Let's make something clear.

[Rawley]

Thinking for yourself too difficult? Imagine my surprise.

What was the due process afforded him in Maine?

 

[BackAgain]

What was the due process afforded him in Maine?

Big won’t answer. He can’t. But that’s only because the answer is clear.

There was zero due process in Maine.

 

[berg80]

What was the due process afforded him in Maine?

The fact that you asked the question tells me you are ignorant about the procedure ME established for ballot disqualification.



Unlike in Colorado, Maine law requires voters to petition the secretary of state with challenges to a candidate's qualifications, after which a public hearing is held where the challengers make their case as to why the primary nomination should be invalidated.

Trump appeals Maine secretary of state's decision barring him from primary ballot

Former President Donald Trump asked a state court in Maine to toss out the secretary of state's determination that he is disqualified from holding public office.

www.cbsnews.com

Title 21-A, Chapter 5: NOMINATIONS

 

[Cellblock2429]

You’re a snore fest.

You can’t handle the most obvious challenge to your ignorant mutterings:

The 14th Amendment, Section 3 (assuming it applies to the President at all, which is not at all clear), disqualifies such a candidate if that candidate has engaged in (among other things) an “insurrection.”

That’s a criminal allegation. To make use of the disqualification provision, therefore, requires a criminal conviction for that crime in a federal criminal court.

You can continue to mindlessly deny it. I don’t expect any hint of logic out of you, bug. But I believe you will see that the SCOTUS is not nearly as narrow minded and biased as you are.

/——/ I wish the gun grabbing libtards could promote the 2nd amendment with the same passion.

 

[berg80]

Big won’t answer. He can’t. But that’s only because the answer is clear.

There was zero due process in Maine.

What's clear is your head is too far up your ass to see the facts.

 

[BackAgain]

What's clear is your head is too far up your ass to see the facts.

Nah. What’s clear is that you’re a hack and that you don’t understand what’s at issue. Or why.

 

[berg80]

/——/ I wish the gun grabbing libtards could promote the 2nd amendment with the same passion.

I wish gun totting dotards didn't butcher the 14th A as they do the 2nd.

 

[berg80]

Nah. What’s clear is that you’re a hack and that you don’t understand what’s at issue. Or why.

What's clear is you're better at gratuitous insults than comprehension of basic concepts. Other than "Trump can do no wrong."

 

[Cellblock2429]

I wish gun totting dotards didn't butcher the 14th A as they do the 2nd.

/——/ OH, you mean the two clauses, well regulated militia AND the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

 

[BackAgain]

What's clear is you're better at gratuitous insults than comprehension of basic concepts. Other than "Trump can do no wrong."

Again ^ proving me right.

You refuse to even consider that you could be wrong. You’re such a mindless hack troll.

And again, I’ve made my prediction. Now let’s see how the SCOTUS decides.

 

[Rawley]

The fact that you asked the question tells me you are ignorant about the procedure ME established for ballot disqualification.

The fact that you can't answer and instead spew partisan propaganda tells the board you don't even know what "due process" is.

 

[Rawley]

Again ^ proving me right.

You refuse to even consider that you could be wrong. You’re such a mindless hack troll.

And again, I’ve made my prediction. Now let’s see how the SCOTUS decides.

Is she always like this?

 

[BackAgain]

Is she always like this?

He / she / it is indeed always like this.

 

[konradv]

/——/ Watch these CNN reports and tell us how confident you still are.

Show us the complete CNN report, not just Hannity’s cherry-picked clip.

 

[Nostra]

There's no doubt that any sane reading of A. 14 S. 3 will conclude that Trump should be barred from office.

But I think that SCOTUS will also do a risk analysis and determine that if they bar Trump from running no harm is done. Running for President is not a constitutional or inalienable right. The GOP has plenty of qualified candidates.

However, if Trump is allowed to run, and if he gets elected, it most likely would mean irreparable harm to democracy and the country as a whole. He is a fascist and SCOTUS knows it.

History has shown that whenever people like Trump get in control, it's only a matter of time before they destroy the independence of the judiciary. You can bet that SCOTUS values the independence of the judiciary and will do whatever it takes to preserve it.

 

[Nostra]

It will be vindication of McTreason's unethical, hypocritical treachery by allowing Trump to steal two SC appointments and nothing more.

Link us up to these two stolen appointments.

 

[scruffy]

Trump will be allowed to do the sites, nothing more. Harris has it in for him. Complete immunity you know.

Harris? The one that bailed terrorist arsonists out of jail?

 

[scruffy]

We need to get Trump off the ballot for the good of America. He’s unhinged and getting worse. The Adderall must be getting to him! He, apparently, has been snorting Adderall and “other things” during and before The Apprentice.

Comedian Tom Arnold Accuses Trump of Snorting Adderall

Tom Arnold ???

lmao

Way too funny.

 

[scruffy]

History has shown that whenever people like Trump get in control, it's only a matter of time before they destroy the independence of the judiciary.

lmao

Trump is in control, is he?

Who knew?

You can bet that SCOTUS values the independence of the judiciary and will do whatever it takes to preserve it.

lol

Yet you lot accuse them of corruption, even rape.

Make up your mind. Which is it?

 

[konradv]

Tom Arnold ???

lmao

Way too funny.

He was on The Apprentice. He saw.