Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have lost respect for all three branches of our government, and their bastardization of the Constitution.

Isn't it horrifying how one man can wreck all of our institutions because...of his strong personality?

It's pitiful. The Supreme Court is pititful.

No one has been charged let alone convicted of insurrection.

So?

Here is the text of the Fourteenth Amendment (it doesn't say anything about being charged or convicted):

Section 3.
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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t take it anymore. Trump is winning. The bully is winning

Nah. Look, the Supreme Court will vote to ignore the 14th Amendment. Believe that. It's just too politically inconvenient for them to abide by its text and original intent. So, he'll "win" this particular case I guess.

But we're talking about insurrection again. We're talking about how he violently tried to overthrow the government. So that chips away at some portion of voters who think they can vote for him and still think of themselves as a good citizen. That has value. Bringing this case has value. Keep fighting, and his house of cards will fall.

That makes no sense. Voters will see this as a victory of absolution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can’t take it anymore. Trump is winning. The bully is winning

Nah. Look, the Supreme Court will vote to ignore the 14th Amendment. Believe that. It's just too politically inconvenient for them to abide by its text and original intent. So, he'll "win" this particular case I guess.

But we're talking about insurrection again. We're talking about how he violently tried to overthrow the government. So that chips away at some portion of voters who think they can vote for him and still think of themselves as a good citizen. That has value. Bringing this case has value. Keep fighting, and his house of cards will fall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was always very obvious SCOTUS wasn't going to disqualify him. They are rank partisans. That's why I don't understand why these people even bothered to bring this case. All it does is give Trump a new talking point.

I didn't think there was anything to this. Until I looked at the 14th amendment. It's written there, clearly spelled out. Trump is disqualified.

Is this a fringe argument? Nope. It's one of the most important amendments to the constitution.

Except for the fact that the amendment refers to officers not the president.

Yes just like the constitution does not say Obama can not be president again. It refers to person not Obama.

This argument is like saying a court in a single state can decide for itself that Obama wasn’t born in the US and strike him from the ballot and Congress couldn’t do anything about it. I don’t think the court will allow states to determine the qualifications for presidency, only congress can. Let’s see how they rule - I have no doubt Colorado will lose, but curious what the rationale they decide upon will be.

Anonymous wrote:It was over when Justice Kagan said, “why does Colorado get to decide.”

It was downhill from there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty clear threat by the SC Justices that Republican states are going to use this to disqualify Democrat candidates en masse, if the Court disqualifies Trump.

Sure, if a Dem participated in an insurrection, they should be dq'd. I don't think any Dem is disagreeing with that.

Republicans are arguing that they, the Republicans, will make bad faith accusations against Democrats.

And that there would be no limiting factor to prevent them.

Well, let's inject common sense here. They won't impeach Biden and they won't impeach Mayorkas. No one is going to slap an insurrection disability on a random candidate who clearly has not engaged in insurrection. Most people on both sides of the aisle do live in the same reality and understand they need evidence in court.

So no, I don't think red states can just push out any Democrat they want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point it does not seem like there is a constitution anymore. SCOTUS is a kabuki theater of right wing judges parsing language from the constitution together in such a way to make the constitution meaningless.

It shows the total corruption of the court.

Please. This 14th amendment nonsense seems like such a desperate grasping at straws. And I’m a Never Trumper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point it does not seem like there is a constitution anymore. SCOTUS is a kabuki theater of right wing judges parsing language from the constitution together in such a way to make the constitution meaningless.

It shows the total corruption of the court.

Please. This 14th amendment nonsense seems like such a desperate grasping at straws. And I’m a Never Trumper.

Nor do you grasp what it means to be a nation of laws.

Or are you in favor of going back to having slavery? If we're going to ignore the Fourteenth Amendment as nonsense?

DP.
I think pp was saying that CO's interpretation and decision regarding the 14th Amendment in this case is nonsense.
I agree.

You really think the Fourteenth is is nonsense? All of it? Or just the one section?

I think the CO case that has invoked the 14th is nonsense.
It is.

Anonymous wrote:It was over when Justice Kagan said, “why does Colorado get to decide.”

It was downhill from there.

Anonymous wrote:It was over when Justice Kagan said, “why does Colorado get to decide.”

It was downhill from there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point it does not seem like there is a constitution anymore. SCOTUS is a kabuki theater of right wing judges parsing language from the constitution together in such a way to make the constitution meaningless.

It shows the total corruption of the court.

Please. This 14th amendment nonsense seems like such a desperate grasping at straws. And I’m a Never Trumper.

Nor do you grasp what it means to be a nation of laws.

Or are you in favor of going back to having slavery? If we're going to ignore the Fourteenth Amendment as nonsense?

DP.
I think pp was saying that CO's interpretation and decision regarding the 14th Amendment in this case is nonsense.
I agree.

You really think the Fourteenth is is nonsense? All of it? Or just the one section?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point it does not seem like there is a constitution anymore. SCOTUS is a kabuki theater of right wing judges parsing language from the constitution together in such a way to make the constitution meaningless.

It shows the total corruption of the court.

Please. This 14th amendment nonsense seems like such a desperate grasping at straws. And I’m a Never Trumper.

Nor do you grasp what it means to be a nation of laws.

Or are you in favor of going back to having slavery? If we're going to ignore the Fourteenth Amendment as nonsense?

DP.
I think pp was saying that CO's interpretation and decision regarding the 14th Amendment in this case is nonsense.
I agree.

Anonymous wrote:At this point it does not seem like there is a constitution anymore. SCOTUS is a kabuki theater of right wing judges parsing language from the constitution together in such a way to make the constitution meaningless.

It shows the total corruption of the court.