Supreme Court to Decide Whether to Kick Trump Off Ballot

[We Never Know]

The 2nd Amendment refers to militia in 1789. Those don’t exist anymore.

The 21st century militias are largely criminal gangs with many former leaders in prison.

That’s why states have national guard units that are trained in certain skills. And well equipped.

The national guard is the military. A militia of armed citizens could be called to support them.

A militia is force/military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.


The US has the largest availible militia in the world. Will it ever be needed? Who knows.
But like a spare tire its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

 

[F1fan]

The national guard is the military. A militia of armed citizens could be called to support them.

A militia is force/military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.

Sure, packing sandbags. Latrine cleaning. Directing traffic. Etc. That will allow the well regulated and trained to do the hard jobs.

 

[We Never Know]

Sure, packing sandbags. Latrine cleaning. Directing traffic. Etc. That will allow the well regulated and trained to do the hard jobs.

Thats what you unarmed citizens will be needed to do plus the cooking and laundry.

Btw.... You missed my edit in my previous post.

The US has the largest availible militia in the world. Will it ever be needed? Who knows.
But like a spare tire its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right. It sucks that the writers of the amendments were so vague. Oddly they are quite clear in their simplicity. For example the 2nd amendment says that citiuzens can own guns for the sake of forming militias, but the Supreme Court has simplified the amendment further by ignoring the militia part as a qualified for the ownership. What with the SC do to interpret the 14th? Will it simplify and consider Trump's fraudulent intentions as bad faith against democracy? Or will it require a jury to convict of a crime that they also consider to be intended in the text?


For a text that is pretty clear at face value we have a SC that tends to wiggle around all sorts of agendas. Even the originalists have deviated from originalism as they ignore the "militia" part of the 2nd amendment. WTF?

I say forget sports betting, let's gamble on SC rulings, because we can't really predict much these days. Apart from Alito (a far right hardliner out for power) and Thomas (doesn't want to disappoint his beloved insurrectionist wife), the others have been unpredictable.

I know. If it was a rational court I would not give Trump any chances, but they are far from that.

 

[Sargonski]

Nope. If you didn't understand it you should have said so. If I was wrong you should have quoted my post and shown how it was wrong. Why didn't you do either of those?

Now it looks as if you are trying to use deceit instead of doing your homework.


The two posts are still there, the burden of proof is still on you.

didn't understand what friend -- don't be silly -- it is not up to me to prove your false claim .. that burden is all yours friend.

You said your link proved my definition of mens rea Bogus .. either post from your link where my definition of mens rea is bogus .. or admit to this intentional falsehood and deceit .. Tsk .. tsk .. tsk

 

[McBell]

didn't understand what friend -- don't be silly -- it is not up to me to prove your false claim .. that burden is all yours friend.

You said your link proved my definition of mens rea Bogus .. either post from your link where my definition of mens rea is bogus .. or admit to this intentional falsehood and deceit .. Tsk .. tsk .. tsk

Interesting that someone like yourself, who refuses to support their claims, is so demanding of others to repeatedly support their claims.

What is the sense in presenting it again?
So you can flat out ignore it, again?

 

[Subduction Zone]

didn't understand what friend -- don't be silly -- it is not up to me to prove your false claim .. that burden is all yours friend.

You said your link proved my definition of mens rea Bogus .. either post from your link where my definition of mens rea is bogus .. or admit to this intentional falsehood and deceit .. Tsk .. tsk .. tsk

Please, you are not fooling anyone. Do your homework. Respond properly. That means responding from my posts with the links that we are discussing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Interesting that someone like yourself, who refuses to support their claims, is so demanding of others to repeatedly support their claims.

What is the sense in presenting it again?
So you can flat out ignore it, again?

It is odd that he did not respond from the posts where my links are. It is almost as if he didn't even try.

 

[McBell]

It is odd that he did not respond from the posts where my links are. It is almost as if he didn't even try.

I have no idea what country they live in, but they have shown they don't know jack about the law in the USA.

I wonder if my signature is at play here?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have no idea what country they live in, but they have shown they don't know jack about the law in the USA.

I wonder if my signature is at play here?

I have no idea. But he has been in denial or so long that I thought "Those posts of mine with the links in them that he did not respond to better still be there". It took me less than ten minutes to find both of them. He can find them himself or apologize for his false claims. After all that rudeness and ignorance he does not get the posts for free.

 

[Sargonski]

Interesting that someone like yourself, who refuses to support their claims, is so demanding of others to repeatedly support their claims.

What is the sense in presenting it again?
So you can flat out ignore it, again?

Never a sound plan to start a post off with a lie and nasty name calling fallacy .. but what is it you claim has been ignored .. that you figure there is no sense in presenting -- other than your complete failure to make an argument .. reduced to hiding out in tree tops .. shouting out rude names Har har har ..

but seriously .. how is it you feel ignored -- or rather what has been ignored -- or do you even remember ?!

 

[Sargonski]

I have no idea. But he has been in denial or so long that I thought "Those posts of mine with the links in them that he did not respond to better still be there". It took me less than ten minutes to find both of them. He can find them himself or apologize for his false claims. After all that rudeness and ignorance he does not get the posts for free.

You seem pissed friend -- now reduced gossiping and telling lies behind back like school girls -- encouraged on by the back slap pudd pull crew.

Apologise for what false claim Brother Sub ? -- you are the one who made the falsehood .. telling a lie .. claiming your link showed my definition of mens rea was "Bogus".. but have yet to produce the goods .. show us where in your link this is done.

But, you have not .. and can not .. because it is simply not there.. and you be a sneaky little trickster ..spinning such wild goose falsehoods.

Now tell us about this TDS effect - is that what brought on this decietful and disingenuous behavoir - into many levels of self deception must be .. to act like schoolgirl running round the tree .. hee hee hee

 

[Revoltingest]

Trump's insurrection was even worse than I thought.
I dare say that he employed terrorism to attempt to
coerce election officials to sabotage Biden's win.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/11/11/trump-georgia-ruby-freeman-harrison-floyd-trevian-kutti-stephen-lee/

Excerpted....
CHANNAHON, Ill. — Sitting on the stage of an evangelical church for a fundraiser held in his honor, the Rev. Stephen Lee spoke about the criminal charges he faces in Georgia for allegedly trying to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 election. Bathed in purple light, the 71-year-old said he would not accept a plea deal, as four of his co-defendants have.

“I’m not going to plead out to a lie,” Lee said Thursday. “I’m not going to cooperate with evil. I’m not going to do something that is going to eat away or destroy our First Amendment rights. … This is the Lord’s battle, and we’ve got to fight it.”
Lee is accused of conspiring with the hip-hop publicist Trevian Kutti and former Trump campaign staffer Harrison Floyd to try to coerce a Georgia election worker into falsely confessing to helping rig the 2020 election for Joe Biden.

This unlikely trio are among the least-known Trump supporters facing charges in Fulton County. Their indictments show how Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election pulled in Americans from many walks of life — not just elected officials and high-powered lawyers, but also low-level campaign staffers and ordinary supporters.
Even as more-prominent defendants, including lawyers Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, have pleaded guilty in the case, these three have signaled that they are willing to stand by the former president as he continues to claim falsely that the 2020 election was stolen, even if that means facing prison time. They have become inspirations to Trump’s most ardent fans, especially as they continue to fundraise to pay their lawyers.

It’s unclear how the three came together after the 2020 election — or what connections they had, if any, to the highest levels of the Trump campaign. But unlike other defendants who are accused of attacking democracy broadly, the three are alleged to have targeted an individual election worker in the Atlanta area, Ruby Freeman.

As Trump, his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and others falsely targeted Freeman, the three offered to help her navigate the manufactured crisis. Prosecutors allege that what they really wanted to do was create a justification for Republicans in Congress to reject the election results on Jan. 6, 2021.
The indictment details a top-to-bottom network: At the same time as Trump and his high-profile allies were pressuring governors, state lawmakers and members of Congress to take action to overturn the election, some of his lesser-known backers singled out those at the lowest end of the hierarchy of election administration, including Freeman.


The article continues with much more detail.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You seem pissed friend -- now reduced gossiping and telling lies behind back like school girls -- encouraged on by the back slap pudd pull crew.

Apologise for what false claim Brother Sub ? -- you are the one who made the falsehood .. telling a lie .. claiming your link showed my definition of mens rea was "Bogus".. but have yet to produce the goods .. show us where in your link this is done.

But, you have not .. and can not .. because it is simply not there.. and you be a sneaky little trickster ..spinning such wild goose falsehoods.

Now tell us about this TDS effect - is that what brought on this decietful and disingenuous behavoir - into many levels of self deception must be .. to act like schoolgirl running round the tree .. hee hee hee

It was not behind your back. And it is not anything that no one else knows.


I made no falsehoods. You can't find one. And you keep getting your argument wrong. I repeatedly said that you get your interpretation of mens rea wrong. You probably know that. It is much easier to defend a belief than a mistaken interpretation.

And the posts are still there. You should have responded to them when I posted them. You can even tell that I did not edit them. When one first makes a post there are a couple of minutes or so where one can make quick corrections and it will not show up as an edit. After five minutes at the most and probably closer to two minutes the site will note that the post was edited. And then after a day or so one cannot even edit a post. You will not see any statements that those two posts were edited.

I found a proper US based source that demonstrated that your understanding of mens rea was wrong. Another of your demands was case law. I linked a case law article that showed that your claims were wrong. With all of your distortions and falsehoods about me you do not get to demand evidence without apologizing. Or you could do your homework and find the posts. It took me less than 10 minutes to find both.

 

[Sargonski]

It was not behind your back. And it is not anything that no one else knows.


I made no falsehoods. You can't find one. And you keep getting your argument wrong. I repeatedly said that you get your interpretation of mens rea wrong. You probably know that. It is much easier to defend a belief than a mistaken interpretation.

Of course (below) was schoolgirl gossip .. telling tales and falsehoods about me to another poster .. and you lying about this now another lie in the litany of falsehood.

. I have no idea. But he has been in denial or so long that I thought "Those posts of mine with the links in them that he did not respond to better still be there". It took me less than ten minutes to find both of them. He can find them himself or apologize for his false claims. After all that rudeness and ignorance he does not get the posts for free.

Falsehood

I found a proper US based source that demonstrated that your understanding of mens rea was wrong. Another of your demands was case law. I linked a case law article that showed that your claims were wrong.

Your source did not demonstrate that my understanding of mens rea was wrong -- and you have failed to produce where your source did this .. and no one else can seem to find it either .. so another lame falsehood on your part. You can't even state what about my understanding of mens rea was wrong .. all you do is twirl around in some fallacious self delusional circle thinking that crying out "wrong wrong wrong" is an argument for something other than your lack ther-of.

sds

 

[Subduction Zone]

Trump's insurrection was even worse than I thought.
I dare say that he employed terrorism to attempt to
coerce election officials to sabotage Biden's win.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/11/11/trump-georgia-ruby-freeman-harrison-floyd-trevian-kutti-stephen-lee/

Excerpted....
CHANNAHON, Ill. — Sitting on the stage of an evangelical church for a fundraiser held in his honor, the Rev. Stephen Lee spoke about the criminal charges he faces in Georgia for allegedly trying to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 election. Bathed in purple light, the 71-year-old said he would not accept a plea deal, as four of his co-defendants have.

“I’m not going to plead out to a lie,” Lee said Thursday. “I’m not going to cooperate with evil. I’m not going to do something that is going to eat away or destroy our First Amendment rights. … This is the Lord’s battle, and we’ve got to fight it.”
Lee is accused of conspiring with the hip-hop publicist Trevian Kutti and former Trump campaign staffer Harrison Floyd to try to coerce a Georgia election worker into falsely confessing to helping rig the 2020 election for Joe Biden.

This unlikely trio are among the least-known Trump supporters facing charges in Fulton County. Their indictments show how Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election pulled in Americans from many walks of life — not just elected officials and high-powered lawyers, but also low-level campaign staffers and ordinary supporters.
Even as more-prominent defendants, including lawyers Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis, have pleaded guilty in the case, these three have signaled that they are willing to stand by the former president as he continues to claim falsely that the 2020 election was stolen, even if that means facing prison time. They have become inspirations to Trump’s most ardent fans, especially as they continue to fundraise to pay their lawyers.

It’s unclear how the three came together after the 2020 election — or what connections they had, if any, to the highest levels of the Trump campaign. But unlike other defendants who are accused of attacking democracy broadly, the three are alleged to have targeted an individual election worker in the Atlanta area, Ruby Freeman.

As Trump, his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and others falsely targeted Freeman, the three offered to help her navigate the manufactured crisis. Prosecutors allege that what they really wanted to do was create a justification for Republicans in Congress to reject the election results on Jan. 6, 2021.
The indictment details a top-to-bottom network: At the same time as Trump and his high-profile allies were pressuring governors, state lawmakers and members of Congress to take action to overturn the election, some of his lesser-known backers singled out those at the lowest end of the hierarchy of election administration, including Freeman.


The article continues with much more detail.

It is not a pleasant read, but thank you anyway. What was attempted needs to be made very public. The two women won their lawsuit against Giuliani, now getting their money will be the hard part, but at least they are publicly vindicated to an extent.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course (below) was schoolgirl gossip .. telling tales and falsehoods about me to another poster .. and you lying about this now another lie in the litany of falsehood.


Falsehood


Your source did not demonstrate that my understanding of mens rea was wrong -- and you have failed to produce where your source did this .. and no one else can seem to find it either .. so another lame falsehood on your part. You can't even state what about my understanding of mens rea was wrong .. all you do is twirl around in some fallacious self delusional circle thinking that crying out "wrong wrong wrong" is an argument for something other than your lack ther-of.

sds

Nope, no falsehood. My source did exactly what I said that it did. I doubt if you even found it. If you had you would have hit the reply button on the bottom of the post. That is how any person that found the post would have responded. I am not giving you the link without an apology. I am not stopping you from finding it either. It is still there. it is unedited. I doubt if I could edit it if I wanted to.

Tell my, why haven't you ever properly supported your claims? That means what haven't you ever found a reliable source that agrees with you and quoted from it and linked it? That is what I did with the link that shows that your interpretation of mens rea is wrong.

 

[Sargonski]

Nope, no falsehood. My source did exactly what I said that it did. I doubt if you even found it. If you had you would have hit the reply button on the bottom of the post. That is how any person that found the post would have responded. I am not giving you the link without an apology. I am not stopping you from finding it either. It is still there. it is unedited. I doubt if I could edit it if I wanted to.

Tell my, why haven't you ever properly supported your claims? That means what haven't you ever found a reliable source that agrees with you and quoted from it and linked it? That is what I did with the link that shows that your interpretation of mens rea is wrong.

Prove your source said wht you say it did by quoting your source .. Duh .. This is not a complex concept .. quote where the source shows my interpretation of mens rea is wrong.. but first .. state what my interpretation of mens rea is to begin with.

Nowhere in your link do I find what you claim .. so either buck up -- or shut up after admitting your falsehood that you have been keeping up for 10 posts now.

 

[McBell]

Never a sound plan to start a post off with a lie and nasty name calling fallacy .. but what is it you claim has been ignored .. that you figure there is no sense in presenting -- other than your complete failure to make an argument .. reduced to hiding out in tree tops .. shouting out rude names Har har har ..

but seriously .. how is it you feel ignored -- or rather what has been ignored -- or do you even remember ?!

At this point it appears you are just going to lash out at anyone who dares speak to you.
No worries.
I have known many an insecure person to recognize the symptoms.

You have yourself a nice day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Prove your source said wht you say it did by quoting your source .. Duh .. This is not a complex concept .. quote where the source shows my interpretation of mens rea is wrong.. but first .. state what my interpretation of mens rea is to begin with.

Nowhere in your link do I find what you claim .. so either buck up -- or shut up after admitting your falsehood that you have been keeping up for 10 posts now.

You clearly could not find or did not read my source. You need to use the "Reply" button that is at the bottom of the post of mine. Posting false claims in the hope that I will do my homework for you won't work.