Phil Turner Arrest Details
- Thread starter Maroon Eagle
- Start date
- Status
members of congress called them the President of the United States of America.
Never mind that there were two Presidents of the United States in Congress Assembled prior to Hanson.
Hell, why don't you just name John Hancock the first President. He was President of the Continental Congress when the declaration was first signed. Or whoever you like for that matter, since that appears what you are doing with your revisionist history.
Never mind that there were two Presidents of the United States in Congress Assembled prior to Hanson.
Hell, why don't you just name John Hancock the first President. He was President of the Continental Congress when the declaration was first signed. Or whoever you like for that matter, since that appears what you are doing with your revisionist history.
time between the Declaration in 1776 and Nov 5, 1781 when Hanson took office? Or particuarly, would you care to cover the time period between the ratification of the Articles on March 1, 1781 and Nov 5, 1781?
Our country was formed 3/1/1781. The Articles were proposed on 6/11/1776 but was not agreed upon by Congress until 11/15/1777. Maryland refused to sign the document until Va and NY ceded their western lands ( Maryland was afraid that hose states would have too much power) Once the signing took place in 1781 John Hanson was unanimously chosen by Congress (thats who ran it till then, no Prez). All other potential candidates refused to run against Hanson, as he was a major player in the Revolution and extremely influential in Congress. That is our history. Period.
less wrong. Hanson was elected President of the Congress in November of 1781. Between July of 1781 and November of 1781, McKean served as president of the congress, after being elected to that office by the congress. Between the ratification and McKean's election, Huntington served, although that was a consequence of the fact that he was President of the prior continental congress that drafted and ratified the articles of confederation and that no election for a new president of the congress was held until July.
But, all of that is a mute point -- although sufficient to make you wrong. The big point here is that none of these guys were president of the country. They were presidents of congress.
But, all of that is a mute point -- although sufficient to make you wrong. The big point here is that none of these guys were president of the country. They were presidents of congress.
Under the Articles of Confederation, the United States of America did not exist as we know it. Each state was sovereign, independent, and self-governing. As a result, there was no President of the United States of America that held executive power over the 13 states as a whole. Under the Articles of Confederation, treaties could not be made on behalf of the U.S., there was no power to tax the populace, there was no military, trade agreements could not be made on behalf of the U.S., etc.
I know that you will argue b/c once you are convinced you are right, no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise. However, your version of history is fictionalized and glamorized and not factual.
I know that you will argue b/c once you are convinced you are right, no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise. However, your version of history is fictionalized and glamorized and not factual.
the others..congress. thats where you get lost. Thats the diff that proves me right. thanks for clarifying.
As soon as he took office the troops demanded to be paid...rightfully so. But no funds were there to meet the salaries. As a result the soldiers threatened to overthrow the new Govt and put GW on the throne as Monarch. All other members of Congress ran for their lives, leaving Hanson as the only one left to run the Govt. He managed to calm the troops and hold the US together. If he had failed, the Govt would have fallen immediately and everyone would have been bowing to King Washington. Not agruable.
As soon as he took office the troops demanded to be paid...rightfully so. But no funds were there to meet the salaries. As a result the soldiers threatened to overthrow the new Govt and put GW on the throne as Monarch. All other members of Congress ran for their lives, leaving Hanson as the only one left to run the Govt. He managed to calm the troops and hold the US together. If he had failed, the Govt would have fallen immediately and everyone would have been bowing to King Washington. Not agruable.
Porkchop said:
I'b be right there with you since I obviously have some misgivings about cops. But in this case it was private property. I've always told people that cops suck but the time to make that argument is not when a cop is in your face. Do what you are told to do as long as it doesn't cause you any harm to do so, take the cops name and badge number, and complain later. In this case it does look like they cut him some slack. He very well could have been arrested for trespassing (assuming it was the girls apartment and they didn't share a residence).</p>
Oh, and in case someone comes at me with the "why hate cops?" argument again see exhibit A below:</p>
Cops Protecting and Serving
</p>
there is solid & verifiable evidence that my stance is incorrect. However, in this case, the evidence doesn't exist. You are clinging to the fact that Hanson (& 7 others) were called "President". However, they were "only" Congressional Presidents and not legitimate Presidents of the United States of America since the United States of America was not formed until the ratification of the Constitution. Prior to that, what existed was a loose Confederation of 13 independent & self-governing states. As such, neither Hanson nor any of the other 7 had any executive power over any of the 13 states.
- Status
Get unlimited access today.