The Constitution Prohibits Trump From Ever Being President Again

[jbander]

So, Trump wasn't charged or convicted of insurrection. For that matter, NOBODY who took part of Jan. 6th, from Trump to the QAnon Shaman or even Ray Epps has been charged with insurrection. For that matter, they haven't been charged with violating the Insurrection Act of 1807. So, everyone, supposedly, knows that an insurrection occurred, but nobody within the law enforcement has bothered to charge anybody with being part of it. And this insurrection is a reason why Trump shouldn't even be put on ballots in certain states. Seems kind of bizarre, doesn't it?

Nope , Shitpants is a criminal piece of shit, Who has no redeeming value , he is the ultimate bottom feeder. and is this country's biggest threat and enemy and what he should be doing is standing in front of a court charged with treason and when found guilty should be put to death along with his supporters and followers. as the constitution proscribes.

 

[Faun]

Your only argument is you don’t like him.

Nope. Sad to see you struggle with such delusions.

 

[Faun]

So, Trump wasn't charged or convicted of insurrection. For that matter, NOBODY who took part of Jan. 6th, from Trump to the QAnon Shaman or even Ray Epps has been charged with insurrection. For that matter, they haven't been charged with violating the Insurrection Act of 1807. So, everyone, supposedly, knows that an insurrection occurred, but nobody within the law enforcement has bothered to charge anybody with being part of it. And this insurrection is a reason why Trump shouldn't even be put on ballots in certain states. Seems kind of bizarre, doesn't it?

Nope, not at all. This ruling came from a civil court. All that was needed was for a plaintiff with standing to file a suit like this and show the court, beyond a preponderance of the evidence they could present, that the actions that day meet the definition of of an insurrection and that Trump either participated, incited, or gave aid or comfort to those who did; and for the court to agree.

And that's exactly what happened.

 

[PeanutGallery]

Nope , Shitpants is a criminal piece of shit, Who has no redeeming value , he is the ultimate bottom feeder. and is this country's biggest threat and enemy and what he should be doing is standing in front of a court charged with treason and when found guilty should be put to death along with his supporters and followers. as the constitution proscribes.

So, the Constitution proscribes that Trump supporters and followers should be put to death? What amendment are you basing that on?

 

[PeanutGallery]

Nope, not at all. This ruling came from a civil court. All that was needed was for a plaintiff with standing to file a suit like this and show the court, beyond a preponderance of the evidence they could present, that the actions that day meet the definition of of an insurrection and that Trump either participated, incited, or gave aid or comfort to those who did; and for the court to agree.

And that's exactly what happened.

And when the SCOTUS smacks it down, then what? That would eliminate anybody else who thinks they have standing from filing a civil suit.

 

[jbander]

So, the Constitution proscribes that Trump supporters and followers should be put to death? What amendment are you basing that on?

What it says is this (

§2381. Treason​

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.


(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.))
To be more exact(or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death,) Simple anyone who tries or supports the destruction of our country and or democracy should be put to death if found guilty.

 

[jbander]

By the way to clarify the treason amendment to the constitution, There are three different crimes listed that the treason charge can be used in.

 

[Faun]

And when the SCOTUS smacks it down, then what? That would eliminate anybody else who thinks they have standing from filing a civil suit.

If they do then Trump can hold public office.

 

[PeanutGallery]

What it says is this (

§2381. Treason​

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.


(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.))
To be more exact(or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death,) Simple anyone who tries or supports the destruction of our country and or democracy should be put to death if found guilty.

So, that would mean if Trump were to somehow win in 2024, it would be constitutional for him to order the death of any Biden or democrat supporter? Because it sounds very much like that's what you're saying. And I've been told that Trump is the authoritarian.

 

[PeanutGallery]

If they do then Trump can hold public office.

Perhaps you should say as when they do. You can't really think that the SCOTUS is going to allow the decision in Colorado to stand, do you?

 

[Faun]

Perhaps you should say as when they do. You can't really think that the SCOTUS is going to allow the decision in Colorado to stand, do you?

Why should I say that? I don't know how they're going to rule.

On what grounds do you think they'll overturn it?

 

[jbander]

So, that would mean if Trump were to somehow win in 2024, it would be constitutional for him to order the death of any Biden or democrat supporter? Because it sounds very much like that's what you're saying. And I've been told that Trump is the authoritarian.

What a ******* idiot. You live in a make believe made up bullshit world where you think all rules are made up by the most stupid person in the room. That would be you ace. What a idiot.

 

[PeanutGallery]

Why should I say that? I don't know how they're going to rule.

On what grounds do you think they'll overturn it?

If you don't know how they're going to rule based on the makeup of this SCOTUS, then you're either ignorant or hoping against hope. Give me one reason why you think it's going to stand.

 

[PeanutGallery]

What a ******* idiot. You live in a make believe made up bullshit world where you think all rules are made up by the most stupid person in the room. That would be you ace. What a idiot.

I'm taking your stupid logic to its conclusion. If it's legal for one side to do it, it's also legal for the other side to do the same thing. So, if you want to talk about make believe bullshit worlds, you may want to get out of yours and start living in reality. There's no way that it's constitutional to have Trump's supporters executed for some made up charge of treason.

 

[jbander]

I'm taking your stupid logic to its conclusion. If it's legal for one side to do it, it's also legal for the other side to do the same thing. So, if you want to talk about make believe bullshit worlds, you may want to get out of yours and start living in reality. There's no way that it's constitutional to have Trump's supporters executed for some made up charge of treason.

I literally wrote you the treason part of the constitution, if you can't read that's your problem. There has been 40 charges of Treason in this country, some with less reason to charge then Shitpants actions. Simply Type in any search engine "can Trump be charged with treason" and you will get thousands of results saying he can be charged , You are such a dumb **** that your make believe made up world is blind stupid to everything you don't agree with. You are the typical MAGA Maggot,hate driven, stupid and having no values or morals. You simply have no clue. You simply are to ******* dumb to understand this but almost everyone else can and will. here is the part of the law that counts. (adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.")

 

[jbander]

If you don't know how they're going to rule based on the makeup of this SCOTUS, then you're either ignorant or hoping against hope. Give me one reason why you think it's going to stand.

what a dumb ******* question, How about the fact that right wing ass holes that are on the supreme court insist that state rights should prevail in federal law. I bet you don't even know what that means.

 

[jbander]

Love playing with the Peanut gallery's of the world , it is like shooting ducks in a barrel

 

[The Duke]

Why should I say that? I don't know how they're going to rule.

On what grounds do you think they'll overturn it?

Ofc you don't, because you're a leftist goober retard. None of the latest retarded Democrat plan to illegally cull

the opposition is going to work. They'll probably have a couple more stupids before the election. It's what they do.

They already did the 13 year old thing with a deepfake. (that they do every election cycle)

It worked once, and they've trotted it out every election cycle since.

I forget what year that was, sue me. It was probably after Bush I.

If it was 10AM tomorrow, I'd probably remember who the target of the 1st Democrat "He molestered a 13 year old" lie

was used on successfully. It worked once, and they've tried it every time since...but it only worked the once..

 

[Faun]

Ofc you don't, because you're a leftist goober retard. None of the latest retarded Democrat plan to illegally cull

the opposition is going to work. They'll probably have a couple more stupids before the election. It's what they do.

They already did the 13 year old thing with a deepfake. (that they do every election cycle)

It worked once, and they've trotted it out every election cycle since.

I forget what year that was, sue me. It was probably after Bush I.

If it was 10AM tomorrow, I'd probably remember who the target of the 1st Democrat "He molestered a 13 year old" lie

was used on successfully. It worked once, and they've tried it every time since...but it only worked the once..

 

[Faun]

If you don't know how they're going to rule based on the makeup of this SCOTUS, then you're either ignorant or hoping against hope. Give me one reason why you think it's going to stand.

Are you saying this court is politically biased? What difference does the makeup of this court make in terms of holding uo the Constitution?

As far as it standing, I didn't say it would. My actual words were I don't know how they're going to rule. And quite frankly, neither do you. States decide the qualifications to be on their ballots beyond just being 35 or older, a natural born citizen, and a resident for the last 14 years.