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.
Went over real well with the judge, eh? Trial on the citizen's lawsuit, scheduled for Oct 30th, by the judge's order after reading Donny's lawyer's motion to dismiss. Maybe you should contact the judge.The Oath the POTUS takes does not use the word "support", thus the argument by his lawyers
You've been taken by the most obvious con man in America's history./-----/ Mac1958 is jealous. His theme song is:
Papa was a rolling stone
Wherever he laid his hat was his home
And when he died All he left us was Alone - Temptations
Went over real well with the judge, eh? Trial on the citizen's lawsuit, scheduled for Oct 30th, by the judge's order after reading Donny's lawyer's motion to dismiss. Maybe you should contact the judge.
Oops. Sorry.I did not say I agreed with it, just gave the argument being used.
WTF?
lol
You chicken shit
You already have that market cornered.Sounds like you are trying to defend the indefensible.
Lawyers speak for their clients geniusI have no idea if that’s true. I’ve no idea if trumps lawyers go to him for everything they are going to present in their case, beyond that, it’s also not apparent that they are even arguing that trump doesn’t have to support the cotus, they are making an argument about the application of S3 of the 14A based on the wording of the oath he takes.
So it was his first lie?
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Ok, where's your boy Biden fit in then??So it was his first lie?
Ok, it probably was. As POTUS.
That has got to be the stupidest defense strategy I have ever heard.Former President Donald Trump is arguing to a judge in Colorado that he was not required to "support" the Constitution as president, reported Brandi Buchman from Law & Crime.
The argument came as he seeks to dismiss a lawsuit filed in the state by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), seeking to have him disqualified from the ballot in the state under the 14th Amendment. The Insurrection Clause of the amendment prohibits those who have "engaged in insurrection" against the United States from holding a civil, military, or elected office without unless a two-thirds majority of the House and Senate approve.
But Trump's lawyers are arguing that the specific language of the Constitution argues that this requirement only applies to people in offices who are bound to "support" the Constitution — and the presidency is not one of those offices.
Trump tells court he had no duty to 'support' the Constitution as president
Former President Donald Trump is arguing to a judge in Colorado that he was not required to "support" the Constitution as president, reported Brandi Buchman from Law & Crime.The argument came as he seeks to dismiss a lawsuit filed in the state by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in...www.rawstory.com
This is totally bizarre! If the President of the United States isn't required to support the Constitution - then who is? What do you think?
The lawyers speak for tRump. You know this.Ok, so firstly, your title is misleading, trump himself didn’t say this, it was his lawyers, just for clarification.
Please, show us.DAMN, Trump must be right again because-- SHAZZAM!-- Biden has not only not supported it, but has shit, pissed and walked all over it and YOU DON'T MIND.
On paper, show us how it is.That has got to be the stupidest defense strategy I have ever heard.
You've been taken by the most obvious con man in America's history.
Former President Donald Trump is arguing to a judge in Colorado that he was not required to "support" the Constitution as president, reported Brandi Buchman from Law & Crime.
The argument came as he seeks to dismiss a lawsuit filed in the state by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), seeking to have him disqualified from the ballot in the state under the 14th Amendment. The Insurrection Clause of the amendment prohibits those who have "engaged in insurrection" against the United States from holding a civil, military, or elected office without unless a two-thirds majority of the House and Senate approve.
But Trump's lawyers are arguing that the specific language of the Constitution argues that this requirement only applies to people in offices who are bound to "support" the Constitution — and the presidency is not one of those offices.
Trump tells court he had no duty to 'support' the Constitution as president
Former President Donald Trump is arguing to a judge in Colorado that he was not required to "support" the Constitution as president, reported Brandi Buchman from Law & Crime.The argument came as he seeks to dismiss a lawsuit filed in the state by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in...
This is totally bizarre! If the President of the United States isn't required to support the Constitution - then who is? What do you think?
Trump says stuff without consulting his lawyers,, or ignores their advice on what to say or not say. There isnt a better lawyer existing to solve that problem.I think he needs better lawyers, the only argument that needs be made in that case is "standing", the commies don't have it.
.
Is preserving and protecting and defending the Constitution NOT supporting it?
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
