General Election 2024

Quote: GenoDRPh

https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-releases/judge-removes-couy-griffin-from-office-for-engaging-in-the-january-6-insurrection/

That's one judges opinion, it's meaningless. And the guy wasn't charged with the crime of insurrection, nobody has been. Nobody has been arrested and charged and gone to court over it because it didn't happen and they know they can't prove it. The last place they want it going to is the Supreme Court because they'll throw it out and they know it.

Quote: Evenbob

That's one judges opinion, it's meaningless. And the guy wasn't charged with the crime of insurrection, nobody has been. Nobody has been arrested and charged and gone to court over it because it didn't happen and they know they can't prove it. The last place they want it going to is the Supreme Court because they'll throw it out and they know it.

Dude got booted from office and didn't appeal.

.....

Quote: Evenbob

That's one judges opinion, it's meaningless. And the guy wasn't charged with the crime of insurrection, nobody has been. Nobody has been arrested and charged and gone to court over it because it didn't happen and they know they can't prove it. The last place they want it going to is the Supreme Court because they'll throw it out and they know it.

I don’t know….. Meaningless? The judge said the guy was disqualified from office for participating in an insurrection. That’s on the record. The guy is no longer a representative. If that’s meaningless, tell me what would be meaningful? I don’t necessarily agree with the ruling, but it’s certainly meaningful.

It's the lowest level of federal court.

Have to have money and be willing to spend it to defend self good.


The governor that appointed the Democrat judge:

--------------

Susana Martinez
.
.
.
Martinez endorsed Marco Rubio for the Republican primary in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
.
.
.
On October 8, 2016, after The Washington Post released a 2005 video of Trump making comments about women that the Post described as "extremely lewd," Martinez announced she would not vote for Donald Trump in the 2016 general election.
.
.
.
https://ballotpedia.org/Susana_Martinez

----------------

Both Rubio and her are Latino.

She used to be a Democrat, so that tells me she's likely a RINO.

And she's anti-Trump because of her Trump comment.

But even before the comment, she wanted a different person.

I feel like when Trump won, that humiliated her.


All Democrat judges will likely convict as many as they can.

In order for the ruling to be significant, it has to be a high-level Republican non-RINO judge.

Add Maine to the list:

Quote:

BREAKING: Maine bars Trump from ballot as U.S. Supreme Court weighs state authority to block former president from elections.

Quote: ams288

Add Maine to the list:

This could be slightly more significant than CO. Maine allocates electoral votes not winner take all, but by Congressional district, and one district is solidly Red. If the ruling stands, it would deprive Trump of a sure electoral vote.

Quote: ams288

Could someone please point out where it says you have to be *convicted* of insurrection?

I honestly do not know. It seems many judges are thinking that you may not need a conviction, because they are barring him from being a candidate on ballots administered by the State for insurrection activity. My personal assumption would be a conviction would be required for such an event (that would restrict you from a basic right.) But, also there has never been a case in history like this with a rogue President, so there is not really any historical comparisons to make.

Quote: Gandler

I honestly do not know. It seems many judges are thinking that you may not need a conviction, because they are barring him from being a candidate on ballots administered by the State for insurrection activity. My personal assumption would be a conviction would be required for such an event (that would restrict you from a basic right.) But, also there has never been a case in history like this with a rogue President, so there is not really any historical comparisons to make.

The individuals the section originally was meant for-Confederates- were never convicted of insurrection. Mere participation was sufficient to be DQ'd, back in the day.

Quote: GenoDRPh

The individuals the section originally was meant for-Confederates- were never convicted of insurrection. Mere participation was sufficient to be DQ'd, back in the day.

If you believe Trump participated in the ‘event’, why have NONE of the other people who CLEARLY participated in the event been charged with insurrection!?! NONE. Not ONE. You (and most media) continue to use the word insurrection.

Please explain to me why NO ONE has been charged with that crime? Did I miss one?