Trump barred from being President of Colorado.

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/...-why-it-plainly-applies-to-trump-200681029617

Very informative.

 

Just trying to get to a place where I can communicate with you.

 

The only ones who DO believe it about Joe Biden are completely biased.

 

Let's analyze this sentence. The answer is quit obvious. My charge is based on fact......it is! Your charge is based on appearance.....look/see.

You just don't take over half a Nations desire to vote for a specific candidate and toss it to the wind based on an appearance. Especially when a great many don't hold to that appearance!

 

Your charge is based on your RW view of the world. It is in no way objective.

1. Was 1/6 an insurrection? Yes...by every definition of the word. You don't like that so you try to claim it wasn't. That is not reality
2. Did 1/6 happen at the behest of Trump? Yes...again just an objective fact. Every politician speaking out on 1/6 (including the Republicans) laid the blame for what happened right at the feet of Trump.

The only two questions now remaining

1. Is clause 3 of the 14th Amendment self executing? In other words does any other action need to be taken by a court or by the legislature to invoke clause 3? I would say no.
2. Does clause 3 include the President of the United States? That's a trickier question. I would say yes, but that is just my opinion. It is an opinion I would hold regardless of the party of the candidate involved.

 

Sarcasm is not a trait right-wingers are very apt for. This is why so few right-wing comedy shows ever make it.

 

Oh, I'll be the first to commend the quality of Mexican workers! I was greatly relieved the last time I had a top-tier roofing company in Denver re-do my roof and saw that all of the workers were Mexican (or Latino). I enjoyed exchanging pleasantries with them in the "Norteño Tex-Mex" language they all speak. Besides, what were the alternatives? A gaggle of American Anglo twenty-somethings whose proficiency begins and ends with the ability to play with their smartphones? No thanks!

But, come on, when the U. S. took over nearly all the Southwest in 1845, and added the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, there was scarcely anything there but scattered Catholic missions, rancho-haciendas, and military garrisons!

Mexican-Americans were part of the general population of the United States, but were frequently kept out of contention for political office and mobility into the middle-class because of strong prejudice against anyone with a Spanish heritage. They were forced to live in run-down 'barrios' where a lack of economic opportunity, the local Anglo populations, and the Catholic Church kept them in a near-static poverty that they didn't begin to break out of until after World War II.

But to say that Mexicans or Mexican Americans "built ... almost the whole South West" is some of the most frankly ignorant revisionist twaddle I've ever read....

 

Other than during Roosevelts recovery work programs, when a lot of the modernization of the Southwest began; who do you think built it. Have you ever been to Albuquerque? The beautiful Adobe’s there have never been replicated anywhere else no matter how hard it’s been tried.

Southwest Mexican culture was far advanced before we ever got there. Other than the dubious addition of giant dams I don’t think we actually “improved” the area.

 

Biden will be prosecuted if Trump wins? I wouldn't be surprised. Trump will want revenge.

 

Sooo you have nothing but sarcasm to respond with and yet you label my arguments you are responding to as ridiculous. You have nothing relevant to reply with, and yet you keep replying.

 

Revenge in the form of applying the law to those who flout the law.

 

No. But I do tend to respond with sarcasm to dumb arguments. The thing is people who make the most ridiculous arguments appear to be the same as those that don't grasp sarcasm. Which, I HAVE to admit, actually makes it more fun. The fact is that "Trump said the word 'peacefully'. Therefore you must ignore everything else" pretty much SCREAMS for a sarcastic response.

 

You pontificate about 'worthiness' and then you engage in a tawdry debate tactic called 'posturing' ('do better next time')? As if that proves you are right?


Jimmy Carter was a neoliberal, which is a philosophy more common to the right than the left, and so was clinton.

There is no proof that 2020 was stolen.

You'll have to offer proof.

Until you can offer proof, you're debate 'worthiness' is of no consequence.

Trump is alleging that Democrats stole the election via internal methods, tampering with the ballot, etc.

The logistical nightmare required for one party to tamper with the national internal voting apparatus, by it's extremely decentralized design, requiring hiring of operatives and installed in place in at least a dozen key states, months in advance, keeping everyone under the radar, think about it, it is well nigh impossible task, which precludes any possibility of a party rigging the election internally. To accomplish it, it would require months of advance planning, the recruitment of both republicans and democrats (because each election district has both working there, many volunteering ) to cooperate in a vast conspiracy to rig the election for a DEMOCRAT. And, to do that, we would expect that they would be able to do it clandestinely, that the observers,both right and left, would be part of the conspiracy, and no one would leak, all with the threat of being caught and being sent to prison. And what is their gain? Not money. Why would anyone participate in an impossible scheme where they would surely get caught? That the beauty of the AMerican system, it's so big, each state with different systems, no one knows for sure ahead of time which of the few states will wind up being the swing states ( out of a dozen or more potential swing states, which is why they will need operatives in all of them, they don't know which ones in advance will be the actual swing states), it is absurd,

The more we scrutinize what would have to occur in order for a massive rigging to occur, the more absurd the idea becomes

And where are the whistleblowers? A cabal of this size would have a few of them, but there are none.

And is there any evidence of 'Democrats stole the election'?

Absolutely none.

 

So only Democrat judges are supporting this idiocy, but its not Democrats.
Got it

Since the SCOTUS already kicked this 14th amendment idiocy to the curb in October, how do you think they will rule this time. lol
Supreme Court declines to hear long-shot 14th Amendment challenge to disqualify Trump
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...14th-amendment-challenge-to-disqualify-trump/

 

The Ls solution to everything law is to close their eyes and throw darts at a target

 

Watching them do the same things over and over expecting a different result is adorable though

 

I'd go with predictable, and boring.. Right now the entire country Ls and Rs are numb to all this drama bullshit.

MSM is boring old reruns

 

Both you 1st 1 &2 are subjective. That is how YOU see it. I see it as a "spontaneous riot" for most and a chance to vent anger for several misguided souls spurred on by undercover F.B.I. for some. Anyway, they are paying the price. The weaponized FBI are not. We had similar riots the summer of that year that could also be viewed as insurrections.

Did you know that in spite of the 14th amendment there were several Confederates that served in the Federal Government? Guess it was determined ina "spirit of reconciliation" and that they were not a danger. Do you understand that if you continue to split hairs and assume your opinion is the right one, you could blow this country apart in a real insurrection? I firmly believe it will not happen but perhaps you'd be best to just let the citizenry decide if you are right and I am wrong.

 

never see Gutfeld? You are missing something. Those people actually laugh!

 

Labeling my argument below as "dumb" is as meaningless as your sarcasm. Its what you do when you have nothing of substance to respond with, which is most of the time.

 

We have a speech that lasted over an hour inciting an armed mob (Trump KNOWING they were armed). We have Trump's phone calls pressuring state officials, we know how he pressured people in Congress from their own testimony, we've seen his veiled (and sometimes not so veiled) threats... We have depostions under oath from his own staff. We have tapes, videos, and many speeches... To dismiss that he incited an insurrection because he said the word "peacefully", expecting people of average intelligence and above to forget everything else... is more than a "dumb argument" (reference to an argument... not a person). But the attempts of opening threads by several posters in this forum (including, but not limited to, myself) to explain what it REALLY is have been deemed incompatible with the forum's rules.

 

You have to learn how to use your computer.

 

I lived in New Mexico for five years! How many of the buildings in downtown Albuquerque do you think that the Spanish or Mexicans built before 1845? And, you may want to remember that the meager scattering of villages, haciendas, ranchos, missions, and army forts that the Spanish, and later, the Mexicans built in the Southwest were done with slave labor extracted from the same native Indian populations who built the pueblos you admire....

. "I dunno... it looks pretty "Anglo" to me...." --

 

Your proof the charge is political...?

Right--and why I asked, "Why would we rule based on what I see?"

Prosecutions shouldn't be based on "half a Nations desire," but instead on evidence.

 

Yes we heard all that crap. Did you hear the part about "go and demonstrate peacefully"? It is a contrast to what you imply. Why on earth would someone bent on insurrection even say that? Did it ever occur to you how easy it would be for the "opposition" to have "plants" to push an agitated crowd over the edge? Of course that wouldn't have happened if Pelosi had National Guard in place as Trump had offered. That would have dampened the plan. There is film that makes this idea all very conceivable, so the idea of a planned insurrection is ridiculous. You wouldn't go up against armed police without weapons anyway.....ask Ashli Babbit! Where were the arms? Besides Capitol Police, who fired weapons?