• @DigitalFrank
    link
    English
    -21
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    But it is the process by which a candidate can be removed from the ballot.

    So if you want to go with Trump is criminally guilty of insurrection, and therefore ineligible to be on the ballot, when and where was the trial?

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      199 months ago

      Being convicted of a crime doesn’t disqualify anyone; people have run for President from prison. And most of the people who attacked Congress on Jan. 6 would not be disqualified for it even if they are convicted of a crime for it.

      Disqualification is not a criminal punishment. It’s not a crime to be 34 years old, for example, or to have been born in another country. But those are still disqualifications, and they are and always have been enforced by the states.

      • @DigitalFrank
        link
        English
        -109 months ago

        The specific crimes I was thinking of were: impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors or criminal conviction for treason.

        • Melllvar
          link
          fedilink
          English
          89 months ago

          “High crimes and misdemeanors” is a term of art that refers to acts committed by a public official which, while not necessarily a crime in themselves, are a violation of public trust.

          For example, a president that accepted a foreign title of nobility without Congressional consent would have committed a high crime, but they couldn’t be hauled into a criminal court for it.

          • @DigitalFrank
            link
            English
            -109 months ago

            Right.

            Congress would control that, just like determining an insurrection was committed.

            They didn’t do that.

            The media did.

            • Melllvar
              link
              fedilink
              English
              109 months ago

              The only thing Congress can do is remove Trump’s disqualification under the 14th amendment. They can’t decide whether he’s disqualified in the first place.

              • @DigitalFrank
                link
                English
                -119 months ago

                The could have impeached him (again). And if the Senate convicted, he would have been ineligible to run again.

                • Melllvar
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  10
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  The 14th amendment doesn’t require impeachment or criminal conviction, though. It’s a completely different disqualification provision from impeachment.

                  For example, members of Congress cannot be impeached, but they can be disqualified under the 14th amendment. It makes no sense to roll impeachment and the 14th amendment into the same category of disqualification.

      • @DigitalFrank
        link
        English
        -69 months ago

        One judge “finds” he did it. What a lovely country we would have if that’s all it took. No defense, no evidence needed. Just a judges opinion.

        Short slope to a work camp. Maybe we could sort of concentrate all the people we disagree with in one.

        • Optional
          link
          59 months ago

          All fair points that still ignore the guy who tried to overthrow the country where absolutely nothing was done about him, to hold him accountable.

          If the feds are saying only they can protect the country from all enemies orange and domestic, there’s about 80 million active voters who might, uh, decidedly disagree. As opposed to some other adverb.

          • @jj4211
            link
            29 months ago

            Point is that if the three blue states disqualify without a federal ruling and that stands, then you can bet a bunch of red states will declare Biden disqualified because he stole the election or some crap.

            The place to direct frustration is the federal government for failing to make the requisite determination. Not at the unanimous supreme court decision that prevents chaotic behavior by the states with respect to federal races. There should be consistency state to state as to whether a candidate is fundamentally qualified or not.

          • @DigitalFrank
            link
            English
            -99 months ago

            If O’l Joe has 80 million voters, why are you worried about Trump being on the ballot? He can’t possibly win.

              • @DigitalFrank
                link
                English
                -119 months ago

                Strong emotions there. Take a valium or smoke a bowl before you pop a valve.

                • @nomous
                  cake
                  link
                  59 months ago

                  You’re a clown all over this thread, not a single point made or convert earned. Just shitposting, not even jeans, just snark.

                  Fuckin’ dork.

                  • @DigitalFrank
                    link
                    English
                    -99 months ago

                    Good luck making converts in a political thread.