On 1/24/2024 5:39 AM, scooter lied:
>
>
> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:QkVrN.44861$Iswd.15909@fx05.iad...
>> On 1/23/2024 9:59 AM, scooter lied:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad...
>>>> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont-
>>>>>>>>>> email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mere accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation.
>>>>>>>>>> There
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's
>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate those charges.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A civil court can not determine if someone committed a crime.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver conducted a
>>>>>>>>>> trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through incitement."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?  A trial without
>>>>>>>>>> charges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or arrest?  Wow, what is it you advocate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office even though
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they were never convicted and in fact had been pardoned.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be
>>>>>>>>>> disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the
>>>>>>>>>> Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for sure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be disqualified.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of those eight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one said he was before now, scooter.
>>>>>
>>>>> Excellent, so
>>>>
>>>> Trump engaged in insurrection,
>>>
>>> Excellent and since that is a crime
>>
>> It's also an event, scooter.
>>
>> You're funny, scooter, in addition to being a knuckle-dragging fuckwit. You keep
>> trying the same gags, over and over, after they've already failed.
>
> events don't disqualify you

Participation in an insurrection event after swearing an oath to defend the
Constitution disqualifies you, scooter.

Phat Phani <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote in
news:20240123.221406.fafc9014@erienetworks.net:

> In <zXWrN.118351$q3F7.74367@fx45.iad> Rudy Canoza
> <mike.am.surreal@earthlink.nut> wrote:>

>> The vast majority of legal scholars, and all of the good ones, say
> the
>> presidency is a covered office, Francis.
>
> "legal scholars" in this case are just left-wing activist assholes
> trying to subvert a national election.
>
Oh! The Federalist Society is "left-wing activist assholes"?!!

all 4 of tRump's SCOTUS judges are Federalist Society.

Quit sucking tRump's arsehole.
============
Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6

Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the
original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to
hold government office.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/10/us/trump-jan-6-insurrection-
conservatives.html
=============

Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in news:MPG.401aa8a8913dca64990fe9
@usnews.blocknews.net:

> In article <uopimo$1g0lk$3@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
> says...
>>
>> Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in
>> news:MPG.4019a20a8d8ec9bd990fd2@usnews.blocknews.net:
>>
>> > In article <dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
>> > says...
>> >>
>> >> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, Scout wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> > news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
>> >> >> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
>> >> >>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> >> >>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>> >> >>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in
>> >> >>>>>> news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont- email.me:
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>> >> >>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
>> >> >>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>> >> >>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order to be disqualified under 14.3.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?� How so?
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.� I saw nothing in there that I would
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpret as mere accusation being sufficient.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ����� -WBE� [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation.
>> >> >>>>>> There
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state's
>> >> >>>>>> decision
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> those charges. A civil court can not determine if
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone committed a crime.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection.
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> conducted a
>> >> >>>>>> trial
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>> January 6, 2021 through incitement."
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?� A trial
>> >> >>>>>>>>>> without
>> >> >>>>>> charges
>> >> >>>>>>>>>> or arrest?� Wow, what is it you advocate?
>> >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office
>> >> >>>>>>>>> even though they were never convicted and in fact had
been
>> >> >>>>>>>>> pardoned.
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
>> >> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> ===============
>> >> >>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally
adjudicated
>> >> >>>>>> to be disqualified and barred from public office under
Section
>> >> >>>>>> 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in
1868.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for
sure.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be
>> >> >>>> disqualified.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of
>> >> >>> those eight.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No one said he was before now, scooter.
>> >> >
>> >> > Excellent, so
>> >>
>> >> Trump engaged in insurrection, scooter, so he is disqualified from
>> >> any future office.
>> >
>> > Then why is he running and winning?
>> >
>>
>> He's running because he thinks he can pardon himself.
>>
>> And he's "winning" the MAGA vote because, well, they're MAGA cultists.
>
> He's ahead of Joe.
>
Really?! Biden won New Hampshire and he wasn't even on the ballot.

In article <7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
says...
>
> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
> >
> >
> > "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:VkVrN.44865$Iswd.21381@fx05.iad...
> >> On 1/23/2024 9:55 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:hfSrN.44073$SyNd.13643@fx33.iad...
> >>>> On 1/23/2024 4:44 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:uomt6t$ubd2$4@dont-email.me...
> >>>>>> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>> news:t4CrN.221410$Ama9.131673@fx12.iad:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:31 PM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "Winston" <wbe@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>> news:ydede9tldd.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com...
> >>>>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:uojin6$8j9n$1@dont-email.me...
> >>>>>>>>>>> Where in 14.3 does it say anything about convicted or even
> >>>>>>>>>>> indicted? Show us the exact quote.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>> 5th Amendment.
> >>>>>>>>>> We don't restrict your liberties without a criminal trial.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Technically, since the 14th was passed after the 5th, its wording
> >>>>>>>>> prevails, just like the 21st repealed the 18th (prohibition).
> >>>>>>>>> -WBE
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Only if it specifically supersedes the language that exists. Nothing
> >>>>>>>> in the 14th sec 3 does supersedes the need to have such
> >>>>>>>> disqualifications due to a finding in a criminal case.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A criminal conviction is not required for 14.3, scooter.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The writers of the 14th Amendment did not use the word "convicted".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> They didn't have to. the 5th and 6th
> >>>>
> >>>> Inapplicable, scooter. Those pertain to criminal cases. 14.3 is not about
> >>>> criminal behavior.
> >>>
> >>> So Insurrection isn't a crime?
> >>
> >> It is a crime, scooter.
> >
> > And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>
> Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
>
> You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?

Because Trump hasn't been charged with it.

In article <nO9sN.53938$5Hnd.28147@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
says...
>
> On 1/24/2024 5:42 AM, scooter lied:
> >
> >
> > "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:GkVrN.44860$Iswd.8200@fx05.iad...
> >> On 1/23/2024 10:00 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:dfSrN.44068$SyNd.13328@fx33.iad...
> >>>> On 1/23/2024 5:03 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:p4CrN.221406$Ama9.13528@fx12.iad...
> >>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:47 PM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:9zwrN.295260$xHn7.235573@fx14.iad...
> >>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:27 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:5eTqN.116701$q3F7.94114@fx45.iad...
> >>>>>>>>>> On 1/20/2024 4:50 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>>>> news:f6HqN.211867$Ama9.108404@fx12.iad...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:50 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as mere
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation being sufficient.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation. There
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's decision is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to judicial review.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was tried in Colorado for an insurrection that happened in DC?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, idiot. Trump was not tried. A civil suit, pursuant to Colorado
> >>>>>>>>>>>> law, was filed in Colorado to keep him off the ballot in that state,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> pursuant to 14.3. The Colorado court meticulously reviewed what
> >>>>>>>>>>>> constitutes insurrection and engagement in one, and concluded that
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the event of 01/06/2021 was an insurrection and that Trump engaged
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in it. Trump was not on trial.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Further I would note that NO INDIVIDUAL has EVER been charged with
> >>>>>>>>>>> Insurrection for the events on Jan 6th.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> People have been tried and convicted for a more serious charge than
> >>>>>>>>>> insurrection.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maybe it was more serious, maybe it wasn't.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is no "maybe" about it. Seditious conspiracy carries a maximum
> >>>>>>>> prison term of 20 years;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Great. Now all you have to do is show were Trump was convicted.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't have to show that, scooter. Conviction is not required for 14.3
> >>>>>> disqualification, scooter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You assert he committed a crime
> >>>>
> >>>> No, scooter. In fact, he *did* engage in many crimes, not all of them
> >>>> connected to the insurrection. These are the crimes addressed in the four
> >>>> federal indictments for election interference. For example, coordinating the
> >>>> submission of slates of *fake* electors is a crime, but not connected to the
> >>>> insurrection. Directing the DoJ to send a letter to states falsely saying
> >>>> that DoJ had found massive "fraud" also is a crime not connected to the
> >>>> insurrection.
> >>>
> >>> Cite the convictions for these alleged crimes.
> >>
> >> They're still to come, scooter. His trial is on hold pending the appellate court
> >> chucking out his absurd "immunity" claim. He'll be convicted on some of the
> >> counts, too.
> >
> > We've been hearing that for about 8 years now
>
> You've been hearing it for less than six months, scooter. The indictments were
> handed down last August.
>
> You always lie, scooter, and you always get caught.

8 years you fucks have been trying to "get Trump".

In article <oO9sN.53939$5Hnd.13090@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
says...
>
> On 1/24/2024 5:39 AM, scooter lied:
> >
> >
> > "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:QkVrN.44861$Iswd.15909@fx05.iad...
> >> On 1/23/2024 9:59 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad...
> >>>> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
> >>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
> >>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
> >>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont-
> >>>>>>>>>> email.me:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mere accusation being sufficient.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation.
> >>>>>>>>>> There
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's
> >>>>>>>>>> decision
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate those charges.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A civil court can not determine if someone committed a crime.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of insurrection.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver conducted a
> >>>>>>>>>> trial
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through incitement."
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?  A trial without
> >>>>>>>>>> charges
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> or arrest?  Wow, what is it you advocate?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office even though
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> they were never convicted and in fact had been pardoned.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> ===============
> >>>>>>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be
> >>>>>>>>>> disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the
> >>>>>>>>>> Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for sure.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be disqualified.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of those eight.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No one said he was before now, scooter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Excellent, so
> >>>>
> >>>> Trump engaged in insurrection,
> >>>
> >>> Excellent and since that is a crime
> >>
> >> It's also an event, scooter.
> >>
> >> You're funny, scooter, in addition to being a knuckle-dragging fuckwit. You keep
> >> trying the same gags, over and over, after they've already failed.
> >
> > events don't disqualify you
>
> Participation in an insurrection event after swearing an oath to defend the
> Constitution disqualifies you, scooter.

But he didn't.

In article <uorb18$1rsah$5@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
says...
>
> Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in news:MPG.401aa8a8913dca64990fe9
> @usnews.blocknews.net:
>
> > In article <uopimo$1g0lk$3@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
> > says...
> >>
> >> Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in
> >> news:MPG.4019a20a8d8ec9bd990fd2@usnews.blocknews.net:
> >>
> >> > In article <dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
> >> > says...
> >> >>
> >> >> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, Scout wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
> >> >> >> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
> >> >> >>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >> >> >>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
> >> >> >>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in
> >> >> >>>>>> news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont- email.me:
> >> >> >>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
> >> >> >>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order to be disqualified under 14.3.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpret as mere accusation being sufficient.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation.
> >> >> >>>>>> There
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state's
> >> >> >>>>>> decision
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> those charges. A civil court can not determine if
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone committed a crime.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> conducted a
> >> >> >>>>>> trial
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>> January 6, 2021 through incitement."
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?  A trial
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> without
> >> >> >>>>>> charges
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> or arrest?  Wow, what is it you advocate?
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> even though they were never convicted and in fact had
> been
> >> >> >>>>>>>>> pardoned.
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
> >> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
> >> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>> ===============
> >> >> >>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally
> adjudicated
> >> >> >>>>>> to be disqualified and barred from public office under
> Section
> >> >> >>>>>> 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in
> 1868.
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for
> sure.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be
> >> >> >>>> disqualified.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of
> >> >> >>> those eight.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> No one said he was before now, scooter.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Excellent, so
> >> >>
> >> >> Trump engaged in insurrection, scooter, so he is disqualified from
> >> >> any future office.
> >> >
> >> > Then why is he running and winning?
> >> >
> >>
> >> He's running because he thinks he can pardon himself.
> >>
> >> And he's "winning" the MAGA vote because, well, they're MAGA cultists.
> >
> > He's ahead of Joe.
> >
> Really?! Biden won New Hampshire and he wasn't even on the ballot.

Just Wondering <JW@jw.com> wrote in news:Tx3sN.76203$TSTa.41676@fx47.iad:

> On 1/23/2024 8:07 PM, Baxter wrote:
>> Just Wondering <JW@jw.com> wrote in
>> news:8eZrN.250037$Wp_8.189870@fx17.iad:
>>
>>> On 1/23/2024 4:46 PM, Baxter wrote:
>>>> Just Wondering <JW@jw.com> wrote in
>>>> news:n6WrN.255738$PuZ9.219859@fx11.iad:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/23/2024 1:28 PM, Wilson Woods wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He is, scooter, because 14.3 doesn't require a criminal
>>>>>>>> conviction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where does it state that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's what it doesn't say, scooter: it doesn't say a criminal
>>>>>> conviction is necessary. It is plainly intended as a purely civil
>>>>>> measure, scooter.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Black-letter rules of construction prohibit absurd results.
>>>>> Allowing each state to rule separately leads to an absurd result.
>>>>> You could have 45 states decide Trump isn't disqualified under 14.3
>>>>> and 5 states deciding he is, but having to accept the fact that
>>>>> Trump will be sworn into office on January 20, 2025.
>>>>> The only interpretation that does not lead to an absurd result
>>>>> is a ruling on the federal level that would apply to all states.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's before the SCOTUS right now.
>>>>
>>> As it should be. Piecemeal state-by-state determinations of POTUS
>>> eligibility are absurd.
>>
>> Yet strangly they didn't have that problem right after the 14th was
>> ratified.
>>
> Nobody argued that 14.3 disqualified Andrew Johnson or Ulysses Grant.
>

Because they were't Confederate insurrectionists. But plenty of
Confederate insurrectionists DID get disqualified.

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote in
news:uor43j$1qtjj$1@dont-email.me:

> ... There are so many questionable items during the 2020 election
> which is why only 62% believe the election was fair.
>
There were not "questions" there were lies repeated over and over to the
gullible.

Chinese space laser are not a "question", bamboo ballots are not a
"question", etc.

Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad:

> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>

>> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>
> Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
>
> You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?
>
>

If the writers of the 14th had intended for criminal trials they would have
use the word "convicted" - they didn't.

On 1/24/2024 7:42 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
> says...
>>
>> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:VkVrN.44865$Iswd.21381@fx05.iad...
>>>> On 1/23/2024 9:55 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hfSrN.44073$SyNd.13643@fx33.iad...
>>>>>> On 1/23/2024 4:44 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:uomt6t$ubd2$4@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:t4CrN.221410$Ama9.131673@fx12.iad:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:31 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Winston" <wbe@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:ydede9tldd.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com...
>>>>>>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:uojin6$8j9n$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where in 14.3 does it say anything about convicted or even
>>>>>>>>>>>>> indicted? Show us the exact quote.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 5th Amendment.
>>>>>>>>>>>> We don't restrict your liberties without a criminal trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Technically, since the 14th was passed after the 5th, its wording
>>>>>>>>>>> prevails, just like the 21st repealed the 18th (prohibition).
>>>>>>>>>>> -WBE
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Only if it specifically supersedes the language that exists. Nothing
>>>>>>>>>> in the 14th sec 3 does supersedes the need to have such
>>>>>>>>>> disqualifications due to a finding in a criminal case.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A criminal conviction is not required for 14.3, scooter.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The writers of the 14th Amendment did not use the word "convicted".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They didn't have to. the 5th and 6th
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Inapplicable, scooter. Those pertain to criminal cases. 14.3 is not about
>>>>>> criminal behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> So Insurrection isn't a crime?
>>>>
>>>> It is a crime, scooter.
>>>
>>> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>>
>> Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
>>
>> You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?
>
> Because Trump hasn't been charged with it.

Irrelevant.

On 1/24/2024 7:45 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <uorb18$1rsah$5@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
> says...
>>
>> Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in news:MPG.401aa8a8913dca64990fe9
>> @usnews.blocknews.net:
>>
>>> In article <uopimo$1g0lk$3@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> Skeeter <Skeeterweed@proton.me> wrote in
>>>> news:MPG.4019a20a8d8ec9bd990fd2@usnews.blocknews.net:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
>>>>> says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont- email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> order to be disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpret as mere accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state's
>>>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those charges. A civil court can not determine if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone committed a crime.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conducted a
>>>>>>>>>>>> trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> January 6, 2021 through incitement."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?  A trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>>>>>>> charges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or arrest?  Wow, what is it you advocate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even though they were never convicted and in fact had
>> been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pardoned.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>>>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally
>> adjudicated
>>>>>>>>>>>> to be disqualified and barred from public office under
>> Section
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in
>> 1868.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for
>> sure.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be
>>>>>>>>>> disqualified.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of
>>>>>>>>> those eight.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No one said he was before now, scooter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excellent, so
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump engaged in insurrection, scooter, so he is disqualified from
>>>>>> any future office.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why is he running and winning?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He's running because he thinks he can pardon himself.
>>>>
>>>> And he's "winning" the MAGA vote because, well, they're MAGA cultists.
>>>
>>> He's ahead of Joe.
>>>
>> Really?! Biden won New Hampshire and he wasn't even on the ballot.
>
> Biden didn't win shit.

On 1/24/2024 7:43 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <nO9sN.53938$5Hnd.28147@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
> says...
>>
>> On 1/24/2024 5:42 AM, scooter lied:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:GkVrN.44860$Iswd.8200@fx05.iad...
>>>> On 1/23/2024 10:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:dfSrN.44068$SyNd.13328@fx33.iad...
>>>>>> On 1/23/2024 5:03 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:p4CrN.221406$Ama9.13528@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:47 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:9zwrN.295260$xHn7.235573@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:27 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:5eTqN.116701$q3F7.94114@fx45.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/20/2024 4:50 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:f6HqN.211867$Ama9.108404@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:50 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation. There
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's decision is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subject
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was tried in Colorado for an insurrection that happened in DC?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, idiot. Trump was not tried. A civil suit, pursuant to Colorado
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> law, was filed in Colorado to keep him off the ballot in that state,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pursuant to 14.3. The Colorado court meticulously reviewed what
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constitutes insurrection and engagement in one, and concluded that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the event of 01/06/2021 was an insurrection and that Trump engaged
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in it. Trump was not on trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Further I would note that NO INDIVIDUAL has EVER been charged with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Insurrection for the events on Jan 6th.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> People have been tried and convicted for a more serious charge than
>>>>>>>>>>>> insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe it was more serious, maybe it wasn't.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is no "maybe" about it. Seditious conspiracy carries a maximum
>>>>>>>>>> prison term of 20 years;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Great. Now all you have to do is show were Trump was convicted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't have to show that, scooter. Conviction is not required for 14.3
>>>>>>>> disqualification, scooter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You assert he committed a crime
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, scooter. In fact, he *did* engage in many crimes, not all of them
>>>>>> connected to the insurrection. These are the crimes addressed in the four
>>>>>> federal indictments for election interference. For example, coordinating the
>>>>>> submission of slates of *fake* electors is a crime, but not connected to the
>>>>>> insurrection. Directing the DoJ to send a letter to states falsely saying
>>>>>> that DoJ had found massive "fraud" also is a crime not connected to the
>>>>>> insurrection.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cite the convictions for these alleged crimes.
>>>>
>>>> They're still to come, scooter. His trial is on hold pending the appellate court
>>>> chucking out his absurd "immunity" claim. He'll be convicted on some of the
>>>> counts, too.
>>>
>>> We've been hearing that for about 8 years now
>>
>> You've been hearing it for less than six months, scooter. The indictments were
>> handed down last August.
>>
>> You always lie, scooter, and you always get caught.
>
> 8 years

No.

In article <uorbgb$1rsah$7@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
says...
>
> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad:
>
> > On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
> >>
>
> >> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
> >
> > Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
> >
> > You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?
> >
> >
>
> If the writers of the 14th had intended for criminal trials they would have
> use the word "convicted" - they didn't.

He's still on the ballot.

On 1/24/2024 7:44 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <oO9sN.53939$5Hnd.13090@fx03.iad>, banmilk@hotmail.com
> says...
>>
>> On 1/24/2024 5:39 AM, scooter lied:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:QkVrN.44861$Iswd.15909@fx05.iad...
>>>> On 1/23/2024 9:59 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:dfSrN.44069$SyNd.750@fx33.iad...
>>>>>> On 1/23/2024 5:01 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:v4CrN.221412$Ama9.199601@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:43 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:XywrN.295239$xHn7.129338@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:38:23 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote in news:uojmva$aia3$3@dont-
>>>>>>>>>>>> email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh?  How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3.  I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mere accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       -WBE  [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's
>>>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate those charges.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A civil court can not determine if someone committed a crime.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver conducted a
>>>>>>>>>>>> trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through incitement."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted?  A trial without
>>>>>>>>>>>> charges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or arrest?  Wow, what is it you advocate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office even though
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they were never convicted and in fact had been pardoned.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stupidity limit reached.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ===============
>>>>>>>>>>>> At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be
>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Eight is significantly less than "tens of thousands" for sure.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eight is the number who were formally adjudicated to be disqualified.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Great, now all you have to do is show us were Trump is one of those eight.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No one said he was before now, scooter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excellent, so
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump engaged in insurrection,
>>>>>
>>>>> Excellent and since that is a crime
>>>>
>>>> It's also an event, scooter.
>>>>
>>>> You're funny, scooter, in addition to being a knuckle-dragging fuckwit. You keep
>>>> trying the same gags, over and over, after they've already failed.
>>>
>>> events don't disqualify you
>>
>> Participation in an insurrection event after swearing an oath to defend the
>> Constitution disqualifies you, scooter.
>
> But he didn't.

On 1/24/2024 8:04 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <uorbgb$1rsah$7@dont-email.me>, bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com
> says...
>>
>> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad:
>>
>>> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>
>>
>>>> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>>>
>>> Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
>>>
>>> You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> If the writers of the 14th had intended for criminal trials they would have
>> use the word "convicted" - they didn't.
>
> He's still on the ballot.

Not in Colorado and Maine he isn't.

On 1/24/2024 5:42 AM, pothead wrote:
> On 2024-01-24, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 21:42:53 -0000 (UTC), George Busche <gbusche@trump.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When an election is closed, it's over. Vote counting stops. That's
>>> what they do with military personnel.
>>>
>>> That is not what happened. Using COVID as an excuse, Democrats
>>> continued counting votes until Biden/Harris "won".
>>
>> Vote counting does NOT stop when the polls close. Vote counting stops when all legally
>> cast votes have been counted. If that means Wednesday morning counting of remote, late
>> reporting precincts, so be it.
>>
>> Swill
>> --
>
> Of course but that's not what is questionable which is the patterns of voting when compared to all
> the data that has been collected from previous elections.
> Of course demographics change, patterns change but it's usually only slightly and happens to all
> candidates pretty much equally.
> There are so many questionable items during the 2020 election which is why only 62% believe the
> election was fair.

Because Trump has spread lies that far too many of his supporters have
swallowed. As Bill Barr said, it's all bullshit.

On 1/24/2024 5:42 AM, pothead wrote:
> On 2024-01-24, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 21:42:53 -0000 (UTC), George Busche <gbusche@trump.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When an election is closed, it's over. Vote counting stops. That's
>>> what they do with military personnel.
>>>
>>> That is not what happened. Using COVID as an excuse, Democrats
>>> continued counting votes until Biden/Harris "won".
>>
>> Vote counting does NOT stop when the polls close. Vote counting stops when all legally
>> cast votes have been counted. If that means Wednesday morning counting of remote, late
>> reporting precincts, so be it.
>>
>> Swill
>> --
>
> There are so many questionable items during the 2020 election

There are no legitimately questionable things about the election. There are only
extremist lying Trumpswabs like you saying there are, but there's nothing real.
You are lying about "questionable items." You've been fed lies, and now you're
spewing them. They are lies.

"Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:uoraqk$1rsah$3@dont-email.me...
> Phat Phani <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote in
> news:20240123.221406.fafc9014@erienetworks.net:
>
>> In <zXWrN.118351$q3F7.74367@fx45.iad> Rudy Canoza
>> <mike.am.surreal@earthlink.nut> wrote:>
>
>>> The vast majority of legal scholars, and all of the good ones, say
>> the
>>> presidency is a covered office, Francis.
>>
>> "legal scholars" in this case are just left-wing activist assholes
>> trying to subvert a national election.
>>
> Oh! The Federalist Society is "left-wing activist assholes"?!!

Not usually, but there are always a few from an opposing view.
Then consider what they say, and what is reported they are saying can be
critically different.

I will simply note that it is a standard of our jurisprudence that we do
not limit or restrict people about asserted crimes as if they were guilty
until a conviction is obtained in a criminal court of law.

As such the 14th's restrictions would therefore need to be the result of
criminal convictions of such crimes.. not merely the political accusations
of such.

Particularly when they are asserted years afterwards from events in which
not a SINGLE individual was ever charged much less convicted of committing
the crime in question.

You must have to establish that the crime actually occurred before you can
impose any penalties.

Further I would note that in this case Mr. Trump has not even been legally
charged by a grand jury for such a crime, much less having indictment of
such even filed.

No, you are attempting to pervert and twist the law to suit a private
political agenda.... and that's not what the law is for.

>
> all 4 of tRump's SCOTUS judges are Federalist Society.
>
> Quit sucking tRump's arsehole.
> ============
> Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6
>
> Two law professors active in the Federalist Society wrote that the
> original meaning of the 14th Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to
> hold government office.
>
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/10/us/trump-jan-6-insurrection-
> conservatives.html
> =============

"Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bO9sN.53928$5Hnd.5817@fx03.iad...
> On 1/24/2024 5:33 AM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:_kVrN.44867$Iswd.30831@fx05.iad...
>>> On 1/23/2024 9:54 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:5fSrN.44060$SyNd.20161@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 1/23/2024 4:36 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:u4CrN.221411$Ama9.213342@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:23 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:ezwrN.295268$xHn7.113462@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:47 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "NoBody" <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:sfgqqilvl3rij61l4afqlvvf7pdun7jahp@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:52:50 -0000 (UTC), Baxter
>>>>>>>>>>> <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody <NoBody@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:epqnqi5b5n5duvovfirmifl7v3aje6e8ud@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh? How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3. I saw nothing in there that I would
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interpret as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mere accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -WBE [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation. There
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate those
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charges.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A civil court can not determine if someone committed a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crime.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver conducted
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a trial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2021
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through incitement."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When was he criminally charged and convicted? A trial without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> charges
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or arrest? Wow, what is it you advocate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tens of thousands of Confederates were barred from office even
>>>>>>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>>>>>>> they were never convicted and in fact had been pardoned.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Who were these "tens of thousands"?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and which court stated they were barred from office without a
>>>>>>>>>> conviction
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> None — the people petitioning for removal of disability already
>>>>>>>>> knew they were disqualified, scooter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes. They were southern traitors who were former officeholders who
>>>>>>> had sworn an oath to support the constitution, and they knew they
>>>>>>> were disqualified.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just because you "know" something doesn't make it true.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I know are facts.
>>>>
>>>> And yet,
>>>
>>> Another scooterism: empty wheeze that adds nothing.
>>
>> Another Rudyism:
>
> Nope.

Rudy denies the truth.

"Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nO9sN.53938$5Hnd.28147@fx03.iad...
> On 1/24/2024 5:42 AM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:GkVrN.44860$Iswd.8200@fx05.iad...
>>> On 1/23/2024 10:00 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:dfSrN.44068$SyNd.13328@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 1/23/2024 5:03 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:p4CrN.221406$Ama9.13528@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:47 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:9zwrN.295260$xHn7.235573@fx14.iad...
>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 4:27 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:5eTqN.116701$q3F7.94114@fx45.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/20/2024 4:50 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:f6HqN.211867$Ama9.108404@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:50 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh? How so?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3. I saw nothing in there that I would interpret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -WBE [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There was a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's decision
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is subject
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to judicial review.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump was tried in Colorado for an insurrection that happened
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in DC?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, idiot. Trump was not tried. A civil suit, pursuant to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Colorado law, was filed in Colorado to keep him off the ballot
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in that state, pursuant to 14.3. The Colorado court
>>>>>>>>>>>>> meticulously reviewed what constitutes insurrection and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> engagement in one, and concluded that the event of 01/06/2021
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was an insurrection and that Trump engaged in it. Trump was
>>>>>>>>>>>>> not on trial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Further I would note that NO INDIVIDUAL has EVER been charged
>>>>>>>>>>>> with Insurrection for the events on Jan 6th.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> People have been tried and convicted for a more serious charge
>>>>>>>>>>> than insurrection.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Maybe it was more serious, maybe it wasn't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is no "maybe" about it. Seditious conspiracy carries a
>>>>>>>>> maximum prison term of 20 years;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Great. Now all you have to do is show were Trump was convicted.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't have to show that, scooter. Conviction is not required for
>>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification, scooter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You assert he committed a crime
>>>>>
>>>>> No, scooter. In fact, he *did* engage in many crimes, not all of them
>>>>> connected to the insurrection. These are the crimes addressed in the
>>>>> four federal indictments for election interference. For example,
>>>>> coordinating the submission of slates of *fake* electors is a crime,
>>>>> but not connected to the insurrection. Directing the DoJ to send a
>>>>> letter to states falsely saying that DoJ had found massive "fraud"
>>>>> also is a crime not connected to the insurrection.
>>>>
>>>> Cite the convictions for these alleged crimes.
>>>
>>> They're still to come, scooter. His trial is on hold pending the
>>> appellate court chucking out his absurd "immunity" claim. He'll be
>>> convicted on some of the counts, too.
>>
>> We've been hearing that for about 8 years now
>
> You've been hearing it for less than six months

Is that the length of your memory? I remember accusations being made even
before he was elected...

"Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aO9sN.53927$5Hnd.36079@fx03.iad...
> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:ZkVrN.44866$Iswd.5404@fx05.iad...
>>> On 1/23/2024 9:54 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:4fSrN.44059$SyNd.36303@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 1/23/2024 4:38 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:t4CrN.221410$Ama9.131673@fx12.iad...
>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:31 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Winston" <wbe@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:ydede9tldd.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com...
>>>>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:uojin6$8j9n$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>> Where in 14.3 does it say anything about convicted or even
>>>>>>>>>>> indicted?
>>>>>>>>>>> Show us the exact quote.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>> 5th Amendment.
>>>>>>>>>> We don't restrict your liberties without a criminal trial.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Technically, since the 14th was passed after the 5th, its wording
>>>>>>>>> prevails, just like the 21st repealed the 18th (prohibition).
>>>>>>>>> -WBE
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only if it specifically supersedes the language that exists.
>>>>>>>> Nothing in the 14th sec 3 does supersedes the need to have such
>>>>>>>> disqualifications due to a finding in a criminal case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A criminal conviction is not required for 14.3, scooter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Says who? You?
>>>>>
>>>>> Says the amendment, scooter.
>>>>
>>>> Cite the text that says what you assert.
>>>
>>> It's what is *not* in the text,
>>
>> You lied then.
>
> No.

.....and you're lying now.

"Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad...
> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>
>>
>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:VkVrN.44865$Iswd.21381@fx05.iad...
>>> On 1/23/2024 9:55 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Wilson Woods" <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:hfSrN.44073$SyNd.13643@fx33.iad...
>>>>> On 1/23/2024 4:44 AM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:uomt6t$ubd2$4@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:t4CrN.221410$Ama9.131673@fx12.iad:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/22/2024 12:31 PM, scooter lied:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Winston" <wbe@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:ydede9tldd.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com...
>>>>>>>>>> "Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:uojin6$8j9n$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Where in 14.3 does it say anything about convicted or even
>>>>>>>>>>>> indicted? Show us the exact quote.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>> 5th Amendment.
>>>>>>>>>>> We don't restrict your liberties without a criminal trial.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Technically, since the 14th was passed after the 5th, its wording
>>>>>>>>>> prevails, just like the 21st repealed the 18th (prohibition).
>>>>>>>>>> -WBE
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Only if it specifically supersedes the language that exists.
>>>>>>>>> Nothing
>>>>>>>>> in the 14th sec 3 does supersedes the need to have such
>>>>>>>>> disqualifications due to a finding in a criminal case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A criminal conviction is not required for 14.3, scooter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The writers of the 14th Amendment did not use the word "convicted".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They didn't have to. the 5th and 6th
>>>>>
>>>>> Inapplicable, scooter. Those pertain to criminal cases. 14.3 is not
>>>>> about criminal behavior.
>>>>
>>>> So Insurrection isn't a crime?
>>>
>>> It is a crime, scooter.
>>
>> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>
> Not needed,

Actually the law does require a conviction. It's the very basis of our
entire jurisprudence..

Meanwhile I will note that Trump doesn't even an indictment for such a
crime, much less a conviction.

"Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:uorbgb$1rsah$7@dont-email.me...
> Wilson Woods <banmilk@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:7O9sN.53926$5Hnd.21588@fx03.iad:
>
>> On 1/24/2024 5:34 AM, scooter lied:
>>>
>
>>> And there has been no criminal trial convicting him of it.
>>
>> Not needed, scooter. 14.3 is purely a civil matter.
>>
>> You keep trying the same failed gag, scooter. Why is that?
>>
>>
>
> If the writers of the 14th had intended for criminal trials they would
> have
> use the word "convicted" - they didn't.

Wasn't needed.. already considered and addressed by the 5th Amendment.

It would fall under the general category of "liberties". Ever wonder why a
felon can't run for election?

Because of the 5th.

Insurrections and aid of insurrection are federal crimes.
If it had occurred.. why was he never convicted?
If it had occurred.. why was no one ever convicted?
What legal action can you point to that such a crime was even committed on
Jan 6th?

Sorry, but they don't have to say it because "innocent until proven guilty"
is a corner stone of our entire legal system.

You've not proven guilty, you have merely asserted it. We don't penalize
people because idiots assert they committed a crime.

"Baxter" <bax02_spamblock@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:uojitv$8j9n$3@dont-email.me...
> Josh Rosenbluth <noway@nowhere.com> wrote in
> news:uojhci$86i3$4@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 1/20/2024 11:41 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 17:25:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/19/2024 5:16 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 09:20:26 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/19/2024 4:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 18:09:53 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:39 AM, Winston wrote:
>>>>>>>>> OrigInfoJunkie <bondrock@att.net> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> {snip}
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> He doesn't have to be charged and convicted in order to be
>>>>>>>>>> disqualified under 14.3.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh? How so?
>>>>>>>>> I read 14.3. I saw nothing in there that I would interpret as
>>>>>>>>> mere accusation being sufficient.
>>>>>>>>> -WBE [IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump has not been disqualified based on a mere accusation.
>>>>>>>> There was a trial in Colorado and Maine's secretary of state's
>>>>>>>> decision is subject to judicial review.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There has been no criminal trail held to evaluate those charges.
>>>>>>> A civil court can not determine if someone committed a crime.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 14.3 disqualification isn't a criminal punishment.
>>>>>
>>>>> No court of any kind has proved he's guilty of insurrection.
>>>>
>>>> The District Court of the City and County of Denver conducted a
>>>> trial and held that "Trump engaged in an insurrection on January 6,
>>>> 2021 through incitement."
>>>
>>> Was he indicted? Was he booked? Did he attend? Face his accusers?
>>> Was he represented by counsel who argued his case for him.
>>>
>>> Unless all these criteria were met, said trial was a kangaroo court,
>>> irrelevant and powerless.
>>
>> A civil trial requires no indictment nor booking. He had the right to
>> attend, although I don't think he did (his choice). He was represented
>> by counsel who argued the case, called their own witnesses, and
>> cross-examined witnesses who testified against Trump.
>>
>>
>
> Nowhere in the 14th amandment section 3 does it say anything about
> conviction or even indictment.
>
> Historially, none of the Confederates barred from office were tried for
> insurrection.

Were they bared, or was it merely assumed they were?

Assumption is not a basis for law.