 
     |
| 40+ Informants Told FBI of Biden Criminal Activity (Page 1/3) |
|
Doug85GT
|
OCT 26, 04:38 PM
|
|
Maybe if only one or two people came forward with information about Biden's criminal activity the FBI could ignore it. But how did they keep ignoring it when 10 people came forward. And then kept ignoring it when 20 people came forward. And kept ignoring it when 30 people came forward. I guess if you are on a roll, keep ignoring it after 40+ people came forward.
https://nypost.com/2023/10/...chuck-grassley-says/
|
|
|
|
Raydar
|
OCT 26, 09:03 PM
|
|
You can't sink the people who are "on your team".
Plain and simple.
I've mentioned this before, but people should read "JFK and The Unspeakable".
Unrelated to Brandon, on the face of it, but it will demonstrate how out of control the FBI and CIA truly are.
"The Ministry Of Dirty Tricks".
As despised as he seemed to be, by the "powers that be", I'm truly amazed that "45" wasn't offed either during or after his term. Or maybe he knew enough to keep moving.
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain", indeed.  Things are not as they seem. And probably haven't been for most of my lifetime.[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-26-2023).]
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
NOV 04, 08:46 AM
|
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
NOV 04, 09:40 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Raydar:
As despised as he seemed to be, by the "powers that be", I'm truly amazed that "45" wasn't offed either during or after his term.
|
|
You know what a "dead man's pedal" is.
Well, this one is in a box between the sea and the lake.
Just the opinion of an old retired gearjammer.
|
|
|
|
Wichita
|
NOV 05, 06:36 PM
|
|
 [This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 11-05-2023).]
|
|
|
|
ray b
|
NOV 06, 11:57 AM
|
|
THE ONE WITH A FRANTIC PANIC IS ON TRIAL TODAY
ABOUT TO BE DIVESTED OF THE RUMP EMPIRE'S ILL GOTTEN GAINS
Just before 10 am local time, Trump walked into the courtroom at 60 Centre street to testify in New York State Attorney General Letitia James’ civil fraud case against him.
SHORTY TO BE JAILED FOR OTHER CRIMES
AND BARRED FROM A RERUN BY OUR CONSTITUTION
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State ...
Fourteenth Amendment Section 3 | Constitution Annotated
|
|
|
|
Doug85GT
|
NOV 06, 12:22 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by ray b:
THE ONE WITH A FRANTIC PANIC IS ON TRIAL TODAY
ABOUT TO BE DIVESTED OF THE RUMP EMPIRE'S ILL GOTTEN GAINS
Just before 10 am local time, Trump walked into the courtroom at 60 Centre street to testify in New York State Attorney General Letitia James’ civil fraud case against him.
SHORTY TO BE JAILED FOR OTHER CRIMES
AND BARRED FROM A RERUN BY OUR CONSTITUTION
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State ...
Fourteenth Amendment Section 3 | Constitution Annotated |
|
I know it is the left wet dream to use the 14th Amendment to bar Trump from running because they know he will win. You have a problem with the text of the Amendment:
| quote | Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. |
|
When was Trump a member of Congress, an officer of the US, a member of a state legislature, or an executive or judicial officer? The answer is never. The president is not an officer. Trump did not hold any other office prior to being elected president. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to him.
|
|
|
|
rinselberg
|
NOV 07, 12:39 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Doug85GT:
[The last thing said by Doug...] |
|
"Responding to Mukasey: The President Is an “Officer” Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment"
Praveen Fernandes, Brianne J. Gorod and Jess Zalph for the Constitutional Accountability Center; September 26, 2023.
https://www.theusconstituti...ourteenth-amendment/
Three "worthies" argue in a very brief blog entry that the correct reading of the Constitution leads to the conclusion that the President is an "Officer of the United States" as referenced by Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, [where it] provides that “Officers of the United States” who engaged in insurrection against the country are disqualified from holding office.
Their argument comes to about a single page of text, or even less, in a typical novel or reference book that any of us might read or consult. It's just 7 paragraphs, all within the range of typicality for English language paragraphs of a dignified character. It would take about as long for me to Read-o-Meter it, as for just about any of us to read it.[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-07-2023).]
|
|
|
|
Doug85GT
|
NOV 07, 11:26 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by rinselberg:
"Responding to Mukasey: The President Is an “Officer” Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment"
Praveen Fernandes, Brianne J. Gorod and Jess Zalph for the Constitutional Accountability Center; September 26, 2023.
https://www.theusconstituti...ourteenth-amendment/
Three "worthies" argue in a very brief blog entry that the correct reading of the Constitution leads to the conclusion that the President is an "Officer of the United States" as referenced by Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, [where it] provides that “Officers of the United States” who engaged in insurrection against the country are disqualified from holding office.
Their argument comes to about a single page of text, or even less, in a typical novel or reference book that any of us might read or consult. It's just 7 paragraphs, all within the range of typicality for English language paragraphs of a dignified character. It would take about as long for me to Read-o-Meter it, as for just about any of us to read it.
|
|
That all you got? Because a leftist blog says so. They give no historical reference or any other evidence to support their claim.
The president is not an officer. That claim is absurd and turns other things such as the oath of enlistment into nonsense.
https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html
| quote | | I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962). |
|
Why would the oath differentiate between the president and officers if the president is an officer?
|
|
|
|
randye
|
NOV 08, 02:49 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Doug85GT:
The president is not an officer. That claim is absurd and turns other things such as the oath of enlistment into nonsense.
|
|
SCOTUS already settled this issue some time ago.
In Free Enter. Fund v. Pub. Co. Accounting Oversight Bd. (2010), Chief Justice Roberts observed that "[t]he people do not vote for the 'Officers of the United States.'" Rather, "officers of the United States" are appointed exclusively pursuant to Article II, Section 2 procedures. It follows that the President, who is an elected official, is not an "officer of the United States."
In United States v. Mouat (1888), Justice Samuel Miller interpreted a statute that used the phrase "officers of the United States." He wrote, "[u]nless a person in the service of the government, therefore, holds his place by virtue of an appointment by the president, or of one of the courts of justice or heads of departments authorized by law to make such an appointment, he is not strictly speaking, an officer of the United States."
As usual, Leftoids have zero understanding of American civics and the law.
Leftists gotta Leftist
|
|
|
|