US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[XYZpdq Jr.]

Know your pajeet taxonomy. Someday it will matter.

yeah from what I understand Tamil is sorta like Texas if it had an IRA and it was pissed at the mainland since... like, the bronze age or so?

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

The 14th argument is weird, because the 14th doesn’t list the president (or vice president) as applicable party.

The 14th applies to “[anyone] who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof”

Trump indeed has taken an oath of office, but it was not “as a member of Congress”, an officer of the United States”, a member of any State legislature”, “an executive or judicial officer of any State”. Trump has never been a member of Congress, he is not a member of the State legislature, nor is he an executive or judicial officer of any state.

But what about the part I left out, about an “officer of the United States”? Presidents don’t count, officers are not elected but chosen by the President. This is how the Supreme Court has interpreted that phrase. See Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company, 561 U.S. 477, 130 S. Ct. 3138, 177 L. Ed. 2d 706 (2010)

That’s not counting the theory that the 14 (as it relates to insurrections) was dissolved by the Amnesty Act of 1872

To me it seems obvious that if the Congress, Senate, and the States wanted to punish the President (or the Vice President for that matter) for an insurrection, it would be clearly reflected in the language of the Amendment. As it stands, the President is evidently missing from this. If they want to insurrection-charge him, their only choice (if he hasn’t the Presidential Immunity for actions taken in office) is 18 U.S. Code § 2383 which applies to everyone, but bars no one from office

Forget about repealing the 19th, repeal the 14th. It's the Swiss Army knife of laws where it's made to do whatever the user wants it to do.

 

[dustbuster]

repeal the 14th

Equal protection under the law is one of the few weapons the right has to wage lawfare on the marxist double-standards being enacted everywhere.

If you want to wage war on a cancer in our legal system, go after "Protected classes" in the 1964 civil rights act USING the 14th amendment.
The argument is simple: If some classes are "protected", then implicitly this means there are others that are not, a blatant violation.

The argument should not be that the goal of the civil rights act should not be pursued, but that it should require legislation that gives everyone equal weight (the most obvious way to do this is to extend 'public accomodations' and 'common carrier' laws where applicable to compel any denial of services or goods be based upon criteria germane to their provision, such as illegal behavior and nonpayment, but I'm open to other creative methods).

The request should be to rule a mandated sunset on the civil rights act of 1964 of 2-4 years to allow the legislative branch to replace it thoughtfully and in compliance with the 14th amendment.

The 14th argument is weird, because the 14th doesn’t list the president (or vice president) as applicable party.

Of course the most important aspect of the 14th amendment is that it requires a finding of guilt through due process, which involves proper, fully adjudicated and final criminal conviction against the party in question, and does not involve years of talking heads on TV simply declaring guilt

 

[Coptakhenaten]

Equal protection under the law is one of the few weapons the right has to wage lawfare on the marxist double-standards being enacted everywhere.

If you want to wage war on a cancer in our legal system, go after "Protected classes" in the 1964 civil rights act USING the 14th amendment.
The argument is simple: If some classes are "protected", then implicitly this means there are others that are not, a blatant violation.

The argument should not be that the goal of the civil rights act should not be pursued, but that it should require legislation that gives everyone equal weight.
The request should be to rule a mandated sunset on the civil rights act of 1964 of 2-4 years to allow the legislative branch to replace it thoughtfully and in compliance with the 14th amendment.

It is a mess of an amendment with a ton of loopholes that needs to be amended to be less exploitable, but not repealed. The main important things worth staying is that rights enumerated in the 1st-9th amendment are protected on all levels of government and no citizen regardless of background should be given special treatment. The rest is a swiss army knife of loopholes however.

 

[OrangeJuliusEvola]

yeah from what I understand Tamil is sorta like Texas if it had an IRA and it was pissed at the mainland since... like, the bronze age or so?

More like there's a huge ethnic split between the Northern Indo-Aryan groups and Southern Dravidian descended groups in India. That's why English is the de facto national language of India instead of Hindustani. It really does go all the way back to the Bronze Age, but right now it's not a hot war in India (Sri Lanka on the other hand...)

Tamils think of Punjabis as loud violent dumbasses who are either gangsters or religious fanatics who love fighting and dancing, while Punjabis, if they can be bothered to think of other Indian ethnic groups at all, think of Tamils as sneaky supercilious two-faced cowards.

 

[XYZpdq Jr.]

More like there's a huge ethnic split between the Northern Indo-Aryan groups and Southern Dravidian descended groups in India. That's why English is the de facto national language of India instead of Hindustani. It really does go all the way back to the Bronze Age, but right now it's not a hot war in India (Sri Lanka on the other hand...)

Tamils think of Punjabis as loud violent dumbasses who are either gangsters or religious fanatics who love fighting and dancing, while Punjabis, if they can be bothered to think of other Indian ethnic groups at all, think of Tamils as sneaky supercilious two-faced cowards.

I was trying to dumb it down into burger-ese, cut me some slack.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

repeal the 14th

Unironically. It literally doesn’t do anything. If SCOTUS stopped trying to shove it in every decision, it’d literally just die off.

“Ahhh, but what about section 1???????”

Article 4, Section 2 of US constitution.

“But mah section 2!”

Article 1

“But das ramoval from public office!”

Article 1, Section 3

“…but like, what about the debt, man?”

Article 1, Section 8 and 10

Sure, the 14th may make some of these clearer, but it’s been used as a shoein to make everything constitutional.

It is a mess of an amendment with a ton of loopholes that needs to be amended to be less exploitable, but not repealed. The main important things worth staying is that rights enumerated in the 1st-9th amendment are protected on all levels of government and no citizen regardless of background should be given special treatment. The rest is a swiss army knife of loopholes however.

But, Race does give you special treatment. 14th constitutionalised racial classifications (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)), until one day it didn’t (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina (2023)).

That said I would be willing to concede to incorporation style doctrine again.

 

[dustbuster]

But, Race does give you special treatment. 14th constitutionalised racial classifications (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)), until one day it didn’t (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina (2023)).

You're literally describing any section of the constitution + a partisan hack judge.
If the 14th didn't exist they'd pull a Roe and just invent it from their ass

A well constructed section of the constitution is still an asset because it exposes this bullshit, and gives a legitimate avenue for its overturn later.

 

[Barry McKockner]

f they want to insurrection-charge him, their only choice (if he hasn’t the Presidential Immunity for actions taken in office) is 18 U.S. Code § 2383 which applies to everyone, but bars no one from office

I would suspect that's what the "self executing" portion is. Once you're charged, the 14th self executes with it. I can't see the 14th sidestepping the 5th amendment ever. That would be counter to the entire foundation of our justice system.

 

[CharlesBarkley]

Things you should need to be president:

Bench at least 160
Deadlift 300
Say the word “nigger” unironically in a karaoke song but get claps after.
Troll a ethot so bad she stops posting

 

[dustbuster]

Once you're charged, the 14th self executes with it.

None of the 14th explicitly supersedes 1-10.
This means due process must still apply, and "due process" hasn't existed for Trump or his supporters since 2018

 

[draggs]

Unironically. It literally doesn’t do anything. If SCOTUS stopped trying to shove it in every decision, it’d literally just die off.

“Ahhh, but what about section 1???????”

Article 4, Section 2 of US constitution.

“But mah section 2!”

Article 1

“But das ramoval from public office!”

Article 1, Section 3

“…but like, what about the debt, man?”

Article 1, Section 8 and 10

Sure, the 14th may make some of these clearer, but it’s been used as a shoein to make everything constitutional.

But, Race does give you special treatment. 14th constitutionalised racial classifications (Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, 515 U.S. 200 (1995)), until one day it didn’t (Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina (2023)).

That said I would be willing to concede to incorporation style doctrine again.

The 14th is useful in not allowing states to violate the bill of rights

Past that, ehhhh

 

[Drag-on Knight 91873]

None of the 14th explicitly supersedes 1-10.
This means due process must still apply, and "due process" hasn't existed for Trump or his supporters since 2018

But it "does" in that Trump is on trial in New York. That court will find him guilty in the same way they found Derek Chauvin guilty.

Caesar should have killed the entire Senate.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

If the 14th didn't exist they'd pull a Roe and just invent it from their ass

The 14th exists and they’ve been pulling shit out of it that’s not there since forever.

I would suspect that's what the "self executing" portion is. Once you're charged, the 14th self executes with it

There’s no self executing portion.

I can't see the 14th sidestepping the 5th amendment ever.

It can’t. I believe that when an Amendment doesn’t clearly state it overwrites another, the courts must interpret them in a way to avoid clash between them. Can’t find anything on it, so I might be misremembering something.

 

[Would]

And people didn't believe me when I said Blacks love to go to Germany to fuck rural German chicks and impregnate them.
Germanistan is less than a generation away.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4369472-texas-dan-patrick-biden-ballot-border/

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/Z3Wou?wr=true

 

[dustbuster]

The 14th exists and they’ve been pulling shit out of it that’s not there since forever.

Yes, but without the 14th there would be no legitimate basis to overturn it.

The 2nd has been mass violated for 90 years.
Without it in black and white text to legitimize Bruen, it would be violated in perpetuity.

View attachment 5580227

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4369472-texas-dan-patrick-biden-ballot-border/

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/Z3Wou?wr=true

This is legitimate.
Article IV Section IV

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion;

This is not a "may"
Biden has violated his oath of office and committed treason.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

The 2nd has been mass violated for 90 years

2nd has a legitimate part to play that isn’t present in the rest of the Amendments, though. As above, I don’t believe that is the case with the 14th.

Of course, repealing it is as difficult as clarifying it, so might as well fuck less things over and attempt to fix it with a new one. Or maybe I should just stick to my extreme position. That’d, at least might be good for a laugh.

 

[dustbuster]

repealing it is as difficult as clarifying it

It's not, actually.
Just blacklist the "federalist society" and appoint ethnonats to the supreme court using the new senate rules the democrats rammed through in 2013.
Then suddenly "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" only applies to those born in the USA, not foreigners. Goodbye birthright citizenship.

 

[HackerX]

Equal protection under the law is one of the few weapons the right has to wage lawfare on the marxist double-standards being enacted everywhere.

If you want to wage war on a cancer in our legal system, go after "Protected classes" in the 1964 civil rights act USING the 14th amendment.
The argument is simple: If some classes are "protected", then implicitly this means there are others that are not, a blatant violation.

The argument should not be that the goal of the civil rights act should not be pursued, but that it should require legislation that gives everyone equal weight (the most obvious way to do this is to extend 'public accomodations' and 'common carrier' laws where applicable to compel any denial of services or goods be based upon criteria germane to their provision, such as illegal behavior and nonpayment, but I'm open to other creative methods).

The request should be to rule a mandated sunset on the civil rights act of 1964 of 2-4 years to allow the legislative branch to replace it thoughtfully and in compliance with the 14th amendment.


Of course the most important aspect of the 14th amendment is that it requires a finding of guilt through due process, which involves proper, fully adjudicated and final criminal conviction against the party in question, and does not involve years of talking heads on TV simply declaring guilt

You're overcomplicating the hell out of this. Thankfully, I already did the math and cross-referenced my solution with the work of an obscure Austrian painter. (TBH, I'm a huge fan)

Funnily enough, the math checks out! A... Final Solution, if you will.