Correct response: “This action would destroy democracy.”
That’s all you need to say, no explanation necessary. It’s what they do and it seems to be working.
Trump meets the Constitutional requirements for President. The only way to add additional requirements, or prohibit him from taking office:
1) Impeachment and conviction in the Senate - this failed twice
2) Amend the Constitution.
This bill is also a bill of attainder, which is prohibited by the Constitution.
Let’s also note the hypocrisy. Democrats constantly whine about the threat to Democracy and attempts by Trump and Republicans to interfere with our sacred democracy. Central to “democracy” is the people freely choosing their elected representatives. What this bill proposes to do is limit the ability of people to choose, so it is a blatant attack on democracy.
Everything Donald Trump said in his speech last night was true and in the face of these communist that are called Democrats. They are scared to death of this man. I love him and we may never in our life time see a man that cares more about America and its people .
And, anyone who believes this BS deserves the tyranny in place.
The only way someone can be banned from the Pres office is having been convicted of insurrection. This is not a “believe all women moment”, it requires conviction.
A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person, or a group of people, guilty of some crime, and punishing them, often without a trial. As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person’s civil rights, most notably the right to own property (and thus pass it on to heirs), the right to a title of nobility, and, in at least the original usage, the right to life itself.
They don’t need a bill passed in Congress, they need a conviction for sedition in a court of law.
The D’s and GOPe, “Trump is toxic, give up on him, his time has past, he can’t win, the mid-term elections prove it, blah, blah”.
Announcement: Trump is officially running for POTUS again.
The D’s and GOPe, “We must stop him from being able to run! Invoke the 14th Amendment!!! We cannot ALLOW this!!”.
Nothing says they’re terrified more than this pathetic narrative.
When Christ went into the Synagogue where trade was ongoing and turned the tables over declaring they’d “taken a place of worship and turned it into a den of thieves” he alienated the Jewish establishment. He also threatened the political authority of the Romans. They decided to crucify him for it. Together they were “The Establishment”. The stories still told 2000 years later, obviously it was epic and historical.
Then Trump came to Washington D.C. ...and if they could, they would crucify him for exactly the same reasons. Same story, just a different means to an end.
Any marxist would be proud of this.
Jan. 6! Damn, what they are all admitting is they NEVER had anything to bitch about with Trump until then??? 5 years of pissing and moaning and impeachments!
ex post facto
The lame duck session is under way.
Wouldn’t be surfing the Democrats passed a law making it illegal to investigate Democrats . . .
Cicilline? That castrato from Rhode Island?
He can screech all he wants, to no avail.
David Cicilline (D-R.I.) is pursuing legislation that would make Donald Trump tell where all the UFO’s are stashed and how many and where did he ship the aliens to .............
Lame Ducks in action. Panic time.
Looking at the articles there, Bipartisan Report - Uniparty Report.
Sounds like a “threat to democracy” to me, overriding the will of the people.
It sounds like their argument is: we have to kill democracy in order to save it. Either that or their Newspeak definition of “democracy” does not include permitting the little people to actually have a choice.
Punishment without conviction.
Way to go idiot democRATS. (That’s redundant)
Bill of Attainder is unconstitutional but Demon Rat party hacks don’t care.
In fact, in stark contrast to the ongoing Democratic and RINO evil of bearing false witness against Trump regarding January 6 (J6) imo, every member of Congress who voted not to investigate allegations of rigged electoral votes needs to be removed from office under Section 3 for not upholding their oaths to protect the following constitutionally enumerated safeguards to insure fair elections.
Starting with Section 2 of 14A, a penalty that mandates a loss of House seats for states where elections have been stolen, I wouldn't be surprised if Democratic Rep. David Cicilline hasn't read that section.
Excerpted from 14A:
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Section 2: Apportionment of Representatives]
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
In fact, Cicilline can be the first to be booted under Section 3 of 14A for voting to ignore the federal government's Section 2 responsibilities to investigate alleged voting fraud on J6.
Consider that the post-Civil War congressional Republicans who drafted Section 2 made it to discourage southern Democrats (my word) from rigging the ballot boxes that Democrats are now alleged to have done for 2020, and now 2022 elections!
Section 2: Apportionment of Representatives
So untaught history may be repeating itself.
In fact, federal government-ignored allegations of integrity problems with 2020 and 2022 elections might lead people to question if political descendants of the former Confederate States who are possibly in Congress are effectively trying to reverse the outcome of the Civil War!
Adding to his Section 3 list of possible constitutional violations to boot Cicilline from Congress, also consider that. by his J6 vote, he chose to ignore the Constitution's guarantee of republican form of government for each state.
"Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government [emphasis added], and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
Additionally, Cicilline also ignored that so-called state "winner take all" laws for electoral votes are unconstitutional imo, another consideration for being kicked out of Congress under Section 3 imo.
More specifically, Cicilline ignored that when the states ratified the 12th Amendment (12A), they effectively prohibited themselves from making such laws imo.
Excerpted from the 12th Amendment:
"12th Amendment: The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate [emphasis added], ..."
In fact, Justice Joseph Story had emphasized that the overall effect of a state with divided electoral votes is that it reduces number of electoral votes for a single candidate.
"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote, while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833."
Regarding 12A, let's add to Cicilline's list that he also ignored that 12A also indicates that the chain of custody for electoral votes is to remain unbroken between official, constitutionally qualified electors and Vice President imo.
Again, half of Congress needs to be warned not to let the door hit them when they follow Cicilline out of the House of Representatives under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for violating their oaths to protect and defend constitutionally enumerated voting integrity safeguards.
Corrections, insights welcome.