-->
@TWS1405_2
Overthrowing an election affects Florida.
Should trump be disqualified as president for rebellion against the constitution?
Posts
Total:
288
-->
@FLRW
And YET…absolutely, positively, NO election was in fact, “overthrown.”
Nowhere in the 14th Section three does it discuss [an] election, specifically, let alone one being (or attempted to have been), overthrown.
What you specifically referred to was FL statutory law prohibiting the incitement of a riot (every state has this). While J6 was a small scale riot, it happened in DC where FL law doesn’t apply, and FL has no jurisdiction to try someone for an alleged crime committed in a completely different state.
Lastly, DJT didn’t invite anything on J6. That was the doing of the covert agents in the crowd aided by Capital Police.
You lose too.
You’re dismissed along with ✏️ Richard.
And YET…absolutely, positively, NO election was in fact, “overthrown.”
Oh, so if you fail to get any money during a bank robbery because the safe won’t open, then no harm, no foul. Even if the bank robbers are a few black guys. Right?
like a $2 hooker on PMS night.
So that’s how you met your wife.
Easy to claim, harder to prove.
Unemployed former enlisted guy with correspondence degree vs. former Federal Judge and successful lawyer who was in close proximity to the White House and the Supreme Court over a 50 year legal career. Gee, I wonder who is right.
-->
@FLRW
TWS is a proud member of the disabled peanut gallery
And YET…absolutely, positively, NO election was in fact, “overthrown.”Oh, so if you fail to get any money during a bank robbery
Oh look, an ignorant false equivalency fallacy 😂
Corporate lawyer who went back to being a corporate lawyer after he got off the bench. When you become a judge it is day in and day out OJT. Judges don’t know everything under the Sun, let alone everything about each branch of law.
Your childish characterization of me proves that your ED keeps getting in the way of any semblance or measure of intelligence.
Your fallacious appeal to a false authority demonstrates your intellectual cowardice denialism.
You’re still wrong. I’m factually accurate. And that just annoys the FUCK out of you, doesn’t it!!!
Yup. The fact I am right and you and your false authority are wrong really does piss you the FUCK off!!!
Easy to tell when you being another man’s wife into the debate in a disparaging way. Speaks volumes about YOU! But hey, as if any “all talk and no action” moderator here would even care that that ad hom definitely crosses the line, they don’t do shit about it.
So this factually accurate legal analysis doesn’t get lost amongst IWRA’s bullshit whining and Sidewalkwr’s “Cry Racism” Syndrome and FLRW’s inanity.
JFC, this subject was already covered and I shut it down with actual legal facts and proper analysis of the 14th Section 3. Again…
14th Amendment, Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office:
"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."
First key legal term in that criteria is "shall": Shall is an imperative command, usually indicating that certain actions are mandatory, and not permissive.
Second key term here is "engaged": involved in activity; involved especially in a hostile encounter
Third key term, and its legal definition thereof is, "insurrection": A rebellion of citizens or subjects of a country against its government.
- Rebellion: The taking up arms traitorously against the government and in another, and perhaps a more correct sense, rebellion signifies the forcible opposition and resistance to the laws and process lawfully issued.
The final legal term (phrase) in that criteria is "giving aid and comfort to the enemy": SECTION 3. Clause 1. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court.
"The two branches of treason, "levying war," and "adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort," are distinct, and do not embody synonymous actions."
"The term 'enemies,' as used in the second clause, according to its settled meaning, at the time the Constitution was adopted, applies only to the subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us. It does not embrace rebels in insurrection against their own government."
"...whereas giving aid and comfort is generally committed in connection with a war waged against the United States by a foreign power."
President Donald J. Trump did NOT (shall have) directly engage in an armed insurrection "in a hostile encounter" against the United States Constitution for which he gave oath to support. Equally, President Donald J. Trump did NOT give aid and comfort to the enemy since there was no enemy (a foreign power) to give aid and comfort to on January 6, 2020. More importantly, the United States Government via the F.B.I.emphatically declared that J6 was NOT an insurrection. Nor was President Donald J. Trump charged with inciting a riotand/or directly engaging in said riot that was facilitated by FBI agents placed within the J6 crowd and Capitol Police who aided in the breach of the Capitol.
"The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials."
No insurrection, as such no rebellion either.
No enemies (agents of a foreign power) were present at the events of J6 either. Therefore, no enemies for anyone to give aid and comfort thereto.
The 14th Amendment, Section 3, does not apply where President Donald J. Trump is concerned.
He can and will likely serve another term as POTUS.
Speaks volumes about YOU! But hey, as if any “all talk and no action” moderator here would even care that that ad hom definitely crosses the line, they don’t do shit about it.
You’re the one who brought up the $2 hooker.
You reap what you sow LCpl.
So this factually accurate legal analysis doesn’t get lost amongst IWRA’s bullshit whining and Sidewalkwr’s “Cry Racism” Syndrome and FLRW’s inanity.
“factually accurate legal analysis” lol
By an unemployed former army enlisted guy. Oh yeah!
Yes, it reads much better a second time.
shall - engaged - woman - man - camera - tv lol
Your impotence knows no bounds.
PS. The $2 hooker was a metaphor, it wasn’t literal let alone directed at an actual person. YOU and your ignorance of what a metaphor is, turned it personal and worthy of action as a clear cut violation of the CoC. But like I said, the moderators are impotent just like you, Fanchick!
I seriously doubt the MSM boob-tube watcher crowd will stop for a hot minute to wonder why Trump has never, and never will be charged with insurrection.
-->
@n8nrgim
Not at least until a conviction
-->
@Vegasgiants
There won’t be any conviction for it since he has never - ans will never be - charged with insurrection.
correct
-->
@TWS1405_2
if the situation is as your legal argument presents, then of course trump shouldn't be disqualified. but are you sure that your definition of rebellion is the same as it was during the time the constitution was written? the definition you present makes armed rebellion part of what 'rebellion' means. obviously, just reading words as they are, that might not be how the people who wrote it intended.
-->
@n8nrgim
Imagine if the government declared the million man march an "unarmed rebellion"
You have to be extremely careful not to discourage democratic protests in order to preserve democracy (in theory)
-->
@n8nrgim
It’s factually accurate.
BTW, it was written in 1787 and the 14th passed in 1866. There was no change in the definition of what a rebellion was as it was know. From its roots to Shay’s Rebellion (1786-1787) being fresh on the Founder’s minds.
obviously, just reading words as they are, that might not be how the people who wrote it intended.
And this is why everyone is getting it wrong, to include corporate and tax layers filing motions on 14:3, they’re doing a plain reading and they know better. Plain (layman) readings is why everyone is making a frivolous TDS asshole of themselves.
-->
@TWS1405_2
that's a great point if it's true. sounds like you r right that trump shouldn't be disqualified.
Your impotence knows no bounds.
My impotence? You’re the one who doesn’t have any kids, lol
It’s called birth control, it’s been around since ancient Egyptian times. Clearly you never heard of it. And the meaning of life isn’t about having kids, it’s just about living your best regardless of what choices you make.
And I am sure I am correct in saying, most of us here having to deal with your sophomoric banality feel sorry for your demon offspring.
-->
@n8nrgim
…if it’s true…🤦♂️
It is true.
I am right.
Everyone who claims otherwise is an ignorant fool.
I’ll give you credit for conceding the point of the legal analysis provided.
I seriously doubt the MSM boob-tube watcher crowd will stop for a hot minute to wonder why Trump has never, and never will be charged with insurrection.
As opposed to the Jimmy Dore YouTube watcher crowd? The media that the average (actually below average) MAGA moron uses is a reflection of their weak mindedness
legal analysis
Lol
It’s called birth control,
I didn’t think a eunuch needed birth control
There won’t be any conviction for it since he has never - ans will never be - charged with insurrection.
How many confederates from the American Civil War were charged with insurrection? Zero
But that didn’t stop the 14th Amendment from being applied to many Confederate leaders
This why Trump will go to prison. On Jan. 6 he said "Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election." 5 people died.
From Andrew Mitrovica
These days, I believe the inconceivable is conceivable: Trump, I am more than hopeful, will be jailed. Look at the number and breadth of the charges set out with surgical precision in persuasive indictment after persuasive indictment. Taken together, they catalogue a crime spree that constitutes a “criminal enterprise” of breathtaking scope, with the intent to silence his accusers, hoard a cache of sensitive documents, incite an insurrection to prevent Congress from certifying Joe Biden as president, and subvert the democratic will of millions of voters in Georgia and beyond.
The 91 stiff, uncompromising charges are immune to Trump’s screeching outbursts and tired shenanigans meant to dilute and distract from the inevitable consequences of the barrage of felonies that he will, in due and steady course, be compelled to answer for.
Fox News cannot save him. His loud, obnoxious family and surrogates cannot save him. Neither will the imprisoned fanatics now holed up in jail for having stormed the Capitol at their patron saint’s sinister, self-serving urging.
The 91 stiff, uncompromising charges are immune to Trump’s screeching outbursts and tired shenanigans meant to dilute and distract from the inevitable consequences of the barrage of felonies that he will, in due and steady course, be compelled to answer for.
Fox News cannot save him. His loud, obnoxious family and surrogates cannot save him. Neither will the imprisoned fanatics now holed up in jail for having stormed the Capitol at their patron saint’s sinister, self-serving urging.
-->
@TWS1405_2
JFC, this subject was already covered and I shut it down with actual legal facts and proper analysis of the 14th Section 3. Again…
Third key term, and its legal definition thereof is, "insurrection": A rebellion of citizens or subjects of a country against its government.
- Rebellion: The taking up arms traitorously against the government and in another, and perhaps a more correct sense, rebellion signifies the forcible opposition and resistance to the laws and process lawfully issued.
You are presenting a legal argument that your own definitions do not support.
First, you seem to be relying on the idea that arms = guns, which is not true. Arms simply means weapons, and the rioters who broke into the capitol carried all kinds of weapons from mace, flag poles, hell even the riot shields they stole from the capitol police.
Second and more importantly, you ignored the second part of your own definition of rebellion which specified it's main qualifier ("perhaps a more correct sense") as a "forcible opposition and resistance to the laws and process lawfully issued". That couldn't describe what occurred on January 6th any more perfectly.
Moreover, you seem to not understand the entire point of the 14th amendment - it was passed in the aftermath of the civil war. It's entire point at conception was to stop Americans who tried to overthrow our constitution for running for office. That's literally what Trump did, so the argument that it couldn't apply to him because the rioters were not a foreign power is absurd on its face.
More importantly, the United States Government via the F.B.I.emphatically declared that J6 was NOT an insurrection.
"Or rebellion..."
Nor was President Donald J. Trump charged with inciting a riotand/or directly engaging in said riot
There is nothing about the 14th amendment requiring this.
that was facilitated by FBI agents placed within the J6 crowd and Capitol Police who aided in the breach of the Capitol.
Cause when all else fails, go full blown Alex Jones on us.
Former Proud Boys leader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, described by a judge as “the ultimate leader” who “was motivated by revolutionary zeal” in organizing members of his far-right group to spark the breach of the U.S. Capitol, was sentenced Tuesday to 22 years in prison, the longest sentence yet among the hundreds convicted of disrupting the peaceful transfer of presidential power on Jan. 6, 2021.
Tarrio wasn’t in DC during the attack on the Capital. This proves you don’t have to physically participate in the insurrection to be guilty of seditious conspiracy.
Trump should be banned from running for office under the 14th Amendment and of course he should go to jail, just like Tarrio