Spearfeather

I might be misunderstanding you, but if it's months before the election, how could he believe he's won ? Or maybe your saying his delusions were both before and after the election.

He certainly could live for another decade which in no way means he would last as President for another five years.

1. I think he thought that he was being screwed. In other words, I don't think he knew for a fact ( and maybe still doesn't think ) that he lost, even if he eventually used the phrase " I lost ". In his stubborness he became more and more frustrated and desperate and did things that were reprehensible. I also don't think he was an illegitimate President as Biden, Harris, and Cinton labeled him. 2. and 3. I'm glad the Supreme Court is ruling on this, and if states are allowed to decide for themselves what qualifies as " engaged in insurrection " , I think that sets a really bad precedent that sets the wheels in motion for simular actions by states not just now, but in the future, and they assuredly wont all be focused on Republicans. So, I suppose the answer is yes. 4. I'm not 100 % certain. It's a possibility that for the first time in 35 years I wouldn't vote at all, but I really hate the idea of doing that. A vote for Joe is a vote for Joe and whoever would finish out his term and I'm not sure we know yet, for a fact, who that would be. I assume your answers are : Yes No No No 🙂

So, no chance Kegan, Sotomayor, or Brown Jackson side against Colorado ?

I believe you.

That's not what I was saying but ok.

Well, you should. Yes, I understand that. And those people were firing guns and cannons at the US military. So, we have examples of both people who have been charged and convicted of the crimes they are being disqualified from office for, and people who have not been charged and convicted of what they're being disqualified from office for.

So you're acknowledging that guy was charged and convicted for the crime that he was being removed from office for. Unlike what's happening now. So, I'll ask again, Should each state be able to make their own interpretation, or not ? If you think so, just say yes. Personally, I think that's a terrible idea, which is why I've been a proponent of the SC ruling on this. Which, they will. If they decide that Colorado and other states can do that. OK, but I think it's a really bad idea that just leads to more of a mess in the future. And I never actually said this: " he should be convicted of insurrection first "

Really. Where are they now ? That guy was convicted of espionage by the US government. I suppose you're advocating for each state to be able to interpret disqualification when and however they see fit. Sounds like a bad idea, to me.

You're implying the answer is zero ,and maybe it is, and most of those disqualification were removed a few years later via the Amnesty act. So, former soldiers of a standing army that had actually taken up arms against the US military were once again allowed to run for office. The point in my example was that the guy had actually been charged and convicted by the US government of espionage. Not just deemed to be by this state or that state.

...in 1919 and 1920, it blocked Victor L. Berger, a member of the Socialist Party who had won both elections, from taking office as the Representative from Wisconsin because he had been convicted of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 Not insurrection but he was convicted of espionage.

Why weren't they charged with insurrection ?

So, without a ruling, you think every state would adhere to the exact same standard ? I bet you they wouldn't.

So, charge these people with insurrection. Sounds like you think a conviction would be a slam-dunk. Heres a list of the people so far that have been charged with insurrection: Open your eyes, Lady.

So, what do you think the dissenting judges meant in the 4-3 Colorado case, when they said this:

I'll play. This little fireworks show introducing DeNiros " Aces High " in the movie Casino, went on a few years later to be sentenced to 12 years for attempted murder.

Not what I'm saying, at all.

I know they're not exactly the same. I purposely made them that way.

I think you're leaving some things out. They don't have to be. That's the whole point.

O.k. That's cool. It's a late spring afternoon. A crowd of a couple thousand has gathered at the Capital protesting a bill that every Republican is voting for, Democrats and the left are absolutely apoplectic about it. There's been a couple of rocks thrown through the windows, halting proceedings for 45 min. A couple of fights with Capital police and around 35 arrest. Assaulting Capital Police, Destruction of property, etc. Over at the White House, Joe is in his favorite den in the Whitehouse, sitting in his favorite chair, feet propped up on the ottoman. His chin, resting gently on his chest. Karine, unaware of the arrest at the Capital, comes running in and informs Joe about the crowd at the Capital protesting the bill that Joe has already stated his disdain for. " The staff is suggesting a statement of support Mr. President ". " My statement is I support them 100 percent ", says Joe. " Yes Mr. President. We'll get that out, right away." The protest continues for a couple of more hours, with two people associated with Antifa being arrested while trying to break down a door at the back of the Capital and are facing federal charges. About 15 minutes later, a photograph on social media starts going viral showing two protesters holding up signs saying " Eradicate the Republicans ", and just to the left of them there's a guy standing with what appears to be a pistol in his hand but some are saying it's some type of baton. There are no weapons arrest. Come November, Biden is off the ballot in 19 states for " engaging in insurrection ". " But, but, .. they never got inside the..." Doesn't matter. " But, no one was even charged with insurr..." Doesn't matter. " But Joe never said ... " Doesn't matter State Judges and Election Officials in these 19 states have determined that Joe, with his statement of support, combined with the " Eradicate the Republicans " signs, along with the ( possibly) armed guy standing next to them and the " Antifa Two " .. is guilty of " engaging in insurrection ". These State Judges and Election Officials have spoken, and that's that.

I just think it's hard to make this case with no one being convicted or even charged with insurrection. Are you sure you want each state to be able to determine for itself what qualifies as " engaged in insurrection " ? Are you sure that's what you want ?

I don't think he was going for his knees, or any part of his legs for that matter. I do think he was going for his head.

Like I said earlier in the thread .. For some maybe, but probably not for most.

You know, I really would love to see that list. I think we can assume McLaurin. But personally, I would hope Brian Robinson is on it. To me he was maybe the most underutilized player on offense. He wasn't going to get but so many carries anyway in Bienimy"s throw the ball 74 times a game offense but I'd be really interested to see what he would do in a slightly more RB friendly system.