During a two-hour oral argument, justices avoided wrestling with the contentious question of whether former President Donald Trump “engaged in insurrection.”
Then just like the j6 committee there would have to be a congressional bi partisan hearing like there was for trump to determine what the charges are and what the facts are.
Sounds great. Like I say, I think it’s grossly foolish that the federal government hasn’t tried to give Trump more consequences than they have. Beer Hall Putsch etc.
You guys act like someone just claimed “trump doesn’t qualify” and there isn’t actual proof.
When did I say that? There’s plenty of proof; it’s on video. I just think the states making major decisions (not operational decisions about running the election, which is clearly in their purview) about the federal elections is going to lead to a civil-war-inciting mess.
There are several Republican state legislatures that are saying that they have the right to determine for themselves which electors their states should send to Washington, not the will of the voters in their state. That’s clearly wrong also (criminal), but it’s a little hard for me to see the difference between that and the power you’re claiming that the states have to disqualify Trump.
I mean, if you could wave a magic wand and say that states are allowed to make their own decisions about the federal elections, but only if those decisions are right and truthful, then sure. You can say they can disqualify Trump, because Trump should actually be disqualified. You can say they can’t disqualify Biden, though, etc etc. But… that’s not how these systems works. Absent you or I being the determiners of what disqualifications states are or aren’t allowed to make, I would rather fall back on “major questions about the federal election are decided federally.”
That’s exactly how these systems work tho. The states have a mechanism to determine if someone is eligible. They determined trump is not. “What if they did it to someone innocent” isn’t even a question here… you are the one who brought it up and made it one.
Sounds great. Like I say, I think it’s grossly foolish that the federal government hasn’t tried to give Trump more consequences than they have. Beer Hall Putsch etc.
When did I say that? There’s plenty of proof; it’s on video. I just think the states making major decisions (not operational decisions about running the election, which is clearly in their purview) about the federal elections is going to lead to a civil-war-inciting mess.
There are several Republican state legislatures that are saying that they have the right to determine for themselves which electors their states should send to Washington, not the will of the voters in their state. That’s clearly wrong also (criminal), but it’s a little hard for me to see the difference between that and the power you’re claiming that the states have to disqualify Trump.
I mean, if you could wave a magic wand and say that states are allowed to make their own decisions about the federal elections, but only if those decisions are right and truthful, then sure. You can say they can disqualify Trump, because Trump should actually be disqualified. You can say they can’t disqualify Biden, though, etc etc. But… that’s not how these systems works. Absent you or I being the determiners of what disqualifications states are or aren’t allowed to make, I would rather fall back on “major questions about the federal election are decided federally.”
That’s exactly how these systems work tho. The states have a mechanism to determine if someone is eligible. They determined trump is not. “What if they did it to someone innocent” isn’t even a question here… you are the one who brought it up and made it one.
I think we’re going in circles at this point. All the best