Now Missouri

[SeaMajor7]

And what of a Native American born without a state birth certificate. Would he be barred from running for any federal office, since he couldn't produce an official birth certificate?

That person couldn't get a driver's license.

 

[Lesh]

Perhaps I am wrong, but it is my understanding that when this part of the Constitution was used in the past to bar people from office most, if not all, were not convicted of insurrection

Nor was Congress involved .
Precedence should matter

 

[SeaMajor7]

I assume it's the Maine courts at this point.



Yes it was. FPOTUS#45 was given due process as part of a civil bench trial in Colorado.

"PROVEN GUILTY" is a standard applied to criminal cases. "ENGAGED IN" is the Constitutional standard cited in the 14th Amendment.

The President and Vice President being elected does not make them not officers. Just as Senators and Representatives, also elected, are still subject to the 14th.



Read the 14th, insurrection against the Constitution, not the President.

Also, if you go back to the Congressional record and read about the debates there was a specific question as to whether the "any officer" provision applied to the Office of the President and the answer was yes.

WW

There was no insurrection, so your point is moot.

 

[postman]

He's not eligible to hold the office. He doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements.

That doesn't say how it's actually done.
Start with WHO has the legal authority to keep someone off the ballot?

In Maine in was done by the secretary of state?

Is that the right person?

 

[SeaMajor7]

That doesn't say how it's actually done.
Start with WHO has the legal authority to keep someone off the ballot?

No, you START by following the statutes to get on the ballot.

 

[postman]

There was no insurrection, so your point is moot.

To repeat an often used childish taunt.

No insurrection? Sez who?

 

[postman]

No, you START by following the statutes to get on the ballot.

And who enforces them?

That's the whole point, WHO has that legal authority to decide and enforce, and what due process do they have to use before doing so.

 

[SeaMajor7]

To repeat an often used childish taunt.

No insurrection? Sez who?

The FBI.

 

[postman]

The FBI.

The FBI never said there was no insurrection.
In fact, no legal opinion has been rendered that there was no insurrection.
In fact multiple conviction for seditious conspiracy would prove the opposite.

 

[SeaMajor7]

And who enforces them?

That's the whole point, WHO has that legal authority to decide and enforce, and what due process do they have to use before doing so.

Perhaps you should take a course on Civics of the USA.
There are procedures and rules to follow backed by the Constitution.

 

[SeaMajor7]

The FBI never said there was no insurrection.
In fact, no legal opinion has been rendered that there was no insurrection.
In fact multiple conviction for seditious conspiracy would prove the opposite.

They (the FBI) testified that there was no evidence of an insurrection.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Nor was Congress involved .
Precedence should matter

True, but also none of those were, as far as I know, a Federal level office like that of the POTUS.

I know that people like you really hate Trump, and I do not like him myself, but this is not a door you want to open as it will never be closed once you do

 

[Lesh]

True, but also none of those were, as far as I know, a Federal level office like that of the POTUS.

I know that people like you really hate Trump, and I do not like him myself, but this is not a door you want to open as it will never be closed once you do

A. I see no difference regarding a former POTUS or an alderman. Insurrection is insurrection and it should prevent anyone from holding power. Maybe most importantly the Office of the Presidency

B. I understand your concern but we can not allow that behavior to be repeated .

 

[SeaMajor7]

A. I see no difference regarding a former POTUS or an alderman. Insurrection is insurrection and it should prevent anyone from holding power. Maybe most importantly the Office of the Presidency

B. I understand your concern but we can not allow that behavior to be repeated .

There was no insurrection. That is only your NARRATIVE.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I see no difference regarding a former POTUS or an alderman. Insurrection is insurrection and it should prevent anyone from holding power. Maybe most importantly the Office of the Presidency

And who gets to decide if there was insurrection is based upon what office they are running for.

I understand your concern but we can not allow that behavior to be repeated .

Then keep him out of office by not electing him.

 

[postman]

Perhaps you should take a course on Civics of the USA.
There are procedures and rules to follow backed by the Constitution.

And i'm asking what they are.
You can used those of a particular state that you're familiar with as an example.

But just saying there are procedures, means nothing. The procedure could be flipping a coin (as some states use to settle tied elections)

 

[postman]

There was no insurrection. That is only your NARRATIVE.

The same could be said of the Civil War. Since nobody was convicted.

 

[SeaMajor7]

And i'm asking what they are.
You can used those of a particular state that you're familiar with as an example.

But just saying there are procedures, means nothing. The procedure could be flipping a coin (as some states use to settle tied elections)

You could do your own homework.

 

[eagle1462010]

Really?
Who told you that?

Bullshit.
When did the left EVER try to overthrow the election and the US government?

Fuck you traitor.

Fuck you right back Traitor.

Your side is trying to rig another election. Your side is violent as fuck too. Being the good little Fascist you have become.

 

[postman]

And who gets to decide if there was insurrection is based upon what office they are running for.

Actually it's based on the conclusion of the state you're trying to get on the ballot of. Since states are in charge of their elections.