My choice would have been taken away. — GRWelsh
I love to see dissenting opinions, when the dissenter fully backs up his opinion with facts.Why does it hurt so much to see a dissenting opinion? — NOS4A2
Like Trump you say something then say something else to modify it. As if you did not say what you said and said something else all along. And like Trump you attempt to hide behind your words when your actions tell a different story.
That is one of the Constitutional questions that SCOTUS will have to decide on. The question was evaluated by the DOJ's Office of Legal Council, in 2000.Their conclusion was:He was acquitted of insurrection in the impeachment process with the Chief Justice presiding. — NOS4A2
The Constitution permits a former President to be criminally prosecuted for the same offenses for which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate while in office. — Relativist
Their conclusion seems well-reasoned (supported by 45 pages of analysis, considering both sides of the question), and deserving of more weight than the sort of armchair analysis we engage in around here. If you've seen something equally well-reasoned that draws a different conclusion, please share it.
The Constitution permits a former President to be criminally prosecuted for the same offenses for which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate
Maine's Secretary of State was required by Maine Law to hold a hearing and make a decision on the matter. How can it be considered wrong to follow the law?I cannot follow. That someone has the right to do something does not entail that she is right to do it — NOS4A2
The question of whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection was evaluated on the evidence by Colorado Courts. Their Supreme Court noted:That he hasn’t been criminally prosecuted, let alone convicted, and also that he has been acquitted of the charge in the impeachment process, are two points against the argument that he has engaged in insurrection. — NOS4A2
Maine's Secretary of State was required by Maine Law to hold a hearing and make a decision on the matter. How can it be considered wrong to follow the law?
The question of whether or not Trump engaged in insurrection was evaluated on the evidence by Colorado Courts. Their Supreme Court noted:
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.