Sleigh bells ring, are you listening?
In the lane, snow is glistening
A beautiful sight
We're happy tonight
PUD DUP DUP DIT UP DIT BU UP DIT UP DI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwGMnEt6XQw HIT IT MR ANDY
Maine secretary of state removes Trump from 2024 ballot
Maine’s Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows on Thursday removed/disqualified former President Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 ballot, citing the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause.
Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung blasted the decision, calling Bellows a “virulent leftist” and “hyper-partisan Biden-supporting Democrat,”
He said the campaign would “quickly file a legal objection in state court to prevent this atrocious decision in Maine from taking effect.”
“I do not reach this conclusion lightly. Democracy is sacred,” Bellows wrote in her 34-page decision on multiple complaints challenging the 77-year-old Trump’s eligibility for the primary ballot in Maine based on his actions leading up to and during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol.
“I am mindful that no Secretary of State has ever deprived a presidential candidate of ballot access based on Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment. I am also mindful, however, that no presidential candidate has ever before engaged in insurrection,” she stated, calling the riot at the Capitol “unprecedented and tragic.”
“They were an attack not only upon the Capitol and government officials, but also an attack on the rule of law. The evidence here demonstrates that they occurred at the behest of, and with the knowledge and support of, the outgoing President,” Bellows argued.
https://nypost.com/2023/12/28/news/maine-secretary-of-state-removes-trump-from-2024-ballot/
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Rethuglikkklan meltdown in 3... 2... 1...
Anonymous
>>1250886 democrats be like "we have to stop voter disenfranchisement" and then do this. kek
Anonymous
>>1250901 It be like that tho
They are pushing society to a point where states won't even let candidates on the ballot different from the political party of the states governor.
Democrats are just driving everything towards a system where every state will have a single candidate, everyone will be disenfranchised, and votes will no longer matter
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250903 Holy slippery slope
>>1250901 Yeah, how dare they require politicians be eligible in order to be included on a ballot.
Anonymous
>>1250901 Right-wingers be like "we have to stop voter disenfranchisement", then try to draw up racially gerrymandered districts after being to by SCOTUS they aren't allowed to, try to ban mail-in voting, try to ban universal voter registration, try to ban ranked choice voting, try to block legitimate electoral votes from being certified, etc
Anonymous
>>1250886 why are demontards so afraid of the orange cheeto man?
Anonymous
>>1250915 Because they're riggers.
Anonymous
>>1250916 Remind us what happened after reconstruction ended in the south
Anonymous
>>1250919 Who was it that took Lincoln off of ballots again?
Anonymous
>>1250920 So you're admiting 'Democrats' are once again as undemocratic as they were leading up to the civil war?
Anonymous
>>1250920 >Did you know Abraham Lincoln was also absent from the ballot in 1860? Ten Southern states failed to issue ballots on behalf of the Republican candidate because he was opposed to slavery. When that was not enough to prevent a Lincoln victory, his opponents had him assassinated. Oh man.
Are Democrats repeating history again?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250926 if you must know......... yes. we democrats only ever believed in the pursuit of power by any means.
Anonymous
>>1250927 >>1250926 If you use the term Democrat and Republican to mean the same thing now as it did almost 200 years ago you're a moron and need immediate state supervision.
Anonymous
>>1250931 literally just confederate apologism. that's like saying, "if you use the term nazi to mean the same thing as it did 80 years ago you're a moron"
Anonymous
>>1250932 >literally just confederate apologism I have no interest in giving you a 9th grade history lesson or explaining the overton window to you.
>that's like saying, "if you use the term nazi to mean the same thing as it did 80 years ago you're a moron" Unironically, yes. It definitely just illustrates how out of touch you are with the evolution of politics throughout history. A socialist in fucking 1921 Italy is not the same thing as a socialist in 2023 America. That's beyond obvious, of course. Thank you for further elucidating your ignorance.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Racist DemoKKKrats lowering the bar, yet again
Anonymous
>>1250933 >he's a confederate apologist as well as a nazi apologist well at least you're consistent.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250933 100 years ago is same. 150 years ago is opposites. Lrn 2 cycles.
Anonymous
>>1250937 >he's a confederate apologist as well as a nazi apologist I actually refuse to believe that these are the best strawmen you could come up with
Anonymous
>>1250939 >strawman you're imagining things again. you're a very confused person.
Anonymous
>>1250941 >"Hey did you know that political ideologies change and evolve throughout history?" >"OH WOW SO UR LIKE AN APOLOGIST" Actual retardism.
Anonymous
>>1250939 this is how retarded the controlled opposition has gotten
Anonymous
>>1250943 i can't take a confederacy apologist seriously. you'll have to go embarrass yourself in front of someone else.
Anonymous
>>1250946 Lincoln's republican government oversaw the largest amount of physical property stolen from whites by the government and redistributed to black people.
It literally destroyed the south and took away generations of wealth from southern landowners.
Its natural that a scuzzy bitch like you would be sympathetic to republicans using the government to steal money from Americans
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250952 Yeah guys, won't somebody think of the poor slave owners who betrayed the country?
Anonymous
>>1250903 Or hopefully they push us towards civil war so we can see white/conservative Americans finally torture them to death in the streets like the vermin that they are.
tolielikethe kingPatRumppumpumpumTRumppumpumpum
tolielikethe kingPatRumppumpumpumTRumppumpumpum Fri 29 Dec 2023 05:21:11 No. 1250961 Report Quoted By:
>>1250914 >be like ALL CAPS CHRISTMAS CAROLER, be like:
Maine gov. sings, are you listening?
In such pain , tRump is blistering
A beautiful sight
tRump is banned tonight
Walking in a wintry blunderland
>>1250933 >A socialist in fucking 1921 Italy is not the same thing as a socialist in 2023 America. But white bigot scum in 1880 be like that today, only they be on the meth, and fenny, not the moonshine, and they be tryin' to hang Pence, rather than Pharrell, and they be drivin' a beatup ol' pickup instead of ridin' a beat up ol mule
Anonymous
Looks like the party that has been screaming about election interference for the past 7 years has been doing a lot of election interference...
Anonymous
>>1250968 Gotta save that Democracy by ensuring no one can vote for who they want to.
Anonymous
>>1250975 Maybe Republicans should've thought of that before they tried to own the libs.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250968 >Looks like the party that has been screaming about election interference for the past 7 years has been doing a lot of election interference... Yep. That's why they're off the ballot. Shouted about elections being rigged then tried to rig one. Fuck Republicans.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250901 Dude, just don't stage a coup.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250944 Better blame it on jews and chinamen
Anonymous
Anonymous
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Anonymous
>>1250998 You understand this is happening due to the failed insurrection Trump caused, right?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250998 >This secretary of state should be arrested. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Anonymous
There was no insurrection. Trump is on record telling the crowd to be peaceful. FBI and CIA plants incited the riot.
Anonymous
>>1251036 Get a load of Baghdad Bob over here
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251036 You should join Trump's legal team. You'd probably do a better job than they're doing now.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251041 Get a load of the Useful Idiot here.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250931 But the word “nigger” hold up just fine
Anonymous
>>1250931 I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth fork-tongue.
Removing candidates from ballots was undemocratic then, it's undemocratic now and it'll be undemocratic tomorrow. Try and stay focused
Anonymous
>>1251069 the 14th amendment actually preserves democracy, whether from slave owners or anti-democratic despots like trump
Anonymous
It's going to be hilarious when Trump is reelected in a historic landslide lol
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250999 Wasted trips. This only happen in your head.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
tdif is getting desperate
Anonymous
>>1250977 Republicans do oppose the racist DemoKKKrat party.
I bet you believe that you’re “on the right side of history”
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251077 So funny how these conservatives pretend it is silly to call the fascism of conservatism for what it is and try to “no,you” to any criticism.
>>1251073 When their fellow conservatives can’t help but say the quiet part out loud and cheer on the fascism to come.
Anonymous
>>1251072 It being "ratified" at bayonet point was surely democratic as well in your eyes.
But ignoring that, your interpretation of section 3 not requiring any charge let alone conviction of insurrection to disqualify a candidate and doing so based on a secretary of state's sole subjective opinion isn't democracy.
In democracy, you're right to run for office exists and can't be taken away without trial.
Anonymous
>>1251083 unless you're a traitor to the nation. ask a confederate soldier
Anonymous
These blue states can rule however they want, it’s fine. SCOTUS will slap this nonsense down 9-0 in Trump’s favor, 7-2 worst case. Leftists can get fucked.
Anonymous
>>1251088 >the entity that interprets the constitution will slap down something explicitly written in the constitution Anonymous
>>1251092 Nta, but it's highly debated if trump engaged in insurrection and really seems to be more a matter of personal interpretation. It seems premature to rule him disqualified based on something that roughly half of Americans don't even believe is true.
Anonymous
>>1251087 No there's no unless.
Treason, like insurrection, is a crime you need to be convicted of BEFORE being deprived of your right to run for office.
Otherwise you get lunch mobs and witch hunts NOT democracy.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251083 >In democracy, you're right to run for office exists and can't be taken away without trial. Unless you don't meet any of the other requirements to run for office, right?
Did you forget about them?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251117 the 14th amendment was legislation, no conviction required
>all persons who voluntarily adhered to the late insurrection, giving it aid and comfort, shall be excluded from the right to vote for Representatives in Congress and for electors for the President and Vice President of the United States >The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251117 Racist DemoKKKrats are the shining example of lynch mobs and court of public opinion to get what they want.
Anonymous
>>1251110 Even if you want to argue Trump didn't personally engage in insurrection, section 3 of the 14th amendment also considers providing aid and comfort to insurrectionists as grounds for disqualification. Trump is on record providing aid and comfort to the insurrectionists (the Save America rally speech where he says he'll be right there with them, the Twitter video in the aftermath of the attack in which he says "we love you, you're very special" to the insurrectionists, Trump saying he'd pardon the insurrectionists if re-elected, etc)
Anonymous
>>1251125 Once again, how many people were actually found to have committed insurrection? Like 6 out of 10,000? Around half the population of America doesn't think it was an insurrection, it was a protest, and the American court system doesn't even believe that the people were there to perpetrate an insurrection
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251133 >there was only a little insurrection Anonymous
>>1251133 >Around half the population of America doesn't think it was an insurrection So the court of public opinion is more important than the constitution?
Anonymous
>>1251138 Lol nice strawman.
Insurrection is against the law, so deciding someone committed it and applying constitutional liabilities against them without due process is just as much ignoring the constitution as allowing him to run if he was convicted of insurrection.
There's more than this single amendment in the constitution you know, you can't just selectively apply the clauses you want when it's convenient for you to do so
Anonymous
>>1251141 Does the insurrection section invoke a criminal, civil or other process? Cite your specific Constitutional reasoning.
Anonymous
>>1251142 Wait Wait wait hold up
Let me get this straight.
After you said "So the court of public opinion is more important than the constitution" what you are suggesting is that this determination of a criminal act ignore the constitution and instead use the "court of public opinion" for the determination?
How are you this disingenuous?
Seriously?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251144 I didn't say that, dipshit.
Anonymous
>>1251141 >>1251144 The constitution, being the supreme law of the land, doesn't defer to statutory law. If a specific clause in the constitution says something is a disqualifying factor for holding office without specifically saying a criminal conviction is required, then it doesn't require a criminal conviction.
Anonymous
>>1251138 >>1251146 So you are literally saying that insurrection, a criminal act, is up to "the court of public opinion" but only in the case that trump be decided that he's an insurrectionist, but not in the case that trump is decided to not be an insurrectionist?
Because the alternative option for that determination here is due process.
Or I guess the other alternative option is having judges unilaterally decide if trump committed insurrection, which once again would violate due process and is unconstitutional, but that really seems to be what your pushing for , isn't it?
Anonymous
>>1251148 >the court of public opinion A court of public opinion didn't disqualify Trump. A Secretary of State did.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251148 Posts like this are why it's a good thing you aren't an attorney.
>So you are literally saying that insurrection, a criminal act, is up to "the court of public opinion" but only in the case that trump be decided that he's an insurrectionist, but not in the case that trump is decided to not be an insurrectionist? Insurrection isn't defined as a criminal act in the constitution. It is listed as a disqualifying factor for holding office. The constitution doesn't defer to US Code for what qualifies someone to hold office. And even still, like I said earlier, even if Trump himself didn't personally engage in insurrection, he would still be disqualified for offering aid & support to the insurrectionists that have indeed been convicted.
>Because the alternative option for that determination here is due process. >Or I guess the other alternative option is having judges unilaterally decide if trump committed insurrection, which once again would violate due process and is unconstitutional, but that really seems to be what your pushing for , isn't it? No, see above.
Anonymous
All talk of insurrection is moot since Congress brought impeachment proceedings against Trump for it and he was acquitted of all charges.
Anonymous
>>1251160 How are you going to claim insurrection requires a criminal conviction, but then bring up impeachment, which isn't a criminal court proceeding?
Anonymous
>>1251161 Not that anon, you leftist fuckhead. I’m saying ALL talk of insurrection is moot. It wasn’t an insurrection. A handful of people walking around a building cannot topple a government, no matter how many agent provocateurs are planted by the political opposition.
Regardless of any of that, let me assure you of two things: SCOTUS will rule in Trump’s favor and he WILL be on the 24 ballot.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251151 >A court of public opinion didn't disqualify Trump. A Secretary of State did Well that's even less democratic lol
Anonymous
>>1251162 The Republican leader of the Senate said it was an insurrection. Why would he say something that would damage his own party's chances of regaining the presidency?
Anonymous
>>1251162 What's it like trying to maintain the fiction that it wasn't an insurrection when everyone around you, including members of your own party, call it an insurrection?
Anonymous
>>1251173 then why has not a single person been charged with insurrection?
Anonymous
>>1251169 >>1251173 > I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Tell me what part of that sounds anything like someone trying to incite violence, much less an insurrection?
Anonymous
>>1251169 >Someone stated their opinion >Why would they do that!!??? Retard.
Not surprising a democrat thinks that every party member needs to move and think as a single entity. Tow the line, if you will
Anonymous
>>1251175 see
>>1251136 >>1251176 >And we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore. >>1251177 >claim no one thinks it's an insurrection >top ranking member of own party thinks it's an insurrection >"well, that's just his opinion!" The question was: why would he hold an opinion that would damage his party's pursuit of power (including his own power in the Senate, considering the potential down-ballot ramifications)?
Anonymous
>>1251175 Insurrection isn't a criminal offense. Instead they were charged with obstructing an official proceeding and/or violence
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases Take the case of Daniel Adams
>Civil Disorder; Obstruction of an Official Proceeding; Assaulting, Resisting or Impeding Certain Officers; Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building; Impeding Passage Through the Capitol Grounds or Buildings; Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building Anonymous
>>1251180 Paste the McConnell quote
Anonymous
>>1251183 >“We all were here. We saw what happened. It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election, from one administration to the next. That’s what it was,” https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/mcconnell-calls-jan-6-violent-insurrection-breaking-rnc-rcna15404 >"The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people." https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/mcconnell-says-jan-6-capitol-attack-was-provoked-by-trump-and-others-in-power Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1251180 > And we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore Imagine believing this constitutes incitement of insurrection. What kind of twisted, pansy ass leftist logic is this? Let’s go back through history and look at how many speeches given by American presidents mentions fighting. If a single one is found, your example is bullshit.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1251185 >>1251186 >>1251189 Mitch McConnell is not the emperor of republicans, you know that right? Most of us don’t care what some rino career politician has to say about it.
Anonymous
>>1251191 For the third time: why would he hold an opinion that would damage his party's (and his own individual) pursuit of power?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251191 LOL. go get better shills, you've been cornered with ease
Anonymous
>>1251192 I don’t care why. His opinion is just that. It’s irrelevant.
SCOTUS will vote 9-0, 7-2 worst case and Trump will be on the ballot.
Anonymous
>>1251194 >I don’t care why. His opinion is just that. It’s irrelevant. is every piece of evidence not in your favor irrelevant, or are you an irrelevant shill on a dead board getting btfo
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251182 >Insurrection isn't a criminal offense I don't know who told you this buy they were mistaken. Insurrection is a criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. 2383.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251195 Mitch McConnell’s opinion is not evidence, no matter how you TDS suffering shills want it to be.
Anonymous
>>1251192 If you like him so fucking much why don't you vote for him faggot?
Nobody gives a shit what corpses like Mitch McConnell or Nancy Pelosi or even Joe Biden think despite them holding seats of great power. Nobody would be foolish enough to think they were making decisions for themselves.
Anonymous
>>1251182 >Insurrection isn't a criminal offense I don't know who told you this but they were mistaken. Insurrection is a criminal offense under 18 U.S.C. 2383.
Anonymous
>>1250931 Conservatives will never take responsibilities for any of the crimes they committed against American and will always project them onto others. In this case, pushing their crimes onto their old party after they all switched to the Republicans when the Civil Rights Act was passed.
A friendly reminder that;
The Conservatives were the Loyalists fighting for the British Crown during the Revolutionary war, while the liberals at the time were fighting for self governance and independence.
The Conservatives were the Confederates who betrayed America to keep the racist and conservative institution of slavery alive, while liberals were fighting for the Union and abolition.
The Conservatives were the Fascists during World War II who supported the Nazis with with groups like the American Bundt while the liberals stood with the free world to fight them.
And the Conservatives were MAGA who staged a coup on January 6th to end over 200 years of direct democracy because their candidate lost and created a lie about fraud.
Conservatives have no respect for freedom, unless it's their personal freedom to oppress others.
Anonymous
>>1251199 i wonder what are you faggots going to latch onto when trump is dead
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251202 Put it in your blog, faggot.
Anonymous
>>1251200 The constitution doesn't defer to USC. Insurrection being a disqualifier from holding office is independent of insurrection being a crime.
Anonymous
>>1251202 Low IQ post. Modern day conservatism has more in common with classic liberalism than DNC socialists.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251205 The goal posts have been moved so far they can’t even be seen anymore.
Anonymous
>>1251205 According to what?
Anonymous
>>1251199 I'm not a Kentuckian. Also, acknowledging that someone said something doesn't mean I like the person.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251206 you mean wahabbism
Anonymous
>>1251208 The constitution is the supreme law of the land. USC derives its authority from the constitution. The constitution explicitly lists insurrection as a disqualifier from holding office, with no mention of it requiring a criminal conviction.
Anonymous
>>1251203 Probably voting for Trump Jr, faggot. Deal with it.
Anonymous
>>1251212 >he'd vote for the most aggrieved whiny beta male on the planet, rivalled in having a persecution complex by only his own father Lol
Lmao even
Anonymous
>>1251211 Congress brought impeachment proceedings against Trump for incitement of an insurrection and he was acquitted. Therefore, he did not incite an insurrection.
What part of this confuses you leftist retards?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251209 Yeah, my point was you don't give a shit about his opinion or voting for him any more than I do, but him shitting on Trump is the one thing you and his old decrepit ass can agree on.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251216 >aggrieved I didn't see where he was voting for a Democrat.
Anonymous
>>1251218 not really, republicans knew they couldn't defend his actions so they used the excuse that impeachment shouldn't apply to people no longer in office. why else would mcconnell say what he did
Anonymous
>>1251221 Again, McConnell is not the emperor of republicans. His opinion matters less than the buzzing of flies around his bullshit.
Congress: impeachment for incitement of insurrection
Trump: acquitted of said charge
You idiots have already lost. The funny thing is watching so many of you get overexcited. The anticipation of your tears and seething when SCOTUS rules in Trump’s favor is absolutely incredible.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251224 it's funny how trumpfags are as adept at burning bridges as trump himself
Anonymous
>>1251218 Impeachment proceedings aren't criminal court proceedings. Impeachment is purely a political process. Also, removal from office by impeachment conviction is completely separate from not qualifying to hold office by not meeting the constitutional requirements for office. Why would they add an amendment with a separate specific clause about someone not qualifying due to insurrection if the constitution already describes impeachment?
Anonymous
>>1251227 So who decides if he participated in insurrection? Leftists? Media? Conservatives?
It’s already been decided by Congress and SCOTUS will cite that fact when they rule in Trump’s favor. Seethe about it all you want but prepare yourself and be ready to cope.
Anonymous
>>1251229 did he try to use fake electors and violent mobs to usurp democracy? checks out to me
Anonymous
>>1251230 And who the fuck are you?
Congress made the decision. He was acquitted.
Anonymous
>>1251192 He's an establishment Republican. He openly benefits from kowtowing to the Democratic party, calls it bipartisanship, and gatekeeps the rest of the Right from actually making change in America.
Most of the Republican party is comprised of neocon warhawks and retards who are looking to game the stock market. That's why they bend over backwards to fund foreign wars; they personally gain by investing in companies that will immediately benefit from spending bills.
McConnell hates Trump because Trump is the first pro-peace president we've had in twenty years. Conversely, Biden gets sucked off because foreign wars means more profit for congress at home.
This is the same reason why the GOP talks a big game about policing the border, but does fuckall about it. They're financially benefiting from the cheap labor that's polluting the US economy.
Anonymous
>>1251229 >tells me to seethe and cope >as he himself is seething and coping Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251234 Not really, sport. I’m enjoying all the straws you reprobates keep grabbing at to stop the bad orange man and save democracy.
Anonymous
>>1251233 Then why do right-wingers keep voting for establishment neocon Republicans rather than primarying them? Or establishing a party further right than Republicans?
Anonymous
>>1251206 >Modern day conservatism is authoritarianism Fixed
Anonymous
>>1251232 Anyone whose opposition party doesn't have a two-thirds Senate supermajority will always get acquitted. Because impeachment is a political process and two-thirds is too high a threshold to expect that many Senators to cross party lines to expel a president of their own party. McConnell himself voted to acquit, despite simultaneously admitting he still believes Trump is responsible for the January 6 insurrection. That alone clearly illustrates how impeachment is nothing more than a political exercise.
Anonymous
>>1251242 >political exercise And that’s all Colorado’s and Maine’s crap is going to amount to when SCOTUS rules in Trump’s favor.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1251244 How can SCOTUS rule against something clearly written in the constitution when the entire point of SCOTUS is to determine the constitutionality of things?
Anonymous
>>1251238 Yeah, how dare they attempt to control who people can vote for.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1251246 As of right now, the only official findings of Trump’s involvement in an insurrection are on record as Congress acquitting him.
Explain to me how Trump was involved when fucking Congress ruled that he was not?
There is no legal standing for Colorado or Maine to make their decisions.
SCOTUS will end this obviously leftist attempt to preempt Trump’s reelection in 24.
Anonymous
>>1251254 how many times do you have to be reminded that impeachment isn't criminal court
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251254 and also reminded that there are several historical applications, most without being initiated by trial, many reviewed and upheld by the courts?
BTW, NTA.
Anonymous
>>1251255 Nta but why do you think the job of determining if someone committed insurrection is best left up to a politically elected individual such as a sec of state, and not a federal court, not a criminal court, not a congressional court, not a judge, not even a goddam public vote? But someone who literally works for a political party?
Anonymous
>>1251211 Insurrection only matters to the law as it's defined under the law. And it's defined specifically in US code as a criminal offense. To claim someone has "engaged in insurrection" is to allege they are guilty of a crime. Since Trump hasn't been convicted of insurrection, the CO SC is attempting to make a ruling without legal basis.
Anonymous
>>1251255 Doesn’t matter. As of right now, there is no criminal ruling that Trump was involved in an insurrection.
SCOTUS will remind you leftist reprobates of that.
Anonymous
>>1251260 SCOTUS will review the history of the section, finding that no criminal ruling is needed then return the case back to the States for further consideration.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251258 >But someone who literally works for a political party? The secretary of state isn't an employee of a political party. What the fuck are you talking about?
Anonymous
>>1251211 So your saying is all it takes is a secretary of state claiming that biden's actions of letting so many illegal immigrants into the country every year that it's triple the size of Seattle is the same as "aiding and abetting an enemy" by helping illegal immigrants more than Americans, and nobody has any right to disagree because the 14th amendment never requires a criminal conviction for aiding and abetting an enemy?
Not a good hill to die on.
Anonymous
>>1251268 that's what you said, and we know you're going to throw a shit fit, have fun
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Democrats be like: "we must disenfranchise as many non-democrat voters as possible, it doesn't matter if anyone actually did anything wrong, we will just repeat baseless claims and unproven allegations"
Anonymous
>>1251264 Love the enthusiasm!
Never gonna happen.
9-0 best case scenario.
7-2 worst case scenario.
There’s nothing you can do about it, leftist.
Anonymous
>>1251269 SC is going to shoot this down
Have fun shitting your pants when it happens
Anonymous
>>1251268 NTA but you have you amendments and articles crossed.
>criminal conviction for aiding and abetting an enemy This would be treason, no? A conviction of requires two witnesses to the treasonous act, or a confession.
Anonymous
Anonymous
>>1251273 Yet the 14th amendment requires none of this, supposedly.
All it requires is a secretary of state to decide it's true
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251259 The constitution doesn't defer to USC. USC defers to the constitution. Saying someone engaged in insurrection and is thereby disqualified from office isn't an allegation of a crime. Just as saying someone isn't yet 35 years old and is thereby disqualified from office isn't an allegation of a crime. Yes, someone can be criminally charged with insurrection per USC, but the criminal charge of insurrection is an entirely independent thing from disqualifying someone for insurrection per the constitution.
Anonymous
>>1251271 leftist?
Republican since I could vote, not that you will take what I say as fact. Doesn't change the fact though.
I believe your kool-aid needs a bit more rat bait.
Anonymous
>>1251264 The only precedent is the civil war confederacy, which surrendered the official war.
Anonymous
>>1251279 Sure thing Mr. Bush. Fuck off to the Democrat side.
Anonymous
I think what all the libtards here are overlooking is the fact that a single person is making a very controversial decision that roughly 50% of Americans believe is a factually incorrect decision.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251276 Firstly, no it doesn't require a secretary of state to decide it's true.
Seriously, how fucking hard is it for you to look up the text?
The construction of the Constitution and the various Amendments isn't random. There is purpose is the construction of sentences, what is stated and what isn't.
This is basic English 101 you should have learned years ago.
Anonymous
>>1251279 If you’re a republican and you want Trump taken off the ballot, then you can fuck right off to the other side. You’re not wanted, traitor.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251281 Nope, here are additional applications.
They exist whether or not you believe them to. You can read the opinions of the ones that were reviewed by courts.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251283 >>1251286 someone needs to take politics 101
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251268 >biden's actions of letting so many illegal immigrants into the country every year that it's triple the size of Seattle Did he personally let them in? Did he even tell them to come?
>is the same as "aiding and abetting an enemy" How are illegal immigrants "enemies"? Are they, like, enemy combatants? Are they acting on behalf of hostile governments?
>by helping illegal immigrants more than Americans By what metric does aid to illegal immigrants surpass aid to Americans? Illegals don't even qualify for like 99% of public assistance programs.
Anonymous
>>1251286 Any Republican that gives a shit about winning should want that loser off the ballot, whether the Dems do it, the Feds do it, or an act of God does it.
Anonymous
>>1251292 He’s already won twice and will win again in 24, you useless pavement ape. Fuck off
Anonymous
>>1251286 Traitor? To whom, you?
You and your ilk are sick, cancerous even.
It is as simple as:
Does section 3 of the 14th apply to Trump?
What is necessary to trigger?
Did Trump do what is needed to trigger?
If the answer is Yes and you still go on about traitors and such, well you would actually be the one on the wrong side of the treasonous line.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251272 >even if it's true trump's scotus appointees will negate it why aren't you appealing to democracy anymore
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251293 anything is possible in your imagination
Anonymous
Quoted By:
The main issue here is that the decision is being made based on what currently are simply allegations.
Anonymous
>>1251293 >He’s already won twice If that was true, then wouldn't he be disqualified from running again per the 22nd amendment?
Anonymous
>>1250955 Nah, you don't want that. Most conservatives are obese and uneducated.
>but they got guns! Yes, and we just need to go hiking so they can't get to us on their rascals.
Most conservatives are keyboard warriors. Let's take that school shooting were, statistically, most of those cops would be conservative. They were pissing their pants.
Y'all ain't gonna do shit.
Anonymous
>>1251295 Whatever gets you through the day, bootlicker.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251311 The only one licking a boot is you but youve been trained not to even notice.
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251307 The level of intelligence these posters display is for a lack of a better description, sad.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251309 Libtard fanfiction is wild.
Anonymous
So basically everything is being set up for Civil war 2.0 electric boogaloo?
Anonymous
>>1251371 why are republicucks so intent on going against the constitution and allowing an insurrectionist to run for office?
Threatening violence because you can't have a criminal represent you is particularly retarded
Anonymous
>>1251372 Because they can run who they want? He was beaten by Joe Biden in 2020, why are the democrats so scared now that things are back to normal to let him run in 2024? If democrats beat him in 2020 why are they so scared they can't beat him in 2024?
Anonymous
Maine and Colorado are nothingburgers. Nixon wasnt even on california and he still won.
Anonymous
>>1251374 Even they don't think their sponge-brained mummy can win but they don't have any better ideas, thus they pay 3rd worlders to shit up the site instead.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251376 t. Trump voter in 2019
Anonymous
>>1251375 This. Not to mention the fact that SCOTUS absolutely WILL rule in Trump’s favor, nulling and voiding colorado and maines idiocy
Anonymous
>>1251380 SCOTUS will decline the case.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251396 I needed a good laugh.
Thanks.
Anonymous
>>1251396 Keep dreaming. Not only will they accept the case, they’ll rule 9-0 in Trump’s favor. 7-2 worst case. Again, there’s not a goddamn thing leftists can do about it.
clarence thomas thinks he's white, but da beat make his toe tap
clarence thomas thinks he's white, but da beat make his toe tap Sat 30 Dec 2023 04:54:38 No. 1251407 Report >>1251399 >Not only will they accept the case, they’ll rule 9-0 in Trump’s favor. these rightwing scotus judges just said that abortion should be left up the state.
They will pass the buck back to the state, and then other states will ban tRump. and it's over
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250886 youre really sick in the head.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250886 Putin, xi, maduro, kim and abrador are so proud of you marxist dems.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251284 >Good post: ignored Hard to argue with the truth, isn't it?
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1250886 a. I am pretty sure the GOP can just do a caucus and get trump on the ballot, like how the Dems abandoned caucuses after 2016 so they could more easily rig elections because bernie won colorado's caucus in 2016 before colorado went to a normal primary in 2020
b. obviously dems are doing this because they know they cannot win free and fair elections.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251376 T. #StillWithHer 2016-2020
I won't vote for him, but will still revel in your tears when it happens because you're out of touch retards rallying behind a drooling, pantshitting pedo
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251237 >Then why do right-wingers keep voting for establishment neocon Republicans rather than primarying them? Because they don't know any better.
The vast majority of voters are uninformed and stupid. They listen to whatever the media tells them and then immediately assume they have all the tools necessary to vote in their own best interest.
Mainstream media is the product of an industry which carefully cultivates media content in exchange for political favors. They seek to manipulate the populace for the benefit of DC, who in turn promise to grant them special privileges, grants, or immunity from unscrupulous activities.
>Or establishing a party further right than Republicans? Without the aid of the free press, there isn't anything they can do, because the DC-led media will mine the ground out from under their feet, just like they did to the J6ers.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251374 >Because they can run who they want? Do you even have the slightest clue about the qualifications for running for office?
Anonymous
United states like any superpower is and has to be a form of deep state run dictatorship. People have way too little information and knowledge and intelligence to decide for themselves.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251479 Universal suffrage was unironically a mistake.
Anonymous
>>1251479 >United states like any superpower is and has to be a form of deep state run dictatorship. What's stopping you from moving to a dictatorship where you can be more comfortable?
Anonymous
>>1250999 I'm confused. I'm not from USA but even the news outlets here screech about Trump and have been doing so for 8 years. I want to know why.
Tried to look this shit up and as far as I can determine, Trump has done nothing noteworthy or criminal and that "coup" is laughable, Trump told people to be chill, there is video footage of them just letting the people in. Also the treatment of those arrested seems peculiar, last I checked USA had some sort of constitution that guarantees fair treatment and swift judications, not months upon months of rotting in a cell for literally nothingburger.
There seems to be no hard evidence against the "orange devil", just years worth of smearing, and made up stuff, even FBI admitted they made the russian stuff up. Is this just sunk cost fallacy or people starting to believe their own lies or what?
Doesn't make much sense to me.
Anonymous
>>1251407 >these rightwing scotus judges just said that abortion should be left up the state. >They will pass the buck back to the state, and then other states will ban tRump. and it's over if Scotus has any last remnant of honesty, this is the way to go
Anonymous
>>1251571 Only that won’t be the way they go. They’ll hear the case, as it’s way too important to leave up to states and their political agendas. We’re not talking about a non US born citizen or a convicted criminal or someone under 35. American citizens, and only citizens, have the right to vote for who they want. Any discussion or action that interferes with that is sedition.
SCOTUS will rule 9-0, 7-2 worst case. There’s not a goddamn thing you seditious leftists can do about it.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251572 >it's sedition if you don't let us do sedition you love flipping reality on its head
Anonymous
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251522 Good post
>Is this just sunk cost fallacy or people starting to believe their own lies or what Why not both?
Anonymous
There are two things that will always be true: Jews rape kids, and the DemoKKKrat party is the racist party.
i'm dumb but at least them n******$ are dumberer than i is
i'm dumb but at least them n******$ are dumberer than i is Sat 30 Dec 2023 19:08:03 No. 1251600 Report Quoted By:
>>1251593 >There are two things that will always be true: Jews rape kids, and the DemoKKKrat party is the racist party. 2 other things are true,
1 you state that all jews rape kids, so you are a racist
2 you quite stupid for not seeing this
Anonymous
>>1251522 >Doesn't make much sense to me. Have you heard of "Trump Derangement Syndrome"?
It's not a meme. It's actually a real thing.
Liberals, progressives and antifa-types hate Trump so much that they lie to tear him down. Eventually they lie so much that they have difficulty telling fact from fiction, so they start to believe their own lies, creating a downward spiral of obsession and self-perpetuating fiction.
If you ask any of these people how Trump committed an insurrection, they literally would not be able to describe how he did it in fine detail. Everything they've chosen to believe comes from a deep-seated delusion, and if you challenge that belief with the truth, they will enter a severe state of anxiety.
I'm being completely serious. This is a huge problem that's affecting a large percentage of Americans, to the point that our politicians and justice system have been perpetuating those same lies. And it's worrying because they act like paranoid schizophrenics; if you try to reason with them, they immediately assume you're an "enemy of democracy", or whatever boogeyman they are convinced exists.
Anonymous
Anonymous
MS MAINE SECRETARY AMERICAN HERO
Quoted By:
What d'you say?
I, I wish you could swim
Like the dolphins, like dolphins can swim
Though nothing, nothing will keep us together
We can beat them, for ever and ever
Oh we can be Heroes, just for one day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTzcaEpvQec ROCK ON MR BOWIE
Anonymous
>>1251188 In what other context could telling people to go to the Capitol and "fight like hell" be taken? They already fought the legal way by voting on election day, and they lost that fight. Congress is constitutionally bound to certify the electoral votes, so peacefully protesting wouldn't really accomplish anything (It would be illegal for Congress to just say "okay, we've been persuaded to agree with the mob outside. Let's just not certify the election results, as they requested"). So, the only other context it can be taken in is to tell the mob to go to the Capitol and disrupt the certification by force.
Anonymous
>>1251694 >If you ask any of these people how Trump committed an insurrection, they literally would not be able to describe how he did it in fine detail Interesting, I've noticed the same and none of our news reports can adequately tell WHAT he actually did or why he is so bad and hated.
And this has been going on for years, all my friends hate him despite no one caring about USA but cannot give any clear answers when pressed for details. Just "he must be bad, why would they go so far if he was innocent?". None of them question why our media has such a hateboner for him either.
And this thread seems a lot of the same, Trump is bad but all there is is just other like-minded people saying he's bad quoting others saying he's bad claiming he did something terrible because someone accused him of doing something somewhere once, maybe.
just lol
Anonymous
>>1251915 Kinda like that time Trump said Obama committed Obamagate, which was "the biggest political crime in history", but when asked what Obamagate actually was, Trump just said "You know it is!" without elaborating further.
Anonymous
>>1251916 >https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_Barack_Obama_spying_on_Donald_Trump Straight from the libshits editing Wikipedia. They claim it's unfounded, but it's all confirmed that the FBI was spying on everybody in the Trump organization during the campaign. Whether or not it was justified is another question, and presumably they wouldn't have had to lie on secret FISA warrant applications if their actions were truly justified.
The fact that we have secret courts issuing warrants based on nothing against people running for the highest political office says only bad things about the country.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251971 From the article you linked:
>On May 10, 2020—one day after former president Barack Obama criticized the Trump administration's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic — Trump posted a one-word tweet: "OBAMAGATE!" On May 11, Philip Rucker of The Washington Post asked Trump what crime former president Barack Obama committed. Trump's reply was: "Obamagate. It's been going on for a long time ... from before I even got elected and it's a disgrace that it happened.... Some terrible things happened and it should never be allowed to happen in our country again." When Rucker again asked what the crime was, Trump said: "You know what the crime is. The crime is very obvious to everybody. All you have to do is read the newspapers, except yours." On May 15, Trump tweeted that Obamagate was the "greatest political scandal in the history of the United States." Anonymous
>>1251906 Again, show me a speech from history by any elected official that mentions fighting and also resulted in an insurrection. You can’t.
There was no insurrection. A handful of people walking through a building is not an insurrection. It wasn’t a riot, or an attack. It was a protest. A raucous but mostly peaceful protest.
Anonymous
>>1251997 >Again, show me a speech from history by any elected official that mentions fighting and also resulted in an insurrection. If you insist.
>The surest way to secure peace, is to show your ability to maintain your rights. The principles and position of the present administration of the United States — the republican party — present some puzzling questions. While it is a fixed principle with them never to allow the increase of a foot of slave territory, they seem to be equally determined not to part with an inch "of the accursed soil." Notwithstanding their clamor against the institution, they seemed to be equally opposed to getting more, or letting go what they have got. They were ready to *FIGHT* on the accession of Texas, and are equally ready to *FIGHT* now on her secession. Why is this? How can this strange paradox be accounted for? There seems to be but one rational solution — and that is, notwithstanding their professions of humanity, they are disinclined to give up the benefits they derive from slave labor. Their philanthropy yields to their interest. The idea of enforcing the laws, has but one object, and that is a collection of the taxes, raised by slave labor to swell the fund, necessary to meet their heavy appropriations. The spoils is what they are after — though they come from the labor of the slave. Alexander H. Stephens, vice president of the Confederate States (formerly US representative from Georgia)
Anonymous
>>1251997 >While, therefore, our success in driving the enemy from our soil has not equaled the expectations confidently entertained at the commencement of the campaign, his progress has been checked. If we are forced to regret losses in Tennessee and Arkansas, we are not without ground for congratulation on successes in Louisiana and Texas. On the seacoast he is exhausted by vain efforts to capture our ports, while on the northern frontier he has in turn felt the pressure and dreads the renewal of invasion. The indomitable courage and perseverance of the people in the defense of their homes have been nobly attested by the unanimity with which the Legislatures of Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia have recently given expression to the popular sentiment, and like manifestations may be anticipated from all the States. Whatever obstinacy may be displayed by the enemy in his desperate sacrifices of money, life, and liberty in the hope of enslaving us, the experience of mankind has too conclusively shown the superior endurance of those who *FIGHT* for home, liberty, and independence to permit any doubt of the result. Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States (formerly US representative and US Senator from Mississippi)
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1251484 I don't care about any of it, I'm fine where I am. Just telling you how it is so you don't delude yourself into thinking your voice matters or should matter.
Anonymous
>>1252007 >>1252010 You’re a faggot. Bring something to the table that doesn’t involve the civil fucking war, then we’ll debate. Unfuckingbelievable. The civil war?? Lmao
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>1252027 >"show me a speech from history from any elected official..." >gets shown two speeches from history from two elected officials >"th-th-those don't count!" I accept your concession. You should be ashamed of how comprehensively you got BTFO'd.
Brian Jonestown
Quoted By:
>>1250886 Banning the opposition. How absurd.
Brian Jonestown
Quoted By:
>>1251316 The nation is so gay.
