- 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: Roberts/SCOTUS needs to address this Trump shite right now
Posted on 1/2/24 at 10:09 am to NC_Tigah
Posted on 1/2/24 at 10:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
That is your opinion
I'm basing it off data (polling).
quote:
and based on the nature of a one-sided narrative to this point
I called it!
It's actually a very strong self-fulfilling prophecy as a fallacy because even if I'm right and what I say does happen, then you'll just try to argue that the system is not valid somehow. So let's say Trump is removed by the Senate for engaging in this behavior like I predict, you will shift the blame to something else that you've invalidated like the media
quote:
Establishing the fact of unfairness
The public waits for like like they wait for evidence of the Kraken
quote:
If the public holds the perception in November which you claim it does now, Trump will not be electable.
Again, Biden isn't doing well and our economy may finally pay some of the price for 2009-2021, in 2024. People holding their nose and voting for Trump doesn't mean they're going to also flip their stance on the prosecutions. If that was one of the primary issues, sure, but it's way down the list if Trump has any chance. The economy will be 1st, 2nd, and maybe even 3rd.
1
Posted on 1/2/24 at 11:33 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:You are opining on public attitudes next year based on surveys this year.
I'm basing it off data (polling).
quote:What an odd take. Did that make sense to you when you posted it?
I called it! ...the system is not valid somehow
The only system extrapolation you could be referencing from my post is the 2024 election. I stipulated that if you are right, Trump will not be elected. In that case, lawfare prosecutions in a banana republic system would continue, and we'd remain on the present absurd course. If you want to take credit for "calling" that, please do wear yourself out.
quote:TDS
The public waits for like like they wait for evidence of the Kraken
quote:So you say, and you're obviously entitled to your opinion.
People holding their nose and voting for Trump doesn't mean they're going to also flip their stance on the prosecutions.
However, even as things stand now, until Potatobrain&Co unleashed a weaponized DOJ, Biden was leading in the polls. As soon as Trump got JackSmithed, Potatobrain lost the lead. The thing speaks for itself.
---
In response to your pardon citations, if Trump were to pardon himself and if the DOJ supported him, fired Smith and his henchmen, and dropped the Federal cases, what party would have standing to bring the pardon case to SCOTUS?
Posted on 1/2/24 at 5:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Uh...why?
Colorado actually had a trial and some due process for findings of fact, using actual state election law as a backbone (opening up potential Federalism issues with current USSC state election law and the 14A).
I can only think you and so many other leftist morons are well morons. Have you read the 14th amendment? All of it? Section 5? And by the way what insurrection? You appear like most dumbazz leftists, a leaky tampon.
Section 5 Enforcement
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
If you actually want the possibility for a ruling with any actual discussion of the merits in the law then I don't see why you'd ever think the Maine case gives you a better opponent than the Colorado case. They're way too many ways for them to just get rid of the main case without even touching the merits or the 14th.
I think ultimately they say Congress has to clarify this but also nuke the Colorado opinion by saying this clause doesn't apply to the President.
It doesn't apply because there was no insurrection.
This post was edited on 1/2/24 at 5:43 pm
Posted on 1/2/24 at 7:00 pm to RedHog260
quote:+1
It doesn't apply because there was no insurrection.
Posted on 1/5/24 at 5:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Same with the potential immunity issue in the DC case
---
Totally different situations.
In one, a normal process (delay) allows the electorate to decide. In the other, an expedited SCOTUS ruling is the only chance for the electorate to decide.
quote:
The justices’ order sets the case up to be heard at a speedy pace, with oral arguments scheduled for Feb. 8 and a decision to follow that could spark Trump’s removal from the ballot in states across the country.
LINK
Posted on 1/5/24 at 5:10 pm to RedHog260
quote:
It doesn't apply because there was no insurrection.
Don’t even have to go there. Section 3 of the 14th amendment doesn’t apply to Trump, regardless of whether there was an insurrection or not.
As a threshold matter, he has never held any of the offices listed by Section 3’s qualifying phrase:
quote:
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
This post was edited on 1/5/24 at 5:20 pm
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News