Donald Trump has been convicted of no crimes that I am aware of, yet Democrats are trying to leave him off ballots. Isn't that the real threat to democracy?
Threat to Democracy?
- Thread starter Bob Estey
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
ScottA
Well-Known Member
- Feb 24, 2011
- 11,744
- 5,599
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Indeed!
I am no expert in constitutional law, but removing someone for the ballot seems unconstitutional.
I think we're just waiting for the big top circus to come down, where the accusers become the condemned. The rats are just jumping into the trap.
Last edited:
Chains Broken
Well-Known Member
From what I've heard section 3 of the 14th Amendment doesn't need a conviction in the same way that OJ simpson had lost civil court cases although he was not convicted in the criminal case. That doesn't answer if it's a threat to democracy though.
As far as I know if the case goes to SCOTUS his name goes back on the ballot until a decision is made?
Last edited:
If a handful of Democrats are allowed to decide who is allowed on ballots, and who isn't, then would you agree the election is rigged?
I imagine the SCOTUS will have a say in this.
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
It is. It's a shame how easily the Left can brainwash their own with the lie that President Trump invited insurrection.
He never did. Pelosi allowed the radical violent people access. And someone bussed them to our Capitol.
Those ones should be arrested for insurrection.
Chains Broken
Well-Known Member
Yeah I would agree that it undermines the integrity of the election, I believe it should go to SCOTUS
Nazi Germany and Communist Nations only play games like the Democrat Socialist do ! such is warfare, Socialist are always at war 24/7 peddling their deceptions and delusions, because Socialist like that are Anti-Christ in fact ! They have no real foundations regarding the truth, for they just make it up as they go along ! and it sticks out like dogs balls to anyone who understands the nature of Anti-Christ, for they are dupes who swallow anything their Leaders claim ! but they are not Leaders at all, for they do not have Christ Jesus as their first and foremost in their lives, they have domination of all first and foremost intentions in fact, just like Hitler and every Communist moron did.
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
I think it has come down to the place where we can only trust God!
Mankind will fail to measure up anytime we trust them more.
Chains Broken
Well-Known Member
I can't see the artlce because I'm not subscribed but I agree with L.A.M.B. that God is the only one we can and should trust.
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
@Chain Breaker, here's the article.
The Supreme Court will be tested in the coming weeks to untangle politically consequential legal questions with the potential to reshape the 2024 presidential election. The court’s reputation remains marred by ethics controversies involving lavish travel and gifts, and public approval ratings remain low following high court rulings to overturn long-standing precedent.
Keeping up with politics is easy with The 5-Minute Fix Newsletter, in your inbox weekdays.
But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. did not address any of those contemporary issues Sunday in his annual “Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary.” Instead, he looked back on technological advancements in the nation’s court system, detailing developments from the quill pens used by justices in the 19th century to electronic databases of the 1980s to online trial proceedings prompted by the coronavirus pandemic.
Roberts, a history buff, also expounded on the potential for artificial intelligence to both enhance and detract from the work of judges, lawyers and litigants. For those who cannot afford a lawyer, he noted, AI could increase access to justice.
“AI obviously has great potential to dramatically increase access to key information for lawyers and non-lawyers alike. But just as it risks invading privacy interests and dehumanizing the law,” Roberts wrote, “machines cannot fully replace key actors in court.”
Public approval of the Supreme Court remains at historically low levels, reflecting a dip that followed its 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate the nationwide right to abortion. The court has also faced immense public pressure and criticism following news reports that some justices accepted, but did not disclose, luxury travel funded by billionaire friends.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts's 2023 year-end report
Roberts also did not mention in his 13-page report the court’s adoption for the first time of a formal code of conduct, announced in November, specific to the nine justices and intended to promote “integrity and impartiality.” For years, the justices said they voluntarily complied with the same ethical guidelines that apply to other federal judges and resisted efforts by Congress to impose a policy on the high court.
But the lack of a code became a persistent complaint from Capitol Hill that the justices were forced to address in 2023. In the weeks before the court’s announcement, several justices said publicly that it would be a good idea for the court to embrace its own plan rather than giving Congress an opening to pass a law.
Supreme Court, under pressure, issues ethics code specific to justices
The policy was praised by some as a positive initial step, but criticized by legal ethics experts for giving the justices too much discretion over recusal decisions and for not including a process for holding the justices accountable if they violate their own rules.
Still, Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, a nonprofit group advocating for court transparency, called 2023 the “most important year for judicial ethics in decades.”
It is “incumbent upon the justices in 2024 not simply to hope that questions surrounding their conduct die out — they won’t — but to make pronounced improvements in transparency and accountability,” he said in a statement before Roberts issued his report.
“That’s especially true since the Court will be deciding such critical issues in the months to come, and it can’t afford to lose any more of the public’s trust.”
Share this articleShare
Already, the justices have been asked to expedite consideration of a Colorado Supreme Court ruling in December that former president Donald Trump’s name cannot appear on the state’s primary-election ballot because he engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. Maine officials have also barred Trump from the state’s primary ballot, putting pressure on the Supreme Court to settle the novel eligibility issue for all states.
Separately, Trump’s claim that he can’t be prosecuted for trying to block Joe Biden’s 2020 victory because he is protected by presidential immunity is expected to make its way to the high court after review in January by an appeals court.
The court’s 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices picked by Trump, but the former president does not have a winning track record at the high court. Some Democratic lawmakers have called on Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from cases involving Trump because of the efforts by his wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, to challenge the 2020 election results.
Supreme Court seems destined to play pivotal role in 2024 elections
On top of the Trump-related election matters, the justices are contending this term with high-stakes cases involving guns, the power of federal agencies and the future of free speech online. The court has also agreed to decide this term whether to restrict access to a key medication used in more than half of U.S. abortions.
Roberts used his year-end wrap-up, released by tradition on New Year’s Eve, in part to thank the court system’s technologists and cybersecurity experts. Those experts, he said, keep the judicial branch running behind-the-scenes and answer calls from judges, including Roberts, who said he has “been known to call on help desk staff for urgent and essential assistance.”
Roberts did not mention that this time last year the court was finishing its investigation into the shocking leak of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s draft opinion that eventually overturned a half-century of abortion rights. The court’s investigative report released last January did not determine the identity of the leaker. While the court’s IT experts did not rule out a hack, the report said there was no evidence to suggest improper access to the court’s IT networks.
In reflecting Sunday on technological advancements in the federal court system, Roberts noted that the legal profession is notoriously averse to change. He emphasized that human judgment will still be required for legal determinations that often involve gray areas. Judges and especially Supreme Court justices face novel, open questions about how the law should develop in new areas — something AI can inform, but not decide, Roberts said.
“Some may wonder whether judges are about to become obsolete,” he wrote. “I am sure we are not — but equally confident that technological changes will continue to transform our work.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts's 2023 year-end report
Roberts sidesteps Supreme Court’s ethics controversies in yearly report
December 31,2023The Supreme Court will be tested in the coming weeks to untangle politically consequential legal questions with the potential to reshape the 2024 presidential election. The court’s reputation remains marred by ethics controversies involving lavish travel and gifts, and public approval ratings remain low following high court rulings to overturn long-standing precedent.
Keeping up with politics is easy with The 5-Minute Fix Newsletter, in your inbox weekdays.
But Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. did not address any of those contemporary issues Sunday in his annual “Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary.” Instead, he looked back on technological advancements in the nation’s court system, detailing developments from the quill pens used by justices in the 19th century to electronic databases of the 1980s to online trial proceedings prompted by the coronavirus pandemic.
Roberts, a history buff, also expounded on the potential for artificial intelligence to both enhance and detract from the work of judges, lawyers and litigants. For those who cannot afford a lawyer, he noted, AI could increase access to justice.
“AI obviously has great potential to dramatically increase access to key information for lawyers and non-lawyers alike. But just as it risks invading privacy interests and dehumanizing the law,” Roberts wrote, “machines cannot fully replace key actors in court.”
Public approval of the Supreme Court remains at historically low levels, reflecting a dip that followed its 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate the nationwide right to abortion. The court has also faced immense public pressure and criticism following news reports that some justices accepted, but did not disclose, luxury travel funded by billionaire friends.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts's 2023 year-end report
Roberts also did not mention in his 13-page report the court’s adoption for the first time of a formal code of conduct, announced in November, specific to the nine justices and intended to promote “integrity and impartiality.” For years, the justices said they voluntarily complied with the same ethical guidelines that apply to other federal judges and resisted efforts by Congress to impose a policy on the high court.
But the lack of a code became a persistent complaint from Capitol Hill that the justices were forced to address in 2023. In the weeks before the court’s announcement, several justices said publicly that it would be a good idea for the court to embrace its own plan rather than giving Congress an opening to pass a law.
Supreme Court, under pressure, issues ethics code specific to justices
The policy was praised by some as a positive initial step, but criticized by legal ethics experts for giving the justices too much discretion over recusal decisions and for not including a process for holding the justices accountable if they violate their own rules.
Still, Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, a nonprofit group advocating for court transparency, called 2023 the “most important year for judicial ethics in decades.”
It is “incumbent upon the justices in 2024 not simply to hope that questions surrounding their conduct die out — they won’t — but to make pronounced improvements in transparency and accountability,” he said in a statement before Roberts issued his report.
“That’s especially true since the Court will be deciding such critical issues in the months to come, and it can’t afford to lose any more of the public’s trust.”
Share this articleShare
Already, the justices have been asked to expedite consideration of a Colorado Supreme Court ruling in December that former president Donald Trump’s name cannot appear on the state’s primary-election ballot because he engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021. Maine officials have also barred Trump from the state’s primary ballot, putting pressure on the Supreme Court to settle the novel eligibility issue for all states.
Separately, Trump’s claim that he can’t be prosecuted for trying to block Joe Biden’s 2020 victory because he is protected by presidential immunity is expected to make its way to the high court after review in January by an appeals court.
The court’s 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices picked by Trump, but the former president does not have a winning track record at the high court. Some Democratic lawmakers have called on Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from cases involving Trump because of the efforts by his wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, to challenge the 2020 election results.
Supreme Court seems destined to play pivotal role in 2024 elections
On top of the Trump-related election matters, the justices are contending this term with high-stakes cases involving guns, the power of federal agencies and the future of free speech online. The court has also agreed to decide this term whether to restrict access to a key medication used in more than half of U.S. abortions.
Roberts used his year-end wrap-up, released by tradition on New Year’s Eve, in part to thank the court system’s technologists and cybersecurity experts. Those experts, he said, keep the judicial branch running behind-the-scenes and answer calls from judges, including Roberts, who said he has “been known to call on help desk staff for urgent and essential assistance.”
Roberts did not mention that this time last year the court was finishing its investigation into the shocking leak of Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.'s draft opinion that eventually overturned a half-century of abortion rights. The court’s investigative report released last January did not determine the identity of the leaker. While the court’s IT experts did not rule out a hack, the report said there was no evidence to suggest improper access to the court’s IT networks.
In reflecting Sunday on technological advancements in the federal court system, Roberts noted that the legal profession is notoriously averse to change. He emphasized that human judgment will still be required for legal determinations that often involve gray areas. Judges and especially Supreme Court justices face novel, open questions about how the law should develop in new areas — something AI can inform, but not decide, Roberts said.
“Some may wonder whether judges are about to become obsolete,” he wrote. “I am sure we are not — but equally confident that technological changes will continue to transform our work.”
Chief Justice John G. Roberts's 2023 year-end report
I've been thinking for years now our Legislative and Judicial systems are in desperate need of a cleansing, from bottom to top !
BlessedPeace
Well-Known Member
I think a great contributor to the corruption in the Legislative and Judicial branches is their having no term limits.
I totally agree.
Look at Ted Kennedy and others whom made an elected office their mission. I'm wondering how much loyalty was to their constituents or their wallets.
Chains Broken
Well-Known Member
Honestly I'm not crazy about any source that refers to abortion as a right. They'll talk about how bad disposable plastic water bottles are but they have no moral hesitations about disposing of their unborn heart-beating children no questions asked. The fact that that's the "mainstream" opinion is terrifying for the future.
Anyway back on track, I don't know if Trump really was or was not involved but I'd rather have the highest court determine what is and isn't justice instead of some secretaries of state who for all I know could be salavating at the ability to take someone they don't like off the ballot.
Threat to Democracy?
The PEOPLE in and of the USA ARE a threat to:
The REPUBLIC, for which it STANDS.
The REPUBLIC, for which it STANDS;
IS: Lord God Almighty, Liberty, Citizens, Country, and Defender thereof.
Democracy, for which it Stands:
IS: Self imposed Demi-gods, Oppression, Control, World, and Eradication of Liberty and People.
Glory to God WILL NOT BE OVERCOME.
The Answer is PRAYERS, His WILL BE DONE.
Glory to God,
Taken
The PEOPLE in and of the USA ARE a threat to:
The REPUBLIC, for which it STANDS.
The REPUBLIC, for which it STANDS;
IS: Lord God Almighty, Liberty, Citizens, Country, and Defender thereof.
Democracy, for which it Stands:
IS: Self imposed Demi-gods, Oppression, Control, World, and Eradication of Liberty and People.
Glory to God WILL NOT BE OVERCOME.
The Answer is PRAYERS, His WILL BE DONE.
Glory to God,
Taken
Yes, of course it is the real threat to democracy. Democrats, especially the leadership, are socialists. The United States of America is a Democratic Republic. Socialism is a threat to the democratic republic basis of this country. Socialism is, just like communism, fascism, and Naziism, a statist system. Statism is government over and above the individual. Democrats call themselves liberals. But their version of liberal is the exact opposite of classical liberalism. The key features of classical liberalism, as defined by Ludwig von Mises in his 1927 book Liberalism, are property rights, freedom, peace, equality under the law, acceptance of the inequality of income and wealth based on the reality of human uniqueness, limited constitutional government, and tolerance. I could add some others such as the right of self defense, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. Democrats are 100% against all of these. They are even now conspiring to overturn all of these key features. It is only the Constitution and the Supreme Court of the United States that even slows them in there efforts to destroy this once great nation. Democrats call Donald Trump a Fascist and a Nazi. It is democrats that are Fascists and Nazis.
Donald Trump has demonstrated that he stands strong in favor of almost all of these key features. Unfortunately, he has not shown that he is in favor of limited government. But that can be tolerated for the moment.
What you're seeing is the communists emerging in the USA. They are hidden in the GBLT agenda, and not traditional communists. They have infiltrated the schools, law and government.
I don't totally trust the SCOTUS but I think it probably will come out on our side.
Similar threads
