quadraginta
Becoming Beth
That would create an interesting dilemma for his SS security team. I can see how it might go.
"You boys go ahead and load back up on AF1. I think I'll just hang around here for a while."
Cont: Trump et al continued “2020 election” conspiracy theories
- Thread starter quadraginta
- Start date
- Status
That would create an interesting dilemma for his SS security team. I can see how it might go.
"You boys go ahead and load back up on AF1. I think I'll just hang around here for a while."
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
"He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day."
It isn't 'giving up'. It's a tactical advance to the rear.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Or maybe, "You boys just wait here a minute, I left some stuff back on AF1 that I have to pop back for." And then he'll nick it.
Dave
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
I'm not sure that it would.
Qualifications to be President;
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The highlighted part doesn't specify when those fourteen years have to have occurred. It could be argued that there is no reason they have to have been current up to the time of the election.
Sure, that might be a bit of a reach, but if you don't think it is the sort of argument Trump lawyers would cheerfully make in court then you haven't been paying attention.
And it isn't beyond credulity to suspect that Trumpist SCOTUS judges might find safe haven in such logic.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
I'm pretty sure that his citizenship cannot be revoked against his will. If he were a naturalized citizen it could. But he isn't.
He could ask for it to be revoked, but I don't see him doing that. And that request doesn't have to be granted even if he were to.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
I was more thinking that he might find it a bit difficult to run an effective campaign when he's a fugitive from justice in a foreign country. Stranger things have happened, though. I'd like to think that Trump campaigning over a video link from Russia on the basis that the Democrats were in the pocket of foreign interests would be too much for his followers to swallow, but given what they've already digested I suppose they'd be able to rationalise it without missing a step.
Dave
Countries like the UK have exceptions for diplomats and other “high” ranking visitors to have armed guards. I would have thought as a courtesy an ex President of the US would fall under that and would likely have additional UK supplied armed details if they wanted. We wouldn’t really want even an ex POTUS to be assassinated whilst visiting.
Or much more difficult for Trump to understand “you cant have everything you want”.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
I don't know why we'd need anyone all that special.
Look up "extraordinary rendition". The U.S. government, up to the Presidential level, has been sanctioning the illegal abduction and removal of people from sovereign states at least as far back as the Reagan administration. It's almost routine.
And most of them haven't even been U.S. citizens, which makes it even more egregious.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
From what I've seen of his supporters I doubt that hiding in another country would dampen their enthusiasm much. He could do virtual rallies and paint himself as a persecuted victim. He's doing that already. Hell, he's been doing that since before he was elected.
I'm not sure what it would take for them to abandon him, but I don't think that would be it.
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
A RINO is anyone failing to provide unquestioning, unwavering support for Trump no matter what he says or does.
The sad thing is that this is largely true. The GOP has become the Party of Trump.
Where this takes them in the future remains to be seen. I can only hope it is down to their ultimate destruction as a viable political entity in the U.S..
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
sts60
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2007
- Messages
- 4,107
How about, “he’s a dirt ball, but he doesn’t want to go to jail for you”?
Armitage72
Philosopher
As an amusing aside, I recently watched the new Animaniacs reboot. In one episode, the Warners went to Russia to stop the production of a rip-off of their show. It ended with them going to a Russian airport to return home.
"How'd she find us a flight so fast?"
"Apparently, this plane flies Moscow to Washington daily."
The camera pulled back to show them boarding Air Force One while "Hail to the Chief" played.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,545
Hey if it is good enough for the Kushner's why shouldn't it be good enough for the witnesses?
Sending sex tapes like that is pure class in Trumpland.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,545
No it wouldn't.
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Messages
- 29,691
One amusing scenario: Trump lands AF1 in some Trump-friendly but US-unfriendly country. They then deny AF1 permission to take off, and block the runways.
I suppose the US could drone strike AF1 in hopes of denying this country access to its top secret infrastructure, but even the wreckage would probably be useful, and the optics of this would still be horrible.
In these unprecedented times, who are we to stand in the way of one more unprecedented action? Revoke his citizenship, and let him argue his case from the Middleofnowherestan.
Ladies, gentlemen and the rest - this is the election fraud CT fraud!
On the topic of the fraud CT...
One of the latest judgements: https://www.scribd.com/document_dow...id=356281693&uahk=FRuvZMpvPoyds4hT4E5poOZaMCI
Interesting reading. What I’ve found in all these judgements is they all have gone beyond what they needed to do to dismiss or find against the plaintiffs. They all seem to have an eye on possible appeals. So in this one it’s not “you don’t have standing - here is why - dismissed” but “you don’t have standing - here is why - but even if you did have standing here is why it would have been dismissed anyway”.
On the topic of the fraud CT...
One of the latest judgements: https://www.scribd.com/document_dow...id=356281693&uahk=FRuvZMpvPoyds4hT4E5poOZaMCI
Interesting reading. What I’ve found in all these judgements is they all have gone beyond what they needed to do to dismiss or find against the plaintiffs. They all seem to have an eye on possible appeals. So in this one it’s not “you don’t have standing - here is why - dismissed” but “you don’t have standing - here is why - but even if you did have standing here is why it would have been dismissed anyway”.
Getting a "This link is not valid".
Yes, noticed that too. That's why I like to read these judgements.
"You have no standing, and if you had standing, laches, and if not laches, it is moot, and if it wasn't moot, it's utter nonsense".
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2001
- Messages
- 14,867
No--that establishes a precedent that, frankly, extreme right types have been picking at--they want to be able to revoke citizenship if a person is "bad" enough.
- Status