Trump can't run for POTUS in 2024.

[Botany]

Do not fall for any of the Trump, "I'll run again" memes. Trump broke the law in stealing the
classified documents ... aka state secrets ... so he can't run in 2024.

I don't have the exact statute in front of me but by just having that classified information Trump
is now ineligible to run in 2024.

Although, he will still pretend that he wants to run again in order to grift from his rubes.

[Runningdawg]

1. Unless he's convicted before the deadline to announce. He can and will be a candidate in '24.

He WILL run, 3 party if the GOP try to stop him, but he has no intention of winning. He needs angry losers to carry out his agenda.

[Kid Berwyn]

2. Meanwhile, he drowns out deSatan and Team GZP.

Corporate McPravda does have a hard time multitasking.

[Initech]

3. Didn't the GOP say they'd stop paying his legal fees if he did?

Trump is a moocher, I can't imagine he would be that stupid. But then again, there is no limit to his madness.

[Claustrum]

5. They actually only said they would stop paying if he announces his run before the midterm.

They have no problem with him announcing afterwards.

[relayerbob]

4. Nope

Hasn't been convicted of anything, much less the specific crimes that would prevent that .... and being a felon doesn't automatically disqualify anyone from running for office.

[Claustrum]

6. There is a specific statue under the espionage or one of the 3 statue people talked about

that the OP is referencing. Though, I doubt we will get a conviction before 2024, much less before TFG announces his run.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

11. Convicted or not, it won't matter

Statutes can't overrule the Constitution. Eligibility and disqualification is set in the Constitution. No statute trying to change or expand that would survive a court challenge.

[relayerbob]

32. The 14th Amendment, section 3 could be used

IF he is convicted of those offenses, AND he doesn't get 2/3 of the Congress (both houses) to nullify the conviction.

The only reason a statute could not be used (for example, the Espionage Act) is that SCOTUS has been corrupted.

But, he still hasn't been convicted of anything, and there is no requirement beyond the 14th and those few laws that prevents a felon from serving as President, even from in prison.

[H2O Man]

64. Congress

cannot "nullify the conviction. It is a separate branch of government.

[relayerbob]

67. Bad choice of words on my part

True, they cannot nullify the conviction, but they could, with a 2/3 vote, decide to allow for the convict to continue to pursue office, even when the crime is insurrection, as defined in Section 3.

[H2O Man]

68. It is perhaps

more likely that Trump would go to the USSC. Just my opinion.

[relayerbob]

71. Well, we all know how that would turn out

What I don't get is why the SCOTUS doesn't turn on tfg. After all, their jobs are guaranteed for life. Tossing him under the bus would actually be in their best interests. But then again, that requires logic, something the GQP lacks.

[H2O Man]

77. In the last ruling

that involved Trump, he losy 8 to 1. Only Clarence supported him. He doesn't do well in the federal courts.

[H2O Man]

78. ...... but it

is one of the delay tactics his legal team would attempt.

[sarisataka]

7. You don't have that statute

Because it doesn't exist.

There is no statute that says if you are accused of illegally possessing classified documents you cannot run for President.

[Claustrum]

12. This is not true.

18 U.S.C. §§ 2071: Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally, which carries a penalty of up to three years in prison and disqualification from holding office (more on this below).

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/12/trump-search-warrant-cites-statutes-that-call-for-prison-sentences.html

[JustAnotherGen]

13. Yep - and it was

referenced in the Affidavit last week.

[sarisataka]

15. So he has been convicted under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2071?

No he hasn't-

Trump has not been charged with any crime, and it’s not clear whether he will be charged.

Also from that article-

It’s unlikely Trump would be banned from running for president again if he were indeed convicted of violating the law mentioned above, because the Constitution would take precedence over the statute, legal experts have said.

“Can’t impose qualifications on holding the presidency by statute — the qualifications are set out in the Constitution. The search for ‘one weird trick’ to banish Trump from politics will have to continue,” Washington Post legal columnist Jason Willick tweeted earlier this week, before the warrant was unsealed and released.

[Claustrum]

17. I said in another response of mine that he likely won't get convicted even before 2024.

But the point is, there is a statue, whether it will get challenged in the court or not.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

61. Point is sarisataka wrote "accused" in post 7 & you read "convicted". Italics there for emphasis. nt

[relayerbob]

33. Except for the 14th Amendment

[brooklynite]

42. "holding any office under the United States" is understood to refer to appointments or hiring...

...not to elected office.

[Sogo]

53. Are you sure about that?

When we elect them, we hire them....

[LeftInTX]

69. There is a huge difference

We can only get rid of a US President
Voting them out of office
Impeaching them

Can't fire him any other way.
And since you said that we hire them by voting for them...Yeah, that means that get voted for...They aren't given background checks etc. They run and we hire them.

[fescuerescue]

55. The law may state that, but it won't hold up

The constitution outlines the requirements for office.

Attempts at term limits for Congress face the same problem.

[Botany]

46. Thank you

Not being a lawyer I can't say for sure about what will happen to him but to me it looks like an
open and shut case of breaking 18 U.S.C. §§ 2071

He was hiding them ... Concealment
He had taken them from D.C. to Florida .... Removal
He had mutilated them .... his handwriting is on them.

[Claustrum]

47. But like I said in another post.

Even if we ignore the fact that TFG and republican will definitely bring this to the SC, he will likely not be convicted by 2024, let alone in the next few months when he decides to announce his run. This statue is unfortunately not going to bar him from running.

[CaptainTruth]

66. "Holding office" is not the same as "running for office."

If you can find anything in the Constitution or statute that disqualifies anyone from RUNNING for office please share it.

I don't believe it exists.

[Demsrule86]

73. office which does not apply to the presidential office. The requirements are outlined in

the constitution and conviction for criminal offenses is not there. You would need a constitutional amendment to change that.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

8. He hasn't been convicted

And even if he is, statutes don't overrule the Constitution. Eligibility and disqualification is set there. That statute could apply to other positions where eligibility is not set within the Constitution. There are only 2 paths to Constitutionally disqualify him, through the impeachment clause in Article 2, or through the disqualification clause of the 14th Amendment

[brush]

9. I hope he does run. He has no chance of winning...

possibly not even getting the repub nom.

If he gets it, there are not enough magats, and Dems, never-trumpers and Indies won't trust him to ever be in charge of state secrets again and possibly selling them.

If he doesn't get the repub nod he'll be so disruptive it'll split the party, just as he did in the Georgia Senate race in 2020.

[sarisataka]

20. DU- June 15, 2015

The day before he announced his run:

Is anybody else happy Donald Trump is running for president as a Republican?

predict he wil not run.

He'll proclaim he is worth $9 billion (a lie) and will say he can influence better from the outside.

It's just another self promotion move by the idiot

Load 'em up. The clown bus is rolling! Cannot be happier that the donald is pretending he's going to be president. Still got room for Newt and Michele and Jindal. This is going to be a wonderful primary on the Republican side. Jeb the son and brother of presidents is running as an outsider, the neurosurgeon doesn't understand evolution, the pastor likes to hang out with pedophiles, the ex-governor is under indictment, and one is cross-eyed and another is thirsty. Whew - what a collection of fine Americans!

I will

happily be peeing my pants if he runs, and at least shows up to the debates.

And June 16, 2015-

HE IS RUNNING

LMFAO

[brush]

22. FYI...conditions have changed since then. Haven't you heard.

[sarisataka]

24. I am aware,

There was no MAGA at that time...

[brush]

25. And what is that supposed to mean? The magats...

who support him now weren't enough for him to win in 2020. Haven't you heard that either?

[sarisataka]

27. I prefer not to repeat mistakes

And I never forget the number 270.

x million votes are irrelevant, there are only 538 that matter.

[brush]

28. You're not making much sense. But keep on rooting for trump.

He's nothing but a traitor and loser. And as far as the 270 EC votes needed in 2020, Biden got 306, trump got 232.

[sarisataka]

30. I am not the one trying to put him back in office

Let me put it as clear as I can-

If you underestimate him again you may very well see him in the White House again

[brush]

37. Again, things have changed since 2016. Are you keeping up with the news?

Last edited Tue Aug 30, 2022, 01:18 PM - Edit history (1)

trump is done. He'll be lucky to not be indicted and prosecuted soon. The Alanta DA is building her case against him, as is the AG in NY. The DOJ is doing a criminal investigation against him for stealing government docs. The J6 Committee isn't done with him either.

He's a known quantity now, not the unknown candidate with no track record he was in 2016. He's got a track record and it ain't a good one.

I'm not underestimating him, you're overestimating that traitor.

[sarisataka]

41. Trump is done

I bet if I ran a search on that phrase it would have thousands of hits. Same with quitting, fleeing the country, indicted and never wanted to be President.

I have been keeping up on the news so know all of those predictions have a 0% accuracy rate.

I have been very successful by overestimating any opposition I have faced. YMMV

[brush]

45. At least you're consistent, but like I said, trump is done...

and very significantly diminished from the 2016 trump.

But keep it up.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. Apples & Oranges

He was an unknown quantity & an "outsider" in '15 &'16.
There's nothing unknown about him now, and he's now an ultimate insider.
The cult still will support him, but he motivates those voting AGAINST him, his approval among indies has tanked, and he's lost the PV twice.
We cannot compare his chances in '24 to those in '16.

[sarisataka]

26. In 2015 he was dismissed

Because he was an unknown quantity & an "outsider"

My prediction at that time was he would win the nomination because his opponents wouldn't take him seriously. I further predicted in Democrats didn't take him seriously he would be President.

Today I see posts saying The exact same things that were said about him in 2015.

Here is my prediction-

He will run in 2024 if he is alive. If he is not taken seriously as an opponent in 2024 he will repeat Grover Cleveland's feat.

[relayerbob]

35. The day he announced, I had zero doubt he would win

Times are different now, of course. But the streak of racism and stupidity in this country (really, humanity, overall) runs VERY deep. And the tides of history strongly suported that the next President after Obama would be the anti-Obama

[musclecar6]

44. Yeah

When Obama won the first time, all the racist deplorables went crazy. When he won the second time they were even more incensed. So when the democrats put up a woman with Hillary, the racists and mysoginists were going off the deep end. Every single hateful bias was in full swing at the ballot box. When it comes to decency, only one thought comes to mind. Fucking Trash with a capital T.

[BlackSkimmer]

50. Oh yes, I remember this well.

I also remember that several posters, along with me, were called names for expressing “concern” that he might succeed.

[sarisataka]

57. What's old is new again

It appears 7 years later we have learned nothing.

[Shipwack]

58. History doesn't always repeat herself...

Sometimes she hits you upside your head with a two by four screaming, “Weren’t you listening the first time?” 😜

[BlackSkimmer]

76. It does appear that way, doesn't it?

I’m seeing people called names for expressing doubt that tfg will ever face consequences.

[Torchlight]

65. I guess a room full of many people will have a lot of different opinions.

Difficult for me to guess who speaks for who, though. Also difficult for me to know when my guesses are proven wrong seven years later, but I guess there are many who rely on it (though in six years that may be proven wrong).

[getagrip_already]

10. NOPE, LIKEY WON'T APPLY TO A RUN AT POTUS....

The requirements to run for and hold office for potus are explicitly spelled out in the constitution, as is their removal and banning from holding office.

The constitution will over rule laws passed by congress. So the laws which state you can't hold any office would be unconstitutional for potus.

But it hasn't been tested. Or so the lawyers and scholars here point out (I isn't one).

[SCantiGOP]

14. Why is this posted here?

Complete disinformation.

[48656c6c6f20]

16. Yes there is a clause but the constitution

Is the winner.

Which brings to mind, our constitution is a shit hole. The fucking thing needs a top to bottom update, and without the original racist shit in it.

[Mr.Bill]

51. If today's lawyers rewrote the constitution

the paper it was printed on would fill a football stadium.

[jimfields33]

70. GOP is working it. Only needs four more state houses

[48656c6c6f20]

74. And sadly we will let them and complain about not doing anything

A lot of people see the repugs constitutional convention as a bad thing, I think it could be an opportunity.
That old sacred document is really old and not so sacred. Even the drafter thought it needed to change frequently.

[iemanja]

18. He would need to be convicted

for that provision to apply. Your thinking he is guilty isn't the same as a court declaring him so. As of now, there is nothing stopping him from running.

[Demsrule86]

31. It won't matter. He is 35 or above, he is a natural born citizen and he has live in this country

for 14 years. These are the only three constitutional requirements to become president. The constitution is the final arbiter...not laws passed by Congress.

[relayerbob]

36. Read the 14th Amendment, Section 3

You are incorrect.

Section 5 clarifies it further: "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

However, he has yet to be convicted of those crimes.

[Demsrule86]

52. The constiutional provisions have nothing to do with legislation. Thus the 14th won't

work. And consider if this gets to court Trump appointed three justices who will decide the case even if what you say is true which it isn't IMHO.

[relayerbob]

62. Well, I agree SCOTUS is corrupted

However, the 14th could be applied, both in the insurrection clauses of section 3 and in section 5, which provides for Congress to further define and implement the 14th, which they have done. In any case, untill and unless he is convicted of a suitable charge, this is all moot.

[Demsrule86]

72. The constitution clearly outlines what is required...the three things I discussed before...

The 14th is irrelevant. And if we tried to use it...undoubtedly SCOTUS (right-wing) would not allow it.

[relayerbob]

75. Yes, I understand you are very firm in your opinion

Doesn't make it correct, however.

The 14th Amendment is part and parcel of the Constitution. IF tfg was convicted of insurrection, and not overruled by 2/3 of both houses of Congress, he would not be eligible to serve as President. Until the 14th Amendment itself was overturned by another Amendment.

And, yes, a corrupt SCOTUS would support tfg. in any case.

All moot, no charges have even been filed, much less a conviction reached.

[JustAnotherGen]

19. Affidavit

And he is going to need to be arrested as quickly as possible. Criminal court - he can't dodge, defer, and deflect like he does Civil Court.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000182-daec-dfd1-adef-dafe79d30000


STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND DEFINITIONS
20. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1519:
Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or
makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to
impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any
matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or
any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter
or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

21. Under 18 U.S.C. § 2071:
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or
destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any
record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited
with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office,
or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Case 9:22-mj-08332-BER Document 102-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/26/2022 Page 6 of 38
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book,
document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes,
mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title
or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be
disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this
subsection, the term "office" does not include the office held by any person as a
retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

[Botany]

43. Thank you

[JustAnotherGen]

48. It stuck out to me

On Friday night last week when I was reading it.

There's a very good reason it only took me about 8 minutes to read through. A lot is black out - but a lot is inferred with those Codes.

[Blue Owl]

21. Put man-baby in the corner

[Captain Zero]

38. I say he can be prosecuted until he's nominated.

Afaic he is not running until he has secured the nomination. That can't happen until the summer of 24. Labor Day 2024 is the official start of the campaign. He can still be convicted on August 30 of 2024 and remanded to custody.

[onenote]

63. And if he's still nominated, and is on the ballot, who is going to challenge it?

Remember the birther cases? Remember how individuals were found not to have standing?

[Demsrule86]

29. That is not true. The constitution outline the requirements for running and serving for president.

The Constitution lists only three qualifications for the Presidency. The President must be at least 35 years of age. He must be a natural-born citizen. Also, the president is required to have lived in the United States for at least 14 years.

Thus a conviction won't matter. He could still run.

[Fiendish Thingy]

34. He would have to be convicted first

If he’s not convicted, he can run and be elected.

[onenote]

39. Three big "ifs"

First, he would have to be convicted of violating the referenced statute before 2024 (probably including losing any appeals) which is unlikely

Second, the courts would have find the statute could be constitutional as applied to the presidency.

And third—and possibly most important who is going to bring a lawsuit to stop him from running (thinking back to all of the birthed cases tossed out on standing grounds).

[brooklynite]

40. "I don't have the exact statute in front of me"...because it doesn't exist.

The obligations to run for President are set in the Constitution. No Statute can override or expand on the Constitutional requirements.

The only exception, also in the Constitution, is he 14th Amendment, Article III:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability

I'll first observe that the Amendment calls out House and Senate, but doesn't call out the Presidency. "Any office, civil or military" could be argued to refer to an appointed or employed Government official, rather than an elected one.

Second, the 14th Amendment provision requires "engaged in insurrection or rebellion", which does apply to the Presidential records issue, or "given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof" which requires proving 1) Trump gave records to a foreign entity. and 2) that entity was an "enemy". The first has yet to be proven, and the likely recipients (Russia, Saudia Arabia) are not, legally speaking, enemies of the US.

[sarisataka]

49. Many people seem to want to pun their hopes

On a silver bullet that will rid them of the person they can't stop talking about. In the quest of that they are looking for any convoluted reading that may result in "disqualification".

When I looked up the 14th amendment I noted exactly what you did that it mentions senators and representatives but not President.

Now you can argue logically that they meant President as well as well, not wanting Jefferson Davis or Robert E Lee to someday be the President. However that would be would be in the hands of SCOTUS to decide.

[budkin]

54. I hope he runs, Biden will defeat him handily

IMO DeSantis is the bigger risk.

[Imperialism Inc.]

56. That part of the statute does not and can not apply to the office of President.

You can't just add new qualifications for President in an ordinary law. The law is talking about civil service offices of various kinds.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

59. Classified or not classified is NOT the issue. And breaking the law(s) is not enough

He broke two acts (mentioned in the warrant) that don't mention the classification system now in place.

Your wishful thinking does not make tRump ineligible until he is convicted by a court or a guilty plea.

[mn9driver]

60. That would be nice, but no.

The only time a conviction would prevent him from running again is if he was impeached by the House AND convicted in the Senate. And it didn’t happen the two times we tried it.

He will be allowed to run and we can only hope that the voting public and the election itself have some trace of integrity and good judgement left.

[quakerboy]

79. And who's gonna stop him?

Unless someone actually prevents him.. he can. Laws are only as useful as their enforcement, and there has been precious little enforcement against any elected republican in the last 40+ years.

Honestly.. depending on how you define run, he may well "run" for president regardless of whether people prevent him from being on the ballot or not.

[onenote]

80. Who has standing?