Fmr. U.S. Legal professional and Senior FBI Official Chuck Rosenberg analyzes the advantages of SCOTUS reaching a decisive opinion on the …
source
Fmr. U.S. Legal professional and Senior FBI Official Chuck Rosenberg analyzes the advantages of SCOTUS reaching a decisive opinion on the …
source
The Biden DOJ had the ability to charge trump with insurrection,they didn't, because they couldn't,but keep up the desperation
SENDING A MESSAGE THAT THE CONSTITUTION ONLY MATTERS WHEN IT HELPS REPUBLICANS ESPECIALLY A TRAITOR TERRORIST ADVOCATING FOR MURDER OF POLITICAL OPPONENTS AND A MAN THAT STOLE AND SOLD OUR SECRETS TO ENEMIES OF THE UNITED STATES THAT HAS CO CONSPIRATOR INSURRECTIONISTS IN CONGRESS ACTIVELY PAYING "WITNESSES" TO LIE TO ATTACK OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT, OBSTRUCTING, ABUSING POWER, SLANDERING, AND THREATENING CIVIL WAR ISN'T A GOOD MESSAGE… ITS TREASON.. NONE OF THIS IS A VOTING ISSUE.. ITS LITERALLY 1930'S GERMANY AND WE ARE WATCHING AND ENABLING TRAITORS TO ATTACK OUR COUNTRY.
yea AND 8323 CANT BE USED BECAUSE "TRUMP WOULD BE IMMUNE BECAUSE OF FREE SPEECH OR SOME OTHER NONSENSE"
THIS IS TREASON
ONCE STATE ISN'T DECIDING… THE MAN THAT COMMITTED TREASON DECIDED TO THROW OUT HIS RIGHT TO RUN AFTER HE ATTEMPTED A COUP ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. THE SUPREME COURTS BLATANT DENIAL OF OUR CONSTITUTION IN FAVOR OF A CRIMINAL TERRORIST SHOULD REMOVE THEM THEMSELVES FROM OFFICE. THIS IS TREASON.. BLATANT TREASON
How many straws do you guys got. The court case are not real.
Just another liberal abuse of laws. You got this fani deal is gone. Biden get of just closed Miami.
You better hope that its not 9 to 0, if they say its not an insurrection. That would stop all stuff. It woll be 9 or 8 votes
It's fascinating to consider the implications of a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court, isn't it? Regardless of the specific case or individual involved, a 9-0 decision often highlights the strength and unity of the judicial system in interpreting the law. It's a powerful reminder of how the judicial branch can function as a cohesive unit, providing clear and decisive interpretations of complex legal issues. This kind of consensus can really underscore the principles of justice and legal consistency in our society! 🌟👩⚖👨⚖
Why does one state get to choose what President is for the whole country? It's almost like the Electoral College
The so called Supreme Court isn't so Supreme, and our laws are not enforced with equality and Justice anymore. Politics and corruption run the show now
Only DEM0CR00K appartachiks can interpret An UNARMED protest as some kind of "insurrection".
This is the twisted stuff of MOR0N1C fantasies… HE DID NOT commit any insurrection – fact
– his request to "peacefully protest" IS the OPPOSITE of an "insurrection". Biased, deceptive "reporting".
MSgNBC that is
What a group of 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Trump lawyers managed to distract everyone from what’s the point of the hearings.
Ok criminal code 18§2383 was passed June 25, 1948 it was not ratified because it is NOT part of the constitution.
14th ammendment was passed by Senate June 8, 1866 and
ratified July 9, 1868
Kinda funny that both these things were not addressed until after a war.
So our country functioned quite nicely and dealt with insurrectionists for 80 years WITHOUT section 18 § 2383 of the criminal code.
So by dent of force the 14th neither requires nor prohibits the use of 18§2383 of the criminal code.
Unelected monarchs making rules for peasants
The President holds 2 highest positions called "Officer of United States"!
So, he is not simply included but also the holds the highest responsibility to protect the Constitution!
Yep and nato does need to pay thermistor part or else. What a disgrace to #1, not pay your share. The rest I think Nato gone rogue
There's a long way to go to resolve insurrection allegations that the US Supreme Court fails to see or appreciate. May I suggest that instead of appealing to cynical viewers who prefer comforting conclusions lacking foundation, listen to legal experts whose prognostications prove prescient.
This one state argument flys in the face of reality.
It assumes that a president must win all states to become president.
How many states did trump loose but still win the presidency in 2016.
This one state thing is in many ways a red herring.
Simply a smoke and mirrors argument to distract from the plain and simple black and white truth of the 14th.
Just like trying to impune it by saying it was a compromise.
What in government that is well done is not a compromise?
I can not think of anything that has not been negotiated to a compromise that has past even if it is simply word choice or order.
If it says MSNBC /MSNBS I know its a lie
TRUMP 2024🇺🇲💪
If Trump isn't disqualified……you may as well rip up your Constitution!
At least Trump is going to jail this year!
Whatever, VOTE BLUE, don't enable dictatorship
Because the supreme court is loyal to trump
Americans argue semantics whilst their democracy swirls around the plug hole
Hey, yeah Trump's lawyer said it was a "riot' and it was "shameful" he also said it was "criminal". Why don't you focus on that? Republicans are dirty and they stink. Vote blue.
Supreme Court is totally political.
The same Justices who took away womens right to choose would also protect criminal Trump.
It is almost as if the decision was to, oh I don't know….Keep America alive for another 300 years or turn it over, open the door tyranny.
Meaning future President can burn the Constitution and write a new law (President4Life). because they are immune from prosecution.
Lets ask China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, and sadly now Turkey too. Actually perfect example.
How much more Constitutional can you get – IT IS WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF – NO INSURGENTS ON THE BALLOT.
Why is that so hard to grasp?
Are you serious? 9-0. Bottom line. Trump will not be removed from the ballot so how does this make it helpful? The spin here is similar to Trump's spin. Bonkers. Only way to find a way to remove him is if he is dead. And even then the GOP would make something up and use a surrogate replacement from A1.