Donnie Two-Dolls (a/k/a The DonFather)

Donnie Two-Weeks (TACO, Man!) on X: "Donald Trump swore an oath to support the Constitution (a stipulated fact). He was found by a competent court to have engaged in insurrection (an adjudicated fact). He has not been absolved by Congress (a judicially noticeable fact). An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not" / X Donald Trump swore an oath to support the Constitution (a stipulated fact). He was found by a competent court to have engaged in insurrection (an adjudicated fact). He has not been absolved by Congress (a judicially noticeable fact). An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not

Unfortunately, Your Honor, it was a dog of an argument. She deserved to lose. The originalist case for his disqualification is more straightforward.

x.com/MannC84373/s...

x.com/MannC84373/s...

Grok: Donald Trump may be eligible for the death penalty.

@joshuaerlich.bsky.social Originalism is a thing, and a thing to be discarded when inconvenient.

We live in a judocracy. The Constitution died long ago.

x.com/MannC84373/s...

@stevevladeck.bsky.social Watching you on Katie.

An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President as a matter of law. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Is Donald Trump our de jure head of state?

It's constitutional.

This is the current state of my resistance. x.com/MannC84373/s...

Have to post on X because it's over 300 characters.

PCP Motion | PDF | Prosecutor | Supreme Court Of The United States Plaintiff K.L. Smith seeks access to a grand jury to present evidence of alleged crimes committed by the defendants, arguing that the Constitution provides mechanisms for citizens to initiate criminal...

@normeisen.bsky.social Private Criminal Prosecution: www.scribd.com/document/897...

PCP Motion | PDF | Prosecutor | Supreme Court Of The United States Plaintiff K.L. Smith seeks access to a grand jury to present evidence of alleged crimes committed by the defendants, arguing that the Constitution provides mechanisms for citizens to initiate criminal...

I've been fighting them, but can't get arrested.

Private Criminal Prosecution: www.scribd.com/document/897...

Donnie Two-Weeks (TACO, Man!) on X: "Abbott v. LULAC. Stay. The most corrupt tribunal in the history of Anglo-American law has weighed in. Calvinball: No matter how bad the case is, Trump always wins with SCOTUS. Judge Grok issues an unbiased opinion: Ruling on Emergency Application for Stay: As instructed, I" / X Abbott v. LULAC. Stay. The most corrupt tribunal in the history of Anglo-American law has weighed in. Calvinball: No matter how bad the case is, Trump always wins with SCOTUS. Judge Grok issues an unbiased opinion: Ruling on Emergency Application for Stay: As instructed, I

Judge Grok weighed in on the Texas redistricting case.

Knock me over with a feather.... x.com/MannC84373/s...

He's not even Honey BooBoo.

@adamkinzinger.substack.com An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio.  Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why won't you say this?

@meidastouch.com An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why can't you just say this?

@judgeluttig.bsky.social An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why can't you just say this?

@tribelaw.bsky.social An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why are you so silent?

@lawyeroyer.com An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio. Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why won't anyone say this out loud?

Doesn't GA allow for private criminal prosecution?

An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio.  Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why can't you just say this?

An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio.  Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why can't you say this?

An oathbreaking adjudged insurrectionist not absolved by Congress cannot serve as President. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 3. Every act a usurper purports to take in that capacity is void ab initio.  Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 443 (1886).

Why can't anyone say this?

Donnie Two-Weeks (TACO, Man!) on X: "MURDER, GROK WROTE? Grok revisits Epstein's death in light of the Epstein E-mails. Unknown Party: How did the timing of Epstein’s death help Trump? GROK: The timing of Jeffrey Epstein's death on August 10, 2019—weeks after his arrest and amid swirling speculation about elite https://t.co/hJWxfz4GhM" / X MURDER, GROK WROTE? Grok revisits Epstein's death in light of the Epstein E-mails. Unknown Party: How did the timing of Epstein’s death help Trump? GROK: The timing of Jeffrey Epstein's death on August 10, 2019—weeks after his arrest and amid swirling speculation about elite https://t.co/hJWxfz4GhM

Murder, Grok Wrote? A Fresh Look at the Epstein “Suicide” x.com/MannC84373/s...

OINK!!!

Dear Judge Wolf | PDF | Justice | Crime & Violence The letter addresses Judge Mark L. Wolf, criticizing his perceived hypocrisy regarding the judiciary's role in upholding the Constitution. It argues that the judiciary has failed to protect citizens' ...

@jbf1755.bsky.social America didn't make it to 250. But the cause of the failure is ... complicated.

Response to Judge Wolf: www.scribd.com/document/947...

That playbook was obvious to everyone with a law degree.

SCOTUS was technically right: Congress provided the remedy (quo warranto/mandamus). Read the DC statutes.

Donnie Two-Weeks (TACO, Man!) on X: "@chkbal Dear Judge Wolf (re: The Atlantic article): With respect, you really ought to get off your high horse. You have been raping and sodomizing our “magnificent Constitution” on the altar of expediency for four decades and only now, you are suddenly concerned about assaults" / X @chkbal Dear Judge Wolf (re: The Atlantic article): With respect, you really ought to get off your high horse. You have been raping and sodomizing our “magnificent Constitution” on the altar of expediency for four decades and only now, you are suddenly concerned about assaults

The correct answer is too nuanced for this forum.

X version: x.com/MannC84373/s...

I can't say what I need to with a 300-character limit.

This is MY legal analysis of the Dobbs decision, adapted from court filings. The citations are adequate. Run it through Grok or ChatGPT for soundness, if you like.