even some of they lefty judges think this will sow “chaos”
good job lefties. look what your pathological hate got you
Samour added. “This can’t possibly be the outcome the framers intended.”
tzu
444
The caveat out of the way: Donald Trump is a trash golem, a serial sexual assaulter, a security risk and a conman.
But for another 100 posts it’s just been whimbling and whining and silly forms of ‘j’accuse!’.
So, if you actually think Trump did insurrection - and, you know, he definitely wanted to negate the results of an election, at a minimum - don’t you have to do something, anything more than one finding, and one split State court? Shouldn’t the bar at least be a causal chain of convictions?
Very simply, it doesn’t matter if Jan 6 was or was not insurrectionary. I happen to think it was, but that isn’t in fact germaine to the issue at hand.
The singular issue is: has it been proven that Donald Trump participated in or gave material support to an insurrection?
As he has not been charged, faced a trial judge, or been convicted by a jury of his peers, for - you know - engaging in uprising, how can the CSSC finding stand?
3 Likes
Again, his dissent was quite unimpressive. He fails to understand that the 14th is self executing, you don’t need to be deemed guilty by a jury of your peers for this to take place. For instance, when a President is impeached, they can punish him by banning him to run for office again. And they can do that without a jury as well. Thousands of Confederates were banned from running for office all without a jury. Because it is SELF EXECUTING.
tzu
446
But has insurrection been demonstratively and legally established?
but it’s not SELF LIMITING. so it will lead to chaos as other candidates are stricken from ballots for any reason anyone can cite as “insurrection”
like encouraging 8 million illegals into the country
DougBH
448
The ruling was a joke, a travesty.
4 Likes
Because none of that is required, Tzu.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4155537-the-constitution-bars-trump-from-holding-public-office-ever-again/
This is from CREW, and why this opinion is valid.
This is a piece from Luttig and Lawrence Tribe, explaining why Trump is disqualified.
Here is a nice interview with Luttig and Tribe explaining their position.
Yes, by the lower Court in Colorado. And Trump mounted a Defense and was able to offer an argument against the Plaintiffs. The Judge found in favor of the plaintiffs. All perfectly legal.
Zippy
451
You forgot to write “Dear Santa”.
2 Likes
tzu
452
Says who?
Says folks with case law?
Folks who have demonstrated a causal chain between those who entered the Capitol illicitly and Donald Trump? What are the docket numbers for these cases?
makes you wonder what went on for 2020 huh?
3 Likes
tzu
454
This one ruling, you believe, is sufficient to authorize every and each of the fifty states to use a single case to, say, disqualify a state senator because she attended an environmental workshop also attended by a person who later sabotaged a pipeline and has been charged with terriorsm?
here’s some cold water on this whole flimsy 14th amendment nonsense:
“The 14th Amendment was part of the “Reconstruction Amendments” that were ratified following the Civil War. It was passed to prohibit former Confederate military and political leaders from holding high federal or state office. These men had clearly taken part in a rebellion against the United States: the Civil War. That makes it all the more absurd that a left-wing group in Colorado is asking a federal court to disqualify the 45th President on the same grounds, equating his speech to rebellion against the United States.
And there’s another legal problem: Trump is not a former “officer of the United States,” as that term is used in the Constitution, meaning Section 3 does not apply. As the Supreme Court explained in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010), an “officer of the United States” is someone appointed by the President to aid him in his duties under Article II, Section 2. The term does not apply to elected officials, and certainly not to the President himself. “
thank you Vivek R
5 Likes
Piper
456
Biden personally invited these millions of Illegals and broke immigrant laws. That is grounds for impeachment and all the evidence congress needs. He can’t deny it because it’s all recorded on tape.
3 Likes
The Civil War was a real rebellion rather than some people trespassing at the Capitol.
The difference should be obvious.
3 Likes
That’s a bit over simplistic, Tzu. What disqualifies Trump is violating the Constitution itself. And it is not just insurrection, it is also rebellion OR aiding and comforting those who engage in insurrection or rebellion. Trump certainly qualifies on that last part, he calls the ones who were jailed “political prisoners”, he offers pardons once he regains office, he even plays songs from their choir at rallies. He even wanted to go to the Capitol to encourage them on Jan 6, he was stopped by the Secret Service.
What you are arguing is about crimes, state or federal. This isn’t about crimes, it is about violating your oath to the Constitution which is a disqualifying act for future office. And that doesn’t take a trial or even charges, if an official finds him disqualified he can be left off the ballot. Congress has no role in the 14th, just that they can waive the disqualification once it occurred. Otherwise the disqualification clause is automatic and self executing.
CA now trying to get trump off the ballot
these democrat maniacs are pushing us to civil war
going to be an interesting year
3 Likes
Every election year - civil war!!
How … dramatic.
You guys aren’t alone there of course
i hope just drama. states weren’t unconstitutionally denying anyone the ability to vote for their candidate in other years
3 Likes
