Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Amendment 14, Section 3

You don't have grandkids do you?

This all comes down to Peak Oil.

Lol.. you got me there.

This all comes down to proof. Can the government prove Trump tried to steal it? Can Trump prove his assertions?

Jack Smith will be coming with evidence and witnesses. They will be compelling. You do not charge a former POTUS lightly, and he did not do so. So far Trump has brought……. nothing. Almost 3 years later. The dude has blue balls from all the unreleased krakens.

Or maybe it’s the other way around. Can a 78 year old geezer even RELEASE a kraken? 😂

Guessing about half the crazy forum is qualified to answer that one…………..

But we digress.

He very well might not even be on the ballot. The Constitution has things to say about this… and they are pretty straightforward things… this is not one of those “a well-regulated militia being necessary…” type preambles that muddies the whole damn thing for no good reason (god I hate that preamble); it’s pretty straightforward.

Go ride your dirt bike without a helmet ya fugking dipshit

Not surprisingly, you’re confused.
Trump doesn’t need to prove anything. ‘Beyond a reasonable doubt’ only applies to one side.

Jeff O is an idiot
Jeff O allways been an idiot
Jeff O will allways be an idiot
Jeff O say it ain't so but with only the credibility of an idiot you'll search for ever to have anything to say but I'm Jeff O resident idiot
Jeff O all due respect, none of us has any for you.
Good bye.

Of course. But practically speaking, if he can’t demonstrate a stollen election, then he’s in trouble, because we all saw what he tried to do. The ONLY justification for it is a stollen election.

You know this. It’s why the folks here are so desperate to hang onto that notion, all evidence to the contrary. Without that, he’s guilty AF, and they are morons for believing a serial liar. Which is what I believe to be the case.

Idiot he doesn't have to prove the election was stolen all he has to do is provide the facts already collected.

https://electionfraud20.org/

This site aims to summarize the allegations of fraud, as presented in governmental hearings, courts, and investigative reports, by state, to provide an easy reference and portal for further research.

A website that summarizes the allegations of fraud. Golf clap.

PROOF, my man. There is none.

Lots of Confederates served in Federal government in the decades after 1865, most never were granted "amnesty". That legislation is a political anachronism and does not come into play in the year 2023. Frankly, it's intellectual laziness to even mention it as a reason to oppose Pres. Trump.

Its the Constitution. It ALWAYS comes into play.

BMT

Idiot read it. Real numbers, did you ever wonder why the invalid votes were not removed from the recounts? Or even why no legitimate federal investigation was launched? GA has no case as there was plenty of reason to question the results of the 2020 election. Fani has no case, which she mostly based on voice mails and phone calls.

It's over, it's irrelevant. Sorry, not sorry. Next!!!!

As pertains to this thread, my opinion that this is a huge looming constitutional issue only gathers strength. The question of whether the 14th sec 3 prevents Trump from ever even RUNNING for an elected position- much less POTUS- appears to be a very legitimate constitutional question. It really only hinges of the definition of “insurrection”. I gave a definition from a legal dictionary, but here it is again:

Insurrection

insurrection n

: the act or an instance of revolting esp. violently against civil or political authority or against an established government
;also
: the crime of inciting or engaging in such revolt [whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or against the authority of the United States…shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years "U.S. Code"]


Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law ©1996. Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Published under license with Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.

Here’s one from a regular dictionary (Cambridge)

insurrection
noun [ C or U ]
US /ˌɪn.sɚˈek.ʃən/ UK /ˌɪn.sərˈek.ʃən/
Add to word list
an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence:

Here’s from Brittanica:


insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt. An insurrection may facilitate or bring about a revolution, which is a radical change in the form of government or political system of a state, and it may be initiated or provoked by an act of sedition, which is an incitement to revolt or rebellion.

I’m not putting these forth as binding on SCOTUS, of course. But note that “violence” is not a requirement as commonly defined.

And make no mistake, this is headed to SCOTUS, and fairly quickly. I guarantee there are election administrators at every level preparing to use this to disqualify Trump from the primary election.

SCOTUS has not taken kindly to Trumps alternate-facts based arguments thus far. We’ll see.

A huge side benefit of this will likely be a clearer definition of what, in constitutional terms, constitutes an insurrection. There will be a whole body of law that will form in the coming years as the 14th Sec 3 is used by partisans on both sides to attempt to disqualify candidates. Obviously, the main thrust of which will be to differentiate between legitimate protest, even that which verges on outright rioting, vs. an insurrection. My guess is that the ultimate guardians of the notion of the rule of law (IE, SCOTUS) will err on the side against organized activities such as we all saw Trump and his clown posse engage in. In other words, in my opinion they will rule that Trump engaged in insurrection for the purposes of the 14th Sec 3. We shall see. But it’s coming.

That’s my broader point here: put this issue right square in your radar. It’s barreling at us like a freight train.

I hope folks here read the preprint of the original article created by the two conservative Heritage Foundation lawyers/ constitutional scholars I linked to at the beginning of this thread. I’ll go grab that link and edit to include it. Here’s a new article from Tribe and Luttig, linked below, that I believe also has that link. It’s important to realize the original paper is being received by serious people as very legit scholarship by very legit constitutional scholars who are presenting very legit constitutional analysis of this issue.

Link to original paper:


https://deliverypdf.ssrn.com/delive...5077094093067&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE

You’ll find fault in the Tribe opinion piece below. I did. And the tone is annoying. I suggest reading it anyway.

Edit: this hits a paywall unless you are a subscriber. I posted the text of this article, next page

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...presidency/675048/?utm_source=apple_news

I think you mean Golf Cap and POOF. You're a liar. You don't HAVE any men on the Fire. You only have Gayghost, Eric302 and Houston_2.

Like the PA judge essentially said, Executive Privilege means this schiett is dead.

free online image hosting

So why would Smith and Fani push this crap? It's because Trump and the Patriots are behind it.

Why? So Trump can be the President with the precedent of being in The Trial of the Century.

Why? So he can prove the traitors perped the Election Fraud of the Century.

Why? So the people will demand Voter ID?

Why? To destroy the DNC

Any more why's?

So people will learn the truth and support what he and the Military Patriots do.

Why? Because those who Commited treason are going to GITMO to die.

Like Dr Jan Harper-Hayes said, Donald Trump has the goods!

Like that crazy Eyeball has been saying for years, Space Force.

We can believe lying you or we can believe Trump and Q.

Both said, "The best is yet to come". Both said, "Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming".

Both said, "We have it all".

Here's a Clue. Connect the Numbers.

Jag, please let the adults talk. I stay off your “Dots” thread. Give us some space for rational discourse here.

The Atlantic is controlled by George Soros dipschit.

About your phony insurrection;

https://hereistheevidence.com/capitol-protest-1-6-21/