Laniakea
Not of this world
You still have a chance to tell us what your definition of insurrection is. This would be a good thread for it.What? Are you now going to claim that you were being dishonest when you made that demand? Oh my! Heaven forbid
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots
- Thread starter Stevicus
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Show the law that he can do that. I do not think that is within the President's power right now. In fact in the compromise bill that Trump had shut down that was added to the President's power so that he could legally do that If I remember correctly.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There is no need. I can see that you could not support your earlier false claim either.
Laniakea
Not of this world
There is also no way you can do it since you keep admitting you don't know.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I have never done that, nor do any of my posts indicate that. Your posts on the other hand have done that quite often.
And Trump legally closed the border entry check points due to the pandemic, but that forced desperate migrants to cross elsewhere. His wall promise has been a complete failure, and even where walls were built they were cut or climbed over. Trump had 4 years to make immigration reform and did nothing. And here is Biden ready to sign a solution by congress and Trump interferesWhat is interesting is that the problem at the border once again started with Trump. He made all of those promises but in 2019 was when the nature of illegal immigrants began to change. Suddenly instead of being mostly single adults it was whole familes:
How border apprehensions, ICE arrests and deportations have changed under Trump
How has immigration enforcement changed under Trump? Here’s a look at the data on border apprehensions, interior arrests and deportations.www.pewresearch.org
View attachment 88161
If I remember correctly Trump quite often broke families up. You can see that the number of people traveling in family units was roughly equal to all of the immigrants in 2014.
It’s against domestic and international laws.
Congress makes the law. There was a solution but Trump sabotaged it.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Wait a second. Migrants, many that were about to cross illegally crossed anyway? The nerve!!!
I have to laugh at the naivety that ordering the border closed would somehow slow illegal immigration. The question that people should be asking is how can we fix the root problem of illegal immigration. It is not as if most of these people really had a life long goal of coming here. It is more that we are their last hope.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Refusing to answer a very simple question that you claim to know the answer to indicates that very well.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Oh? Did he vote against it?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Not if the other person does not appear to be an honest interlocutor.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Once again you disqualify yourself from debate by not even following the topic in the news. But then if you had been following this topic you would have known that it bean under the Trump administration. Please note, I am not blaming Trump, nor am I blaming Biden for the provlem. You seem to use false dichotomies quite often in your reasoning. There are problems that are very often not the fault of the President.
But as to fixing the problem Trump not only told other members of his part to stop it. He took credit for the event. Just ask and I will gladly provide sources.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Thankyou......... Has be been convicted yet? Has there been a trial?You have internet access but too lazy to do your own homework? OK, I will do it for you.
Trump arrested at the Fulton County Jail in Georgia: Highlights
Trump's mug shot was released shortly after he left the jail. Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani and other defendants have also surrendered in the 2020 election case.www.nbcnews.com
If not then maybe the Supreme Court will let his election challenge go ahead.
Not at all.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Thank you for that."Trump was arrested late last month at Georgia’s notorious Fulton County Jail on charges that he tried to steal the 2020 election in the Peach State."
Do you not understand that tRump was arrested by the state of Georgia? It tells you where he was arrested, at the Futon County Jail when he turned himself in. He did not need to be taken anywhere. He took himself.
By the way, even when it is an everyday citizen a police officer can cite someone, give him a summons and release the person where the event happened. A friend of a roommate needed a licensed driver to help him get a potential girl friends car that had been pulled over. As we pull up he said something that made me face palm myself "I hopte that they do not check my license"It was too late at that point. Of course we knew that he was going to ask for my license. which he did, so everything was cool, and then he asked the driver for his. It turns out that he had a suspended driver's license. He was arrested and put in the back of the trooper's car. He wrote him up for the offense. He wrote him a ticket with a court date and then released him. His car was not towed because I was there to drive both of them off. The girl's car was towed.
A person need not be taken anywhere. But he was fingerprinted and mug shot was taken. I am sure that you have seen it. I could give details on other cases too. I am pretty sure that it is similar in England. Get arrested, pay your bail if there is any, and you can get released in very little time.
Has there been a trial and verdict?
This movement to remove Trump from the Presidential election may depend upon whether he has a conviction for insurrection or an attempt.
I couldn't support such as Trump, you know.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Not yet, But for disqualification that is not needed. There were people that were disqualified after the Civil War and they were still removed. I can show you at least one case where the person objected on those grounds. You are conflating civil and criminal matters. They are handled a bit differently in the courts. I do believe it is the same in England. Am I mistaken, if I remember correctly you have different terms for civil and criminal attorneys.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Legal precedent:
www.citizensforethics.org
There are more, but I did not want to copy too many of them.
The precedent for 14th Amendment disqualification - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.
www.citizensforethics.org
| Name | Took oath in what public position? | "Engaged" in insurrection how? | Public position when disqualified | Mechanism of disqualification | Deciding body | Court Review | Convicted of a crime? | Year | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kenneth H. Worthy | County Sheriff | Held local office in a Confederate state. Worthy was not accused of engaging in violence. | County Sherriff | Mandamus action by Worthy to challenge his disqualification by county commissioners under state law implementing Section 3. | North Carolina Supreme Court | Yes. Worthy v. Barrett, 63 N.C. 199 (1869), appeal dismissed, 76 U.S. 611 (1869) | No | 1869 | “The oath to support the Constitution is the test. The idea being that one who had taken an oath to support the Constitution and violated it, ought to be excluded from taking it again, until relieved by Congress.” |
| William L. Tate | County Attorney | Served as an officer in the Confederate Army | State Solicitor | Mandamus action by Tate challenging his Section 3 disqualification by state judge. | North Carolina Supreme Court | Yes. In re Tate, 63 N.C. 308, 309 (1869) | No | 1869 | |
| J.D. Watkins | District Attorney | “Engaged in the late rebellion” (unclear precisely what Watkins did) | State Judge | Quo warranto action filed against Watkins under state law and Section 3. | Louisiana Supreme Court | Yes. Louisiana ex rel. Sandlin v. Watkins, 21 La. Ann. 631 (La. 1869). | No | 1869 | Court confirmed state courts can enforce Section 3 and that Section 3 is not a criminal punishment but a qualification for office. |
There are more, but I did not want to copy too many of them.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
But will the Supreme Court agree with you?
I don't think that the Supreme Court will refer to English history in this matter.
And there clearly is doubt about the outcome of any pending trial.
I do not believe that Mr Trump will be disqualified, and such a decision/verdict will not mean that this court is in itself corrupt.
But we in the UK almost all will be hoping for Democrat victory.
I don’t see “violence” in any of the above.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
That poster didn't mention anything about being "woke" in his response to you.
News about Trump’s two recent civil losses and his four criminal cases are headline news in all major media organizations. Why aren’t you reading the reports?
Trump has no election challenge. Are you referring to the Colorado ballot eligibility case? That was brought by republicans in Colorado. Analysts predict the SC will overrule Colorado.
As far as Trumps immunity claim, that seems unlikely to be accepted by the SC and when that happens Trump will face trial by early summer. Trump has no more tricks to delay it.
Only in his two civil cases which he lost. He owes $83.3 in one, and the other will be between $250-370 million in fines.
There are no specific charges for insurrection since it is a broad offense. There are many other charges that accuse him of election interference and fraud.
That is excellent.