Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (1443861)	3/4/2024 12:42:19 PM
From: Broken_Clock	2 Recommendations Recommended By Bill longz Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572102

The "dEmoQrAcY" Q is mystified by this logic.... "During oral arguments, the justices did not linger on whether the Capitol riot amounted to insurrection, or if the presidency was intended to be one of the offices covered by the 14th Amendment. Instead, much of their focused was on whether states had the ability to bar national candidates for federal office. On that point, most — if not all — of the nine justices seemed skeptical. As Justice Elena Kagan, one of the three liberal justices, put it: “Why should a single state have the ability to make this determination not only for their own citizens but for the rest of the nation?”