2024-03-04, 19:58 | Link #601 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
|
Quote:
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics are not republicans and Colorado was only one of many states where democrats attempted to remove their political opponent from the ballot. |
|
2024-03-04, 20:46 | Link #602 |
Seishu's Ace
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
|
Also, three justices originally dissented (the court forgot to remove the metadata on their press release) but mysteriously changed to a concurring opinion that sounded like a dissent at the last minute. They didn't do that without cutting some sort of deal.
__________________
|
2024-03-04, 21:06 | Link #603 | |
Yurifag
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Kharkiv, Ukraine / Barcelona, Spain
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Like really? Republicans did not have anyone better for the role? I understand preferring one party policy over the other but pushing the worst candidate just because he represents your preferred party is wrong. US already has just two choices every damn elections which is dumb by itself but at least choose someone who is not siding with the country enemies.
__________________
|
|
2024-03-04, 23:36 | Link #604 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
|
MAGA supporters living in their own little delusional world where they stubbornly ignore reality to the bitter end is not new or surprising information.
This decision to keep Trump on the ballot was never about justice, law, or legality. It was about power and trying to gain it or keep it. Any attempt to claim otherwise are nothing more than empty excuses. The ethics scandals this Supreme Court has had shows this quite clearly. Hell Trump doesn't give a shit about being president again anyway. He's only desperate to protect himself from prosecution.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 04:52 | Link #605 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Food for thought, should anyone be able to be a candidate? There's some limits on who can vote so it wouldn't be so hard to think than some limitation could be on who can be a candidate?
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 07:39 | Link #606 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 47
|
Basically, the court says that the Federal government (Congress specifically) is the body to declare if someone should be barred from holding a Federal office under the Constitution. Though Congress has slacked off on actually, you know, do anything about that since it is still supposed to go to court at some point this year. The timeframe for that might put a ruling before the election, but stalling and appeals might make it after the election. Though I suppose if Trump won the election, and then is barred from serving as President due the Constitution, then his Vice President would be the new President instead.
States have their own laws about what parties can or cannot be on the ballot, and there are laws that limit eligibility by age, citizenship and such. But it seems that States do not have a say in if someone is considered an insurrectionist or traitor under Federal law. Now if that person has done something in the State that barred them from office, they could enact that, but a Federal position in D.C. isn't in any State. So, the ball is back in the Feds hands on if Trump can or cannot hold a federal office. And they are dragging their feet about it.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 11:26 | Link #608 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
|
Quote:
Quote:
Congress already held a trial and acquitted Trump of inciting an insurrection. |
||
2024-03-05, 14:36 | Link #609 |
Yurifag
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Kharkiv, Ukraine / Barcelona, Spain
Age: 36
|
Oh yeah, poor abused guy Trump. And seeems like you seriously belive in him being innocent good guy.
You know, after he said "if Russia attacks any NATO member, I don't give a fuck" and after his party blocking military aid to my homecountry in fighting Putin nothing can convince me in them being good guys. Mind you, I don't like a lot of dems policies either. But I consider them lesser evil here. As I said, I would not mind republicans winning the election if it was someone more sane than Trump. If he wins it's WWIII probably as he does not give a shit about other countries. But seems like his voters are as egoistic: "The world can burn as long as I do not lose my money". Missing the point that Trump will take your money anyway and give them to himself, corporats and who else backs him.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 15:30 | Link #611 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2006
|
|
2024-03-05, 15:52 | Link #612 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 47
|
The House impeached him, the Senate decided not to punish him. Note that the majority voted guilty. Just not the 2/3 required.
And yet Congress still investigated afterwards, and trails are still pending on if Trump is immune to charges for crimes in office.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 15:53 | Link #613 | |
The Mage of Four Hearts
Author
Join Date: Mar 2010
Age: 34
|
"If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore" doesn't sound like encouraging people to be peaceful.
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2024-03-05, 16:04 | Link #614 |
Operation sneaky sneaks
IT Support
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hic et ubique
|
Agreed: any other Republican would be preferable. With that being said, I'm curious to know the reasoning behind why Trump is considered a better candidate than anyone else for the Republicans.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 16:23 | Link #617 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 47
|
Cult of personality. Mixed with a belief that since he was an outsider and already rich, he would not be swayed by the political elites and other lobbyists. "Draining the swamp" I believe was one of the pitches in 2016.
As for other lawsuits, he owns the State of New York a LOT of money.
__________________
|
2024-03-05, 20:38 | Link #619 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Also, did you know there are multiple things that disqualify you for being a candidate, such as age, place of birth, and residency? Do you deride the constitution as well? I seem to recall them saying it was a matter for the court to decide. Who has now said it's a matter for congress to decide. |
|
2024-03-08, 19:13 | Link #620 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
|
Quote:
Constitution says they are still held liable in the court of law. Senate is just deciding to remove from office. Cause thankfully, I think when they wrote the constitution, they saw politics playing a part of whether removal or not is decided. That is what played out during his second impeachment. Politics came to play. If impeachment triggered double jeopardy, it would be a joke that the worst thing that can happen to a president that commits treason, high crimes, etc is kicked out of office. |
|
|
|