• MagicShel@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    Trump isn’t going to be declared ineligible. He meets the constitutional requirements for being President. Unfortunately. We are just going to have to win the election by giving Biden more votes. And they’re going to declare fraud whether he loses by 1 vote or 10 million, so let’s try to just absolutely destroy them at the ballot. We can’t just beat him, we have to send a message that Trump and his sycophants will never have a path to election again.

    • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      22 days ago

      His candidacy is clouded, he engaged in insurrection on January 6 and Congress can’t requalify him for office. They and only they have the authority but they don’t have the votes. Even if he loses he’s going to try to seize power. He only has to seize it if he loses. They are past caring about the election and you can tell because they have already told us that win or lose they intend to spill American blood.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        21 days ago

        Congress can’t requalify him for office. They and only they have the authority but they don’t have the votes.

        I don’t disagree with the rest, but this part I just have no idea what part of the constitution you are referencing. He’s 35+, a natural born citizen, and a 10+ year resident. That’s it. He’s qualified because beyond that the founding fathers foolishly had faith that the citizenry would hold politicians to account. I guess to their credit that worked for a couple hundred years.

          • MagicShel@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            21 days ago

            Unfortunately, it is left to Congress to declare an insurrection, and that section is of little use to us. That was adjudicated with several states trying to remove him from the ballot. So he doesn’t need to be requalified.

            I question that decision, particularly given the current extremely partisan court. But unfortunately our constitution gives us no recourse save impeachment or passing explicit laws that are within the framework of the constitution, but bar Trump.

            The votes aren’t there for either so the law holds that the supreme court’s interpretation that Congress must vote to declare an act to be insurrection is currently the law of the land.

            We have a tremendous fight ahead of us to undo all the harm Trump caused in his first term. I’m talking perhaps decades.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              21 days ago

              given the current extremely partisan court

              Note that on this particular matter, they ruled unanimously that Trump couldn’t be removed from ballots.

              • MagicShel@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                21 days ago

                Very true. The partisanship calls into question everything the court does, but the unanimity is a strong statement. There are reasons for it, but it’s frustrating to watch a crowd of people violently attack the Capital for the express purpose of preventing the lawful transfer of power and then have the courts say damn our eyes, Congress gets to decide.

                It very clearly was the thing we all saw with our own eyes as it happened, but the right side of Congress won’t say so because it’s to their political advantage.

                • jj4211@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  21 days ago

                  Agreed, though to be fair, since we all saw it with our own eyes, you would hope we would move to prevent it by voting against him.

              • MagicShel@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 days ago

                Supreme Court said he can’t be removed from the ballot based on that. Not sure what you call that, but the clause does us no good in preventing him from being elected.

          • jj4211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 days ago

            The Supreme court’s reply: Section 5 14th Amendment

            They said only the national legislature can make this determination, based on section 5.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 days ago

        The problem is that ‘everyone knows’ but Congress did not hold designate him as doing so. While Colorado declared he did, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that section 5 of the 14th amendment says it’s up to congress, not courts (neither state or federal) to make the determination.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 days ago

        We can only express that with a vote. I mean besides shouting it from the rooftops, but the only concrete way is with a vote.