Trump barred from running?

[Auld Phart]

An About-Face on Whether the 14th Amendment Bars Trump From Office

WASHINGTON — A little more than a month ago, a law professor who helped found the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, enthusiastically endorsed a new law review article arguing that Donald Trump was ineligible to be president. The article was “a tour de force,” the professor...

www.yahoo.com

Apparently, he can't be.

Professor went from:

"“Trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, and each of the 50 state secretaries of state has an obligation to print ballots without his name on them,” said Calabresi, who teaches at Northwestern University."

to:
"Former President Donald Trump isn’t covered by the disqualification clause, and he is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 presidential election,” Calabresi wrote. “I am correcting the public record on this important issue by sending you this letter.”

Thoughts? Whines?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It'll be mostly whines

 

[Magnus]

An About-Face on Whether the 14th Amendment Bars Trump From Office

WASHINGTON — A little more than a month ago, a law professor who helped found the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, enthusiastically endorsed a new law review article arguing that Donald Trump was ineligible to be president. The article was “a tour de force,” the professor...

www.yahoo.com

Apparently, he can't be.

Professor went from:

"“Trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, and each of the 50 state secretaries of state has an obligation to print ballots without his name on them,” said Calabresi, who teaches at Northwestern University."

to:
"Former President Donald Trump isn’t covered by the disqualification clause, and he is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 presidential election,” Calabresi wrote. “I am correcting the public record on this important issue by sending you this letter.”

Thoughts? Whines?

I will take his word that he came to the new decision after prolonged study and analysis. But I wonder how you guys would handle it if it had been the other way around?

What if he was first against it and then changed his mind? Your side will be out for his blood. You would call him a traitor, a Communist, and a guy who got paid off.

Thoughts? Whines?

 

[forkup]

An About-Face on Whether the 14th Amendment Bars Trump From Office

WASHINGTON — A little more than a month ago, a law professor who helped found the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, enthusiastically endorsed a new law review article arguing that Donald Trump was ineligible to be president. The article was “a tour de force,” the professor...

www.yahoo.com

Apparently, he can't be.

Professor went from:

"“Trump is ineligible to be on the ballot, and each of the 50 state secretaries of state has an obligation to print ballots without his name on them,” said Calabresi, who teaches at Northwestern University."

to:
"Former President Donald Trump isn’t covered by the disqualification clause, and he is eligible to be on the ballot in the 2024 presidential election,” Calabresi wrote. “I am correcting the public record on this important issue by sending you this letter.”

Thoughts? Whines?

To me it just shows that he is arguing in good faith. Sometimes that means you change your mind. It speaks to his intellectual honesty and the complexity of the argument.

I also want to add that that quality makes it incredibly hard to intelligently discuss it's merits on here. Without even considering the complete lack of intellectual honesty on here.

 

[Calypso Jones]

He's gonna be the nominee. He is going to have his second term. WE are going to have his second term..and the left...whether they like it or not, will prosper under a Trump presidency.

 

[ReinyDays]

We need a conviction first ... otherwise Trump is ineligible because of his Gordon Shumway toupée ...

 

[Lisa558]

It was always an unconstitutional Hail Mary pass to keep Americans from deciding whom they want for president - and that man is Trump.

The amendment in discussion pertains to those who were part of an insurrection - and was added specifically to keep Confederate leaders from running for president, following the Civil War. Since there was no insurrection in Trump’s case, the point is moot.

 

[Calypso Jones]

 

[Lisa558]

We need a conviction first ... otherwise Trump is ineligible because of his Gordon Shumway toupée ...

Even a conviction for one of these trumped up charges would not make him eligible.

 

[Lisa558]

View attachment 830864

They’re now using the “belly” stairs because Biden is too infirm and demented (dementia affects balance) to make it up the regular stairs.

 

[Independent thinker]

Another argument against Trump bites the dust. Liberals were so sure they had Trump this time. Doesn't look like the Supreme Court will even come close to agreeing 14A disqualifies Trump from being on the ballot, not that they were going to anyway.

An About-Face on Whether the 14th Amendment Bars Trump From Office

WASHINGTON — A little more than a month ago, a law professor who helped found the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, enthusiastically endorsed a new law review article arguing that Donald Trump was ineligible to be president. The article was “a tour de force,” the professor...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Darkwind]

Of course, it isn't applicable.

To apply the 14th, there would have to be a conviction.

Accusations are not facts.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

If J6 gets a conviction, then it is a possibility, yes.

If elected, Trump will be in remandment, and he will be unable to govern,

The 25th Amendment will be invoked by the VP, and according to the instructions of it, he will be removed permanently from office,

 

[Independent thinker]

Of course, it isn't applicable.

To apply the 14th, there would have to be a conviction.

Accusations are not facts.

Yes, that was the stupidest part, in thinking you can keep Trump off the ballot using 14A and claiming that Trump doesn't even have to be convicted of anything in order to keep him off the ballot or even not allowing him to take office even after he won.

 

[Independent thinker]

If J6 gets a conviction, then it is a possibility, yes.

If elected, Trump will be in remandment, and he will be unable to govern,

The 25th Amendment will be invoked by the VP, and according to the instructions of it, he will be removed permanently from office,

You didn't read the article. That clause in 14A doesn't even apply to a president, even if he were to be convicted.

 

[Care4all]

You didn't read the article. That clause in 14A doesn't even apply to a president, even if he were to be convicted.

Really? I wonder why they didn't say so, when they wrote it? (I haven't read the article yet). I'll a read it now....

 

[Independent thinker]

Really? I wonder why they didn't say so, when they wrote it? (I haven't read the article yet). I'll a read it now....

Knowledge is power. Yes, read it. And weep.

 

[whitehall]

That's the plan isn't it?

 

[Independent thinker]

I will take his word that he came to the new decision after prolonged study and analysis. But I wonder how you guys would handle it if it had been the other way around?

What if he was first against it and then changed his mind? Your side will be out for his blood. You would call him a traitor, a Communist, and a guy who got paid off.

Thoughts? Whines?

That's a lot of words when you could have just admitted 14A doesn't apply.

 

[Independent thinker]

To me it just shows that he is arguing in good faith. Sometimes that means you change your mind. It speaks to his intellectual honesty and the complexity of the argument.

I also want to add that that quality makes it incredibly hard to intelligently discuss it's merits on here. Without even considering the complete lack of intellectual honesty on here.

Yes, orange man bad. The left can't think of anything more complex than that.