TRUMP WINS AGAIN! Cannot be removed for fake erection

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,348]

3 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Need to correct myself, it wasn't a jury trial, but a trail before a judge. 

Anderson v. Griswold

As to your question---no I wouldn't be okay with it, but that's because the premise is ridiculous...and again, all I'm doing is pointing out that SCOTUS did not say they were disputing the fact finding of the lower court on the issue of insurrection, which I found interesting. 

I see, I am of the opinion that in order for any president to be charged he has to be impeached, otherwise I would be all for charging every president for war crimes

I am not sure if thats how the supreme court works honestly, maybe the only topic to be discussed was the 14th and the states having election rights

if the president isnt an officer than the other ruling by a judge is irrelevant

 

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

2 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

At least this was attempted through the legal system instead of a bunch of hopped-upped rednecks crawling all over the Capitol like a bunch of cockroaches.

Actually, that's a million times worse.  One is a bunch of people (morons they may be), making a flailing attempt at change is way better than the government acting on it's citizens in an unlawful manner.  They State of Colorado literally convicted a citizen of a crime that he was never charged with or tried for.  That my friend, is an example of Communism.

[iam90sbaby 2,611]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

Nope, I agree in the result. Just question the rationale for getting there, but that’s all academic anyway 

You seem a little mad 

[Maximum Overkill 1,988]

2 hours ago, Pimpadeaux said:

instead of a bunch of hopped-upped rednecks crawling all over the Capitol like a bunch of cockroaches.

"Redneck" is no different than calling a Black the N Word. 

You prove your Liberal hate every time you speak.

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

2 hours ago, Fumbleweed said:

I think Trump actually has an outside shot at winning Colorado. I don't think he can get 45% of the vote there, but I could see several states in which he gets 41% or so and all the third candidates swallow up 20% of the vote, leaving Biden with only 39% (approximately). No way Trump wins in Colorado with just him and Biden on the ballot, but with other options, those sensible enough to know that Biden is not capable of leading a country while Trump is not their choice will simply go with a different, third option, candidate. I think Virginia, Minnesota, and a few other states are in play for this very reason. 

I don't see that happening.  I have a hard time believing that the non-R/D candidates could combine for any more than 8 to 10% in any state, especially in blue states.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

46 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so I would rather actually read from the Justices than a liberal opinion rag

It’s a quote from the opinion, dumbass.

You want to read the same thing in the opinion, here you go   

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf

[Mike Honcho 5,275]

1 hour ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I see, I am of the opinion that in order for any president to be charged he has to be impeached, otherwise I would be all for charging every president for war crimes

I am not sure if thats how the supreme court works honestly, maybe the only topic to be discussed was the 14th and the states having election rights

if the president isnt an officer than the other ruling by a judge is irrelevant

 

SCOTUS is taking up this very issue and I will be shocked if they reach that conclusion. Stay tuned for June when that decision arrives.   

[Fumbleweed 547]

47 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't see that happening.  I have a hard time believing that the non-R/D candidates could combine for any more than 8 to 10% in any state, especially in blue states.

You're probably right. I just think these are exceptionally poor choices in the R and D categories. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,348]

3 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

SCOTUS is taking up this very issue and I will be shocked if they reach that conclusion. Stay tuned for June when that decision arrives.   

so you think that a court in Alabama can charge Obama with murdering an American citizen?

[lod001 1,344]

 

[Mike Honcho 5,275]

2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so you think that a court in Alabama can charge Obama with murdering an American citizen?

The courts have recognized that the President has immunity from suits arising from actions relating to "official duties".  So if Obama walked out of the W.H. and shot somebody just because he felt like it, I think he would absolutely be charged. If Obama ordered a military strike and an American citizen died because of it, no he wouldn't be charged(unless there were some incredibly extenuating circumstances.)

You really think, that a president could engage in my first example and if the house and senate didn't impeach and find him guilty, that he couldn't be charged?  That's what a King gets to do and we revolted against that very idea.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,348]

Just now, Mike Honcho said:

The courts have recognized that the President has immunity from suits arising from actions relating to "official duties".  So if Obama walked out of the W.H. and shot somebody just because he felt like it, I think he would absolutely be charged. If Obama ordered a military strike and an American citizen died because of it, no he wouldn't be charged(unless there were some incredibly extenuating circumstances.)

You really think, that a president could engage in my first example and if the house and senate didn't impeach and find him guilty, that he couldn't be charged?  That's what a King gets to do and we revolted against that very idea.

I agree with your premise completely, I am trying to see where Trump did anything outside of duties though

 

[Fnord 2,265]

4 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I agree with your premise completely, I am trying to see where Trump did anything outside of duties though

 

He refused to accept the results of the election, despite multiple audits, court cases, and members of his own staff and family telling him otherwise. His speech on Jan 6 was not in an official capacity as POTUS, since he was addressing a crowd of his supporters in an attempt to get them to march to the Capitol.

One can disagree with that last part I suppose, but if you think it's cool for a POTUS to do that, you don't want a president, you want a king. Or a dictator.

[Fumbleweed 547]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

He refused to accept the results of the election, despite multiple audits, court cases, and members of his own staff and family telling him otherwise. His speech on Jan 6 was not in an official capacity as POTUS, since he was addressing a crowd of his supporters in an attempt to get them to march to the Capitol.

One can disagree with that last part I suppose, but if you think it's cool for a POTUS to do that, you don't want a president, you want a king. Or a dictator.

I'm not a Trump guy, but you have to remember how crazy that time frame was. Most of us went to bed thinking Trump had won the election only to find the next morning that all sort of votes had come in throughout the night under odd (at best) pretenses. Add to that all the voting irregularities and the crazy ballot harvesting and the whole election just smelled fishy. I think if the shoes were on the opponent's feet, he would have done the same type of thing. The election didn't feel right and it still doesn't to a lot of people. 

[Fnord 2,265]

8 minutes ago, Fumbleweed said:

I'm not a Trump guy, but you have to remember how crazy that time frame was. Most of us went to bed thinking Trump had won the election only to find the next morning that all sort of votes had come in throughout the night under odd (at best) pretenses. Add to that all the voting irregularities and the crazy ballot harvesting and the whole election just smelled fishy. I think if the shoes were on the opponent's feet, he would have done the same type of thing. The election didn't feel right and it still doesn't to a lot of people. 

I get this line of reasoning, but it only means you weren't paying attention. Trump and his team, especially that gutter dwelling drunk Steve Bannon, telegraphed their entire playbook before voting even started. It was well known that the absentee ballots would favor Democrats, since the GOP had been waging war on it for months telling Republicans not to vote that way. It was also well known that those votes would be tabulated after in person votes in most districts. 

BEFORE the election, Bannon told his listeners the plan. It was 100% telegraphed to maximize outrage without any proof whatsoever. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,348]

14 minutes ago, Fnord said:

He refused to accept the results of the election, despite multiple audits, court cases, and members of his own staff and family telling him otherwise. His speech on Jan 6 was not in an official capacity as POTUS, since he was addressing a crowd of his supporters in an attempt to get them to march to the Capitol.

One can disagree with that last part I suppose, but if you think it's cool for a POTUS to do that, you don't want a president, you want a king. Or a dictator.

I am completely ok with anyone objecting to the results and doing whatever is legally in his power, I dont want a king or a dictator

saying go peacefully is not getting them to march on the capitol

[Mike Honcho 5,275]

3 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

I am completely ok with anyone objecting to the results and doing whatever is legally in his power, I dont want a king or a dictator

saying go peacefully is not getting them to march on the capitol

Pretty sure he said exactly that.

 

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,348]

peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard....to people on the left means INSURRECTION got it

 

[Horseman 2,458]

 

 

[Ron_Artest 1,523]

59 minutes ago, Horseman said:

 

 

Engoransayswhat

[TheNewGirl 1,491]

3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Actually, that's a million times worse.  One is a bunch of people (morons they may be), making a flailing attempt at change is way better than the government acting on it's citizens in an unlawful manner.  They State of Colorado literally convicted a citizen of a crime that he was never charged with or tried for.  That my friend, is an example of Communism.

Exactly.

Removing candidates from a ballot to basically make it so there is only ONE option that the party has chosen is communism. 

How people are not seeing this is baffling. 

If Trump wins, they will refuse to certify his Presidency.  

[Patented Phil 1,469]

Commie fockers should be hung in the town square for this.  Seriously.  We know who the real Authoritarians are.  We know where the real threat to Democracy is.

Wait until Trump gets elected…

[Maximum Overkill 1,988]

Can't touch this 

 

 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

8 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Most likely the correct decision there. Would’ve been pure chaos otherwise 

Most likely?  You focking dumbass.  It was UNANIMOUS.  When was the last time anything was unanimous in this country?  You’ve been wrong about all these authoritarian state over-reaches all along.  Eat your humble pie dumbass.  

 

[Horseman 2,458]

18 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

Most likely?  You focking dumbass.  It was UNANIMOUS.  When was the last time anything was unanimous in this country?  You’ve been wrong about all these authoritarian state over-reaches all along.  Eat your humble pie dumbass.  

 

[Fnord 2,265]

56 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

Wait until Trump gets elected…

What then?

[Tree of Knowledge 1,857]

1 hour ago, TheNewGirl said:

Exactly.

Removing candidates from a ballot to basically make it so there is only ONE option that the party has chosen is communism. 

How people are not seeing this is baffling. 

If Trump wins, they will refuse to certify his Presidency.  

Yes.  That will be the last hurdle.  Heck, they tried to pressure the electoral college to not certify him in 2016.  This will be much worse.  

[Mike Honcho 5,275]

1 hour ago, TheNewGirl said:

Exactly.

Removing candidates from a ballot to basically make it so there is only ONE option that the party has chosen is communism. 

How people are not seeing this is baffling. 

If Trump wins, they will refuse to certify his Presidency.  

You have a problem with govt. officials refusing to accept the results of an election and try to block the certification of said election? 

[KSB2424 3,148]

[Hardcore troubadour 15,430]

They tried and failed to get him with  insurrection.  Now stand by for the resurrection. 

[shorepatrol 1,870]

7 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

so Trump went to trial in colorado?  Interesting I dont remember seeing that trial

 

All trolls or TDS. It's tiresome 

[shorepatrol 1,870]

5 hours ago, Fnord said:

He refused to accept the results of the election, despite multiple audits, court cases, and members of his own staff and family telling him otherwise. His speech on Jan 6 was not in an official capacity as POTUS, since he was addressing a crowd of his supporters in an attempt to get them to march to the Capitol.

One can disagree with that last part I suppose, but if you think it's cool for a POTUS to do that, you don't want a president, you want a king. Or a dictator.

This is clownshoes of the hightest order. 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

3 hours ago, Patented Phil said:

Most likely?  You focking dumbass.  It was UNANIMOUS.  When was the last time anything was unanimous in this country?  You’ve been wrong about all these authoritarian state over-reaches all along.  Eat your humble pie dumbass.  

 

Suck my c0ck, Phylis!

[jonmx 2,429]

11 hours ago, RLLD said:

I would not get too happy.

This will likely just result in even worse tactics from the left.   Desperation will lead them to ever-more  egregious violations of the constitution.

It would not be the first time the deep state assassinated the leading candidate for president.  It would be the first time they assassinated an ex-President.  They can't repeat the JFK thing, because Trump won't be appointing an LBJ or even a Pence this time around. 

[KSB2424 3,148]

[Reality 3,121]

3 hours ago, Patented Phil said:

Most likely?  You focking dumbass.  It was UNANIMOUS.  When was the last time anything was unanimous in this country?  You’ve been wrong about all these authoritarian state over-reaches all along.  Eat your humble pie dumbass.  

 

LoL.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,430]

You know how you can tell Biden didn’t win a free and fair election last time? Nonsense like this. 

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Bunch of kweers up in here

[KSB2424 3,148]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You know how you can tell Biden didn’t win a free and fair election last time? Nonsense like this. 

These folks are pulling out all the stops to prevent Trump from even being on the ballot in 2024.  Unconstitutional and illegal stuff.  BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. 

However these same people were strictly on the up and up in 2020.  Most secure election in history.

Y’all funny as hell.  

[IGotWorms 4,058]

8 minutes ago, KSB2424 said:

These folks are pulling out all the stops to prevent Trump from even being on the ballot in 2024.  Unconstitutional and illegal stuff.  BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. 

However these same people were strictly on the up and up in 2020.  Most secure election in history.

Y’all funny as hell.  

So it’s your belief the 2020 election was rigged? Trump actually won?