Maritime law is in tatters and none of the maroons know or care what is right anymore. Right now, mob rule democracy is in full view for all to see and understand this pause is showing the people what's what-wake up sleepers!!
They must demonstrate 5he absurd in the most contrasting way. We are ruled by idiots. They don't know how. All they can do is play games and write indictments. their real talent is threats that make people capitulate to lesser false charges. They don't defend truth, they manufacture lies. That is their devious skill. Railroading the innocent.
God Bless President Donald Trump, his wife, family, legal team, friends, Q followers, most of all his security team and their families too, God Bless America, missing children and you the reader Too.🙏
Yeah...I was more referring to how this will end up in the courts, most likely as a failure to keep Trump off any state tickets. I take your point, though.
When considering these amendments through time, it is very noticeable how the quality is decreasing to the point where prohibition was instituted and removed.
The amendments are not to clarify what the people are not supposed to do, but to restrain the government from interfering in Reserved Rights! (See also 18 USC 241/242
These Judges and law clerks couldn't find their butts in a dark closet. You expect them to find the law? They will only do what their masters tell them to do. How many disgusting pictures of these judges are being hung over their heads as blackmail?
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
‘...subject to jurisdiction of...’ means no allegiance nor citizenship of any other nation. Children born to parents with citizenship of other nations are citizens of the parents nation, not the USA, even if the spawn was dropped on USA soil.
This is a horrendous interpretation that has prevailed much too long and must be rectified immediately.
It's going to come down to the Supreme Court deciding if the President is covered in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The argument has already been made that the President and Vice President are Officers, who are included. It's just a matter of the SC ruling it that way.
That clause is all sorts of fuckled up, language wise. Whoever wrote it was a hack.
We need to remember that the Supreme Court doesn't just look at what the Amendment says verbatim. They take in the intent of what was written. The argument is going to be that obviously the President and Vice President of the US would be barred from running for office again if they participated in an insurrection against the US. Why would they not be? So yeah, the intent of the Amendment is called into question, and the SC is going to have to decide if POTUS and VPOTUS are included. I would be very surprised if they voted against them being included. And I agree with that because I wouldn't want to leave that door open in the future, to another POTUS or VPOTUS that was accused of insurrection.
But I think that the SC will rule that the person needs to be more than just accused of insurrection. They'll need to be charged and found guilty of it for the 14th Amendment to apply to them.
Officers are not elected - they are appointed. That is the difference.
An Officer works for the state. They can be accused of insurrection if they act against that state, or are plotting against their president or whatever.
An elected offiicial, such as the president, is SUPPOSED to work for the people. In theory, the people voted for him. So, such a person cannot be accused of insurrection, because his office represents the will of the people. It's a logical impossibility to then say such a person is conducting an insurrection. How dare he represent the people? It raises Q -uestions. Like: who is accusing 'insurrection'? Why? Whose butt are they covering?
The entire election process and everything that transpired was an insurrection, against Trump. He has always been the victim of this insurrection. That is why he keeps going back to the specific words he used at the end of his speech. There are certain things that he had to do, like ask those revolting, to go away peacefully. I think that would be all the fake maga people, crisis actors, FBI, etc. I think those remarks were a legal lever to use. Boomerang!!
makes you wonder why a fucking JUDGE and ALL THE FUCKING CLERKS couldn't look this shit up
its almost like
THE ENTIRE FUCKING JUDICIAL SYSTEM HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATES AS BROKEN
hmm
guess it's tribunal time?
Maritime law is in tatters and none of the maroons know or care what is right anymore. Right now, mob rule democracy is in full view for all to see and understand this pause is showing the people what's what-wake up sleepers!!
How can the POTUS engage in insurrection against "the gov't"... when POTUS is the executive branch of the gov't?
You can't engage in insurrection against yourself.
DEI
DIE*
fixed it
They must demonstrate 5he absurd in the most contrasting way. We are ruled by idiots. They don't know how. All they can do is play games and write indictments. their real talent is threats that make people capitulate to lesser false charges. They don't defend truth, they manufacture lies. That is their devious skill. Railroading the innocent.
God Bless President Donald Trump, his wife, family, legal team, friends, Q followers, most of all his security team and their families too, God Bless America, missing children and you the reader Too.🙏
The loonies like a pack of hyenas in comments on this story. Reeeeeeeeeeee
Well that seems to settle the matter.
Now, now, banjoman, we need to wait to see the reaction from the left and how the interpret this idea. Patience is necessary for a week or two.
Yeah...I was more referring to how this will end up in the courts, most likely as a failure to keep Trump off any state tickets. I take your point, though.
Since when do they follow the law?
I'm pretty sure the 14th amendment is liberal fake law
Actually I think all of them are, except the first two, which apply only to conservatives
1-12 and the original 13th ...
When considering these amendments through time, it is very noticeable how the quality is decreasing to the point where prohibition was instituted and removed.
The amendments are not to clarify what the people are not supposed to do, but to restrain the government from interfering in Reserved Rights! (See also 18 USC 241/242
😆
These Judges and law clerks couldn't find their butts in a dark closet. You expect them to find the law? They will only do what their masters tell them to do. How many disgusting pictures of these judges are being hung over their heads as blackmail?
They prefer to find the butts of congressional interns in dark closets.
ugh. Imagine the smell.
14th amendment only exist in the fraudulent corporate constitution.
A most currently relevant aspect of the 14th is:
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
‘...subject to jurisdiction of...’ means no allegiance nor citizenship of any other nation. Children born to parents with citizenship of other nations are citizens of the parents nation, not the USA, even if the spawn was dropped on USA soil.
This is a horrendous interpretation that has prevailed much too long and must be rectified immediately.
Oh poor Pelosi and Waters...
It seems that they are in for it!
It's going to come down to the Supreme Court deciding if the President is covered in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The argument has already been made that the President and Vice President are Officers, who are included. It's just a matter of the SC ruling it that way.
That clause is all sorts of fuckled up, language wise. Whoever wrote it was a hack.
We need to remember that the Supreme Court doesn't just look at what the Amendment says verbatim. They take in the intent of what was written. The argument is going to be that obviously the President and Vice President of the US would be barred from running for office again if they participated in an insurrection against the US. Why would they not be? So yeah, the intent of the Amendment is called into question, and the SC is going to have to decide if POTUS and VPOTUS are included. I would be very surprised if they voted against them being included. And I agree with that because I wouldn't want to leave that door open in the future, to another POTUS or VPOTUS that was accused of insurrection.
But I think that the SC will rule that the person needs to be more than just accused of insurrection. They'll need to be charged and found guilty of it for the 14th Amendment to apply to them.
And yet it has been screeched into my figurative ears that "officer includes elected official because it's holding an office!"
Officers are not elected - they are appointed. That is the difference.
An Officer works for the state. They can be accused of insurrection if they act against that state, or are plotting against their president or whatever.
An elected offiicial, such as the president, is SUPPOSED to work for the people. In theory, the people voted for him. So, such a person cannot be accused of insurrection, because his office represents the will of the people. It's a logical impossibility to then say such a person is conducting an insurrection. How dare he represent the people? It raises Q -uestions. Like: who is accusing 'insurrection'? Why? Whose butt are they covering?
Ruh-roh
The entire election process and everything that transpired was an insurrection, against Trump. He has always been the victim of this insurrection. That is why he keeps going back to the specific words he used at the end of his speech. There are certain things that he had to do, like ask those revolting, to go away peacefully. I think that would be all the fake maga people, crisis actors, FBI, etc. I think those remarks were a legal lever to use. Boomerang!!
Boomerang 14th will be used on them. Everything they hurl at Trump Boomerangs back to hit them.