Obviously I agree because it is so blatantly obvious, but while you can close your eyes and say "technically he said peacefully one-time leading up to it" to explain away his role (while ignoring the mountain of evidence on the other side) in sending people to the Capitol, there's no way to explain his lack of action if your position is that he was actually opposed to what happened.
We already have certain guardrails - minimum age, born in the country, term limits. Refusing to accept the results of an election and trying to halt the transfer of power should be disqualifying as well. Or should we just eliminate all criteria and let voters decide period? Maybe we can have Elon Musk as President or a 20 year old Tik Tokker. Heck we can have Obama run again. If the people vote him in then it's democracy right?
Trump's lawyers made that same claim in the Colorado case--that the 2 term limit for a presidency could be ignored.
Were you out sick the day your teacher went over the difference between speaking and typing? EDIT: LOL. else doesn't know the difference between "grammar" and "vocabulary." Old Chinese proverb: "Better to be the middle finger than the fourth sphincter."
You know our libbies are losing the argument when they resort try to insults or turn into the grammar police. @GatorJMDZ You're the reason God created the middle finger
Is the Supreme Court praying Donald doesnt win the primary so they can stay out of it? Supreme Court Rejects Special Counsel Request To Rule On Trump Immunity Claim Immediately
Messed up that 250 years in and there is still debate about whether a potus is above the law. There should be zero doubt that they are not.
The entire thing is dumb. Waste of taxpayer money. Check. Will be overturned by SCOTUS. Check. Was dead on arrival. Check. Most importantly: will be used by Trump on the campaign trail as proof of election rigging. Check.
If one defines the term broadly enough. The same definition would apply to an impeachment inquiry of the sitting president in which the only documentation of wrongdoing is misbehavior by his relatives.
In an effort to diplomatically put this to avoid the typical pissing contest we see on Too Hot, here's my opinion: Trump is not an insurrectionist. However, 1. The best case that Trump IS an insurrectionist is based on the elector-counting scheme, not the speech or any statement he made prior to people storming the Capitol. 2. The best defense Trump has is that he isn't an insurrectionist, not that this provision of the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to Presidents. That said, question for the lawyers, would SCOTUS have to give a high level of deference to the trial court on the issue of whether he's an insurrectionist? Is that a fact issue or legal issue?
1861 Democrats and 2023 Democrats not much has changed … 'Ballot Banishers' - 2023 Democrats & 1861 Confederates | ZeroHedge
Calling January 6th an insurrection based on the protesters would be kind of like me getting into a fight with Mike Tyson, he lands one punch on my shoulder, I'm hospitalized, and he's charged with attempted murder. If he really wanted to kill me, 1. He could have 2. He would've done a whole lot more than punching me on the shoulder. If it was really an insurrection, there would've been more weapons, more threats, and more deaths. Not one person dying at the scene and that person being a protestor, not the protestors being escorted into the Capitol by police, and not jackasses taking silly pictures in the Capitol. What happened on January 6th was terrible, and the people who broke the law should be held accountable, but resorting to hysteria and irrational inflammatory demonizing rhetoric is exactly what creates the sort of mess where a lot of people think it's reasonable to take the arguable frontrunner in the 2024 election off the ballot based on a provision of the 14th Amendment that hasn't been used in a high profile case since the end of the Civil War.
Really glossing over a lot here like overwhelming the police officers at the barricade lines, forcibly entering through the doorways while police were trying to prevent them from getting in, injuring multiple police officers, having to evacuate members of Congress because the house chambers were penetrated, and delaying the counting of delegates until the middle of the night. No harm, no foul though right? Let's just let bygones be bygones since I'm sure everyone learned their lesson.
