47th President of the USA : D. J. Trump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

Well yeah, of course they're not barred from political office. If they hadn't held military or government position the 14th amendment rule doesn't apply.

---

Some of them were state legislators. The amendment applies to them.

https://www.americanoversight.org/in...capitol-attack

Quote:

---

An appeal for judicial review is not the same thing as a defense against charges. It's administrative law and has very significant differences in burden of proof, evidentiary requirements, etc. Due process is not the same which is the hard kernel of truth behind recent challenges despite how irritatingly "let the rich oppress the poor more" those challenges and decisions have been in nature.

---

The Constitution doesn't provide a mechanism for determining who engaged in an insurrection. It clearly doesn't treat impeachment as the only approach for keeping these kind of people out of office. The only precedents we have is for people who were never convicted in a criminal court asking for pardons. In fact, several congressmen were asking Trump for a preemptive pardon, presumably because they believed they were in trouble. So given that impeachment isn't necessary and criminal proceedings have no precedent, I don't see a problem with having secretaries of state and ultimately the courts deciding whether someone engaged in an insurrection. The alternative is that attempting to overthrow the US government carries absolutely no cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Some of them were state legislators. The amendment applies to them.

https://www.americanoversight.org/in...capitol-attack



The Constitution doesn't provide a mechanism for determining who engaged in an insurrection. It clearly doesn't treat impeachment as the only approach for keeping these kind of people out of office. The only precedents we have is for people who were never convicted in a criminal court asking for pardons. In fact, several congressmen were asking Trump for a preemptive pardon, presumably because they believed they were in trouble. So given that impeachment isn't necessary and criminal proceedings have no precedent, I don't see a problem with having secretaries of state and ultimately the courts deciding whether someone engaged in an insurrection. The alternative is that attempting to overthrow the US government carries absolutely no cost.

---

You are pre-empting the ruling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

You are pre-empting the ruling.

---

Pre-empting what ruling?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

The ability to run for federal office is not a privilege granted by the government. It is afforded to every citizen (every natural-born citizen, in the case of the Presidency), with certain age and residency pre-reqs. I do not know that I would characterize it as a right, per se, but the freedom to do so is most certainly a liberty afforded to US citizens.

---

US citizens who haven't engaged in insurrection while in office as sworn defenders of the constitution. That is one of the necessary qualifications. Though SCOTUS has chosen to dodge the issue in the past, lower courts have explicitly afforded the section 3 disqualification a similar status as the qualifications you mention.

Quote:

---

I have seen it claimed that the 14th amendment is self-executing.

---

You may have seen it in eg. the Colorado Supreme Court ruling. Or in the statement & analysis from the Maine Secretary of State. Or perhaps you saw it in Luttig and Tribe's Atlantic piece. Or perhaps you saw it in Baude & Paulsen's recent analysis. Or perhaps it was SCOTUS.

Quote:

---

That's rampant nonsense. Nothing in the Constitution executes itself

---

In reality, this matter remains an area of active research and debate. If a wide range of knowledgable and experienced jurists treat the matter as being either unsettled or obviously in favour of the doctrine of self-execution, I don't think it's sensible to accept some contrarian internet guy's categorical dismissal out of hand; it's clearly not regarded as rampant nonsense by jurists whose literal job it is to develop our understanding of the law.

Quote:

---

Certainly if a clause about rebellion and insurrection were self-executing, there wouldn't been any point to 18 USC 2383.

---

Even if your premise were true, it wouldn't be the first—or last—pointless piece of legislation in legal history. The premise is, however, not true. There is a point to seemingly redundant legislation—it provides clarity in difficult situations, bolstering one interpretation or another of the constitution's provisions. So there is a legal point, a pragmatic point, and—of course—a political point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Pre-empting what ruling?

---

Of the Supreme Court.

My money is on SCOTUS putting him back on ballot. Seems like disqualifying him would be a tidy and just way to get rid of that fucker and hopefully end the US slide into fascism, but, I'm a big believer in the law of unintended consequences. And what's happening here isn't just about Trump, so, ugly is still our future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Of the Supreme Court.

---

It's better to have tried and failed than to pretend instigating a coup isn't a serious issue.

I'm sure he's calling for the release of all the insurrectionists out of the goodness of his heart.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...ry-2024-01-06/

Twitter Link

Can't wait for all the defenders of the Constitution to condemn this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

It's better to have tried and failed than to pretend instigating a coup isn't a serious issue.

---

Tried what? Convict him in the Court of Liberal Public Opinion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

My money is on SCOTUS putting him back on ballot. Seems like disqualifying him would be a tidy and just way to get rid of that fucker and hopefully end the US slide into fascism, but, I'm a big believer in the law of unintended consequences. And what's happening here isn't just about Trump, so, ugly is still our future.

---

Yes, but don’t forget that Biden being near unelectable plays into this. The Weimar Republic didn’t end just because Hitler got the biggest number of votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Tried what? Convict him in the Court of Liberal Public Opinion?

---

See Korematsu v. U.S. At least once a terrible decision has been made, a future Court can denounce it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

See Korematsu v. U.S. At least once a terrible decision has been made, a future Court can denounce it.

---

Yes, I am aware your Supreme Court basically is a legal seesaw these days. But that wasn’t the question. You excitedly made a claim about a court case in which there wasn’t a ruling yet and then claimed something about trying being important. I’m still confused about what you tried besides stating your hopes as a fact.

So, in case anyone missed it, SCOTUS overturned the Colorado decision. 9-0. Not a surprise.

SCOTUS is also slow-walking Trump's Presidential Immunity claim to help him delay as much as they can. Hard to see that as non-political. Fuckers.

Tbf nobody wants to be murdered by violent extremists

So, Biden has to step aside, right? What are we thinking?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steely Glint

So, Biden has to step aside, right? What are we thinking?

---

He HAS to. There is no fucking way. And FOR FUCK SAKE if they put Harris at the top of the ticket, fuck my life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steely Glint

So, Biden has to step aside, right? What are we thinking?

---

I'm thinking the whole debate plan smells but also that they may both be in the ground by november.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

He HAS to. There is no fucking way. And FOR FUCK SAKE if they put Harris at the top of the ticket, fuck my life.

---

If Biden drops out it'll be Harris unless she's in the lava pit with him.

Nothing helps a party win an election quite like dumping the incumbent who already won the primary.

He's not going to get any better.

He's better than any alternative. Constantly changing leaders without a real electoral process is how you get Brown and Sunak.

There's really no better alternative for the most powerful office in the world than a guy experiencing age-related cognitive decline?

Yeah, there's no one better than an incumbent who already won the primary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yeah, there's no one better than an incumbent who already won the primary.

---

I don't know of anyone who wants Biden to be the candidate except Biden and probably his wife. For fuck sake, this is not shuffling around candidates willy nilly. All the polls show Democrats want to vote for someone else besides Biden and Trump. He's 81 and it shows a LOT. He should not be president any longer than the end of this term and he's not going to beat Trump, so whatever else happens, he's NOT going to win in November. The only question is will Trump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Nothing helps a party win an election quite like dumping the incumbent who already won the primary.

---

Yep. Biden can always withdraw. But it's tantamount to simply conceding to Trump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

I don't know of anyone who wants Biden to be the candidate except Biden and probably his wife. For fuck sake, this is not shuffling around candidates willy nilly. All the polls show Democrats want to vote for someone else besides Biden and Trump. He's 81 and it shows a LOT. He should not be president any longer than the end of this term and he's not going to beat Trump, so whatever else happens, he's NOT going to win in November. The only question is will Trump.

---

If only those Democrats had some way to signal to their party which candidate they wanted to represent them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

Yep. Biden can always withdraw. But it's tantamount to simply conceding to Trump

---

Bullshit. Trumps going to beat Biden anyway. You can't hide that debate performance, its out there and everyone saw it. Nobody likes Harris and there's a good chance she ends up president at some point in the next four years if Biden wins. He's not going to beat Trump. This isn't like "every other time" or that one other time in history you studied. And yeah Loki, Biden "won" the primary, if only the party had let there be a real contest. Biden's on the ticket because he wanted to be and the party deferred to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

Bullshit. Trumps going to beat Biden anyway. You can't hide that debate performance, its out there and everyone saw it. Nobody likes Harris and there's a good chance she ends up president at some point in the next four years if Biden wins. He's not going to beat Trump. This isn't like "every other time" or that one other time in history you studied. And yeah Loki, Biden "won" the primary, if only the party had let there be a real contest. Biden's on the ticket because he wanted to be and the party deferred to him.

---

Hang on, does single occasion debate performance ever influence elections?

Normally they don't but a particularly strong or poor performance or notable moment can, for example in the UK, Nick Clegg's performance in the first debate in 2010 likely lead to a hung parliament. Given how close the polls are in this case, it's wouldn't take much to lead to a second Trump term.

The more important point, though, is that this doesn't seem to be a one off poor performance, but rather an indication that Biden is not mentally or physically capable of actually effectively campaigning, let alone serving another 4 years as president. If that's true things are only going to get worse from here on out. OTOH if this does turn out to be just one bad night and he's fine in the other debates this one bad night might not make a difference; the election is a long way off. On the third hand, if he turns out to be the same or worse in the second or third debates then it will definitely be too late to change.

Look don't rule him out yet, his campaign has rolled out some anti-trans stuff that's bound to work and if it doesn't they can do some diesel handouts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

Bullshit. Trumps going to beat Biden anyway. You can't hide that debate performance, its out there and everyone saw it. Nobody likes Harris and there's a good chance she ends up president at some point in the next four years if Biden wins. He's not going to beat Trump. This isn't like "every other time" or that one other time in history you studied. And yeah Loki, Biden "won" the primary, if only the party had let there be a real contest. Biden's on the ticket because he wanted to be and the party deferred to him.

---

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...2024/national/

The race has been effectively tied for months. If Trump gets a bump from this debate, it will go away by the next news cycle.

A vast majority of Americans are hyper-partisans. They're not going to change their mind based on a debate. Some Americans vote based on economic conditions. Those won't change because of a debate. Their are some voters who are just idiots or don't pay attention to the news until late October. They won't even know this debate happened.

The people I see complaining the most about this debate are partisan Democrats, who'll still vote for Biden, and the MAGA crowd, who was always going to support Turmp.

Swing voters exist.

They're overwhelmingly in the last two categories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...2024/national/

The race has been effectively tied for months. If Trump gets a bump from this debate, it will go away by the next news cycle.

A vast majority of Americans are hyper-partisans. They're not going to change their mind based on a debate. Some Americans vote based on economic conditions. Those won't change because of a debate. Their are some voters who are just idiots or don't pay attention to the news until late October. They won't even know this debate happened.

The people I see complaining the most about this debate are partisan Democrats, who'll still vote for Biden, and the MAGA crowd, who was always going to support Turmp.

---

And NYT Dinner Party Special Ops team :o

Looks like debates can occasionally move the needle!

https://www.politicususa.com/2024/06...mouth.html/amp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Their are some voters who are just idiots or don't pay attention to the news until late October.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

They're overwhelmingly in the last two categories.

---

Ah, so, you're expecting him to improve by October?

There's going to be a ton of mud thrown at both candidates in October (several billion's worth). This will be but one small data point.

Well, whatever Biden decides to do, he'll at least enjoy immunity from prosecution

Everyone knows that this only applies to Republican presidents.