The Constitution Prohibits Trump From Ever Being President Again

[forkup]

I have already pointed out that federal judges are team players for the washington establishment that gave them their position

And trump is a threat to the washington swamp rats and business as usual, including republicans

And I'm pointing out that there's Democratic appointed judges that rule in favor of Trump. Republican appointed judges that rule against him. So, if that's the case how do you determine who's "the establishment?"

 

[forkup]

Because I dont think is as bad or even worse than letting the washington establishment continue ruling over us

We need a change of course

The dems are clearly not democratic

Who is the establishment? The only thing you seem to be saying is that you find an actual dictatorship preferable to a Constitutional Republic. If that's your position, simply say so. But then stop pretending you care an iota what the Constitution says.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I simply see no other way to interpret what you are saying.

 

[scruffy]

And, you thought that affected the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution? How?

YOU thought it did. You brought up the 14th, not me.

You're thick today, leftard. Insurrection is a criminal offense. It requires a criminal trial. There is NO OTHER WAY, other than a criminal trial, to determine if a person has engaged in insurrection. Saying so without a conviction is called SLANDER and LIBEL and there are laws against that.

The scumbag psychopathic Stalinist democommie bastards are trying g to convict someone without a trial. They're ******* un-American scumbags and I hope they choke on their own spew.

14th my ass. Let's see proper Constitutional procedure before you commie fucktards go all Stalinist on us.

 

[White 6]

YOU thought it did. You brought up the 14th, not me.

You're thick today, leftard. Insurrection is a criminal offense. It requires a criminal trial. There is NO OTHER WAY, other than a criminal trial, to determine if a person has engaged in insurrection. Saying so without a conviction is called SLANDER and LIBEL and there are laws against that.

The scumbag psychopathic Stalinist democommie bastards are trying g to convict someone without a trial. They're ******* un-American scumbags and I hope they choke on their own spew.

14th my ass. Let's see proper Constitutional procedure before you commie fucktards go all Stalinist on us.

Reading is Fundamental. You should try reading, even the parts you don't like.

 

[jknowgood]

"Tried" is the key word. Yes, they tried to break into the White House but never did. Unlike the insurrectionists on J6 who did successfully break into the Capitol building.

They were let in, but don't let a lie go to waste.

 

[22lcidw]

Who is the establishment? The only thing you seem to be saying is that you find an actual dictatorship preferable to a Constitutional Republic. If that's your position, simply say so. But then stop pretending you care an iota what the Constitution says.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I simply see no other way to interpret what you are saying.

We are in a dictatorship. We have for a long time. Please stop with the Constitutional Republic. We are a Fiat Currency driven Democracy which was infected with radicals decades ago who changed our whole system and then people like you spout Constitutional Republic. So, when the Democracy runs near Marxists that is okay because it is a DEMOCRACY. We had near 50/50 in the House and Senate the first two years of Joe and it was pure Prog Socialist legislation passed with some of it also voted with the Progs y the fraud Republicans who show up to make sure the elites' goals are passed. Trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars of legislation passed, and we will be lucky to have one tenth of that as something real and concrete for the taxpayers.

 

[Faun]

The police. BLM protesters set Portland police station on fire as riot intensifies

Maybe, i suppose. But it was just one person who lit that fire. I'm not so sure one person can constitute an insurrection.

 

[Mac-7]

And I'm pointing out that there's Democratic appointed judges that rule in favor of Trump.

It meaningless

All that matters is how the majority voted

 

[Faun]

They were let in, but don't let a lie go to waste.

LOL

This is your idea of letting them in, is it?

 

[Mac-7]

Who is the establishment? The only thing you seem to be saying is that you find an actual dictatorship preferable to a Constitutional Republic. If that's your position, simply say so. But then stop pretending you care an iota what the Constitution says.

I'm not trying to be mean, but I simply see no other way to interpret what you are saying.

The establishment is a de facto dictatorship

Everyone in washington drinks from the same watering hole

And its them against the outsiders, in this case Trump and the MAGAs

Next it might be RFK jr

Or another third party rich guy they dont have full control over

And yes, trump is a 3rd party candidate even when he’s running as a republican

 

[forkup]

It meaningless

All that matters is how the majority voted

What is meaningless?

 

[Mac-7]

What is meaningless?

The fact that some judges voted against banning trump

The court made sure they had enough votes agsinst trump

The others were just window dressing

 

[OKTexas]

I would prefer a criminal standard, but there is none mentioned in the 14th Amendment anywhere, so it is not actually a requirement:

​

​

View attachment 877148​

So my "preferences" do not really count for much.​

​

​

​

​

Funny how the President and VP are conspicuously absent from the list. I've never noticed that before.

.

 

[forkup]

The establishment is a de facto dictatorship

Everyone in washington drinks from the same watering hole

And its them against the outsiders, in this case Trump and the MAGAs

Next it might be RFK jr

Or another third party rich guy they dont have full control over

And yes, trump is a 3rd party candidate even when he’s running as a republican

That "watering hole" you're talking about is called capital. Rich people with money to spend on campaigns. So, legislation can be passed beneficial to them. Trump simply cut out the middleman and started affecting policy personally.

The idea that a rich white guy with a propensity for bluster, an insatiable ego, and decades of grift somehow is the "champion for the little man" is preposterous.

 

[forkup]

The fact that some judges voted against banning trump

The court made sure they had enough votes agsinst trump

The others were just window dressing

Again, simply asserting that your opinion is fact when the facts seem to go against you. Let me ask you. How will you make Trump the victim if SCOTUS votes for him? Something I expect they will. Scotus is not "the establishment?"

 

[White 6]

Funny how the President and VP are conspicuously absent from the list. I've never noticed that before.

.

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office,".
I would say the office of President of the United States is an office. If not legal to hold it, they might not have legal standing to run for it.
Who knows? Maybe the Supremes will say it is not an office. If the conservative court is made up of strict constructionists as most conservatives are, they can still do as they please, whether anybody in Colorado or elsewhere likes it or not.

 

[jknowgood]

LOL

This is your idea of letting them in, is it?

Just as peaceful as the protest you loons did in the summer of love.

 

[Mac-7]

That "watering hole" you're talking about is called capital. Rich people with money to spend on campaigns. So, legislation can be passed beneficial to them. Trump simply cut out the middleman and started affecting policy personally.

The idea that a rich white guy with a propensity for bluster, an insatiable ego, and decades of grift somehow is the "champion for the little man" is preposterous.

When he adopt populist issues he is far ahead of the swamp rats who spit on the average voter

The split between governors and the governed goes back a long way

Here is one early example

George Bush the “Compassionate Conservative” wanted to give amnesty to up to 20 million illegal aliens back around 2002

Powerful politicians in both parties supported it, the lib media was for, and so was John McCain and La Raza

Only ordinary Americans were opposed

Bush and McCain called them bigots but they stubbornly resisted

Trump came along in 2016 and he sided with people and against the swamp rats in washington

And naturally he’s labeled as a bigot too

Or a dictator

 

[Mac-7]

Again, simply asserting that your opinion is fact when the facts seem to go against you. Let me ask you. How will you make Trump the victim if SCOTUS votes for him? Something I expect they will. Scotus is not "the establishment?"

You have no special facts to show how non partisan the judges are in their heart of hearts

Just your opinion the same as me

 

[BS Filter]

Maybe, i suppose. But it was just one person who lit that fire. I'm not so sure one person can constitute an insurrection.

That's weak.