Insurrection and running for office

[pucho812]

2 states have decided to not allow Trump in the primary ballot claiming the 14th amendment and Trump participating in an insurrection. While I am sure some. Members here are overjoyed at this news I find it unnecessary. If he truly is that bad, then he wouldn’t win anyway. More over is all it takes is to claim some one is an insurrectionist and boom they are off the ballot?

 

[Brian Roth]

Pucho.....here we go with another Brewery sh!tstorm LOL!! I am a registered Independent... and "ex RINO" (for many years) as one good friend calls me. I'll skip this thread since it will explode into 20000 pages within the next day or two. Name calling insults etc. I'm too old for this.....

Good luck to all.....

Bri

 

[CJ]

Don't worry, the proud boys will take care of it,

 

[crazydoc]

If he truly is that bad, then he wouldn’t win anyway.

I'll start with an implication of Godwin's law here -that thought is somewhat naive.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'll start with an implication of Godwin's law here -that thought is somewhat naive.

I'm almost afraid to ask for that explanation.

JR

 

[pucho812]

Pucho.....here we go with another Brewery sh!tstorm LOL!! I am a registered Independent... and "ex RINO" (for many years) as one good friend calls me. I'll skip this thread since it will explode into 20000 pages within the next day or two. Name calling insults etc. I'm too old for this.....

Good luck to all.....

Bri

Yeah I saw the impending shit storm but I have to ask, is it really that simple? Can saying one is an insurrectionist be enough to revoke their name on a ballot?
He hasn’t been found guilty of it yet so trying to be academic here.

 

[fallout]

Can saying one is an insurrectionist be enough to revoke their name on a ballot?

You answered your own question. That said, it seems fairly desperate.

2024 is going to be a shit show. I plan to focus on friends, family and hobbies and try my best to filter out the noise.

 

[jabe]

Can saying one is an insurrectionist be enough to revoke their name on a ballot?

Academically speaking, no. There's nothing in the 14th amendment that requires the subject be found guilty in a criminal trial, but the burden of proof is still higher than just calling someone an insurrectionist. In Colorado this condition was adjudicated during a five-day trial with witnesses and documentary evidence. Neither the defense, nor the original district finding in favor of the defense, nor dissenting opinions in the state Supreme Court disputed it. Will SCOTUS agree? We'll find out. This is new territory. But so far it takes more than simply calling someone an insurrectionist to get them removed from a ballot.

 

[Tubetec]

I think its pretty obvious Trump incited insurection that day ,
he didnt care about the lives of the people sworn to defend the capitol , or the lives of the people he called in to try and wreck the place ,

So the question I ask is , does Trump have to be found guilty before people accept that his intention was to cause riots and a breakdown in law and order ?

If more that 50% of the US vote believe Trump did no wrong that day , you get the leader you deserve after the next election . A courtroom trial might not happen in time or ever , its the American publics call .

 

[fazer]

It’s Pandora’s Box. Once it’s open it will just be normal operating procedures. Seems to be no limit in politics. I’m staying out.

 

[Spiritworks]

This seems to me a very slippery slope, regardless of which side of the aisle any of us support. It's obvious that our choices in any election have been limited by many factors, and this is only going to reduce choice even more, in the long run. Tit for Tat. I wouldn't be surprised if there are members of the Republican party who are supporting/promoting this from the shadows because they believe Trump is a hindrance to the party but are too afraid to speak out.

 

[jabe]

I wouldn't be surprised if there are members of the Republican party who are supporting/promoting this from the shadows because they believe Trump is a hindrance to the party but are too afraid to speak out.

Not from the shadows, even. In Colorado, it was a group of Republicans who initiated the removal. Since it's the primary ballot, only Republicans would have legal standing to do so in court.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I'm not as good at mind reading as so many here are. I try to look at politics like 3D chess, while many of our less intelligent politicians are barely managing to play checkers.

Since legal minds do not expect this 14th amendment nonsense to survive SCOTUS review one could imagine anarchists setting up SCOTUS with another negative talking point to inflame the already existing detractors.

JR

PS: I realize I am practicing some mind reading here too.....

 

[Matador]

Since legal minds do not expect this 14th amendment nonsense to survive SCOTUS review

Here is the majority opinion from Colorado. It is a masterclass in originalist interpretation, so it will be entertaining to watch SCOTUS do their best to contort themselves into knots to wriggle out of it.

Coincidently, there already is a remedy in section three of the fourteenth amendment to restore Trump to all ballots:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

[CJ]

An insurrection is defined as
"a violent uprising against an authority or government."

Do you think that a supreme court with its 3 new appointees and a non corrupt thomas - and a court that overturned wade/roe - will see it as such?

That court is as pure as the driven snow.

California is smart, they know what the court will do and what the voters will do.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Here is the majority opinion from Colorado. It is a masterclass in originalist interpretation, so it will be entertaining to watch SCOTUS do their best to contort themselves into knots to wriggle out of it.

Coincidently, there already is a remedy in section three of the fourteenth amendment to restore Trump to all ballots:

For "originalist" context the 14th amendment was passed after the civil war to deal with "actual" insurrectionists.
===
President Biden appears to be giving lots of aid to America's enemies, but that is already being investigated. I'd hate to see him removed from state ballots in a similar tit for tat move. That would likewise be wrong... dangerous?

Nobody seems concerned about unintended consequences? Lots of partisans out there playing checkers, just barely.

JR

 

[Soundwaves]

You answered your own question. That said, it seems fairly desperate.

2024 is going to be a shit show. I plan to focus on friends, family and hobbies and try my best to filter out the noise.

Do you think a 52 ohm capacitor would block the noise on the line as it use to for ham radio on cheaper record players?

 

[CJ]

yes.

gonna be another city vs country election.

i drive out to the sticks, yakima wa, tractors have trump flags flying,

same thing in Misery, kansas city and st louie out voted by meridian, 57-41

 

[pucho812]

For "originalist" context the 14th amendment was passed after the civil war to deal with "actual" insurrectionists.
===
President Biden appears to be giving lots of aid to America's enemies, but that is already being investigated. I'd hate to see him removed from state ballots in a similar tit for tat move. That would likewise be wrong... dangerous?

Nobody seems concerned about unintended consequences? Lots of partisans out there playing checkers, just barely.

JR

I thought about that in similar lines that is sets a bad precedent. Too many in either side will play the tit for tat.

 

[hodad]

Speaking of Godwin's Law, I kind of enjoyed this from Godwin himself:

https://wapo.st/3tCR3ok