Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Turley: The "haymaker" in Supreme Court arguments. Chief Justice Roberts. "Openly mocking of DC Circuit."
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 5:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (5 comments) [147 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (4 comments) [26 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (4 comments) [80 views]

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (7 comments) [333 views]

The latest general election polls from this weekend reveal something interesting.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 22, 2024 11:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (10 comments) [423 views]

So Ukraine got money.
Military by oldedude     April 24, 2024 3:58 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (6 comments) [92 views]

Donna may be getting her wish granted: Gateway Pundit to file for bankruptcy
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:28 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [35 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [81 views]

Trump, Giuliani, Meadows are unindicted co-conspirators in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 4:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Ponderer (3 comments) [42 views]

Russia is even more furious over vote by Congress to support Ukraine than MTG.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 21, 2024 6:09 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (11 comments) [641 views]

Law selectors, pages, etc.
Barack Obama deserves at least a trial before he is forbidden from seeking a third term.
By Curt_Anderson
January 2, 2024 2:22 pm
Category: Law

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Amendment XXII be damned! Why are we denying the people a very popular choice for president? Barack Obama is rested and ready...and he is always tanned. Olde Dude makes a compelling case that Obama deserves at minimum to have his day in court before he is excluded from any ballots.

"In order to stop him from running, our constitution says he must have a trial (see above) to LEGALLY determine that he is in-fact, guilty of the crime before he is taken off the ballot." --OD

"Since we are a nation of laws, the next step is for the courts to weigh the evidence..." --OD

"You are denying him a right he is eligible to have. Once you do the process (court) and if he's found guilty, you're good. No trial, Constitutional violation." --OD

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "Barack Obama deserves at least a trial before he is forbidden from seeking a third term.":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on January 2, 2024 2:29 pm

    Curt,

    I'd like to think that you're joshin us but, after all these years, I'm pretty sure you don't have a sense of humor.

  2. by Curt_Anderson on January 2, 2024 2:35 pm
    HtS,
    I suppose you think that Obama's right to due process is a laughing matter! Harrumph!


  3. by Ponderer on January 2, 2024 2:40 pm

    Bang on, Curt! Exactly!

    Who is it that gets to verify that Obama is legally ineligible for a third term? It has to be verified , doesn't it? I mean, we can't just take the word of the vast majority of the country's population that he already served two terms, can we...? It needs to be officially verified in a court of law, doesn't it...?

  4. by HatetheSwamp on January 2, 2024 2:44 pm

    I suppose you think that Obama's right to due process is a laughing matter! Harrumph!

    By no means. The ONE should go for it!

    However, I'm pretty sure that you ain't funny.

  5. by Curt_Anderson on January 2, 2024 2:45 pm
    Ponderer, we demand verification! Also we should listen to Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman among others.

    Reagan said: "I would like to start a movement to eliminate the constitutional amendment that was passed a few years ago that limits a President to two terms. Now I say I wouldn't do that for myself, but for Presidents from here on."

    After leaving office, Harry Truman described the amendment as stupid and one of the worst amendments of the Constitution with the exception of the Prohibition Amendment.
    nytimes.com
    en.wikipedia.org

  6. by oldedude on January 2, 2024 2:54 pm
    It doesn't matter. Simply. It's this sort of "I'm taking my ball and going home" BS that sheeple do when they're beaten. And if obomber wanted to completely waste the court's time, he could. He would get bitch-slapped in the initial decision and every appeal. Like the 14th Amendment, it's very clear.

  7. by HatetheSwamp on January 2, 2024 3:12 pm

    After leaving office, Harry Truman described the amendment as stupid and one of the worst amendments of the Constitution with the exception of the Prohibition Amendment.

    By all means, the 18th Amendment was repealed. Go for it!

    Here's the thing, since you are either lying about OD and pb or misunderstanding:

    I think OD'd agree with me. One of your problems is that, according to the Fourteenth Amendment, state judges and bureaucrats of any ilk don't possess the authority to prevent a second Trump term as President.

  8. by Curt_Anderson on January 2, 2024 3:30 pm
    “ according to the Fourteenth Amendment, state judges and bureaucrats of any ilk don't possess the authority to prevent a second Trump term as President.” —HtS

    Among your many false claims, this should be easy for you to verify. Quote the relevant passage of 14th.

  9. by HatetheSwamp on January 2, 2024 4:07 pm

    Sure, Curt, easily done. Read Section 5: “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

    The amendment gave authority to the federal government...and to the EFFINlegislative branch.

  10. by Curt_Anderson on January 2, 2024 5:01 pm
    Wrong, HtS, on multiple levels.

    First off, that passage refers to section one of the 14th. It was anticipated that southern states might be stubborn about granting Blacks their civil rights.

    Secondly, that passage you quoted does not exclude state and local judges and election officials from enforcing the 3rd section of the 14th. It does not say “only”. Notice the similar language in 8th of the Constitution:
    “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises…”
    Do you seriously think that ONLY Congress can impose taxes?

    Anyway, look up Couy Griffin. He was barred from office by a local judge. Congress was not involved.

  11. by oldedude on January 2, 2024 5:29 pm
    First off, that passage refers to section one of the 14th. It was anticipated that southern states might be stubborn about granting Blacks their civil rights.
    No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Anyway, look up Couy Griffin. He was barred from office by a local judge.

    He was also arrested, went to court, and was found guilty in court regarding him trespassing on the capital ground. The state had the right to make him ineligible to serve as the county Sheriff. Fully within the state's rights. But in order to do that, they needed the evil "due process." I know you hate that, but NM did it correctly, and well within state and federal law.
    constitutioncenter.org
    cnn.com

  12. by Curt_Anderson on January 2, 2024 6:05 pm
    Notice Couy Griffin was found guilty of trespassing not insurrection.

  13. by oldedude on January 2, 2024 6:55 pm
    Also, in NM law, that is enough to keep him from a political position. Most states have that.

  14. by oldedude on January 2, 2024 6:58 pm
    Lead- this is what happens when curt is defeated and has to be stupid about what he doesn't understand. And I guess that's what happens with TDS. You don't have the ability to actually look at the facts of anything. I'm very disappointed mostly with him.😞

  15. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 4:05 am

    Anyway, look up Couy Griffin. He was barred from office by a local judge. Congress was not involved.

    Please show me the US Supreme Court refusing to take the case or, better yet, upholding the barring. C'mon man. Gimme a break! You clerked at the Supreme Court. You know better!

  16. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 4:18 am

    Curt,

    I know that you clerked at the Supreme Court but, buddy, in the moment after the Colorado thing broke, pb's Legal Goober # 1 said that this is silly because the whole purpose of the 14th Amendment is to give to Congress prerogatives once claimed by the states.

    And, buddy, this Supreme Court is all about reasserting the authority of the Legislative Branch.

  17. by Ponderer on January 3, 2024 7:43 am

    Curt, you need to contain yourself.

    Hate and olde dude are allowed to pontificate until the cows come home about any legal issues they want to. They can site any deranged lawyer on Fox's payroll to support their legal contentions. They can spout all manner of irrelevancy and non sequitur that they think makes their case. Misread and distort any law into whatever they want to make it say.

    But we are not allowed any freedom to say anything unless we have a law degree, which they certainly don't have. If we comment on legal matters in opposition to their opinions, we are stepping out of line. Being too big for our britches. Exceeding our qualifications to comment on such things.


    These MAGA Republicans here defending Donald Trump are the biggest flaming hypocrites on the face of the planet.


  18. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 8:46 am

    But we are not allowed any freedom to say anything unless we have a law degree...
    Say away. PLEEEEEASE!

    But, if you spect us not to guffaw over you thinking you know what you're saying?, get over it.

    pb says nuthin not coming from one of his highly respected and profoundly esteemed Legal Goobers.

    You? Curt? Post like you have Justice Kagan on speed dial. Baha.

  19. by oldedude on January 3, 2024 8:58 am
    And honestly, These are about things you should have learned from the sixth grade. At least in an "accredited" school. It doesn't take a law degree. It takes someone that pays attention about the basics of our government. And in this day and age, it's much easier. I didn't use a law library (which I don't have). I could look up a reputable source to support what I said. That's why I didn't let go of this.

    The worst of this is the complete lack of knowledge from people thinking they actually understand law. Not even "knowing" law. But just having the general knowledge of laws. Reading (and understanding) laws are something different. It's actually a skillset few develop, so no fault, no foul there to anyone. T refusal to read the law is different.

  20. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 9:02 am

    The worst of this is the complete lack of knowledge from people thinking they actually understand law.

    Or, think they center the universe and that their wanting something has power over the universe.

  21. by Curt_Anderson on January 3, 2024 9:15 am
    HtS,
    Notice the case was considered and decided at the state level, no congressional involvement. Denying an appeal IS upholding the lower court’s decision.

    The New Mexico Supreme Court denied an appeal from former Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin in the case that removed him from office based on his actions during the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection.
    nmpoliticalreport.com

  22. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 9:29 am

    Notice the case was considered and decided at the state level, no congressional involvement. Denying an appeal IS upholding the lower court’s decision.

    I do notice. What's the highest Court that denied an appeal?

    That's why I inquired if it was appealed. Obviously, lower level judges make unconstitutional rulings. Nearly every Supreme Court decision is for that reason.

    I'm not a former Supreme Court clerk, as so many others are. But. I do know what my highly esteemed Legal Goobers say. I'm inclined to trust the likelihood that they speak from know.

    And, Alan Dershowitz is convinced that the US Supreme Court will rule that Section 5 of the 14th Amendment applies. Maybe you know more than does he. Baha.

  23. by Curt_Anderson on January 3, 2024 9:49 am
    After the NM supreme court dismissed his appeal, Couy Griffin proclaimed, "it will be appealed to the United States Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court will only show how corrupt the New Mexico Supreme Court is."

    That was last February. I don't find any reporting that Couy Griffin appealed to any other courts, much less the US Supreme Court.


  24. by HatetheSwamp on January 3, 2024 9:54 am

    Bingo.

    My guess that the Supreme Court will soon provide an opinion that will shed light. No doubt Trump has more moolah for legal fees than does Couy.

  25. by Indy! on January 3, 2024 6:46 pm

    Obama didn't even want to serve his second term. You know how I know? Because he didn't. He just pretended he was president when he had to... for some foreign dignitary's funeral, when he had to pardon a turkey for thanksgiving or Jimmy Fallon wanted to do a duet with him on Late Nite.

  26. by oldedude on January 3, 2024 8:27 pm
    Welcome to politics. Griffin was nothing more than a fly that kept buzzing at an important meeting. He pissed off the gov, etc. They did something with him. His district covers a lot of res land, not that it makes a difference because the res is federal property. But it would be hard to bury a body if the locals like him. Someone will turn it up, then the feds get involved. That was the shot across the bow and he's keeping a lower profile.

Go To Top

Comment on: "Barack Obama deserves at least a trial before he is forbidden from seeking a third term."


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page