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.
I understand, but that is not an adjudication. there is no standard there, just evidence.We know Trump called the mob to the Capitol on January 6th. And when it turned into an insurrection, Trump did nothing for THREE HOURS, to stop it.
Remember: In June 2020, President Trump considered—and was talked out of—invoking the Insurrection Act against protesters who took to the streets
Only the rebels who once swore an oath to the Constitution were excluded from holding office again, not every Tom, Dick, or Harry that served or supported the Confederacy were excluded.
After the Civil War they didn't want those that committed insurrection, to hold any office in the government. Amendment 14 Section 3.Have you figured out yet why the Founders said innocent until proven guilty is a Constitutional right?
The 14th sec 3 only required evidence. Those that wrote it, had no intention of requiring a conviction. Only evidence of their participation.I understand, but that is not an adjudication. there is no standard there, just evidence.
The precedent has been set: Insurrectionists can serve in US office.Seditious conspiracy
Look it up
Now I'm confused. When people say things is it only a joke if it is said by Democrats but it's not a joke if said by Republicans?Russia if you’re listening…
You claimed that was a joke.
Russia didn’t think it was
The precedent has been set: Insurrectionists can serve in US office.
The law wasn't written correctly, which is why they changed the law recently, and now you want to blame Trump retroactively for finding a loophole in the poorly worded law, which had to be fixed. It had to be fixed because it was open to interpretation.They aren't. Benedict Donald demanded that Pence throwing out the legitimate slates of electors in various States and substituting forged ones in their place, enough to reverse the election and make Benedict Donald the President. That is a rebellion against the Constitution and everything it stands for.
factually incorrect as usual for a demofk such as you!Only the rebels who once swore an oath to the Constitution were excluded from holding office again, not every Tom, Dick, or Harry that served or supported the Confederacy were excluded.
It's a joke, if those listening know it's a joke.Now I'm confused. When people say things is it only a joke if it is said by Democrats but it's not a joke if said by Republicans?
What?Only the rebels who once swore an oath to the Constitution were excluded from holding office again, not every Tom, Dick, or Harry that served or supported the Confederacy were excluded.
the congress corrected this in 1872The law wasn't written correctly, which is why they changed the law recently, and now you want to blame Trump retroactively for finding a loophole in the poorly worded law, which had to be fixed. It had to be fixed because it was open to interpretation.
no, demofks used the word fight fking hundreds of times more than any conservative or trump ally.It's a joke, if those listening know it's a joke.
When the people take it seriously, it's no longer a joke.
Take the movie The Bedford Incident. Where the Captain said "If they fire one, we'll fire one"
And hearing that, the young officer "Ay ay, Captain. Fire one!" and launched a missile.
LOL. So when Democrats hear a joke from Democrats, it's a joke but if they hear a joke from Republicans then it's not a joke. Got it.It's a joke, if those listening know it's a joke.
When the people take it seriously, it's no longer a joke.
Take the movie The Bedford Incident. Where the Captain said "If they fire one, we'll fire one"
And hearing that, the young officer "Ay ay, Captain. Fire one!" and launched a missile.
Uh huh. A loophole that no VP had ever found to exist before the 2020 fraud Benedict Donald tried to pull off. Over 200 years where no VP tried to unilaterally throw out votes based on the unfounded allegations of the losing candidate. "Shall Count.." is not ambiguous.The law wasn't written correctly, which is why they changed the law recently, and now you want to blame Trump retroactively for finding a loophole in the poorly worded law, which had to be fixed. It had to be fixed because it was open to interpretation.
The law was clear, which is why the participants have been indicted and are awaiting trial. The clarification to the law was to make the planning also a crime.The law wasn't written correctly, which is why they changed the law recently, and now you want to blame Trump retroactively for finding a loophole in the poorly worded law, which had to be fixed. It had to be fixed because it was open to interpretation.
Again, the stupid you don't know is you!!!Uh huh. A loophole that no VP had ever found to exist before the 2020 fraud Benedict Donald tried to pull off. Over 200 years where no VP tried to unilaterally throw out votes based on the unfounded allegations of the losing candidate. "Shall Count.." is not ambiguous.
www.npr.org
After the Civil War they didn't want those that committed insurrection, to hold any office in the government. Amendment 14 Section 3.
They had no plans of prosecuting the hundreds of thousands of insurrectionists from the war. Because they never intended to put them on trial in order to get a conviction, is why no conviction is necessary.
nope, it will all get overturned once the SCOTUS reviews it and entrapment is determined out loud for all you morons.The law was clear, which is why the participants have been indicted and are awaiting trial. The clarification to the law was to make the planning also a crime.
