Posts Made By: Rod Kaufman

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

"That part seems a little over the top."

Well, that's easy off ramp for SCOTUS: they mandated congress should act to remove a candidate from a ballot. That's never going to happen. Congress can barely approve a budget to keep its own government functioning. I agree with judge Luttig that no effective change will ever occur even in Trump's case wherein his actions were in clear violation of the 14th amendment. And, of course, Trump is celebrating his victimhood and his vindication even though the SCOTUS decision provides neither...

Originally Posted by James Brown

I have skimmed the concurrences.   They are nice and short.   Neither ACB nor the liberal justices said anything like the quote above.  If I missed it let me know.   It appears that Luttig, and the Hill are intentionally misleading gullible readers.

Here are the opinions:  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf

Originally Posted by James Brown

I disagree.   Congress impeached Trump for "inciting an insurrection."  He was acquitted.   With better facts supporting the insurrection charge, Trump could have been convicted and barred from office under the impeachment clauses and the 14th Amendment.  There are plenty of R's who would have voted to convict if there had been evidence that Trump planned and executed the insurrection.

We both know that impeachment is political.   The criminal insurrection statute is different, it is not inherently political.  There are different burdens of proof and so on too.   But the reality is that if Jack Smith thought he had a prayer of convicting Trump of criminal insurrection, he would have brought the charges.  Unfortunately, there is little or no evidence that Trump participated in an insurrection.  Without any compelling evidence other than Trump's rambling speech, I am not sure how you can argue that Trump's actions were in clear violation of the 14th Amendment.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

No, just that Luttig is full of shit.  As another Constitutional conservative spoke of Luttig, he referred to Luttig as a "Legal Clown".

Originally Posted by James Brown

Ya know what's funny?  If I were Rich and you posted the above, I'd go berserk and shout, 'SHOW ME WHERE I SAID THAT...'  'I'M WAITING'...' etc.   Then I would call you names...

Thank goodness I'm not Rich!   Yes indeed, I do believe that a R (or a D, or a split) Congress would impeach and convict under the obvious insurrection scenario I hypothesized.   I may be jaded, but come on, I was talking about genuine armed insurrection!  Is anyone besides Rod so cynical that they believe some future R Congress would give active participation in an armed insurrection a pass?  I sure hope not.

Originally Posted by James Lacey

I started to respond to Rich, but what's the point? As you stated, of course, context matters. And cherry-picking one statement out of what was a long, chaotic, and complex day and somehow thinking that absolves Trump of any guilt is nonsense.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Resident lunatic communist in California said: 

''Trump only made that comment after the invasion of the capitol that was incited by himself"

Now that is hilarious.  I've seen the video many, many times and he uttered that statement during his speech, so he told the crowd to go over and peacefully make their voices heard.  

Therefore your assertion is complete made up bullshit, but then being a ward of the Biden regime, the puppet that you are, I wouldn't expect anything else to come out of your mouth.  

Since you claim that Trump incited it, give me the specific lines that he stated which made the people there riot.  

By the way, has anyone told you lately that you get more and more buffoonish each day?  

Originally Posted by Jim Moscheck

Yet the only poll that make the newscasts are that 60% of republicans think Biden stole the election.

Originally Posted by James Brown

James:  I agree with everything you posted.  The rioters who have faced the law got what they deserved.   There is also a cause and effect between Trump's lies and rhetoric and the riot.  That said, I do not think Trump is guilty of insurrection under the law or the 14th Amendment.   He is clearly not guilty under the law, since he has not been charged with insurrection.   We can debate the applicability of the insurrection clause in the 14th Amendment all day long, since it has not been used in this fashion before.   My preference of course is to trust the criminal system to prosecute criminals (including Trump) and to trust the voters to elect the president.

Regarding the second impeachment trial.   The Democrats presented lots of social media, video, transcripts, and so on showing Trump's unhinged big lie after the election results came in.  Yes, it was a lot more than just the speech, but it all falls into the category of "fiery rhetoric pushing the big lie" just like portions of the speech itself.  No evidence I am aware of was presented linking Trump to the planning or execution of the actual assault on the Capital.   So, I think several things are true:

1.  Without Trump's big lie (his words) no riot would have occurred...

2.  Even so, there is no evidence Trump coordinated the riot in advance with any rioter.  The rioters are responsible for their own actions!  Under criminal law, conspiracy requires an overt act, not just words.  buying the gun, making the bomb, some sort of action.  For example, Talib is not held accountable in law or under the 14th Amendment when her rhetoric inspires hate crimes against Jews.  The perpetrators of those crimes are responsible for their own actions, no matter who may have inspired them.  Talib may be held responsible by the voters, if they chose to do so.

3.  Because of the disconnect between 1 and 2, Trump has not been charged with seditious conspiracy, insurrection, or treason.  Anyone who thinks Jack Smith would not bring those charges if he thought he had a case is simply not paying attention.

4.  Because of 1, 2, and 3, I personally think the 14th Amendment is inapplicable.   Reasonable people disagree.  Hopefully we all agree that implementing the 14th Amendment on an ad-hoc, politically motivated, state-by-state basis is a bad idea.

5.  Some of the Proud Boys and the like planned an insurrection and even moved guns into Pennsylvania, if memory serves.  (An overt act).  They are paying the price for their criminality with extremely long jail terms.

6.  Other casual rioters moved into the Capital on an extremely ill advised whim.   Hundreds are paying the price with jail terms of various appropriate lengths.  The system is working and in November the system can rid of us Trump forever, if the Democrrats don't drop the ball.