Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

FCC reinstates net neutrality policies after 6 years. Did you miss it?
Computers by Curt_Anderson     May 4, 2024 2:35 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [51 views]

People who say they are voting for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are probably low-information voters.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     May 3, 2024 9:58 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (8 comments) [132 views]

New poll reveals demographic voter shifts. Biden leads Trump, especially among "definitely voting" voters.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     May 2, 2024 11:04 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (9 comments) [243 views]

The pro-Palestinian campus protests are not very well thought out.
Opinion by Curt_Anderson     May 1, 2024 10:21 am (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: oldedude (14 comments) [285 views]

Our President speaks about college unrest
President by HatetheSwamp     May 2, 2024 9:32 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (2 comments) [33 views]

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (36 comments) [1547 views]

Professor who correctly predicted 9 presidential elections weighs in on Biden vs. Trump
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 30, 2024 9:33 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (3 comments) [52 views]

Baha. Pro-Israel and Pro-Palestine protesters join in chanting "Eff Joe Biden!"
Politics by HatetheSwamp     May 2, 2024 3:34 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [22 views]

Trump court situation must be REALLY boring
Soap Opera by Indy!     May 1, 2024 2:08 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (4 comments) [77 views]

The WA GOP put it in writing that they’re not into democracy
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 30, 2024 8:55 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (13 comments) [290 views]

Law selectors, pages, etc.
Guess who isn't blowing off the legal argument for invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?
By Curt_Anderson
September 11, 2023 4:56 pm
Category: Law

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Trump and his lawyers seem to taking it seriously enough that they are going to great legal lengths to stop it in its tracks.

Trump asks to move 14th Amendment case against him to federal court
Former President Donald Trump on Friday asked to have the case to bar him from the Colorado ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment be moved from state court to federal court.

In the notice of removal, it says "there is an urgent public interest in promptly resolving whether Trump is constitutionally eligible to serve as president in advance of the approaching primary election."

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold's office responded to Trump's filing, saying that state courts were "well suited" to answer 14th Amendment questions and that the office is "exploring legal options."

Cited and related links:

  1. abcnews.go.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Guess who isn't blowing off the legal argument for invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?":

  1. by oldedude on September 11, 2023 8:09 pm
    Obviously, this is of great concern to you. I'm calling you on your shit. Put out those that are doing this. Put up or STFU. It's easy. You're drilling to find anything you can, and haven't found anything. So lay out the LEGAL ARGUEMENT and cite. That's all I ask. Remember, CITE.

  2. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 3:53 am

    Of course.

    As pb's Legal Goober #1 and Megyn Kelly, who's a lawyer agree, if any state tries it, it'll go to the Supreme Court.

    What amazes me is that you woke, white electric limousine lovin TDSers don't care about the precedent that'll be set if any of your stunts work out.
    selectsmart.com

  3. by Curt_Anderson on September 12, 2023 8:22 am
    HtS,
    It would not be a precedent if the 14th were applied to Donald Trump. Besides the Confederates kept off ballots 150 years ago, insurrectionist Couy Griffin was disqualified in New Mexico from holding elective office. See link.

    apnews.com

  4. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 8:26 am

    Did you see how my Legal Goober #1 argues that the Doddering Old Fool could be kept off ballots for leading an insurrection!!!!!?

    Clearly, insurrection is in the eye of the beholder. Keehee baha, ahhhhhhhhhhh.

  5. by Ponderer on September 12, 2023 9:16 am

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is extremely clear about it, Bill. By virtue of his rebellious and insurrectionist behavior towards the government, Trump is not eligible to be president of the United States.

    "there is an urgent public interest in promptly resolving whether Trump is constitutionally eligible to serve as president in advance of the approaching primary election."

    He needs to be careful about what he wishes for.


    Bill, could you explain for us why you think that his attempted coup against the government shouldn't disqualify him based on the 14th Amendment?



    (That should be a very simple question for him to answer, but he will bring up beaten wives or some such nonsense to excuse his refusal to answer.)

  6. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 9:22 am

    Bill, could you explain for us why you think that his attempted coup against the government shouldn't disqualify him based on the 14th Amendment?

    Uh...

    ...because that didn't happen?

  7. by Ponderer on September 12, 2023 9:31 am

    Okay. So you assert that Trump's insurrectionist actions never took place? Okay. Fine.

    And I will bet that you think you used reason and logic to arrive at that conclusion. Instead of your heart and your emotions completely and entirely.

  8. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 9:36 am

    po,

    Trump is despicable but on J6 he instructed the rally attenders to "march peacefully and patriotically" to the Capitol.

    That ain't insurrection talk!
     View Video

  9. by Ponderer on September 12, 2023 10:50 am

    "Trump is despicable but on J6 he instructed the rally attenders to "march peacefully and patriotically" to the Capitol.

    That ain't insurrection talk!"     -Hate


    I just think that it is absolutely adorable for you (by way of your overwhelming "reason and logic" mind you) to have focused on that one single sentence in an hour long speech as somehow negating the volumes of actual insurrection incitement talk aimed at the government that he spewed throughout the rest of the speech. A speech, wherein he instructed already riled up individuals who he knew to be armed, to march on the Capitol and to "fight like hell", or they "won't have a country left". Explain how that is supposed to be interpreted as "peaceful", non-insurrectionist talk.

    You're about as rational and logical as an fanatical Flat-Earther with dementia, Bill. It's rather obvious that he threw that "peaceful and patriotic" line in there to hopefully give him some cover and so pig-ignorant Trump devotees such as yourself would focus on it. I'll even bet that throwing that line in there made it a "perfect speech" in his mind.

    Ya got nuthin', Bill. Other than Trump's hook, line, and sinker you have lodged deep in your guts that is.


  10. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 11:04 am

    po,

    I possess the honesty and integrity to acknowledge that all of us bring our preferences and prejudices to every moment of our lives. You?

    Trump is despicable. But, if Trump's an insurrectionist then, as pb's Legal Goober #1 points out, so is "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap."

  11. by Ponderer on September 12, 2023 11:47 am

    "I possess the honesty and integrity to acknowledge that all of us bring our preferences and prejudices to every moment of our lives. You?" -Hate


    Sure. But there's a big difference between bringing preferences and prejudices to certain issues and making them into the foundation of a cult like you do whenever Trump is involved.


  12. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 11:59 am

    Really?

    What's the difference?

  13. by Ponderer on September 12, 2023 1:37 pm

    You know, the more I'm hearing about this, the more I CAN'T FREAKING WAIT!

    This eventual dumpster fire is going to make that asinine joke of a circus Jim Jordan has been ring-mastering look like the Nuremberg Trials.

    Seriously, Bill. How can we put something down on this?


    How about this:

    If this inquiry DOES NOT uncover any actionable crime that Joe Biden has at some point committed, you will go on Etsy and buy a Hummy Wand.


  14. by HatetheSwamp on September 12, 2023 2:01 pm

    Crime?

    Impeachment ain't criminal, po. It's 100% SwampPolitcs.

    But, po? Having some sense of where you look for your, uh, "news," I'd love to know what you're hearing. Love, love, love to.

  15. by Ponderer on September 13, 2023 9:23 am

    "Crime?

    Impeachment ain't criminal, po."     -Hate


    But impeachment can certainly expose crimes. Just as the two impeachments Trump did.

    In spades.

Go To Top

Comment on: "Guess who isn't blowing off the legal argument for invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page