FOOD FOR THOUGHT....FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT

www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/0...d-presidency/675048/

we long ago came to the conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment, the amendment ratified in 1868 that represents our nation’s second founding and a new birth of freedom, contains within it a protection against the dissolution of the republic by a treasonous president.

This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.

SO WHEN U LISTEN TO TRUMP ON TUCKER (he will not be on debate platform)THINK ABOUT SECTION 3 OF THE FOURTEENTH......UPHOLD OR
IGNORE??? Your way of life is on the line.......JMO

So President Biden needs to be impeached for providing billions of dollars of military equipment to the Taliban, our enemies and also releasing billions of dollars to the Iranian government which uses it to sponsor worldwide terrorism.
Thanks for pointing this out HA and the Atlantic. Much bigger crimes than protesting an election. Al Gore and Hillary Clinton were never indicted for protesting their election outcomes.

homeagain wrote: www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/0...d-presidency/675048/

we long ago came to the conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment, the amendment ratified in 1868 that represents our nation’s second founding and a new birth of freedom, contains within it a protection against the dissolution of the republic by a treasonous president.

This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.

SO WHEN U LISTEN TO TRUMP ON TUCKER (he will not be on debate platform)THINK ABOUT SECTION 3 OF THE FOURTEENTH......UPHOLD OR
IGNORE??? Your way of life is on the line.......JMO

FOR RAMAGE.....there is a LEGITIMATE loop hole that STOPS his attempt at a run. It it time to test the
founding fathers wisdom.

Unlike your thinking all loopholes are legal. The concept of "loophole:" was conjured in order to allow Congress an escape from the fact that they wrote a law that allowed such practice.
It simply allows an argument before the court. Interestingly that is what the democrats are arguing that
Republicans are not allowed to proffer.
I truly have never encountered or corresponded with someone who so virulently hates President Trump as you do. What will you do should he die unexpectedly ? Will your animus be directed to any
Republican candidate, or is it only the man, Donald Trump?

ramage wrote: Unlike your thinking all loopholes are legal. The concept of "loophole:" was conjured in order to allow Congress an escape from the fact that they wrote a law that allowed such practice.
It simply allows an argument before the court. Interestingly that is what the democrats are arguing that
Republicans are not allowed to proffer.
I truly have never encountered or corresponded with someone who so virulently hates President Trump as you do. What will you do should he die unexpectedly ? Will your animus be directed to any
Republican candidate, or is it only the man, Donald Trump?

[/b]

IT'S ONLY THE EGOCENTRIC,ELITIST .EXISTENCE OF TRUMP......WHEN U BELIEVE U R KING AND "ONLY I CAN FIX IT" THERE IS A FAILURE OF FAITH.

coloradosun.com/2023/09/06/donald-trump-...o/?mc_cid=6e534e617b

A lawsuit filed by a watchdog group aims to block former President Donald Trump from appearing on Colorado’s 2024 ballot because of his ties to the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The suit was filed by the Washington, D.C.-based Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a nonprofit, on behalf of a group of Republican and unaffiliated voters, including a former state lawmaker. Martha Tierney, one of the lead attorneys in the case, however, often represents the Colorado Democratic Party in campaign matters.

This would set a dangerous precedent in American politics if the current leader of the executive branch gets to decide who can run against him in his next election.
I prefer Presidents who think they can win on their own. Not those who jail their lead opponents.
Imagine what Nixon would have done with this power?

homeagain wrote: www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/0...d-presidency/675048/

we long ago came to the conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment, the amendment ratified in 1868 that represents our nation’s second founding and a new birth of freedom, contains within it a protection against the dissolution of the republic by a treasonous president.

This protection, embodied in the amendment’s often-overlooked Section 3, automatically excludes from future office and position of power in the United States government—and also from any equivalent office and position of power in the sovereign states and their subdivisions—any person who has taken an oath to support and defend our Constitution and thereafter rebels against that sacred charter, either through overt insurrection or by giving aid or comfort to the Constitution’s enemies.

SO WHEN U LISTEN TO TRUMP ON TUCKER (he will not be on debate platform)THINK ABOUT SECTION 3 OF THE FOURTEENTH......UPHOLD OR
IGNORE??? Your way of life is on the line.......JMO

AGAIN,the founding fathers foresaw a constitutional, concrete concern and CYA .IN 1868...GET OVER IT

I take what you post literally. ",the founding fathers foresaw a constitutional, concrete concern and CYA"
So the creators of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution wanted to, as you say "CYA"?

ramage wrote: I take what you post literally. ",the founding fathers foresaw a constitutional, concrete concern and CYA"
So the creators of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution wanted to, as you say "CYA"?

[/b]

BIRTHING a new nation,bore a HUGE responsibility to "get it right"....thoughtful,totally dedicated to forming a cohesive,foundation that addressed the most pertinent problems that could be foreseen as a "destroying"our
freedom/rights.....we had just extracted ourselves from an untenable government,so the focus was creating a NEW foundation that would PREVENT a repeat....PROTECTION from anyone who would dare to " be a king". AKA TRUMP

Wall Street Journal just ran an op-ed about this zany attempt. President Trump does not qualify as an officer.

Guess the conservative Supreme Court will have to confirm this.