Trump wins again: Michigan judge denies effort to keep Trump off 2024 ballot

[Vrenn]

He got a hearing.

That's all the process requires.

The 14th Amendment is clear, a conviction is not required. Only participation in an insurrection, which Trump did.

Rump has NOT had a hearing yet. By April, he will have. and until they convict him of insurrection or inhibiting the Government he will not be convicted of insurrection. And, until then, he's a citizen with full rights and priveleges. Here is the section of the 14th that covers it.

Section 3​

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.

 

[Vrenn]

Lie.

Show me the justification for the removal.

 

[JoeB131]

Rump has NOT had a hearing yet. By April, he will have. and until they convict him of insurrection or inhibiting the Government he will not be convicted of insurrection. And, until then, he's a citizen with full rights and priveleges. Here is the section of the 14th that covers it.

Except, no, he isn't. Section 3 doesn't require a conviction. That was the point, they didn't want ex-confederates in Congress or high office, but they didn't want to go through the trouble of putting them on trial for their treason. (which is the biggest mistake we made after the civil war.. they should have been tried and some of them should have been executed.)

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Rump has NOT had a hearing ye

Lie. Two, just in Colorado.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Show me the justification for the removal.

Your mommy doesn't work here. You are an adult and are expected to know something about these topics before commenting.

Find it yourself then argue against it. If you can.

And don't lie about due process again.

 

[Vrenn]

Except, no, he isn't. Section 3 doesn't require a conviction. That was the point, they didn't want ex-confederates in Congress or high office, but they didn't want to go through the trouble of putting them on trial for their treason. (which is the biggest mistake we made after the civil war.. they should have been tried and some of them should have been executed.)

In the same ammendment, The 14TH, it covers due process.

Due Process of Law​

SECTION 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[Vrenn]

Your mommy doesn't work here. You are an adult and are expected to know something about these topics before commenting.

Find it yourself then argue against it. If you can.

And don't lie about due process again.

In other words? You can't back up your claim but I can. Read my latest posts.

 

[JoeB131]

In the same ammendment, The 14TH, it covers due process.

Due Process of Law​

SECTION 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Except Trump got a hearing in front of the CO Supreme Court.

 

[Dagosa]

Due process is important. And he needs to be convicted of a non civil action. Until then, I Due process comes into play.

No he does not need to be convicted of anything to be adjudged as unqualified. Obviously, he was.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In the same ammendment, The 14TH, it covers due process.

Due Process of Law​

SECTION 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Trump got his due process.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In other words? You can't back up your claim but I can. Read my latest posts.

No you didn't. Your claim is that Trump isnt getting due process.

That claim has been obliterated several times over.

Get a grip on reality.

 

[Vrenn]

Except Trump got a hearing in front of the CO Supreme Court.

Sorry, but that was below the due process. Rump was not given the right to address his accusers in that courtroom.

 

[Vrenn]

No you didn't. Your claim is that Trump isnt getting due process.

That claim has been obliterated several times over.

Get a grip on reality.

He wasn't even invited to the Colorado Court to face his accusers. It doesn't matter if I believe he's guilty or not. We are a land of laws and need to follow them.

You not wanting to allow that right to anyone including rump says that you are no better than he is.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sorry, but that was below the due process. Rump was not given the right to address his accusers in that courtroom.

Lie.

Trump had full opportunity. And lost.

The CO Supreme court simply reviewed that hearing and ruling.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He wasn't even invited to the Colorado Court to face his accusers.

Lie. His lawyers represented him in the court hearing that he lost.

 

[Vrenn]

Lie.

Trump had full opportunity. And lost.

The CO Supreme court simply reviewed that hearing and ruling.

No, it reviewed the court filings of the ones wanting that ruling. There was no court about this in the colorado juristiction in regards of this. It was a ruling based on paperwork. It certainly does not meet the criteria of Due Process.

 

[Vrenn]

Lie. His lawyers represented him in the court hearing that he lost.

Prove that. I hope that you are not charged and convicted the same way. That would be a Fascist heaven.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Prove that

I'm not your mommy. Read up before commenting.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, it reviewed the court filings of the ones wanting that ruling.

False. It reviewed all the evidence and the lower court's decision.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Prove that. I hope that you are not charged and convicted the same way. That would be a Fascist heaven.

It wasn't a criminal charge or a conviction. you seem pretty confused.