Jim Halpert spells it out for the slow

Trump was never convicted or arrested for 'insurrection'. You can't punish someone for a crime they-
1) Never committed.
2) Never got arrested for.
3) Never found guilty.

No one was charged with insurrection so it’s not one because you say so nor because Nancy Pelosi did.

You will have to ask the prosecutor why he didn’t go for that charge if he thought it was easily proven or convictable. Seems he didn’t have a case he could prove.

Sedition Conspiracy? So now you're a conspiracy theorists...

"targeting activities that undermine the state without directly attacking it."

Sounds like you should be for Biden getting charged with this for not securing the Southern Border.

Engaged in insurrection covers that. One must be proven to have engaged in insurrection for that to stick.

Point to the part of Section 3 that requires a conviction. Because it doesn't require one.

To use as an example, Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy. He was arrested. But was released without a trial. He wasn't convicted of anything.

He couldn't be on the ballot. He clearly fails the 14th Amendment test.

Actually NOPE. He wouldn't be.

The South left the Nation. The South became it's own country, albeit briefly. Ergo - he was a foreign entity and was considered a belligerent. It was just a war. Not an insurrection.

Insurrection is armed rebellion - rebellion comes from within. The moment the south declared their independence from the Union, they were no longer insiders.

Also - wasn't just "set free" like you claimed.

"He bid farewell to the United States Senate on January 21, 1861. A month later, he became president of the Confederacy. Captured by Union troops in 1865, Davis was indicted for treason and imprisoned for two years. He died in New Orleans in 1889."

Notice how he was INDICTED FOR TREASON. He then spent two years in prison. The reason he couldn't take office ever again is because he was TRIED IN A COURT OF LAW and found GUILTY of TREASON.

Trump has not been indicted of anything. Nor did he participate in Insurrection.

Davis was held in prison for 2 years. His $100,000 bail was posted by several prominent citizens. the Attorney General stopped pursuing a conviction due to President Johnson's Christmas Proclamation.

Davis never went to trial. He was never convicted.

And the 14th Amendment was written in reaction to the Civil War. It was written to make sure any Confederate couldn't serve in Federal, State, or Local governments.

It was specifically written for people like Jefferson Davis. It was enshrined as an Amendment rather than a law to make sure it applied to anyone who rose up against the United States could never serve in its government.

No conviction necessary.

He was charged with treason against the United States for his part in leading the states in rebellion during the American Civil War, 1861-1865. But instead proceeding with the trial, federal prosecutors entered a “nolle prosequi,” or statement of decision not to prosecute.

So he was Charged with TREASON, imprisoned for TREASON - and then 2 years later, let go with "nolle prosequi". So yes - he was CHARGED with TREASON.

Meaning they had him dead to rights and as a part of keeping the southern states a bit happier about the entire "losing the war" thing was let go.

Please show me anywhere that states Trump has been charged with insurrection. You can't - once again. So try and dance around history all you want to support your argument... You're wrong. Plain and simple.

There is nothing in the 14th Amendment that requires a conviction or a charge.
It was written in specific reaction to the Civil War to make sure anyone who had ever worked against the United States could hold office in the local, state, or federal governments.

Trump got his followers riled up. He organized a rally. He got them pissed off even more. Then he pointed them straight at the Capital building and said, "go get them."

And they did.

Then when it failed, he gave them comfort by saying he loved them and they were very special people. Now he's saying if he's elected President, he'll give them aid by pardoning them.

Did he organize an insurrection? Yes. Did he provide comfort to the people on the ground? Yes. Is he attempting to provide aid by offering pardons? Yes.

He's unfit to serve as President on those grounds.

Engaged in Insurrection spells it out quite nicely. Now - class, can you tell me how someone is able to be identified as "engaging in insurrection" ?

They would at bare minimum be charged for it wouldn't they? Indicted for it... Which hasn't happened.

Try as much as you want... Trump didn't do that ergo your argument is moot.

The part that says "engaged in insurrection". You can't prove he did that because he was never charged for it now was he?

No it's not... there was No Due Process allowed to Trump in their decision...

Exactly - you can't be found guilty of something if you're not given due process to fight the claim. That is of course if you're living in a Constitutional Republic that states such things, like our constitution states.

You could totally do that if you're acting like a bunch of Nazis though - which is what the left is doing lately.

Well hmmm I guess he's just a racist and didn't do anything research wise that may bring him to that conclusion in the US. Having adequate data that supports his claim - readily available doesn't make someone a racist.

Statistics aren't racist. Now - your opinion of how he is racist, because of his assessment... Does mean you're not intellectually engaged, but rather emotionally engaged.

Actually it states "engaged in insurrection" - Trump has not been found guilty of engaging in Insurrection. In fact - he didn't even have due process to defend against such a charge.

He didn't enter the Capitol Building - he didn't take poles or bear spray to enter the building, didn't engage violently with Capitol Police, and specifically stated to be peaceful to the people at the rally.

So yes - you actually have to be involved in the insurrection.

That’s just your opinion.

Yes. It is.

Ya simple problem is no charges no conviction therefore not guilty and it doesn’t apply. Those pesky American due process rights be damned though right?

Literally... "Engaging in Insurrection" - it's right in the Amendment.

How does one determine that someone has engaged in insurrection ? They are brought on trial and defend their stance in a court of law. Trump was not given this due process - ergo, he did not engage in insurrection.

I guess the court will decide, but while we wait please show me where it says that a party operative gets to usurp congress and remove the primary opposing candidate for president from the ballot because they think anything.

I’ll keep your answer for review once the court resolved the matter.

Pick that nit

It banned those who “engaged in insurrection” against the United States from holding any civil, military, or elected office without the approval of two-thirds of the House and Senate.

Trump did not engage in insurrection. Show me any video proof of where Trump was at the Capitol Building entering or climbing walls or scuffling with Capitol Police... You can't?

HMMMM seems pretty clear cut that it violates his Constitutional rights then.

Actually I didn't do that - but it's understandable for a lefty not to understand logic and reasoning.

Trump didn't lie about the election being stolen. He wasn't given the opportunity to prove it, because Democrat Judges refused the processes. He wasn't given the opportunity to prove his case.

When Al Gore (who I voted for) didn't win Florida - he wasn't pegged as an election denier. He was given ample time, ample resources and every vote was counted appropriately in a recount. Why is that? Why would we allow one person ample time and resources to count every vote (manually with Election Officials watching the entire process)... But then not give Trump that same opportunity?

I'll answer for you: when Bush won , he knew he won. He didn't mind the votes being counted properly because he knew Al Gore didn't beat him. When Trump questioned it - they knew their crime would be exposed.

Now as far as it being an insurrection - nope. Wasn't that at all. Please provide me examples in history where a crowd tried to take over the government with Bear Spray and make shift poles. You won't find any because no one would be so limp twisted to think a riot is an insurrection.

Had the group showed up with Guns and Body Armor or taken hostages... Yes, that would be an insurrection. There's never been an insurrection in history where everyone was home for dinner. And you know it.

Interesting take- if there was no conviction there can't have been a crime. Weird, but okay. If there's no conviction of voter fraud, then by your 'logic' there can't have been any, right?

But Trump could prove it now. He could release all that proof in "one big beautiful report."

Remember how he said he was going to do that? But then he didn't.

He could put it all together and put it out on his website and his own social media network.

Also, not all of the judges in the 62 court cases were "Democrats." Some were appointed by him. Republican judges.

Like in Wisconsin. It was a Republican majority State Supreme court that said no.

Fortunately, all the cases have been brought together with summaries. https://campaignlegal.org/results-lawsuits-regarding-2020-elections

Notice how in many of those cases he failed to produce ANY evidence. And in some cases the evidence his lawyers put forward wasn't actually evidence of fraud at all.

He was given all the legal chances to overturn the election.

He was denied the opportunity in a court of law by corrupt Judges. So yes - because there was no recount committed, because there was no court that would take the case and actually rule on it... Historically speaking, it will be a long time before we learn what truly happened (just like we do with most Interference by the DOJ and FBI), and until then - it will be written there wasn't election interference.

Also - NONE of the 5 counties that ran Midnight Ballot drops were Republican Judges that said no. The counties that did midnight ballot drops were all super majority Democrat counties. Strongholds so to speak because they housed large Democrat cities.

Republican Judges didn't chime in until it was passed the county levels.

And NO he wasn't given legal chances to overturn the election. Name me one of the 5 midnight ballot drop counties that completed thorough - televised - fully witnessed MANUAL recounts (like Al Gore got in Florida when he ran against Dubyah Bush)..

You can't because they didn't do it.

Had they completed Al Gore style Recounts in ALL 5 counties ... AND the results were the same, I wouldn't have a problem saying Biden won fairly. But that wasn't completed.

The closest they had to that was pushing the ballots through the same machines, without the publics watchful eye on the event. It was almost has closed room as the midnight ballot drops themselves.

That didn't happen though...

How about Bognet v Boockvar?

https://web.archive.org/web/20201222013405/https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/10/show_temp.pl-4.pdf

It was dismissed because they literally had no evidence.

I forget which of the Pennsylvania suits went all the way to the state supreme court, but they were all dismissed because... a total lack of evidence.

And what does a Lawsuit have to do with a Manual Recount like was done for Al Gore in Florida?

It has nothing to do with it. When the losing candidate is not satisfied with the result and calls for a Recount, if that recount doesn't look like what Al Gore (who I voted for - who I held dearly that he would still win Florida) got...

Then they didn't do a proper recount.

It's teh lawsuit his lawyers filed after the recounts didn't change anything. Because, yes, the ballots were recounted. By hand.

And that lawsuit was thrown out because his lawyers presented 0 evidence.

So, yes, he had EVERY legal opportunity to challenge the results of the election.

When... Bc reports I read stated they just ran through the machines again. And there was the Georgia audit that showed plenty of errors. Those would have been caught in a manual proper recount .

Didn't happen

Lycoming County did do a hand recount. and the results didn't change. It's exceptionally rare for a recount to change the results of an election.

https://www.spotlightpa.org/news/2023/01/pa-2020-presidential-election-recount-lycoming-county-results/

Yes... you never heard of Due Process... that's almost as bad as some of the Biden judge appointees never hearing of the Brady Motion...

The pass/fail of your information... Is applicable to the charges of insurrection. If you aren't charged with insurrection and found guilty of it... In a court of law, you didn't commit insurrection.

In charging Trump with insurrection - it's a pass fail. You either charged Trump with insurrection or you didn't.

Has he been charged with insurrection - yes
/No. Pass/fail.

What utter and total bullshit

Sorry... Due Process wasn't given... case over...

Bullshit

Of course, did you expect anything different