Supreme Court to Decide Whether to Kick Trump Off Ballot

[Twilight Hue]

Has anyone heard the latest. Congress has finally got the 40,000 hours of Capital security video footing from the Jan 6 incident they requested two years ago. Originally this block of material was given to Tucker Carlson, just before he was dismissed at FOX in April this year. That was the same month the first Trump indictment happened. Weird coincidence. I wonder if that dismissal was related. Was FOX preventing Carlson from reporting this data through FOX. FOX may not have wanted the injustice system down their throat, seeing how the Swamp had no fear indicating a former President. Carlson also went silent so the thugs must have visited him.

Now 95% of the data is being made available through the House web site. It may also be on the internet. I watched a little bit this afternoon, but it was boring, with people calmly walking about. I remember seeing a tape, the first week after Jan 6, of the Capital police calmly giving a tour to that guy with the horned helmet, who was l later called a ring leader. I was not expecting everyone to be so calm and polite, at any point, based on the Fake News narrative of a storm the castle invasion. That video disappeared soon after and was dismissed as propaganda. I may have written about on this site, after I saw it in Jan that year. I report the facts like good old fashion news.

It also turns out that a substantial block of Jan 6 trial transcripts, from the Jan 6, Kangaroo Court, is now missing. This is not normal. It is unlawful to destroy investigation records, even if Hillary got away with it. This may not work this time. The Jan 6 narrative we all have heard, may have to been based on half the truth; the half needed to favor the Democrat narrative. The rumors are with Trumps Jan 6 trial coming up in Jan, he and his team will have subpoena power. This missing data must have been helpful to Trump, and may have been hidden for delayed access, to undermine his case; run out the clock. Then crooks are in panic mode.

One Congressman says every record from 911 and other such important Congressional investigations are fully accounted for, so such a loss of a Terabyte of data is not normal. I am sure there is a fall guy to protect the criminals. The Congressman also said there should be backups since the data is stored redundantly, and if these are also gone, there would be a felony investigation. If Trump was to win, this may be a good place to to set the record straight.

They never interviewed Pelosi or did they? This was never part of the selectively released Narrative. This may have been the type of information that would have made it harder to railroad jan 6, and could have backfired if released. Now we may never know, until Pelosi is subpoena by the Trump team. Trump has got through three hurdles and not it is do or die for team crook.

It remind me of the Collusion Coup where the entire Democrats leadership lied about collusion on TV, while the Congressional records could show they knew there was no collusion, based on top level FBI and CIA testimony. This is why it ended as it did. It too bad so many Democrats are willing to go down with the ship. There is still time to repent.

House Republicans to release most of Jan. 6 footage

Just a side note.

The insurrection "Shaman", he's now said to be running for Congress.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/11/18/smr-shaman-runs-for-congress.cnn

 

[We Never Know]

Just a side note.

The insurrection "Shaman", he's now said to be running for Congress.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/11/18/smr-shaman-runs-for-congress.cnn

Is he even eligible?

He plead guilty to obstructing an official proceeding which is a federal felony and served time in federal prison.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Is he even eligible?

He plead guilty to obstructing an official proceeding which is a federal felony and served time in federal prison.

Well if there is no actual conviction, I dont see any legal recourse.

 

[F1fan]

Is a total witch hunt ---

Sorry, Trump lost the election. He claimed fraud in numerous states, and none of that was true. He was told it wasn't true, yet he kept lying. His dumb and gullible followers believed him and created a protest of the election. Some actors planned an attack, and many of the followers joined in. Crimes. Trump encouraged all these actions, and was even happy to se it unfold. Now he is being accountable for his part.

but also an example of Gov't using "fear" of some big external or internal threat ..

There's none of this from the current administration, but Trump is threatening to do it if he were to win re-election. The fellow seems to be making the case why he shouldn;t b re-elected.

to get the people to trade liberty for security .. increase police state power. Protesters and/or dissidents and/or dissenters can now be classified as "Terrorists" .. the normal rules of justice no longer apply -- like with Martial Law - the Espionage act - Rico and lest we not forget - Gitmo and Assange.

All this ranting as if Tump hasn't threatened to use whatever powers he can use against anyone he thinks is against him.

Obama went after Whistle-blowers like no president before -- those who outed Gov't crimes got the major state spanking.

Not sure what you are referring to here. More vague nonsense. He was an ethical president who inherited quite a few problems from Bush.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Posts consisting of nothing but unqualifield personal invective do not constitute an argument Brother Sub .. you keep telling us you of this mens rea definition your article has rendered "Bogus" .. but have failed to show where in the article this claim of yours happened... yet run around pretending you have .. so as the saying goes friend .. tis time to "Put up - or Shut up" .. Show us the goods friend .. your bluff has been called.

and you did guess correctly that I am not a creationist though .. kudo's for that much .. not for much else though .. your arguments hovering at the creationist level you are trying to project on to my good nature.

Keep that stank to yourself friend .. and what is this Ad Hom fallacy you want to tell us about .. after you are done putting up ..

Oh my!! That's you. Not me. But you never owned up to your errors. I put up. More than once. You ignore and run away.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is he even eligible?

He plead guilty to obstructing an official proceeding which is a federal felony and served time in federal prison.

Though one can lose the right to vote, in some states permanently, but in more and more only temporarily, I do not think that one loses the right to run for office, aside from the 14th Amendment. Lyndon Larouche, a perpetual runner for President, ran one time from Prison. Trump could run from prison himself if the 14th Amendment does not apply to the Presidency.

 

[Sargonski]

Sorry, Trump lost the election. He claimed fraud in numerous states, and none of that was true

Not sure what you are referring to here. More vague nonsense. He was an ethical president who inherited quite a few problems from Bush.

Who told you Trump won the election ? .. and why are you pretending it was me ? in some effort to deflect from the fact that this effort to keep Trump off the Ballot and to go after the Capital Protesters is a 3rd world kangaroo court witch hunt.

You didn't know about the Obama Kangaroo show - going after whistle blowers .. .. and how is this vague ? .. what is nonsense is your claim that Dirty Obama was ethical.

 

[F1fan]

Who told you Trump won the election ?

Trump, Guliani, Eastman, Sydney, among many other co-conspirators in the election fraud claims. of course these people are unethical, and Bill Barr, Chris Wrey, all 50 state election officials, among others said the election was secure and valid, so Trump was wrong. Trump continues to claim there ws massive fraud, and he continues to be a liar.

.. and why are you pretending it was me ?

Did I say you told me Trump won?

If you accept that Trump lost then how can you defend the Jan 6 protest? What did it protest if not what was Trump's lie?

in some effort to deflect from the fact that this effort to keep Trump off the Ballot and to go after the Capital Protesters is a 3rd world kangaroo court witch hunt.

The lawsuit was brought within the law, and has a viable argument. It seems a long shot to my thinking. Frankly I think it a dangerous thing for a judge to rule on if the ruling is to reject Trump as a valid candidate.

You didn't know about the Obama Kangaroo show - going after whistle blowers .. .. and how is this vague ? .. what is nonsense is your claim that Dirty Obama was ethical.

I have no idea what you are referring to. You seem to be a victim of far right wing disinformation, so i suspect you have been duped. Feel free to post some valid and reputable sources about what you are on about.

 

[We Never Know]

Trump, Guliani, Eastman, Sydney, among many other co-conspirators in the election fraud claims. of course these people are unethical, and Bill Barr, Chris Wrey, all 50 state election officials, among others said the election was secure and valid, so Trump was wrong. Trump continues to claim there ws massive fraud, and he continues to be a liar.

Did I say you told me Trump won?

If you accept that Trump lost then how can you defend the Jan 6 protest? What did it protest if not what was Trump's lie?

The lawsuit was brought within the law, and has a viable argument. It seems a long shot to my thinking. Frankly I think it a dangerous thing for a judge to rule on if the ruling is to reject Trump as a valid candidate.

I have no idea what you are referring to. You seem to be a victim of far right wing disinformation, so i suspect you have been duped. Feel free to post some valid and reputable sources about what you are on about.

"I have no idea what you are referring to. You seem to be a victim of far right wing disinformation, so i suspect you have been duped. Feel free to post some valid and reputable sources about what you are on about."

There were at eight whistleblowers prosecuted under Obama. More than any other president.

"“Under the Obama administration was a complete misuse of the Espionage Act to target whistleblowers and to create an example of these individuals who came forward to blow the whistle on really serious intelligence community abuses of power,” says Liz Hempowicz, director of public policy at the Project on Government Oversight. Only 13 people have been charged under the Espionage Act, but eight of these cases occurred during President Barack Obama’s two terms."

All the President’s Whistleblowers

The history of government whistleblowing in the U.S. is fraught with charges of espionage, inadequate protections, and real hardships for those who speak out.

prospect.org

 

[Subduction Zone]

Who told you Trump won the election ? .. and why are you pretending it was me ? in some effort to deflect from the fact that this effort to keep Trump off the Ballot and to go after the Capital Protesters is a 3rd world kangaroo court witch hunt.

You didn't know about the Obama Kangaroo show - going after whistle blowers .. .. and how is this vague ? .. what is nonsense is your claim that Dirty Obama was ethical.

No, we have been over this. They were insurrectionists, you use a strawman version of bother mens rea and even of what an insurrection is. It does not have to be an attempt to overtake the government. It only has to be an:

"
Insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt. An insurrection may facilitate or bring about a revolution, which is a radical change in the form of government or political system of a state, and it may be initiated or provoked by an act of sedition, which is an incitement to revolt or rebellion.

In the United States, insurrection against the authority of the federal government is a crime under 18 U.S. Code §2383, which provides that:

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Insurrection | Definition, Laws, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

Insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt.

www.britannica.com

The rioters, not protesters, once a protest is violent and out of control it no longer a protest, were also insurrectionists. They were found guilty in courts of laws defended by lawyers that no far more about the law than either your or I do. Your odd defense of them appears to be pure TDS.

You have also failed to show that any of the court cases were "kangaroo courts". In fact your prejudice was shown from the start when the Colorado case had not even begun. It was repeatedly pointed out to you that none of the courts can possibly fit that definition since the final decision can only come from the USSC which is where everyone has said that it will end up eventually said, except for you of course because that would refute your false narrative.

 

[Sargonski]

No, we have been over this. They were insurrectionists, you use a strawman version of bother mens rea and even of what an insurrection is. It does not have to be an attempt to overtake the government. It only has to be an:

"
Insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt. An insurrection may facilitate or bring about a revolution, which is a radical change in the form of government or political system of a state, and it may be initiated or provoked by an act of sedition, which is an incitement to revolt or rebellion.

In the United States, insurrection against the authority of the federal government is a crime under 18 U.S. Code §2383, which provides that:

Insurrection | Definition, Laws, Examples, & Facts | Britannica

Insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt.

www.britannica.com

The rioters, not protesters, once a protest is violent and out of control it no longer a protest, were also insurrectionists. They were found guilty in courts of laws defended by lawyers that no far more about the law than either your or I do. Your odd defense of them appears to be pure TDS.

You have also failed to show that any of the court cases were "kangaroo courts". In fact your prejudice was shown from the start when the Colorado case had not even begun. It was repeatedly pointed out to you that none of the courts can possibly fit that definition since the final decision can only come from the USSC which is where everyone has said that it will end up eventually said, except for you of course because that would refute your false narrative.

Just because some protestors get violent and damage some property does not turn the Protesters into "Terrorists" nor the Protest into an "Insurrection" .. You keep repeating this fallacious nonsense -- and failing to support your claim by providing "Men's Rea"

You double down on the appeal to authority fallacy crying out "They were convicted" ?? seeming not to realize that the fact that this is why we call it a 3rd world Kangaroo court.

What is it you think a Kangaroo court is - if not one that gives bad rulings - engages in illegitimacy of authority -- and so on. Do you not see the nonsensical circular fallacy friend ? We can go through it step by step if you like. and the fact that you not being able to come up with mens rea shows it is Kangaroo court .. which we can explain as well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just because some protestors get violent and damage some property does not turn the Protesters into "Terrorists" nor the Protest into an "Insurrection" .. You keep repeating this fallacious nonsense -- and failing to support your claim by providing "Men's Rea"

You double down on the appeal to authority fallacy crying out "They were convicted" ?? seeming not to realize that the fact that this is why we call it a 3rd world Kangaroo court.

What is it you think a Kangaroo court is - if not one that gives bad rulings - engages in illegitimacy of authority -- and so on. Do you not see the nonsensical circular fallacy friend ? We can go through it step by step if you like. and the fact that you not being able to come up with mens rea shows it is Kangaroo court .. which we can explain as well.

That is not what happened. Your TDS is rather strong this morning.

 

[Sargonski]

That is not what happened. Your TDS is rather strong this morning.

What is not what happened ? are you having trouble making a coherent sentence friend ? -

Just because some protestors get violent and damage some property does not turn the Protesters into "Terrorists" nor the Protest into an "Insurrection" .. You keep repeating this fallacious nonsense -- and failing to support your claim by providing "Men's Rea"

You double down on the appeal to authority fallacy crying out "They were convicted" ?? seeming not to realize that the fact that this is why we call it a 3rd world Kangaroo court.

What is it you think a Kangaroo court is - if not one that gives bad rulings - engages in illegitimacy of authority -- and so on. Do you not see the nonsensical circular fallacy friend ? We can go through it step by step if you like. and the fact that you not being able to come up with mens rea shows it is Kangaroo court .. which we can explain as well.

Now TDS ? look friend .. do you not see the nonsensical circular fallacy in your previous post ? .. Why are you ignoring your fallacies ? and not correcting. and is this not a sign of some kind of Trump Fixation .. you lable "TDS" .. so lest we not Tar me with that Stank Brush friend .. can keep that all to yourself .. this path to Totalitarianism down which you are won't to trod .. chanting Prog Blue Tropes -

Where is the "mens rea" friend ? In the adult room the onus to support claim is on the claimant .. and thus far you have failed horribly - at providing mens rea for the crime of "Insurrection" .. nor justified the violations of essential liberty - Rule of Law - and of Justice.

mostly because you are unaware of these violations Brother Sub - thus eager to allow the trampling of liberty and justice .. in some ends justifies the means fixation on Old Carrot Top ... the definition of TDS .. as why would one allow such things .. harm to the nation .. harm to self ... because you wan't Trump punished for something he didn't do .. because you hate him so much..

My apologies in advance friend -- but, this is illogical partisan emotionally based irrational stuff going on here. I know you hate the Trumpster .. but that is no reason to turn the nation into a police state --- engage in 3rd world kangaroo justice like in some African Puppet State.

I am not willing to drag this nation through that mud puddle for some prudish partisan angst against this former reality TV star turned President. I am not willing to throw logic, reason and the rule book out the window .. over an obsession to get the Trumpster....

 

[metis]

I think Donald should stay on the ballot and be the nominee. He's blowing everyone away in the polls.

No, he sucks!

 

[SkepticThinker]

What is the difference between typo nazism and quotation mark nazism ?

Dude, everyone is struggling to read through your posts.


If I had this many people pointing this out to me, I might take some time to think seriously about it. But that's just me, I guess.

 

[Sargonski]

Dude, everyone is struggling to read through your posts.


If I had this many people pointing this out to me, I might take some time to think seriously about it. But that's just me, I guess.

Not everyone Skeptic -- only the kindergarten class who mistakenly came into the adult room figuring that name calling was an argument for something so don't worry too much about them .. no need to "think seriously" on the subject

 

[SkepticThinker]

Not everyone Skeptic -- only the kindergarten class who mistakenly came into the adult room figuring that name calling was an argument for something so don't worry too much about them .. no need to "think seriously" on the subject

A lot of people. It's not name calling. Name calling would be "You're stupid." That's not what's being said here. What is being said here is that it is very difficult to read through your posts and make sense of what is being said. I've struggled through several of them, and on some, I've just chosen to give up because I can't make heads nor tails of it. 'm not saying that to be mean. Or to call you names. I'm offering constructive criticism. I guess instead of thinking about it, you're just going to call us "kindergarteners" and dismiss us. Oh well, I guess.

Kindergarteners in my country are taught to write with proper grammar and sentence structure. Just sayin'.

 

[Sargonski]

A lot of people. It's not name calling. Name calling would be "You're stupid." That's not what's being said here. What is being said here is that it is very difficult to read through your posts and make sense of what is being said. I've struggled through several of them, and on some, I've just chosen to give up because I can't make heads nor tails of it. 'm not saying that to be mean. Or to call you names. I'm offering constructive criticism. I guess instead of thinking about it, you're just going to call us "kindergarteners" and dismiss us. Oh well, I guess.

Kindergarteners in my country are taught to write with proper grammar and sentence structure. Just sayin'.

Now "Difficult to Read" - has the underlying message that the writer is weak - and thus is name calling .. but that is not main issue.. no worries bout that -- the problem is not realizing that Ad Hom Fallacy is not an argument for much here in the Adult room ... that a typo does not make the message false .. nor spelling, grammar and so on .. and in an internet chat room .. well .. that would be really silly irrational silliness now wouldn't it

Now the Spelling Bee Fallacy - which you have mentioned previously .. same as above - just a deflection down some Ad Hom fallacy kindergarten rabbit hole .

K - so do we at least agree that chasing down typo's in an interenet chat room not an argument for other than for something moronic ? Thought we agreed on this previously .. Just sayin .. and let us not pretend that you are the more intelligent of the two .. bragging about sentence structure -- give me strength Mother Mary .. Getting 92% on the spelling Bee don't make you a good Skeptic har har har.

Now after all that .. hiding out in tree-tops .. shouting out rude names... did you have any comment on the Topic .. I am guessing you are very excited to have Trump on the Ticket --- Give ol Biden what for. Have to get yourself a new MAJA hat ..

 

[SkepticThinker]

Now "Difficult to Read" - has the underlying message that the writer is weak

No, it doesn't. It means what it says. As I said.

I don't feel the need to point out "weak" people or whatever. That's not something I focus on in life.

- and thus is name calling

Nope.

.. but that is not main issue.. no worries bout that -- the problem is not realizing that Ad Hom Fallacy is not an argument for much here in the Adult room .

There is no ad hom fallacy.

.. that a typo does not make the message false .. nor spelling, grammar and so on .. and in an internet chat room .. well .. that would be really silly irrational silliness now wouldn't it

I'm not a spelling nazi. I'm just telling you your posts are difficult to read. As others have also pointed out.

Now the Spelling Bee Fallacy - which you have mentioned previously .. same as above - just a deflection down some Ad Hom fallacy kindergarten rabbit hole .

I've not corrected any of your spelling and I don't think anyone else has either.
No ad hom here either.

K - so do we at least agree that chasing down typo's in an interenet chat room not an argument for other than for something moronic ?

I didn't mention typos.

Thought we agreed on this previously .. Just sayin .. and let us not pretend that you are the more intelligent of the two .. bragging about sentence structure -- give me strength Mother Mary .. Getting 92% on the spelling Bee don't make you a good Skeptic har har har.

I've never claimed I'm more intelligent than you are. I've not bragged of anything.

I've only pointed out that YOUR POSTS ARE DIFFICULT TO READ THROUGH.

Now after all that .. hiding out in tree-tops .. shouting out rude names... did you have any comment on the Topic .. I am guessing you are very excited to have Trump on the Ticket --- Give ol Biden what for. Have to get yourself a new MAJA hat ..

I haven't shouted out any rude names. That's your thing.

My opinion on Trump? Not fit for office.

 

[Sargonski]

No, we have been over this. They were insurrectionists, you use a strawman version of bother mens rea and even of what an insurrection is. It does not have to be an attempt to overtake the government. It only has to be an:

"
Insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt. An insurrection may facilitate or bring about a revolution, which is a radical change in the form of government or political system of a state, and it may be initiated or provoked by an act of sedition, which is an incitement to revolt or rebellion.

In the United States, insurrection against the authority of the federal government is a crime under 18 U.S. Code §2383, which provides that:

Holy Carp this is dissillusioned unintelligible nonsense.. "You use a Strawman version of Mens Rea" what the heck is that pray tell. Clearly you have not the faintest idea what strawman fallacy is --

but then .. you cry "it does not have to be an attempt to overtake Gov't" then give a definition for Insurrection .. which talks about rebellion and revolution against Gov't --

What exactly did you think a revolution against the Gov't attempting to do exactly .. if not overtake the Gov't ???

You don't understand your own definition friend -- Inssurection -- if we are talking a ship does not mean taking over the Gov't .. but insurrection against the Gov't .. is taking over the Gov't ..

This mistake is perhaps why you have been so out in left field all this time.