THE TRUMP 2024 THREAD

Brownsocks

Just a dog
Nope, sayeth then14th amendment. And there are 16 other states that may invoke the 14th amendment against Trump. States Rights!!
No, Colorado does not have the authority to remove a candidate to generate a specific electoral outcome. Removal of a candidate is not included n the Constitution that grants times, places and manner to the states.
The court will overturn.
Screenshot_20231222_172827_Chrome.jpg
 

Brownsocks

Just a dog
More election interference from Orange Jesus
There is nothing illegal about this
 

Brownsocks

Just a dog
There have been many shady things go down in our history of presidential elections.
Only fascist governments jail political rivals.
As an example of how it should work, Trump said he wouldn't pursue a case against Hillary after he was elected.
 

Thebrownblob

Well-Known Member
There is nothing illegal about this
Yep as matter fact, it’s the only way anything could’ve possibly changed, by January 6. Nothing could change it was way too late even if he thought he could do something there was nothing that could be done to change the outcome.
 
"First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."


William Baude, University of Chicago Law School
 

DriveInDriveOut

Inordinately Right
" Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. "
So an insurrection is anything that one person says it is, and that person's opinion can take away constitutional rights.

Nope.
" it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."
Not certifying an election is an overthrow?
And an "overthrow" of an election that hasn't been certified yet is an insurrection?

So all the times that Democrats voted not to certify, those were attempted insurrections?

Ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

twohearts

New Member
Why anyone would want him back after the virtual nightmare of 2020 remains a mystery to me. And I’m not talking about covid 19. I’m talking about the assault on our freedom
What assault on freedom? Inflation at 1.9%, economy growing at 6%, no wars, NATO paying their fair share, border secure & real wages highest ever.
 

twohearts

New Member
"First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."


William Baude, University of Chicago Law School
As we know lawyers have also been brainwashed into activist rather than actually following the Consttution. Maybe you should read the Federalist Papers.
 

tourists24

Well-Known Member
"First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election."


William Baude, University of Chicago Law School
As long as those cheering now will also be ok with all the implications moving forward then so be it. It's just so dangerous and cavalier but, hey, welcome to the new way for elections
 
Top