Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Using President Trump as an example; he has never even been charged with insurrection.The insurrection charge is a lie
If you watch the video, he did not do that. It is just a click bate fake story in the gateway pundit.It's bad when George Stephanopoulis has to point out that keeping Trump off the ballot is an affront to the Constitution.
You don't understand the 14th amendment.Um... They are following the constitution when they ban insurrectionists from the ballot.
So we can keep Biden off the ballot because he's incompetent.Where does it say they have to be?
Being charged was never required or used when section 3 was used to keep traitorous Confederates off the ballots after the civil war.Using President Trump as an example; he has never even been charged with insurrection.
But if he were, it would have to be in federal court. And he’d have to be convicted. Absent that, the 14th A. doesn’t mean squat in terms of his qualification to be a candidate.
He did say that. While Pelosi was talking you could hear George say the Constitution.If you watch the video, he did not do that. It is just a click bate fake story in the gateway pundit.
That's because they fought for states that seceded from the union. When did Trump's state of New York secede from the union?Being charged was never required or used when section 3 was used to keep traitorous Confederates off the ballots after the civil war.
If you read the plain text, look at the original intent or the historical usage then you would be the one that doesn't understand. But ultimately the conservatives on the USSC will probably drop their originalist facade and rule in favor of Trump.You don't understand the 14th amendment.
The text is referring to combatants who fought for states that seceded from the union. It's a post civil war Amendment.If you read the plain text, look at the original intent or the historical usage then you would be the one that doesn't understand. But ultimately the conservatives on the USSC will probably drop their originalist facade and rule in favor of Trump.
One could hardly be charged with the “crime” of being a confederate soldier.Being charged was never required or used when section 3 was used to keep traitorous Confederates off the ballots after the civil war.
No, at this point, she just looks too old to be part of the national conversation.
Someone please. . . !!! Just put her in a nursing home. It is past time for her to retire.
Section 3 say "insurrection" not specifically the American Civil war. Jan. 6th and Trump's fake elector plot definitely fits some definitions of insurrection but I for one would love for the USSC to rule on that aspect but they will probably find a more cowardly way of limiting States rights to run their elections.That's because they fought for states that seceded from the union. When did Trump's state of New York secede from the union?
You said that he said "keeping Trump off the ballot is an affront to the Constitution" and that is not true.He did say that. While Pelosi was talking you could hear George say the Constitution.
It actually was targeting politicians more than soldiers. i.e. Jefferson DavisOne could hardly be charged with the “crime” of being a confederate soldier.
That shit was never in doubt.
Ultimately courts are who decide when constitutionality is in question. Initially the states create the framework for determining ballot eligibility.How many here are willing to let partisan politicians decide what is constitutionally correct?
~S~
Again. It wasn’t exactly an unknown that Jeff Davis had been the President of the Confederate States.It actually was targeting politicians more than soldiers. i.e. Jefferson Davis
There is nothing in the text stating it applies only to "the civil war".The text is referring to combatants who fought for states that seceded from the union. It's a post civil war Amendment.
Yes, specifically the Civil War. That's the reason for the Amendment.Section 3 say "insurrection" not specifically the American Civil war. Jan. 6th and Trump's fake elector plot definitely fits some definitions of insurrection but I for one would love for the USSC to rule on that aspect but they will probably find a more cowardly way of limiting States rights to run their elections.
It was written for Civil War combatants from the Confederacy. Read a history book.There is nothing in the text stating it applies only to "the civil war".
