Posts Made By: James Brown

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Haha. Rich and Greg are arguing for a distinction that doesn't matter; as it turns out, sedition is the more severe crime.

What happened at the Capitol has widely been described as an insurrection. People there, such as Mitt Romney and others, called it an insurrection. For all practical purposes, it was an insurrection. The semantic hairsplitting changes nothing.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

No, oops is not correct, because that isn't the point.  The point is the 14th amendment, the 3rd section, which Specifically for legal purposes, identifies Insurrection as the Charge that the Left Believes can be used to keep Trump from attaining office in the Future.  

The 14th amendment doesn't indicate "sedition" as a charge that can be used to keep him out of office.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

The rest is just political posturing by you and your soul mates on the left...

No. no posturing by me, as I'm just putting up the facts which the leftists here are in utter denial about.

Greg put it succinctly some time ago that the leftist politicians are worried about Trump running and I pointed out what myriads of others have pointed out, and what leftist politicians have admitted flat out, that they are going to try whatever they can and use whatever means necessary, to keep Trump from being able to hold office.

When numbers of them, politicians, and leftist political pundits, both on TV and in other media have flat out admitted to what their method is and these guys here on the left say they aren't, it strikes me that they are the ones posturing.

When 40 leftist Democrats actually introduce a bill for passage that lays out precisely there method for being able to keep Donald Trump for running for office by using the language of the 14th amendment, who is posturing?  

Certainly not me.   

Lastly, these leftists here are the furthest thing from my soul mates.  I think you might want to look in a mirror and see who the soul mate of the left is.  He'll be staring right back at you.  

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

the bit about you being immune from political posturing in this threadd

You sure seem to enjoy putting up fantasy created out of whole cloth, as you have there claiming falsely that I said I'm immune from politically posturing.

That assertion is something you're now making up.

When did I ever even say that?  Here's a fact, I didn't.

I can be just as guilty of that just as you have been in the past.  

What you did is make a charge that I'm politically posturing with respect to the Jan 14th issue.  

The left may be posturing, but bringing forth facts regarding what they are doing isn't posturing in any sense of the word.  

Words matter.  You being a lawyer should know that.  

And your ridiculous analogy about Soul Mates has to be one of the most comical remarks I've heard in some time.

I'll give you kudos for stretching credulity beyond belief.   LOL  

Originally Posted by James Lacey

I'm sure you will split semantic hairs and claim it's not what you said, but what you said is close enough to justify Jim's comment. You certainly act like you are immune from it with all your bluster about all you do is present facts, which is also downright laughable.

Originally Posted by James Lacey

Jim doesn't need my defense, but he clearly said, "you are soulmates in the opposites attract fashion."

Either your reading comprehension is awful (plenty of evidence for that), or you are completely ignoring what Jim wrote merely to be argumentative and sniping to score some cheap points in your mind.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

"My buddy Ted has never drank, has never smoked, has never done drugs in his life, is a devout Christian, is a staunch Republican, and he enjoys staying home and reading books in his spare time.  He finally met a woman who loves the outdoors, mountain biking, and she's a Staunch Atheist.  She also is a daily pot smoker as well as drinking Rum in the early afternoon.  Last week she became the Local head of the El Paso county Democrat party.  I was so happy to see that Ted finally found his soul mate"!!  

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

While I understand and appreciate your point, even if Rich can't which is, in my opinion, to be expected, I don't consider myself to be a soul mate as I understand "soul mates" with Rich on any level...

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

And once again, you're incorrect and wrong.  

Care for me to prove you wrong?  

Check posting #131 by Jim Brown.  

He wrote this:  


I don't think we disagree Richard, but I'm not sure.  No one gets criminally prosecuted for violating the 14th Amendment.  They have and do get prosecuted for violating the federal criminal statutes I linked to above.  Of course the authority for the criminal statutes is derived from the Constitution, including the 14th Amendment.  That is why the "hold no office" clause is included in the treason and insurrection statutes of Title 18, but not in the sedition statute.

It is an anomaly that the sedition statute carries a greater jail term at the maximum than Treason, for example.  The "oops" moment was when the Rs changed sedition from a misdemeanor to a felony.  A lot of Proud Boys wish they had not. 

The statutes are pretty clear.  Read them.  If the government thinks they can apply them, and prosecute anyone up to and including Trump, I presume they will.  The rest is just political posturing by you and your soul mates on the left...



It has to be almost embarrassing for you James, that you get everything completely backwards and wrong.   

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

And once again, you're incorrect and wrong.  

Care for me to prove you wrong?  

Check posting #131 by Jim Brown.  

He wrote this:  


I don't think we disagree Richard, but I'm not sure.  No one gets criminally prosecuted for violating the 14th Amendment.  They have and do get prosecuted for violating the federal criminal statutes I linked to above.  Of course the authority for the criminal statutes is derived from the Constitution, including the 14th Amendment.  That is why the "hold no office" clause is included in the treason and insurrection statutes of Title 18, but not in the sedition statute.

It is an anomaly that the sedition statute carries a greater jail term at the maximum than Treason, for example.  The "oops" moment was when the Rs changed sedition from a misdemeanor to a felony.  A lot of Proud Boys wish they had not. 

The statutes are pretty clear.  Read them.  If the government thinks they can apply them, and prosecute anyone up to and including Trump, I presume they will.  The rest is just political posturing by you and your soul mates on the left...



It has to be almost embarrassing for you James, that you get everything completely backwards and wrong.