Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Illinois Judge Says 14th Amendment Bars Trump From 2024 Primary Ballot
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stevil" data-source="post: 77587644" data-attributes="member: 277368"><p>Politicians doing the impeachment process are not bound to anything tangible. They are supposed to look for "high crimes and misdameanors" but they don't have to. They simply take a vote, based on whatever they want. As long as they have the numbers in the vote then voila you have an impeachment.</p><p></p><p>They are not tied to the constitution or to law, they don't need evidence and they don't need witnesses. All they need are the vote numbers.</p><p></p><p>So, a president could pick up a gun and shoot the VP as he is counting the electoral votes. He could then declare himself the winner. If an attempt is made to impeach him, all you need is to have his own party vote not to impeach him, and if they have the numbers, then he doesn't get impeached.</p><p></p><p>The situation for a congressmen is very different for a judge. A congressman is concerned about his next election and maintaining his position in office. If he has a movement of people who will do whatever that president tells them to do. e.g. not vote for that congressman, then that congressman knows he must kowtow to that president's whims otherwise he will lose his job and career as he will be voted out in the next election.</p><p></p><p>The judge however, isn't up for election and is entirely focussed on setting precedent which will hold for decades to come. Setting a rule that abides by the law, and the constitution and will not be reversed on appeal.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No it's not. A judge and a Supreme Court made a judgement based on law and constitution.</p><p></p><p>No, the judge doesn't go to the polls in order to make a determination.</p><p></p><p><em>Yes, that's what they said.</em></p><p><em>They didn't say the mechanism that Congress are to go through to make the determination though.</em></p><p></p><p>Yes they did. They didn't make a determination as to whether D Trump engaged or provided comfort to an insurrection</p><p></p><p>Noone is asking for a new law, just upholding a current law, a current clause in the constitution.</p><p></p><p>That is not what the Supreme Court ruling has said. They aren't asking congress to create any new laws.</p><p></p><p>SC pointed to Congress and said they are the ones responsible for determining if D Trump engaged in an insurrection.</p><p>But previously some members of the Senate said </p><p>it was upto the courts to determine if D Trump engaged in an insurrection.</p><p></p><p>So we have two of the executive branches pointing away from themselves and towards each other, neither one willing to make a determination. WEAK!</p><p></p><p>This is what courts do. It is their job to make rulings on whether people committed crimes.</p><p></p><p>Nope this is not what the Supreme Court said.</p><p></p><p>It seems, even if D Trump was found guilty of seditious conspiracy in court, the individual states would still not be able to remove D Trump from the ballot. Even though the Constitution says they must.</p><p>What the Supreme Court have said is that Congress must be the ones to decide, not the courts. So this means is just comes up in a vote, and Trump's party can simply vote without evidence, without witnesses on whether they want D Trump to be on the ballot or not.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stevil, post: 77587644, member: 277368"] Politicians doing the impeachment process are not bound to anything tangible. They are supposed to look for "high crimes and misdameanors" but they don't have to. They simply take a vote, based on whatever they want. As long as they have the numbers in the vote then voila you have an impeachment. They are not tied to the constitution or to law, they don't need evidence and they don't need witnesses. All they need are the vote numbers. So, a president could pick up a gun and shoot the VP as he is counting the electoral votes. He could then declare himself the winner. If an attempt is made to impeach him, all you need is to have his own party vote not to impeach him, and if they have the numbers, then he doesn't get impeached. The situation for a congressmen is very different for a judge. A congressman is concerned about his next election and maintaining his position in office. If he has a movement of people who will do whatever that president tells them to do. e.g. not vote for that congressman, then that congressman knows he must kowtow to that president's whims otherwise he will lose his job and career as he will be voted out in the next election. The judge however, isn't up for election and is entirely focussed on setting precedent which will hold for decades to come. Setting a rule that abides by the law, and the constitution and will not be reversed on appeal. No it's not. A judge and a Supreme Court made a judgement based on law and constitution. No, the judge doesn't go to the polls in order to make a determination. [I]Yes, that's what they said. They didn't say the mechanism that Congress are to go through to make the determination though.[/I] Yes they did. They didn't make a determination as to whether D Trump engaged or provided comfort to an insurrection Noone is asking for a new law, just upholding a current law, a current clause in the constitution. That is not what the Supreme Court ruling has said. They aren't asking congress to create any new laws. SC pointed to Congress and said they are the ones responsible for determining if D Trump engaged in an insurrection. But previously some members of the Senate said it was upto the courts to determine if D Trump engaged in an insurrection. So we have two of the executive branches pointing away from themselves and towards each other, neither one willing to make a determination. WEAK! This is what courts do. It is their job to make rulings on whether people committed crimes. Nope this is not what the Supreme Court said. It seems, even if D Trump was found guilty of seditious conspiracy in court, the individual states would still not be able to remove D Trump from the ballot. Even though the Constitution says they must. What the Supreme Court have said is that Congress must be the ones to decide, not the courts. So this means is just comes up in a vote, and Trump's party can simply vote without evidence, without witnesses on whether they want D Trump to be on the ballot or not. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Illinois Judge Says 14th Amendment Bars Trump From 2024 Primary Ballot
Top
Bottom