States may move to keep Trump off the ballot based on 14th Amendment disqualification (1 Viewer)

superchuck500 said:

Those charges have their own elements beyond the mere participating in insurrection so you can’t presume they’re exactly the same - and yes, a prosecutor has to think about proof beyond a reasonable doubt on criminal conviction principles. Section 3 ineligibility isn’t a criminal conviction.

The “office” question is interesting and the lower court’s rationale appears solid but as I said before, it’s really impossible to try to weigh in on these finer legal points without reading the arguments and authorities. It certainly could be that simple and SCOTUS holds similarly. But there’s obviously a differing opinion that the higher court took.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what other elements you are talking about and I don't see any in the US criminal code for rebellion or insurrection.


With all due respect, I'm not buying any arguments or excuses why Jack Smith didn't charge Trump with inciting an insurrection or participating in one.

Jack Smith could have easily charged Trump with inciting or participating in an insurrection if it as iron clad as the left claims it is.

The fact that Smith didn't charge Trump with that shows that the Trump incited an insurrection narrative is complete partisan bullshirt.

The 14th ammendment was inacted to prevent Confederates from joining the Congress after the Civil War. That's the kind of insurrection the ammendment refers to. A rebellion or a major civil war against the US that divided the country. Not a two or three hour riot that Trump wasn't even present for.

The only way they could have accused Trump of inciting or participating in an insurrection was to claim the speech he gave on January 6th to the crowd somehow constitutes an incitement to insurrection. The same speech that Trump said to peacefully express their grievances and he didn't tell them to commit violence. Fight like hell is a phrase that's long been used in politics and the courts wouldn't find that that was a call to violence.

And because of the difficulty of charging him with that(and the 1st ammendment) Jack Smith opted not to. Same with the Democrat prosecutor in Atlanta who also opted not to.

MT15 said:

Actually what he said sounds like a call for violent action to me. Twitter is full of MAGAs calling for civil war right now. I was surprised that you would post that, as irresponsible as it is.

Click to expand...

What in the world are you talking about? It doesn't sound anything like that.

SaintForLife said:

What in the world are you talking about? It doesn't sound anything like that.

Click to expand...

Whatever. Trump supporters are all over Twitter calling for violence. I took his reply as a call to action. He says “now is not the time for voting”. Trump supporters threaten violence a lot and sometimes they carry out violence. I don’t think they deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point in time. I’m not talking about you but about accounts like that guy.

MT15 said:

Whatever. Trump supporters are all over Twitter calling for violence. I took his reply as a call to action. He says “now is not the time for voting”. Trump supporters threaten violence a lot and sometimes they carry out violence. I don’t think they deserve the benefit of the doubt at this point in time. I’m not talking about you but about accounts like that guy.

Click to expand...

Now is not the time for voting is a call to action or violence? Wtf? You probably don't understand his joke because he talking about people like you who excuse authoritarian actions to "save democracy."

SaintForLife said:

Now is not the time for voting is a call to action or violence? Wtf? You probably don't understand his joke because he talking about people like you who excuse authoritarian actions to "save democracy."

Click to expand...

I don't understand all the hand wringing, and whining? If Trump is kept off the ballot it will be decided by a conservative majority SC. Colorado is/was a swing state, with the judges facing state wide elections.

The 14th amendment is there for a reason. What I hear is "I would really like to ignore parts of the constitution I don't like."

J-DONK said:

I don't understand all the hand wringing, and whining? If Trump is kept off the ballot it will be decided by a conservative majority SC. Colorado is/was a swing state, with the judges facing state wide elections.

The 14th amendment is there for a reason. What I hear is "I would really like to ignore parts of the constitution I don't like."

Click to expand...

It's a ridiculous interpretation by partisan democrat judges. You just like their interpretation.

Do tell how a group of judges can determine that someone is guilty of a crime(insurrection) without due process.

SaintForLife said:

It's a ridiculous interpretation by partisan democrat judges. You just like their interpretation.

Do tell how a group of judges can determine that someone is guilty of a crime(insurrection) without due process.

Click to expand...

Then the SC will over rule the decision. What's your deal?

It's also not clear if Trump needs to have been found guilty of insurrection to be kept of the ballot.

J-DONK said:

Then the SC will over rule the decision. What's your deal?

It's also not clear if Trump needs to have been found guilty of insurrection to be kept of the ballot.

Click to expand...

So we shouldn't worry about authoritarian actions because the Supreme Court will overturn it?

Once again, how can a group of judges can determine that someone is guilty of a crime(insurrection) without due process.

MT15 said:

The videos you are talking about were people being led out of the building as they cleared it. I cannot even fathom how you can pretend to not understand what happened that day.

Click to expand...

Yeah sure.

MT15 said:

BLM protests that turned into riots were pretty spontaneous as I recall. Jan. 6 was meticulously planned with the express intent of stopping the official count of the electors. People were armed and planned to break into the Capitol. This has all been proven in court. You should read some of the accounts. If you cannot stand to read news accounts just read the court findings. It’s all out there.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about BLM protests in general. I'm specifically talking about BLM attacking the federal courthouse.

If we are using the ridiculous Democrats logic on insurrection, then that attack on the courthouse was an insurrection.

The fact that you try to excuse it while calling January 6th an insurrection shows its nothing but partisan politics.

SaintForLife said:

So we shouldn't worry about authoritarian actions because the Supreme Court will overturn it?

Once again, how can a group of judges can determine that someone is guilty of a crime(insurrection) without due process.

Click to expand...

There is a stay on the decision to give the SC time to make a ruling.

Do you need to have been found guility of insurrection to be kept of a ballot? That's not clear in the 14th amendment. That's why courts are ruling on this.

If the SC finds against Trump, you can read the brief with the rest of us.

superchuck500 said:

What was this supposed purpose of taking over the courthouse?

Click to expand...

I don't know. Was it to take over the federal courthouse and destroy it?


If we twist things hard enough then maybe this applies to it.

What about CHOP or CHAZ or whatever it was called when they took over entire city blocks for 3 weeks in Seattle. Using the Democrat's logic that has to be an insurrection as well right?

MT15 said:

Ah, yes. Here it is. Hm, I have been assured that nobody was ever charged with crimes for any of the riots during the summer of 2020.

18 Arrested, Facing Federal Charges After Weeknight Protests at Federal Courthouse in Portland

www.justice.gov

Click to expand...

Nobody claimed that they didn't charge any BLM rioters. What people have said is that many had their charges dropped or they weren't charged at all.



Contrast that with how they charged January 6th defendants even if they only stepped one foot inside the perimeter and never entered the Capital building.

MT15 said:

I thought this response by Biden was really good. He makes it clear that whatever the court decides will be followed, yet offers the actual truth of what we all know he did.

Click to expand...

You think it's good idea for the President to make statements about current court cases?

fooferdoggie said:

so trump saying he will be dictator for a day and take over the whole government and go after his political opens and far more is somehow not authoritarian????

Click to expand...

Dictator for a day is something you take seriously as opposed to a political quip?

samiam5211 said:

Do you think the case in Colorado has something to do with Democrats?

Click to expand...

100%. CREW is a left wing organization and they filed the lawsuit.

MT15 said:

I am firmly of the opinion that we shouldn’t use politics to make legal decisions. The reason we are in this mess is because Republicans have thwarted various systems and norms every single time Trump broke them. They thwarted both impeachments. The second time McConnell argued that it was proper for the courts to hold Trump to account and now that this process is beginning all of the GOP attacks the courts and the legal system as “politicized”.

Click to expand...

How can you claim that in bold while saying what you did below?

You are complaining about thwarting norms after Democrats got the leading candidate from President removed from the ballot in Colorado?

How did the Republicans thwart the impeachment? By not voting to convict Trump? So the normal process right?

MT15 said:

I also disagree with those who say we shouldn’t allow the legal system to work as intended to keep him off the ballot because we need to let the election play out. I do think Trump would be defeated in the general and I don’t think it would be as close as last time, BUT we all saw what he did when he lost in 2020 and there’s no evidence he wouldn’t do it all again. In fact I think he and his goons would be emboldened. So him losing the election is no guarantee he would step away and quit inciting violence.

Click to expand...

No guarantee he steps away like he did last time?

MT15 said:

Sarah Longwell said on a podcast that she fears we have entered a situation where there is no good direction to go. That each option that could happen will lead to bad outcomes.

Click to expand...

Sounds like an excuse to excuse authoritarianism.

J-DONK said:

There is a stay on the decision to give the SC time to make a ruling.

Do you need to have been found guility of insurrection to be kept of a ballot? That's not clear in the 14th amendment. That's why courts are ruling on this.

If the SC finds against Trump, you can read the brief with the rest of us.

Click to expand...

I didn't say they had to be found guilty. I asked you a question twice that you ignored.

FullMonte said:

Did the individuals who were rioting have an intention to stop Congress from counting the electoral votes and certifying the results of the election? (For reference: They had just left an event named "Stop the Steal.")

Click to expand...

Does one have to try to stop Congress from counting votes to be involved in an insurrection?

Is the name of a rally a factor in determining if an insurrection occurred?