Historians Brief: Twenty-five historians of the civil war and Reconstruction filed a US supreme court brief

[Orangecat]

There was no insurrection. /thread

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

There was no insurrection. /thread

Yet many courts and people say there was.

go figure
as a matter of fact one more of your disgusting kind just faced Justice:

Man Convicted of Assaulting Police in Tipping Point on Jan. 6​

Ryan Samsel, a Pennsylvania barber, was found guilty along with four co-defendants, but he was acquitted of trespassing on the Capitol grounds.

The barber, Ryan Samsel, was one of the first people to confront the police on Jan. 6 and push through barricades at what is known as the Peace Circle, allowing hundreds of others behind him to breach the grounds of the Capitol and ultimately the building itself. Prosecutors at a trial for Mr. Samsel and four co-defendants, who were also convicted of assault and other charges, said that the men’s actions “ignited a fire that burned for over four hours at the Capitol.”

The guilty verdicts, returned by the judge after a bench trial in Federal District Court in Washington, were the latest reminders that the prosecutions of those who took part in the storming of the Capitol continue apace, even more than three years after the attack. This week alone, charges were unsealed against at least nine additional defendants, bringing the total number of people accused in connection with the Capitol attack to more than 1,260.

Man Convicted of Assaulting Police in Tipping Point on Jan. 6

Ryan Samsel, a Pennsylvania barber, was found guilty along with four co-defendants, but he was acquitted of trespassing on the Capitol grounds.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Rawley]

No one has been charge with insurrection for Jan 6 - yet.

Over 3,000 charges filed by Biden's DOJ and not a single one for insurrection.

 

[Lastamender]

and of course, Lawrence has a superb take on it all.

Congress violated their oath of office when they voted not to investigate the 2020 election.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Over 3,000 charges filed by Biden's DOJ and not a single one for insurrection.

and?

What have courts found?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Congress violated their oath of office when they voted not to investigate the 2020 election.

go away

 

[Rawley]

and?

What have courts found?

All the state court trial judges have found that section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not cover the President.

Whether or not state courts and SOSs even have the power to find a candidate ineligible under the 14th is going to be answered by the Supreme Court.

 

[Orangecat]

Yet many courts and people say there was.

Convictions, kid, not gossip.

 

[BackAgain]

This is a must read for anyone looking to make sense out of the history of the 14th Amendment, and how it is being asked to apply to Donald J. Trump.

Lots of people speaking about this are doing so with little to no understanding of the actual history. It's a fair and brilliant analysis, and of course like all analysis it comes down on a side. It has to. There are no two or many sides to this. Facts are facts.

US historians sign brief to support Coloradoâs removal of Trump from ballot

Twenty-five civil war and Reconstruction scholars support invoking 14th amendment to bar Trump from ballot over January 6

www.theguardian.com

The brief:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298895/20240126151819211_23-719%20Brief.pdf

lol.

Yeah. Then Donald Trump who wasn’t even close to being born was a confederate soldier. That’s the ticket!

No?

Oh. Then he must have been convicted of insurrection in some federal criminal trial.

No?

Well then. I don’t give a fuck what these alleged historians might want to “argue.”
They’re ridiculous.

 

[Rawley]

lol.

Yeah. Then Donald Trump who wasn’t even close to being born was a confederate soldier. That’s the ticket!

No?

Oh. Then he must have been convicted of insurrection in some federal criminal trial.

No?

Well then. I don’t give a fuck what these alleged historians might want to “argue.”
They’re ridiculous.

I'm a firm believer in Scalia's rejection of legislative history in interpreting the Constitution or statutes. The only thing that matters is the actual words they used in the laws they pass.

 

[Lastamender]

go away

Congress sided with the possible fraud anyway you look at it. I suggest you go away. You sound like every other hater.

 

[BackAgain]

I'm a firm believer in Scalia's rejection of legislative history in interpreting the Constitution or statutes. The only thing that matters is the actual words they used in the laws they pass.

Except in cases of ambiguity.

But otherwise I agree.

And there’s no ambiguity here.

 

[Robert W]

Yet many courts and people say there was.

go figure
as a matter of fact one more of your disgusting kind just faced Justice:

Man Convicted of Assaulting Police in Tipping Point on Jan. 6​

Ryan Samsel, a Pennsylvania barber, was found guilty along with four co-defendants, but he was acquitted of trespassing on the Capitol grounds.

Man Convicted of Assaulting Police in Tipping Point on Jan. 6

Ryan Samsel, a Pennsylvania barber, was found guilty along with four co-defendants, but he was acquitted of trespassing on the Capitol grounds.

www.nytimes.com

If you claim you saw insurrection charged against the man in your article, you are needing glasses.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

All the state court trial judges have found that section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not cover the President.

Whether or not state courts and SOSs even have the power to find a candidate ineligible under the 14th is going to be answered by the Supreme Court.

State court trial judges?

List them

 

[Rawley]

State court trial judges?

List them

CO

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

CO

So one state. One group of state judges. Okay

 

[Rawley]

So one state. One group of state judges. Okay

The only state to reach the merits. All the rest tossed this silly bullshit out.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

All the state court trial judges have found that section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not cover the President.

Whether or not state courts and SOSs even have the power to find a candidate ineligible under the 14th is going to be answered by the Supreme Court.

Here:

In a ruling that Trump's legal team has said will soon be appealed, a majority of Colorado's seven justices wrote that the former president "engaged in insurrection," on Jan. 6, 2021, and reversed a lower court's determination that Trump could remain on the ballot because a U.S. president was not an "officer of the United States."

 

[marvin martian]

This is a must read for anyone looking to make sense out of the history of the 14th Amendment, and how it is being asked to apply to Donald J. Trump.

Lots of people speaking about this are doing so with little to no understanding of the actual history. It's a fair and brilliant analysis, and of course like all analysis it comes down on a side. It has to. There are no two or many sides to this. Facts are facts.

US historians sign brief to support Coloradoâs removal of Trump from ballot

Twenty-five civil war and Reconstruction scholars support invoking 14th amendment to bar Trump from ballot over January 6

www.theguardian.com

The brief:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298895/20240126151819211_23-719%20Brief.pdf

This is almost as funny as the 51 "intelligence officials" who signed a letter saying Hunter Biden's laptop was "Russian disinformation".

You fell for that one, too. LOL!

 

[Rawley]

Here:

In a ruling that Trump's legal team has said will soon be appealed, a majority of Colorado's seven justices wrote that the former president "engaged in insurrection," on Jan. 6, 2021, and reversed a lower court's determination that Trump could remain on the ballot because a U.S. president was not an "officer of the United States."

Yup, Exactly what I said

Hate to break it to you, but this bullshit is going down 9-0 , or at worst 8-1.