The minority's opinion on today's case is truly mindblowing.

How did they do that without a trial? Without affording Trump the right to confront his accusers in a trial? Without allowing him to present a defense?

Courts are supposed to have trials... not just say such stuff out of hand. It's ridiculous.

 

Are you going to report me again?...lol

Look up the posts, my information-shy chum.

 

As usual, you can't support your claim.

 

I always do. Maybe that's why you use the tactics you do.

 

Baloney!

 

Yes, it's a crime. It can also be determined in a CIVIL proceeding that a person has engaged in insurrection, meriting a civil penalty.

 

There WERE trials. Trump WAS permitted to present a defense.

I should have thought this was utterly obvious due to the fact that the Colorado case was appealed right through to SCOTUS.

 

What is the 'fine' for insurrection?(Note, one can't use the criminal statute since the claim is that it's a CIVIL penalty). There's a blatantly obvious reason why we have US. Title code, and everything not covered by that code(civil)

It's the same format as the bill of rights.

 

And none of those States had standing. Hell, a large part of the Colorado republican judiciary openly questioned whether or not the case should have been heard.

The opinion that was foistered onto the court was an extreme minority even in legal circles. So citing those clown trials does not make it so that Trump was legitimately brought into the court system for the non-charged crime of insurrection.

The vast majority of the USA rejects on principle the merits of the claims.

 

The 14th was tailored in 1868 to put the federal government in a position to stop the South from running people for public office intent upon dismantling the Republic. Section 5 strengthens Congress' hand in any dispute about states' rights that might arise enforcing the 14th against states.

 

In this case the civil penalty resulting from a civil proceeding determining that a person engaged in insurrection is disqualification.

 

The petitioners had standing. Hence the cases were not dismissed. Civil cases, which determined through civil proceedings that Trump had engaged in insurrection, meriting the civil penalty of qualification.

 

I'm not sure most Americans go beyond a personal judgment on Trump. Consideration of underlying principles has been lost in partisan bickering.

 

I'm 50 percent there is going to be a plane crash.

 

Right. Pick your poison, basically

There's already been one member of Congress say he should be shot. We all know they're saying that behind closed doors. That's why she slipped up and said it on a national news show.

 

Explain why it's baloney.

 

Please explain why you don't know already.

 

I knew you couldn't...lol

 

There are no states rights in the 14th amendment.

 

It would be difficult to make a legal determination that’s appealable by the Orange Turd if he wasn’t a participant. Do the Trumpies think he let the matter go by default or something?

 

No...there wasn't. Stop saying it, because it isn't true.

 

Oh I can explain to you, but it is such a fundamental shortcoming in your knowledge that I fear it would require way more time than I am prepared to spend on bringing you up to speed on the most basic of facts.

But, hey, you interpret it however you like - whatever makes you feel all chuffed.

 

The cases were overruled...lol.

 

If you could, you would. Hell, you don't even know what the 6th and 7th Amendments say...lol

 

It is true. Unfortunately this is one of those basics that you simply don't understand.

You don't even understand that a matter tried in court is a ... trial. Bizarre.