this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
638 points (96.8% liked)

News

23667 readers
5667 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that while he didn’t want to do it, he had to remind people of how “severe” the situation is.

A top Republican official in Missouri is threatening to remove President Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot as retaliation for the determination in two other states that Donald Trump doesn't qualify because he "engaged in insurrection."

"What has happened in Colorado & Maine is disgraceful & undermines our republic," Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft wrote on the social media site X on Friday. "While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!"

Ashcroft's post came shortly after the Supreme Court agreed to review a decision by Colorado's high court that found Trump could be barred from the state's primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 92 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!

If it applies equally to both, Biden shouldn't be taken off since he hasn't been found guilty of sedition ya dipshit.

[–] Furedadmins 39 points 11 months ago

Because he didn't engage in, not found guilty of.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Trump hasn't been found guilty of sedition either.

Yes, I'm prepared for the down votes from a bunch of idiots who hate reality.

[–] PorradaVFR 44 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Article 14 doesn’t stipulate guilt, just engaging in which the Colorado court determined he did. His removal is the result of due process. So if they can show in court that Biden did the same then sure…but they cannot.

Not the same, purely partisan BS.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Article 14 doesn’t stipulate guilt,

Nor did I say it did.

[–] PorradaVFR 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

No, but you said Trump has not been found guilty which is not required for him to be precluded from running for office. It’s an artificial bar some are trying to set unsupported by the text in the Constitution.

In any rational timeline SCOTUS would agree but with these justices who knows.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

He was responding to another poster who said not being found guilty should make Biden immune to being taken off.

That's the context in which that was said, and you're ignoring that context. There's a big difference between saying it's also true of trump, for consistencies sake, and someone bringing it up out of the blue to advocate for trump.

You either have poor reading comprehension or you are responding in bad faith.

[–] PorradaVFR 1 points 11 months ago

I understood it perfectly - my point which applies to both comments is that nothing in the 14th stipulates or indeed even mentions conviction, it does specifically exclude insurrection which applies, as determined by the Colorado court, solely to Trump.

The original response was flawed in its premise, agreed, but the guilt angle is Constitutionally irrelevant regardless - that was my point.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Trump hasn't been found guilty of sedition either.

Not in a court of law; but given all the evidence you have to be willfully ignorant to believe he isn't guilty of it and wouldn't receive a conviction if/when there actually is a trial.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think he's guilty of it. But we shouldn't be talking about guilt because it's not part of the amendment.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

But we shouldn't be talking about guilt because it's not part of the amendment

That's just being pedantic. What's a better word to use to say "he fucking did it?"

[–] douglasg14b 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

.... Did you really just dismiss something that relies, literally, on pedantry, as a system of understanding, for being.... Pedantic?

Guilt isn't part of the amendment, just engaging in sedition is enough, not being found guilty of it.

Guilty being the operative word, which has legal definitions, feel free to ignore/dismiss actual meanings of words for convenience but that is an odd stance to be taking if you aren't a MAGA? (I've interacted with you before, and you're better than that which is why I'm confused)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

Guilt isn't part of the amendment, just engaging in sedition is enough, not being found guilty of it.

He engaged in it. Another way to say that is he is guilty of it. I didn't say he was convicted. So the question still stands: Do you have a better word that means "he fucking did it" that isn't "guilty?" Because this isn't a court room and we're not lawyers. Reasonable people understood what I meant.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Correct. Trump hasn't been found guilty of sedition. He has been found guilty of insurrection by the Colorado supreme Court. He also hasn't been criminally convicted of insurrection, because this isn't a criminal case.

Sedition and insurrection are different, and parts of different laws. Criminal and civil guilt are also different mechanisms of our laws, but the 14th amendment doesn't state someone needs to have a criminal conviction to be considered ineligible for office.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

He has been found guilty of insurrection by the Colorado supreme Court.

An interesting thing I hadn't thought about. Thanks.

[–] KredeSeraf 8 points 11 months ago

You're not wrong. However by the text of the Constitution a guilty verdict isn't required to invalidate candidacy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Technically that is true. However, he was impeached for incitement of insurrection by the House of Representatives. The majority of the Senate then voted to remove him after impeachment, but not the 2/3s majority required.

So no, not "found guilty of sedition". But he was impeached for inciting insurrection.

[–] RampantParanoia2365 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

So what, you're suggesting the reality is it was staged? Because we all observed reality with our real eyes in real time.