One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Smith's Next Move Is Likely To Involve Charges That Preclude Ever Serving In An Elected Position...Check (Mate)?
Jul 27, 2023 14:21:56   #
woodguru
 
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment

Reply
Jul 27, 2023 14:22:43   #
woodguru
 
Trump's e******n will not survive a constant narrative about the fact that the constitution says he can't.

Reply
Jul 27, 2023 15:31:44   #
BIRDMAN
 
woodguru wrote:
Trump's e******n will not survive a constant narrative about the fact that the constitution says he can't.


Any news on the Brandon crime family



Reply
 
 
Jul 27, 2023 17:01:02   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
woodguru wrote:
Trump's e******n will not survive a constant narrative about the fact that the constitution says he can't.


And your h**e will live on forever. Stupid.

Troll alert.

Reply
Jul 27, 2023 17:10:54   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
And your h**e will live on forever. Stupid.

Troll alert.



Reply
Jul 27, 2023 21:26:41   #
microphor Loc: Home is TN
 
woodguru wrote:
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has... (show quote)


Indictments aren't convictions, otherwise anyone in office could just arrange to have their opponents indicted and BINGO, guarantee party elected. Are you dense or unable to reason because your feelers are hurt?

Reply
Jul 28, 2023 14:39:47   #
WEBCO
 
Keeping Trump from running has been the intent for 7+ years now

Reply
 
 
Jul 28, 2023 16:55:07   #
Wonttakeitanymore
 
woodguru wrote:
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has... (show quote)


They wish! That’s what they’re after

Reply
Jul 28, 2023 17:07:54   #
EmilyD
 
woodguru wrote:
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has... (show quote)


"Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is "

Another brilliant observation by OPP's "cognizant" clown...😂😂

Reply
Jul 28, 2023 19:29:57   #
ed4short Loc: New Hampshire
 
Woody-

Looks like erudite people here are getting s**k of your stupidity.
Appears you really are simple minded.

Reply
Jul 28, 2023 23:28:58   #
keepuphope Loc: Idaho
 
woodguru wrote:
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has... (show quote)


That was the goal before one charge was filed,as soon as he announced his intention to run they came on gangbusters because if he gets in s**t will hit the fan and people will go down for corruption.

Reply
 
 
Jul 29, 2023 09:22:37   #
Charlie D.
 
woodguru wrote:
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has figured out that there actually is language in the constitution that specifically spells out conduct that will keep people convicted from ever serving in an elected position again...

...but what about the language that specifically keeps someone who is under indictment from serving as president? What about the rather obvious fact that there would be no point in even running if it meant that if a person were to win they would be prohibited from serving as president? The founding fathers would never have ever dreamed that people would be stupid enough to even consider someone that was under criminal indictment...and if they did they would not have been able to understand the constitutional crisis the country would be thrown into.

The words "cannot serve as a sitting president while under indictment..." doesn't mean unless v**ers are stupid enough to v**e for a criminal it goes away, it doesn't mean the newly elected criminally indicted president can pardon himself...which by the way they never envisioned we would have a president that needed to pardon themselves.

There are charges surrounding the J****** 6th i**********n attempt that involve conspiracy to subvert an e******n and dereliction of p**********l responsibilities, among dozens of related elements.

Trump will be under indictment, we know this because he already is, but new indictments will involve his profound unfitness to serve as a president as well as legal restrictions on it.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4122904-trump-braces-for-third-possible-indictment-as-grand-jury-meets/?email=efe571ef5256093f41ddc38748f117b2e17c959d&emaila=c9f53ef4f79d401cfaf066ddb80ea001&emailb=8253f47e4ed477155249a07be8172fe918415676e024fc1ab4e32ba083861cc0&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07.27.23%20SR%20Trump%20expecting%20indictment
I suspect that even the most ignorant among us has... (show quote)


That's exactly what the democraps in the white house are trying to do. They've been trying to get Trump on something, anything for 7 yrs. Reminds me of some of these countries ran by tyrants and C*******t before an e******n, their opponents end up in jail with trumped charges or they are forced to leave their country to stay alive.

Reply
Jul 29, 2023 10:05:17   #
keepuphope Loc: Idaho
 
Charlie D. wrote:
That's exactly what the democraps in the white house are trying to do. They've been trying to get Trump on something, anything for 7 yrs. Reminds me of some of these countries ran by tyrants and C*******t before an e******n, their opponents end up in jail with trumped charges or they are forced to leave their country to stay alive.


A very good point and true. Although the Trump h**ers are blind to those facts, what goes around comes back around and I'm curious to see their reaction when the same results start happening to their side of the tracks how they handle it. I would guess there will be r**ting buildings being burnt down and people assulted as their side promotes the biggest share of violence in our society.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.