Should people who attempted to overthrow the will of the people be allowed to stand for elected office?

[goaded]

There has been exactly no evidence that the 2020 election wasn't as free and fair as any previous election. For over two centuries, the losing party has peacefully accepted their loss and handed over power. Should proven liars be allowed to seek office?

Yes

No

Other

[loveslongnails]

The case against Marjorie Green of Georgia is proceeding not just because she lied, but because she openly supported and endorsed an insurrection and the overthrow of the US Government. HOWEVER, that alone will not be enough in the long run unless it can be proven that she had a direct hand in it, I believe. The case will be made against her that because of her position, her vocal support and non-condemnation was the equivalent, but I don't think it will stand. Do I think she's an idiot and shouldn't represent anyone - yes, absolutely.

If proven "liars" were forbidden to hold office, there would be no one to elect.

[msc545]

This isn't about people who lie since all politicians lie. Instead it's about people who tried to overthrow the government like Marjorie Taylor Greene.

[JamesDiaz11]

The fact that you have a Ukrainian flag, and jump all over the designation "liar" shows you're a scumbag leftist, but I'll answer your question.
First, people have not just accepted the "will of the people" for two hundred years- there was a civil war, if you remember. The Democrats tried to impeach Trump continuously for his entire presidency, mostly from rumors they themselves created.
So, don't give me that nonsense of how anybody who was skeptical that some magic occurred at 3am after election night, where Biden who was trailing in every toss-up state suddenly won should be exempt from running. This just stinks of a transparent desire to forbid anyone you don't agree with from running again.

[goaded]

It's amazing how showing support for a democratic country under attack from a dictatorship now upsets the American right. I thought you stood for freedom?

The civil war was whole states leaving the country after they lost the election. They weren't saying the election wasn't valid.

Both of Trump's impeachments were valid and should have resulted in his conviction, but Republican senators ignored their oath of office and put party and power before country. Neither were based on "rumours".

[JamesDiaz11]

Pot calling the Kettle black, eh? Republicans are scumbags, but only slightly less so than Democrats. Democrats have suppressed every valid challenge of their elected leaders for decades, so don't give me this nonsense on how the most corrupt party is suddenly righteous...
As far as "freedom," freedom to do what? Freedom to chop your children's genitals off, if you even permit them to be born? Freedom to prance around in a rainbow thong in kindergartens? Freedom to broadcast a steady stream of interracial porn in advertisement in hopes it will further diminish a white population? Freedom to outsource every job possible so we can make the almighty line (i. e. the economy) rise 3% this year (YAY!)? What has this "freedom" brought us? Any sense of community/ identity has been destroyed (80% by Democrats, 20% by Koch brother-type Republicans), Marriage has fallen apart, children don't have two parents, women are diseased, depressed, and "empowered" by working their best years away for $20/ hour, and a pat on the back of how they "broke the glass ceiling." Men are killing themselves in droves, cutting off their dicks, and about as feminine as an average woman was 50 years ago. Yea, I'm not about this "freedom," buddy. As far as this "democracy" you so prize (as long as you win), one of the greatest philosophers in history, Plato, explained how ridiculous the notion of placing power in the whims of (on average) stupid, manipulated people. Boss Tweed of Tammany hall epitomizes the "democracy" of the US, where both sides (especially democrats) simply promise more freebies to people, so they'll grant them more power.

[JamesDiaz11]

Continued: So, no, I don't personally care for Republicans, who's "freedom" only means a degraded population, medicated into compliance, and slowly replaced by cheaper brown people to serve as gears in the machine, any more than I care for Democrats who would tear everything we've ever built down for just so the Tyones and Shaniquas will keep voting for them ast 90%+ each election.

[goaded]

"Democrats have suppressed every valid challenge of their elected leaders for decades"
Name me a couple of "valid challenges", I could do with a laugh. Benghazi? Her e-mails?

[JamesDiaz11]

Ted Kennedy: www.usatoday.com/.../
Biden: www.theguardian.com/.../joe-biden-corruption-donald-trump
Hillary/ Bill Clinton: www.politico.com/.../inconvenient-truths-about-clinton-foundation
Not to mention his various reports of rape, sexual assault, and gross misconduct.
LBJ: medium.com/.../lyndon-johnson-penis-nicknamed-jumbo-6eba2f1894fa
They call this behavior a "sex offense" nowadays.
And your Messiah, Obama: www.cato.org/.../top-10-ways-obama-violated-constitution-during-presidency

Any of these things would elicit an impeachment charge by Democrats, had they been done by a Republican; so, again, drop the faux self-righteous nonsense.

[goaded]

The fact that you have to go back over 50 years to find 5 examples speaks volumes. Trump broke more laws in his 4 years. I'll have a look through your list. In the meantime:

The Hatch act (using federal resources for political purposes), frequently, 18 U. S. Code § 872: “Extortion by officers or employees of the United States.” (the Ukraine phone call, which the GAO concluded also broke the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, also the Georgia phone call to "find" ballots), 2 U. S. Code § 192, “Refusal of witness to testify or produce papers,” (ignoring subpoenas), 18 U. S. Code § 610, “Coercion of political activity.” (withholding the funds was a political activity), his removal of classified documentation from the White House when he left, 18 U. S. Code § 607, “Place of solicitation,” and 52 U. S. Code § 30121, “Contributions and donations by foreign nationals.” (all those Saudi "guests" at his hotels, etc.), destruction of presidential records (to the extent of flushing them down the toilet), keeping expensive gifts which are the property of the people (the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act).

theintercept.com/2019/10/10/trump-crimes-law/
www.foxnews.com/.../gao-says-trump-admin-broke-law-ukraine
www.nytimes.com/.../trump-foreign-gifts.html

[goaded]

Ted Kennedy was never president, so you're down to 4.

The Biden article is about when he was a senator, and I'm sure you'd be the first to say they're all corrupt. (It's not true, but the country has basically legalised bribery - it's what many of them do.) 3.

"This is sponsor generated content Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President." 2.

The world was a lot different in 1968. But OK.

"The Obama administration has been the most lawless in U. S. history."
Oh, come on. Watergate? Iran-Contra? 1.

[AviatorTom]

Your post contains some errors.

First, there have been several US elections that contained fraud. The presidential election of 1876 was ultimately decided in a secret, closed session among members of both parties just days before the inauguration. The 1880 election involved fraudulent tactics like multiple voting in New York, which gave the electoral vote win to James Garfield. In 1960, there are credible claims that John F Kennedy stole the election through falsifying vote totals and other methods, particularly in Texas and Illinois.

Second, there hasn't always been a peaceful exchange of power. When George Bush took office, the "W" key had been removed from every White House PC. In the early 1800s, John Adams and his son, John Quincy Adams, refused to attend the inauguration of their successor, who defeated them in the elections. In 1980, Ronald Reagan wanted "nothing to do" with Jimmy Carter, the outgoing president.

[goaded]

Are you serious? 19th century elections (not turning up to your successor's inauguration is not the same as violently trying to stop it), and John F Kennedy (who became president peacefully)? He also won by a 77 electoral vote margin. *

"When George Bush took office, the "W" key had been removed from every White House PC." Oh, the humanity! I'm pretty sure that's a myth, and it's certainly not violence.

As to Reagan, firstly, he was the incoming president, not the outgoing one, and secondly, Carter was present at the inauguration.

upload.wikimedia.org/.../...ted_States_Capitol.jpg

* chicago.suntimes.com/.../jfk-stolen-1960-election-chicago-illinois

[loveslongnails]

"In 1960, there are credible claims that John F Kennedy stole the election through falsifying vote totals and other methods, particularly in Texas and Illinois" - Totally debunked.

"In 1980, Ronald Reagan wanted "nothing to do" with Jimmy Carter, the outgoing president."
Reagan's personal feelings about Carter were irrelevant. His administration did NOT interfere with transitioning matters of state and security. By the way, the rest of that supposed story goes like this:
" during their limousine ride to the Capitol on Inauguration Day, Carter was deep in thought about the release of the Iranian hostages. Reagan, meanwhile, told a series of anecdotes that Carter said “were remarkably pointless.”

I don't find that difficult to believe, as most of, albeit not all of, what Reagan had to say was remarkably pointless, particularly "Reaganomics".

[exitseven]

no, there was plenty of evidence. Refusing to look at it and thoroughly investigate it does not magically make it disappear. I still have not heard an explanation for the suitcases of ballots that were dragged out from under the table after everyone was sent home and magically the next morning Biden was the winner. That is but one instance that was just brushed off.

[goaded]

Really? So the months of "investigations" in various states turned up evidence of fraud, did they? Or just more votes for Biden?

If you haven't heard the explanation, it's because you didn't want to.

[exitseven]

Have you heard expalations about any of the allegatoiions? Th only one I heard was the local politicians that had the hearing with the woman that had the cell phone video of the white van that pulled up at the polloing place in Ga. and dropped off stacks of ballots that appeared magically. The board looked at the video and just said that the video did not clearly show that those stacks of papers were ballots and that was the end of it. The woman said that the ballots looked like they were all copies of each other. How hard would it have been to look at all the ballots and find copies? If the FBI wasn't so busy investigating every single person that was in DC on 1/6 to be bothered with a little thing like election theft.

[goaded]

Like I said, you couldn't be bothered to look, in favour of wild unsupported accusations. And there was nothing "magic" about Biden coming from behind in many states, it was (largely Democratic) postal votes being counted after the in-person votes. In states where they counted postal votes early it would be the other way around.


www.snopes.com/fact-check/georgia-suitcases/

eu.usatoday.com/.../

[exitseven]

These so called investigstors turned over every rock except for the one that had the fake ballots under it. Why did that woman send everyone home? Why were those ballots hidden in suitcases under that table? The investigation was almost laughable. And lets face it, how could a senile old political hack running on a platform of I am going to raise your taxes, send your job to China and take away your guns beat one of the most popular presidents in history? Even with the fake news and big tech pulling him across the finish line. A half million people did not show up in DC on 1/6 for nothing.

[goaded]

Does it occur to you that your ideas about the election might be as accurate as your other ideas?

Biden neither ran on or intended to do any of the ridiculous things you list. Your "one of the most popular presidents in history" never reached 50% approval during his term, not even once (45.8%, tops). Finally, you clearly have no idea what half a million people look like, the crowd there was in the tens of thousands, maybe 120,000.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com/.../
www.newsweek.com/exclusive-classified-documents-reveal-number-january-6-protestors-1661296

[exitseven]

GThere were 450,000 people protesting in DC. They could only fit 120,000 on the national mall.

[exitseven]

There are videos during the campaign of Biden saying taxes will go up. He campaigned on raising corporate taxes which just raises prices on everything. He did say that he was coming after your guns and he did say that he would be pro China (IE: all the jobs that Trump tried to bring back will go right back to China). Read his manifesto if you don't believe me. It is online. It is 110 pages of the most frightening thing that I have ever read. And Biden is actually doing some of this stuff. No wonder the country is going down the drain.

[goaded]

Of course there were. Except there were 1.2 million people on the National Mall for Lyndon Johnson’s 1965 inauguration. The Ellipse is only a part of the National Mall.

[exitseven]

the fact is there was 450,000 people in DC that day. Just ask the FBI. They spent millions investigating every last one of them?

[goaded]

No it's not a fact. The 120,000 number comes from the secret service and the FBI. And neither number would overflow the National Mall, like you claim.

www.newsweek.com/exclusive-classified-documents-reveal-number-january-6-protestors-1661296

[Jamie05rhs]

They didn't try to overthrow the will of the people. They were simply trying to challenge the results in certain states. A challenge doesn't mean you throw them out. It just means you investigate and determine if any wrongdoing went on, and then you address those incidents specifically.

[goaded]

So, now the challenges have been found to be baseless, what are they saying?

[Jamie05rhs]

@goaded There never were any challenges. The challenges were never allowed.

[goaded]

Arizona held multiple investigations and only found more votes for Biden. You need evidence of wrong-doing to make a challenge and there wasn't any. Senator Chip Lee and Representative Mike Roy were willing to go along with any challenge, but they weren't given any evidence. Others didn't have even that basic level of honour.

Anyone challenging the results without evidence was trying to overturn a legitimate election.

[Jamie05rhs]

@goaded It takes time to gather evidence. Especially if it's being hidden.
The challenge wasn't to say "there was fraud.". The challenge was to say "there MIGHT have been fraud. So let's take a pause and investigate and get to the bottom of this.".

[goaded]

Well, now they've had two years to find evidence. Where is it? Mike Lindell keeps saying he's got some, and has since days after the election. He's lying. There isn't any, because the election was at least as fair as all previous ones.

What's happening today, right now, is that Trump is attempting to get cronies elected to count the votes (Secretaries of State, etc.). People he can rely on to pretend there are problems when he loses. Some of them are even people who were at Jan 6th.

If they get elected, you can forget about American democracy.

[Jamie05rhs]

They stopped looking.

[goaded]

No, there was nothing to find.

[Jamie05rhs]

You just prefer not to consider the possibility of nefarious activities on the part of your side. (Unless you are well aware what went on and you are running cover for them.)

[goaded]

Go and look at the texts to and from Mark Meadows where half the Republican leadership was saying it was illegal and bullshit and the other half were calling for martial law or fraudulent "electors" to take the country. They knew damn well they were making shit up to cover for a coup.

[CaptainSmartass]

Nope. That's treason, isn't it? They should hang for that.

Simples...

[goaded]

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Not hanging, but not allowed to hold office.

[CaptainSmartass]

Stupid law. Won't let us have any fun...

[Snakeyes7]

Even if there wasn't election fraud there was plenty of fuckery going on. Social media censoring stories like Hunters laptop saying its russian disinformation or something, allowing people to vote before the debates, PA allowing mail in votes even though they knew it wasn't constitutional in their state, Chris Wallace who is an establishment shill moderating the debates.

We have more than election fraud to say that we should at least be suspicious of what was going on.

[goaded]

No, you don't, because there wasn't any significant election fraud. (Not counting the Republicans voting twice and lying about their addresses.) There was hardly a single person found voting who wasn't entitled to, and Chris Wallace was a Fox News presenter, hardly a radical leftie.

[Snakeyes7]

I was not entertaining the idea of election fraud.

Also late last year Wallace announced that he was moving to CNN. I don't know if he did or not but to that I'd say he'd be a lot more at home there.

[Still-alive]

nope and that damned jan 6th committee better act soon

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

Not sure how to feel about this. I mean I get 2020 but Hugo Chavez also attempted a coup before he was democratically elected.

[goaded]

There is a constitutional amendment in the US explicitly excluding insurrectionists from office.

[joeldalton]

Wait so you didn't think Biden should have been allowed to run for office?

[goaded]

I think the candidate who was elected should be president. And he is.

[joeldalton]

But you said this "Should proven liars be allowed to seek office?"

[goaded]

When was that, then?

[joeldalton]

WASHINGTON (AP) _ Sen. Joe Biden claimed during a campaign appearance in New Hampshire last spring that he finished in the top half of his law school class, although records indicate he finished near the bottom.

[goaded]

No, dumbass, when did I say "Should proven liars be allowed to seek office?"?

[goaded]

Although I'd have been fine with that rule, considering Trump's first act in office was to lie about crowd sizes.

[joeldalton]

The very last sentence in your 'question'.

[goaded]

Touche! So both candidates should have been excluded (that "scandal" was from the 1980's, by the way). Who would have been the alternatives? Bernie, and?

[joeldalton]

The year doesn't matter. Other than to prove that Biden is wholly unlikable and always has been. He was near last place in 2020 till the DNC realized Bernie or Tulsi could take the nomination and they had to get them out of there.

[goaded]

And who would have been the Republican nominee who hadn't lied?

[joeldalton]

Really doesn't matter. This is your criteria, not mine.

[goaded]

So you think Bernie should have run unopposed. Sounds good to me.

[joeldalton]

lmao. No, by your standard, Biden was unfit to run.

[goaded]

As was Trump and all the other Republicans.

[joeldalton]

Bro, you played yourself. AGAIN. Just stop. It’s getting sad, honestly.

[goaded]

Yes, because Biden telling a lie in 1985 is just the same as telling lies every day for six years.

[joeldalton]

Holy fuck, you are mentally ill

[goaded]

More projection.

[joeldalton]

lol, more like an accurate statement. you played yourself hard on this one. I get it, you're trying to resurrect some dignity. But the best bet is to let it go. Take your L like a man.

[goaded]

OMG, you just can't understand someone admitting a mistake is not the same as them being totally wrong about everything, can you? No wonder you never admit being wrong, even when it's blindingly obvious. The article you dug up was literally from 1987.

[joeldalton]

Does that mean the Joe Biden is a proven liar?

[goaded]

Of course. But, and this is obvious to almost everyone except for you: A single lie told 35 years ago is less serious than thousands of lies being told over just six years.

[joeldalton]

lmao, it’s not a single like, dipshit. You’re fucking delusional.

[goaded]

So what lie did Biden tell in the last week?

[joeldalton]

He lied and said that people couldn’t buy cannons when the 2nd amendment was passed. That isn’t true. That was on April 12. A tad over a week, but I don’t hang on his every word as you do. There were no restrictions on any weapon being owned privately when the 2a was passed.

[joeldalton]

On April 14 he claimed he was a professor for 4 years at Penn. He never taught a class.

[goaded]

www.politifact.com/personalities/joe-biden/ 21% False or worse, 2% Pants on Fire, from 228 checks.
www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ 54% False or worse, 17% Pants on Fire, from 949 checks.

And some of Biden's False-rated statements can easily be attributed to misspeaking, like the comment about the minimum wage that would be $20 if it were linked to inflation.

It would be $23, if it was linked to productivity. That gets the same rating as Trump's “You go to a store, they don’t have bread.” Trump has no clue whether that's true or not, he just doesn't care about the truth, that's why you like him.

Or Biden's "Thanks to the American Rescue Plan’s changes to the Affordable Care Act, “four out of five consumers (are) finding quality coverage for under $10 a month.”

Politifact found: "Four of five consumers would qualify for coverage costing $10 or less a month if they looked for it. However, only about one-third of actual insurance signups under the Affordable Care Act ended up costing $10 or less per month in premiums."

So “four out of five consumers COULD FIND quality coverage for under $10 a month.” would have been fine. And let half the ACA customers know that they don't have to pay as much as they are.

Compare that to "The Strategic Petroleum Reserve has “been mostly empty” for decades." (it was at least 90% full for years before he came into office). Trump was responsible for it for four years.

[joeldalton]

weird you completely ignored the two lies I pointed out to you.

Oh look, even politifact agrees, your own source

www.politifact.com/.../

You fucking idiot

https://tenor.com/byMbR.gif

[goaded]

I didn't see the second before I posted, and I didn't dispute the former was wrong. You're ignoring the fact that statements by Biden that could be corrected by changing a word or two get the same False rating as Trump's outright lies, and that Trump outright lies between two (False) and eight (Pants on Fire) times the rate of Biden, even if you don't take misstatements into account.

Are stores in the US without bread? No.
Were the national petroleum reserves empty for decades? No.

Would Biden have been correct about the minimum wage if he'd said "productivity" rather than "inflation"? Yes.
Would Biden have been correct about the ACA if he'd said "could have" rather than something like "have"? Yes.
Would Biden have been correct about his professorship if he'd left out the word "full" (or if you simply don't interpret it as "full-time" or "teaching")? Yes. He had the title and an office.

www.politifact.com/personalities/joe-biden/ 21% False or worse, 2% Pants on Fire, from 228 checks.
www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/ 54% False or worse, 17% Pants on Fire, from 949 checks.

www.snopes.com/.../
"What’s True: From 2017 to 2021, then-former Vice President Joe Biden was the Benjamin Franklin Presidential Practice Professor at the University of Pennsylvania. During his time there, he collected more than $900,000. However …

What’s False: … this role was honorary. He gave lectures and talks to students on campus, but did not teach a full semester’s course load during that time."

https://amc.sas.upenn.edu/people/joe-biden
"Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. has been named the Benjamin Franklin Presidential Practice Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, where he will lead the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, a new center focused principally on diplomacy, foreign policy, and national security. The Center will be located in Washington, D. C. Biden will also have an office on the Penn campus in Philadelphia."

[joeldalton]

Yes, Joe Biden was given an honorary professorship by the president of Penn who he repaid by making her an ambassador. He taught 0 classes and was not there 4 years. An insult to professors. Pretty much like Jill's an insult to doctors.

But keep going, I love watching you dig your hole.

[goaded]

Biden was a professor at Penn from 2017 to 2021, but you want to make that sound like he'd claimed to have been on the moon. Bread: can you buy it? Yes, Trump was lying. Oil reserves, were they practically full? Yes, Trump was lying.

[joeldalton]

lmao. He claimed to be a teacher. Did he teach a class? No. He was lying. GTFOH.

[goaded]

Yes, he did lecture classes. I expect you'll acknowledge your mistake now. Oh, no, you don't do that.

[joeldalton]

He made $900,000 a year to give speeches

[goaded]

And lecture students. In classes. As a professor. (It's in the text I quoted above.)

[joeldalton]

lmao. which class? You Know the Thing 101?

[goaded]

I don't know, it just says "He gave lectures and talks to students on campus". That's what professors do. (As to what he was paid, don't you like capitalism, now? I'm sure Penn made more than that from having a former VP as professor.)

[joeldalton]

He was paid so he could give the president of penn a cushy job in return. Quite frankly, I'd ask for a refund on my tuition. I thought your dad was a professor or something. I'm sure he'd love you telling everyone all he did was give talks to students. A TED talk can do that for a lot cheaper.

[goaded]

Yeah, keep it up. His title was professor, he had an office on campus, he lectured students. In the meantime, the national oil reserves were practically full, which Trump just lied about, and people can buy bread, ditto.

[goaded]

Wait, you think the president of Penn thought Biden would be president in 2021, back in 2017? Smart cookie!

[joeldalton]

She didn't do it because he was articulate, qualified, and intelligent.

[goaded]

Didn't do what?

[joeldalton]

hire him as a "professor"

[goaded]

So, Biden was a professor at a university, with an office, from 2017 to 2021, who lectured students. Right? Tell me again what a liar he is?

Strategic Petroleum Reserve: practically (over 90%) full for the last 15 years, or "It’s called the Strategic National Reserves, and it hasn’t been full for many decades. In fact, it’s been mostly empty." like Trump lied? (Amazingly, now I think about it, the price of crude went negative some time in 2020 because of the pandemic. What kind of moron doesn't take advantage and make money by filling the reserve? Trump left it at 89% full.)

[joeldalton]

Ok, so he's a professor because he was given a ceremonial title? In that case you must refer to me as Lord, because I got drunk one night and bought a lordship over the internet.

[goaded]

He was given the title of professor and he lectured students in class. That's a professor. It's really sad that you pretend that's anything like a Trump lie. But of course you're not going to address the fact that he claimed the Strategic Petroleum Reserve "hasn’t been full for many decades. In fact, it’s been mostly empty.", when it was 90%-100% full in that time, except when he didn't want the government to be paid to fill it and left it at 89% full.

Or admit that you love the fact that Trump lies because hurting people with lies is what you do.

[joeldalton]

Right, I was given the title of Lord. So bow down, bitch boy.

[goaded]

*sigh* I said you wouldn't address the fact that Trump, a few weeks ago, claimed the Strategic Petroleum Reserve "hasn’t been full for many decades. In fact, it’s been mostly empty.", when it was 90%-100% full in that time, except when he didn't want the government to be paid to fill it and left it at 89% full.

Biden was given the title of professor BY AN ACCEDITED UNIVERSITY and he lectured students in class. That's a professor. It's really sad that you pretend that's anything like a Trump lie.

Just admit that you love the fact that Trump lies because hurting people with lies is what you do.

[joeldalton]

Kneel, bitch boy.

[goaded]

You're really sad, you know that? You lie to hurt people, and won't ever admit you're wrong. Pathetic.

[joeldalton]

You like taking L’s don’t you.

[goaded]

More projection from the guy who thinks there's no difference between misspeaking and lying.

[joeldalton]

lmao. dude, you’re really sad. You were so proud of yourself thinking you were dunking on Trump, made a stupid statement, forgetting that Biden is a pathological liar. ALWAYS has been. And you got called on it. Now you’re desperately trying to pull this into a win. It’s not going to happen.

[goaded]

"Pay no attention to the man telling lies 54% of the time, look at the one whose lies are 20% of checked statements and often objectively misstatements rather than outright lies like Trump's". Enjoy the bread Trump claims you can't buy, the reduced fuel prices due to the reserve Trump said was mostly empty and Trump being president, because OMG Biden said "inflation" instead of "productivity" and "have" instead of "could have", which is far worse!

[joeldalton]

The more you try the more pathetic it becomes.

[Themostabsurd]

Your question is self defeating.

[goaded]

How?

Article 3 of the 14th Amendment bars from office any official who swore to protect the Constitution and then has “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same [United States], or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

If Georgia voters can prove she did either of those things, she shouldn't be allowed to run for office again.

[Anonymous]

This is for you.

🙄🙄🙄

[MountAverage]

Nope.