Originally Posted by Al Norris
Here, Alan Gura is directly telling the court that the amici Historians have lied to the court. In doing this, it calls into question the validity of any other thing that this amici has said.
Even for a bunch of gun grabbers, it's surprising that their historians would be so bold as to intentionally misquote a famous historical figure whose views are central to the point under consideration. That they would do so is further proof (as if we needed any) that the opposition is not only devoid of intellectual integrity, but stupid
Did they really think he wouldn't check their quotation?