- 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
re: Dems float 14th amendment to bar Trump from running "Conviction isn't needed to qualify"
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:08 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:08 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Some do. Some don't. They aren't a bloc any more than the GOP.
At one point they did because they thought he would be aneasy win.
Now with the polls and Biden losing support among POC they are terrified, they revealed all their cards. They know if they lose they'll get back what they dished out. Trump won't conceed to establishment stooges and avoid hurting norms as he did last time.
0
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:09 am to Giantkiller
quote:
Trump has been indicted 4 times, which if you believe the mainstream media, was completely bipartisan and was totally justified.
Theyve been after him since prior to the election.
No sane person actually believes this is non partisan and fair.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:09 am to RaoulDuke504
Already shot down by a Federal Judge who is an Obama appointee in FL. This ain't going to happen and SCOTUS will squash that shite with the quickness.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:11 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Of course, it is ALSO silent as to how participation in an "insurrection" might be determined or adjudicated.
So, how would it work? We don't know, but can draw some inferences.
Let's begin with illegal changes to state election law, pushed out by various SecsState to widen mail-in voting in an effort to open pathways for fraud.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:11 am to RaoulDuke504
This is only to make sure that Trump is the nominee as per Ronbots.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:13 am to AggieHank86
quote:
States choose their electors. Thus, the actual election would probably proceed as normal. There is certainly nothing in the 14th Amendment that would bar Trump from "running" or bar states from putting his name on their ballots. Of course, individual states might seek to exclude him from their ballots.
Imagine some states having a Trump on ballot and others not. No way could such an election be certified by Congress. I don't put it past Dems to attempt this, but imagine how much further it would divide our country. We aren't talking about a fringe candidate pulling 2 % in polls. They can't take away the peoples opportunity to make our own decisions without severe consequences.
Every move the Dems make against Trump further displays their contempt for this nation, our constitution, and the will of the people.
Whether for or against Trump, surely most can agree we don't need the Federal government trying to decide who THEY think we should vote for.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:14 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
They will end up making a deal with him
quote:
this entire fiasco is just to keep Trump out of the white house
They will end up making a deal with him. Just more election interference from the original Election Deniers.
This is an amazing opinion from a guy who has TDS, believes Trump is actually a Democrat, and will not vote for Trump.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:14 am to RaoulDuke504
This is tenuous at best, I would think they'd need a conviction ultimately to enforce it. You'll probably get some that try it but it won't go anywhere.
Of course I also felt nobody would think the vice president has the authority to overturn an election based on the constitution but some on here felt he did.
Partisans tend to see it the way they want too when they want too. And people on this board are prime examples of extreme partisans.
Of course I also felt nobody would think the vice president has the authority to overturn an election based on the constitution but some on here felt he did.
Partisans tend to see it the way they want too when they want too. And people on this board are prime examples of extreme partisans.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:15 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
They can't take away the peoples opportunity to make our own decisions without severe consequences.
This is why they will attempt to take down our election infrastructure via "foreign cyberattack" (from "rUsSiA", most likely) in an effort to postpone/derail the general election on Nov. 5, 2024.
Too bad Trump charged CISA with planning/implementation of a hard copy backup/poll books when he set it up in Aug 2019.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:17 am to stelly1025
quote:
Already shot down by a Federal Judge who is an Obama appointee in FL. This ain't going to happen and SCOTUS will squash that shite with the quickness.
They just keep pushing until they get a favorable judge. They’ll do it close enough to the election to where it won’t get to SCOTUS until after the election. Then you put SCOTUS in a situation where they would have to remove Biden from a second term and re-do an election. You think the judges want to be in that position.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:18 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Precisely where do you plan to get the votes even for articles of impeachment, much less a conviction?
Why is impeachment even necessary? According to your view, simply getting people to believe it is all that needs to be done. Quite a loophole progressives have found that you see as a valid and correct interpretation to everyone's surprise.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:19 am to tango029
quote:
This is tenuous at best, I would think they'd need a conviction ultimately to enforce it. You'll probably get some that try it but it won't go anywhere. Of course I also felt nobody would think the vice president has the authority to overturn an election based on the constitution but some on here felt he did. Partisans tend to see it the way they want too when they want too. And people on this board are prime examples of extreme partisans.
Give me one instance where Dems floated an idea to take down Trump where they didn’t actually go through with it?
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:22 am to RaoulDuke504
Reminder: He had been sworn into office less than an hour when the first Dem brain trust reps in Congress were talking about seeking impeachment.
CIA Washington Post - 12:19pm Jan 20, 2017 (19 minutes after Trump's first term began)
CIA Washington Post - 12:19pm Jan 20, 2017 (19 minutes after Trump's first term began)
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:23 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
No sane person actually believes this is non partisan and fair.
The national electorate sees a narrative being pushed every single night from ABC/NBC/CBS... even Fox. Trump has been indicted. Lester Holt tells them, George Stephanopoulos tells them, David Muir tells them. So it must be true. He broke laws. He's a criminal. It must be true.
When they start telling the country that this is the perfect use of the 14th amendment, and there's little Republican pushback, then it must be true too.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:23 am to RaoulDuke504
“You don’t have to be convicted, you just have to do these acts and your disqualified…”
How convenient. Put another way, “Trump is disqualified because I said so”
How convenient. Put another way, “Trump is disqualified because I said so”
This post was edited on 9/5/23 at 9:24 am
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:26 am to lake chuck fan
quote:Why? It has happened before. Lincoln was excluded from the ballot in ten states in 1860.
Imagine some states having a Trump on ballot and others not. No way could such an election be certified by Congress
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:26 am to RaoulDuke504
They are doing this to help Trump right?
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:30 am to GRTiger
quote:I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Sorry.
Why is impeachment even necessary? According to your view, simply getting people to believe it is all that needs to be done. Quite a loophole progressives have found that you see as a valid and correct interpretation to everyone's surprise.
You post here, so the chances are about 95% that you vote GOP. As such, the chances are also VERY high that (you at least think) you are a Textualist.
Look at the 14th Amendments and quote us the language that requires a "conviction" for "insurrection."
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:31 am to Giantkiller
quote:
The national electorate sees a narrative being pushed every single night from ABC/NBC/CBS... even Fox. Trump has been indicted. Lester Holt tells them, George Stephanopoulos tells them, David Muir tells them. So it must be true. He broke laws. He's a criminal. It must be true.
Most humans would rather agree with popular narratives than be right.
I have a hard time believing that deep down inside they cannot see the truth.
Posted on 9/5/23 at 9:31 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Precisely where do you plan to get the votes even for articles of impeachment, much less a conviction?
If the Dems open the door to "we'll just take people off the ballot with no court case or vote," Reps definitely should run through it. There are more states controlled by Rs than Ds. Just take the Dem candidates off the ballot for being members of a party that is engaging in lawless ballot removal and therefore attacking "our democracy." If we're going to burn the system down, then let's burn it down.
Page 2 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News