Per the 14th Amendment,

[YoursTruly]

I've asked this question before, but didn't get an answer. BTW, I can't find one instance of any of the rioters in the capital being charged and found guilty of that actual charge of "insurrection." I've seen numerous ones that skirted "insurrection." But not one with that charge and guilty verdict containing that word.

If there is one, then an insurrection has been committed, according to a jury and judge. And in all probability, Trump will be found guilty of inciting it. And will not be qualified to be the POTUS. Even if he wins the election.
And it could do down this way. Trump wins the election, but before taking office, the election is thrown out because the winner doesn't qualify. The same way it would happen if say Edward Snowden where to get the winning amount of electoral votes. He still doesn't qualify to be president. He'd qualify to run. But he could never be sworn in.

The big "oh shit" moment after Trump wins the election, when his supporters realized they put all their efforts into someone who doesn't even qualify, per the US constitution.

On the flip side, IF no guilty verdict of insurrection has been made, then according to the law, there really was no insurrection. Trump wins the election and takes office. And there's nothing the democrats can do about it.

 

[Oddball]

 

[elektra]

How many threads on the exact same subject must we suffer

There was no insurrection you fucking idiot!

 

[YoursTruly]

How many threads on the exact same subject must we suffer

There was no insurrection you fucking idiot!

Then why even comment?

Out of all the people the jurors found guilty, was any of them found guilty of the actual charge of "insurrection?"

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Then why even comment?

Out of all the people the jurors found guilty, was any of them found guilty of the actual charge of "insurrection?"

None have been charged with insurrection.

 

[Lemmi]

In order for there to be a serious insurrection you need F15s. I heard it from Biden's own lips.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

In order for there to be a serious insurrection you need F15s. I heard it from Biden's own lips.

What's Happened Many Times in Many Countries Can Happen Here

The majority of pilots will be on the side of insurrection.

 

[YoursTruly]

None have been charged with insurrection.

That's what I was thinking. So then there's no way to say Trump incited an insurrection since no insurrection has not been found in in any court of law. Trump wasn't found guilty of insurrection in the Senate (his 2nd impeachment).

So the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to Trump.

 

[YoursTruly]

In order for there to be a serious insurrection you need F15s. I heard it from Biden's own lips.

You missed the entire point.

This is about actual court documents and guilty verdicts of an insurrection. Trump can't be guilty of inciting an insurrection if one hasn't been committed and proven in a court of law.

The left says Trump is guilty of inciting one. But there's been no guilty verdict of an insurrection from ANY of those who participated in 1/6.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

That's what I was thinking. So then there's no way to say Trump incited an insurrection since no insurrection has not been found in in any court of law. Trump wasn't found guilty of insurrection in the Senate (his 2nd impeachment).

So the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to Trump.

Trump has never been charged with insurrection. Everything, since the moment Trump came down the escalator has been to conceal, muddy, cloud or confuse. Nothing that comes from democrats will be honest or above board. Jack Smith is known for this as well as not having a record of convictions.

 

[Slade3200]

I've asked this question before, but didn't get an answer. BTW, I can't find one instance of any of the rioters in the capital being charged and found guilty of that actual charge of "insurrection." I've seen numerous ones that skirted "insurrection." But not one with that charge and guilty verdict containing that word.

If there is one, then an insurrection has been committed, according to a jury and judge. And in all probability, Trump will be found guilty of inciting it. And will not be qualified to be the POTUS. Even if he wins the election.
And it could do down this way. Trump wins the election, but before taking office, the election is thrown out because the winner doesn't qualify. The same way it would happen if say Edward Snowden where to get the winning amount of electoral votes. He still doesn't qualify to be president. He'd qualify to run. But he could never be sworn in.

The big "oh shit" moment after Trump wins the election, when his supporters realized they put all their efforts into someone who doesn't even qualify, per the US constitution.

On the flip side, IF no guilty verdict of insurrection has been made, then according to the law, there really was no insurrection. Trump wins the election and takes office. And there's nothing the democrats can do about it.

There were several found guilty of sedition… isn’t that synonymous with insurrection?

 

[YoursTruly]

Trump has never been charged with insurrection. Everything, since the moment Trump came down the escalator has been to conceal, muddy, cloud or confuse. Nothing that comes from democrats will be honest or above board. Jack Smith is known for this as well as not having a record of convictions.

I may be the only one on the planet who see things this way, but to me, it almost seems like they're (the democrats) aren't charging Trump with things he's actually done. Trumps guilty of some things. But the democrats won't charge him for those things he's guilty of.

Like the first impeachment. Trump was completely guilty of bribing Ukraine. 100%. But Pelosi didn't even try to impeach Trump of that. There's other instances.
To me, it's like they're doing all of this on purpose. One false charge after another just so he wins, walks free and garners so much support that he can't lose. In fact, he may have so much support that the country will want to make him chancellor.

Maybe I'm retarded. But I just can't see any reason why they'd NOT charge him for things he's actually guilty of.
Maybe I've seen too many drama movies with huge plot twists at the end.

 

[Slade3200]

Trump has never been charged with insurrection. Everything, since the moment Trump came down the escalator has been to conceal, muddy, cloud or confuse. Nothing that comes from democrats will be honest or above board. Jack Smith is known for this as well as not having a record of convictions.

You’re missing the OPs point. Slow down

 

[YoursTruly]

There were several found guilty of sedition… isn’t that synonymous with insurrection?

Yes, but it's still not insurrection. IIRC, "sedition" doesn't disqualify anyone to hold public office.
The word sedition isn't mentioned.

"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."

Trump didn't engage in the 1/6 riot, so he's not guilty of "rebellion." And since no one has been charged or found guilty of "insurrection," he's not guilty of inciting one.

 

[Flash]

I've asked this question before, but didn't get an answer. BTW, I can't find one instance of any of the rioters in the capital being charged and found guilty of that actual charge of "insurrection." I've seen numerous ones that skirted "insurrection." But not one with that charge and guilty verdict containing that word.

If there is one, then an insurrection has been committed, according to a jury and judge. And in all probability, Trump will be found guilty of inciting it. And will not be qualified to be the POTUS. Even if he wins the election.
And it could do down this way. Trump wins the election, but before taking office, the election is thrown out because the winner doesn't qualify. The same way it would happen if say Edward Snowden where to get the winning amount of electoral votes. He still doesn't qualify to be president. He'd qualify to run. But he could never be sworn in.

The big "oh shit" moment after Trump wins the election, when his supporters realized they put all their efforts into someone who doesn't even qualify, per the US constitution.

On the flip side, IF no guilty verdict of insurrection has been made, then according to the law, there really was no insurrection. Trump wins the election and takes office. And there's nothing the democrats can do about it.

You can have a six month Negro insurrection and the police will stand down and you can riot, kill and loot to your heart's content. No worries whatsoever about the Feds.

However, if you protest against the goddamn Democrats stealing the election then the filthy government will either kill you or throw you into prison.

That is the way things work in the Banana Republic of America.

 

[YoursTruly]

You can have a six month Negro insurrection and the police will stand down and you can riot, kill and loot to your heart's content. No worries whatsoever about the Feds.

However, if you protest against the goddamn Democrats stealing the election then the filthy government will either kill you or throw you into prison.

That is the way things work in the Banana Republic of America.

I get the hypocrisy, 100%. But what you're not getting is the point of the OP.
We're talking fine details that'll be used in a court of law. Specific words that'll be deliberately brought up by the democrats, that'll bring Trump out of this unscathed.

Trump wasn't at the capital when the rioting began. The democrats know this. So they're charging him as if he was there and participating in it. Knowing full well that won't stick. So why aren't they charging him for things he's actually guilty off?

It sounds to me like they're deliberately trying to create a lot of drama, only to make him more popular and supported, only to set him free.

An example: A guy steals money from a liquor store, at gun point. So the prosecutors go on an on about how dangerous the guy is. How he threatened the lives of the people in the liquor store and the public in general. They go on and on about how this guy is a threat to society. But then only charging him with stealing a bottle of booze, knowing full well he didn't steal booze, only money.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

A. It doesn't meet the definition of insurrection, period. Fuck, the left's deep state ensured there would be a riot on some level. Jan 6th is the classic example for a false flag. I think it had the greatest impact since Vietnam, which BTW, came by the hands of Democrats as well.

B. Trump incited no such thing. If leftists say it's so it never is. The lft knows they can build any narrative they like and their kind, who are soft and unwise will eat it all up. They love victim roles "oooooooooooo, ahhhhhhhhh, what about our democracy".

 

[Astrostar]

I've asked this question before, but didn't get an answer. BTW, I can't find one instance of any of the rioters in the capital being charged and found guilty of that actual charge of "insurrection." I've seen numerous ones that skirted "insurrection." But not one with that charge and guilty verdict containing that word.

If there is one, then an insurrection has been committed, according to a jury and judge. And in all probability, Trump will be found guilty of inciting it. And will not be qualified to be the POTUS. Even if he wins the election.
And it could do down this way. Trump wins the election, but before taking office, the election is thrown out because the winner doesn't qualify. The same way it would happen if say Edward Snowden where to get the winning amount of electoral votes. He still doesn't qualify to be president. He'd qualify to run. But he could never be sworn in.

The big "oh shit" moment after Trump wins the election, when his supporters realized they put all their efforts into someone who doesn't even qualify, per the US constitution.

On the flip side, IF no guilty verdict of insurrection has been made, then according to the law, there really was no insurrection. Trump wins the election and takes office. And there's nothing the democrats can do about it.

Trump & cult best bone up on the 14th Amendment. It may well be his Waterloo!

 

[Rogue AI]

The presidency isn't mentioned in the 14th. Try again.

 

[BluesLegend]

Trump left the White House, Biden moved in and took over. I'm not seeing the "insurrection" BS. Some idiots got rowdy and were arrested, that shit happened for months across U.S. cities during the Dem stoked uprisings. Rioting, looting, burning, damage and take over of government buildings, over 2,000 police injured. The audacity of Democrats to encourage that shit then express faux rage over Jan 6th laughable.