Constitutionally Speaking, Trump Is Toast

[BS Filter]

Democrats hate democracy. Hence the stolen election and bastardizing of the law.

Democrats preach democracy and how they love it...until they don't.

 

[Nostra]

Being convicted of defrauding The United States is close enough.

Link?

 

[Rigby5]

Poor little commie, individual voters are the ones that sued. The cases should have been dismissed for lack of standing.

.

Wrong.

The birther suit was denied because the individual plaintiff was trying to over ride everyone else, and take a candidate OFF the ballot.
You need standing for that, since it impacts EVERYONE in a harmful way.

In this case, individual plaintiffs are trying to aid the voters and everyone else, by trying to ensure their candidate is ON the ballot.

See the difference?
Almost no one has standing to remove candidates.
Almost everyone has standing to add candidates.

 

[Rigby5]

When was the last time a losing candidate for president tried to overturn an election using a slew of his barbarian follwers to stop Congress from certifying the results? Or by plotting to send a bunch of idiot fake electors to Congress?

Let's have it, CLOWN.

There were no "fake electors" and there is absolutely no way anyone could possibly use "fake electors".
But there obviously was massive voter fraud.
We all saw people dumping bags for of ballots into drop boxes, that do not check any sort of ID.
We all saw easily hacked or backdoor computers being used as voting machines.

 

[OKTexas]

Wrong.

The birther suit was denied because the individual plaintiff was trying to over ride everyone else, and take a candidate OFF the ballot.
You need standing for that, since it impacts EVERYONE in a harmful way.

In this case, individual plaintiffs are trying to aid the voters and everyone else, by trying to ensure their candidate is ON the ballot.

See the difference?
Almost no one has standing to remove candidates.
Almost everyone has standing to add candidates.

The topic is the CO case, and no I don't see a difference. It's trying to prevent voters from having Trump as a choice on their ballot.

.

 

[MagicMike]

Poor little commie, individual voters are the ones that sued. The cases should have been dismissed for lack of standing.

.

Lack of standing like Trump's 63 voter fraud cases that got laughed out of federal courts?
Is this what you mean?

 

[Rigby5]

No it's not. Read the constitution.

The electors meet in their respective states. They cast their ballots for President and Vice President separately. They then send the ballots sealed to the Congress. The joint session of Congress opens and counts the votes. If there are objections raised to any of the votes, then each house will consider those objections independently. The person with the most votes for President becomes the President elect, so long as she has achieved a majority of all votes. And the person with the most votes for Vice President becomes the Vice-President elect as long as they also achieve a majority. If the President-elect fails to quality then the duly elected Vice President becomes acting President until the President-elect qualifies, or until a President is elected.

The constitution clearly envisions the constitutional qualifications of a potential President to be analyzed after the votes are counted.

You are forgetting the Amendments.
Here is about the 12th Amendment.
{...
The president and vice president of the United States campaign together and are elected as a team and not individually following the adoption of the 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which was drafted to prevent the nation's two highest elected officials from being from opposing political parties. The amendment made it more difficult, but not impossible, for voters to elect members of two political parties as president and vice president.

Candidates for president and vice president have appeared together on the same ticket since the election of 1804, the year the 12th Amendment was ratified. Prior to the adoption of the constitutional amendment, the office of vice president was awarded to the presidential candidate who won the second-largest number of votes, regardless of which political party they represented.
...}

 

[Rigby5]

The topic is the CO case, and no I don't see a difference. It's trying to prevent voters from having Trump as a choice on their ballot.

.

Maybe I misunderstood then.
Because my point is that it should be extremely difficult to take anyone off a ballot, but extremely easy to get anyone put on the ballot.

 

[OKTexas]

Lack of standing like Trump's 63 voter fraud cases that got laughed out of federal courts?
Is this what you mean?

No.

.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

You are forgetting the Amendments.
Here is about the 12th Amendment.

Maybe you should read the 20th amendment.

 

[Rigby5]

Maybe you should read the 20th amendment.

I brought up the 12 amendment only because the section of the Constitution you quoted said the candidate with the most votes was president and the one with the second amount of votes was vice president.
The 12th amendment paired president and vice president.
But you are correct that the 20th amendment suggests that if Pence had not certified the vote on Jan 6th, that Trump still would not have remained president. But instead congress would decide what to do. So those claiming Trump was trying to inflict an insurrection to stay in power have to be lying. Trump would not have stayed in power regardless of what ever Pence did.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I brought up the 12 amendment only because the section of the Constitution you quoted said the candidate with the most votes was president and the one with the second amount of votes was vice president.

No, I didn't.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Article II of the Constitution pertains to the Office of the President and Executive Powers. It makes clear the fact that the Presidency is indeed an Office.

Constitutionally speaking, Trump is toast.

Article II of the Constitution pertains to the Office of the President and Executive Powers. It makes clear the fact that the Presidency is indeed an Office. Section 1: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of...

www.dailykos.com

Yep. The OFFICE of the Presidency. That makes him an OFFICER.

Now the Roberts court will be forced to rule for, or against the Constitution. If they rule against, then they are clearly saying the Presidency is not an office, AND saying they can inject themselves into the states decisions on federal elections.

Choose wisely John. The court won't always be conservative, and once it flips, your decision will have consequences.

You do read English, right skrewey?

 

[justoffal]

Why would you expect standards from Roberts that you don't expect from judges like Chutkin and Engoron?

 

[jbrownson0831]

Fortunately for Trump, he has a Supreme Court dominated by corrupt, dishonest conservative ideologues who will once again ignore precedent and the Constitution.

Translation from Mrsjonesican to English:
Fortunately for all Americans, the Supreme Court is made up of a majority of non-corrupt, honest, law enforcing conservatives who will once again rule by the laww and the Constitution.

Law enforcement just drives the wackos crazy.....