Once more time, for the thick headed.


Nowhere does that post state the FBI determines who is and who is not a insurrectionists. Deeds determine who is and who is not an insurrectionist. You're welcome.

If you truly believe your own words, what label would you assign those who followed Donald Trump's words?

The 14th amendment still applies, it is part of the Constitution, and the last I heard, the Constitution or any part thereof does not have an expiration date.

The House and the courts for members of the House of Representatives. The Senate and the courts for Senators. The Congress and the courts for the President and other Officers of the government and U.S. Attorneys and the courts for the rest of us.

My understanding and opinion.

I would say what you or I believe is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Neither you or I can convict Trump of being an insurrectionist or take away and forbid him from running for public office again. There has to be a process of some kind.

We can label whoever whatever we want anytime we want. But whoever we label has no consequence to whom we are labeling. It might make us feel better for awhile, but we have no enforcement tools to make using Trump as an example, insurrectionist stick and deprive him of holding any other public office.

Fact is we just peons, pawns on the political chessboard to be moved around by those who are politically powerful and have the sway to make things happen. We move one way or the other according to their wishes or how they were able to make us think.

You and I may think Trump is an insurrectionist and deserves all that is coming to him. But we're just two out of 320 million or so. There is a process that must be gone through instituted by the political powerful who hold sway. We can label all we want, but without the correct process and the correct outcome, what exactly does all the labeling mean?

"Judgement in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office."

"... but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article I, Section 3 paragraph 7

Yes a citizen can convict a defendant of Insurrection if they are a member of the jury in the trial. So our opinion does matter and understanding of the Constitution does matter...

Here is the Amdt14.S3.1.1 Disqualification Clause:

Fourteenth Amendment, 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.

The right to remove disabilities imposed by this section was exercised by Congress at different times on behalf of enumerated individuals.1 In 1872, the disabilities were removed, by a blanket act, from all persons "except Senators and Representatives of the Thirty-sixth and Thirty-seventh Congresses, officers in the judicial, military and naval service of the United States, heads of departments, and foreign ministers of the United States."2 Twenty-six years later, Congress enacted that "the disability imposed by section 3 . . . incurred heretofore, is hereby removed."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution...isqualification

If I am reading this one right then Trump is done. Anytime he tries to run somebody will bring a law suite to put a stop to it and I would expect the courts would agree. That only needs to happen once and he is flat out done. So, regardless of what the Senate does about any of this I think that just about everybody can agree that if it goes to the courts he loses.

In other words. Regardless of just about anything Trump is done and has no place to go but down. Given we are talking about Trump he will work VERY hard to make sure that whatever he does it will fail. The man is, quite possibly, the greatest failure in virtually he has ever done. His daddy gave him close to a half a billion dollars and he went bankrupt! He doesn't pay his bills, He has harassed and otherwise given offense to virtually the entire female race, he invited the entire White Nationalist group of loons to Washington DC and then encouraged them to attack the congress of the United States. One can go on and on about this one. The truly amazing thing is that he had the ability to infect otherwise normal folks with his disease (his true believers). These people need help but they won't accept it. I suspect our nation is just going to have to keep on plugging away and hope that the true believers, over time, come to understand the problem.

So, even if the Senate does nothing about impeachment, nothing about Trump running again, etc. Trump is well and truly screwed (couldn't happen to a nicer guy?)

Roger, it all boils down then to someone filing a lawsuit which will then be decided, ruled on by the court/s. Imposed by the court/s if they deem the 14 applies. In short, there's your and my answer. The court/s will determine if Trump was an insurrectionist or not. Whether he can or can't run and hold political office again.

I suppose one can say the 14th gives the avenue for a lawsuit, but ultimately whether or not Trump falls into that category will be decided by a judge and jury and finally most probably by the SCOTUS regardless of what we label him.

It will fall to someone official with the power to label Trump an insurrectionist and the ability to enforce it. We don't have that power, we have only the power to state our opinions.

The 14th Amendment does not say you have to be an insurrectionist, convicted or not. It includes anyone who gives "aid or comfort" to "enemies" who took part.

There is also 18 US Code 2383: "Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Donald Trump certainly did give "aid or comfort" to the people who invaded the Capital, when he said he loved them and they were special people. So if any one such person is convicted of this crime or of just declaring themselves as being at war with the US, Trump is barred from office.

I think we have made some mistakes starting after the Malheur Bird Sanctuary occupation. Jon Ritzheimer plead guilty to Conspiracy Against the United States for acting as one of the leaders of that armed rebellion. But then he ran for Congress in Arizona in 2018, even though as a felon he couldn't vote. Trump pardoned all the guys who did that, but his pardon does not remove the 14th Amendment disqualification. The Amendment says specifically that Congress has to do that.

In fact, pardoning people who participated in an armed rebellion against the US, sounds like "aid or comfort" to me.

We're getting no where. I suppose just because you say Trump is ineligible to run, he's is ineligible. Case closed.

Me saying it means nothing. The Speaker of the House bringing up the 14th Amendment is pretty important. We'll see what AG Garland says when he takes office. All I can do is predict things, but I try to do that logically. I was posting about it before Pelosi ever mentioned it.

The judicial system is certainly not big fans of pardons, because they can reduce all the system's efforts to nothing. If judges have a legitimate reason to void all of Trump's last minute pardons, I think they will take it. It also avoids the thorny legal issue of Trump pardoning himself. The Supreme Court loves selecting options to avoid stuff like that.

We shall see shortly.