Someone wants to use the 14th Amendment to fix the 2024 election for Dems.

[martybegan]

Of course it’s the truth. Until now you were content to treat me as a slow child. But now you are angry. Why? Because I lied? Nope. It’s because I told the truth.

But let’s ask what if? I’m an old Combat Engineer. Part of my training was to think about things. Possible outcomes if you will. To try and figure out what could go wrong, and what would be the outcome.

The worst case scenario is not that the Supremes decide that Colorado can keep Trump off the ballot. The worst case scenario is that they announce the decision after Trump has sewn up the nomination. Because then the Supremes would have decided it was an Insurrection and Trump had participated and was thus ineligible to be President.

At that point in time, Biden can go on vacation. Now the lawsuits really begin. Every Republican will be arguing about the nuances of the rules, the convention is a dumpster fire, and the general election sees Biden re-elected.

You guys aren’t playing what if. You declare your feelings. No! Then you won’t even consider what if you are wrong.

If I’m wrong. Trump is on the ballot and there is roughly speaking a coin toss chance that he will be President. If he is sworn in he will be a lame duck for his entire term. He won’t have a big enough majority in Congress to get the legislation he wants. He will be subjected to dozens of court cases. And when he leaves office he will need Air Force One to take him to his new home in exile because the prosecutions will commence. And he can’t pardon his way out of Georgia’s.

No, because you are a narcissistic asshat.

I'm an Engineer as well, so that attempt at superiority won't hunt.

You guys are playing lawfare to deny the will of a substantial number of your fellow citizens. That you don't see the danger in that just shows you are a short sighted idiot.

 

[SavannahMann]

No, because you are a narcissistic asshat.

I'm an Engineer as well, so that attempt at superiority won't hunt.

You guys are playing lawfare to deny the will of a substantial number of your fellow citizens. That you don't see the danger in that just shows you are a short sighted idiot.

Ok. Now you argue we are a pure democracy. And the will of the majority is the only standard we must embrace. But. Here is the question. When does the Constitution come in? If a majority of the voters want to ban guns, does the Constitution protect gun owners?

Pure democracy, the will of the majority matter. Right?

The Constitution prohibits banning firearms. The will of the people is irrelevant so long as the Amendment stands.

The United States exists so long as the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. We become something far worse when that supreme law is broken.

And as an Engineer. Surely you agree with my worst case scenario.

 

[martybegan]

Ok. Now you argue we are a pure democracy. And the will of the majority is the only standard we must embrace. But. Here is the question. When does the Constitution come in? If a majority of the voters want to ban guns, does the Constitution protect gun owners?

Pure democracy, the will of the majority matter. Right?

The Constitution prohibits banning firearms. The will of the people is irrelevant so long as the Amendment stands.

The United States exists so long as the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. We become something far worse when that supreme law is broken.

And as an Engineer. Surely you agree with my worst case scenario.

No, I do not. I have argued counter to that plenty of times. But denying a leading candidate a spot on the ballot isn't about democracy, it's about authoritarianism.

When you decide to use the constitution, in this case the 14th amendment, wrongly for short term political victory, it is YOU shitting on the Constitution, not me.

Worst case scenario is he wins and the Dems refuse to leave office, which is on THE DEMS, not Trump.

 

[SavannahMann]

No, I do not. I have argued counter to that plenty of times. But denying a leading candidate a spot on the ballot isn't about democracy, it's about authoritarianism.

When you decide to use the constitution, in this case the 14th amendment, wrongly for short term political victory, it is YOU shitting on the Constitution, not me.

Worst case scenario is he wins and the Dems refuse to leave office, which is on THE DEMS, not Trump.

First. I don’t think the Dems will refuse to leave office if they lose. They might file some legal challenges. But nothing beyond that. Insisting that they will is merely projection my friend.

Second. The Constitution says what it says.

I’m a member of both the ACLU and the NRA. I believe in defending the whole Constitution. All of it. Every right in there is precious to me. Then again I swore an oath to defend it.

The Constitution says that if Trump or anyone was involved in an insurrection after swearing an oath to support the constitution they are ineligible.

Just as I don’t care how many people want to ban firearms. I don’t care how many people want to vote for Trump. The constitution says what it says.

 

[martybegan]

First. I don’t think the Dems will refuse to leave office if they lose. They might file some legal challenges. But nothing beyond that. Insisting that they will is merely projection my friend.

Second. The Constitution says what it says.

I’m a member of both the ACLU and the NRA. I believe in defending the whole Constitution. All of it. Every right in there is precious to me. Then again I swore an oath to defend it.

The Constitution says that if Trump or anyone was involved in an insurrection after swearing an oath to support the constitution they are ineligible.

Just as I don’t care how many people want to ban firearms. I don’t care how many people want to vote for Trump. The constitution says what it says.

They are leading up to it.

The ACLU lost its way decades ago. They still support token non left causes, but when they sided against the baker in the SSM cake thing, you know they only really care about lefty causes.

He hasn't been convicted of insurrection, or even charged with it. He made no declaration of secession or taking over anything.

Your position supports the people who want to take your guns, and you are too fucking stupid to realize it.

 

[SavannahMann]

They are leading up to it.

The ACLU lost its way decades ago. They still support token non left causes, but when they sided against the baker in the SSM cake thing, you know they only really care about lefty causes.

He hasn't been convicted of insurrection, or even charged with it. He made no declaration of secession or taking over anything.

Your position supports the people who want to take your guns, and you are too fucking stupid to realize it.

Trump acted to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. As for the 14th. It doesn’t mandate a conviction to make the individual ineligible. It is an ethical rule. A requirement similar to the age and birth requirement. Or the limits on electors voting for President and Vice.

 

[martybegan]

Trump acted to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. As for the 14th. It doesn’t mandate a conviction to make the individual ineligible. It is an ethical rule. A requirement similar to the age and birth requirement. Or the limits on electors voting for President and Vice.

And nothing happened to that transfer. He fought what he thought was fraud during the proper period, using the proper channels.

All the previous people denied were either voters for articles of secession, or members of the confederate government or a rebelling State government, or officers in the confederate military.

You really want a system where a few people deciding on their own they don't like a person running can deny them running?

You got a hard on for Venezuelan political processes?

 

[SavannahMann]

And nothing happened to that transfer. He fought what he thought was fraud during the proper period, using the proper channels.

All the previous people denied were either voters for articles of secession, or members of the confederate government or a rebelling State government, or officers in the confederate military.

You really want a system where a few people deciding on their own they don't like a person running can deny them running?

You got a hard on for Venezuelan political processes?

The Court will decide. And I’m comfortable with that. The Colorado Supreme Court has decided, and I’m comfortable with that.

Like many power either granted to the Courts, or taken by the Courts. Someone needs to decide such questions. I’m willing to listen and consider any opinions. But yours gets us to Venezuela, not mine.

I don’t like that so we aren’t going to do it isn’t a Constitutional standard. You can find writings from me calling on stricter adherence to the Constitution. You can find me arguing for. Woman’s right to Choose being Constitutional. It was common at the time the Constitution written after all. There were no laws prohibiting it.

You can find my arguments agains Constitutional Carry. I think that is an abomination. I do support licensed carry.

 

[martybegan]

The Court will decide. And I’m comfortable with that. The Colorado Supreme Court has decided, and I’m comfortable with that.

Like many power either granted to the Courts, or taken by the Courts. Someone needs to decide such questions. I’m willing to listen and consider any opinions. But yours gets us to Venezuela, not mine.

I don’t like that so we aren’t going to do it isn’t a Constitutional standard. You can find writings from me calling on stricter adherence to the Constitution. You can find me arguing for. Woman’s right to Choose being Constitutional. It was common at the time the Constitution written after all. There were no laws prohibiting it.

You can find my arguments agains Constitutional Carry. I think that is an abomination. I do support licensed carry.

Courts Decided Plessey, Dred Scott, Roe and Chevron. This is worse than those, except for maybe Plessey.

Not even close. When has the right ever tried to keep someone off the ballot?

So you are a picker and chooser of the Constuction, like most leftists. Got it.

 

[SavannahMann]

Courts Decided Plessey, Dred Scott, Roe and Chevron. This is worse than those, except for maybe Plessey.

Not even close. When has the right ever tried to keep someone off the ballot?

So you are a picker and chooser of the Constuction, like most leftists. Got it.

My friend. I have explained by beliefs often and extensively. My reasons why I support my positions.

But I’m not the one insisting that the Constitution doesn’t apply. I agree with Cato who said that the decision by the Colorado Supreme Court was well considered judicial argument.

You are aware that the decision is more than 200 pages of explanation? Two hundred pages where the various arguments are listed, considered, and the finding of the court. They use precedent and legal reasoning.

 

[martybegan]

My friend. I have explained by beliefs often and extensively. My reasons why I support my positions.

But I’m not the one insisting that the Constitution doesn’t apply. I agree with Cato who said that the decision by the Colorado Supreme Court was well considered judicial argument.

You are aware that the decision is more than 200 pages of explanation? Two hundred pages where the various arguments are listed, considered, and the finding of the court. They use precedent and legal reasoning.

You agree because you hate Trump, not because of any love of the Constitution.

You would be happy jumping off a cliff as long as Trump and people who vote for him go first.

Mein Kampf is over 500 pages, does volume make something right?

And Plessey used supposed legal reasoning. It was still bullshit.

 

[SavannahMann]

You agree because you hate Trump, not because of any love of the Constitution.

You would be happy jumping off a cliff as long as Trump and people who vote for him go first.

Mein Kampf is over 500 pages, does volume make something right?

And Plessey used supposed legal reasoning. It was still bullshit.

I voted for Trump in 2016. I don’t hate anyone. I have never hated anyone. Hatred is a poison for your own soul, the only person it hurts is you. It is a powerful weapon your opponents will happily use against you. Why would I give anyone that much power over me?

You can’t argue the details of the decision. You haven’t read it. You can’t argue the text of the constitution. You won’t do anything but stop your foot like a child and scream its not fair.

 

[martybegan]

I voted for Trump in 2016. I don’t hate anyone. I have never hated anyone. Hatred is a poison for your own soul, the only person it hurts is you. It is a powerful weapon your opponents will happily use against you. Why would I give anyone that much power over me?

You can’t argue the details of the decision. You haven’t read it. You can’t argue the text of the constitution. You won’t do anything but stop your foot like a child and scream its not fair.

Anger in defiance of evil is not a vice.

The 200 pages is pointless because the underlying assumptions are bullshit. Insurrection is a specific crime, and crimes in our country are punished by criminal trials using juries at a given severity.

You can't say "Well we can't try him for insurrection, but we can ban him from office for insurrection" and not take a giant dump on 4th amendment rights.

 

[SavannahMann]

Anger in defiance of evil is not a vice.

The 200 pages is pointless because the underlying assumptions are bullshit. Insurrection is a specific crime, and crimes in our country are punished by criminal trials using juries at a given severity.

You can't say "Well we can't try him for insurrection, but we can ban him from office for insurrection" and not take a giant dump on 4th amendment rights.

It’s covered in the decision. If you don’t know what you are opposed to, then your opposition is based on emotional response. It isn’t based in any principle.

As I said. You are a child stomping your foot in the midst of a tantrum.

 

[martybegan]

It’s covered in the decision. If you don’t know what you are opposed to, then your opposition is based on emotional response. It isn’t based in any principle.

As I said. You are a child stomping your foot in the midst of a tantrum.

The whole left is the child stomping, and you are playing the part of Vidkun Quisling for them.

 

[SavannahMann]

The whole left is the child stomping, and you are playing the part of Vidkun Quisling for them.

I’m not the one refusing to even consider the other side’s argument.

 

[martybegan]

I’m not the one refusing to even consider the other side’s argument.

I considered it, and found the basis of it bullshit. 200 pages doesn't change the underlying faulty logic that is the basis of the farce.

 

[TheParser]

*** If the Dems succeed in keeping The Donald off the ballot, they may just succeed in getting someone else elected who will really give the Dems headaches.

*** The Donald was all hat, no cattle.

*** Someone more clever might make the Dems go to bed every night crying & weeping inconsolably.

 

[dblack]

*** If the Dems succeed in keeping The Donald off the ballot, they may just succeed in getting someone else elected who will really give the Dems headaches.

*** The Donald was all hat, no cattle.

*** Someone more clever might make the Dems go to bed every night crying & weeping inconsolably.

Yeah. I've been saying this for awhile. Trump is a nut, but he's not Hitler. Fuck around and find out.

 

[merrill]

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.