quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
"The prohibition on rebellion and insurrection arises in federal law at 18 U.S.C. Section 2383. The law prohibits incitement, assistance, and participation in a rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States and its laws."

It is possible that Jack Smith could issue a new indictment per 18 U.S.C. section 2383.

After all, the evidence he will be using in prosecuting the federal indictments already are the same evidence for insurrection.

it's possible that ....

weird, 11 pages, on a topic started by YOU that claims " The Constitution bars Trump from holding public office ever again"

and the entire SCOTUS sasys "nah, bro" .. and you aren't in the least bit apologetic?

you have been RANTING, with repeated self posts and "more proof" for over 6 months, when doctors, lawyers, and engineers have told you that you are incorrect ...

"it's possible that" ..
let's boil it down to two letters for you

"if"

you and schiff should go away and compare your "evidences" to each other --
here's your sign - and your lunch

Simply outstanding!

But the senile old woman doesn't even have the sense to see it!!!!


you and schiff should go away and compare your "evidences" to each other -- here's your sign - and your lunch

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...6be5ab68938d5a&ei=13


Democrats announce bill to kick Trump off the ballot

So, the authority rests in congress.

It's not whether I agree with him or not. The authority is with congress.

So be it. SCOTUS dumped it.

https://www.house.gov/the-hous...0passes%20the%20bill.

"If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill."

Except this not going to pass.

That independent from AZ is not going to bite on this in the Senate. I wonder if the Filibuster applies?

Hey, this bone has been carried this far. Give it a go. It ain’t like the Republicans in the House are going to pass anything anyway.

Now, that I think about it, you are not going to get a simple man in the House.

quote:

Except this not going to pass.

In part my point is that this ain't over yet.

SCOTUS just allowed an insurrectionist and a guy under four indictments to be a candidate for POTUS.

If elected, he may be a convict by then.

Maybe the 25th amendment becomes relevant at some point. He may win the election, but he's already lost his mind.

We all, especially GOPers, should worry about who he selects as VP.

Just imagine Tucker Carlson as POTUS to get the picture.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...Ik2?ocid=socialshare

Judge Luttig reacts to Supreme Court Colorado decision
Story by Sarah Fortinsky • 16h

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Monday that Colorado cannot disqualify former President Trump from the ballot under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection ban.

The Supreme Court also ruled Congress has exclusive authority to enforce the 14th Amendment to disqualify federal candidates.

“In reaching and deciding those questions unnecessarily, the court, the majority, as the concurrences said, effectively decided that the former president will never be disqualified from holding the presidency in 2024. Or ever, for that matter,” Luttig continued.

“But even more importantly, as the concurrence said, effectively, the court today decided that no person in the future will ever be disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, regardless [of] whether he or she has engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution of the United States,” he said.

Luttig compared the reach of the ruling to those of the Warren Court, largely considered the most liberal Supreme Court in recent history.

“It’s stunning in its overreach. It’s a textbook example, Jake, of the kind of activist judicial opinion from the 1960s and the Warren Court era that begat the conservative legal and judicial movement in the 1970s and 1980s. But of course, it’s different here. Because this is unmistakably a conservative court,” he said.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Except this not going to pass.

In part my point is that this ain't over yet.

SCOTUS just allowed an insurrectionist and a guy under four indictments to be a candidate for POTUS.

If elected, he may be a convict by then.

Maybe the 25th amendment becomes relevant at some point. He may win the election, but he's already lost his mind.

We all, especially GOPers, should worry about who he selects as VP.

Just imagine Tucker Carlson as POTUS to get the picture.

The movement to disqualify President Trump through the IC is over.

For the immediate future, this matter rest in the hands of the American people. I quit praying for who should be President when I realized God had nothing to do with it. It is given and left up to us.

quote:

this matter rest in the hands of the American people.

Does it really work that way?

There is a stunning fact residing at the root of Trump's support and ascendence in national politics.

That root or basis is founded on/in lies, lots of lies.

It's just like the old saying - "follow the money". In this case it is about who benefits. The real financial beneficiaries are the elites of the GOPers. The others benefit from ideological or worldview affirmations - those who are all-in on the lies, the zero-sum.

One citizen one vote subject to the constitutional limitations of the Electoral College.

Maybe President Trump gets convicted. Then he gets impeached or 25th Amendment gets him.

I bet President Trump gets convicted somewhere. Is permitted bond on appeal. Yet, does not get removed through impeachment nor the 25th Amendment. This assumes he wins the election. I could be wrong.

Those are secondary to the election. The choice rest with us. If the collective we are too stupid to see the shadow king and destroy those who tell the truth, we deserve it. At that point, we will seek to engage other legitimate means assuming conviction.

Ultimately, I would see President Trump resigning before he has to be taken into custody and pardoned. Again, assuming he is convicted and ultimately remanded. State crimes not withstanding.

He could be acquitted.

Either way, the current avenue to expel President Trump and those he represents from government are the elections. That is where debate, time, money, and focus must be. Placing those resources elsewhere only helps to see President Trump re-elected. All this bit of litigation did was strengthen President Trump w the electorate and donors.

In my neck of the woods a vote against Trump is like pissing into the wind.

I am sure that you, LHeym, are a wiser man than I. So, I'll chill.

Meanwhile remember that Hitler was elected initially.

There is a lot of resemblance. I'm loathe to evoke the Hitler card, but here it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...l_(1931%E2%80%931933)

On 30 January 1933, the new cabinet was sworn in during a brief ceremony in Hindenburg's office. The NSDAP gained three posts: Hitler was named chancellor, Wilhelm Frick Minister of the Interior, and Hermann Göring, Minister Without Portfolio (and Minister of the Interior for Prussia).[94][95] The SA and SS led torchlit parades throughout Berlin. It is this event that would become termed Hitler's Machtergreifung ("seizure of power"). The term was originally used by some Nazis to suggest a revolutionary process,[96] though Hitler, and others, used the word Machtübernahme ("take-over of power"), reflecting that the transfer of power took place within the existing constitutional framework[96] and suggesting that the process was legal.[97][98]

Papen was to serve as Vice-Chancellor in a majority conservative Cabinet – still falsely believing that he could "tame" Hitler.[99] Initially, Papen did speak out against some Nazi excesses. However, after narrowly escaping death in the Night of the Long Knives in 1934, he no longer dared criticise the regime and was sent off to Vienna as German ambassador.[100]

Both within Germany and abroad, there were initially few fears that Hitler could use his position to establish his later dictatorial single-party regime. Rather, the conservatives that helped to make him chancellor were convinced that they could control Hitler and "tame" the Nazi Party while setting the relevant impulses in the government themselves; foreign ambassadors played down worries by emphasizing that Hitler was "mediocre" if not a bad copy of Mussolini; even SPD politician Kurt Schumacher trivialized Hitler as a Dekorationsstück ("piece of scenery/decoration") of the new government. German newspapers wrote that, without doubt, the Hitler-led government would try to fight its political enemies (the left-wing parties), but that it would be impossible to establish a dictatorship in Germany because there was "a barrier, over which violence cannot proceed" and because of the German nation being proud of "the freedom of speech and thought". Benno Reifenberg of the Frankfurter Zeitung wrote:[101]

It is a hopeless misjudgement to think that one could force a dictatorial regime upon the [German] nation. [...] The diversity of the German people calls for democracy.

Not wiser. Every mine has their talents and training.

KY is going to go to the Republican nominee. That is going to be President Trump. Yo disengage is to surrender. President Trump did not win last time; even with me voting for him.