THE TRUMP 2024 THREAD

[Box Ox]

Trump was literally impeached over causing an insurrection. What more proof do you need?

Even the leftists on Morning Joe this morning were saying they hope the Supreme Court issues a 9-0 overturning of Colorado's decision because they know they effed up.



Impeachment is a political procedure that isn't necessarily about finding facts or proof of anything.

I'll have to disagree about impeachment. More accurate to say it has become a political procedure. It serves a very real Constitutional function to remove crooks or traitors from office.

There shouldn't be a sort of handoff where House members accusing a President of the opposite political party of an offense is considered sufficient grounds for a court of law to find them guilty of that offense.

It might be a whole different deal if Colorado has actually discovered damning new evidence that the January 6th Committee didn't have access to. If that damning new evidence were available I'd think there would be new calls on a broader scale for Trump to be criminally charged for insurrection. But that hasn't happened.

 

[vantexan]

There shouldn't be a sort of handoff where House members accusing a President of the opposite political party of an offense is considered sufficient grounds for a court of law to find them guilty of that offense.

It might be a whole different deal if Colorado has actually discovered damning new evidence that the January 6th Committee didn't have access to. If that damning new evidence were available I'd think there would be new calls on a broader scale for Trump to be criminally charged for insurrection. But that hasn't happened.

The CSC based their ruling on a state civil judgement. That alone should be enough for SCOTUS to overturn it. That they went so far as to say Trump did this and that without benefit of a Federal criminal trial and conviction says imo they have no standing.

 

[tourists24]

And it should have been used against 45 as he was both a crook and a traitor as well as an insurrectionist

and can just as easily be said about current President. Or might it be coming too?

 

[tourists24]

We might need Biden off ballots for his crimes against Merica'. Flooding of illegal's!

yep. That makes Biden a traitor and insurrectionist under the NEW rules. Texas, Florida, SC etc should all start taking him off their ballots

 

[Box Ox]

We might need Biden off ballots for his crimes against Merica'. Flooding of illegal's!

yep. That makes Biden a traitor and insurrectionist under the NEW rules. Texas, Florida, SC etc should all start taking him off their ballots

Rebellion also qualifies under the 14th Amendment. Republicans are probably already making lists of what that could be.

 

[Wally]

The CSC based their ruling on a state civil judgement. That alone should be enough for SCOTUS to overturn it. That they went so far as to say Trump did this and that without benefit of a Federal criminal trial and conviction says imo they have no standing.

The Lib-Activist Judges believe it to be true. No need for any presumption of innocence. Countries like Iran are so proud!

 

[fxdwg]

When the Republicans impeach Biden 3+ times, he'll hold the record.
Won't be long now.

 

[Brown Down]

Rebellion also qualifies under the 14th Amendment. Republicans are probably already making lists of what that could be.

Which bringse back to my original thought. It needs stomped out now or 1 of 2 scenarios will happen. 1 side takes total control and we become an authorian state or both sides will use it as will and it becomes an absolute joke throwing us even further down into Idiocracy.

 

[vantexan]

Someone may have mentioned it but I believe it was yesterday, possibly Tuesday, that former AG Edwin Meese and two former Supreme Court clerks have just filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court pointing out that Special Counsel Jack Smith was given powers beyond the scope of a normal special counsel and as such was illegally appointed by Merrick Garland. That he needed to be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. If SCOTUS upholds that then Smith goes away and his two Trump trials disappear. Will be very interesting to watch that play out. Would leave the Georgia and New York cases.

 

[oldngray]

Someone may have mentioned it but I believe it was yesterday, possibly Tuesday, that former AG Edwin Meese and two former Supreme Court clerks have just filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court pointing out that Special Counsel Jack Smith was given powers beyond the scope of a normal special counsel and as such was illegally appointed by Merrick Garland. That he needed to be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. If SCOTUS upholds that then Smith goes away and his two Trump trials disappear. Will be very interesting to watch that play out. Would leave the Georgia and New York cases.

They have a strong argument but the Supreme Court dodges issues like that whenever possible.

 

[vantexan]

They have a strong argument but the Supreme Court dodges issues like that whenever possible.

They're likely to rule on any convictions of Trump anyways if the trials are allowed to proceed. Pretty hard to dodge a Federal trial of a former president without looking partisan. If it goes that far it would likely be argued by Trump's attorneys that Smith had illegal powers given him. The Court may want to set a precedent on how former presidents are to be treated by their political enemies.

 

[728ups]

There shouldn't be a sort of handoff where House members accusing a President of the opposite political party of an offense is considered sufficient grounds for a court of law to find them guilty of that offense.

It might be a whole different deal if Colorado has actually discovered damning new evidence that the January 6th Committee didn't have access to. If that damning new evidence were available I'd think there would be new calls on a broader scale for Trump to be criminally charged for insurrection. But that hasn't happened.

There are several other states who have legal filings against Trump being on the ballot. This States Rights thing might blow up in Trumps face

https://www.axios.com/2023/11/16/trump-efforts-disqualify-2024-ballot-14th-amendment

 

[728ups]

When the Republicans impeach Biden 3+ times, he'll hold the record.
Won't be long now.

The republicans can hardly elect a speaker of the house

 

[728ups]

Someone may have mentioned it but I believe it was yesterday, possibly Tuesday, that former AG Edwin Meese and two former Supreme Court clerks have just filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court pointing out that Special Counsel Jack Smith was given powers beyond the scope of a normal special counsel and as such was illegally appointed by Merrick Garland. That he needed to be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. If SCOTUS upholds that then Smith goes away and his two Trump trials disappear. Will be very interesting to watch that play out. Would leave the Georgia and New York cases.

It’s interesting that when the Special Investigation was launched you poo pooed it away, saying there was no evidence to be found, yada yada and that you expected it to blow away in the wind
Now a few months later when it seems smith is compiling a very strong case against Trump you are hoping the entire investigation will be dismissed

 

[Wally]

Someone may have mentioned it but I believe it was yesterday, possibly Tuesday, that former AG Edwin Meese and two former Supreme Court clerks have just filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court pointing out that Special Counsel Jack Smith was given powers beyond the scope of a normal special counsel and as such was illegally appointed by Merrick Garland. That he needed to be appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. If SCOTUS upholds that then Smith goes away and his two Trump trials disappear. Will be very interesting to watch that play out. Would leave the Georgia and New York cases.

So these Dems in their quest to stop Trump actually get him elected!

 

[Box Ox]

There shouldn't be a sort of handoff where House members accusing a President of the opposite political party of an offense is considered sufficient grounds for a court of law to find them guilty of that offense.

It might be a whole different deal if Colorado has actually discovered damning new evidence that the January 6th Committee didn't have access to. If that damning new evidence were available I'd think there would be new calls on a broader scale for Trump to be criminally charged for insurrection. But that hasn't happened.

There are several other states who have legal filings against Trump being on the ballot. This States Rights thing might blow up in Trumps face

https://www.axios.com/2023/11/16/trump-efforts-disqualify-2024-ballot-14th-amendment

How does several states doing the same thing make it any more legitimate though? Biden won several states in 2020.

It’s interesting that when the Special Investigation was launched you poo pooed it away, saying there was no evidence to be found, yada yada and that you expected it to blow away in the wind
Now a few months later when it seems smith is compiling a very strong case against Trump you are hoping the entire investigation will be dismissed

Trump is already being removed from 2024 ballots and we're only at "seems" when it comes to supporting evidence for it?

 

[oldngray]

How does several states doing the same thing make it any more legitimate though? Biden won several states in 2020.



Trump is already being removed from 2024 ballots and we're only at "seems" when it comes to supporting evidence for it?

The chaos started by Colorado makes it almost certain the Supreme will be forced to quickly step in and end it.

 

[vantexan]

It’s interesting that when the Special Investigation was launched you poo pooed it away, saying there was no evidence to be found, yada yada and that you expected it to blow away in the wind
Now a few months later when it seems smith is compiling a very strong case against Trump you are hoping the entire investigation will be dismissed

Has there been evidence found? Such as? I can't wave my hands and make it go away but if this amicus brief makes it disappear that's fine by me. I won't be the one crying.

 

[vantexan]

There are several other states who have legal filings against Trump being on the ballot. This States Rights thing might blow up in Trumps face

https://www.axios.com/2023/11/16/trump-efforts-disqualify-2024-ballot-14th-amendment

And if the Supreme Court rules against Colorado then all the other state ballot initiatives go away too. Might blow up in Dems faces.

 

[Box Ox]

And if the Supreme Court rules against Colorado then all the other state ballot initiatives go away too. Might blow up in Dems faces.

Probably not a good idea to start getting moderates actively thinking that Democrats might actually be more dangerous to democracy than Trump.