This was understood at the time by ex-CSA officials:
" In fact, ex-Confederates flooded Congress with thousands of amnesty requests to “remove” their Section 3 disqualification, demonstrating that they understood themselves to be disqualified even without a formal adjudication."
"No one who has been formally disqualified under Section 3 was charged under the criminal “rebellion or insurrection” statute (18 U.S.C. § 2383) or its predecessors. "
https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-reports/past-14th-amendment-disqualifications/
@AverageJoe1
Can a court vaporize a pres candidate? Any decision preventing the voters from voting will immediately discredit the election. No matter which side wins!!!!
It is a democracy-ending move.
The pres of the USA is telling us that Trump should not run!!! Biden will lose big cred around the world.
Marauder is smoking you guys big time. NO one in the world thinks the guy in the big buffalo hat and the people with their feet up on the desks, laughing and celebrating, during Jan 6, were trying to ';coup' or overtake our government. I guarantee you SCOTUS will not believe it.
@AverageJoe1
Would be nice if Sonhouse got a ghostwriter to write his thoughts (concisely) so that we could understand it.
@averagejoe1 saidYou didn't answer my question, Joe, so I'll repeat it:
@AverageJoe1
Can a court vaporize a pres candidate? Any decision preventing the voters from voting will immediately discredit the election. No matter which side wins!!!!
It is a democracy-ending move.
The pres of the USA is telling us that Trump should not run!!! Biden will lose big cred around the world.
Marauder is smoking you guys big time. NO one in ...[text shortened]... 6, were trying to ';coup' or overtake our government. I guarantee you SCOTUS will not believe it.
Thousands of persons attacked police, some of them smashed windows and broke down doors to allow the mob to enter the Capitol where they intended to force Congress to not fulfill its Constitutional duty and count the Electoral votes legally submitted by the States in order to overthrow the results of an election and allow the defeated candidate to remain President.
What would you call that?
@no1marauder saidwell you start it with a lie, “thousands of people did not attack police shytweasel
You didn't answer my question, Joe, so I'll repeat it:
Thousands of persons attacked police, some of them smashed windows and broke down doors to allow the mob to enter the Capitol where they intended to force Congress to not fulfill its Constitutional duty and count the Electoral votes legally submitted by the States in order to overthrow the results of an election and allow the defeated candidate to remain President.
What would you call that?
@sh76 saidLikely.
They don't need an excuse. They deny cert to 49 of every 50 cases appealed to it.
They'll take this one, though. It's too big for them to duck.
I'd give 3 to 1 odds that they'll take it.
If they do and reverse, I say it's likely they do so on grounds that do not address the legal meaning of the Section, relying on the "political questions" doctrine or standing or some such dodge.
@mott-the-hoople saidBS. The tapes are available for even idiots like yourself to see.
well you start it with a lie, “thousands of people did not attack police shytweasel
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidOof. You think it was all AI generated footage then?
well you start it with a lie, “thousands of people did not attack police shytweasel
They admitted to the crimes. I watched it live on TV.
1 edit
@kevcvs57 saidkevbollah, Dominic Pezzola admits to making mistakes, at any rate you didn't hear Dominic Pezzola's side of the story, you're not interested in Dominic Pezzola's side of the story, you're only interested in the sound of your own keyboard, and it show's.
If you allowed the words of convicted felons to mean 💩 we could empty the jails and then put their victims in jail 🙄 your so effing dumb it’s painful
I was replying to this:
"Trump knew that his supporters were angry and prepared to use violence to ‘stop the steal’ including physically preventing Vice President Pence from certifying the election,”
This was not Pezzola, this was not what he was trying to do. And there has been 0 proof that this was any kind of organized plan. And with good reason, when they try to formulate a scenario it becomes ridiculous.
@wildgrass saidI want to see if you lie too…how many “attacked” the police?
Oof. You think it was all AI generated footage then?
They admitted to the crimes. I watched it live on TV.
@mott-the-hoople said"The riot -- which followed a months-long disinformation campaign by former President Donald Trump and his allies, who claimed without evidence that the election had been stolen through fraud -- lasted seven hours, during which approximately 10,000 people came onto Capitol grounds, with many engaging in violent clashes with officers trying to protect the building and lawmakers inside. At least 2,000 made it inside the Capitol building."
I want to see if you lie too…how many “attacked” the police?
https://abcnews.go.com/US/numbers-jan-investigation-shaping-year/story?id=82057743
Thousands is no "lie".
@mott-the-hoople saidI dunno exactly..a. lot. Why would I lie? It's on tape.
I want to see if you lie too…how many “attacked” the police?
The dissent does not challenge the factual funding that trump engaged in an insurrection. They did not explicitly disagree that trump would be barred from office if he did so. The counterargument here is not on facts, but on procedure.
@no1marauder saidWell, trespass, destruction of property, disorderly conduct, noise, vandalism, publio intoxication, lewd behavior, suspected jaywalking, profanity..... I love your saying what they intended to do. You and Sonhouse. Y'all know what people are thinking, why they do things, their plan....
You didn't answer my question, Joe, so I'll repeat it:
Thousands of persons attacked police, some of them smashed windows and broke down doors to allow the mob to enter the Capitol where they intended to force Congress to not fulfill its Constitutional duty and count the Electoral votes legally submitted by the States in order to overthrow the results of an election and allow the defeated candidate to remain President.
What would you call that?
:"...intended to..", "...force', and to "overthrow". and to "allow the defeated candidate to..."
Hw do you and Sonhouse know what is going on in a person's mind?!
@averagejoe1 saidA court can vaporize peoples right to vote so this seems consistent
@AverageJoe1
Can a court vaporize a pres candidate? Any decision preventing the voters from voting will immediately discredit the election. No matter which side wins!!!!
It is a democracy-ending move.
The pres of the USA is telling us that Trump should not run!!! Biden will lose big cred around the world.
Marauder is smoking you guys big time. NO one in ...[text shortened]... 6, were trying to ';coup' or overtake our government. I guarantee you SCOTUS will not believe it.