Liberal Forum

Zeets2 » 05 Jan 2024, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:33 am

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?

Sec 3 doesn't even require an indictment to disqualify.
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:24 am

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

 

Some is in Melt Down Mode.  You go ahead and hijack another thread on your own.  Now, Control Freak, you not only want to control a thread, you want to control what threads a poster participates in.

You need help, Lonely Old Guy.

Trumpyist...just what we need.

Another retread Neocon and all his retread Bush trannies.....

Huey » 05 Jan 2024, 11:37 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:37 am

Some is in Melt Down Mode.  You go ahead and hijack another thread on your own.  Now, Control Freak, you not only want to control a thread, you want to control what threads a poster participates in.

You need help, Lonely Old Guy.

There's a meltdown going on alright....

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 told you I didn't remember if I read it or heard in on a broadcast...or when, in the last 7 months I ran across it.  That was the answer to your question/challenge then, and it's the answer today. There is no requirement that you like the answers I give you.  That probably comes as a shock to your system, but that's your **** problem, not mine.

No, you can either be an adult, get past the disappointment of not liking an answer you are given, and discuss it issue or run away whimpering like one of the puppies you continuously abuse sexually.  The choice is entirely yours.

 

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 12:01 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:01 pm

I told you I didn't remember if I read it or heard in on a broadcast...or when, in the last 7 months I ran across it.  That was the answer to your question/challenge then, and it's the answer today. There is no requirement that you like the answers I give you.  That probably comes as a shock to your system, but that's your **** problem, not mine.

No, you can either be an adult, get past the disappointment of not liking an answer you are given, and discuss it issue or run away whimpering like one of the puppies you continuously abuse sexually.  The choice is entirely yours.

There isn't a **** chance in Hell that you are entertaining the authority of so many you cannot name.

If you're gonna try to carry their water, name them.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:12 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:12 pm

There isn't a **** chance in Hell that you are entertaining the authority of so many you cannot name.

If you're gonna try to carry their water, name them.

Believe as you wish.
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:12 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:12 pm

There isn't a **** chance in Hell that you are entertaining the authority of so many you cannot name.

If you're gonna try to carry their water, name them.
 

Just courios...I don't remember the names of my history and civics teachers/professors, does that mean I cannot discuss history and/or civics?

I also don't remember the names of all my professors in college, does that mean I can no longer work in my chosen profession?

 

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:17 pm

Just courios...I don't remember the names of my history and civics teachers/professors, does that mean I cannot discuss history and/or civics?

I also don't remember the names of all my professors in college, does that mean I can no longer work in my chosen profession?

The Colorado decision was handed down in Dec. 2023.

It doesn't require a prodigious feat of memory, in fact, completely forgetting every one is quite an impressive show of unawareness.
 

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 12:15 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:15 pm

Believe as you wish.

Watch this...


List your principal sources for news, and I'll tell you whose arm is up your *** moving your lips.

But, of course, here again you will lie.
 

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 11:09 am » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 11:09 am

None required to disqualify under Section 3.

 

According to what authority?

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

Citizens have a right to free and fair elections.  And, that includes a right to be on a ballot. Just like a right to bare arms includes a right to have ammo.

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

Vapid, empty argument. No reply necessary.


 

Skans » 05 Jan 2024, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:32 pm

According to what authority?

Citizens have a right to free and fair elections.  And, that includes a right to be on a ballot. Just like a right to bare arms includes a right to have ammo.

Vapid, empty argument. No reply necessary.

Read Section 3.

No one has a right to appear on a ballot.

Just like a right to bare arms

Kill yourself.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:34 pm

Read Section 3.

No one has a right to appear on a ballot.


 

I have Section 3 memorized, don't need to read it.

You read the Amendment XII: "The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President..." 
Then read Amendment XIV.  The 14th Amendment protects the fundamental right to vote and bars states from needlessly imposing substantial burdens on that right.

Go get a pocket constitution.  Study it.  Understand it.  And, memorize it, ****.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:25 pm

Watch this...

List your principal sources for news, and I'll tell you whose arm is up your *** moving your lips.

But, of course, here again you will lie.
 

If you've already decided I will lie, why should I bother?

Just so you don't whine about not being answered, I (from time to time) check out the sites of CBS, NBC and ABC.  I will also check out the Washington Time, USA Today, NY Post, and the finance and news sections on Yahoo. If I happen to see something that looks interesting (or relates to something I recently read or heard) I will follow an occasional stray link in hopes of getting a different perspective.  Understand, I don't visit all those sites every day and there are others every now and then...but they are the primary sources and provide topics I want to dig into occasionally. 

Then, unfortunately, since my wife and I live with and care for her 99 year old mother who guards the TV remote like it was the key to a vault full of gold, I get way too much exposure to CNNLOL and MSNBS...but admittedly I am almost always halfway listening (at best) to those while doing other things.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:34 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:34 pm

Read Section 3.

No one has a right to appear on a ballot.

Kill yourself.
 

Section 3 does not mention ballots.
 

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 ASSWIPE CUMSUCK, tell us WHO can "remove the disability" from persons the 14th amendment says can't be elected if they were involved in an INSURRECTION???

ANSWER THIS QUESTION OR SHUT THE **** UP!!! NONE OF YOUR **** OR ANYTHING, BUT A SIMPLE ANSWER!!!

 

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 12:43 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:43 pm

If you've already decided I will lie, why should I bother?

Just so you don't whine about not being answered, I (from time to time) check out the sites of CBS, NBC and ABC.  I will also check out the Washington Time, USA Today, NY Post, and the finance and news sections on Yahoo. If I happen to see something that looks interesting (or relates to something I recently read or heard) I will follow an occasional stray link in hopes of getting a different perspective.  Understand, I don't visit all those sites every day and there are others every now and then...but they are the primary sources and provide topics I want to dig into occasionally. 

Then, unfortunately, since my wife and I live with and care for her 99 year old mother who guards the TV remote like it was the key to a vault full of gold, I get way too much exposure to CNNLOL and MSNBS...but admittedly I am almost always halfway listening (at best) to those while doing other things.

Please stop.

The first item, "double jeopardy", is direct from a TrumpCo recatapulter...no one with a professional reputation would float it. It's ******* Raw Meat for the Faithful.

Of those you list only the Post or Moonie Times would peddle it.

Probably in an unsigned piece.



 

Beekeeper » 05 Jan 2024, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:45 pm

So ASSWIPE CUMSUCK, tell us WHO can "remove the disability" from persons the 14th amendment says can't be elected if they were involved in an INSURRECTION???

ANSWER THIS QUESTION OR SHUT THE **** UP!!! NONE OF YOUR **** OR ANYTHING, BUT A SIMPLE ANSWER!!!

Since Griffin is not considered a precedent, the matter is unclear.

I believe that Congress may restore on a case by case basis.

ConsRule » 05 Jan 2024, 12:44 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:44 pm

Section 3 does not mention ballots.

Hence a new paragraph.

R.Suave » 05 Jan 2024, 12:56 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jan 2024, 12:56 pm

Since Griffin is not considered a precedent, the matter is unclear.

I believe that Congress may restore on a case by case basis.

Oh, so you AGREE that CONGRESS can enact legislation that REMOVES this from being utilized against ANYONE!!

And for your information, ******* CUCKED ******, they did. 


 

And do you know what that means???

ALL AND THAT MEANS ALL OF YOUR **** JUST GOT GUTTED, FILETTED AND SEND TO THE CRAPPER TO NEVER BE SEEN AGAIN!!