The Supreme Court did not say!!

BartenderElite said:
Pretty much everyone condemned the violence. It's a lame and completely inaccurate talking point that the right keeps parroting.

But it's still not comparable. No Democrat had the power to call off the riots. Trump could have stopped 1/6 in a minute (and did - but only after waiting & watching for 3 full hours).
Click to expand...
Agreed. MAGAts lie a lot and the closer to the election, the more they’ve spun their lies.

In some cases I think they actually believe the lies which means they’ve been lied to and accept it because they are either mentally ill or simply stupid.
 
Flash said:
I understand a criminal conviction is not required by the 14th. But, you can't just let any court determine a person is not eligible to hold office again using standards different from the other 50 states/DC. There is no official method for making this determination. In the history of its use each House used its power to remove these members--a power clearly specified in the Constitution.

This is a power standardized in all the states and not just left up to each state. Congress should use its power under the 14th to enforce the provisions of this article by appropriate legislation.
Click to expand...

Sure and that is what the Supreme Court said. COngress must create some standard.

But what we CAN and SHOULD allow is for each State to adjudicate if a person is a Insurrectionist, even if then, how they handle that person, has to conform to a COngressional Process.

And that is what has been done in Colorado.

Colorado had a lower court make a finding of FACT that Trump IS an Insurrectionist and then the Colorado SC affirmed that. That is case close with regards to him being an Insurrectionist.

And just for added oomph, the Federal SC let those findings stand, when they could have reversed them and within the SC ruling Trump was referred to as an "Oath breaking Insurrectionist" 3 times.


So we know in todays reality Congress will not be able to agree on legislation for any removal method for those found to have committed Insurrection but that should not stop States adjudicating and FINDING it.
 
ExpressLane said:
No supporter should lose sight of the fact that DNC supporters rioted in multiple cities for months and burned and looted. They killed around 30 people injured over 3000 police and the VP encouraged people to bail them out . Nancy Pelosi sympathized with them and NO Democrat has ever condemned them. No Democrat at the convention even told them to stop.
Click to expand...

WHATABOUT BLM!!!


:laugh:
 
Jarod said:
Very interesting to me that the Supreme Court did not say Trumps actions were not an insurrection, they simply said States do not have the power to remove him after such a finding.


They could have said, Trump was innocent, they refused to do so.
Click to expand...

Interesting observation, thanks.

What are your thoughts on the upcoming blanket immunity ruling? I'm thinking they're not going to give him that.
 
ExpressLane said:
No supporter should lose sight of the fact that DNC supporters rioted in multiple cities for months and burned and looted. They killed around 30 people injured over 3000 police and the VP encouraged people to bail them out . Nancy Pelosi sympathized with them and NO Democrat has ever condemned them. No Democrat at the convention even told them to stop.
Click to expand...

Indeed…100% accurate.

Insurrection…no Democrat called them insurrectionists but they were.
 
ExpressLane said:
No supporter should lose sight of the fact that DNC supporters rioted in multiple cities for months and burned and looted. They killed around 30 people injured over 3000 police and the VP encouraged people to bail them out . Nancy Pelosi sympathized with them and NO Democrat has ever condemned them. No Democrat at the convention even told them to stop.
Click to expand...

Remember also how Pelosi and Schumer attended George Floyd's memorial service served up live on TV in an election year. How anybody can justify that is truly beyond me.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Interesting observation, thanks.

What are your thoughts on the upcoming blanket immunity ruling? I'm thinking they're not going to give him that.
Click to expand...

I think they are going to set up a standard for presidential immunity, some line that delineates a qualified immunity. The problem with that is that it will be kicked back to the Judge to decide based on the new standard, once she decides, Trump will get to appeal again and again claiming she abused the new standard, this will cause delay after delay. I do not think this trial will get started before the election.

If that is what the S. Ct. does.... The trial is more than a year away.
 
Jarod said:
I think they are going to set up a standard for presidential immunity, some line that delineates a qualified immunity. The problem with that is that it will be kicked back to the Judge to decide based on the new standard, once she decides, Trump will get to appeal again and again claiming she abused the new standard, this will cause delay after delay. I do not think this trial will get started before the election.

If that is what the S. Ct. does.... The trial is more than a year away.
Click to expand...

How utterly depressing.
 
ExpressLane said:
Sorry that your case isn't going to happen until after the election . :rofl2: I guess the people will have to decide not a liberal court in DC.
Click to expand...

If it happens after the election, no one will decide because if #TRE45ON wins, he'll have all charges dismissed. Of course that suits you fascists perfectly, doesn't it?
 
Jarod said:
I think they are going to set up a standard for presidential immunity, some line that delineates a qualified immunity. The problem with that is that it will be kicked back to the Judge to decide based on the new standard, once she decides, Trump will get to appeal again and again claiming she abused the new standard, this will cause delay after delay. I do not think this trial will get started before the election.

If that is what the S. Ct. does.... The trial is more than a year away.
Click to expand...

No doubt Christian Nation SCOTUS will follow their precedent of election fixing to comply with one must vote in their Christian Nation for those who celebrate Kristallnacht preyer of thieving US Constitution Bill of Rights - old glorys - old testaments - absentee voting ballots Christianananlity pedophilia arsonists for an Islamidiotocracy of Mohammed Vallhalla peodphilia martyrdom as "one nation under God with equal justice under law" .....
 
saltydancin said:
No doubt Christian Nation SCOTUS will follow their precedent of election fixing to comply with one must vote in their Christian Nation for those who celebrate Kristallnacht preyer of thieving US Constitution Bill of Rights - old glorys - old testaments - absentee voting ballots Christianananlity pedophilia arsonists for an Islamidiotocracy of Mohammed Vallhalla peodphilia martyrdom as "one nation under God with equal justice under law" .....
Click to expand...

Look how they are slow walking the immunity decision, doing so helps Trump.
They ruled on the disqualification issue with rapid speed, doing so helped Trump.
 
Flash said:
Would it have mattered? They banned him from the Republican primary ballot. If he won the nomination at the national convention he would still be the Republican nominee on the Colorado general election ballot..
Click to expand...

If he could be removed from the ballot in the Primary for "being an Insurrectionist" he could be removed from the ballot in the General for that same reason. Your post is absurd.

If the AG charged him with Insurrection and he was convicted, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 
Jarod said:
Look how they are slow walking the immunity decision, doing so helps Trump.
They ruled on the disqualification issue with rapid speed, doing so helped Trump.
Click to expand...

Look how they convinced the liberals on the court to vote with them. They must be truly EEEEEVvvviiiilllllll!!!!!!! And Witches!

images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top