Precedent
Comments
-
HHusky said:
The Colorado Supreme Court already drew Daddy a roadmap for how to remain on the primary ballot. You fake outrage girls are amusing.
-
This Colorado thing aside, why do you think Jack Smith didn't charge Trump with insurrection?HHusky said:The Colorado Supreme Court already drew Daddy a roadmap for how to remain on the primary ballot. You fake outrage girls are amusing.
-
Faced with a beyond a reasonable doubt burden of proof, prosecutors pick and choose what to charge all the time. Abe Lincoln's advised lawyers not to plead everything they possibly can, and most of us try to adhere to that.Bob_C said:
This Colorado thing aside, why do you think Jack Smith didn't charge Trump with insurrection?HHusky said:The Colorado Supreme Court already drew Daddy a roadmap for how to remain on the primary ballot. You fake outrage girls are amusing.
-
Sounds like it can't be proven that Trump committed insurrection
H once again
-
They kill you for own goals in South America.RaceBannon said:Sounds like it can't be proven that Trump committed insurrection
H once again -
Daddy isn't being charged with every felony he committed.
Sweet victory!
congrats -
They declined to charge him on the worst one. Talk about an over sell.HHusky said:Daddy isn't being charged with every felony he committed.
Sweet victory!
congrats -
We've been through this how many times? How many times you gonna drag out the same tired lies? Someone wanna bump the thread where we littered H's corpse with quotes from the founders?HHusky said:
Yeah, they were obviously just joking about a "well regulated militia".Sledog said:
They didn't extend the 2nd far enough to get back to the founders meaning. You really are bad at this. The Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery, must not have been very good.HHusky said:
I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised, but I predict SCOTUS will either duck the merits or butcher the 14th Amendment in the same way they butchered the 2nd. I'm betting they'll duck the merits.Goduckies said:
The only partisans were the 4 colorado judges.... this should be a 9 0 rebukingHHusky said:
I would never underestimate the partisan cowardice of this Supreme Court.Sources said:
Way to narrow it down. SCOTUS will take it from here, kidHHusky said:I'd ignore the GOP participants in these lawsuits too if I were you.
Anyway, CREW is either correct about the precedent or it is not. Feel free to show their error.
You won't, of course.
I already told you gals you probably have nothing to worry about.
They might get 9-0 if they duck the merits. I doubt very much they'll get a 9-0 vote on the merits. -
And he hasn't been convicted of anythingHHusky said:Daddy isn't being charged with every felony he committed.
Sweet victory!
congrats
Sweet victory indeed -
Question for the lawyers, if Trump was charged with insurrection and was found not guilty, would this 14th amendment application still apply?
-
Dazzler and the dementia patient share the same keen legal minds
"He certainly supported an insurrection," Biden told reporters Wednesday in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on his way to a campaign event. "No question about it. None. Zero."
Biden did not share his opinion on the Colorado court ruling but said it was "self-evident" Trump supported an insurrection.
"Certain things are self-evident," Biden said. "You saw it all. Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies, I'll let the court make that decision."
Fascist -
No. Even the dazzler posted some pseudo history on the 14th amendment language - There was no "violent insurrection" let alone any evidence that Trump "knowingly and voluntarily aided violent insurrections". As I said, the 14th Amendment Section 3 was a result of 300,000 Union soldiers dying in an obvious violent insurrection. No federal employee died as a result of a US government encouraged violent insurrection. If the dazzler thinks it was a violent insurrection, then any FBI agent involved in encouraging the trespass into the Capitol would be subject to Section 3.Bob_C said:Question for the lawyers, if Trump was charged with insurrection and was found not guilty, would this 14th amendment application still apply?
==========
Section 3 is not a criminal penalty, but rather is a qualification for holding public office in the United States that can be and has been enforced through civil lawsuits in state courts, among other means.
The precedent likewise confirms that one can “engage” in insurrection without personally committing violent acts. Neither Kenneth Worthy nor Couy Griffin were accused of engaging in violence, yet both were ruled to be disqualified because they knowingly and voluntarily aided violent insurrections. These rulings are consistent with the views of Attorney General Henry Stanbery, who opined in 1867 that when a person has “incited others to engage in [insurrection or] rebellion, he must come under the disqualification.” -
Im no attorney but as I mentioned before...Bob_C said:Question for the lawyers, if Trump was charged with insurrection and was found not guilty, would this 14th amendment application still apply?
Trump was charged with inciting an insurrection @ impeachment trial #2 and was acquitted.
There is no "if" and I believe double jeopardy is why J smith cannot charge him again.
-
Not a criminal attorney but the Double Jeopardy clause generally deals with a crime. Impeachment isn't a criminal charge - no criminal fine or jail.Blueduck said:
Im no attorney but as I mentioned before...Bob_C said:Question for the lawyers, if Trump was charged with insurrection and was found not guilty, would this 14th amendment application still apply?
Trump was charged with inciting an insurrection @ impeachment trial #2 and was acquitted.
There is no "if" and I believe double jeopardy is why J smith cannot charge him again.
==================
The Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for substantially the same crime. The relevant part of the Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . "
-
High crimes and misdemeanors?WestlinnDuck said:
Not a criminal attorney but the Double Jeopardy clause generally deals with a crime. Impeachment isn't a criminal charge - no criminal fine or jail.Blueduck said:
Im no attorney but as I mentioned before...Bob_C said:Question for the lawyers, if Trump was charged with insurrection and was found not guilty, would this 14th amendment application still apply?
Trump was charged with inciting an insurrection @ impeachment trial #2 and was acquitted.
There is no "if" and I believe double jeopardy is why J smith cannot charge him again.
==================
The Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for substantially the same crime. The relevant part of the Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . " -
Game set matchHHusky said:
Faced with a beyond a reasonable doubt burden of proof, prosecutors pick and choose what to charge all the time. Abe Lincoln's advised lawyers not to plead everything they possibly can, and most of us try to adhere to that.Bob_C said:
This Colorado thing aside, why do you think Jack Smith didn't charge Trump with insurrection?HHusky said:The Colorado Supreme Court already drew Daddy a roadmap for how to remain on the primary ballot. You fake outrage girls are amusing.
March peacefully -
It's pretty bad Biden won't step up for the constitution he is sworn to defend.... f that dude.RaceBannon said:Dazzler and the dementia patient share the same keen legal minds
"He certainly supported an insurrection," Biden told reporters Wednesday in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on his way to a campaign event. "No question about it. None. Zero."
Biden did not share his opinion on the Colorado court ruling but said it was "self-evident" Trump supported an insurrection.
"Certain things are self-evident," Biden said. "You saw it all. Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies, I'll let the court make that decision."
Fascist -
76th out of 85 in his Third-Tier Syracuse Law School class.Goduckies said:
It's pretty bad Biden won't step up for the constitution he is sworn to defend.... f that dude.RaceBannon said:Dazzler and the dementia patient share the same keen legal minds
"He certainly supported an insurrection," Biden told reporters Wednesday in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on his way to a campaign event. "No question about it. None. Zero."
Biden did not share his opinion on the Colorado court ruling but said it was "self-evident" Trump supported an insurrection.
"Certain things are self-evident," Biden said. "You saw it all. Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies, I'll let the court make that decision."
Fascist
He wouldn't recognize the Bill of Rights if it was stapled to his nose.
