Now That Democrats Have Made Us a Banana Republic

[Nostra]

It was a civil case, not a criminal.

Shocking (well not really) how uninformed you people are

What is the civil code for insurrection?

I can't find one.

 

[Nostra]

Petitioning government does not include smashing out windows to rush the floor of Congress.

Link us up to Trump doing that, Simp.

 

[Marener]

Where did anyone get tried and convicted of Insurrection?

Of course cheaters always provide all the evidence of their cheating.....

The defendant is not responsible for providing evidence of their own crimes. It's up to the prosecution to do so.

Under your insane interpretation of the 14th amendment, Jefferson Davis would have been eligible to run for president. That's your position. That the authors intended for Jefferson Davis to be able to run.

 

[martybegan]

The defendant is not responsible for providing evidence of their own crimes. It's up to the prosecution to do so.

Under your insane interpretation of the 14th amendment, Jefferson Davis would have been eligible to run for president. That's your position. That the authors intended for Jefferson Davis to be able to run.

They aren't even defendants yet, because the people in the locations where the supposed cheating occurred are universally democrats and wouldn't want to catch them anyway.

If they didn't want him to run, they should have tried and convicted him.

 

[Marener]

They aren't even defendants yet, because the people in the locations where the supposed cheating occurred are universally democrats and wouldn't want to catch them anyway.

If they didn't want him to run, they should have tried and convicted him.

“They” couldn’t try and convict him because that power belongs to the executive and they weren't interested in prosecuting them.

Which makes your assertion that the 14th amendment requires a conviction all the more bullshit.

You said the section was intended to stop confederates from holding office and it was used a handful of times immediately after the civil war to do so.

Want to guess how many of those had a conviction of insurrection?

Go ahead. Guess.

 

[martybegan]

“They” couldn’t try and convict him because that power belongs to the executive and they weren't interested in prosecuting them.

Which makes your assertion that the 14th amendment requires a conviction all the more bullshit.

You said the section was intended to stop confederates from holding office and it was used a handful of times immediately after the civil war to do so.

Want to guess how many of those had a conviction of insurrection?

Go ahead. Guess.

Bullshit.

No, it doesn't. It at least requires actual evidence on insurrection, i.e. being a signatory to a secession article, being part of an insurrectionist government, or being in the insurrectionist military.

And even then it wasn't applied to everyone on those lists.

They could have contested it, and probably would have won.

 

[Marener]

Bullshit.

No, it doesn't. It at least requires actual evidence on insurrection, i.e. being a signatory to a secession article, being part of an insurrectionist government, or being in the insurrectionist military.

And even then it wasn't applied to everyone on those lists.

They could have contested it, and probably would have won.

Your belief that the authors of the amendment intended for there to be a conviction is obviously bullshit and historically unnecessary.

It's just shit you made up to get whatever you want.

As always. You're a child.

 

[martybegan]

Your belief that the authors of the amendment intended for there to be a conviction is obviously bullshit and historically unnecessary.

It's just shit you made up to get whatever you want.

As always. You're a child.

It's expected by the rest of the Constitution for any American citizen, and they were again American citizens.

It was never tested by the courts at the time.

Meanwhile you use it to prosecute your political enemies.

Hell, Eugene V Debs was never disallowed under this amendment and he was all for Insurrection.

 

[Marener]

It's expected by the rest of the Constitution for any American citizen, and they were again American citizens.

It was never tested by the courts at the time.

Meanwhile you use it to prosecute your political enemies.

Hell, Eugene V Debs was never disallowed under this amendment and he was all for Insurrection.

Most of the people kept off the ballot had their cases decided by the state supreme courts, so you can blow it out your ass.

You didn't expect convictions in court before you disenfranchised millions of people, so I don't know why you expect it for Trump.

Oh wait, I do know why. It's because you don't give a shit about following the Constitution or democratic principles. You only care about winning. You would use the law to take away the rights of millions of Americans because you disagree with their opinions.

 

[martybegan]

Most of the people kept off the ballot had their cases decided by the state supreme courts, so you can blow it out your ass.

You didn't expect convictions in court before you disenfranchised millions of people, so I don't know why you expect it for Trump.

Oh wait, I do know why. It's because you don't give a shit about following the Constitution or democratic principles. You only care about winning. You would use the law to take away the rights of millions of Americans because you disagree with their opinions.

You got a link to that dipshit?

More of the same lies from you.

More putting the your own sides goals on the other side.

Stop sucking Alisky dick.

 

[Marener]

You got a link to that dipshit?

More of the same lies from you.

More putting the your own sides goals on the other side.

Stop sucking Alisky dick.

The precedent for 14th Amendment disqualification - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.

www.citizensforethics.org

Never forget I'm smarter than you.

 

[martybegan]

The precedent for 14th Amendment disqualification - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.

www.citizensforethics.org

Never forget I'm smarter than you.

As they were confederates.

Trump is not a confederate.

This sites logic is just as twisted as yours.

And I'll put my intellect up against yours any fucking day of the week, mouth breather.

 

[Marener]

As they were confederates.

Trump is not a confederate.

This sites logic is just as twisted as yours.

And I'll put my intellect up against yours any fucking day of the week, mouth breather.

So all of a sudden, you don't care about convictions for insurrection.

Clearly it wasn't intended to be required.

You just change the rules whenever you want. You don't have intellect, it's rationalization.

 

[martybegan]

So all of a sudden, you don't care about convictions for insurrection.

Clearly it wasn't intended to be required.

You just change the rules whenever you want. You don't have intellect, it's rationalization.

They should have been convicted, and I'm sure if the challenge came up then it would have been accepted. The whole thing was rendered moot when that act was passed, and the rest of them died.

Says the guy rationalizing his supposed disenfranchisement is OK because he wants it to be.

And I guess you don't have the balls to take a PM thrashing because you banned me.

Coward.

 

[Marener]

They should have been convicted, and I'm sure if the challenge came up then it would have been accepted. The whole thing was rendered moot when that act was passed, and the rest of them died.

Says the guy rationalizing his supposed disenfranchisement is OK because he wants it to be.

And I guess you don't have the balls to take a PM thrashing because you banned me.

Coward.

No one is being disenfranchised. Everyone still gets to vote in the election.

The only one that supported disenfranchisement is you when you support and defend Trump and his cronies attempts to disenfranchise the people after they voted.

"I'm sure" is worthless. Facts not in evidence.

 

[martybegan]

No one is being disenfranchised. Everyone still gets to vote in the election.

The only one that supported disenfranchisement is you when you support and defend Trump and his cronies attempts to disenfranchise the people after they voted.

"I'm sure" is worthless. Facts not in evidence.

Not for their preferred candidate, who's a previous President. You think the people in the Soviet Union who had a choice of one candidate were enfranchised?

Bullshit same line you've been locked onto like some autistic twit.

 

[JoeB131]

Not for their preferred candidate, who's a previous President. You think the people in the Soviet Union who had a choice of one candidate were enfranchised?

Bullshit same line you've been locked onto like some autistic twit.

Your side went around for eight years claiming that Obama was qualified to be president because he was supposedly born in Kenya. (Which wasn't true and wouldn't disqualify him if he was, as his mother was American).

Trump committed a clearly disqualifying action under the constitution.

 

[martybegan]

Your side went around for eight years claiming that Obama was qualified to be president because he was supposedly born in Kenya. (Which wasn't true and wouldn't disqualify him if he was, as his mother was American).

Trump committed a clearly disqualifying action under the constitution.

first. "wasn't qualified". think before you type.

2nd. Find any post where I bought into that stuff.

3rd. Someone born of a US citizen outside the US is not natural born. McCain got a pass because he was born in the Canal Zone, which was a US territory at the time.

No he didn't.

 

[Marener]

Not for their preferred candidate, who's a previous President. You think the people in the Soviet Union who had a choice of one candidate were enfranchised?

Bullshit same line you've been locked onto like some autistic twit

Great. We will nominate Obama then. Being able to vote doesn’t mean being able to vote for anyone. They still have to qualify for office.

WTF are you talking about a choice of one candidate? Even if Trump is declared ineligible in every state by SCOTUS, there’d still be a republican candidate.

 

[Concerned American]

Of course cheating violates the Constitution. Where did anyone get tried and convicted of this cheating?

LMAO, the same place the CO supreme court got its info that Trump was guilty of insurrection. I'm glad we got that cleared up. The only difference is Trump made his case in court, the leftist courts that were supposed to look at the democrat voter fraud chose to ignore it. Try again, fool.