Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6

a reply to: Mahogany

It should be noted, Trump wouldn't be the first person disqualified for office under Section 3 for their role in J6. A New Mexico county commissioner was removed from office under Section 3 for his participation in the event.

If this is a pervading opinion of the Federalist Society then all those people that were eagerly rubbing their hands together when they found out Justice Thomas oversees that 11th Circuit may start having second thoughts. Maybe this will finally get them to question the millions of dollars in gifts Thomas has received from Federalist Society board member Leonard Leo.

a reply to: Threadbare

Pssst.
Accusation doesn't mean guilt.

a reply to: Mahogany

There was no insurrection except the ongoing one by the Communist/Democrat party. This is the point in their insurrection/revolution that we either stop it or normal folks end up in a gulag after they steal the next election. They have declared war. We stop them or our lives and our children's lives are forfeit

a reply to: Mahogany

a reply to: Mahogany

i'm calling bullsh@@, Eugene Debs was in prison for sedition and ran for president and got a million votes he ran five times total

Debs ran for president in the 1920 election while imprisoned in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. He received 914,191[55] votes (3.4 percent),[56] a slightly smaller percentage than he had won in 1912, when he received 6 percent, the highest number of votes for a Socialist Party presidential candidate in the United States.[5][57] During his time in prison, Debs wrote a series of columns deeply critical of the prison system. They appeared in sanitized form in the Bell Syndicate and were published in his only book, Walls and Bars, with several added chapters. It was published posthumously.[1]
Eugene V. Debs

plus that part of the 14th doesn't apply to the President only representatives and senators and states governors. no mention of the President at all,

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The right to remove disabilities imposed by this Section was exercised by Congress at different times on behalf of enumerated individuals.1 In 1872, the disabilities were removed, by a blanket act, from all persons "except Senators and Representatives of the Thirty-sixth and Thirty-seventh Congresses, officers in the judicial, military and naval service of the United States, heads of departments, and foreign ministers of the United States."2 Twenty-six years later, Congress enacted that "the disability imposed by section 3 . . . incurred heretofore, is hereby removed."3

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The Qualifications Clause set forth in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requires the President to be a natural-born citizen, at least thirty-five years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least fourteen years.1

they would haves how me where there are any disqualification for president using the words of the United States listed.

the constitution would have to be amended.

a reply to: BernnieJGato

During the debate on Section Three, one Senator asked why ex-Confederates “may be elected
President or Vice President of the United States, and why did you all omit to exclude them? I do not
understand them to be excluded from the privilege of holding the two highest offices in the gift of
the nation.” Another Senator replied that the lack of specific language on the Presidency and Vice-
Presidency was irrelevant: “Let me call the Senator’s attention to the words ‘or hold any office, civil
or military, under the United States.’”

Source

The people that wrote the 14th Amendment consider the Presidency to be a civil and/or a military office.

I'm not sure why we (the citizens) care at all about wether Trump can run or not again. He didn't do anything to change the satus quo. If anything, the powers that be, want to keep pushing the divide between left and right by keeping Trump in the news.

We should be focusing on rising inflation, private firms and foreign interests buying up housing and raising rent prices significantly to the point that its hard to just survive if you're not making a large salary. Plus, we have a congressional hearing on UFOs. The most important discovery in human history if true.

The problem is democrats and republicans being controlled by corporations. Trump and Biden (and most democrats and republicans) did nothing to fight against corporations taking over our government and wealth. The wealth gap is increasing at an alarming rate.

So, who gives a f$ck about Trump. How about we start electing people in office who aren't corporate shills and forget about the Trump drama. Let that guy fade away and move on for god's sake.

a reply to: Threadbare

that's bullsh@@, so we're just supposed to believe that the people that drafted and passed the amendment, mentioned every elected office by name but not the President the highest office in the land, nor did they list any disqualifications for the office at all by name. and that the Highest Office In The Land is covered by just those few words, please.


and here's a keyword,

One scholar notes that the drafting history of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment suggests that the office of the President is coveredsuggests :

and then there this a little further down.

As the Supreme Court has observed in the context of the Insurrection Actit is generally up to the President to determine whether a civil disturbance rises to the level of an insurrection or obstruction of the laws serious enough to overcome the ability of civil authorities to suppress it. Consequently, a presidential invocation of the Insurrection Act would likely suffice to establish the existence of an insurrection for Fourteenth Amendment disqualification purposes. However, presidential invocation of the act might not be necessary.

i don't recall anybody calling Jan 6th a insurrection until later, if memory serves it wasn't called a insurrection until after slo joe took office,and a house( who were out to get him this time after 6 years) subcommittee declared it.

you can find lame stream articles that called it a riot for at least a couple of months. the weaponization of law and political offices actually started the day trump was elected and became solidified when slo joe took office.

oh, it is a common practice to warn when a link opens up something that downloads, some people don't like stuff that just downloads withiout asking.

Regardless, the tide is turning on Trump. A large portion of the Republican party is against Trump. Sure they supported him in 2016, even before the 2020 election Trump was losing support amongst the party. Many politicians supported him for votes but behind closed doors despised him.

After January 6th he lost even more support, again many have no denounced him publically because it would cost them votes.

Now as the Republican primaries heat up, we will see a lot more established Republican and conservative outlets throw him under the bus. They are hopeful they can find someone to challenge him in the primary, they were hopeful with DeSantis but greatly underestimated how stupid and unlikelable he is. I dont think they will get behind Christie but who knows.

If they cant find someone to challenge Trump in the primary then might resort to this old clause to disqualify him.

Remember who was leading the GOP polls in August of 2015 and how far Trump was behind(early on). My point is despite strong polling numbers now, we still have 5 months until the Iowa Caucus.

a reply to: Threadbare

Hahahah, a county commissioner in NM wouldn't have a pot to piss in after the feds were done with him for Jan. 6

He probably couldn't afford to fight the county.

Trump can and will.

a reply to: jrod

Youve listened to mslsd instead of looking at all the polls. Trump leads even the summation of all the other candidates.

Personally I like DeSantis/Scott/Ramaswamy or some combo, but that isn't reality. Reality is the nearly 40% lead Trump easily commands.

Where are all these disgruntled republicans going?

Why is Biden the only candidate for the DNC? Is he really the BEST y'all can do? I'd consider RFK but y'all have him written off as a kook already, Williamson too! So where is the DNC bench? Gruesome Newsom??? ROFLMAO

originally posted by: jrod
Regardless, the tide is turning on Trump. A large portion of the Republican party is against Trump. Sure they supported him in 2016, even before the 2020 election Trump was losing support amongst the party. Many politicians supported him for votes but behind closed doors despised him.

After January 6th he lost even more support, again many have no denounced him publically because it would cost them votes.

Now as the Republican primaries heat up, we will see a lot more established Republican and conservative outlets throw him under the bus. They are hopeful they can find someone to challenge him in the primary, they were hopeful with DeSantis but greatly underestimated how stupid and unlikelable he is. I dont think they will get behind Christie but who knows.

If they cant find someone to challenge Trump in the primary then might resort to this old clause to disqualify him.

Remember who was leading the GOP polls in August of 2015 and how far Trump was behind. My point is despite strong polling numbers now, we still have 5 months until the Iowa Caucus.

Funny, we heard all of this stuff almost verbatim back in 2016.

How did that go?

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

I suppose all this nonsense is what you get when you have politically appointed Judges?

Why not have an independently appointed Judiciary?

Is this a Constitutional thing?

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Trump will NEVER be President again, that is certain.

The GOP does not want him to be their candidate. There will be a lot more dirt about Trump coming out in the months ahead.

a reply to: underpass61

Did you even read what I wrote?

I was wrong...it was around this time in 2015 when Trump started leading polls. Regardless watch fir more attacks on Trump as the GOP "old guard" tries to find someone to get behind.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Many judges are elected, depends on the state.

Federal judges aren't elected because they dont want them involved in politics, ironically enough, which would be even more so if we voted for them. I don't really get it, but it's the reason the USSC are life positions.

In theory the Senate is an independent commission that approves or disapproves them.

a reply to: jrod

Regardless, the tide is turning on Trump. A large portion of the Republican party is against Trump. Sure they supported him in 2016, even before the 2020 election Trump was losing support amongst the party. Many politicians supported him for votes but behind closed doors despised him.

Many Republicans road Trumps Coat tails into office once they realized he could win .

They never actually liked him or supported him , He is not a Politician , He didn't go to Law School he is not a DC good ol boy but he had the Votes and that is what matters.

What Really turned the Left and Right on Trump is him turning off all the dirty money flows and that is the simple Truth .

Orange man bad Trump is racist blah blah blah it's all bullsh*t and people jump right on the wagon , Trump exposed the Dirty money in Ukraine , China and Russia that was flowing into so many DC good ol boys pockets and when he messed with their money they lost it on him .

Left Media hit piece after hit piece and it's all Hyoerbole crafted to get rid of him so the Money can Flow .

a reply to: jrod

If you really were paying any attention, you would know that the candidate the Republicans you speak of is DeSantis, and he has been declining as the attacks on Trump increase.

The left fell out for Biden when they were really voting against Trump.

The right, all of them, will fall out for Trump against Biden. Particularly as more and more bribery, influence peddling, protection racket and militarization of the DoJ are discovered.

The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Thanks. Sounds like a right old mess!

a reply to: jrod

I remember the very same words being said about Trump in 2016.

You would rather keep a treasonous felon in office than Trump, yeah?

It's one or the other. I'd rather vote for one that will spend more on OUR border than Ukraines.

Its that #ing simple.