@no1marauder saidsimply state the words that include the president then
He isn't now, so Article 2, Section 4 is irrelevant.
But Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is and it gives no pass to ex-Presidents.
2 edits
@mott-the-hoople saidAgain? Sure:
simply state the words that include the president then
"Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
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 Constitution repeatedly says the Presidency is an "office". And it definitely is included as "any office" (you are aware what the word "any" means) under the United States.
And someone who held it was an "officer" of the United States who took an oath to support the Constitution.
@mott-the-hoople saidAre you stupid?
wow a coward scared to post under their real userid
He's been here longer than you have.
@moonbus saidWhat is your source of information?
Trump is not an executive officer now, but he was from January 20, 2017 until January 20, 2021. He held the office of President of the United States, chief officer of the executive branch of the federal govt., as defined by the Constitution. The president of the U.S. is commonly referred to as the Chief Executive. Only a troll would continue to deny this.
What the Free Enterprise Fund defines as an executive officer is irrelevant.
@sonhouse saidWT actual F just happened, the dims gave Trump a whole lot of free publicity and the end result he comes out the winner?
@Mott-The-Hoople
Well, I have just one ID here, so give it up assshole.
@no1marauder
Maine has concurred with Colorado
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/28/politics/trump-maine-14th-amendment-ballot/index.html
@moonbus saidThe decision is here: https://www.maine.gov/sos/news/2023/Decision%20in%20Challenge%20to%20Trump%20Presidential%20Primary%20Petitions.pdf
@no1marauder
Maine has concurred with Colorado
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/28/politics/trump-maine-14th-amendment-ballot/index.html
@no1marauder saidYou would think the law is broad enough to capture all of Trump's malfeasance. Other than 2/3rds of both houses saying otherwise, you would safely bet that his goose is cooked.
or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
1 edit
@kmax87 saidhttps://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/donald-trump-to-be-included-in-colorado-ballot-following-appeals/ar-AA1maFYl
You would think the law is broad enough to capture all of Trump's malfeasance. Other than 2/3rds of both houses saying otherwise, you would safely bet that his goose is cooked.
How do you read this?
@wajoma saidThey want the Federal government to overturn the decisions of a State? That’s a new position for the Right to take.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/donald-trump-to-be-included-in-colorado-ballot-following-appeals/ar-AA1maFYl
How do you read this?
Can they do that? I thought the State courts were separate from the Federal court.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/court-role-and-structure/comparing-federal-state-courts