BillStime Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 19 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: I wonder if it requires a conviction of being under 35 to keep someone off the ballot. Does someone need to be convicted of having not lived in the US long enough? Or convicted of being born elsewhere? I’m not sure, I really wish Bonnie would come back and clear this up for us. He’s an expert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 6 minutes ago, BillStime said: I’m not sure, I really wish Bonnie would come back and clear this up for us. He’s an expert. Maybe he needs to be convicted of being wrong in order to respond 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 35 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: I’m predicting a 5-4 decision…😉 I'm going with 6-3, but I think they punt the whole insurrection part, and make some ruling on a different issue, that overturns. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 40 minutes ago, JaCrispy said: I’m predicting a 5-4 decision…😉 So it would require a conviction I guess? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 (edited) 1 hour ago, Pokebball said: So it would require a conviction I guess? no. I'm predicting 8-1. slightly better odds than 9-0. clarence may try to save face. Edited January 6 by Joe Ferguson forever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 Should read PAC vs democracy. Hopefully the courts do the right thing and let the people choose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 1 hour ago, Tommy Callahan said: Should read PAC* vs democracy. Hopefully the courts do the right thing and let the people choose. * - only PACS that Chris does not approve. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted January 6 Author Share Posted January 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 (edited) 14 hours ago, John from Riverside said: I’m not sure that he should be off the ballot anyway People should be allowed to vote for whoever they want and live with the consequences of it So …disregard the constitution? Scotus just going to say this doesn’t apply to the Office of the Presidency Edited January 6 by TH3 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 (edited) 4 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: no. I'm predicting 8-1. slightly better odds than 9-0. clarence may try to save face. Edited January 6 by Pokebball 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 Even the dei justices will probably vote to let the people choose as it's a democratic process 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 A political cartoon, so some of the dullards here might understand the argument. . 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 10 hours ago, B-Man said: A political cartoon, so some of the dullards here might understand the argument. . What if they were voting for someone under 35? What if they were voting for someone who wasn’t a natural born citizen? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted January 7 Author Share Posted January 7 ⬆️ The King! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 On 1/6/2024 at 5:46 AM, Joe Ferguson forever said: no. I'm predicting 8-1. slightly better odds than 9-0. clarence may try to save face. How about this gem? LOL. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 On 1/5/2024 at 7:13 PM, B-Man said: Not much to “hear”. The 14th amendment doesn’t apply here, NO ONE has been charged with insurrection. Let me know if anyone ever is. . UNANIMOUS ! . 2 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 (edited) The King and Daz come to mind... Not sure where Finding Qanon came down on this, but likely took the commie position. PER CURIAM, *****. It's certainly gratifying that @dhillonlaw client Donald Trump won the Colorado case before the Supreme Court. (I was not part of the superb SCOTUS advocacy, but I was very involved in DJT's challenge to Colorado's actions which SCOTUS upheld.) HAVING SAID THIS, It is no less gratifying to witness the unanimous bench slap delivered to all the wise-ass academic, corporate media and Twitter constitutional law experts who got this so, so wrong. Edited March 4 by BillsFanNC 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 10 minutes ago, B-Man said: UNANIMOUS ! . Add all nine members of the US Supreme Court to the list of people the mental patients on the American left believes are "threats to democracy". 2 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts