Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 124,365
- 81,209
According to the Constitution,Trump could have had Pence arrested on 1/6/21.
For what?
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.
According to the Constitution,Trump could have had Pence arrested on 1/6/21.
Under these unprecedented circumstances, with or without Pence under arrest ,the president could have declared martial law and began confiscating Dominion voting machines immediately. ....among other things .
Regardless of .the Constitution .
It would have meant the 4 year attempted coup d'etat came to an end.Does that mean Dictator for a day would just have come early?
WW
I and you can run for President, NAZI.If that were true, then every single candidate running for prident would have to have their name appear on every ballot in every state. Yet many do not.
I and you can run for President, NAZI.
So, you're all about free elections and democracy until the country elects someone you hate, that about right?No one is denying that there isn't enough scared, hate driven, stupid people in this country to elect him. That means little. If he was elected we will be at that point in a dictatorship. with a dictator that is a traitor to this country and a total piece of shit. Elected by ugly hate driven Americans that sold out their country and are traitors to this country.
I think he's more concerned when the country selects someone who's willing to use all means at his disposal,legal and otherwise, to remain in power even after he loses an election.So, you're all about free elections and democracy until the country elects someone you hate, that about right?
It takes a criminal court to remove a persons constitutional rights, NAZISure we can. But not because it's a right. It's a privilege.
And because it's not a right, neither you nor I would get our names on any State's ballot.
It takes a criminal court to remove a persons constitutional rights, NAZI
Does it now? What trial does a 34 year get to be deemed ineligible to run for President. Since you content it's a Constitutional right?It takes a criminal court to remove a persons constitutional rights, NAZI
It takes a criminal court to remove a persons constitutional rights, NAZI
We already know you’re a fascist who hates America.Nope, never has.
Being under the required age is not a CRIME, moron. Engaging in insurrection IS A CRIME, which requires due process to determine guilt. There was no insurrection so there obviously was no one that engaged in insurrection. If due process had been afforded, that would have been determined. There has been no one charged or convicted of insurrection nor any declaration or official recognition that there was an insurrection. NEXT.Does it now? What trial does a 34 year get to be deemed ineligible to run for President. Since you content it's a Constitutional right?
Due process. Like a judge determining you engaged in an insurrection while lawyers for Trump could argue he didn't. That is due process.Being under the required age is not a CRIME, moron. Engaging in insurrection IS A CRIME, which requires due process to determine guilt. There was no insurrection so there obviously was no one that engaged in insurrection. If due process had been afforded, that would have been determined. There has been no one charged or convicted of insurrection nor any declaration or official recognition that there was an insurrection. NEXT.
No, like a jury of his peers determining guilt. BTW, when did that judge become the sole arbiter of whether or not an insurrection ever took place. Next.Like a judge determining you engaged in an insurrection while lawyers for Trump could argue he didn't. That is due process.
Since he or she had to rule on it to determine the relevance of the 14th amendment. And they aren't the sole arbiter since it has to go through 2 levels of judicial review. As due process dictates.No, like a jury of his peers determining guilt. BTW, when did that judge become the sole arbiter of whether or not an insurrection ever took place. Next.
Insurrection is a crime. Your assertion is moot. No one has been charged with the crime. The crime has not been officially recognized by the federal government. There was NO CRIME. There can be no penalty levied. This isn't rocket science. Don't live up to your handle.Since he or she had to rule on it to determine the relevance of the 14th amendment. And they aren't the sole arbiter since it has to go through 2 levels of judicial review. As due process dictates.
We already know you’re a fascist who hates America.
Your terrified manner of Trump winning is both telling and hilarious.
Being under the required age is not a CRIME, moron. Engaging in insurrection IS A CRIME, which requires due process to determine guilt. There was no insurrection so there obviously was no one that engaged in insurrection. If due process had been afforded, that would have been determined. There has been no one charged or convicted of insurrection nor any declaration or official recognition that there was an insurrection. NEXT.