I don't know who posted "secede", but around here there are actually posters who still believe states have a right to any time they want. It wasn't a spelling or proofreading error- it was a Freudian slip!

But, if it was actually a spelling or proof-reading error, it isn't the fault of the education system. The likely, real problem is that whoever posted it DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO USE SPELL CHECK.








(BTW, I am among the worst spellers who post here. MACS says he is a pretty good speller and I believe him...)

Article 14 does not give him sole authority to raise the debt ceiling. Read it all, and understand it, rather than just cherry picking parts of the article to fit your agenda.

And that's why his attorneys have told him don't try it.

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."



US debt that was authorized by law is valid. Confederate debt is not valid. Once forced back into the Union, Confederate states can't move to invalidate the Union Civil War debt.

In the recent debate, some have taken the "Shall not be questioned" to mean the debt payments must be the first thing the government pays in a money shortfall. Others have said the Federal Budget is authorized by law so the new debt it causes is valid and a debt ceiling law is in direct conflict.

If Congress passes a budget which is totally in conflict with another law they passed, which law is valid. Neither is unconstitutional. This is a valid argument for the pro-debt camp (Democrats). The Fourteenth Amendment is not.

YAY

no mule for X...... 😞