US US Rep. Greene challenges the 14th amendment to run for reelection - Treasonous bitch

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

US Rep. Greene challenges the 14th amendment to run for reelection​


ATLANTA, GA. (WCTV/AP) - U.S representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has filed a lawsuit challenging a provision in the 14th amendment in Georgia’s state law that a group of voters are using against her eligibility to run for reelection.

The challenge filed last month against Greene alleges that she helped facilitate the January 6, riot in 2021 that disrupted Joe Biden’s presential election victory.

Greene filed a lawsuit Friday asking a judge to declare the law unconstitutional and prohibit state officials from enforcing it.

Copyright 2022 WCTV. All rights reserved.


 
Click to expand...
I must have missed at what point during Jan 6 she led people on an assault of our democracy.
 
Elwood P. Dowd said:
Was she even there?

In any event, the article is so poorly written I can't tell if this is the 14th amendment to the US Constitution or the Georgia state constitution.

edit: Doesn't look like Georgia's state constitution has any amendments.
Click to expand...
It's just disingenuous journofags using weaponized word salad to obfuscate the true meaning of what they say. She didn't challenge any amendment. Some idiots tried filing an injunction against her to keep her from running under a provision of the 14th amendment to the constitution, arguing that her "involvement" in Boomercaust '21 disqualifies her as a participant in criminal conspiracy against the US. She filed a request for a judge to strike it down to prevent it from being upheld or enforced by some leftist pet in robes, because it's blatantly bullshit.
 
Technically if is proven they assisted the Jan 6th insurrectionists the yes, they are disqualified for running and may be removed from Congress and also from running again.

However, someone thinking she did assist them is not enough; she would have to be charged and found guilty by a trial for this to hold substance.

Until she has been charged and found guilty, it is merely someone's belief she was involved and is insufficient for their remedy sought. No court of Judge can provide remedy until there is conviction.
 
Menotaur said:
Technically if is proven they assisted the Jan 6th insurrectionists the yes, they are disqualified for running and may be removed from Congress and also from running again.

However, someone thinking she did assist them is not enough; she would have to be charged and found guilty by a trial for this to hold substance.

Until she has been charged and found guilty, it is merely someone's belief she was involved and is insufficient for their remedy sought. No court of Judge can provide remedy until there is conviction.
Click to expand...
She, like all people in the US, are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. She's never been convicted, let alone charged. Therefore, she can run for reelection.
 
Menotaur said:
Technically if is proven they assisted the Jan 6th insurrectionists the yes, they are disqualified for running and may be removed from Congress and also from running again.

However, someone thinking she did assist them is not enough; she would have to be charged and found guilty by a trial for this to hold substance.

Until she has been charged and found guilty, it is merely someone's belief she was involved and is insufficient for their remedy sought. No court of Judge can provide remedy until there is conviction.
Click to expand...
Define assist and define insurrectionist. I think it's bullshit, fwiw.
 
whatever I feel like said:
Define assist and define insurrectionist. I think it's bullshit, fwiw.
Click to expand...
That's not my job. Thats the job of the people who want to bar her from running. That is kind of the point of my response - if she isn't charged and isn't found guilty of either, then it is a long shot to ask her to be off the ticket.

I'm not here to debate if she did or did not assist - I don't really care. I just find the idea is interesting and has merit - if indeed they can prove it.

And to Nod Flenders who said...

"She, like all people in the US, are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. She's never been convicted, let alone charged. Therefore, she can run for reelection."

Is what I actually said.
 
Last edited:
Last I heard, Greene has not been convicted or even charged under 18 USC 2383 making this injunction and article incredibly fraudulent and homosexual.
 
On a more important note:

I feel Greene's supporters are actually missing the point: Greene’s lawsuit asks a judge to declare that the law that the voters are using to challenge her eligibility is itself unconstitutional and to prohibit state officials from enforcing it.

So Greene is trying not to challenge those who are accusing her, but the law in place that would see her barred if the accusation is true. For Greene's supports, that should raise red flags as bright as the sun at mid day.

That's like being accused of manslaughter for drunk driving and then asking before you go to trial that the court rule the law that says drunk driving causing death is manslaughter be revoked.
 
The only red flag in this thread is the amount of gleeful frenzied posting Fatataur is doing. He might get another heart attack at this rate.
 
Sithis said:
Some idiots tried filing an injunction against her to keep her from running under a provision of the 14th amendment to the constitution, arguing that her "involvement" in Boomercaust '21 disqualifies her as a participant in criminal conspiracy against the US.
Click to expand...
I don't really understand why this is an amendment. It seems ripe for abuse; to be used in exactly this way where a vindictive government uses it to silence and disqualify their ideological opponents.

Surely, if people are claiming you were involved in a criminal conspiracy against the United States and can still get elected, there's probably more nuance to the situation, right? Sounds like some jewish, post-civil-war tomfoolery...
 
Menotaur said:
So Greene is trying not to challenge those who are accusing her, but the law in place that would see her barred if the accusation is true. For Greene's supports, that should raise red flags as bright as the sun at mid day.
Click to expand...
Are you retarded? challenging the law itself can be done before anything else is in motion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom