return2ozmaIllinois judge rules Donald Trump is disqualified from the state's 2024 election ballot
Funderpants So, just to be certain, when USA today keeps giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and uses words in this article like, riot, and alleged role, they’re carrying water for him right? The man has been found to have had a role andtaken part in an insurrection in multiple cases now. They should just say it.
When was he convicted of insurrection or anything related to that?
Jo Miran
Its paywalled, but does it talk about him being convicted of insurrection?
The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol outlined 17 specific findings on Monday in the executive summary of its final report. Here are the findings, with additional context.
Annotation: This reflects the committee’s finding that Mr. Trump’s repeated false claims that the election was rigged had both a political and financial motive. During its second hearing, the panel introduced evidence that Trump supporters donated nearly $100 million to Mr. Trump’s so-called Election Defense Fund but that the money flowed instead into a super PAC the president had created. It was not just “the big lie,” the committee said. It was also “the big rip-off.”
Annotation: Mr. Trump and his allies filed more than 60 lawsuits challenging the results of the election and lost all but one of them. Many of the suits, the committee determined, were brought even after some of Mr. Trump’s closest aides — including his campaign manager, Bill Stepien, and his attorney general, William P. Barr — told him that there was no fraud that could have changed the outcome of the race.
I am aware of the facts, but again, there was no conviction of insurrection or anything related. Do you understand how the conviction is the important part, not what people claim?
Conviction is not the important part, at all.
The 14th Amendment was intended to keep former Confederates out of government. The people who wrote it had no intention of putting former Confederates on trial.
I agree, that amendment was directly talking about confederates who had done a known and agreed on insurrection.
It was also meant to apply to any future insurrections, like the one on Jan 6.
Jan 6th wasnt and insurrection, and trump would need to be convicted of an insurrection not just declared guilty by someone.
Nobody needed to be convicted in 1868, therefore Trump doesn’t need to be convicted today.
Yeah because it was literally a civil war…
The 14th Amendment applies to insurrections, not just wars. Any attempt to stop the function of government by force is an insurrection, including the Whiskey Rebellion, the Civil War, and Jan 6.
Sounds good if it is a universally understood insurrection.
Insurrection has a legal definition, and that’s the definition that counts.
Judges are the ones responsible for deciding whether a legal definition applies, and so far all those involved said it does.
Do you see the issue with one judge or a couple judges deciding who get to run for office at their whim?
Judges already do a lot more than that, they have the power to decide who lives and dies.
Thats fair, but Trump running for office could be a lot bigger than that if it leads to domestic conflict.
Judges generally don’t care if their decisions lead to domestic conflict. Nor should they, that’s how rule of law can succumb to mob rule.
I understand that, but when judges do things like remove people from ballots over accusation, that is obviously a political decision.
When they order congressional districts that obey the Voting Rights Act, that is also political. It has resulted in elected representatives losing their seats multiple times
Judges enforce the law, and politics are not above the law
The law is not what they say, its biased and is not real justice many times. Do you recognize the five or so prosecutions against trump are political, and could result in severe domestic violence?
I think Trump broke the law and needs to face the consequences. I am not afraid of his threats of violence.
Okay, lets look at the real estate “crime” because i know real estate well. Who did he defraud and how?
He lied on his loan applications, which is illegal.
How did he lie on his application and who was harmed by this?
He overstated the value of his assets on a loan document. This is illegal in NY, so the people of NY were harmed.
Are you aware of underwriting? What it does is the loan company asks for all of the information it wants, and uses that information to decide if they should give you money and how much money to give you. So it doesnt matter what value they put on the property, the loan company decides what the value is.
This is illegal in NY, so the people of NY were harmed.
How is having an opinion that your property is worth more than someone else thinks a crime? And if it is, how can you possibly justify so much for a crime what you cant point to an actual person that was directly or even indirectly harmed?
Falsely stating the value of an asset is a crime in NY. It doesn’t matter if someone else is directly harmed.
There are plenty of laws that are designed to reduce the risk of harm. Apartment buildings are required to conform to fire codes. Restaurants are required to conform to health codes. Drivers are required to be sober and carry insurance.
If your apartment has no fire exits, it doesn’t matter if nobody is hurt in a fire. If your restaurant has spoiled meat in the fridge, it doesn’t matter if nobody got food poisoning. If you are pulled over drunk without insurance, it doesn’t matter if you didn’t get in an accident.
In each of those examples, you put people at risk, even if you “can’t point to an actual person that was directly of even indirectly harmed”. You broke the law, and you should be punished.
Furthermore, the punishment has to exceed whatever you might have gained from breaking the law. If you don’t have auto insurance, the penalty has to be higher than what auto insurance costs. Otherwise, you would be happy to pay a fine instead of buying auto insurance.
In New York, there are laws against inflating your asset values on loan documents. Those laws are meant to protect all New Yorkers. When Trump lied on his loan documents, he harmed all New Yorkers. He broke the law. And the penalty has to be greater than whatever money he thought he might save by lying.
Value of property is highly variable and up to opinion.
How was an average New Yorker harmed by trump claiming his property was worth more than it was? Please be very direct and specific. I can give you how trump getting that loan benefitted New Yorkers if you want…
For starters, the square footage of an apartment is not a matter of opinion, and Trump lied about the square footage.
The average New Yorker was harmed by Trump in the same way that the average New Yorker is harmed by a drunk driver who makes it home without hitting anyone.