Could Trump be barred under the constitution’s ‘engaged in insurrection’ clause?

The Guardian ^

[Fury]

The SCOTUS has resurrected the Brunson filings for another look. The filings have already been distributed to the justices for conference but no conference date scheduled. They are just holding them like a loaded gun at Congress. Trump has re-truthed it.

Stop pretending. SCOTUS has not "resurrected" anything. In fact, if you look at this:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22-1028.html

You can see that the request for rehearing was denied -TODAY.

You have to be working for Joe...

[Fury]

Re: 80 - Will not happen. It’s easier to make CT claims and then scurry off to the next thread.

[TexasGunLover]

It’s easier to make CT claims and then scurry off to the next thread.

Yep, rational thinking has been out the window for some time on FR. It's why it's dwindled to virtually nothing.

[Fury]

Agreed.

An example is that poster making the claim (last Spring?) that almost all the current US military combatant commanders were nominated for appointment by President Trump, and implying they would be loyal to him and not the current CiC.

It took 5 minutes of searching to confirm that multiple combatant commanders had been appointed by Biden and not by President Trump. It was not just a wrong claim but misleadingly wrong, done I believe to stoke conspiracy theories. It was fun outing that fake crap.

[TexasGunLover]

So true, and the military was completely neutered and made woke before Obama ever left office.