According to this story, U.S. District Court Judge Amy Totenberg expects to issue an order on Monday, April 11, in Greene v Raffensperger. This is the lawsuit in which Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to stop Georgia election officials from adjudicating a challenge to her qualifications to be a congressional candidate.
1-5-1 — one of the FATAL violations of Separation of Powers.
See Spirit of the Laws by the celebrated Montesquieu 1748 French original >>> English.
Majority Rule and SOP = 2 things preventing nonstop total monarch/oligarch tyranny.
ALL sorts of ROT copied from rotted Brits and put into 1776-1789 and later USA/State Consts.
>>> current pending USA Civil WAR II – in MANY parts of the USA.
—–
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Thomas Jefferson and all of the other signers of the Declaration of Independence would not be able to run for office according to the people going after Greene.
I doubt any of the signers of the Declaration of Independence ever took an oath, in their role as British officials, to support the Constitution of Great Britain. For one thing, there is no such written document as the Constitution of Great Britain.
Thomas Jefferson did not revolt against the US government.
The real insurrectionists were those who betrayed our country and cooperated with the Chinese Communists to steal our election. Those who served as politicians and voted to certify the stolen election should be barred from holding office under the insurrection clause. The corrupt judges who dismissed legal cases against this fraud should all be impeached and removed.
We need a real insurrection to remove the Chinese Occupation Government of quislings which is destroying our economy through inflation, trying to destroy our social fabric with critical race theory and transgenderism, and leading us down the path to a world war by backing the wrong side in Ukraine. We the people need Trump back in office. Greene should be Speaker of the House. The traitors should be impeached, removed, tried, convicted, and executed on live national television.
Let’s not forget treasonous election officials, the lying fake news media, and everyone else who helped carry out the Chinese coup against our Republican form of government. There are many traitors that need to hang by their neck til dead or face firing squads. That day is coming, and it can’t get here fast enough.
Richard, you of all people should know that the federal government is woefully corrupt, as are all of the state and local governments. Government officials violate their oath to the Constitution every day. The Declaration of Independence says that we the people have a right and duty to alter or abolish the government when it becomes destructive to our liberty.
George Washington took an oath to the King in the British Army. I’m sure many of the other founders took oaths to the King as colonial legislators or in any number of other capacities. Jefferson said the tree of liberty needs to be watered periodically with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Still waiting for Maxine Waters to be challenged by the 14th. Of course that will never happen because commies are never called out. Richard Winger won’t talk about it because he supports her.
See ALLEGIANCE in last para of 4 July 1776 DOI.
Result – oaths to USA State consts and USA Const 6 para 3 — 14-3 Amdt
Brit oaths-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_(United_Kingdom)
—-
Brit Republic folks at work to get rid of the Brit monarchy –
esp after QE II passes on.
The 14th amendment was never properly ratified. Southern states were held under federal occupation and excluded from congress until they ratified it. As with last year, which side were the real insurrectionists was flipped on its head because the winners write the textbooks – “might makes write.” But it does not make right, and looking at logic and history, States had every right to secede under the Constitution. Contrary to common lies, the question wasn’t logically resolved by war or by an erroneous court ruling.
The wrong side won in 1865, just as in 2021. And the insurrection clause itself exists in an improperly ratified amendment as a result. One thing for sure, we need to overturn at least one of those wrong results overturned to survive as a people in the face of the globalist bloodsucking elites, their population replacement agenda, their cultural Marxism, their scamdemics, their critical race theory, their insane saber rattling against Russia, their burn loot murder anti-police craziness and all the rest of their satanic evildoing.
An oath to the King of England is not the same as an oath to a constitution. The 14th amendment doesn’t have provision for an oath to the President, or the government in general. It is an oath to “support the Constitution”.
REAL cost to end racist slavery in the USA–
about 750,000 DEAD in 1861-1866 — 2011 estimate.
Multi-multi thousands more maimed for life – no body parts – eyes, hands, arms, feet, legs.
Super EVIL top confeds did NOT commit suicide – J. Davis, R. E. Lee, etc.
Moron Lincoln picked Johnson [ from slave state Tenn ] as VP in 1864.
13 Amdt proposed Jan 1865 – ratified Dec 1865.
Moron Congress failed to immediately convene on Mar 4, 1865 — such that Johnson [after Lincoln killed] let racist rebel regimes assemble and enact their infamous Black Codes — having ex-slaves with NOOO *civil* rights and NOOO *political* rights — vote / hold office.
Thus 14 Amdt proposed in 1866 – ratified July 1868.
Bare election of Grant in Nov 1868 caused total panic to get 15 Amdt proposed in Feb 1869 – ratified Feb 1870.
Civil wars in other regimes generally ended in mass purges of defeated — French Revolution, etc.
—–
Civil WAR II pending due to —
Voter machinations
Unequal ballot access laws
Gerrymanders
Party hack execs/judics
Fatal SOP violations
—-
Underlying monarch/oligarch vs Democracy factions.
“An oath to the King of England is not the same as an oath to a constitution.”
So what? The founders were still insurrectionist. Besides, those who voted to uphold the real winner of the election, Donald Trump, were being much more faithful to the Constitution than those who voted to certify the stolen by Chinese Communist election for there puppet Ho Xiden. Besides, even if the events of 1/6/21 were anything like an “insurrection,” MTG was legally in the Capitol doing her job that day, so how could she have been trespassing?
“REAL cost to end racist slavery in the USA–
about 750,000 DEAD in 1861-1866 — 2011 estimate.
Multi-multi thousands more maimed for life – no body parts – eyes, hands, arms, feet, legs.”
So how were so many other countries able to end slavery without a war? Simple, by compensating legal property owners for their expropriated property. It would have cost the country far less than the war, and slavery would have ended sooner. That is, if ending slavery had been the actual goal of the war. It wasn’t; in fact, Lincoln proposed making slavery permanently enshrined in the Constitution if Southern States would stay in the union. Lay all those deaths and other consequences at the feet of the evil Lincoln and his evil minions.
“Thus 14 Amdt proposed in 1866 – ratified July 1868.
Bare election of Grant in Nov 1868 caused total panic to get 15 Amdt proposed in Feb 1869 – ratified Feb 1870.”
How can States without self-government or representation in Congress ratify an amendment? The whole process was corrupt and illegitimate, including the Congressional part of the ratification.
“racist rebel regimes…”
What could be more racist than Lincoln’s admitted plan to deport all the blacks to Africa? Perhaps the origins of the war when racist abolitionists were motivated by keeping not just slaves, but also free blacks, out of the Western territories. Their goal was to create whites only ethnostates in the West by clearing Indians and keeping out blacks. Lincoln wanted that for the whole country.
If the war was about ending slavery, why did the Emancipation Proclamation not come until halfway through the war and not apply to slave states that fought on the union side?
Richard, most of the people in government today do not support the Constitution. They violate their oaths of office pretty much every day.
“We the people need Trump back in office.”
And yesterday!
Leo, the idea that Trump won the election is rebutted by 90 lawsuit decisions, many of them with Trump-appointed judges, who took evidence and found no merit in that claim. Furthermore, if Democrats magically cheated, why didn’t they arrange to elect more members of congress, and why didn’t they sway any state legislative chamber from Republican to Democratic? The only legislative chambers that changed hands were from Democratic to Republican, in New Hampshire.
Polls showed that Democrats would do much better in the US Senate races in North Carolina, than they actually did. If there was Democratic cheating, why did that North Carolina races turn out that way?
The overwhelming majority of county election administrators are Republicans, not Democrats.
The judges were/are corrupt and need to be impeached and removed.
There was nothing magic about the cheating. It took place in heavily Demoncrap areas which already have Demoncraps in Congress and legislatures but in “swing” states.
The polls are biased, that’s not exactly news.
A lot of Republican officials are corrupt globalist. That’s also not news. But the vast majority of the cheating took place in high population, heavily demoncrap counties. A small number of demoncrap officials were all that was needed.
North Carolina may either have been out of their reach to steal, or maybe they got overconfident and thought they cheated enough but didn’t.
“maybe they got overconfident and thought they cheated enough but didn’t.”
That’s what happened in 2016. Democrats miscalculated and didn’t cheat enough but they tried. When they lost they blamed Russia which was classic projection. The greatest foreign interference was from Mexico with illegals voting in California and Texas.
No illegal alien ever registers to vote, or votes. Illegal aliens do everything possible to avoid coming to the attention of any government agency or officer. They even skip needed medical treatment. They even avoid going to the police when they are the victims of crime. I know this from firsthand experience.
Why do so many people assume that vast numbers of other people are evil? Would you commit voter fraud? I assume you would not. So why assume that other people are so different from you, so much more evil?
Many leftists are evil. They allow infanticide without batting an eye. They want to castrate and give puberty blockers to children. They want to jail political opponents. Why is it so surprising that they commit voter fraud?
“No illegal alien ever registers to vote, or votes.”
That is absolutely false.
“I know this from firsthand experience.”
No doubt you know that *some* illegals avoid coming to the attention of any government agencies, but there are tens of millions of illegals so there is no way for you to know all of them.
“Why do so many people assume that vast numbers of other people are evil?”
Because it is demonstrably true.
“Would you commit voter fraud? I assume you would not. So why assume that other people are so different from you, so much more evil?”
There are lots and lots of people who in fact do things that I would not do every single day: steal, rape, murder, use and/or deal illegal drugs, molest children, worship the devil and various false gods, disrespect their parents, commit fornication and/or adultery, abort their children, have sex with animals or have same sex sexual relations, etc. So why wouldn’t voter fraud be a thing that other people do?
Bit more –
EVIl rotted slave monarchs / oligarchs in 1860 slave state regimes kept poor WHITES brain dead ignorant about REAL Democracy
—- nothing new in 6,000 plus years.
Failure to do major study of gerrymander results in ALL States in 1860 – USA Reps and all State legislatures.
ie esp 1860 votes / 1860 Census stats per county — free States vs slave States.
Richard Winger has openly supported voter fraud.
Richard Winger “Why do so many people assume that vast numbers of other people are evil?”
Left wing collectivists were bullied as kids and grew up terrified that the adult world will be the same, if there is no government teacher to protect them.
Right wing collectivists were bullies as kids and grew up terrified that the rest of the world will treat them as they treated others, if there is no government teacher around to protect them.
I was neither bullied nor a bully myself.
I was a pretty much average child. Not the most or least popular, smart, athletic, or anything else. I do recognize reality though. There is plenty of evil in the world, and plenty of people doing it every single day.
As far as bullies go, I noticed that at many of the schools I attended the bullies were disproportionately racial minorities, just as we see with both juvenile and adult criminals. Racial minorities as adults also tend to vote for Demoncraps and participate in left wing burn loot murder “activism”.
As for democracy, how about Lincoln having the legislature of Maryland arrested, opposition newspapers shut down and their editors thrown in jail? Or take the aforementioned ratification of the 14th amendment; starting with a vote in Congress where many states went unrepresented and proceeding to blackmail States under the literal guns of federal occupation that they would only be represented in Congress if they voted to ratify. This is your “real democracy”?
I never believed any 2020 presidential election cheating took place; but, now I am changing my mind. The Democrats didn’t need to cheat everywhere. Just target a few contested states regarding presidential votes and that’s all it would take to tip the balance toward a Biden victory. I believe they weren’t interested too much in gaining more Congressional seats and TRUMP was their number one target. The covid epidemic was the crowbar used that allowed mail-in ballots and ballot box stuffing to happen. Also, the head of Facebook used 400 million dollars in certain targeted states to get out the vote for Biden. This was the greatest threat to Democracy when CORPORATISM can sway elections. The Democrats need to hope that another covid epidemic increases before the mid-terms to do the same thing again for the open House and Senate seats. Opppss. It’s already happening.
Marie LePen is about to be President of France. It’s long overdue. Look at the amazing wins of Viktor Orban and Vucic. Look at how Lukashenko beat back another attempted color revolution against him last year. Watch how Russia will win in the East and South of Ukraine and perhaps the rest as well by May 9. Watch the huge red wave sweep Congress this fall, and at the state and local levels. Watch abortion and many other evils stopped by the Supreme Court this year and even more in coming years. Watch Trump win in an amazing historic landslide that democrats can’t cheat their way out of in 2024.
Look on the side of the road and see all the Trump, Thin Blue Line, Confederate and Gadsden flags flying everywhere you look. Our people are on the rise and taking back what belongs to us. We’re going to round up and deport the illegals, shove homosexuals back into their filthy closets, bring back school prayer and segregation, restore the traditional patriarchal family. It will be even better than the 1950s, and the left will not be able to stop us. They’ll be wishing for the good old days of Joe McCarthy and Bull Connor long before we’re done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Army
part —
Over the course of the war, 2,128,948 men enlisted in the Union Army,[1] including 178,895 colored troops; 25% of the white men who served were immigrants, and further 25% were first generation Americans[2]
Of these soldiers, 596,670 were killed, wounded or went missing.[3]
—
Many of the missing were wounded and died alone in thick grass / forest looking for water.
How many escapees from the 1848 revolts in Europe [ precursors to WW I ] ???
ANY $$$ reparations for the dead/injured Union Army/Navy folks – esp black ex-slave escapees from the slave camps ???
14-3 Amdt affected how many Confeds – esp who had been Union Army officers before 1861 ???
“ANY $$$ reparations for the dead/injured Union Army/Navy folks – esp black ex-slave escapees from the slave camps ???”
They should have sought those reparations from Lincoln and his government, because the war was unnecessary. Dozens of other countries ended slavery without a shot fired by simply compensating slaveowners for what was legally held property at the time, and it cost them a lot less than the war of Yankee aggression cost this nation. Imagine if today for whatever odd reason, perhaps environmental extremism or – use your imagination – we decided it was now immoral and illegal for households to have power appliances such as vacuum cleaners, microwaves, dishwashers, and washers and dryers. At the same time, let’s say it was also applied to farm equipment like tractors and so on. If you didn’t compensate the owners of that property for their loss, you might have a war on your hands.
The wrong side won the war. Sherman committed more war crimes than any modern warmonger. Grant was a drunken idiot. And Lincoln was a tyrant. It isn’t recorded that way because the wrong side won. Many are clueless about the history and just believe what the regime brainwashes them to believe.
Amen!
What was more EVIL –
Lincoln and his gang actions – and post war stuff – esp 13-14-15 Amdts ???
J. Davis and his gang actions – and post war stuff [Black Codes, KKK, terrorized ex-slaves] ???
— going back to 1619 first black slaves into VA colony [Brit monarchs / oligarchs gang EVIL in competition with France, Spain , Portugal slavery stuff ].
NOOO slavery allowed in UK proper.
—–
Let the EVIL past rot in polisci/history records / graveyards.
Save Democracy —
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Slavery was allowed in UK proper until the 1770s. What was more evil? Lincoln!
Leo – The government not having money of its own, and taxation being theft, all you are proposing is shifting the theft from those who committed an immoral act (the slavers) to those who did not.
A better solution would have been to prohibit the southern states from conscripting people into slave patrols, which is how they kept most slaves from escaping. That could have been followed by making it legal for a slave to kill his enslaver. That would have limited most of the damage to those who deserved it.
That would have caused war. What I proposed was the only proven way for slavery to end in multiple countries without war.
Slavery existed throughout the Americas
at the start of the 19th century and ended over the course of that century. The only other war was in Haiti, where slaves killed all their masters. Haiti was before that prosperous, but has been a basket case of misery ever since, much like post-colonial Africa. In most countries slavery ended peacefully with the masters compensated.
The last country in the new world to end slavery was Brazil in 1898. Its exports were becoming increasingly unwanted in Europe because it was a Christian nation which still had legal chattel slavery. It became cheaper to end slavery than to continue it. The same thing would have happened in the CSA, no later than it did in Brazil, had Lincoln not pursued his war. Perhaps the CSA and USA would have reunited then, or perhaps not.
War cost everyone more than having avoided it would have. Including the then slaves, many of which died in the war either as soldiers or as civilian casualties. Among many other kinds of collateral damage they suffered such as injury, losing family members, and so on.
https://resources.saylor.org/wwwresources/archived/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Slavery-Abolition-Act-1833.pdf
1833 Brit Anti-Slavery Act — many Brit oligarchs had slaves overseas.
—–
$$$ Profit per slave in 1860 in Southern slave states ???
It would have cost the north less to buy the slave owners out than to pursue the war, which was not even fought to free the slaves. In fact, Lincoln offered to guarantee making slavery permanently enshrined in the Constitution if it would save the union. The emancipation didn’t apply to slave states which fought on the union side and didn’t come until 1863. Lincoln openly derided any notion of racial equality and wanted to send blacks to Africa.
1860 – Lincoln *election* =
one more ANTI-Democracy minority rule Prez election via the EC gerrymander system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_United_States_presidential_election
Jefferson Davis was a much better President.
There were plenty of countries that ended slavery without compensating the owners. Most directly relevant to the US was the 1772 Somerset v Stewart case, which abolished slavery in England – without war. It was, however, one of the direct causes of the southern US states pushing for revolution. Which says a lot about the slave owners of the south. Also, some northern states abolished slavery without compensating the owners and without causing a war. See Commonwealth v. Jennison, the 1780 Massachuesetts case. Other northern states abolished it gradually, without compensating owners.
You have no idea what you are talking about with regards to Haiti. It’s a basket case, and extremely poor, because of France. Under threat of invasion, France extorted massive payments from Haiti into the 1950s. The payments were so burdensome that Haiti was unable to build basic infrastructure, like schools and hospitals. A similar situation occurred in the French colonial states in Africa, except France to this day exerts severe control over many of those countries. France does everything from control their sovereign wealth funds to prohibiting alliances to mandating that they teach French in schools (which has been demonstrated to lower their GDP.) The French are scumbags.
Leo “had Lincoln not pursued his war.”
Uh-huh. As much as you historical revisionists don’t like to admit it, the south started the war. It will always be a fact that the south fired the first shots and they only reason they wanted to secede was because the Missouri Compromise was officially broken in 1854. The northern free states had long had a larger population and controlled the House and the Kansas-Nebraska act meant that free states were going to control the Senate, too. Lincoln was a well-known supporter of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, so once he was elected President, the South knew slavery was done. Look it up: 7 southern states seceded after Lincoln was elected, but before he was sworn into office. They seceded based on nothing but talk of ending slavery. So yes, that was what the civil war was about. After they seceded because of a fear slavery would end, they fired the first shots on territory that South Carolina had legally transferred to the federal government several decades earlier. That is what started the war.
Slavery within England itself, or in Northern states which abolished slavery earlier, was not a significant part of their economy. It was not an analogous situation.
If former French rule is the reason for the continued situation in Haiti and parts of Africa, what explains the conditions in the rest of subsaharan Africa? Why are conditions not as bad in former French colonies in Asia, Pacific Islands, Canada, etc? Even French Guyana is less of a basket case than Haiti now. Why was Haiti so much better off when the French still ruled it?
Lincoln proposed an amendment to enshrine slavery in the Constitution to save the union. You can look that up, too.
Yes, the South fired the first shots. Naturally, they were not going to pay tariffs to a union they were no longer part of. Fort Sumter was a customs house skimming off their trade. It would have been left alone had it left their trade alone.
The part about teaching French is just weird. Foreign language instruction can’t be that expensive. If anything, knowing a second language has been shown to be positive for cognitive development. In any case Haiti has no native language, and many African colonies were drawn – not just by the French – intentionally to divide native ethnic and language groups and thrust different ones together, so as independent countries they would have had no common native language, only the colonial one.
But that’s really besides the point. If you insist: no country where slavery was a major part of the economy ended it without either a war or compensation or other major economic incentive.
Jim in April 8:
“Thomas Jefferson did not revolt against the U.S. government”
Actually, he did. The constitutional convention was only authorized to amend the Articles of Confederation, not replace them. So the signers of the Constitution actually did revolt against the U.S. government of the time.
Later, as President, Jefferson exceeded his authority with the Louisiana Purchase. It may or may not have been a good idea, which is a separate question. But it was nowhere within his powers as President.
Jim wants to keep his cake and eat it too. He regurgitates the modern revisionism that Somerset was a major cause of the American revolution, even though it’s not anywhere in the Declaration of Independence. Yet he rejects trade and tariff issues as a major cause of the war between the States because they’re not mentioned in State secession resolutions. Why the disparity?
Since secession is not forbidden in the Constitution, by the logic of the 9th and 10th amendments, it is allowed. Some states reserved ratifying the Constitution until the Bill of Rights was added. Some states had the right to leave the union as part if their legislative vote to enter it. Some had been independent nations before entering. Texas was in the last two categories. States had every right to secede, regardless of whether they were right to secede or not. In fact, northern states had secession talk earlier.
Slavery was not illegal, and it was far from universally agreed at that time that it was immoral. Slave owners acquired their slave property legally, and for many of them it was a major part of their net worth. Ex post facto laws are forbidden in the Constitution. Thus, if slavery was subsequently deemed immoral and made illegal, slave owners were due compensation for confiscated property.
There are people now who believe in animal rights. If in the future we come to a consensus that hunting, farming and fishing for meat, leather, etc, keeping pets, and caging animals in zoos is immoral and therefore make it illegal, all the property owners and businesses impacted by such a change in laws should be compensated for their loss. They did not do anything illegal or anything that was universally considered immoral, and if social norms and laws change, their economic loss should be made whole.
Take two parts of Jim’s argument together.
1) Slavery was immoral, therefore ending slavery made forcing the Confederate States back into the union justified, even though ending slavery was not an original stated war aim of the Union side, just a fear of the Confederate side.
2) A major reason for the American Revolution was that Britain was ending slavery, and some American colonists feared that their slaves would be next.
If both of those are correct, does that mean that Britain would have been right to suppress that rebellion? Granted, they didn’t issue an emancipation proclamation at the time. However, slavery would have ended earlier in what became the USA had the loyalist side won, perhaps in the 1830s if not before.
It seems unlikely that Haiti was seriously afraid of French invasion after the Spanish-American war, and certainly after WWI. The US had made it abundantly clear by then that the Monroe doctrine and its Roosevelt corollary had teeth:
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine
See discussion underneath.
The South fired the first shot, but the decision to go to war was clearly Lincoln’s. Yes, South Carolina ceded Ft Sumter to the federal government decades earlier, but it demanded the return of federal forts, military installations and custom houses upon secession. Lincoln ignored this demand, and blockaded Southern trade. He left no choice. Allowing the resupply of a now foreign fort in a major harbour would have been a suicidal abrogation of sovereignty. Lincoln intentionally left the South with an impossible choice between allowing resupply of the fort and firing the first shot.
At this point the South had no choice but to go to war. The north did have a choice, however. All they had to do was withdraw from military installations, forts and custom houses in seceded states and not blockade trade or attempt to enforce tariffs in those states.
Slavery would still have ended before very long, and with far less blood shed. For one thing, there would have been no more enforcement of fugitive slave laws in the north, leading to a rising tide of fugitive slaves making slavery more and more costly. This would have led to increasingly costly and violent fugitive slave patrols, and thus ever increased condemnation from the CSA’S European trade partners. It’s unlikely that slavery would have survived for even a decade in the absence of war. It’s likely that something like Jim Crow would have taken its place, but then that’s what happened anyway, except at a much higher human and economic cost.
Consider:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2006/07/thomas-dilorenzo/lincolns-pro-slavery-record/
How many rich Brits due to slave cotton shipped to Brit land before 1861 ???
How close was Union north to WAR with Brits in 1861-1865 ???
How much Brit weapons / ammo smuggled to slave regimes in 1861-1865 ???
Excuses for Napoleon III to invade Mexico ??? — possible Union North WAR with France also ???
ie – Lincoln dealing with slave monarchs / Brit monarchs / French monarchs in 1860-1865.
How many rich Brits due to slave cotton shipped to Brit land before 1861 ???
Many, although the switch was on to Egyptian cotton.
How close was Union north to WAR with Brits in 1861-1865 ???
Not particularly close. They had there hands fulls with the CSA. There was no way they would take on more foes unless one joined the war on the CSA side.
How much Brit weapons / ammo smuggled to slave regimes in 1861-1865 ???
UK and other nations considered supporting the CSA but decided against it due to evolving standards regarding slavery, which was also part of why they were switching their cotton sourcing.
Excuses for Napoleon III to invade Mexico ??? — possible Union North WAR with France also ???
The French installed a puppet emperor in Mexico. The US helped Mexicans overthrow him. The US was not in any position to fight France directly.
Logan – Jefferson did not sign the US Constitution. And not every unconstitutional act can be considered a revolt.
The government makes things illegal all the time without providing compensation. All ex post facto means is the government can’t prosecute someone for an act that later became illegal. It does not require compensation.
Logan/Overton – I have not, at any point, argued that the south did not have a right to secede. I will argue that the seceding states did not have a right to reclaim federal land which they had previously voluntarily signed over to the federal government, as South Carolina did with Fort Sumpter. If you sign over the rights to your car or house, you don’t get it back if you change your mind 30 years later.
Leo – Whether or not slavery was a significant part of the economy, abolishing it without compensation was still a blow to the slavers. They were not compensated and there was no revolt.
It is ongoing defacto rule by the French in Africa, not former rule. And the French did not extort astronomical payments from Canada for 120 years, as they did with Haiti. France literally parked its navy off the Haitian coast and ordered the leader of the newly freed slaves to sign the document or they were going to invade and re-enslave or kill them all. When the Haitians said they did not have the money, France allowed them to borrow it, from French banks, with suitably high interest. Haiti was in no position to challenge the French military at any point. The issue with teaching French is not the cost of teaching. The problem is that French is a less useful language in the global economy than English. But that is a small thing compared to what else the French are doing there.
Fort Sumpter was not a customs house. The customs house was in Charleston itself. There was no reason to fire on it, other than that the sight of it infuriated them.
“Major part of the economy” is too vague for me.