Marchimedes
Platinum Member
Are you trying to speak English here?
Yes.
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.
Are you trying to speak English here?
Retarded Horses is dumber than the cheeseTrump is as guilty as the rat caught with the cheese.
Totally fucking idiotic.Wallace walked through the evidence for the first component of her finding in detail over 102 pages. She focused on the timeline of Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6, 2021 — which she said showed that Trump desired this outcome. And she documented his history of promoting and legitimizing political violence — which she said helps prove he incited the riot.
“The Court concludes that Trump acted with the specific intent to incite political violence and direct it at the Capitol with the purpose of disrupting the electoral certification,” Wallace wrote.
She added that Trump’s “inaction during the violence and his later endorsement of the violence corroborates the evidence that his intent was to incite violence on January 6, 2021 based on his conduct leading up to and on January 6, 2021.”
Among her other key findings:
- “Trump cultivated a culture that embraced political violence through his consistent endorsement of the same. He responded to growing threats of violence and intimidation in the lead-up to the certification by amplifying his false claims of election fraud.”
- “He convened a large crowd on the date of the certification in Washington, D.C., focused them on the certification process, told them their country was being stolen from them, called for strength and action, and directed them to the Capitol where the certification was about to take place.”
- “[T]he Court has found that Trump was aware that his supporters were willing to engage in political violence and that they would respond to his calls for them to do so.”
- She ruled that Trump’s inaction during the riot didn’t itself constitute engaging in insurrection, but that it was evidence “that he intended for the crowd to engage in violence when he sent them to the Capitol ‘to fight like hell.’”
- She wrote that Trump’s 2:24 p.m. tweet on Jan. 6 attacking Vice President Mike Pence, an hour after he had been informed of unrest at the Capitol according to a White House employee’s testimony, “caused further violence at the Capitol.”
- She said Trump’s comments after the fact show he “endorsed and intended the actions of the mob on January 6, 2021.”
You are the leader of this community and that's your fu(kin reply? Other than protecting my children I don't think the word 'obsessed' has much to do with me. I said that you sending my thread "There's a crew of clever Fascists trying to derail our site" to The Rubber Room, a mod of yours told me you said you sent it there cause of a 'non-political' thread title' was Bull$h!t. Benito Mussolini was the first Fascist. "Fascist" is a political term he coined thus my thread title was political. But you know my thread title was political therefor your sending my thread downstairs to The Rubber Room was done because of political bias. I killed it in that thread, you can't have that wandering around in the Politics sub-forum.
Go fu(k yourself. All you've said is you need censure me. I get it, you're a lefty, I'm a righty, you are in charge of this site, this site is a private entity and thus your will holds sway. But then, lady this site is supposed to be an interweb political debate forum and I have arrived. It's all very easy to run a site like this when the best the right can post is "your gay" until the likes of me comes along. Here we are. You should not have replied to me. If you further engage me I'll whup you. More. When this moment in the past reared it's ugly head I used to counsel the left to pretend all this never happened. Run away and sooner or later we'll all forget about it. I recently came up with a more betterer reply from the left... change the subject. That way the lefty hasn't all out fled yet gets to feel engaged. You try it! I expect more from the leader of this site. You. So far I'm handing you your azz, site leader.
Here's intheButtAgain with nothing substantive to add to the thread but trolling insults mocking other people's intelligence.Retarded Horses is dumber than the cheese
Wrong on the facts, on the Constitution -- and vitiated by galactically illogical reasoningHistorical precedent also confirms that a criminal conviction is not required for an individual to be disqualified under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. No one who has been formally disqualified under Section 3 was charged under the criminal “rebellion or insurrection” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or its predecessors. This fact is consistent with Section 3’s text, legislative history, and precedent, all of which make clear that a criminal conviction for any offense is not required for disqualification. Section 3 is not a criminal penalty, but rather is a qualification for holding public office in the United States that can be and has been enforced through civil lawsuits in state courts, among other means.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/r...eports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not expressly require a criminal conviction, and historically, one was not necessary. Reconstruction Era federal prosecutors brought civil actions in court to oust officials linked to the Confederacy, and Congress in some cases took action to refuse to seat Members. Congress last used Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1919 to refuse to seat a socialist Congressman accused of having given aid and comfort to Germany during the First World War, irrespective of the Amnesty Act. The Congressman, Victor Berger, was eventually seated at a subsequent Congress after the Supreme Court threw out his espionage conviction for judicial bias. Recently, various groups and organizations have challenged the eligibility of certain candidates running for Congress, arguing that the candidates’ alleged involvement in the events surrounding the January 6, 2021, breach of the Capitol render them ineligible for office. No challenges have to date resulted in the disqualification of any congressional candidate. A New Mexico state court, however, has removed Otero County Commissioner County Griffin from office and prohibited him from seeking or holding any future office based on his participation in, and preparation for, the January 6 interruption of the election certification.
Absent evidence in contradiction of CREW's assertion I suspect Trumpleton's will ineffectually attack CREW and or the CRS. It is the Trumpian way. When facts and evidence fail them they rely on what amounts to character assassination. Which is why Trump attacks the media, anyone who opposes him, and most especially those like Jack Smith who are working to hold Don accountable for his illegal actions.
Furthermore, quite a bit has been made about the removal of a candidate's name from the ballot being anti-democratic. Yet the Constitution itself tells us that it is the conduct that gives rise to disqualification under the 14th Amendment that is anti-democratic. From the moment Trump began the anti-democratic act of conspiring to steal the election he violated his oath of office and forfeited his right to once again run to be the prez.
Here’s MangledDick again with nothing substantive to add but his constant trolling ….Here's intheButtAgain with nothing substantive to add to the thread but trolling insults mocking other people's intelligence.
Go find somewhere else to preen princess.
This is a place where adults have conversations.
It happened in DC , the area administered DIRECTLY by Congress12 cases on the Act in History. If you are charging with Insurrection then the Bill of Rights demand a fair Trial and conviction.
Willy Nilly you are guilty just because is Where in the Constitution
Here’s MangledDick again with nothing substantive to add but his constant trolling ….
Libturds like him always do what they falsely accuse others of doing.
You sound triggered princess.Go suck another hobo’s diseased cock, MangledDick.
Nah. That’s just your wishful thinking, MangledDick.You sound triggered princess.
You are the leader of this community and that's your fu(kin reply? Other than protecting my children I don't think the word 'obsessed' has much to do with me. I said that you sending my thread "There's a crew of clever Fascists trying to derail our site" to The Rubber Room, a mod of yours told me you said you sent it there cause of a 'non-political' thread title' was Bull$h!t. Benito Mussolini was the first Fascist. "Fascist" is a political term he coined thus my thread title was political. But you know my thread title was political therefor your sending my thread downstairs to The Rubber Room was done because of political bias. I killed it in that thread, you can't have that wandering around in the Politics sub-forum.
Go fu(k yourself. All you've said is you need censure me. I get it, you're a lefty, I'm a righty, you are in charge of this site, this site is a private entity and thus your will holds sway. But then, lady this site is supposed to be an interweb political debate forum and I have arrived. It's all very easy to run a site like this when the best the right can post is "your gay" until the likes of me comes along. Here we are. You should not have replied to me. If you further engage me I'll whup you. More. When this moment in the past reared it's ugly head I used to counsel the left to pretend all this never happened. Run away and sooner or later we'll all forget about it. I recently came up with a more betterer reply from the left... change the subject. That way the lefty hasn't all out fled yet gets to feel engaged. You try it! I expect more from the leader of this site. You. So far I'm handing you your azz, site leader.
If you further engage me I'll whup you.