Maybe so, we'll see.Judge Eileen will clamp down on this nonsense.
The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
Where are you getting that "has to be charged with a CRIME.... info? Are you making it up? Is this another one of your considered legal opinions? If so, on what basis did you form it?
I find the question to be interesting. A quick Google search to learn more produced this helpful article. While you'll likely like how the writer make a good case why the 14th Amendment does not affect Trump's eligibility, there is no discussion about "has to be charged with a CRIME." "Has to be charged with a CRIME" has no bearing on this question that I can find. If you can show me different, I'm open to it.
What people are you talking about? Names? Case numbers? Other identifying info?
Judge Eileen IS nonsense, as the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals so clearly showed.Judge Eileen will clamp down on this nonsense.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Well the constitution is pretty clear on that point.....but if a Democrat judge follows that document I would be surprised.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
That is my point those jailed for the January 6th riot many are still in jail with out a bail hearing 2 years later.....only a few have taken deals to get out of jail.
I think things will change now that the house has been taken over by Republicans....I mean Biden went to el paso,tx only after Mccarthy became speaker.
Report: Joe Biden Left Classified Documents in an Old Office
AG Merrick Garland assigned a U.S. attorney to review the roughly ten classified documents that were found in an old office of Joe Biden.
www.breitbart.com
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Let me ask more specifically. If someone is in jail for two years without a bail hearing, that is a serious matter. But you are providing no details to show this is actually happening. If you want us to believe it's happening, it would help to provide the names of the people in jail and the locations. Without at least that, there is no reason to believe this is an issue at all.
OK. Now that you have had your laugh, what would you like to see happen? Classified documents were found in a former vice president's office which was not a government office or authorized location.Report: Joe Biden Left Classified Documents in an Old Office
AG Merrick Garland assigned a U.S. attorney to review the roughly ten classified documents that were found in an old office of Joe Biden.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
What do you think should be done or not done? What should the next step be and who should take it?
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
The dc jail.....run by a Democrat warden....in a city run by Democrats.
The Democrats and their cohorts in the mainstream media were talking about using the 14th Amendment against Trump two years ago. Fast forward and we have a slip-and-fall lawyer taking the first shot. However, even then they knew they were on shaky legal ground because even proving there was an "insurrection" would be difficult. At last count no one has been charged with insurrection for their participation in the Jan 6 assault on the Capitol. It's only logical that there was no insurrection in which Trump could have been involved, much less instigated.
"All it takes is one registered Republican in New York state to say Donald J. Trump is not qualified to be president because he violated Section 3," he said, adding such an objection would be made to the state board of elections. "My guess is it'll be made against a bunch of candidates in a bunch of states. For Congress, an important question is, do you want to be in the driver's seat here setting forth the rules of the road for Section 3 litigation, or do you just want to wait for 2023 to come around and let it rip?"
The obscure constitutional provision hanging over Trump's post-presidency
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was referenced in the House's article of impeachment against former President Donald Trump.
www.cbsnews.com
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Funny how the main stream news is now talking about the border crisis now that the house has the Republicans in charge and OH look Biden went to the cleaned up el paso border........
You are still not answering the question. What are the details. Saying "The dc jail.....run by a Democrat warden....in a city run by Democrats." provides no information to back your claim that someone is in jail for two years without a bail hearing.
Valid points.
The January 6 event has been described in various ways. With the eligibility question now in court, and the word "insurrection" used in the 14th Amendment, a central question in this case is, was what happened actually an insurrection, or was it something else? In this case and context, much hinges on how the word "insurrection" is defined.
Wikipedia provides a helpful discussions about this. You can read it here.
I have not studied this question in depth, but my reading so far leads me to believe that the terms "insurrection clause" and "14th Amendment" are quite useful for those who want to spin a certain point of view. But proving it in court seems to be an uphill climb with a small chance of success.
It may happen that a court rules the events of January 6 were in fact an insurrection. But that would be a ruling about the terminology of the event. To use the 14th Amendment to then bar Trump from serving as president again, it would be necessary to prove that he engaged in it. The House Jan. 6 Committee has assembled a large body of testimony and evidence that ties Trump to the events of Jan 6. But using that evidence in court would be laborious because the witnesses interviewed by the Committee were not cross examined in that fourm.
A court hearing is different than a committee hearing.
I don't bet on court cases, but if I did, I'd bet against the case Castro is trying to make. I don't think he and whoever may be backing him in this will get very far in court.
That said, the term "insurrection" may gain future traction of legal significance for Trump. The Castro case is unlikely to be the last time we see this question in court.
"On December 19, 2022, the [Jan 6] committee spelled out a devastating set of accusations against Trump: obstruction of an official proceeding; conspiracy to defraud the nation; conspiracy to make false statements; and, most grave of all, inciting, assisting, aiding, or comforting an insurrection. For the first time in the history of the United States, Congress referred a former President to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution." (Source)
If DOJ charges Trump with insurrection, and if he is convicted of it, the 14 Amendment question would be moot because Trump would likely live out the rest of his days behind bars, without the ability to post his "truths" or otherwise communicate with the public.
Last edited:
Some say the remedy would be an appropriate( not a leftist hack) Special Counsel or a commencement of impeachment proceedings.
V.P. Joe can’t declassify documents like a President can, and which Trump did.
#busted
Before looking for remedies, an investigation is more appropriate, don't you think? Does it not make sense to determine who knew what and when, and who did what and when, before offering remedies? If a brick of cocaine was found at Mar-a-Lago, and if Trump was then president, would you immediately initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump for the cocaine?
With the Trump documents case, one remedy was to search Mar-a-Lago and seize the classified documents that Trump failed to return. No such remedy is needed in the Biden documents case because his attorneys immediately returned them to the government upon their discovery, before the government even knew they were missing (presumably), and before they even asked for their return.
Additional remedies may be forthcoming in the Trump case but we won't know that until the investigation is complete. I believe a Trump-appointed prosecutor is now investigating the Biden case, so the status of the two is roughly equivalent in that regard. Classified documents were found where they should not be and investigations are underway.
While I was not pleased to learn classified documents were found in Trump's or Biden's private offices, I think it is crucial that the rule of law be equally applied in both cases. DOJ should thoroughly investigate both cases, follow the evidence and bring charges as appropriate.
While that approach may in fact be identical in both cases, the outcomes are unlikely to be the same. For one, Trump fought hard multiple times to keep the documents that were not his to keep. He is uncooperative. Biden returned the documents before even being asked. He is proactively cooperative. In Biden's case, that takes a potential obstruction of justice charge off the table. In Trump's case he may well find himself in court as a defendant so charged.
Last edited:
Wow, they allegedly “found out” about it on Nov 2? Yeah, right. They found out much earlier than that, but didn’t make it public. Yet raided Trump’s place in a public spectacle a couple of months before the midterm election. Smells like a coverup to me.
Last edited:
Every President since Truman and every Vice President since Alben W Barkley has taken home classified materials, intentionally or unintentionally. Both the President and Vice President have classification (and declassification) authority. The only limitation on the Vice President is he (or she) cannot declassify something the President has classified, but anything classified from the Vice President on down to agency heads and the Intelligence Community the VP can declassify at will.
Nothing should be done about what Biden did. Which makes what they did to Trump and are continuing to try to do all the more outrageous.
Edit: as for the China and Ukraine documents, I seriously doubt they survived more than a few years. Months more likely. <snort>
Nothing should be done about what Biden did. Which makes what they did to Trump and are continuing to try to do all the more outrageous.
Edit: as for the China and Ukraine documents, I seriously doubt they survived more than a few years. Months more likely. <snort>
Last edited: