FYI: the judge who coined that -- Sol Watchler -- was himself indicted, plead guilty, and sentenced to 15 months in prison several years after he coined the phrase.
Sol Wachtler - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Just thought I'd throw that out there without further comment.
Depending on what they decide a major part of Democracy in this country could very well be dead and I don't say that as one of Trump's "Yes men."This just popped up on my news feed ..
Supreme Court to decide whether to kick Trump off ballot
Castro v. Trump, a case challenging Trump's candidacy with the 14th Amendment, is expected to decided by the justices on or before October 9.www.newsweek.com
The Supreme Court is going to weigh in on the 14th Amendment question.
This just popped up on my news feed ..
Supreme Court to decide whether to kick Trump off ballot
Castro v. Trump, a case challenging Trump's candidacy with the 14th Amendment, is expected to decided by the justices on or before October 9.www.newsweek.com
The Supreme Court is going to weigh in on the 14th Amendment question.
I'm half expecting them to punt on the issue with "certriorari denied" and no further comment. I, like you, am dreading something open-ended enough to allow for endless shenanigans or worse.Depending on what they decide a major part of Democracy in this country could very well be dead and I don't day that as one of Trump's "Yes men."
The fact is that if you make it where the 14th can be invoked with no conviction in a formal court of law it opens the doors to all sorts of shenanigans involving both parties repeatedly trying to frame each other's actions as falling under its definition.
And Marcus Aurelius Antoninus killed shitloads of people, doesn't mean he didn't say correct things from time to time.
Depending on what they decide a major part of Democracy in this country could very well be dead and I don't say that as one of Trump's "Yes men."
The fact is that if you make it where the 14th can be invoked with no conviction in a formal court of law it opens the doors to all sorts of shenanigans involving both parties repeatedly trying to frame each other's actions as falling under its definition.
The court has a choice between ending the republic or trying to please an unpleasable left.
Perhaps a minor detail, but I thought the purported blocking of ballot access was to be done entirely on the state level?The court has the choice of "upholding the republic" and "letting the federal government decide who runs"
Perhaps a minor detail, but I thought the purported blocking of ballot access was to be done entirely on the state level?
But still doesn't get to dictate to the states that they have to put someone on the ballot or remove someone, right?The federal government is who levies treason and sedition charges.
But still doesn't get to dictate to the states that they have to put someone on the ballot or remove someone, right?
Is there anything left that isn't corrupt as hell?
how many Nuclear plants have they let us build in the last few decades? they are in charge of that.Off the top of my head? Department of Energy.