- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/5/24 at 8:58 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Where is it mentioned that this is a requirement? Because it's not in the Constitution. May as well ask which Court found Trump guilty of landing on the moon, since it carries the same weight.
Ok, so if insurrection is a political question and not a criminal matter then Joe Biden and many Democrats are guilty of insurrection.
Posted on 1/5/24 at 9:39 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
What was the point of the protest?
None is required by the first amendment. Nor proscribed by it.
But what was the point. What were they hoping to do? What was the ultimate outcome?
Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
Posted on 1/5/24 at 9:47 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
But what was the point. What were they hoping to do? What was the ultimate outcome?
Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
You are the reason why bad speech needs to be made with more speech. Not less.
You may be the biggest idiot in the land.
Posted on 1/5/24 at 10:24 pm to BamaAtl
quote:None of that matters. The right to protest creme filled donuts is as protected as the right to protest over George Floyd.
But what was the point. What were they hoping to do? What was the ultimate outcome?
quote:
Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
Nah. And the fact that they were dispersed in a matter minutes makes that painfully evident to anyone with a functional brain. People trying to overthrow a government come armed. And have a plan. At least. Neither were present. Posted on 1/6/24 at 12:28 am to jatilen
As if the Russia collusion coup attempt wasn’t flagrant enough, leftists are now simply striking him from the ballot. This should be terrifying to a western democracy. This is banana republic shite. But democrats are in lockstep support bc the ends always justify the means for them.
This post was edited on 1/6/24 at 12:34 am
Posted on 1/6/24 at 12:34 am to BamaAtl
quote:
But what was the point. What were they hoping to do? What was the ultimate outcome? Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
Oh please. No functioning adult brain can possibly think those Jan 6 goofballs were seriously overthrowing anything. They were allowed in, were almost all unarmed, and were having a good time goofing off and taking selfies.
Is that really what you think a real “insurrection” would look like? You have the impressionable mind of a child, if so.
You know what the real “insurrection” was? It was that coup attempt based on Russia collusion lies.
Your people would be ashamed, if you were capable of shame, of the treason and division you’ve caused.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:41 am to baybeefeetz
quote:
States can, like, put you in jail, take away your voting rights, and execute you… with due process
Yep, subject to what standard? A criminal standard ... is that what happened here?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 3:57 am to BamaAtl
quote:
It's very clear that Section 3 is self-executing and Section 5 doesn't require them to make specific laws.
Sometimes people are so stupid as to be beyond redemption. You are one of the few. Be proud.
What you wrote above shows how stupid you are. Section 5 does not require (big word) congress to make a specific law. But, (another big word). They did! See if your brain can process that. And.. if you can, since congress passed a law, explain why it was not applied in Colorado? Not even addressed.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:02 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Your problem isn't with my understanding, it's with multiple judges in multiple states and their understanding.
I have witnessed people make unbelievably stupid and flat out wrong arguments in courts over the years. This is another example.
Do you want to bet a million dollars that no judge in any state other than Colorado, as of today has made a ruling of insurrection against trump to keep him off the ballot.
Otherwise, you should just shut up
Posted on 1/6/24 at 4:17 am to BamaAtl
quote:Hint: Unconstitutional electoral processes do not jibe with "a lawfully elected government."
Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
quote:• The point was to get Mike Pence to grow a set.
But what was the point.
• The point was to get Mike Pence to take advantage of a legal loophole in the Electoral College process.
• The point was for Mike Pence to simply leave elector envelopes from controversial states unopened.
• Leaving controversial states' envelopes unopened would result in both candidates falling shy of the electoral total requisite for election, thus sending the matter to the House where there might be an actual investigation of a very shady election.
THAT was the point, airhead.
FWIW, if you obtained your news from a place other than the inside of Anderson Cooper's pants, you'd have not needed to ask the question in the first place.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 5:48 am to jatilen
We are about to see how much of an Activist the new one is ,but even she would have trouble justifying this to stand. It should be a unanimous ruling. This will be either a unanimous or 8-1 ruling. I don't even think Wise Latina and Bull Dyke will even go there.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 7:29 am to dakarx
quote:
Even if SCOTUS says they can't do that, how would they enforce their ruling if CO decides they know better?
Well...that has always been the rub. As Jackson was quoted as saying, "Justice Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it" in response to its decision in Worcester v. Georgia (indian removal [Cherokee]), the SCOTUS has not enforcement mechanism on its own - it must rely on the Executive to enforce it (see also use of federalized National Guard/Army to enforce Brown v. Board of Education in Southern states).
But, if the fabric of this nation is to truly unravel over this, may as well get it over with.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:15 am to BamaAtl
quote:
But what was the point. What were they hoping to do? What was the ultimate outcome?
Hint: it was overthrowing a lawfully elected government.
There are some really ignorant people on this board. There are some that are ignorant to the word of law. Then there is BamaAtl which is not only oblivious to rational thought but also makes pond scum look like Albert Einstein. I have seen some stupid post here but without a doubt she takes the blue ribbon for dumbest post in the history of the internet.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:15 am to stelly1025
quote:Republicans (like me) always hope for the best. Unfortunately, being hopeful mandates a certain amount of faith in the goodness of mankind and that nefarious people couldn't possibly be installed in positions of such great power.
This will be either a unanimous or 8-1 ruling.
As we've seen since JAN20, 2021, we can make mistakes. The left side of the court is so beholden to their appointers that they simply will not yield to reason - or the Constitution. They are willing to wage the appearance of stupidity to foster anarchy. 6-3
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:18 am to jatilen
What's it going to take to tie all the cases together?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:27 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
The right to protest creme filled donuts is as protected as the right to protest over George Floyd.
But the right to attempt to overthrow the government is not protected, and excludes anyone who does it (or offers aid/comfort to those who did) from running for federal office again.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:27 am to BamaAtl
quote:
hint:%20it%20was%20overthrowing%20a%20lawfully%20elected%20government.
So the legality of a protest is based on rule of the mob?
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:29 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Unconstitutional electoral processes
Which did not occur - everything in the 2020 election was legal, per the dozens of lawsuits that MAGA lost in court.
We know you feel that this isn't the case, but facts don't care about your feelings.
quote:
The point was to get Mike Pence to grow a set.
Grow a set to overthrow the government? That's why Trump is excluded from the ballot.
quote:
The point was to get Mike Pence to take advantage of a legal loophole in the Electoral College process.
This loophole didn't exist, except in the fever dreams of John Eastman, soon to be ex-attorney.
Posted on 1/6/24 at 8:30 am to BamaAtl
quote:
attempt to overthrow the government i
How can you think an unarmed protest was an attempt to overthrow anything? It was to be heard, that frickery was afoot. But you guys don’t like dissent, just rule of the mob. When you are the mob. You love to protest stupid shite like hog farms, removing books about butt fricking from elementary schools, career criminals getting arrested…but allah forbid people question an election?
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News