Liberal Forum

Skans » 05 Jan 2024, 10:25 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:25 am

There are a number of problems relying on that constitutional provision for disqualifying Trump and keeping him off the ballot:

• First and foremost, there was no trial, no conviction, not even an indictment.  Without a conviction for a felony, yes, it is very similar to what happened in "those other cases".   I would agree with you, however, if Trump was tried and convicted of a felony.
• Second, Trump did not actually violate Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.  The facts just don't bare this out in the historical context of what that provision had been used for in the past.

First and foremost, there was no trial, no conviction, not even an indictment.  Without a conviction for a felony

There was a trial, and an appeal.

SECTION 3 DOES NOT REQUIRE A CONVICTION.

Stop listening to idiots suggesting otherwise.

Second, Trump did not actually violate Section 3 of the 14th Amendment

That is EXACTLY what the Colorado courts concluded.

Buffalo » 05 Jan 2024, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:22 am

It doesn't apply to Trump case EITHER!!!

Look up Charles S. Thomas, dick sucker!!!

Two state courts have determined that it does.

If Thomas matters, you'll have to tell me why.
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am

There was a trial, and an appeal.

SECTION 3 DOES NOT REQUIRE A CONVICTION.

Stop listening to idiots suggesting otherwise.

That is EXACTLY what the Colorado courts concluded.

There was no criminal trial.  Civil trials are a far cry different from Criminal trials.  You can't take away someone's rights based upon a civil trial.  Don't believe me?  Let's see what the Supreme Court will have to say about that.  I reckon it will have a lot to say about that.  But, we'll have to wait and see.
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 10:08 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:08 am

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is there for a reason, Zeet.

We aren't here to cater to your Daddy Issues.

So tell us, nitwit.  When has Trump EVER even been charged with insurrection, let alone been found guilty of such a crime?

Or are you that strongly opposed to the 5th Amendment of the Constitution, stupidly believing that Trump does not have the same God-given right as any other citizen?:
5th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.
 

Zeets2 » 05 Jan 2024, 10:41 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:41 am

So tell us, nitwit.  When has Trump EVER even been charged with insurrection, let alone been found guilty of such a crime?

Or are you that strongly opposed to the 5th Amendment of the Constitution, stupidly believing that Trump does not have the same God-given right as any other citizen?:
5th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment doesn't require a conviction to disqualify a traitor..
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 10:37 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:37 am

Two state courts have determined that it does.

If Thomas matters, you'll have to tell me why.

You obviously don't know who the **** he is, dick sucker!!!

The CO SC are nothing but partisan HYPOCRITES!!!

 

maineman » 05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am

and, as has been noted here on more than one occasion, people have been disqualified for public office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment without ever being convicted of any crime.

Right, I noted that you were bitch-slapped into oblivion when you posted the same nonsense previously.
 

Buffalo » 05 Jan 2024, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:48 am

You obviously don't know who the **** he is, dick sucker!!!

The CO SC are nothing but partisan HYPOCRITES!!!

Why should I care?

RebelGator » 05 Jan 2024, 10:55 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:55 am

Right, I noted that you were bitch-slapped into oblivion when you posted the same nonsense previously.

That's ****.

 
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:01 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:01 am

That's ****.

You don't **** from bulimia, fat boy.

Skans » 05 Jan 2024, 10:40 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:40 am

There was no criminal trial.  Civil trials are a far cry different from Criminal trials.  You can't take away someone's rights based upon a civil trial.  Don't believe me?  Let's see what the Supreme Court will have to say about that.  I reckon it will have a lot to say about that.  But, we'll have to wait and see.

There was no criminal trial

None required to disqualify under Section 3.

Civil trials are a far cry different from Criminal trials.  You can't take away someone's rights based upon a civil trial. 

There is no "right" to be on a ballot.

Don't believe me? 

You have no idea what you're going on about.

Let's see what the Supreme Court will have to say about that.

won't even come up.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:31 am

There was a trial, and an appeal.

SECTION 3 DOES NOT REQUIRE A CONVICTION.

Stop listening to idiots suggesting otherwise.

That is EXACTLY what the Colorado courts concluded.

Are you sure?

Section 5 of the 14th states: "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."  Congress has codified insurrection into the US Code as a crime.  Since the event happened at the US Capital, it is a federal crime.  State courts don't have the authority investigate or adjudicate federal matters.  The fact that insurrection is part of the US Code also brings Section 1 of the 14th into play...due process.

This is just one of several constitutional questions that need to be addressed.

This is where you strike through the post because it causes you emotional distress.  Carry on.

RebelGator » 05 Jan 2024, 10:55 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:55 am

Right, I noted that you were bitch-slapped into oblivion when you posted the same nonsense previously.

Au contraire mon frère.  There is nothing nonsensical about it.  It is a totally true statement.

The public position the people were disqualified from is irrelevant.  The principle remains the same.

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:10 am

Are you sure?

Section 5 of the 14th states: "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."  Congress has codified insurrection into the US Code as a crime.  Since the event happened at the US Capital, it is a federal crime.  State courts don't have the authority investigate or adjudicate federal matters.  The fact that insurrection is part of the US Code also brings Section 1 of the 14th into play...due process.

This is just one of several constitutional questions that need to be addressed.

This is where you strike through the post because it causes you emotional distress.  Carry on.

Bugger off...

You actually floated the "Double Jeopardy" idiocy.

You renember what you're told to believe in great detail, but not the name of a single soul who told you.

You have excuses for not answering questions, but believe you answer questions.

You believe you must be answered, without condition, but only answer conditionally.

You consistently welsh on your pledges, while you insist on getting yours "up front".

Have this exchange with a peer....some quivering ******, like
@Huey  ​​​​or @Vegas  
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:22 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:22 am

Bugger off...

You actually floated the "Double Jeopardy" idiocy.

You renember what you're told to believe in great detail, but not the name of a single soul who told you.

You have excuses for not answering questions, but believe you answer questions.

You believe you must be answered, without condition, but only answer conditionally.

You consistently welsh on your pledges, while you insist on getting yours "up front".

Have this exchange with a peer....some quivering ******, like
@Huey  ​​​​or @Vegas  
 

 

I am not participating in the thread, Stalky.

Huey » 05 Jan 2024, 11:23 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:23 am

I am not participating in the thread, Stalky.

You should, because you too are a ******.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:00 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:00 am

Why should I care?

because the dim-0-crap partisan CO SC is HYPOCRITICAL!!!  According to them the 14th only applies to their republican political rivals.

Charles S. Thomas of Colorado was the last Confederate veteran to serve in the Senate. Born in Georgia, he served briefly as a teenager in the Confederate Army. He settled in Denver after the war, where he built a law practice and pursued a Senate career. Following three failed attempts to gain a Senate seat, the 63-year-old Thomas finally became a U.S. senator in 1913, a position he held until 1921. During his years in the Senate, Thomas became known for a rather unconventional habit that marked the arrival of springtime in the Senate Chamber.

He was also governor of Colorado from 1899-1900.



 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 10:48 am

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment doesn't require a conviction to disqualify a traitor..

You're correct.  It doesn't need to, because indictment of such a charge like treason AND CONVICTION is required to be found guilty of such a crime.

So when was Trump even charged with insurrection?  
How come the other phony charges were filed against him but not for THAT far more serious assumed treasonous crime?
Obviously, there was ZERO evidence to support such an idiotic charge, or your beloved Democrats would certainly have done so!

Apparently, you don't believe Trump is entitled to have the God-given freedom under the 6th Amendment either, do you?
Or do you believe a dolt like you can take away the rights given to Trump by God?
Is there any other explanation for your ignorance?
 

Buffalo » 05 Jan 2024, 11:32 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:32 am

because the dim-0-crap partisan CO SC is HYPOCRITICAL!!!  According to them the 14th only applies to their republican political rivals.

Charles S. Thomas of Colorado was the last Confederate veteran to serve in the Senate. Born in Georgia, he served briefly as a teenager in the Confederate Army. He settled in Denver after the war, where he built a law practice and pursued a Senate career. Following three failed attempts to gain a Senate seat, the 63-year-old Thomas finally became a U.S. senator in 1913, a position he held until 1921. During his years in the Senate, Thomas became known for a rather unconventional habit that marked the arrival of springtime in the Senate Chamber.

He was also governor of Colorado from 1899-1900.

A complete waste of time.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:34 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:34 am

A complete waste of time.

Go **** yourself, it might be the best ****** you ever had!!! BYE!!!