Republican secretary of state threatens to kick Biden off the ballot as Trump payback
Republican secretary of state threatens to kick Biden off the ballot as Trump payback
Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that while he didn’t want to do it, he had to remind people of how “severe” the situation is.
Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that while he didn’t want to do it, he had to remind people of how “severe” the situation is.
A top Republican official in Missouri is threatening to remove President Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot as retaliation for the determination in two other states that Donald Trump doesn't qualify because he "engaged in insurrection."
"What has happened in Colorado & Maine is disgraceful & undermines our republic," Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft wrote on the social media site X on Friday. "While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!"
Ashcroft's post came shortly after the Supreme Court agreed to review a decision by Colorado's high court that found Trump could be barred from the state's primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
You're viewing a single thread.
I don’t like trump and agree he belongs in jail but how the democrats are doing it is wrong we are innocent until proven guilty in the court of law he is on trial right now but has yet to be convicted of a crime so he should not be removed until he is proven guilty in a court of law. The trail likely won’t be over until after the election so the are using dirty tactics to remove him before he is found guilty so I am not surprised if the start removing Biden from state ballots as well. We will see what the Supreme Court says but I would assume the would say the same but could very well be wrong nobody should vote for trump but we gotta do it correctly.
Firstly, the amendment does not require any conviction. It is simply a prerequisite. Secondly, Colorado literally held a trial to determine this. It was determined in a court of law after reviewing all the evidence and holding a trial that he was not eligible. This was not done “by the democrats”. This is the legal system and election officials doing their jobs
That’s the thing it is too vague and why it will be all hell I have a feeling both trump and Biden will be missing from ballots and if that happens both are not eligible.
It's not vague at all. Engage in an insurrection, you can't hold office. Trump incited an insurrection that was broadcast on national television.
Biden hasn't incited an insurrection, but if he did, he would also be ineligible for office.
The problem with Republicans is they actually don't give the smallest shit about the law or the US Constitution. They're fascists, the don't have integrity or values, except to value seizing and maintaining power, by any means necessary.
Yeah Republicans and Democrats both bad choices i do not like any of them but i do believe Biden shouldn't hold office he is too old and honestly smells of corruption from Hunter Biden scandal. Trump yeah hard no i do not want him in office lets not repeat time to move on we need different candidates from both party's. Lets get some fresh options.
There's lots of good reasons to be anti-Biden.
BUT PER THE LAW, Biden is eligible to run and Trump is not.
This has nothing to do with feelings or even policy. Nothing to do with sides.
This is just the straight up facts. Trump has engaged in insurrection. Biden has not. The 14th Amendment is clear that insurrectionists are not eligible for office.
If you want to be eligible for office, dotn engage in insurrection. It's not fucking complicated.
Cool I don’t really care enough to keep this conversation going I rarely get into politics and even then who cares it’s always a bad choice either way.
Laws are important, I'm sure if someone broke into your home and stole all your stuff you wouldn't want the law to just shrug and go who cares.
I never said laws where not important I just lack the interest to further this I’ll let the people already taking care of it do it.
Why should he be treated any differently than anyone else that was disqualified under the 14th amendment?
The big distinction here would be that everyone else disqualified under Section 3 was a public officer in a major political organization (the CSA) who was in open war with the US. No question of fact whatsoever.
While Trump was too much of a wuss to openly lead his insurrection himself, so some government entity should probably be responsible for determining whether or not section 3 applies, and what standard they have to meet to do so. There are probably good arguments why qualification for a federal office isn't properly decided by a state judge or official.
That is not a distinction actually made by section 3. Oath breakers are disqualified, not rebels per se.
There are probably good arguments why qualification for a federal office isn’t properly decided by a state judge or official.
State elections officials already do that for things like age, residency requirements, etc. It's part of federalism that the state governments administer federal elections.
I am not saying he should all candidates suck honestly don’t want any of them but. Nothing you can do unfortunately I am just stating an opinion you should have to be convicted of an actual crime like treason which I think they could charge him with and then remove him based on that charge.
Requiring a conviction in the first place is the special treatment I'm referring to.
Disqualification is not a criminal penalty. If it were then it could be removed by a presidential pardon.
Instead it can only be removed by Congress--a body that is specifically prohibited from passing laws that set or alter someone's criminal liability.
I agree then let’s congress decide and not the court my only point is now the create where we are now the could remove Biden and say it’s because of hunter biden and the would not be wrong that’s my only point.
congress can decide by a 2/3 majority that his insurrection doesn't bar him from running. it's in the constitution. failure to pass that resolution is congress deciding that his insurrection counts and he's disqualified.
Congress can only remove the disqualification, they can't impose it.
It's a problem that the amendment doesn't tell us how it's supposed to work, but the fact that other disqualifying factors (age, residency, etc.) are determined by the states suggests that the states can determine disqualification on the insurrection factor too, and through the same procedural mechanisms.
This makes much more sense thanks for the clarification. 🖖