HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Please stop w/the Trump r...

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:01 AM

Please stop w/the Trump running in 2024 "stuff" because he can't. 14th Amendment Section 3

Trump saying he will run again is just a vehicle for him to grift from his rubes and or hoping to forestall
his upcoming criminal trials and prosecution. The DoJ, the Congress (they can refer things to the DoJ),
Fani Willis in Georgia, and the IRS all have the receipts on Trump and company's crimes. I really doubt
that shits like Mark Meadows, Flynn, Rudy, Stone, and so on will take the fall for Trump


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 . . .

snip

Section Three is once again relevant due to the extraordinary events at the Capitol and the widespread condemnation of the attack as an insurrection by Republicans and Democrats in Congress. This characterization, reinforced by the article of impeachment adopted by the House of Representatives that expressly invoked Section Three, strongly suggests that anyone who “shall have engaged” in that insurrection after having sworn an oath to protect the Constitution is now ineligible to serve.

https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/enforcing-the-14th-amendments-bar-on-insurrectionist-officers-and-candidates/

29 replies, 1893 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 29 replies Author Time Post
Reply Please stop w/the Trump running in 2024 "stuff" because he can't. 14th Amendment Section 3 (Original post)
Botany Oct 2022 OP
Lovie777 Oct 2022 #1
ProudMNDemocrat Oct 2022 #3
Mad_Machine76 Oct 2022 #27
msfiddlestix Oct 2022 #2
Scrivener7 Oct 2022 #4
jimfields33 Oct 2022 #14
msfiddlestix Oct 2022 #23
ProudMNDemocrat Oct 2022 #28
FBaggins Oct 2022 #5
SharonClark Oct 2022 #8
Botany Oct 2022 #9
FBaggins Oct 2022 #12
Treefrog Oct 2022 #24
Hermit-The-Prog Oct 2022 #29
J_William_Ryan Oct 2022 #6
GoCubsGo Oct 2022 #7
Chainfire Oct 2022 #10
ColinC Oct 2022 #11
Chainfire Oct 2022 #13
brooklynite Oct 2022 #15
Botany Oct 2022 #16
Scrivener7 Oct 2022 #17
brooklynite Oct 2022 #21
Botany Oct 2022 #25
brooklynite Oct 2022 #26
FBaggins Oct 2022 #18
sarisataka Oct 2022 #19
Autumn Oct 2022 #20
newdayneeded Oct 2022 #22

Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:06 AM

1. RWers want to completely redo the Constitution in their own image .....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lovie777 (Reply #1)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:13 AM

3. Thom Hartman had a show about that a few weeks ago that was quite startling.

It was telling how Republicans need several more state houses to take over for a Constitutional Convention to take place. But he also stated that it could take years to redraft the Constitution due to the complexities as to who would have rights, and who would not. Repealing the 13th, 14th, 16th, 17th, and 19th Amendments will not be easy. Nor rewriting the Bill of Rights will be a cakewalk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudMNDemocrat (Reply #3)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 02:57 PM

27. Plus

38 states would have to ratify for any proposed changes to become law. We need to keep our eyes on this but unless some blue states get completely taken over by radical right-wing Republicans, it will be hard for them to reach the designated number of states to even call for a convention, much less ratify any changes to the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:11 AM

2. Thank you for posting this clause, we'll look upon it with wistful memories as we remember the time

when such things could be relied upon as a respected and important component to our democratic form of government which will no longer exist once that is violated.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msfiddlestix (Reply #2)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:13 AM

4. Sadly, this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msfiddlestix (Reply #2)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:29 AM

14. I suspect he'll announce his run November 9th

I don’t think he will win in 2024.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimfields33 (Reply #14)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 09:11 AM

23. In my view, he's been campaigning for 2024, unofficially.

those who say, 'he's not running', based on the Constituion or based on the fact that he hasn't filed, is to me, irrelavant because all norms, legally speaking, ethically speaking, practically speaking, etc no longer have any bearing on reality.

No longer can we assume safeguards against misignant forces remain in place as a defender of our democracy.

We can only hope our one and only existing avenue of defense, the power of the ballot, remains in place despite all efforts to invalidate it's legitimacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jimfields33 (Reply #14)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 03:02 PM

28. He is still a Private Citizen when a candidate.

So he can indeed still be indicted for crimes when he was POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:16 AM

5. Flat untrue - How many times must this be debunked?

Unless he is actually convicted on the crime of insurrection or the senate votes by 2/3... the only way to beat him is at the polls (either primary or general).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #5)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:33 AM

8. Exactly this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #5)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:49 AM

9. "They" have the receipts

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142987874

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/top-national-security-prosecutor-joins-trump-mar-a-lago-investigation/ar-AA13uqDd

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/21/trump-criminal-referral-sent-to-prosecutors-and-irs-by-letitia-james.html

America has had 3 people who were found guilty of espionage @ the level which Trump might have very well
been at and they were the Rosenbergs (executed) and FBI Agent Robert Hansen (15 life sentences Colorado Super Max)

Although, I think I have the same fears that you do and that is what would happen if the republicans took back
power? I think so many republicans were involved in the attempted J-6 coup and had knowledge of the Trump
Russia connection they will fight like hell to keep things "all covered up."

FBaggins

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #9)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:04 AM

12. No doubt - but it doesn't matter

If your county passes a law that says that you can't be a police officer if you exceed the speed limit - it wouldn't matter even if you were caught on camera doing it and everyone in town believed it. Unless you're convicted in court of speeding, the penalty can't be applied.

It sure looks to us as though they have "the receipts," - but unless they charge and convict him, it doesn't matter (as far as 14A goes). And the conviction must be for insurrection. Incitement to riot won't do it... and certainly not fraud by a company that he owns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #12)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 09:45 AM

24. This.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FBaggins (Reply #5)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 04:44 PM

29. Am 14, S. 3 is not a criminal penalty; it is a Constitutional qualification for office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:17 AM

6. As noted in the article,

the problem would be enforcing a Section Three action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:27 AM

7. He can't afford to do so, anyway.

If he runs, he loses his "Save America" PAC (a.k.a., SAP--as in you're a sap if you contribute to it) cash cow. And, the RNC will cease to pay his legal bills, which are likely through the roof at this point. They're almost certainly going to get worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:50 AM

10. It is not an insurrection until a jury says it was an insurrection.

It doesn't go to a jury without an indictment. Where is the indictment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chainfire (Reply #10)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 07:56 AM

11. Perhaps the doj is using this

Maybe suggesting to him that they will not charge him with insurrection if he does not run🤷‍♂️

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ColinC (Reply #11)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:05 AM

13. It is a special legal theory known as "Dives et potens"

If you don't rob the bank again we will not charge you for robbing the bank this time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:31 AM

15. Please stop with the "Trump can't run because of the 14th Amendment" threads because he can.

Insurrection isn’t a “we know it when we see it” definition. He hasn’t been indicted much less convicted of anything. Nothing will prevent him from running g if he wants to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #15)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:35 AM

16. The documents found on his property @ Merde a Logo should very well stop Trump

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #16)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:37 AM

17. Absolutely. But unless he's convicted, they can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #16)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:53 AM

21. Violation of the Presidential records act does it constitute "insurrection".

And if you’re going to tell me he sold documents, that’s also not insurrection and hasn’t. Den proven. We don’t block candidates based on “we know he did” assertions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #21)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 02:45 PM

25. "Violation of the Presidential records act" is a serious charge but what they will get him on is

espionage. He had documents about foreign intelligence assets both American and foreign and
HIGHLY CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS ABOUT OUR SPY SATELLITES. I have a family member who
worked in that program and to this day she/he can not say one word about it. Why he is still
walking free is beyond me. Even though Putin invaded Ukraine for a 2nd time after TFG was no
longer in office we have had remote sensing satellites in geosynchronous orbit over Ukraine and
that part of the world for years and I have no doubt that some of the stolen documents had
information on that program and since Trump is an active Russian asset he gave up that info
to Putin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Reply #25)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 02:52 PM

26. Again, espionage requires proof beyond possession.

"I have no doubt" is not an argument to make in Court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #15)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:38 AM

18. And how likely is a jury without a single MAGA member?

Any judge who would allow a "did you vote for Trump?" question to disqualify a juror would have to allow a "did you vote against Trump" question to do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:40 AM

19. I always find it odd

When people post a link that undercuts their claim.

It clearly says enforcement would be up to the courts and suggests Congress adopt a resolution that he is ineligible (something they have not done). However the author notes-

... a concurrent resolution of Congress declaring that Trump is ineligible does not make him ineligible. 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:49 AM

20. Who is going to respect that rule? Republicans?

That's a joke because they respect nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Botany (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2022, 08:58 AM

22. Who or what is gonna stop him?

So far all I've seen is the J6 committee document his wrong doings and a visit to his property to take back some documents, and then leave with a cordial good bye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread