https://youtu.be/Mgo_hJbuDNU?si=QoRr-643p6Lpk6Zd

ACLJ filing a brief with the Supreme Court on behalf of several Red States about Colorado's decision to remove Trump for the Ballot for 2024.

Simple easy language that one can easily understand.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Back up my hard drive? I can't find the reverse switch!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

@TID: Mystic BBS 1.12 A49
@MSGID: 1:342/200 89718354
@TZUTC: -0700

https://youtu.be/Mgo_hJbuDNU?si=QoRr-643p6Lpk6Zd

ACLJ filing a brief with the Supreme Court on behalf of several Red States about Colorado's decision to remove Trump for the Ballot for 2024.

Simple easy language that one can easily understand.

So much for states rights?
--- AfterShock/Android 1.7.5
* Origin: South of Heaven - Chaos rampant, an age of distrust (1:154/30.1)

On 01 Jan 2024, Mike Miller said the following...

So much for states rights?

States have rights... We live in a Constitutional Republic and the CONSTITUTION says that ... Amendment 14 section 5...
Section 5

:Start
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
:Stop

Not it says CONGRESS... not unelected State judges or State Secretary of State...

Moreover, in the same Amendment but section 1 is where you find due process...

:Start
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 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.
:Stop

Trump, or any person involved with J6 have not been charged with "Insurrection" or anything like that.

Congress had it's chance to work their magic/vodo on this case but they failed to prove their case against Trump.

Ergo... It's time to move on. What I think is simple... If Biden's policies are so great... let the people chose.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... I'd love to help you out. Which way did you come in?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

IB Joe wrote to Mike Miller <=-

Ergo... It's time to move on. What I think is simple... If Biden's policies are so great... let the people chose.

Based on polling numbers, the Elitists know what will happen there.

And if Trump gets into office, the (rightfully) fear that he will start investigations and many of these Elitists are going to prison.


... To know the road ahead, ask those coming back.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the ovisions of this article.

Congress has already passed a law to enforce the 14th. I have cited to you already multiple times. That section does NOT mean they have to pass a new
law EVERY TIME someone might have violated the 14th. The law is already in place that sets forth the punishment for violating the 14th.

It is up to the courts to decide who breaks it and then to follow the law already put into place by Congress over 100 years ago.

States have the right to interpret, and a duty to follow, the Constitution
so long as their interpretations do not conflict with decisions by the US Supreme Court. We shall soon hopefully find out what their decision is in
this case.


* SLMR 2.1a * Unable to locate Coffee -- Operator Halted!
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 02 Jan 2024, Ron L. said the following...

Based on polling numbers, the Elitists know what will happen there.

And if Trump gets into office, the (rightfully) fear that he will start investigations and many of these Elitists are going to prison.

I'm okay with how things turned out... Trump exposed the corruption... well he exposed them a little bit... Now they have exposed themselves with their T.D.S.. David Axelrod was on the news claiming that the Democrats have taken this too far, Law-Fare and what not, and its having the opposite effect... They should stop what they are doing.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... You can learn many things from children... like how much patience you have

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

On 02 Jan 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

Congress has already passed a law to enforce the 14th. I have cited to you already multiple times. That section does NOT mean they have to
pass a new law EVERY TIME someone might have violated the 14th. The law is already in place that sets forth the punishment for violating the
14th.

It's up to congress to deal with this... The did... Impeachment #2 and it didn't succeed.

If the constitution wanted this to be the case it would have said so in the constitution. This insurrection business is a FEDERAL charge that is dealt with by the FEDS and not the states. You can say that you've said whatever in the past, doesn't make it so. Legal experts on either side, as well as pundits (David Axerod et al) believe its a stretch and unconstitutional....

BTW, I just read a headline that Trump's team is asking the courts to throw out Jack's DC case because the J6 committee destroyed all the evidence to their findings in haste to cover their own tracks...

HAHAHAHA, he has a good point. If you are charged with a crime... and the DC charges are not insurrection... the police can't destroy evidence that could exonerate you...

T.D.S. is real... There might be medication for it.

States have the right to interpret, and a duty to follow, the
Constitution so long as their interpretations do not conflict with decisions by the US Supreme Court. We shall soon hopefully find out
what their decision is in this case.

No they don't ... It's the US constitution, not the state constitution. Its interpretation is done by the Federal lawmakers and the US Supreme Court. This is why States who feel that a Federal law is wrong they petition the US Supreme Court.... Does any of this sound familiar to you... States just don't do what they want...

There is a constitutional way to be heard... Trump, though you may not like him, needs to be afforded due process... The list goes on and on...

Joe Biden needs to be a man and run on his policies...

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... They say there's always one weirdo on the bus, but I couldn't find them!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

And if Trump gets into office, the (rightfully) fear that he will start
investigations and many of these Elitists are going to prison.

I'm okay with how things turned out... Trump exposed the corruption... well he exposed them a little bit...

He exposed, and continues to expose his own corruption.

Now they have exposed themselves with their T.D.S..

T.D.S.. is what Trump supporters exhibit.

Law-Fare and what not,

It Law & Order, relax.. ;)

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-6
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

IB Joe wrote to Dr. What <=-

I'm okay with how things turned out... Trump exposed the corruption... well he exposed them a little bit... Now they have exposed themselves
with their T.D.S.. David Axelrod was on the news claiming that the Democrats have taken this too far, Law-Fare and what not, and its
having the opposite effect... They should stop what they are doing.

Yup. At the very least, Trump ripped the curtain away and allows anyone, who wants to, to see the corruption.

That's another reason the Elitists need to hold on to power. Even if Trump isn't elected, we know them for the reptiles that they are. I suspect that many are planning their escape routes right now.


... Your aims are high, and you are incapable of much.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

Mike Powell wrote to IB JOE <=-

States have the right to interpret, and a duty to follow, the
Constitution

This opens up an interesting question, though.

Who in the state does that?

Is it a Secretary of State? It is the Legislature?

The U.S. Constitution makes it clear that the state Legislatures are the ones who get to set things like voting rules, for example.

It will be interesting to see what the SCOTUS does on this. My guess is that they will say that states can remove Trump from the ballot, but only after Due Process has happened and it's up to the Legislatures of those states - not a partisian Secretary of State.


... History is a set of lies agreed upon by the Victors
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

States have the right to interpret, and a duty to follow, the Constitution so long as their interpretations do not conflict with decisions by the US Supreme Court. We shall soon hopefully find out what their decision is in this case.

No they don't ... It's the US constitution, not the state constitution. Its i
erpretation is done by the Federal lawmakers and the US Supreme Court. This is
hy States who feel that a Federal law is wrong they petition the US Supreme Co
t.... Does any of this sound familiar to you... States just don't do what the
want...

YES THEY DO. Otherwise, any and every case would wind up in federal court because any and every defense attorney would claim that their client's
civil rights were violated and every case would have to go to federal court.

That does not happen. If states didn't interpret, and follow, the US Constitution (what I said above), states COULD do what they want and get
away with it so long as no one appeals it higher.

There is a constitutional way to be heard... Trump, though you may not like h
, needs to be afforded due process... The list goes on and on...

Which is why we let the SCOTUS hear it and take care of it. Duh.

Joe Biden needs to be a man and run on his policies...

Indeed.


* SLMR 2.1a * IBM = Institute of Black Magic
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

It will be interesting to see what the SCOTUS does on this. My guess is that they will say that states can remove Trump from the ballot, but only after Due
Process has happened and it's up to the Legislatures of those states - not a partisian Secretary of State.

In the case of Maine, I certainly think this will be the case. It sounds
like there was no court action there at all. I have not even bothered listening to her reasoning as it cannot be good.

In Colorado, they had a judicial case. Their SoS did not initiate the
case, and has reinstated Trump while awaiting the SCOTUS decision, which is
the correct thing to do.

Once the Colorado case happened, IMHO, there was no point in any other
states acting until after the SCOTUS reviews the case. I think maybe the
Maine SoS is trying to score points. Maybe she wants a place in the next D administration in DC, or a sweet press gig like Jen Psaki got.


* SLMR 2.1a * Talk is cheap -- supply exceeds demand!
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 03 Jan 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

YES THEY DO. Otherwise, any and every case would wind up in federal
court because any and every defense attorney would claim that their client's civil rights were violated and every case would have to go to federal court.

That does not happen. If states didn't interpret, and follow, the US Constitution (what I said above), states COULD do what they want and get away with it so long as no one appeals it higher.

The US constitution is exactly that a FEDERAL document in place to prevent the FEDERAL government in over stepping.

In recent times you commented on the ACLJ taking up the case against Colorado and Maine... They take this to the Supreme Court to decide... It is the US Supreme court that looks at the constitutionality of decisions made by LOWER federal courts that made decisions on FEDERAL LAW.

States need to focus on state stuff... There are red states right now talking about taking Biden off the ticket... And they probably have a better argument than the dems have in taking Trump off the ticket.

I say don't... let the voters decide.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Reward for a job well done: More work

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

On 03 Jan 2024, Ron L. said the following...

It will be interesting to see what the SCOTUS does on this. My guess is that they will say that states can remove Trump from the ballot, but
only after Due Process has happened and it's up to the Legislatures of those states - not a partisian Secretary of State.

Due Process... It was done, impeachment #2. He was acquitted... Double Jeopardy.

BTW... Best meme ever..

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=762445145917995&set=a.463125072516672

Someone confused about all the guided tours the armed insurrectionists were getting.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... A PC a day keeps the Apple away!

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-

In the case of Maine, I certainly think this will be the case. It
sounds like there was no court action there at all. I have not even bothered listening to her reasoning as it cannot be good.

Then what she did was unconstitutional and certainly outside of her authority.

But these elitist operatives constantly try to grab more power than they have.

In Colorado, they had a judicial case.

Which was outside of their jurisdiction. If a crime was committed, it was not committed in Colorado.

Once the Colorado case happened, IMHO, there was no point in any other states acting until after the SCOTUS reviews the case. I think maybe
the Maine SoS is trying to score points. Maybe she wants a place in
the next D administration in DC, or a sweet press gig like Jen Psaki
got.

I think you are right on that.


... Be kind to animals.....Take your Boss to lunch......
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

In the case of Maine, I certainly think this will be the case. It sounds like there was no court action there at all. I have not even bothered listening to her reasoning as it cannot be good.

Then what she did was unconstitutional and certainly outside of her authority.

Not sure about the unconsitutional part. In its early days, the 14th was
used without court actions or trial. It was applied with a blanket to
pretty much anyone holding any elected office in a state that had left the Union. They were removed from office and, until the mid-1870's, were covered
by the "cannot hold office again" bit without court action or conviction of
any kind.

I think it is unconstitutional in this case but that will be for the courts
to decide. I have read that Trump's team is now pursuing this one in the courts. There could be some constitutionally-questionable law on the books
in Maine that gave her authority to act without a court action, and that
will certainly be questioned during the future court proceedings.

But these elitist operatives constantly try to grab more power than they have.

I agree, but I don't think any politicians, including Trump, are immune to
the temptation to do so.

In Colorado, they had a judicial case.

Which was outside of their jurisdiction. If a crime was committed, it was not
committed in Colorado.

I do agree with that, and I think it will play into the SCOTUS decision.


* SLMR 2.1a * SHOCKING TRUTH: 50% of all people are below average....
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 04 Jan 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

Which was outside of their jurisdiction. If a crime was committed, it w not
committed in Colorado.

I do agree with that, and I think it will play into the SCOTUS decision.

The SCOTUS ONLY looks at constitutionality of things.... ONLY... The states handle the legality of things. Note in Maine the GOP want to move ahead with impeachment against the SoS... That's how to handle a corrupt partisan hack... They should do the same with the entire Supreme court in Colorado... I don't know if they can, but they should.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Fer sell cheep: BBS spel chekker. Wurks grate.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-

Not sure about the unconsitutional part. In its early days, the 14th
was used without court actions or trial. It was applied with a blanket
to pretty much anyone holding any elected office in a state that had
left the Union. They were removed from office and, until the
mid-1870's, were covered by the "cannot hold office again" bit without court action or conviction of any kind.

But the purpose of it was to keep the Rebels out of the gov't so that they wouldn't try to subvert the work needed to repair the union.

I would argue that if a person worked for the Conferacy, that's proof that he participated in insurrection. So I can see where a trial would be needed. The person, in effect, admitted his crime.

They usually don't have trials when the person freely admits his guilt.

I agree, but I don't think any politicians, including Trump, are immune
to the temptation to do so.

The temptation is one thing. The act is another. Most good people practice restraint. The Elitists just do whatever they want and we have to do the work through the courts to smack them back down.


... Hell hath no fury like the lawyer of woman scorned!
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

Which was outside of their jurisdiction. If a crime was committed, it not
committed in Colorado.

I do agree with that, and I think it will play into the SCOTUS decision.

The SCOTUS ONLY looks at constitutionality of things.... ONLY... The states ha
le the legality of things. Note in Maine the GOP want to move ahead with impe
hment against the SoS... That's how to handle a corrupt partisan hack... They ould do the same with the entire Supreme court in Colorado... I don't know if ey can, but they should.

You do realize that your first sentence there, re: states handle the
legality of things, contradicts one of your earlier arguments, right?


* SLMR 2.1a * "La Quinta." Spanish for "Next to Denny's."
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Not sure about the unconsitutional part. In its early days, the 14th was used without court actions or trial. It was applied with a blanket to pretty much anyone holding any elected office in a state that had left the Union. They were removed from office and, until the
mid-1870's, were covered by the "cannot hold office again" bit without court action or conviction of any kind.

But the purpose of it was to keep the Rebels out of the gov't so that they wouldn't try to subvert the work needed to repair the union.

I would argue that if a person worked for the Conferacy, that's proof that he participated in insurrection. So I can see where a trial would be needed. Th
person, in effect, admitted his crime.

I don't think it was just "Federal Confederates" or State elected officials
we are talking about here. In this instance, I think they even unseated
people like Mayors.

An issue they had for the persons they did try to charge, like Jefferson
Davis, was that they could not prove any direct link between him and what
they wanted to charge him with. Part of the issue was what position they
were in when the state they were in decided to leave the Union. Because
Davis was a resident of Mississippi, and did not participate in Mississippi's decision to leave, US prosecutors were not sure they could make the insurrection charge stick *even though* he was eventually President of the Confederacy.

So Davis was charged and indicted in a civil case, but the case never went
to trial and was dropped in early 1869, after President Johnson pardoned
most participants on Christmas, 1868.

Using your logic - participation is admission of guilt - if a court case against a 1/6 participant determines there was an insurrection or some
other charge of equal weight, that would mean anyone else who participated
that day was covered by that blanket, even if they personally don't go to trial.

They usually don't have trials when the person freely admits his guilt.

They at least have hearings, though. One where the person enters their plea officially in court, and one where they are sentenced (if that was not done
in the first hearing). These people were just unseated without court appearances.

I agree, but I don't think any politicians, including Trump, are immune to the temptation to do so.

The temptation is one thing. The act is another. Most good people practice restraint. The Elitists just do whatever they want and we have to do the work
through the courts to smack them back down.

The only restraint I see Trump and several of the more vocal "Ultra MAGA" politicians practicing is because they are forced to. In other words, they
are getting to be no better than the Elitists they are supposedly different than. In other words they, too, are proving not to be good people.


* SLMR 2.1a * A penny saved is a Congressional oversight.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

On 05 Jan 2024, Mike Powell said the following...

You do realize that your first sentence there, re: states handle the legality of things, contradicts one of your earlier arguments, right?

I'm a Canadian who naturalized to the US... As a result I had to pass a civics test... you might want to review some things...

Here U go... for review.... There are crimes that are handled at the State level and some at the Federal level... Here are some names of CRIMES that the Feds handle... Murder, Bank Robbery and Insurrection just to name a few....

More review... Back in the early 1900's there were gangsters reeking havoc in the US... Robbing banks and whatnot and crossing a state line and hiding from authorities because there was no real continuity with law enforcement between states.... Never mind the fact that there wasn't continuity between counties in some states...

So, how did the Feds solve this problem... They made some crimes Federal crimes... Like Murder, Robbing banks and Insurrection. In cases like this... The FBI, US Marshals and a local US District Attorney investigate and gather evidence ... that evidence would be presented to a Grand Jury and if that GJ came to the conclusion that charges would be handed out... That US DA would try that case in front of a US Federal Judge....

Where do Supreme courts come into play... They don't decide guilt or innocents... DOESN'T even cross their minds.... NOT PART of their reasoning. The only thing they'll concern themselves with is... Did the Government act according to the Constitution... Due process.. Search Warrants... All of the nice things that protect the individual from an over zealous prosecutor acting not in accordance with the constitution...

Now have guilty men been set free because the constitution is our Supreme document and it's the law of the land... Have some innocent people been set free, cases over turned, because of the same constitution.... Yes!!!

So lets bring this back... And I have said this before... A Grand Jury needs to hear evidence... Consider this evidence and recommend charges to a local US DA... That evidence will be presented to a Federal Judge and/or jury those people will determine guilt or innocents.... That case/charges can be appealed, at first by the local and state levels and them eventually the US Supreme Court will either uphold the decision or overturn it... In either case they are only looking at the CONSTITUTION ... PERIOD... as it relates to the PROCESS... and YES a guilty man could walk free...

So again... It's not up to the Colorado Supreme Court to come to some kind of decision on guilt denying someone of their due process rights. It's not up to an unelected SoS to watch some YouTude videos and make a decision that no SoS has ever made in the past... Taking away the rights for the people to vote for the candidate they want is, and should be, a big thing.

If the Feds had the goods on Trump, and it's obvious they don't, they would have just used regular order to do so.

If you need help to better understand the Constitution and the legal processes I'll send you some YouTube links.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... The caterpillar does all the work but the butterfly gets all the publicity

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/200)

Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-

I don't think it was just "Federal Confederates" or State elected officials we are talking about here. In this instance, I think they
even unseated people like Mayors.

Interesting. I'm constantly amazed at how LITTLE we were taught about our history in schools. Lately I've been exploring the era around the Revolutionary War in Michigan. Sooooo much stuff going on that was never covered in school - even in a Michigan school.

Using your logic - participation is admission of guilt - if a court
case against a 1/6 participant determines there was an insurrection or some other charge of equal weight, that would mean anyone else who participated that day was covered by that blanket, even if they
personally don't go to trial.

Keep in mind, in my vision of this, we have the Governor and many of the Legislature deciding that they don't want to be in the union and going off and going their own thing - including seizing Federal peoperty in their state.

The idea that there were people, like mayors, using your example, that had no say in the matter and decided it was better for them to stay in their office (assuming for altrustic reasons) never really entered my mind. But, ya, there would be a bunch of "edge cases" and it's really questionable as to whether they should be held responsible or not.

The only restraint I see Trump and several of the more vocal "Ultra
MAGA" politicians practicing is because they are forced to. In other words, they are getting to be no better than the Elitists they are supposedly different than. In other words they, too, are proving not
to be good people.

I don't see this yet. Now that could be because of the extreme abuse that we see from the Elitists in power right now is overshadowing others.

But that does go back to what I said: We are not seeing a fight between the Good Guys and Bad Guys, but rather a fight between different groups of Bad Guys over who gets to rule the rest of us.

But the evidence shows that life under Trump was so much better than life under Biden's Controller.


... If there is no God, who pops up the next Kleenex?
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.52

--- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)
* Origin: cold fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (1:120/616)

I don't think it was just "Federal Confederates" or State elected officials we are talking about here. In this instance, I think they even unseated people like Mayors.

Interesting. I'm constantly amazed at how LITTLE we were taught about our history in schools. Lately I've been exploring the era around the Revolutionary War in Michigan. Sooooo much stuff going on that was never covered in school - even in a Michigan school.

I don't doubt it. I learned a little (very little) during some trips to
the area and never realized that much went on in the Great Lakes area,
outside of Lake Ontario. For example, there were some big naval battles on Lake Erie during the War of 1812 (not the Revolution, but close).

In Kentucky, you are supposed to have a Kentucky History class at some
point during elementary or middle school. The district I went to school in,
who thinks they are better than the rest of the state, just barely touched
on it.

Using your logic - participation is admission of guilt - if a court
case against a 1/6 participant determines there was an insurrection or some other charge of equal weight, that would mean anyone else who participated that day was covered by that blanket, even if they personally don't go to trial.

Keep in mind, in my vision of this, we have the Governor and many of the Legislature deciding that they don't want to be in the union and going off and
going their own thing - including seizing Federal peoperty in their state.

Yes, you definately had those and those things were pretty blatant.

The idea that there were people, like mayors, using your example, that had no say in the matter and decided it was better for them to stay in their office (assuming for altrustic reasons) never really entered my mind. But, ya, there
would be a bunch of "edge cases" and it's really questionable as to whether they should be held responsible or not.

Part of my assumption here is the sheer number of individuals. When they
say that "all but roughly 500" had their rights restored, and 500 are in the minority, there must have been thousands. It probably applied not just to politicians, but anyone in the military, too.

I also wonder, when kicking legislatures out of office, did they make any exceptions for members who were against succession? Some states maybe
didn't have many, but for example Tennessee was never in full agreement...
the eastern, mountain part of the state was more pro-Union than the west.

The only restraint I see Trump and several of the more vocal "Ultra MAGA" politicians practicing is because they are forced to. In other words, they are getting to be no better than the Elitists they are supposedly different than. In other words they, too, are proving not
to be good people.

I don't see this yet. Now that could be because of the extreme abuse that we see from the Elitists in power right now is overshadowing others.

But that does go back to what I said: We are not seeing a fight between the Good Guys and Bad Guys, but rather a fight between different groups of Bad Guy
over who gets to rule the rest of us.

Yes, exactly!

But the evidence shows that life under Trump was so much better than life unde
Biden's Controller.

No doubt. Economically speaking, things were a whole lot better. I was pleasantly surprised by Trump in his first three years. Things
are going to be so much worse off than 2017, should he take over in 2025,
that I am not certain if it will work a second time. Time will tell.

My opinion of him has been tarnished by his actions when, and after, leaving office. To me, he seems like the Boy Who Cried Wolf, but in reverse. He cried "wolf!" about things that he was right about, but now is crying "wolf!"
when confronted about things he himself has done that were less than right.

Meanwhile, yes, some "wolves" are still trying to stretch things out that
are either based on distored reality, or that may be based on reality but are not really theirs to decide.


* SLMR 2.1a * ASCII stupid question - get a stupid ANSI
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

https://youtu.be/oErYhFABeN4?si=obGOLoTG4bZVML5v

The ACLJ take on the Democrats and Immunity... The guest speaker is Gay so, from the left' perspective, it must be correct.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... How do I set my laser printer to stun?

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

https://youtu.be/oErYhFABeN4?si=obGOLoTG4bZVML5v

The ACLJ take on the Democrats and Immunity... The guest speaker is Gay so, from the left' perspective, it must be correct.

The Democrats are the ones who think that they are above the law, but they're "smart" enough to blame others of doing it first.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)

On 05 Jul 2024, Aaron Thomas said the following...

The Democrats are the ones who think that they are above the law, but they're "smart" enough to blame others of doing it first.

Thank GOD for FidoNET and other forms of technology that they are being exposed.

IB Joe, Pronouns (FJB/LGB)
AKA Joe Schweier
SysOp of 4A 6F 65 73 42 42 53
-=JoesBBS.com=-

... Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A49 2023/04/30 (Windows/64)
* Origin: JoesBBS.Com, Telnet:23 SSH:22 HTTP:80 (1:342/201)