Jump to content

Fourteenth Amendment | Section 3 - Disqualification from Holding Office


Recommended Posts

If the AP's calling it, then it's pretty much over.

 

The Supreme Court seems poised to reject efforts to kick Trump off the ballot over the Capitol riot

 

"Justice Elena Kagan was among several justices who wanted to know “why a single state should decide who gets to be president of the United States.”

 

In another sign of trouble for the Colorado voters who sued to remove Trump from the ballot, the justices spent little time talking about whether Trump actually “engaged in insurrection” following the 2020 election."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

It must not be hard being told what to think and believe.  Which is how they get you.

So you're saying there wasn't a rally or that there were no crimes??  If I believed neither thing happened, then clearly I myself would be the one being told what to believe.  Anyone who can think KNOWS that they were both at a stop the steal rally, and they attempted to stop Bidens electoral count.  Those are just cold hard facts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Were any of them attempts to stop the peaceful transfer of power?  

There's a case before the SC today, addressing this exact thing

2 minutes ago, daz28 said:

So you're saying there wasn't a rally or that there were no crimes??  If I believed neither thing happened, then clearly I myself would be the one being told what to believe.  Anyone who can think KNOWS that they were both at a stop the steal rally, and they attempted to stop Bidens electoral count.  Those are just cold hard facts.  

He's saying there were 27,000 of them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, daz28 said:

So you're saying there wasn't a rally or that there were no crimes??  If I believed neither thing happened, then clearly I myself would be the one being told what to believe.  Anyone who can think KNOWS that they were both at a stop the steal rally, and they attempted to stop Bidens electoral count.  Those are just cold hard facts.  

 

Sure there was a rally and sure there were crimes.  No one has ever said otherwise.  And if you've been paying attention, I've said from the beginning that those who committed actual crimes deserved to be punished.  But that doesn't make an insurrection, either (poorly) planned or otherwise, much less Trump responsible when he never told them to get violent, much less break into the Capitol either publicly or even in private.  A group of unarmed people cannot take over a (modern, first world) government

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Were any of them attempts to stop the peaceful transfer of power?  

I think the charge would be disrupting an official proceeding but I'm not sure if anybody got charged for that act on J6.

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Colorado and Maine are so upset by Trump running, perhaps it would be best for both states to not participate in this election.  Spread their electoral college delegates among the states that have decided to fully embrace this election.    

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Precision said:

If Colorado and Maine are so upset by Trump running, perhaps it would be best for both states to not participate in this election.  Spread their electoral college delegates among the states that have decided to fully embrace this election.    


Like Trump embraced the outcome of the last one?

 

gtfoh w this garbage DR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Sure there was a rally and sure there were crimes.  No one has ever said otherwise.  And if you've been paying attention, I've said from the beginning that those who committed actual crimes deserved to be punished.  But that doesn't make an insurrection, either (poorly) planned or otherwise, much less Trump responsible when he never told them to get violent, much less break into the Capitol either publicly or even in private.  A group of unarmed people cannot take over a (modern, first world) government

They were there to stop the steal, and install their illegitimate, unconstitutional, illegal ex president.  Yes, they ALL did it poorly, especially Eastman who was sending out emails admitting they knew what they were doing was illegal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I think the charge would be disrupting an official proceeding but I'm not sure if anybody got charged for that act on J6.

 

Must not have happened then.  I guess that delay was imaginary, too.  There weren't literally people on the house floor with guns drawn afraid for their lives.  People with gas mask being rushed off.  Yeah, must not have been any obstruction of an official proceeding.  Apparently, if no one is charged that means we can suspend reality.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Must not have happened then.  I guess that delay was imaginary, too.  There weren't literally people on the house floor with guns drawn afraid for their lives.  People with gas mask being rushed off.  Yeah, must not have been any obstruction of an official proceeding.  Apparently, if no one is charged that means we can suspend reality.  

Lemme guess j6 is up there with pearl harbor right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, daz28 said:

They were there to stop the steal, and install their illegitimate, unconstitutional, illegal ex president.  Yes, they ALL did it poorly, especially Eastman who was sending out emails admitting they knew what they were doing was illegal.  

 

Why didn't they bring weapons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

Lemme guess j6 is up there with pearl harbor right?

Is this make a stretch Thursday?  No one told me about that.  Seeing as it is, I guess you're thinking it's closer to Japanese detention camps than jail for the Jan 6thers right?  Is that you MTG.  Why don't you bake them some brownies.  

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Why didn't they bring weapons?

That's what Ashley Babbit said.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, daz28 said:

That's what Ashley Babbit said.  

 

Yeah, maybe if she had, it could have been somewhat closer to (but still not) an "insurrection" and Byrd would have killed her in self defense instead of cold blood.

Edited by Doc
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yeah, maybe if she had, it could have been somewhat closer to (but still not) an "insurrection" and Byrd would have killed her in self defense instead of cold blood.

I don't know man.  If someone's coming for me, and I don't know their intentions, they're getting it.  I realize Byrd should have been trained to handle it differently, but it was def a FAFO moment for her.  

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Back to the thread. . . . . . 

 

 

 

Justice Brett Kavanaugh Delivers Reality Check to Colorado Attorney in Effort to
Exclude Trump from Ballot: ‘Trump Has Not Been Charged with an Insurrection’

by Jim Hoft

 

During the Supreme Court oral arguments for Trump v. Anderson, Justice Brett Kavanaugh delivered a pointed reminder that former President Donald Trump has not been formally charged with insurrection. Thursday’s proceedings centered on the contested application of the 14th Amendment’s prohibition against insurrectionists holding office, which has been invoked in an attempt to disqualify Trump from the 2024 primary ballot in Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled in a 4-3 decision to keep President Trump off the 2024 Primary ballot in the state.

 

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/justice-brett-kavanaugh-delivers-reality-check-lead-attorney/

 

.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...