sure is aware of Johnsons pardon.
There were a several reasons for the pardon. One being that treason would be nearly impossible to prove. Typically, pardons are granted for those already tried and convicted. Not one confederate was ever tried or convicted of treason, which makes Johnson's "pardon" an empty one.
The Souths aim was to succeed. Succession was not illegal or unconstitutional. Unlike people like you, Southerners believed in this nation's founding and the Constitution and were not anti-American in the least. The founders did not establish an all-powerful centralized government, but a confederation of sovereign states...states that make their own laws and elect their own leaders.
Traitors you say?
Aldrich Ames spied for the Russians, Benedict Arnold for the British. What foreign power did Lee work for?
But Senator Garrett Davis of Kentucky was quick to argue that treason, strictly speaking, was a crime involving “adherence to a foreign enemy with which the United States are at war…and that adherence to a domestic enemy was not an adherence to an enemy within the meaning of the Constitution.” It only confused matters more that the Confederacy had been accorded belligerent rights “in exchanges of prisoners and other acts,” and that concession could imply that Confederate officers had been the servants, not of treason, but of a separate, sovereign nation. [30]
As regards the secondary argument that Southern secession may have been legal, even some of the historians most hostile to Confederate heritage admit the possibility. Allen Guelzo, for example, recently conceded in his analysis of a hypothetical treason case against Robert E. Lee that the constitutional question of whether a citizen’s primary relationship was to his state, or the Union of states, was unclear:
Nowhere in the Constitution, as it was written in 1787, is the concept of citizenship actually defined. In the five places where the Constitution refers to citizenship, it speaks of citizens of the states, and citizens of the United States. But the Constitution made no effort to sort out the relationship between the two, leaving the strange sense that Americans possessed a kind of dual citizenship, in their native State . . . and in the Union.
[U]ntil the Civil War settled matters, there was a plausible vagueness in the Constitution about the loyalty owed by citizens of states and the Union, and so long as it could be argued that Lee was simply functioning within the latitude of that vagueness by following his Virginia citizenship, it would be extraordinarily difficult to persuade a civilian jury that he had knowingly committed treason.Some argue that Confederate generals were “treasonous” since they took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States when they joined the military. At the time before the ratification of the 14th Amendment, people were citizens of the individual states that were members of the United States. Once a state declared itself free of the United States, the people were no longer affiliated with the United States. The Electoral College, the Bill of Rights, the original election of the Senate and the Tenth Amendment all prove that the Constitution did not establish an all-powerful national democracy, but a confederation of sovereign states. At the time of the Civil War, the notion of secession was still a topic of heated debate, unlike today. Furthermore, the oath taken after the Civil War specified they swore to uphold the Constitution and the Union. This, coupled with the 14th Amendment which was ratified after the Civil War, cleared up the ambiguity of loyalties to states versus the Union.
Yawn. Yes of course, Johnson's pardon, your go to. Everyone I'm sure is aware of Johnsons pardon.
There were a several reasons for the pardon. One being that treason would be nearly impossible to prove. Typically, pardons are granted for those already tried and convicted. Not one confederate was ever tried or convicted of treason, which makes Johnson's "pardon" an empty one.
The Souths aim was to succeed. Succession was not illegal or unconstitutional. Unlike people like you, Southerners believed in this nation's founding and the Constitution and were not anti-American in the least. The founders did not establish an all-powerful centralized government, but a confederation of sovereign states...states that make their own laws and elect their own leaders.
Traitors you say?
Aldrich Ames spied for the Russians, Benedict Arnold for the British. What foreign power did Lee work for?
Not every traitor was given the pardon with Johnson's Proclamation. There was an exception list where the traitors had to put in a "special application to the President". These traitors had to apply for a pardon for their treason. Over 12,000 traitors were given these pardons for treason. If they weren't traitors, why would they apply for a pardon for treason and have to take an oath?
Do you think Senate Davis's (from a slave state btw) definition of treason overrules the definition of treason in the Constitution? Again, which words do you not understand?
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Your feelings mean nothing. The feelings on authors of articles written 150+ years after the facts, means nothing. Both United State Presidents during our Civil War pardoned Confederates of treason. Again, who need pardons for treason? Traitors do. That the United States wanted to try heal the wounds caused by these slaver traitors, has no bearing on them being traitors.
You can justify the slavers trying to succeed from our country. You can thank those groomers The Daughters of the Confederacy for your feelings on that subject.
-
Yeah, it's a great day for our country. No more traitors' names on our military bases.
If abraham lincoln, ulysses grant and william t sherman didnt object im not sure a leftist internet troll carries a lot of weight.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Yawn. Yes of course, Johnson's pardon, your go to. Everyone I'm sure is aware of Johnsons pardon.
There were a several reasons for the pardon. One being that treason would be nearly impossible to prove. Typically, pardons are granted for those already tried and convicted. Not one confederate was ever tried or convicted of treason, which makes Johnson's "pardon" an empty one.
The Souths aim was to succeed. Succession was not illegal or unconstitutional. Unlike people like you, Southerners believed in this nation's founding and the Constitution and were not anti-American in the least. The founders did not establish an all-powerful centralized government, but a confederation of sovereign states...states that make their own laws and elect their own leaders.
Traitors you say?
Aldrich Ames spied for the Russians, Benedict Arnold for the British. What foreign power did Lee work for?
Not every traitor was given the pardon with Johnson's Proclamation. There was an exception list where the traitors had to put in a "special application to the President". These traitors had to apply for a pardon for their treason. Over 12,000 traitors were given these pardons for treason. If they weren't traitors, why would they apply for a pardon for treason and have to take an oath?
Do you think Senate Davis's (from a slave state btw) definition of treason overrules the definition of treason in the Constitution? Again, which words do you not understand?
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Your feelings mean nothing. The feelings on authors of articles written 150+ years after the facts, means nothing. Both United State Presidents during our Civil War pardoned Confederates of treason. Again, who need pardons for treason? Traitors do. That the United States wanted to try heal the wounds caused by these slaver traitors, has no bearing on them being traitors.
You can justify the slavers trying to succeed from our country. You can thank those groomers The Daughters of the Confederacy for your feelings on that subject.
Not every traitor was given the pardon with Johnson's Proclamation. There was an exception list where the traitors had to put in a "special application to the President". These traitors had to apply for a pardon for their treason. Over 12,000 traitors were given these pardons for treason. If they weren't traitors, why would they apply for a pardon for treason and have to take an oath?
Do you think Senate Davis's (from a slave state btw) definition of treason overrules the definition of treason in the Constitution? Again, which words do you not understand?
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason"
Your feelings mean nothing. The feelings on authors of articles written 150+ years after the facts, means nothing. Both United State Presidents during our Civil War pardoned Confederates of treason. Again, who need pardons for treason? Traitors do. That the United States wanted to try heal the wounds caused by these slaver traitors, has no bearing on them being traitors.
You can justify the slavers trying to succeed from our country. You can thank those groomers The Daughters of the Confederacy for your feelings on that subject.
-
If abraham lincoln, ulysses grant and william t sherman didnt object im not sure a leftist internet troll carries a lot of weight.
Pretty sure none of them were alive when they named the military bases. Really sure about Lincoln.
When the newly formed Confederacy opened fire on Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861, Grant wrote that, “There are but two parties now: traitors and patriots. And I want hereafter to be ranked with the latter.” - Ulysses S. Grant
-
It’s pretty pathetic when someone tries so hard to look smart….
Tri-c is someone who has zero friends and is definitely a victim of abuse somewhere in his youth.
good luck with your pain.
-
It’s pretty pathetic when someone tries so hard to look smart….
Tri-c is someone who has zero friends and is definitely a victim of abuse somewhere in his youth.
good luck with your pain.
It’s pretty pathetic when someone tries so hard to look smart….
Tri-c is someone who has zero friends and is definitely a victim of abuse somewhere in his youth.
good luck with your pain.
Cult member cannot refute claim backed up by evidence. How did they respond?
a. Meme
b. Ad hominem attack
c. Link to rightwing nutjob "source"
d. #whataboutism
e. combination of a, b, c, or d
-
It’s pretty pathetic when someone tries so hard to look smart….
Tri-c is someone who has zero friends and is definitely a victim of abuse somewhere in his youth.
good luck with your pain.
Cult member cannot refute claim backed up by evidence. How did they respond?
a. Meme
b. Ad hominem attack
c. Link to rightwing nutjob "source"
d. #whataboutism
e. combination of a, b, c, or d
Cult member cannot refute claim backed up by evidence. How did they respond?
a. Meme
b. Ad hominem attack
c. Link to rightwing nutjob "source"
d. #whataboutism
e. combination of a, b, c, or d
Groomer member cannot refute claim backed up by evidence. How did they respond?
a.Cry
b. Change sex
c. Link to CRT, DRAG QUEEN nutjob "source"
d. Severe TDS
e. combination of a, b, c, or d
Your Hatred of your country. Sad. -
watched Brett Beir - talking to one of 50 cia officers who signed a letter - saying the hunter biden laptop had all the earmarks of a russian disinformation thing.
they admit they had no idea if it's being true or not.
But they issued the letter anyways.
Just in time for biden to use it in the presidential debates.
The smug arrogance and dishonesty is worrisome.
the agent seems happy to lie his ass off. What a squid.
Bret Baier presses ex-CIA intel officer standing by Hunter Biden 'Russian info' letter: 'It wasn't true'
-
watched Brett Beir - talking to one of 50 cia officers who signed a letter - saying the hunter biden laptop had all the earmarks of a russian disinformation thing.
they admit they had no idea if it's being true or not.
But they issued the letter anyways.
Just in time for biden to use it in the presidential debates.
The smug arrogance and dishonesty is worrisome.
the agent seems happy to lie his ass off. What a squid.
Bret Baier presses ex-CIA intel officer standing by Hunter Biden 'Russian info' letter: 'It wasn't true'
watched Brett Beir - talking to one of 50 cia officers who signed a letter - saying the hunter biden laptop had all the earmarks of a russian disinformation thing.
they admit they had no idea if it's being true or not.
But they issued the letter anyways.
Just in time for biden to use it in the presidential debates.
The smug arrogance and dishonesty is worrisome.
the agent seems happy to lie his ass off. What a squid.
Bret Baier presses ex-CIA intel officer standing by Hunter Biden 'Russian info' letter: 'It wasn't true'
Wrong thread baby cow.
-
In case you guys missed it.
WASHINGTON — It was a name synonymous with failure. More than 80 years ago, an Army base in Blackstone, Va., was named for George E. Pickett, the defeated Confederate general who led the disastrous “Pickett’s charge” at the Battle of Gettysburg.
Now the base is the first of nine named for a Confederate to be redesignated by the end of this year. On Friday, Fort Pickett became Fort Barfoot, in honor of Col. Van Barfoot, a World War II hero and a Medal of Honor recipient.
Col. James C. Shaver Jr., the base’s garrison commander, said it was an honor to be the first base renamed and that Fort Barfoot was now the first Army base in the continental United States to bear the name of a Native American soldier.
-
Its interesting to me that people who hate america, the values it was founded on and who only stand for degeneracy and deviants and want to fundamentally change the country to mirror a failed state like the u.s.s.r. are so concerned about traitors.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Its interesting to me that people who hate america, the values it was founded on and who only stand for degeneracy and deviants and want to fundamentally change the country to mirror a failed state like the u.s.s.r. are so concerned about traitors.
Its interesting to me that people who hate america, the values it was founded on and who only stand for degeneracy and deviants and want to fundamentally change the country to mirror a failed state like the u.s.s.r. are so concerned about traitors.
Yeah you have to wonder why those America haters were able to name military bases after traitors in the first place. But luckily those mistakes are going away, and they are to be going to be named after actual American heroes.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login