Just Breaking SCOTUS Rules Trump Is Eligible To Be On Colorado Ballot.

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Degradation33
He didn't commit insurrection, his followers just think he sends them coded messages to fight the deep state.

Teflon Donny.

Hmmmm, what did Michael Cohen say?

"Donald Trump did not tell him directly to lie to Congress. Instead, Cohen said Trump speaks in a kind of code, and that most people who work for him understand what he means even if he does not give explicit orders."

And you believe Trump speaks in a code?

Congrats.

I believe he does exactly what Michael Cohen states as well as what others have said.

But go ahead -- blow it off.

Paper trails are different. Just ask Capone.

a reply to: Annee

Do you have the decoder ring? I've been looking but can't find one.

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Annee

Do you have the decoder ring? I've been looking but can't find one.

Go ahead -- blow it off.

Again -- paperwork is in black and white.

a reply to: Annee

Cohen, the guy who lied under oath?

....in black and white

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Annee

Do you have the decoder ring? I've been looking but can't find one.

I read somewhere that the decoder ring is the prize in the Trump boxes of Cracker Jacks.

It is a special edition that is only made a few months before a Trump Presidential election.

And only distributed to MAGA strongholds.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Annee

Do you have the decoder ring? I've been looking but can't find one.

Go ahead -- blow it off.

Again -- paperwork is in black and white.

I am just trying to understand....you have claimed that Trump is mentally deficient but yet he speaks in a code that only those close to him can understand? Somethings not adding up.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: theatreboy

Here is the process:
1. State is questioning a federal candidate.
2. State congressman brings it to the floor of the House of Representatives in DC.
3. They debate on it and vote on it in the House.
4. The vote determines if they are on the ballot or not.

got a link for that, cause congress is both the house and senate. i would think it would have to be a 2/3rds vote in the senate, seeing how it's about a presidential / election issue, and seeing how it takes 2/3rds to impeach the president in the senate.

No problem and your welcome....

usconstitution.net...

a reply to: BernnieJGato

The thing I make myself remember is that a lot can happen between now and November.

It is refreshing to see a court decision that makes sense, but politically, it only sets a stage upon which the unexpected may well transpire.

Cheers

a reply to: theatreboy

No problem and your welcome....

yes there is a problem, as i said congress is both the house and senate. and section 3 and section 5 both say congress, and you didn't post anything that supports what you claimed.

one of the most common definitions for congress,this one is from the wiki,

The United States Congress is the legislature of the federal government of the United States. It is bicameral, composed of a lower body, the House of Representatives, and an upper body, the Senate

here let me show you from the link you posted that it appears you didn't even bother to read read, just to ensure everyone knows what they are wanting to do in the house, which is half of congress and what you claimed the house can do ny themselves.

section three,

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.

now section 5,

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

if you are paying attention, you will notice that it says congress. as i pointed out a couple of times, congress is both the house of representatives and the senate. and no where in there does it say just the house of representatives as you claimed.

so i'm taking it as you don't have any supporting links that it is just the house can do what you claimed.

also i did get some information about it having to be a 2/3's vote or not, thanks to xuenchen in a another thread.

it's from a free self help resource and they even posted a disclaimer, that says what they say is theoretical and examples of the few time the sections have been used.

the disclaimer,

Since the disqualification clause has been litigated very little, much of the discourse around it is theoretical. Below, we answer a few frequently asked questions about the disqualification clause.

and to the 2/3's question i asked,

Is disqualification different than impeachment? Yes. Someone who is impeached could be disqualified from holding public office in the future if they are convicted, and Congress applies such a punishment. But this is separate from disqualification under the 14th Amendment. Under Sections 3 and 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress can bar someone from holding office. But unlike an impeachment conviction, that decision could be overturned by the courts. Most importantly, disqualification under the 14th Amendment does not require the two-thirds vote needed to convict during an impeachment trial. However, two-thirds of both houses must agree to remove the "disability," once imposed.

Disqua lification from Public Office Under the 14th Amendment

i expect more to come from all this due to the fact that TDS still runs deep in some and the support that trump has from the others.

as i said before, i'm personally not real fond of trump, i did get a kick out of his button pushing and thought some of what he did was good for the country. i would have liked to see one of two others candidates win the nomination but i'm not gonna stand in his way of getting rid of what's up there now.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
Alternate headline:

DEMOCRATS FURIOUS THAT VOTERS WILL DECIDE ELECTION

They were playing stupid games. Now comes those stupid prizes they won.

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Threadbarer

I was just pointing out that the headline claiming someone couldn't be removed from the ballot is incorrect.

The thread title doesn't say nor suggest that.

Schools in Democrat cities do have awful reading comprehension scores.

Awful reading scores and worse math skills more like they were a Neanderthal.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
Alternate headline:

DEMOCRATS FURIOUS THAT VOTERS WILL DECIDE ELECTION

^^ THAT. EXACTLY.

(and no, I"m not a Trump fan)

As of 2017 when it hit me that we should, I realized that we all should be big Trump fans. That is when I knew we had a winner that would do what he said and I liked what he said he would do. I was a Libertarian for years because I could not stomach R's when I left the Democrats party we now call Communist because I had seen enough to know they were crooked. Even Al Gore my Senator last century was strip mining his land in TN while pretending to "save the world from man". It was too much they left me as Reagan said. The sure did go left.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: JinMI

The headline of the article used does. Which is what I'm referring to.

Is context a foreign concept to you by chance?

I mean, it's not like the statement is made in a vacuum.

His rules that he must play by insists he maintain this narrative or else. I suspect the or else is something bad for somebody.

Perot got us Clinton. I think I voted Clinton that last Dem vote I made.

Ron Paul got screwed by the R's when he won the 1st two primaries but MSDNC and the RINO's said it was no name McClain who won. In fact those lies cost Paul the momentum and they lied about a few other states like Mizzou. By the time it was cleared up the media had brainwashed the RINO party that McClame was the winner over all. Then thanks to the Commie party that should have love him, Bernie got the treatment for Hillary and a new vacation home so he would shut up too.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: JinMI

Id say that what you want is not only subjective but impossible do to the very nature and incentives of being a politician.

Yes, it’s a tall order. But there have been candidates that were ahead of their time like Perot and Paul. Since then the public has shown they have an appetite for someone against the grain but also comes off as incredibly sensible.

While I agree, my opinion is that Trump is only the beginning of this standard.

Eh, I think Perot and Paul would have been a better place to start. To many, Trump is a failed experiment. He drove division everywhere he went including his own party. He thrived on it. And while many say that’s what we need, I agree, but done in a way that isn’t so boisterous and actually effective. He and the right had all three branches, yet they spun their tires. And while we could put that on the rinos, part of being president is finding how to lead even if it’s hard.

Do you not share the same sentiment that modern day republicans are merely 90's era democrats?

Absolutely. They don’t talk like it, but they spend like it.

a reply to: Annee

You don’t want to give it ten years to see how it plays out before making a judgement?
Interesting……

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Lumenari


It's kind of hard to compare Trump to Biden when you claim Trump speaks in code.


Second line.

EDIT: Also I would like a get a decoder ring.

Yeah one of my favorites is the "racist dog whistle" claims when only Democrats can hear it.

Rather telling...

Is incredible how people in these boards hates Trump soo much that fail to see the real issue going on with democracy in the US.

One Party is trying to nullify the candidate of the opposite party in any way they can and failing miserably.

Only Third world countries to do this to each other.

I feel pitty for all those that are failing to see how democrats are crapping on democracy in the US.

Incredible.

Nobody wants to talk of the failures of the brain-dead president that we got in power, the president that has launched and facilitated a foreign invasion in our soil, the trafficking of humans specially children, a party that hates Americans soo much that wants to replace them with individuals many from countries that hate American more.

What in the hell is going on with all of you, the repercussion of the invasion of the US will affect all of us for life.

a reply to: BernnieJGato


Once again, the 14th was written after the Civil War in 1866. It was to prevent those on the other side from seeking office. The reason why the President and VP are not in it is that they are federally elected and not elected only in a confederate state which was the concern after the war.

But today it means people walking around taking selfies after they trespass at Capital Hill.

originally posted by: Myhandle
a reply to: Annee

You don’t want to give it ten years to see how it plays out before making a judgement?
Interesting……

I personally am anti-Trump.

I think he's a moron that cares only about himself and what benefits him.

However, there are groups who evaluate all presidents and how their administration affected the country.

I am not a historian of presidents -- they are.

So far, Trump has consistently been in the bottom 3. Biden is not evaluated yet as his first term is still in progress.

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
a reply to: JinMI

SCOTUS declared Congress must decide this matter.

They provided no opinion on the 14th Amendment.

Your Rules for Radicals is failing you. The Gig is up because we know your playbook better than you do.