Supreme Court Poised to Rule on Monday on Trump’s Eligibility to Hold Office

Should Biden tell kamala to count some fake dem electors in states Biden lost?

 

I never said anything about the USSC — I said Republicans. But thanks for the strawman.

 

I don't agree with the GOP on abortion. I also think it is a losing issue for them based on their current extremist position

 

The left argued that? Or did the DOJ memo say that?

 

That's taking the argument out of context. The argument the Trump lawyers are making is that he can't be held liable for actions undertaken while being POTUS. He isn't making an argument that he can't be charged with a crime(and honestly, left sources implying as such are doing the same as Newsmax 2020 election denialism)

This was already decided by the District Court and I think it should have been(and will mostly be stayed, actually). The reason SCOTUS took this one up, is to further define presidential immunities. This one won't go well for Trump, but will be good for the office of the Presidency.

 

support of the insurrectionists?

 

No his lawyers said since he wasn’t impeached for insurrection he can’t be charged with it. Effectively saying anything the president isnt removed for, he has immunity for. So he could order all senators imprisoned and there isn’t a damn thing we could do about it.
Sound like an america you wanna live in?

 

His lawyers made no such legal argument, nor would any such legal argument hold any water. Further, it is not the legal case in question. The case in question is whether or not Trump enjoyed presidential immunity for actions taken on 1/6/2020. The District Court ruled no, and I suspect the SCOTUS will agree, but it will also define what qualifies as an immunity

I heavily criticize all the left columnists, who basically can't read for giving its followers the impression that you have, but this case isn't the hyperbole it's being made to be.

 

Maybe, if he can remember what an elector is.

 

They did! They said he’d have to impeached and removed to charge him!

 

And y’all are doing this by forcing child rape victims to have their rape baby? Whut?

Whataboutism noted

 

Yes, that's what your arguments are advocating for.

 

sounds like that is what your arguments support

 

I agree. If republicans would drop the social warfare and revenge policies, focus on the economy and immigration — democrats wouldn’t have a chance

 

They were talking about the enforcement mechanic within the amendment. The SCOTUS actually did issue a ruling in which they basically outlined that the political court(Congress) can only deal with matters of its proscribed political orbit, and that as such the judicial court is not bound to judgments made within it.(I disagree with this, but that's irrelevant for the context)

Essentially, there's two ways to enforce the mechanic. The first way is through Congress(which Congress voted against it. Lament McConnell and the others. Or lament the then-speaker Pelosi for not acting with the urgency that it required if she wanted to impeach an actual sitting President) but Congress did vote against it.

Now, here's what's interesting: The Liberals on SCOTUS did have a tiny hissy fit: They argue that the majority created some new rule wherein the Congress has to enact legislation to enforce section 3. Little do the Liberal SCOTUS'S know: Congress has already done this. All penal code is borne out of legislation.

The Second way is through that penal code of insurrection. But, guess what? The DOJ hasn't charged Trump with that particular crime.

So we're not even talking about insurrection anymore. We are talking specifically, whether or not Donald Trump enjoyed presidential immunity for his actions(plural) on 1/6/2020 because he was at the time sitting President.

That's all that's being debated in court. The District Court said no, and as I said twice(and now a third time), I believe this court will concur. But what it will do, is it will further define what an immunity is.

 

Nope, I've been 100% opposed to all illegal measures to determine the outcome of an election on 1/6, Maine, Colorado, etc. Don't you wish you could say the same?

 

only one was illegal.... the rest used the courts as they are intended t be used, I disagree with the SC, but they are what we got for now

 

Nobody has been charged with insurrection. You understand this right?

 

LOL, they didn't use the courts. They had to be sued to force them to follow the law. What would have happened if people opposed to their illegal attempt to remove Trump from the ballot didn't sue them? An isurrection. The opposing party used the courts to stop your insurrection. Justice Jackson said you were opposing our democracy. How sad.

Step 1. Use illegal means to remove an opposition candidate from office.
Step 2. Get sued.
Step 3. Claim you "used the courts" and didn't violate the law when the Supreme Court tells you that you violated the law.

 

I think my post made that clear

 

It's not "according to Trump" it's according to the prosecuting attorneys. They knew insurrection charge wouldn't hold up so they never sought it against ANYONE on January 6th.

 

And trumps lawyers said they couldn’t anyway

 

Because the riots on 1/6 didn't meet the legal burden for an insurrection. They've already bent the existing statutes beyond what they were ever intended to charge many of the defendants. However, since so many liberals consider non-violent acts of giving speeches and trespassing to be an insurrection then likewise it's insurrection to try to subvert the election through illegal means of removing an opposition candidate from contention in an effort to determine the outcome of the election in their favor. Justice Jackson said your views on this issue oppose our democracy. In other words, the liberal justices on the court have said the vast majority of liberals on this forum are a "threat to our democracy." They've proven to be a much larger threat than Putin ever was. What a time to be alive.

 

Liberals claim opposition to their political views is a threat to "our" democracy. This democracy belongs to all of us collectively and both political policies function under it's protection. Somehow I get the feeling "our democracy" chant is not intended to be inclusive.

 

Rape victims, as has been endlessly repeated can have access to the plan B all day long. That isn't exactly having an abortion though. Why do you folks insist on having baby body parts markets? Explain why you insist that just minority women have abortions, hence the reason those clinics are where they are. And when do you suppose that you're going to take responsibility for the genocide of the roughly 3-5 million minority children that weren't allowed to be born so your team could continue to enjoy their labor?