President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

Remember.....
..... the Twitter Files?
......the Nunes Memo?
......the Durham Report?
......Cyber Ninjas?
......CRT?

 

The temptation to trot out some "shocked" gif was strong, but I shall choose the high road and merely remind you that you've been taught this since before your voice changed.

 

True. This is the way things are. But it is still absurd that this is our way of doing things.

 

In the general, yes. In the primaries, California can matter. I don’t think we’re on Super Tuesday, but we’re close*. Someone steals a few states and it could matter.

*Sorry just checked. We are on Super Tuesday

Secondly, I meant it more in the sense of someone from California fucking with him by trying to get him off the ballot. It feels like something someone vying for senate might do or just an activist group feeling left out.

 

Full disclosure I have not read the decision.

But I love how the old GOP themes are coming back to bite them in the a**.

1. Remember the "sanctity of state's rights?" Well the SCOTUS dipping into how a State runs itself is exactly what GOP Plank No. 1 was intended to avoid.
2. The SCOTUS cannot tell the State how to deal with the State's operation, only if there is a federal question involved, constitutional or federal law. Not sure its here.
3. Finally, hey don't champion an insurrection and election fraud and we'd never be here.

 

It will, and it probably won't have to strain too hard to do so.

That said, this is a small of part of why Trump needs to lose, preferably in primaries. (Which seems unlikely.)

I have no idea whether the Colorado Supreme Court has something better to do, but the nation sure has better things to talk about and accomplish. Time to move on.

 

Yeah, let's just forget about the guy who tried to overthrow the country.

 

Oh, I'm not forgetting. I want him to lose. And I said it's a small part. He's done lot of bad things and will assuredly do more. He can be punished for what he's done and America as a project can simultaneously move forward from this guy being at the front of its mind every stinkin day.

 

LOL. Nice deflection there. We've added 250 YF Brownie Points to your account!

 

Amendment 14, Section 3

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Ok. I am not a lawyer, but there are a couple here. A Colorado judge heard evidence in a trial, and in his verdict stated that Trump had committed insurrection. The text above does not mention any form of trial, simply "shall have engaged in insurrection". Any thoughts on how the Supremes will approach this?

 

Section 5 says Congress will make appropriate legislation to enumerate and define the relevant questions raised by the rest of the amendment. That was 1868. So far, no appropriate legislation,

 

Always has been, and it’s a bunch of elections at the county and parish level.