Current Topics
Mars
by TatumAH
RoundTable at the End of the Trump Regime!
by Irked
Another reason for impeachment
by pondering_it_all
12:58 AM
investigation into the storming of the United States Capitol on 1/6/21
by jgw
07:17 PM
3 word story game
by TatumAH
04:57 PM
Why some kids stick with their parents' political views and others rebel
by pondering_it_all
10:23 AM
Wizard of Oz
by TatumAH
02/23/21 03:49 AM
Global warming predictions
by jgw
02/22/21 07:43 PM
Slavery in 2020
by jgw
02/22/21 07:33 PM
Doctors fighting back against anti-vaxers online
by pondering_it_all
02/22/21 03:35 AM
Myanmar/Burma
by jgw
02/21/21 07:11 PM
It’s Not You, It’s Pathological Ambivalence!
by logtroll
02/21/21 03:51 AM
‘Earthworm Dilemma’ Has Climate Scientists Racing to Keep Up
by TatumAH
02/20/21 05:31 PM
And Then the Gorillas Started Coughing
by pondering_it_all
02/19/21 10:06 PM
Politics- sailing on the Sea of Insanity
by TatumAH
02/19/21 03:24 PM
An amusement - no politics!
by TatumAH
02/19/21 02:33 AM
American Healthcare
by pondering_it_all
02/16/21 03:41 AM
The Trump Era's silver lining
by pdx rick
02/15/21 04:41 PM
Did Trump think his mob had taken Mike Pence hostage?
by rporter314
02/15/21 04:58 AM
Are the Republicans confabulated?
by TatumAH
02/11/21 12:03 AM
Forum Stats
6292 Members
61 Forums
17081 Topics
306652 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#331775 - 01/26/21 09:09 PM Disqualification Clause
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 3934
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Below is a link to the Constitutional Disqualification Clause (Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution).

I am not really sure what it all means. I think its saying that anybody that "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof" cannot stand, or serve, as an elected official. Then it goes and says that the senate can back it out with a 2/3 vote. This makes no sense to me. However, that being said, it seems that if Trump tries to run again somebody will sue, under this amendment, and put a stop to that? Anybody know?

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S3-1-1/ALDE_00000848/

Top
#331780 - 01/27/21 01:27 AM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: jgw]
TatumAH Online   content
journeyman

Registered: 02/18/11
Posts: 769
Loc: Upstate NY
If a past president was convicted of sedition by the senate, wouldn't those Senators who supported him be guilty of giving aid or comfort to him, and not be able to hold office?

That in itself would be enough to make Senators reluctant to convict, not like those cowards would need more rationalization.

I guess their defense would be that when they supported him, he hadn't yet been convicted of sedition.

Maybe the Justice dept could prosecute him for just regular old civilian sedition, if indicated by investigation, and then the 14th would automatically take effect. Of course, a conviction would be appealed and eventually the SCROTUS might finally come to his rescue.

Then if the house wants to impeach him, just to set an example for future miscreants, then anyone in the senate who still supported him, after being convicted by a judge and jury, would be forced to leave office. I suddenly see a Senate convicting by unanimous consents, after finding their patriotic principles, and rereading their "oath".

What is worse, being automatically ejected from office, or running for election fearing a tweet?

Wouldn't it be rational to just have a felony conviction be a Disqualification, or is that too high a standard for such an exceptional nation?

TAT
_________________________
There's nothing wrong with thinking
Except that it's lonesome work
sevil regit

Top
#331782 - 01/27/21 01:39 AM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: TatumAH]
perotista Online   content
member

Registered: 09/05/19
Posts: 1198
Originally Posted By: TatumAH
If a past president was convicted of sedition by the senate, wouldn't those Senators who supported him be guilty of giving aid or comfort to him, and not be able to hold office?

That in itself would be enough to make Senators reluctant to convict, not like those cowards would need more rationalization.

I guess their defense would be that when they supported him, he hadn't yet been convicted of sedition.

Maybe the Justice dept could prosecute him for just regular old civilian sedition, if indicated by investigation, and then the 14th would automatically take effect. Of course, a conviction would be appealed and eventually the SCROTUS might finally come to his rescue.

Then if the house wants to impeach him, just to set an example for future miscreants, then anyone in the senate who still supported him, after being convicted by a judge and jury, would be forced to leave office. I suddenly see a Senate convicting by unanimous consents, after finding their patriotic principles, and rereading their "oath".

What is worse, being automatically ejected from office, or running for election fearing a tweet?

Wouldn't it be rational to just have a felony conviction be a Disqualification, or is that too high a standard for such an exceptional nation?

TAT

I basically feel the same way. In other words taking this out of the political arena as impeachment is purely a political process and into the judicial system. Present the evidence to a federal grand jury, let them decide whether to prosecute or not. If I'm not mistaken, a conviction of sedition and inciting an insurrection is at least a 20 years prison term plus other penalties a federal judge might decide on.

Impeachment is just for removal from office which has already been accomplished. If trump were convicted in the senate, then a second vote for disqualification would be held. But the conviction must come first. Getting 17 GOP senators to go along, voting guilty is an impossibility. The federal judicial system in my opinion is the best option letting the chips fall where they may.

You have this vote today.

GOP largely sides against holding Trump impeachment trial

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-goes-senate-testing-050327015.html



Edited by perotista (01/27/21 01:40 AM)
_________________________
It's high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first instead of their political party. For way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Top
#331785 - 01/27/21 05:16 AM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17485
Quote:
A survey by The New York Times on the eve of the trial found that 27 Republican senators had expressed opposition to charging Mr. Trump or otherwise holding him accountable by impeachment. Sixteen Republicans indicated they were undecided, and seven had no response. Most of those opposed increasingly fell back on process-based objections, rather than defending Mr. Trump.
With Impeachment Trial Looming, Republicans Waver on Punishing Trump (NYT, Subscription).

The level of my disgust has not abated, just because Trump is in Mar-a-Lago. These people are actual criminals. ACTUAL CRIMINALS. Aiding and abetting the insurrection, with malice aforethought. They know the consequences of their actions and they don't care. They are more afraid of Trump as a former President than they are committed to their oaths of office, to principle or to the Constitution. They are, without a doubt, co-conspirators:
Quote:
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy.

90% of the Republican Senators voted to let Trump off without a trial again. Worthless pieces of excrement.

Top
#331794 - 01/27/21 04:21 PM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: jgw]
perotista Online   content
member

Registered: 09/05/19
Posts: 1198
Want more bad news.

GOP largely sides against holding Trump impeachment trial

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-impeachment-goes-senate-testing-050327015.html

I've said all along that this needs to get out of the political arena and into the federal judiciary system. Give all the evidence to a federal grand jury and let them decide whether to prosecute or not.

Here in Georgia our AG is looking into charging Trump with interference with the election, a felony.

Georgia district attorney says she will 'enforce the law without fear or favor' following Trump call

https://thehill.com/homenews/administrat...aw-without-fear

whether or not she will remains to be seen. But I think this is in the proper arena. The political arena, the senate will find Trump not guilty, hence no second vote on disqualification. Trump and his supporters will crow about being found innocent and put forth the notion that all of this was a political vendetta against a private citizen.

A few months after the trial, most will have forgotten all about it except the avid pro and anti Trumpers. Other hot issues will the the topic, other events and happenings will replace the trial. In a year with most Americans having a very short memory, this will be old news and soon fall into the ancient history category. This is political reality.

For those who thought the first impeachment trial was such a big deal, it wasn't even brought up once during the general election campaign. This one too will fall into that category in the very near future.

Watch, wait and listen.
_________________________
It's high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first instead of their political party. For way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Top
#331798 - 01/27/21 07:25 PM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: perotista]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 3934
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I think you are probably right. The new AG could also go after him as well. I also suspect that those that support Trump actions are also guilty - especially the jackass with the closed fist egging them on.

Top
#331817 - 01/29/21 06:55 AM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: jgw]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 10874
Loc: North San Diego County
I think we can't heal as a nation, until we drain some of the pus out of this wound. The new AG should indict all the congress folks who supported Trump's coup attempt for Sedition. Get them in court under oath, and ask them each if Trump won or they were attempting election fraud.

Politicians feel perfectly free to lie, but most of them are lawyers and won't commit perjury in court. So they either publicly admit they were lying and trying to commit election fraud, or they lie under oath. Once they have all stated their positions, indict the ones who swear Trump won for perjury.

We've got to force people to tell the truth. Otherwise, this BS is just going to get worse.

Top
#331821 - 01/29/21 07:28 PM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: pondering_it_all]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 3934
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I would be for ALL of that! However, its just not gonna happen. We will, however, be entertained by all the reasons why that won't happen, should have happened, or that we are just too stupid to understand.

On reflection anybody can sue anybody in this country. Its one of our big deals. It would be nice if the new AG did it but I am not holding my breath. On the other hand I betcha there are some with the bucks that just might bring suite. Then the problem is, of course, whether they have a right to do that (have standing - which has always amused me).

Top
#331832 - 01/30/21 07:13 PM Re: Disqualification Clause [Re: jgw]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 3934
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Apparently the Lincoln Project is preparing some law suits. I wonder if the 14th amendment is involved?

Top

Who's Online
0 registered (), 70 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Superfly, GreatNewsTonight, danarhea, RoughDraft274, CPWILL
6292 Registered Users
A2