On Truth Social trump demands to be reinstated...again

[Lastamender]

That is not proof of anything other than they do not agree there was a reason for an investigation. They are not fucked for doing so, they will be just fine. There is nothing they did illegal nor against their oath of office

Then they decided not to defend the Constitution with that decision. And in doing that violated their oath of office. Is it too simple for you to understand?

 

[Lastamender]

It will be resolved by SCOTUS refusing to hear the case due to its lack of merit.

It has merit. The Constitution says only two witnesses have to bring charges of treason. Article 2 section 3, read it. Siding with alleged fraudsters is treason.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Then they decided not to defend the Constitution with that decision. And in doing that violated their oath of office. Is it too simple for you to understand?

That is your opinion. You are free to have it, you are free to post it on here, but it is nothing more than that. No court in the land will agree with it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It has merit.

That is not your call to make.

 

[Lastamender]

Wait a minute...................further up the thread you were saying that everyone (meaning the vast majority) knew the election was stolen, and in this post, you are saying that the vast majority will believe it very soon. Which is it? And just because Musk says something doesn't necessar members of Congress are thrown out like the law clearly says people will get the idea.

If 388 members of Congress are thrown out of office people will understand thier vote not to investigate the election made the election illegitimate.

 

[Lastamender]

That is your opinion. You are free to have it, you are free to post it on here, but it is nothing more than that. No court in the land will agree with it.

How couldn't they? They have to defend the Constitution.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

How couldn't they? They have to defend the Constitution.

It is your opinion they did not defend the Constitution, nothing more.

Let me know when a court of law agrees with you.

 

[Lastamender]

That is not your call to make.

If it did have merit it would not have got this far, and you know it you disingenuous fuck.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If 388 members of Congress are thrown out of office people will understand thier vote not to investigate the election made the election illegitimate.

But that will never happen, there is no process to make it happen. You would literally have to shove the constitution up your ass and shit it back out for it to happen.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If it did have merit it would not have got this far and you know you disingenuous fuck.

Lots of meritless cases get this far.

 

[Lastamender]

But that will never happen, there is no process to make it happen. You would literally have to shove the constitution up your ass and shit it back out for it to happen.

The process for removal is in the Constitution. Again it is as simple as you're fired in a civil case which this is. criminal charges of treason can be bought later.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The process for removal is in the Constitution.

 

[Lastamender]

Lots of meritless cases get this far.

Examples? Any cases on oath violation?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Examples? Any cases on oath violation?

Has this case made the SCOTUS docket yet?

 

[Lastamender]

Has this case made the SCOTUS docket yet?

It sure has. There are about 5 threads with that link. But you can go to SC website and search for 22-380.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It sure has. There are about 5 threads with that link. But you can go to SC website and search for 22-380.

A date of Jan 6, 2023. At least you will not have to wait long to have your latest dreams crushed.

 

[Lastamender]

A date of Jan 6, 2023. At least you will not have to wait long to have your latest dreams crushed.

How is that going to happen? It is and open and shut case. There better be a very detailed excuse for not finding them guilty. But I think they will be found guilty.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

How is that going to happen? It is and open and shut case.

You are correct, they will open it, laugh at it and then shut it.

With a little luck they will then sanction the lawyers that filed it for wasting the time of the courts.

 

[Lastamender]

You are correct, they will open it, laugh at it and then shut it.

With a little luck they will then sanction the lawyers that filed it for wasting the time of the courts.

Not defending the Constitution is funny? If that is what are judges think we are in very sad shape. Why does the rule of law upset you so?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Not defending the Constitution is funny? If that is what are judges think we are in very sad shape. Why does the rule of law upset you so?

Nobody did that, it is just your opinion and has basis in fact.

I like the rule of law, thus when the SCOTUS rules against this stupid case I will be very happy indeed.

It seems to me the only reason they took it was to shut it down for good and not have others try this same stupid shit.