Fourteenth Amendment | Section 3 - Disqualification from Holding Office

[T master]

15 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Being careless with documents and purposely showing them to people not authorized to see them is not the same thing.  Intent matters when it comes to the law.  Not that you won't keep whining and rambling. 

 

Justice will hopefully be served.  Otherwise we see just another rich guy get away with breaking the law.  And if Biden is guilty of anything,  still zero proof at this time,  he should suffer too.  The left will not defend him like you swine defend the fat orange f.

 

No the left would never do that would they ? If you put Hillary + Obama + fake Dossier together that = 4 years of a political fallacy ! Which by the way cost millions . Just saying . 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

On 8/30/2023 at 10:24 AM, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't agree with this approach, trying to disqualify him from the ballot based on the 14th Amendment. 

The proper constitutional approach was to impeach him, which happened, but did not succeed. (All you Ron DeSantis types out there - bet you wish that had succeeded)

 

This is unlike the prosecutions, which I believe are valid and of varying strength/merit.

Bragg NY prosecution: stupid, and a shaky legal theory

Smith classified docs prosecution: solid and proper

Smith Jan 6 prosecution: meritorious and necessary, but far from a slam dunk

Willis GA prosecution: the best thought-out, but very complex and will depend on proof

Frank, great post summarizing where we are at.  

 

To be candid, I have no idea what is shaky, solid or proper from a legal perspective.  It seems to me that there are opposing views on situation laid out above, and that there is room for creative interpretation on all these issues.  

 

That said, from a voter perspective, here's the way many voters will see it. 

 

Big picture--the democrat party and Washington establishment is using the weight of the federal/state government and conspiring to destroy an outsider who dared to try and play in their protected sandbox.  Your summary adds credence to this point of view.  Here's why:

 

• Russia was an attempt to remove him from office. There was no conspiracy, never was and that is borne out in the Mueller report.  In fact, AG Barr indicated the true conspiracy was undertaken by those who perpetrated the scam;
• The Russia impeachment was unreasonable and unnecessary, and an attempt to remove Trump from office;
• Ukraine impeachment was unreasonable and an effort to remove Trump from office.  The transcript is clear, as is the response from the Ukrainian president who seemed to be of the same mind as Trump. 
• 1/6 dream team committee declared they would find the evidence that pointed to direct ties between Trump and conspirators.  In the end, they went away with a whisper and apparently destroyed whatever evidence they gathered along the way;
• Bragg 'novel theory' to indict.  As a one and done, maybe this could be written off as a rogue prosecutor looking to make some money and elevate his profile.  In conjunction with everything else, it would appear this 'stupid' indictment is purely intended to harass Trump and is malicious in nature. 
• Smith classified document indictment--absent any other information readily available to the public, maybe this one is solid.  However, the juxtaposition between the prosecutor seeking a decades long prison sentence and the reality that mishandling classified documents (Clinton/Biden specifically) is treated as no big deal is stark.   Considering the lengths the DOJ has gone to in leaking photos, seizing unrelated and privileged documents in relation to how Biden specifically is being treated, it seems reasonable to assume there are two separate standards applied here. 
• Smith 1/6 prosecution, completely unnecessary unless it's a slam dunk, and in context with Barr's comments about political persecution, unreasonable absent clear and convincing evidence that will pass the smell test;
• GA prosecution-if it's very well-thought out, researched and the evidence is clear, it seems that there would be precious few about the complexity of the case  nor the proof of wrongdoing.    

Meanwhile, of course, this all plays out against the backdrop of Biden and his lies about his relationship with his son, the insertion of the IC into the election, that Biden actually mishandled classified documents for decades, and what appears to be a massive case of influence peddling.  

 

It's going to be an interesting year.  

 

 

 

[L Ron Burgundy]

18 minutes ago, T master said:

 

No the left would never do that would they ? If you put Hillary + Obama + fake Dossier together that = 4 years of a political fallacy ! Which by the way cost millions . Just saying . 

Your comparison makes zero sense.  Zero.  

[L Ron Burgundy]

8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Frank, great post summarizing where we are at.  

 

To be candid, I have no idea what is shaky, solid or proper from a legal perspective.  It seems to me that there are opposing views on situation laid out above, and that there is room for creative interpretation on all these issues.  

 

That said, from a voter perspective, here's the way many voters will see it. 

 

Big picture--the democrat party and Washington establishment is using the weight of the federal/state government and conspiring to destroy an outsider who dared to try and play in their protected sandbox.  Your summary adds credence to this point of view.  Here's why:

 

• Russia was an attempt to remove him from office. There was no conspiracy, never was and that is borne out in the Mueller report.  In fact, AG Barr indicated the true conspiracy was undertaken by those who perpetrated the scam;
• The Russia impeachment was unreasonable and unnecessary, and an attempt to remove Trump from office;
• Ukraine impeachment was unreasonable and an effort to remove Trump from office.  The transcript is clear, as is the response from the Ukrainian president who seemed to be of the same mind as Trump. 
• 1/6 dream team committee declared they would find the evidence that pointed to direct ties between Trump and conspirators.  In the end, they went away with a whisper and apparently destroyed whatever evidence they gathered along the way;
• Bragg 'novel theory' to indict.  As a one and done, maybe this could be written off as a rogue prosecutor looking to make some money and elevate his profile.  In conjunction with everything else, it would appear this 'stupid' indictment is purely intended to harass Trump and is malicious in nature. 
• Smith classified document indictment--absent any other information readily available to the public, maybe this one is solid.  However, the juxtaposition between the prosecutor seeking a decades long prison sentence and the reality that mishandling classified documents (Clinton/Biden specifically) is treated as no big deal is stark.   Considering the lengths the DOJ has gone to in leaking photos, seizing unrelated and privileged documents in relation to how Biden specifically is being treated, it seems reasonable to assume there are two separate standards applied here. 
• Smith 1/6 prosecution, completely unnecessary unless it's a slam dunk, and in context with Barr's comments about political persecution, unreasonable absent clear and convincing evidence that will pass the smell test;
• GA prosecution-if it's very well-thought out, researched and the evidence is clear, it seems that there would be precious few about the complexity of the case  nor the proof of wrongdoing.    

Meanwhile, of course, this all plays out against the backdrop of Biden and his lies about his relationship with his son, the insertion of the IC into the election, that Biden actually mishandled classified documents for decades, and what appears to be a massive case of influence peddling.  

 

It's going to be an interesting year.  

 

 

 

You've mentioned the Mueller report more than any other poster I've read personally on this forum.   Out of curiosity,  have you read it?  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

14 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

You've mentioned the Mueller report more than any other poster I've read personally on this forum.   Out of curiosity,  have you read it?  

The Mueller report is an important part of the story of the Trump Presidency, and this particular part of the board is dedicated to politics.  

 

What's your point?

Edited September 1, 2023 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[BillStime]

43 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

weight of the federal/state government and conspiring to destroy an outsider who dared to try and play in their protected sandbox.

Hoax

Beautful talking point but absolutely bullshitt.

 

43 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

• Russia was an attempt to remove him from office. There was no conspiracy, never was and that is borne out in the Mueller report.  In fact, AG Barr indicated the true conspiracy was undertaken by those who perpetrated the scam;
• The Russia impeachment was unreasonable and unnecessary, and an attempt to remove Trump from office;

Hoax

 

Trump colluded and met w Russia over 140 times - shared polling data to help coordinate emails stolen by the Russians to help who? Trump.

 

43 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The transcript is clear, as is the response from the Ukrainian president who seemed to be of the same mind as Trump. 

Hoax.

 

The transcript is beyond clear what Trump was doing.

 

43 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

1/6 dream team committee declared they would find the evidence that pointed to direct ties between Trump and conspirators.  In the end, they went away with a whisper and apparently destroyed whatever evidence they gathered along the way;

 

Funny you didn’t mention anything about the “alternative” electors - where there is a direct tie to the Trump admin. Talk to Stephen Miller if you don’t believe me.

 

Good thing Trump will get his day in court. I bet you can’t wait for that.

 

You’re kidding yourself if you think a guy who has been sued 3,000+times - bankrupted several companies - wasn’t going to be his corrupt ways to the WH - and he did.

 

 

 

 

 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

On 8/30/2023 at 1:43 PM, BillStime said:

 

You're a mess.

 

 

Maaan you started the holiday weekend early lol, what a mess. Go outside jfc

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

14 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Hoax

Beautful talking point but absolutely bullshitt.

 

Hoax

 

Trump colluded and met w Russia over 140 times - shared polling data to help coordinate emails stolen by the Russians to help who? Trump.

 

Hoax.

 

The transcript is beyond clear what Trump was doing.

 

 

Funny you didn’t mention anything about the “alternative” electors - where there is a direct tie to the Trump admin. Talk to Stephen Miller if you don’t believe me.

 

Good thing Trump will get his day in court. I bet you can’t wait for that.

 

You’re kidding yourself if you think a guy who has been sued 3,000+times - bankrupted several companies - wasn’t going to be his corrupt ways to the WH - and he did.

 

Settle down, Spaz. 

 

If Trump conspired with Russia, Mueller would have said so.  Let's not bat around this collusion/conspiracy/obstruction ball again.  We know Mueller would have kicked in doors, flipped witnesses and had Trump placed in solitary confinement if he did.  Plus, the Barr memo is quite clear.

 

The transcript on the Zelensky call is beyond clear, on this we agree.   I firmly believe they could tell you Trump ordering a Stoli and Water is evidence that he was born in Russia and you would believe it. 

 

I don't know a "Stephen Miller", unless you're talking about 3 Finger Stevie Mills down at the butcher shop on Central.  

 

The outcome of Trump's court trials, sequentially mastered though they might be, will not impact me one way or the other beyond what it means politically.   I am interested to see what secrets he might spill if convicted though.  Was Johnson in on the Kennedy assassination? 

 

 

[T master]

1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Your comparison makes zero sense.  Zero.  

 

To you that has failed basic common sense arithmetic & is drinking the kool aid it would . But when you take in all information into consideration you can come up with a truthful conclusion based on truth not made up paid for documentation .

[BillStime]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

If Trump conspired with Russia, Mueller would have said so.  Let's not bat around this collusion/conspiracy/obstruction ball again.  We know Mueller would have kicked in doors, flipped witnesses and had Trump placed in solitary confinement if he did.  Plus, the Barr memo is quite clear.

Trump obstructed the entire investigation and Mueller would have charged him for doing so if it weren’t for some DOJ memo saying he couldn’t.

 

Mueller AND the GOP Select Committee highlighted all the connections between Trump and Russia - it happened and you can’t spin it.

 

Bill Barr? Are you fn serious? He got the job when he wrote an unsolicited memo to Trump’s DOJ saying Mueller had no right to question a sitting POTUS and was awarded with the AG job.

 

And then - he gets out in front of the release of the Mueller Report with his OWN fn spin.

 

16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The transcript on the Zelensky call is beyond clear, on this we agree.   I firmly believe they could tell you Trump ordering a Stoli and Water is evidence that he was born in Russia and you would believe it. 

A swing and miss - nice try

 

16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I don't know a "Stephen Miller", unless you're talking about 3 Finger Stevie Mills down at the butcher shop on Central.  

 

Oh really? You don’t know Trumps Senior Advisor to the President - so that means it didn’t happen?

 

Meanwhile:

 

24 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

will not impact me one way or the other beyond what it means politically. 

 

 

NO WAY “SPAZ”

 

lmao

 

 

 

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

On 8/30/2023 at 9:38 AM, TSOL said:

Wow '16 really did break you guys badly huh 

'16 was rigged in Trump's favor. It didn't break the Democrats.  Trump thought '20 was also going to be rigged again, it wasn't.

 

'20 broke the Righties... Broke them bad. Really bad.  Now suffer the consequences.  If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

[ChiGoose]

15 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Trump obstructed the entire investigation and Mueller would have charged him for doing so if it weren’t for some DOJ memo saying he couldn’t.

 

Mueller AND the GOP Select Committee highlighted all the connections between Trump and Russia - it happened and you can’t spin it.

 

Bill Barr? Are you fn serious? He got the job when he wrote an unsolicited memo to Trump’s DOJ saying Mueller had no right to question a sitting POTUS and was awarded with the AG job.

 

And then - he gets out in front of the release of the Mueller Report with his OWN fn spin.

 

I don't understand how people still buy the Barr memo when Mueller said it wasn't accurate. He even provided executive summaries in the report so Barr wouldn't have to do a memo but they didn't have the spin Barr wanted. 

 

It's like if a someone was giving a book report and the author of the book was in the room saying the kid misinterpreted the book and has the facts wrong but everybody agreed with the kid instead of the author.

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

don't understand how people

They have a psyop to sustain.

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

13 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Trump obstructed the entire investigation and Mueller would have charged him for doing so if it weren’t for some DOJ memo saying he couldn’t.

 

Mueller AND the GOP Select Committee highlighted all the connections between Trump and Russia - it happened and you can’t spin it.

 

Bill Barr? Are you fn serious? He got the job when he wrote an unsolicited memo to Trump’s DOJ saying Mueller had no right to question a sitting POTUS and was awarded with the AG job.

 

And then - he gets out in front of the release of the Mueller Report with his OWN fn spin.

 

A swing and miss - nice try

 

 

Oh really? You don’t know Trumps Senior Advisor to the President - so that means it didn’t happen?

 

Meanwhile:

 

 

 

NO WAY “SPAZ”

 

lmao

 

 

 

 

I know. Mueller was probably in on it and would have written an entirely different report had he known he could.  The goal was always obstruction because they concocted the conspiracy angle.  There’s ample evidence of this.  
 

You don’t like Bill Barr.  Wow. I’m shocked. 
 

This has been fun, but I was simply offering perspective on how many voters view the totality of action against Trump.  I recognize you are not in that camp and never suggested you are. 
 

We’re all going to be ok.  

 

[BillStime]

4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Mueller was probably in on it

[49er Fan]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

• Russia was an attempt to remove him from office. There was no conspiracy, never was and that is borne out in the Mueller report.  In fact, AG Barr indicated the true conspiracy was undertaken by those who perpetrated the scam;
• The Russia impeachment was unreasonable and unnecessary, and an attempt to remove Trump from office;

 

 

 

First bullet - Russia interfered with our 2016 election on a massive scale vis social media bombardment (troll farms) and hacking.  Both candidate Clinton and DNC email servers were hacked and their contents were released at the direction of people working for Trump (e.g. Roger Stone).

 

Second. bullet - There was no “Russia impeachment.” WTF are you talking about?  

 

The Mueller investigation was undertaken by an independent counsel appointed by Trump’s first AG (Rod Rosenstein).  Trump obstructed justice so vehemently during the investigation that he wanted practically everyone having anything to do with it to be fired - and he made good on many of those wishes.

[L Ron Burgundy]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The Mueller report is an important part of the story of the Trump Presidency, and this particular part of the board is dedicated to politics.  

 

What's your point?

Have you read it?

 

I'm guessing you have not.  Again I'm guessing so please enlighten me if your commentary on it is based on having read the actual document.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

25 minutes ago, 49er Fan said:

First bullet - Russia interfered with our 2016 election on a massive scale vis social media bombardment (troll farms) and hacking.  Both candidate Clinton and DNC email servers were hacked and their contents were released at the direction of people working for Trump (e.g. Roger Stone).

 

After many years of thawing of our relationship with the Russians, and notably Obama's hot mic comment pledging flexibility to Russia after he was re-elected, Russia became the big ugly red bear when it became politically expedient for the democrats.   

 

That they attempted to interfere in the election is of no surprise whatsoever.  I would go on here--from Clinton/DNC partnering with a foreign agent to spread disinformation most assuredly to skew our election, 50+ members of the intelligence community declaring something that wasn't was, the Obam admin manufacturing a story about a video leading to the death of an Ambassador---this happens.  I see no particular reason to be surprised by any of it. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, 49er Fan said:

 

Second. bullet - There was no “Russia impeachment.” WTF are you talking about?  

You're correct, I got my dem malfeasance issues wrong here. 

 

25 minutes ago, 49er Fan said:

 

The Mueller investigation was undertaken by an independent counsel appointed by Trump’s first AG (Rod Rosenstein).  Trump obstructed justice so vehemently during the investigation that he wanted practically everyone having anything to do with it to be fired - and he made good on many of those wishes.

There were plenty of unsavory elements by a number of players leading up to the assignment of the SC, and those things are well documented.  Whether they matter to a voter or not on a case by case basis is in the eye of the beholder.  As for obstruction, when faced with allegations of treasonous behavior, I'd assume all options to save oneself are on the table.  In the end, the summary provided by AG Barr lays it all out. 

20 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Have you read it?

 

I'm guessing you have not.  Again I'm guessing so please enlighten me if your commentary on it is based on having read the actual document.  

I don't care what you think, that's a factor here. 

 

Do you have a point? 

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

'16 was rigged in Trump's favor. It didn't break the Democrats.  Trump thought '20 was also going to be rigged again, it wasn't.

 

'20 broke the Righties... Broke them bad. Really bad.  Now suffer the consequences.  If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

We are all suffering the consequences,  unless your in the parents basement like billsy.

 

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

54 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

50+ members of the intelligence community

 

You said "member"