Thursday, October 16, 2025
  • About us
  • Contact us
2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub
  • Home
  • 2nd Amendment
  • Freedom of speech
  • Guns & Ammo
  • Preppers
  • Videos
Social icon element need JNews Essential plugin to be activated.
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • 2nd Amendment
  • Freedom of speech
  • Guns & Ammo
  • Preppers
  • Videos
Social icon element need JNews Essential plugin to be activated.
No Result
View All Result
2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub
No Result
View All Result

Attorney fighting to disqualify Trump at Supreme Court issues CRUCIAL update

February 26, 2024
in Videos
Reading Time: 1 min read
A A
42



The Authorized Breakdown episode 195: Mario Nicolais, one of many attorneys who introduced the Colorado disqualification case in opposition to …

source

Tags: 2nd amendment2nd amendment rights2nd amendment supreme court cases2nd amendment usAttorneybrian cohenbrian tyler cohenCOURTCRUCIALdemocratsDisqualifyfightingfreedom of speechfreedom of speech us amendmentfreedom of speech us bill of rightsgun legality usgun legislationguns amendmentguns amendment constitutionguns america digestguns america legitISSUESnewsPoliticspreppers guidepreppers newsrepublicanssecond amendmentsection 3 14th amendmentSupremetrumptrump disqualificationTrump Supreme Courtupdate
Previous Post

Supreme Court gives Jack Smith deadline to respond to Trump immunity case

Next Post

How Much Does A Bomb Shelter Cost To Build?

Next Post
How Much Does A Bomb Shelter Cost To Build?

How Much Does A Bomb Shelter Cost To Build?

Watch: Supreme Court hears arguments over Trump’s removal from Colorado ballot | NBC News

Watch: Supreme Court hears arguments over Trump's removal from Colorado ballot | NBC News

What Are Faraday Bags Made Of? A Comprehensive Guide

What Are Faraday Bags Made Of? A Comprehensive Guide

Comments 42

  1. @briantylercohen says:
    2 years ago

    Please support this series by subscribing here: http://www.youtube.com/briantylercohen

    Reply
  2. @JamesSmith-vs8nv says:
    2 years ago

    I don't have enough confidence in the Supreme Court on making the right decision because he didn't concede on losing the 2020 election, and he lost countless recounts in battle swing states. He is very dangerous, and he is very, very unpredictable due to his financial situation , so foreign adversaries will use his weakness for their gains. He is going to be a very weak and dangerous president second time around.

    Reply
  3. @gregshuff2597 says:
    2 years ago

    The SCOTUS will rule in Trumps favor 9-0….. A state does not have the power to assert control over a federal election…that would be election inteference…..let the voters decide….Trump has never been charged with or convicted of insurrection by the federal government……who gets to define what a insurrection is or whom is guilty of taking part in it…..every American has the right to due process and a fair trial…..mock trials dont count…..

    Reply
  4. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024 🥒💦🐴

    Reply
  5. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  6. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  7. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  8. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  9. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  10. @phantomaudits says:
    2 years ago

    2024🇺🇲TRUMP/VIVEK🇺🇲2024

    Reply
  11. @grwonderwonderful4541 says:
    2 years ago

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist's to know that Trump is not American. He's a dictator he's not for the constitution he is not for democracy. He's only for what benefits him and maybe hiis family. His not even for his followers. Those that are putting their hard working money in his pocket. It's sad 😢 and people need to wake up. Vote blue!

    Reply
  12. @sergeantschlumpf6368 says:
    2 years ago

    Ohh jeeez 😮😮😮😮😮

    Reply
  13. @Pond_Maven says:
    2 years ago

    The President takes an oath of office — how could he NOT be an officer?

    Reply
  14. @paulmaccarone6157 says:
    2 years ago

    He is commander & chief

    Reply
  15. @francesduty8950 says:
    2 years ago

    Cmmander-in-chief is an officer,. The President is the Head of the military essentially, so he is an officer of the Country, He is elected to the office of the Presidency, and holds office, ego he is an officer. WE are a government, Based on the laws of the seas, not a corporation.

    Reply
  16. @Republicanmouse says:
    2 years ago

    Supreme Court will rule 9-0 in favor of Trump. You lose liberals!

    Reply
  17. @shannonallen7224 says:
    2 years ago

    THE HIGHEST OFFICER OF THE STATES!!

    Reply
  18. @AVOWIRE24 says:
    2 years ago

    It's always fascinating to see the legal process in action, especially in cases that reach the level of the Supreme Court. The complexities and nuances of law can lead to such interesting discussions and debates. It's a great reminder of the dynamic nature of legal systems and how they play a crucial role in shaping our society. Plus, it's always engaging to follow updates on significant legal matters – they often feel like we're watching history in the making!

    Reply
  19. @abstractjames says:
    2 years ago

    I knew we were in trouble when this low energy guy started talking. He acted disinterested, ill-informed, and lacked any passion to preserve democracy. This was not sending our best. Bryan and Glenn should have been harder on him and woke this guy up.

    Reply
  20. @willbrooks8853 says:
    2 years ago

    The 14th was an ammendment not writen by the founding fathers but was adopted by the rules of creating an ammendment so lots of people approved it and none of the founding fathers were alive at that time.

    Reply
  21. @willbrooks8853 says:
    2 years ago

    States run their own elections their way. Supreme Ct. needs to butt out. The issues of who serves after an insurrection is the test case here. The Justices are able to set guidelines for that with this case. Can't leave it up to chief justice on inaguration day to say they can't administer the oath of office to an insurrectionist that was voted into the office they can't hold.

    Reply
  22. @nosaoyemade9618 says:
    2 years ago

    The constitution is the constitution and every attorney and judge including SCOTUS and other Supreme Court justices should be in the same page. When these SCOTUS justices start using their interpretations in order to subvert the truth because of their political affiliation, then justice is corrupted. Nobody is above the law, not even judges or the President, former or current or the lawmakers( those republicans in congress who see themselves above the law). Not even the Creator, the Almighty God breaks his own laws and most criminal laws are biblical.

    Reply
  23. @memyname1771 says:
    2 years ago

    Since the arguments have already taken place, and the "$upreme" court appears like to support Trump's legal argument that the President is not an officer UNDER the United States, will Trump, if again elected, soon be authorized to appoint himself to fill a vacancy in Congress? Will be be able, with the concurrence of the Senate, to appoint himself to the "$upreme" court? What powers will the President gain by an explicit finding that he is not an officer UNDER the United States?

    Reply
  24. @albertbraun2128 says:
    2 years ago

    Most of these sound just like you copied them from the communist manifestos.

    Reply
  25. @lindae2524 says:
    2 years ago

    I still don't understand how the SCOTUS can rule on whether this was an insurrection or not. The main trial has not even happened yet. Even though he didn't go with the charge of insurrection, Jack Smith has an awful lot of evidence to present to show the intent and preparations for the insurrection long before the Jan 6 mob violence. Insurrection entails much more nefarious actions all across the country and at different times. Not just what we saw on Jan 6. That case is on hold now and will be pushed back at least a few months from now. So the case before the Supreme Court right now isn't aware of a lot of the facts.

    Reply
  26. @lindae2524 says:
    2 years ago

    I thought that the oath he took was almost the same as what I took in the Navy. The devil is in the "almost" details?

    Reply
  27. @johnbradford4715 says:
    2 years ago

    Yeah, Trump will be back on the Bell

    Reply
  28. @johnbradford4715 says:
    2 years ago

    I don’t see where he did that so you know, Wife

    Reply
  29. @johnbradford4715 says:
    2 years ago

    Well, you couldn’t find nobody else there that you could ask that could even tell you the truth of what happened

    Reply
  30. @slick73nova says:
    2 years ago

    When was Donald Trump convicted of insurrection? I must have missed that trial.

    Reply
  31. @slick73nova says:
    2 years ago

    Lmfao the TDS is real here.

    Reply
  32. @hatthomas555 says:
    2 years ago

    I admire the left leaning media members' unspoken agreement not to shit talk the conservative justices. Its a smart strategy, one the right is incapable of implementing.

    Reply
  33. @sharonklagstad5061 says:
    2 years ago

    For some reason referring Trump as president and not former is something that encourages these brainless Maga people to call him such. This is my opinion of course.

    Reply
  34. @jeffyount6836 says:
    2 years ago

    This web blogger is nothing more than a paid propagandist for the Democrat party. The Supreme Court will rule the president is not an officer. He is an executive. They will also side with Trump 100%

    Reply
  35. @garysmith9265 says:
    2 years ago

    LET'S GOJACK! WHO LOVES YA BABY? F Q! VOTE BLUE!!!

    Reply
  36. @kevinmcclainsr.2706 says:
    2 years ago

    The Supreme Court’s decision will be a political one and not one based on the law. It would be a bigger mistake to make a political decision because the majority of the people and by the people are interested in keeping the law not politics. Only the few are interested in politics and their own interests.

    Reply
  37. @glendaburness1492 says:
    2 years ago

    It says, "Anyone who gives comfort…". It doesn't say anyone except the President. ANYONE!

    Reply
  38. @sierraguru6942 says:
    2 years ago

    I'm almost certain the Supreme Court is too gutless to decide this case based on the Constitution.

    Reply
  39. @drewspinoso4849 says:
    2 years ago

    “Commander in Chief”

    a head of state or officer in supreme command of a country's armed forces.

    Reply
  40. @mikebrant192 says:
    2 years ago

    It seems to this citizen that the responsibility lies entirely with Chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

    He is a Federal officer, and represents the interests of the entire population of the United States, not just a state.

    He doesn’t have run for re-election. He serves for life.

    No Supreme Court Justice, much less Chief Justice, has ever been successfully impeached.

    The process is already in place.

    The Chief Justice has considerable personal security.

    The Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court administers the President’s Oath of Office.

    All Chief Justice Roberts has to do is to refuse to administer the President’s Oath of Office due to 14th Amendment, Section Three ineligibility and forbid anyone else to usurp the authority of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, and the deed is done.

    All it takes is courage.

    Reply
  41. @willicat44 says:
    2 years ago

    The ad for Trump that came on…What a crock of shit. It mentions that god wanted someone to "get up before dawn to work hard for Americans". What a fuckin' laugh. The Lobster Mobster never showed up until lunchtime after tweeting all night and spending two hours for the taxpayer paid hairstylist to pompadour his combover every morning.
    MAGA doesn't care.

    Reply
  42. @craigsmit4384 says:
    2 years ago

    Yeah but we are right back where we were back before the civil war, a few generations later, old families that owned slaves now have family members in govt repeating the whole fing mess again. How about any remaining families that owned slaves dig deep in their pockets and pay back for the remaining families that had been slaves.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CATEGORIES

  • 2nd Amendment
  • Freedom of speech
  • Guns & Ammo
  • Preppers
  • Videos
No Result
View All Result

LATEST UPDATES

  • LIVE: President Biden’s State of the Union address full coverage
  • Exploring The Pros And Cons Of Using Once Fired Brass And New Brass For Reloading
  • SAF BRIEF SUPPORTS SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION IN WAITING PERIOD CHALLENGE
  • About us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA
  • Cookie Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions

Copyright © 2023 - 2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub.
2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub is not responsible for the content of external sites.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • 2nd Amendment
  • Freedom of speech
  • Guns & Ammo
  • Preppers
  • Videos

Copyright © 2023 - 2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub.
2nd Amendment Alliance News Hub is not responsible for the content of external sites.