The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots

[Subduction Zone]

OK.....but does a civil court finding disbar a person?

That is a bit of a non sequitur, but I can answer it. Neither:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/2012566.pdf

It looks as if you might accuse the SC of corruption if their decision does not meet with your approval.

No, the SC is corrupt because members of the court lied to get onto it. Clarence Thomas is corrupt because he has taken millions in favors and gifts from a contributor and he has never recused himself when he should.

And there's no point in teong me about differences on or legal systems because I am thinking of your system, although I do find it to be dodgy!

What is dodgy about it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

All you are saying is that you think he took part in an insurrection. No state should be able to take a person off a ballot for president based an insurrection charge when he was never charged or convicted. It won't stand I bet it is 9-0 or 8-1.

We have been over this far too many times. First off, no, I showed that it was far more than my thinking that he took part in an insurrection. That was found by two separate courts and the Secretary of State of Maine. I showed that no conviction was necessary multiple times to take someone off the ballot using the 14th Amendment. If you do not understand that would be barely possible as an acceptable answer. But to keep claiming that I have to do so is disingenuous at best. As to what the USSC decides that is likely to be against me. But I have heard some reports both ways as far as the more rational judges go.

 

[Revoltingest]

No, the SC is corrupt because members of the court lied to get onto it. Clarence Thomas is corrupt because he has taken millions in favors and gifts from a contributor and he has never recused himself when he should.

What Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett Said About Roe at Confirmation Hearings - FactCheck.org

In the wake of the leaked Supreme Court draft opinion that indicates the court could overturn Roe v. Wade, some lawmakers have charged that conservative Supreme Court justices led them astray during Senate confirmation hearings. We'll look at what the three most recent conservative justices had...

www.factcheck.org

Given that Trump's stated intention was to overturn
the right to abortion, I suspect that his nominees
were chosen based on this fulfilled intention,
& that they all conspired with him to lie during
confirmation. His agenda, & coincidence of the
3 going against earlier testimony paint this picture.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

We have been over this far too many times. First off, no, I showed that it was far more than my thinking that he took part in an insurrection. That was found by two separate courts and the Secretary of State of Maine. I showed that no conviction was necessary multiple times to take someone off the ballot using the 14th Amendment. If you do not understand that would be barely possible as an acceptable answer. But to keep claiming that I have to do so is disingenuous at best. As to what the USSC decides that is likely to be against me. But I have heard some reports both ways as far as the more rational judges go.

Ok, then maybe we are done here. I am just disagreeing with you. Have a nice day.

 

[Laniakea]

Not if the other person does not appear to be an honest interlocutor.

I guess I should stop communicating with you then.

 

[Laniakea]

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.

I'll take that to mean that you don't know.
I'd respect you if you would shorten your answers to that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess I should stop communicating with you then.

Or, and it appears to be a much better idea. You could try to listen when people refute you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll take that to mean that you don't know.
I'd respect you if you would shorten your answers to that.

See, this is how you relieve others of their burden of proof. I offered sources and you ran away. In effect admitted that I was right.

 

[oldbadger]

The Constitution doesn't require criminal
conviction for a determination of insurrection.

Do you know why Colorado disbarred Mr Trump?

I just checked...... Colorado claimed that he engaged in insurrection. So you might need to find such a conviction

 

[oldbadger]

That is a bit of a non sequitur, but I can answer it. Neither:

https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/2012566.pdf

No, the SC is corrupt because members of the court lied to get onto it. Clarence Thomas is corrupt because he has taken millions in favors and gifts from a contributor and he has never recused himself when he should.

What is dodgy about it?

OK..... Frankly. What a mess!

In that case, that's your Supreme Court, and maybe your future leader.

So what chances do you think you've got for the future? I'm wondering what the world has got coming in the future.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you know why Colorado disbarred Mr Trump?

I just checked...... Colorado claimed that he engaged in insurrection. So you might need to find such a conviction

What? Trump was never a lawyer. That means he cannot be disbarred. He was disqualified. No conviction needed. There was a court hearing and the judge determined that he had participated in an insurrection. The same was found on appeal.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK..... Frankly. What a mess!

In that case, that's your Supreme Court, and maybe your future leader.

So what chances do you think you've got for the future? I'm wondering what the world has got coming in the future.

Odds are that Biden will still defeat him. And yes, it is a mess like we haven't seen since the Civil War.

 

[fantome profane]

Do you know why Colorado disbarred Mr Trump?

I just checked...... Colorado claimed that he engaged in insurrection. So you might need to find such a conviction

You do not need a criminal conviction unless you are imposing a criminal penalty (prison). That may come latter, but that is not what this is about.

And btw, I don't think the term "disbarred" applies here either, unless there is some definition of that word I am unaware of.

This is simply a question of eligibility, nothing more and nothing less.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you know why Colorado disbarred Mr Trump?

I just checked...... Colorado claimed that he engaged in insurrection. So you might need to find such a conviction

What's needed is unclear.
The Constitution doesn't speak to it.
And I'm unfamiliar what the originalist
views behind the 14th Amendment are.

 

[oldbadger]

What? Trump was never a lawyer. That means he cannot be disbarred. He was disqualified. No conviction needed. There was a court hearing and the judge determined that he had participated in an insurrection. The same was found on appeal.

It's a pity that you are not a Supreme Court judge.
Good luck with all this, I hope that such as you succeed, but I just don't think that you will. Can you see that?

 

[oldbadger]

What's needed is unclear.
The Constitution doesn't speak to it.
And I'm unfamiliar what the originalist
views behind the 14th Amendment are.

Well if you are unclear then I haven't got a chance. I just hope that Mr Trump doesn't make it to the White House again.

Many Americans must wonder why a Brit might be so interested in your election, or an Estonian, or..... but this outcome will affect the whole world.

 

[oldbadger]

We

You do not need a criminal conviction unless you are imposing a criminal penalty (prison). That may come latter, but that is not what this is about.

And btw, I don't think the term "disbarred" applies here either, unless there is some definition of that word I am unaware of.

This is simply a question of eligibility, nothing more and nothing less.

Well let's hope that Mr Trump does not win power.

If the Supreme Court decides that Mr Trump can stand for election, all those with certitude about his disbarment/illegibility will be able to do is admit how wrong they were or scream corruption........ Now I wonder which?

 

[oldbadger]

Odds are that Biden will still defeat him. And yes, it is a mess like we haven't seen since the Civil War.

I do hope that Mr Biden will win.
This will affect the world, as you know, nasty situation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's a pity that you are not a Supreme Court judge.
Good luck with all this, I hope that such as you succeed, but I just don't think that you will. Can you see that?

I have said before that they will probably vote against disqualification. I can survive. By the way, TDS affects both the left and the right. At this time it is rather easy to see who has TDS on the right.

 

[Sargonski]

I have said before that they will probably vote against disqualification. I can survive. By the way, TDS affects both the left and the right. At this time it is rather easy to see who has TDS on the right.

No .. TDS does not affect both the left and the right ..how can it, when you have not defined what TDS is ?

What is TDS to you .. is something completely different to someone else .. and the "Trump Effect" .. is completely different on Left vs the Right .. sans the obvious "Out of their mind" actions which are also differernt Red vs Blue .. and thus a pointles false and meaningless comparison.

Blue is exploding with hate for Trump .. been carrying on this mass illegal and illegitimate use and abuse of power .. In conjunction with trampling on Essential liberty - the Rule of Law - Principles of Justice down path of collectivist totalitarianism or more technically Utilitarianism - more specific - fallacious Utilitarian Feudal Facism .. in a system that is an Oligopoly-Bureaucracy Fusion Monster .. the natural outcroping of Pay to Play - the natural outcropping of self interest and Greed as Marx put it. Some smarts to be found everywhere I guess .. even Marx had a few enlightening moments. .. duh .. and pure partisanship in a Trump rage don't lead to any such objectivity now does it.

These deranged cancel culture ideology is an abomination to the founding principle .. the ideas of Liberal Democracy .. Rule of Law .. Magna Carta .. removes the primary safeguard put in place by the founders to limit gov't power.

The nation that turns civil protest into an act of domestic Terrorism .. free speech into an act of domestic Terrorism ... is a nation that has suceeded in moving one further towards the goal of Unlimited Gov't power .. as that is what the special council has power to do .. same as the Gitmo court operating outside the normal rules of Justice and respect for essential liberty and rule of law.

Not understand what the Gitmo treatment is ? went deer in headlights this fact ? I don't get it .. what part of Cop City Protesters do not rise to the bar of the "Gitmo Treatment" is having trouble sinking in ? and where is that bar supposed to be ?

Answer the question - Where is the Gitmo Bar --- and where is it supposed to be ? and do you not give a sht at all about limitations to Gov't power ? recognize importance ? or has the Trump effect gotten rid of such trivialities in the name of the greater good - fallacious utilitarianism.