After 9-0 SCOTUS rejection, Democrats devise Putinesque new plan to keep Trump off the ballot

[Marener]

It did 18, U.S.C., 2383

Enforcement act if 1870, which was partially repealed.

Time to replace it.

Congress is empowered to do so.

 

[Rawley]

Confiscation act of 1862

That's interesting, but 18 U.S.C., 2383 was passed in 1948 That's the congressional legislative enforcement mechanism of section 3. The SOTUS opinion even tells you that. You should read it.

 

[WEATHER53]

All Raskin is doing is what SCOTUS said they should do.

And for that he’s attacked.

Go figure.

No “should do if..” from USSC has been issued

 

[para bellum]

I am not denying the SCOTUS ruling.
The decision did not say that Trump was exonerated for insurrection though.
It only said that individual states cannot kick federal insurrectionists off state ballots.

They were not ruling on whether or not Trump was an insurrectionist. There is no lower court conviction to sustain or overturn. The question was not asked, and it was not answered (either way).

The Congress has already kicked insurrectionists off the ballot by passing legislation that mandates that punishment. If someone is convicted of insurrection, and tries to get on the ballot, the States are obligated to deny them.

But the Supreme Court will never rule on the guilt or innocence of someone. There are Questions of Fact and there are Questions of Law. Questions of fact are resolved in the District Courts. Appellate courts resolve questions of law. That is to say whether or not the law is correctly applied, and sometimes whether or not the law is constitutional at all. Questions of fact that are unresolved at the appellate levels get sent back down to the lower courts to be resolved there. That is because juries are the "finders of fact" in our system of justice. Judges are referees.

 

[para bellum]

That's a silly argument.

If they wanted to deny that Trump was an insurrectionist and settle the matter once and for all they could of. What they did instead was punt and leave open the possibility of a political remedy, rather than a legal one.

They punted nothing. That is not a question for the Supreme Court to decide, and they weren't asked to.

 

[WEATHER53]

So lib loons declaring 9-0 is “punting”

 

[Seymour Flops]

Yes, Trump did have fake electors. They signed fake elector certificates claiming to be the real electors. Thats not been done before. If you think it has, then let’s hear it.

It was John Eastman, and Trump was told it was illegal but he kept on promoting it anyway. Blaming someone else doesn’t work.

Yes, having the state legislature overturn the results after the people voted is unprecedented.

Stay on topic.

Out of all those “fake electors“ how many votes did they cast altogether?

What? Zero, you say?

So what do you think the charge is going to be? Attempted fake elector voting? What’s the statute on that, please?

I will it be the same thing that John Kennedy was charged with when he did the same thing in 1960 with Hawaii?

 

[Curried Goats]

They punted nothing. That is not a question for the Supreme Court to decide, and they weren't asked to.

Of course they were asked to. Trump appealed all the way to SCOTUS and they absolutely did punt on deciding whether Trump was an insurrectionist and thus disqualified. Instead they left it entirely up to Congress to decide. That means for instance, if abortion is the driving issue of the election and Democrats win a super majority in Congress, they very well could use the political process now approved to them by SCOTUS to disqualify Trump through a purely political process. That is the effective result of their ruling.

 

[Marener]

That's interesting, but 18 U.S.C., 2383 was passed in 1948 That's the congressional legislative enforcement mechanism of section 3. The SOTUS opinion even tells you that. You should read it.

I’m right.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yeah, I note that all that "Mah Democracy" stuff goes right out the window when SCOTUS hands them their ass.

So does 'let the courts decide'

 

[Foxfyre]

I’m right.

View attachment 912850

You do know Congress and the Presidency are separate branches of government, given separate constitutional functions?

 

[BS Filter]

And then just like that, President Trump ceased being an insurrectionist. Fascinating.

 

[Marener]

No “should do if..” from USSC has been issued

That’s fair.

How about “empowered by the constitution to enact”

 

[Curried Goats]

Out of all those “fake electors“ how many votes did they cast altogether?

What? Zero, you say?

So what do you think the charge is going to be? Attempted fake elector voting? What’s the statute on that, please?

I will it be the same thing that John Kennedy was charged with when he did the same thing in 1960 with Hawaii?

Well for instance down in Fulton County some of the charges are

1. Making false statements and writings.
2. Solicitation of violation of oath of public officer.
3. Impersonating a public office and conspiring to impersonate.
4. Forgery and conspiracy to commit forgery.
5. Filling false documents.
6. Conspiracy to commit election fraud.
7. Conspiracy to defraud the State.

Among others.

 

[Marener]

You do know Congress and the Presidency are separate branches of government, given separate constitutional functions?

Yes.

 

[Rawley]

I’m right.

View attachment 912850

Yes, the Confiscation Act preceded the 14th amendment (it was actually a model for the Amendment if you read it). Here's your cookie

But as the Court says, Section 2383 is the Congressional legislative enforcement mechanism. No further COngressional action is required as a result of yesterday's decision. It's already on the books.

As you know, asshole Raskin is simply trying to gin up more anger from your cult already pissed off at the 9-0 decision.

 

[Mac-7]

Libs must believe that will win the election if he’s on the ballot

 

[Marener]

Yes, the Confiscation Act preceded the 14th amendment (it was actually a model for the Amendment if you read it). Here's your cookie

View attachment 912852

But as the Court says Section 2383 is the Congressional legislative enforcement mechanism. No further COngressional action is required as a result of yesterday's decision. It's already on the books.

As you know, asshole Raskin is simply trying to gin up more anger from your cult already pissed off at the 9-0 decision.

I’ve been correcting you a lot today.

Your opinion of what is “required” is irrelevant. Congress is constitutionally empowered to write the law.

 

[WEATHER53]

That’s fair.

How about “empowered by the constitution to enact”

They don’t dangle out clues like you feel they may have done for you

 

[San Souci]

It doesn't sound like the DemoKKKrats are very confident in Poor Memory's ability to win this one without a whole lot of election interference...LOL

If all else fails ,they will try assassination. The Dems are SERIOUS. They want absolute POWER. And they play dirty. If they can't do it with phony paper ballots to dead people ,they will use dirty whores like Christine Ford and Stormy Daniels. If that fails ,they will buy Judges. When that fails ,they will pull a JFK. Remember ,JFK was gonna end Vietnam ,disband the CIA ,and fire J. Edgar Hoover. And LBJ.