Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The thread isn’t even about Trump, ignoramus.It's a TDS piss pants thread. Look at the other 3 billion.
You voted Biden, so talk about Biden. But you know fine well he's a shit show and an embarrassment.
What of the many Jan 6th participants still being tortured in some federal hole Clay?It’s actually Constitutional interpretation rather than due process; again, Trump isn’t be charged with a crime, his life, liberty or property are not in jeopardy – this would be in the category of Bush v. Gore and Nixon v. US.
J6 Reichstag FireWhatever you wanna call what happened on J6, the purpose was to install the election loser Trump back into office, thwart the will of the people.
Of course Section 3 of the 14th amendment was designed to keep (Democrat Seditionists, Rebels) from being able to run for office. I just dont think President Trump 45, was a Democrat Seditionist, Rebel.Historical precedent also confirms that a criminal conviction is not required for an individual to be disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. No one who has been formally disqualified under Section 3 was charged under the criminal “rebellion or insurrection” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or its predecessors. This fact is consistent with Section 3’s text, legislative history, and precedent, all of which make clear that a criminal conviction for any offense is not required for disqualification. Section 3 is not a criminal penalty, but rather is a qualification for holding public office in the United States that can be and has been enforced through civil lawsuits in state courts, among other means.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/r...eports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not expressly require a criminal conviction, and historically, one was not necessary. Reconstruction Era federal prosecutors brought civil actions in court to oust officials linked to the Confederacy, and Congress in some cases took action to refuse to seat Members. Congress last used Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1919 to refuse to seat a socialist Congressman accused of having given aid and comfort to Germany during the First World War, irrespective of the Amnesty Act. The Congressman, Victor Berger, was eventually seated at a subsequent Congress after the Supreme Court threw out his espionage conviction for judicial bias. Recently, various groups and organizations have challenged the eligibility of certain candidates running for Congress, arguing that the candidates’ alleged involvement in the events surrounding the January 6, 2021, breach of the Capitol render them ineligible for office. No challenges have to date resulted in the disqualification of any congressional candidate. A New Mexico state court, however, has removed Otero County Commissioner County Griffin from office and prohibited him from seeking or holding any future office based on his participation in, and preparation for, the January 6 interruption of the election certification.
Absent evidence in contradiction of CREW's assertion I suspect Trumpleton's will ineffectually attack CREW and or the CRS. It is the Trumpian way. When facts and evidence fail them they rely on what amounts to character assassination. Which is why Trump attacks the media, anyone who opposes him, and most especially those like Jack Smith who are working to hold Don accountable for his illegal actions.
Furthermore, quite a bit has been made about the removal of a candidate's name from the ballot being anti-democratic. Yet the Constitution itself tells us that it is the conduct that gives rise to disqualification under the 14th Amendment that is anti-democratic. From the moment Trump began the anti-democratic act of conspiring to steal the election he violated his oath of office and forfeited his right to once again run to be the prez.
The riot occurred because Mike pence wouldnt participate in the fake elector plot. Trump and the rioters referenced that on January 6th.This is the part of the narrative that you mass media gobblers haven't thought through, which bugs the hell out of me.
Essential? Essential my ass!
In order to effectuate that part of the plan, doesn't the Congress need to be in session? So how are these two parts even connected? The fake electors, and the riot?
As you obviously aren't aware, you're now waffling between claims of some insurrection you believe took place to now pivoting toward some attempt to overturn an election you believe took place.As you know, this matter involves evidence of Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election, not feelings.
The fact that this matter was adjudicated by a state's SOS or SC, and will ultimately be decided by the SCOTUS due to its gravity, in no way diminishes the legitimacy of the rationale underpinning the rulings made to date.The typically ignorant rant from the hyper-Dem/Socialist.
The fact that 'rulings' from leftist SOS cranks are on hold until review by the USSC should be enough to tell any thinking human that mere 'rulings' do not decide constitutional matters,
Democracy died when the Marxsits/Demofascists stole the 2020 election. All President Trump tried to do is expose that fraud for what it was.As if you give a fuck about democracy after what Trump did in 2020.
That’s your stupid and ignorant OPINION. Amazing you say that after we’ve seen what a disaster Biden has made of our country.The only stupidity and ignorance is that of the right.
Guess CREW just forgot to tell you Bidenfluffers that Congress passed a law declaring them insurrectionists. WOnder why they would leave that out?Absent evidence in contradiction of CREW's assertion I suspect Trumpleton's will ineffectually attack CREW and or the CRS. Or, climb in to their hidey hole of denial in spectacularly infantile and crude fashion.
Of course it does. The very fact that the SCOTUS will overturn it shows how illegitimate it was.The fact that this matter was adjudicated by a state's SOS or SC, and will ultimately be decided by the SCOTUS due to its gravity, in no way diminishes the legitimacy of the rationale underpinning the rulings made to date.
Democracy died when the Marxsits/Demofascists stole the 2020 election. All President Trump tried to do is expose that fraud for what it was.
Here let Joe Bidumb explain it better..
Are you aware that your post is a lie and moronic idiocy, having nothing to do with the topic.What of the many Jan 6th participants still being tortured in some federal hole Clay?
What 'crime' are they guilty of?
~S~
Not really. She could have simply chanted "INSURRECTIONIST" three time and he's off the ballot.He does have to have actually done something, you realize?
In every way! We have students marching around calling for a genocide of the Jews, and the presidents of the colleges approving of it!The left are 1930s Nazis.
Yes we should just start throwing Dems off ballots. Then ignore any laws they pass.
Same as them.
Democrat Leader Caught on Video: We 'Will Lie,' 'Cheat' & 'Steal' to WinI’m actually referring to Republicans trying to take away the votes of millions of people who happened to vote for Biden by filing lawsuits and trying to persuade state officials to eliminate votes or appoint new electors.
Republicans showed they’re antidemocratic in 2020.
Jacks explained that this means lying, cheating, and stealing are considered "morally acceptable" actions if they help Democrat nominee Joe Biden defeat President Trump in November.
The indisputable evidence proves Trump was involved in an attempt to overturn the election. An act of insurrection. That evidence was considered by both the CO SC and the ME SoS and found to be sufficient to disqualify your Dear Leader. Your efforts in obscuring that essential truth have failed.As you obviously aren't aware, you're now waffling between claims of some insurrection you believe took place to now pivoting toward some attempt to overturn an election you believe took place.
….and tap her ruby shoes.Not really. She could have simply chanted "INSURRECTIONIST" three time and he's off the ballot.
The fact that this matter was adjudicated by a state's SOS or SC, and will ultimately be decided by the SCOTUS due to its gravity, in no way diminishes the legitimacy of the rationale underpinning the rulings made to date.
the onus of proof is all you ClayAre you aware that your post is a lie and moronic idiocy, having nothing to do with the topic.
