Two conservative law scholars argue Trump should not be eligible to run again for president

[Billy000]

From the article:

“Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas explain their conclusion in an article set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. The constitutional scholars, both active in the conservative Federalist Society, studied the question for more than a year, according to The New York Times.

The answer, according to Baude: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”

The provision they studied is Section Three of the 14th Amendment, which states that any person who took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Billy000’s take:

I guess the knee jerk response to this from Republicans will be “they aren’t real conservatives!”, despite none of them even knowing who these guys are but that won’t stop me from posting the best possible source for this argument.

Trump Is Disqualified From Holding Office, Conservative Law Professors Argue

Two constitutional law academics determined that the Constitution bars Trump from becoming president again due to his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

www.yahoo.com

 

[ActionJackson]

From the article:

“Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas explain their conclusion in an article set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. The constitutional scholars, both active in the conservative Federalist Society, studied the question for more than a year, according to The New York Times.

The answer, according to Baude: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”

The provision they studied is Section Three of the 14th Amendment, which states that any person who took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Billy000’s take:

I guess the knee jerk response to this from Republicans will be “they aren’t real conservatives!”, despite none of them even knowing who these guys are but that won’t stop me from posting the best possible source for this argument.

Trump Is Disqualified From Holding Office, Conservative Law Professors Argue

Two constitutional law academics determined that the Constitution bars Trump from becoming president again due to his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

www.yahoo.com

They aren't real conservatives.

 

[Billy000]

They aren't real conservatives.

Thank you for validating my point. You didn’t even bother trying to explain why they aren’t. You just just went for it right away lol

 

[excalibur]

Two idiots, one has been in the throes of TDS since 2016.

And they are dead wrong.

Don't make me spank you proving I'm right and they're both wrong!

 

[Billy000]

Two idiots, one has been in the throes of TDS since 2016.

And they are dead wrong.

Don't make me spank you proving I'm right and they're both wrong!

We both know you can’t explain how they are wrong. You would have by now if you had a real reason to believe it.

 

[Blaster]

From the article:

“Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas explain their conclusion in an article set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. The constitutional scholars, both active in the conservative Federalist Society, studied the question for more than a year, according to The New York Times.

The answer, according to Baude: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”

The provision they studied is Section Three of the 14th Amendment, which states that any person who took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Billy000’s take:

I guess the knee jerk response to this from Republicans will be “they aren’t real conservatives!”, despite none of them even knowing who these guys are but that won’t stop me from posting the best possible source for this argument.

Trump Is Disqualified From Holding Office, Conservative Law Professors Argue

Two constitutional law academics determined that the Constitution bars Trump from becoming president again due to his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

www.yahoo.com

Haha

 

[deannalw]

“engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Which he didn't do.

Your "scholars" ain't too sthmart

 

[Billy000]

Two idiots, one has been in the throes of TDS since 2016.

And they are dead wrong.

Don't make me spank you proving I'm right and they're both wrong!

Picture this: a person that believes strongly in the 2nd amendment, deregulation of capitalism, and the usual libertarian values.

What’s the one caveat?

The person also thinks Trump tried illegally to stay in power in 2020.

Why you think those opinions would have to be mutually exclusive is beyond my understanding lol

 

[ActionJackson]

Thank you for validating my point. You didn’t even bother trying to explain why they aren’t. You just just went for it right away lol

I could explain in detail and no genuine LibTard would give a hoot. Most don't have two brain cells to rub together, so an honest attempt at civil discussion is impossible and a complete waste of time.

 

[theHawk]

From the article:

“Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas explain their conclusion in an article set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. The constitutional scholars, both active in the conservative Federalist Society, studied the question for more than a year, according to The New York Times.

The answer, according to Baude: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”

The provision they studied is Section Three of the 14th Amendment, which states that any person who took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Billy000’s take:

I guess the knee jerk response to this from Republicans will be “they aren’t real conservatives!”, despite none of them even knowing who these guys are but that won’t stop me from posting the best possible source for this argument.

Trump Is Disqualified From Holding Office, Conservative Law Professors Argue

Two constitutional law academics determined that the Constitution bars Trump from becoming president again due to his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

www.yahoo.com

No one gives a shit what two anti-Trumpers think. Establishment stooges are so desperate to keep their failed policies and their corrupt system in place. America is going bankrupt both financially and morally, and these “conservatives“ are concerned about Donald Trump.

 

[Billy000]

I could explain in detail and no genuine LibTard would give a hoot. Most don't have two brain cells to rub together, so an honest attempt at civil discussion is impossible and a complete waste of time.

You don’t have an explanation lol

 

[bigrebnc1775]

From the article:

“Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas explain their conclusion in an article set to be published in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. The constitutional scholars, both active in the conservative Federalist Society, studied the question for more than a year, according to The New York Times.

The answer, according to Baude: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6.”

The provision they studied is Section Three of the 14th Amendment, which states that any person who took an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof,” is prohibited from holding any government office.”

Billy000’s take:

I guess the knee jerk response to this from Republicans will be “they aren’t real conservatives!”, despite none of them even knowing who these guys are but that won’t stop me from posting the best possible source for this argument.

Trump Is Disqualified From Holding Office, Conservative Law Professors Argue

Two constitutional law academics determined that the Constitution bars Trump from becoming president again due to his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

www.yahoo.com

Hey I'm a leftist Jo Biden is a criminal and should be charged tried and executed for his crimes.

 

[theHawk]

I forgot, what exactly was President Trump‘s “role” in J6?

Was it when he tried to “grab the steering wheel” to drive to the Capitol?

 

[The Duke]

You don’t have an explanation lol

So is continuing the policies of the past 2 1/2 years a good thing for Americans?

Yes or no, and why?

 

[excalibur]

We both know you can’t explain how they are wrong. You would have by now if you had a real reason to believe it.

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...​

See if you can comprehend the bolded portions.

One clue: The President of the United States is not an 'officer' of the United States.

 

[toobfreak]

Two conservative law professors argue that Donald Trump is ineligible to serve as president again due to a section of the Constitution that prohibits anyone who has engaged in insurrection from holding office.

Hey Stoopid--- --- if none of the people actually arrested at the Capitol and convicted have been charged with "insurrection," then how can Trump be? He wasn't even there! Worse, it is admitted now that they not only withheld security, they withheld information from the head of capitol police! And some of the cops are on tape admitting they planned to infiltrate the crowd as Antifa! And the FBI infiltrated the Proud Boys to set them up as well.

But you and these two boobs think that makes Trump ineligible for office?!

 

[Billy000]

Hey Stoopid--- --- if none of the people actually arrested at the Capitol and convicted have been charged with "insurrection," then how can Trump be? He wasn't even there! Worse, it is admitted now that they not only withheld security, they withheld information from the head of capitol police! And some of the cops are on tape admitting they planned to infiltrate the crowd as Antifa! And the FBI infiltrated the Proud Boys to set them up as well.

But you and these two boobs think that makes Trump ineligible for office?!


View attachment 814270

Hey moron DOZENS of people have been CONVICTED of SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY. A crime that is even worse than insurrection lol.

 

[Billy000]

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...​

See if you can comprehend the bolded portions.

One clue: The President of the United States is not an 'officer' of the United States.

Lol you should probably reread your quote here and see if that the word “or” is used many times. Trump obviously fits the description of a lot of that.

 

[toobfreak]

Hey moron DOZENS of people have been CONVICTED of SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY.

Conspiracy is just an alleged PLAN. Might be nothing more than a phone call or message saying you plan to or intend to do something, even of you never do.

A crime that is even worse than insurrection

Sorry no, dummass, three 000s for you again. Saying you intend to do something is NOT anywhere near as bad as leading an actual open revolt or attack against the government, which Trump nor anyone else obviously did not try to do. If they had, they would have been highly prepared and organized, and heavily armed. And by the looks of the meager preparedness and failures of the DC police that day, should have easily succeeded.

But you go right on posting more stupid stuff, imbecile. You're always good for a laugh.

 

[Billy000]

Conspiracy is just an alleged PLAN. Might be nothing more than a phone call or message saying you plan to or intend to do something, even of you never do.


Sorry no, dummass, three 000s for you again. Saying you intend to do something is NOT anywhere near as bad as leading an actual open revolt or attack against the government, which Trump nor anyone else obviously did not try to do. If they had, they would have been highly prepared and organized, and heavily armed. And by the looks of the meager preparedness and failures of the DC police that day, should have easily succeeded.

But you go right on posting more stupid stuff, imbecile. You're always good for a laugh.

Hey dumbass it’s more than just “a plan”. A mere general “plan” isnt issue. It’s an actual plot to take over the government. That is why those inbred retards got actual prison sentences for two decades at the most. You can downplay it all you want - that is what it amounts to. You retards lack any objectivity whatsoever lol.

You act like that because their plan failed that means they didn’t have one. These are the same Neanderthal morons who filmed themselves committing all those crimes. You’re talking about idiots convicted because of their OWN VIDEO EVIDENCE that they posted on social media. You really think people that stupid could possibly be effective? And contrary to what Newsmax tells you, police reported that many of them were armed with guns. It’s obvious many of them decided the day off to take over congress. Trump told his moronic cult followers to do something about the certification and they followed by trying to take over the government. There are actual idiots on camera explicitly talking about taking over the government. It’s straight from them on VIDEO.