• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Not an insurrection? The State of New Mexico disagrees.

Conviction of that crime would be another restriction to office.

Congress may not overturn any criminal conviction. You continue to ignore the states supremacy on federal elections.

It wouldn't be another restriction to office - it's one and the same as the one authorized by the 14th Amendment. Remember, the Constitution isn't self-executing.

States do not have "supremacy" on Federal elections... if they did, then Congress would not have the power to "at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations...", would they?
 
I am merely one of millions of Americans who are completely certain that DT caused the insurrection. The whole world saw it. They weren't doing it for Hunter Biden.

Jack Smith would have to prove it to the unanimous satisfaction of a jury. He's already got plenty he can prove to put DT away. It is possible that one prejudiced juror could slip past jury selection and stand between such charges and a guilty verdict. Prosecutors prefer to bring charges they feel very confident in winning a guilty verdict. It is easily understandable why Smith brought the charges he did, the ones he felt the most confident in being able to prove.

The 14th does not require that level of proof. There is no requirement that it be proven at all, much less in a court of law.

We millions of Americans are certain DT incited the insurrection because we paid attention to the J6 Committee hearings. The evidence they presented is overwhelmingly in support of DT having caused the insurrection:

1. He improperly cast doubt on the security of the election in the months leading up to it, knowing that he was trailing in the polls. That set the stage for the lie that the election 'was fraudulent,' even though every precaution had been taken to ensure a secure election, and one of DT's campaign team even acknowledged that the 2020 election was the most secure in history. It had been scrutinized up one side and down the other over months of anticipation and preparation for the highest election security possible amid DT's unsupported claims of doubt.

2. He refused to acknowledge he would participate in a peaceful transition of power. He refused to acknowledge there might even be a transfer of power.

3. He refused to acknowledge that he lost the 2020 election. Instead, he claimed it was stolen. His followers, who hang on his every word, believed they were 'saving America' by believing his lies because he told them incorrectly if they didn't prevent the certification "they would not have a country any more."

4. He undertook at least 7 different efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The insurrection was the final most desperate resort after all the others failed.

5. He called the crowd to a rally saying: "It will be wild," at the Ellipse where he had a permit to hold a rally. He wanted the magnetometers removed from the gates but the SS refused to do it. Some of the crowd stayed outside because of the mags. He knew the crowd was armed. People nearby had been spotted with weapons.

6. His incendiary speech at the Ellipse whipped the crowd into a pissed-off frenzy.

7. He illegally sent the known armed crowd to the Capitol, even though he had no permit to have them assemble there.

8. He fought with SS agents in the car after they refused to take him to the Capitol.

9. He sent a tweet down-talking Pence during the insurrection, further endangering the VP, who narrowly escaped the angry crowd.

10. He resisted repeated efforts to get him to send the mob home. Instead, he sat there doing nothing but watching it unfold on TV for hours.

Anybody who paid attention to the Bipartisan J6 Committee hearings knows all of this. That is why DT is ineligible to hold any office in the USA under the 14th Amendment. There is no requirement in the 14th for anything to be proven in a court of law.

11. Every one of his followers who has been tried in connection with the J6 insurrection has either plead guilty or been judged guilty, including the Proud Boys who certainly did not stand back nor stand by.

DT is ineligible to hold any office in the United States. The 14th Amendment prevents him.
We millions of Americans disagree with you. Not only was Jan 6th Not an insurrection but this a conspiracy of entrenched govt employees/unelected officials trying to incite an insurrection by un-American conduct and illegal misuse of offices and public funds.
 
It wouldn't be another restriction to office - it's one and the same as the one authorized by the 14th Amendment. Remember, the Constitution isn't self-executing.

States do not have "supremacy" on Federal elections... if they did, then Congress would not have the power to "at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations...", would they?
They have the ability to make laws on the time place and manner. The same way they can make laws about free speech and freedom of religion.

What is the federal involvement in federal elections? Date? No, that's in the Constitution. Hours?
 
They have the ability to make laws on the time place and manner. The same way they can make laws about free speech and freedom of religion.

What is the federal involvement in federal elections? Date? No, that's in the Constitution. Hours?

Would Congress be acting appropriately in compelling the removal of a candidate for federal office convicted of insurrection from a State ballot?
 
Would Congress be acting appropriately in compelling the removal of a candidate for federal office convicted of insurrection from a State ballot?
No. States have that power. Congress would if they were to pass a law spelling that out.
 
Back
Top Bottom