This could actually play to Trump’s advantage, and I’m surprised jag and his ilk haven’t seized on this yet.
This one is headed to SCOTUS and it’ll happen quickly. Otherwise the whole primary is going to be horked by administrators taking Trump off the ballot in jurisdictions all across America.
SCOTUS is good at narrowing decisions as much as possible, but, it seems like their presumed ruling on this will by necessity be a ruling on whether what Trump did was or was not an insurrection. That, in turn, could bear directly on Jack Smith’s indictments around the election aftermath. In other words, if SCOTUS ruled even tangentially that Trump did not engage in “insurrection”, it would weaken Smith’s case… I think. The law doesn’t always work the way it seems like it should.
Lawyers? Even “Brilliant” ones like JoeBob? Your thoughts?
The REAL "insurrection" is PedoBiden sitting in the Oval Office after STEALING the 2020 election. Everybody knows that, even you.
"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."-- Thomas Jefferson
I will read that more thoroughly this evening. I cannot seem to copy/past from it, but the section on the 3rd page titled “Engaging in Insurrection and Rebellion” jumped out at me. Suggest folks read it.
I will read that more thoroughly this evening. I cannot seem to copy/past from it, but the section on the 3rd page titled “Engaging in Insurrection and Rebellion” jumped out at me. Suggest folks read it.
Cocaine was found in Joe Biden's White House
A dead body was found at Obama's house
A male prostitute was found at Pelosi's house
An illegal server was found at Hillary's house
So the FBI raided Trump's house.....
"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."-- Thomas Jefferson
This could actually play to Trump’s advantage, and I’m surprised jag and his ilk haven’t seized on this yet.
This one is headed to SCOTUS and it’ll happen quickly. Otherwise the whole primary is going to be horked by administrators taking Trump off the ballot in jurisdictions all across America.
SCOTUS is good at narrowing decisions as much as possible, but, it seems like their presumed ruling on this will by necessity be a ruling on whether what Trump did was or was not an insurrection. That, in turn, could bear directly on Jack Smith’s indictments around the election aftermath. In other words, if SCOTUS ruled even tangentially that Trump did not engage in “insurrection”, it would weaken Smith’s case… I think. The law doesn’t always work the way it seems like it should.
Lawyers? Even “Brilliant” ones like JoeBob? Your thoughts?
The REAL "insurrection" is PedoBiden sitting in the Oval Office after STEALING the 2020 election. Everybody knows that, even you.
Excuse me?
The 2020 election was not stolen. It was free and fair. Trump TRIED, but his Clown Coup fizzled out when the popular uprising he hoped to provoke didn’t happen.
We can cuss and discuss that on another thread. This thread is about the 14th amendment of the Constitution and whether it automatically DQ’s Trump from running.
A 30 second search reveals the Atlantic, the journal for the illiterate, published disinformation of over 20 fake news article claiming Russia and Trump collaborated
We can cuss and discuss that on another thread. This thread is about the 14th amendment of the Constitution and whether it automatically DQ’s Trump from running.
Pro tip: it plainly does.
Pro tip: you’ve been wrong plenty in the past, and I don’t believe anyone is looking to you for clarity on Constitutional issues.
If it was ‘plainly’ evident, there wouldn’t be any discussion or debate.
I’m certain the electoral officials in my State give zero [bleep] about your interpretation.
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
Where in this speech did he "tRy tO pRoVoKe aN uPrISiNg"?
And I highly doubt anything was free and fair. It amazes me that people like you exist and the ones that do piss me off to no extent. You stupid fùcks are the reason the country can't improve because you stupidly believe everything is okay because you're ingrained with the sound bites of liberal lies, politicians and media. You can see the writing on the wall, Biden bribes and money laundering with Ukraine, the constant attacks on any opposition, etc... but you keep wringing your hands and shout the loudest. How is the country any better since Biden took office? It isnt and you know it.
The docs case is pretty cut and dried, gentlemen. The FBI raided his house because he willfully defied a subpoena to return government documents. When they raided it, they found them. There’s also clear evidence of obstruction from Trump. He’s in big legal peril. But do you see me pounding that drum? Seriously, do you? No. You do not. It’s an example of why he’s utterly unfit for office but I never did really GAF about that one. I care about the fact that he tried to take down our Republic. Full stop.
I’m not even going to bother with that dumb and disingenuous list. The only thing that’s remotely comparable is Hillary AND I DID NOT VOTE FOR HER!
Sounds like we will be talking about this a bunch in the upcoming months so we might as well get that ball rolling. From what I’m reading this very likely will be used to keep Trump off primary ballots unless the SCOTUS intervenes.
At issue with Trump is Section 3 of the amendment, which bars from office anyone who, having previously sworn an oath to support the Constitution, has "engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." The language was written to prevent former officials who had backed the Confederacy from regaining power, subject to an out — Congress could grant amnesty by a two-thirds vote.
A group of conservative lawyers wrote a long opinion piece after researching this extensively and to hear them tell it, it’s pretty straightforward and conclusive. Here’s the abstract:
The Sweep and Force of Section Three University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 172, Forthcoming 126 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2023 William Baude University of Chicago - Law School
Michael Stokes Paulsen University of St. Thomas School of Law
Date Written: August 9, 2023
Abstract Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range of misperceptions and mistaken assumptions, Section Three’s full legal consequences have not been appreciated or enforced. This article corrects those mistakes by setting forth the full sweep and force of Section Three.
First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.
And here’s a link to the paper, so that the brilliant (sic) legal minds of the Fire can parse it:
Folks….. the overall point I’ve been trying to make, here on this thread and elsewhere, is that reality is coming. Trump is going to trial. I feel like some folks have gotten so addicted to the thrill of seeing no consequences for DJT that they’ve lost sight of reality.
He’s being prosecuted for serious crimes that all evidence points to him committing. He’s going to jail unless he can show that in fact the election was stolen from him. In other words, provide the proof the guy has been claiming to have FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS! Lacking that, he’s in heap big trouble. Why? Because he did what he did and we all saw it being done. It’s utterly inexcusable- unless there truly was a vast conspiracy and it was stolen from him. One way or another we’re going to find out, but it’s not looking good for the former guy.
That’s just a general recap. This thread is specifically about whether the constitution prevents him from even running. If he engaged in insurrection or rebellion, then it very plainly does just that.
This stuff is real, it’s happening, and it’s coming.
Folks….. the overall point I’ve been trying to make, here on this thread and elsewhere, is that reality is coming. Trump is going to trial. I feel like some folks have gotten so addicted to the thrill of seeing no consequences for DJT that they’ve lost sight of reality.
He’s being prosecuted for serious crimes that all evidence points to him committing. He’s going to jail unless he can show that in fact the election was stolen from him. In other words, provide the proof the guy has been claiming to have FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS! Lacking that, he’s in heap big trouble. Why? Because he did what he did and we all saw it being done. It’s utterly inexcusable- unless there truly was a vast conspiracy and it was stolen from him. One way or another we’re going to find out, but it’s not looking good for the former guy.
That’s just a general recap. This thread is specifically about whether the constitution prevents him from even running. If he engaged in insurrection or rebellion, then it very plainly does just that.
This stuff is real, it’s happening, and it’s coming.
You've yet to realize that Jeff_O is a joke here and nobody gives a fugg what he has to say.
Folks….. the overall point I’ve been trying to make, here on this thread and elsewhere, is that reality is coming. Trump is going to trial. I feel like some folks have gotten so addicted to the thrill of seeing no consequences for DJT that they’ve lost sight of reality.
He’s being prosecuted for serious crimes that all evidence points to him committing. He’s going to jail unless he can show that in fact the election was stolen from him. In other words, provide the proof the guy has been claiming to have FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS! Lacking that, he’s in heap big trouble. Why? Because he did what he did and we all saw it being done. It’s utterly inexcusable- unless there truly was a vast conspiracy and it was stolen from him. One way or another we’re going to find out, but it’s not looking good for the former guy.
That’s just a general recap. This thread is specifically about whether the constitution prevents him from even running. If he engaged in insurrection or rebellion, then it very plainly does just that.
This stuff is real, it’s happening, and it’s coming.
What ever happens you'll still be a retard...............
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/9z5FBPJp/CCB5-F1-A8-1-DEA-4-B6-C-978-A-75731-D7-F85-B5.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/m2y9n71j/2-FD4306-D-E88-F-4-D09-BAC5-DFDC6-A396-F40.gif)
![[Linked Image]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Logo_Schmidt_%26_Bender.jpg){kind=logo}