Supreme Court ballot judgement

[eccieuser9500]

WRONG!

Read it again.

[Yssup Rider]

Requires?

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

i don't care about my act only my stock portfolio and it's doing quite nicely thanks.

But I thought if Trump wasn't POTUS, the stock market was gonna crash, and there would be a recession and all sorts of sky is falling type of malarkey?!?

How is any of that stock portfolio action even possible when dear leader told us it couldn't happen without him!!?

Does the SCOTUS know about the stock market performing at all time highs despite DJT not being a part of anything??

I think what the SCOTUS will rule is that Trump must remain on the ballot unless he's been convicted of any crimes that support the insurrection clause; or they will punt on it and simply say that the case doesn't have merit to be heard at their level until there is a ruling from a lower tiered court. They are a big group of pussies when it really comes down to it.

The real interest I have is will they take the meaning of the constitutional ruling as textualism, originalism, and living constitutionalism. ...those will really make a huge difference in the interpretation of the law....and it's outcome.

[Lucas McCain]

You Trumpsters and his retarded desperate lawyers need to get one thing fucking straight. I'm not a lawyer, but Trump being found not guilty of something in congress because the GOP pussies in congress are scared of that fat old orange fucker has nothing to do with following the law.

Let the courts decide. They are supposed to follow the law or perhaps I am mistaken and everyone in congress is a lawyer and a current/former judge with no agenda and actually makes their voting decisions based on the law.

I think it will end in Trump's favor, although I believe it should not; but what the fuck do I know? I'm neither a lawyer nor a high-ranking judge like so many of you whore board Trump legal constitution experts are. LOL

[VitaMan]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

WRONG, that is the lie told by political enemies. No formal charges.


Plus, the 14th amendment requires the House of Representatives, not individual states to take names off the ballot for insurrection.

Completely wrong.


Mr. Trump has been charged with insurrection.


Your other point is incorrect also.

[eccieuser9500]

Maybe he should read it himself, I later thought. Instead of someone else tell him what it says and means.

[farmstud60]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Completely wrong.


Mr. Trump has been charged with insurrection.


Your other point is incorrect also.

By who? Nobody official

[eccieuser9500]

Only a district attorney. Not official enough?

[VitaMan]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

By who? Nobody official

How about the US Congress ? Is that official enough for you ?

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

Less than zero? The Constitution says dumpster is a criminal. Who wants a seditionist and convicted rapist, lying thief and outlaw to be in charge of executing the law. Only the lawless brainwashed want him to be elected.

So the brainwashed dumptards can continue to be programmed. HRC was right. They need to be deprogrammed.

no the constitution does not. the emoluments clause claim was struck down by the courts

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Mr. Trump has been charged with insurrection.

Originally Posted by eyecu2

But I thought if Trump wasn't POTUS, the stock market was gonna crash, and there would be a recession and all sorts of sky is falling type of malarkey?!?

How is any of that stock portfolio action even possible when dear leader told us it couldn't happen without him!!?

Does the SCOTUS know about the stock market performing at all time highs despite DJT not being a part of anything??

I think what the SCOTUS will rule is that Trump must remain on the ballot unless he's been convicted of any crimes that support the insurrection clause; or they will punt on it and simply say that the case doesn't have merit to be heard at their level until there is a ruling from a lower tiered court. They are a big group of pussies when it really comes down to it.

The real interest I have is will they take the meaning of the constitutional ruling as textualism, originalism, and living constitutionalism. ...those will really make a huge difference in the interpretation of the law....and it's outcome.

it crashed 30% due to covid and stayed way off well into Joey's presidency and the recovery of the market and the economy was a Biden clusterfuck and took far longer that it should have because of Biden

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Completely wrong.


Mr. Trump has been charged with insurrection.


Your other point is incorrect also.

nope


show me in Smith's federal indictment that charges Trump with Insurrection ...


https://apnews.com/trump-election-2020-indictment


read it for yourself

Originally Posted by VitaMan

How about the US Congress ? Is that official enough for you ?

Congress doesn't have the authority to block Trump from the ballot without a successful impeachment on charges of insurrection.


that's not gonna happen for several reasons.

[VitaMan]

There was a vote in a Congressional body that charged Trump with insurrection.

I am waiting for the Supreme Court judgement on this matter

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

There was a vote in a Congressional body that charged Trump with insurrection.

I am waiting for the Supreme Court judgement on this matter

was he convicted by impeachment?

nope

[VitaMan]

Not required. Appreciate your input though.

[Precious_b]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

...
note to precious b ... how do you rate the bias of ABC? or CNN? ...

Originally Posted by Precious_b

reminder@twk: you already know. Seems you share a quality that the top demo/repub candidate for office have that people on this site belittle.

Glad to see you recognize ABC as having more viewers than foxy in all its outlets. And no reports from ABC head that they push lies. You showing progress. Just a little. But some.

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

reminder@Precious_b i said no such thing. ...

Aren't you kewt when you forget something?

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

...

and that link to an ABC affiliate was so you can't refute it, yeah?...

What?!?!
You thinking you know what's on my mind?


If you would have


I never would have posted here.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

no the constitution does not. the emoluments clause claim was struck down by the courts

Yes -- it does. It is against the law (the Constitution) to lead or participate in an insurrection. I was not referring to the emoluments clause. State Secretaries of State have the right to declare him a seditionist. Kicking him off the ballot.

I know you remember this clip.