- 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
1
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:13 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
He wasn't "acquitted", he just wasn't removed from office.
He couldn't have been removed from office b/c his term was already up. That is one of the many reasons that the whole second impeachment was a sham. Even if he was found guilty, it would be impossible to punish him since the punishment is removal from office.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:14 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Answered that for you with this .....
Brown asked him: 'Why? It seems to me that you have a list and president is not on it.' The list stated in the text lists offices including senator, representative, and even presidential elector.
Brown asked him: 'Why? It seems to me that you have a list and president is not on it.' The list stated in the text lists offices including senator, representative, and even presidential elector.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:16 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Oh go fck yourself. That is what your ilk do you piece of shite.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:26 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
That is one of the many reasons that the whole second impeachment was a sham. Even if he was found guilty, it would be impossible to punish him since the punishment is removal from office.
I agree.
Both impeachment proceedings were nothing but political theater. Hell, so was the Clinton impeachment, for that matter.
But where is the bar in the 14th Amendment? It doesn't say "convicted in a court of law".
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:36 pm to bluedragon
quote:
It seems to me that you have a list and president is not on it.' The list stated in the text lists offices including senator, representative, and even presidential elector.
Maybe they should have used this list from the Postal Act of 1799:
“And be it further enacted, That letters and packets to and from the following officers of the United States, shall be received and conveyed by post, free of postage. Each postmaster, provided each of his letters or packets shall not exceed half an ounce in weight; each member of the Senate and House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States; the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of House of Representatives, provided each letter or packet shall not exceed two ounces in weight, and during their actual attendance in any session of Congress, and twenty days after such session; the President of the United States; Vice President; the Secretary of the Treasury...”
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:39 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Sorry about the butt kicking you people took today. It happens.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:40 pm to MrLSU
9-0 decision. The state could not provide compelling answers to any of the courts what if questions. All the justices seemed to be concerned that CO position would create more legal problems than solve.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:41 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Trump's team is trying to say that only an appointed official who has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution can be an "officer of the United States", while elected officials who have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution cannot.
It’s as simple as was he charged , and convicted of being an insurrectionist . Answer is no case over . 14th amendment .
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:50 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Jackass Dems are pathetic........but you know this already right? Look at Biden, your hero. He's almost as pathetic as, well,................you.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:51 pm to fwtex
quote:
All the justices seemed to be concerned that CO position would create more legal problems than solve.
ACB made a good point that one state should not be able to determine the eligibility for a candidate to run for national office. The problem seems to that Colorado, as a sovereign state, should be able to keep whomever they want off their ballot. Maybe it's time for actual, national elections that are regulated by the federal government when federal offices are concerned.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:56 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Maybe they should have used this list from the Postal Act of 1799:
They should have jumped up and down on Trump's own prior legal argument in the DC Circuit that POTUS is an officer of the US for the purposes of the federal officer removal statute.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 12:58 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Colorado, as a sovereign state, should be able to keep whomever they want off their ballot.
Sounds arbitrary and capricious.
This post was edited on 2/8/24 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:00 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Maybe it's time for actual, national elections that are regulated by the federal government when federal offices are concerned.
yes, I bet you would like that
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:06 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Dude, you say this
After just saying this?
LOL, you're such a disingenuous joke
quote:
If you want a rational discussion, don't be hyperbolic.
After just saying this?
quote:
You don't understand, at this point I'm thinking the best possible outcome is for Trump to win the presidency. His supporters are so unhinged, I'm afraid that anything short of that will turn them loose on the country.
LOL, you're such a disingenuous joke
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:08 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
WildTchoupitoulas
Sounds like you like to be lorded over like a peasant.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:08 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Sounds arbitrary and capricious.
So you disagree with ACB?
“Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens but also for the nation,” Justice Elena Kagan asked, saying that “seems quite extraordinary.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett echoed the concerns, adding: “It just doesn’t seem like a state call.”
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:10 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
yes, I bet you would like that
Not just me.
“Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens but also for the nation,” Justice Elena Kagan asked, saying that “seems quite extraordinary.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett echoed the concerns, adding: “It just doesn’t seem like a state call.”
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:10 pm to loogaroo
quote:
Sounds like you like to be lorded over like a peasant.
“Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens but also for the nation,” Justice Elena Kagan asked, saying that “seems quite extraordinary.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett echoed the concerns, adding: “It just doesn’t seem like a state call.”
Posted on 2/8/24 at 1:15 pm to Houag80
quote:Why so angry? Is that really all you have to add?
Oh go fck yourself. That is what your ilk do you piece of shite.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News