Is Trump legally qualified to be a presidential candidate?

[Ken]

If these “felonies” were so serious perhaps they should have been prosecuted before 2016.

So like the movie Minority Report. Use a time machine to see into the future and then throw him in jail and prosecute him for crimes that he has not yet committed?

… the “business records” case is about activity long before 2016. Which is why it’s rather concerning. Trump was a public figure and if this really was a big deal and the DA is also politically impartial, why wasn’t he prosecuted back then?

You are wrong. The business records case is about Trump's attempt to fraudulently hide his hush money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels and those payments happened in October 2016.

All of the other felony indictments that Trump is currently facing in Federal and State courts are about acts he committed in 2020 or 2021.

Trump is clearly a habitual criminal and there are no doubt many other felonies that he committed prior to 2016. But he isn't actually being charged with any of those older crimes.

[Ken]

So I suppose this topic is over then.

There are two separate questions here.

The first question is whether or not Trump is legally qualified to be a presidential candidate. The Supreme Court did not rule on that question. They simply ruled that State courts are the wrong forum to make that determination. Or that States do not have jurisdiction to determine qualifications for national office. Only Congress does.

The second question is whether or not Congress is actually going to act to provide clarity and the answer to that question is clearly no.

So the correct answer to the question in the title of this thread is that we do not have a definitive answer and we won't have one prior to the 2024 election because there is no consensus in Congress to find one. Some future Congress might choose to clarify the law. But this one won't.

[Bootstrap]

So I suppose this topic is over then.

There are two separate questions here.

The first question is whether or not Trump is legally qualified to be a presidential candidate. The Supreme Court did not rule on that question. They simply ruled that State courts are the wrong forum to make that determination. Or that States do not have jurisdiction to determine qualifications for national office. Only Congress does.

The second question is whether or not Congress is actually going to act to provide clarity and the answer to that question is clearly no.

So the correct answer to the question in the title of this thread is that we do not have a definitive answer and we won't have one prior to the 2024 election because there is no consensus in Congress to find one. Some future Congress might choose to clarify the law. But this one won't.

Doesn't that mean that he is legally qualified to be a candidate? No legal means has been used to disqualify him. Before the Supreme Court decision, I think there was a lot more ambiguity than there is now.

[Josh]

So like the movie Minority Report. Use a time machine to see into the future and then throw him in jail and prosecute him for crimes that he has not yet committed?

… the “business records” case is about activity long before 2016. Which is why it’s rather concerning. Trump was a public figure and if this really was a big deal and the DA is also politically impartial, why wasn’t he prosecuted back then?

You are wrong. The business records case is about Trump's attempt to fraudulently hide his hush money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels and those payments happened in October 2016.

All of the other felony indictments that Trump is currently facing in Federal and State courts are about acts he committed in 2020 or 2021.

Trump is clearly a habitual criminal and there are no doubt many other felonies that he committed prior to 2016. But he isn't actually being charged with any of those older crimes.

So why wait until 2024 to prosecute it?

[Josh]

So I suppose this topic is over then.

There are two separate questions here.

The first question is whether or not Trump is legally qualified to be a presidential candidate. The Supreme Court did not rule on that question. They simply ruled that State courts are the wrong forum to make that determination. Or that States do not have jurisdiction to determine qualifications for national office. Only Congress does.

The second question is whether or not Congress is actually going to act to provide clarity and the answer to that question is clearly no.

So the correct answer to the question in the title of this thread is that we do not have a definitive answer and we won't have one prior to the 2024 election because there is no consensus in Congress to find one. Some future Congress might choose to clarify the law. But this one won't.

This is birtherism-tier stuff like people who claim Obama wasn't qualified to be a Presidential candidate.

[Ken]

So I suppose this topic is over then.

There are two separate questions here.

The first question is whether or not Trump is legally qualified to be a presidential candidate. The Supreme Court did not rule on that question. They simply ruled that State courts are the wrong forum to make that determination. Or that States do not have jurisdiction to determine qualifications for national office. Only Congress does.

The second question is whether or not Congress is actually going to act to provide clarity and the answer to that question is clearly no.

So the correct answer to the question in the title of this thread is that we do not have a definitive answer and we won't have one prior to the 2024 election because there is no consensus in Congress to find one. Some future Congress might choose to clarify the law. But this one won't.

Doesn't that mean that he is legally qualified to be a candidate? No legal means has been used to disqualify him. Before the Supreme Court decision, I think there was a lot more ambiguity than there is now.

You need to be precise about exactly what question you are asking.

The Supreme Court explicitly chose NOT to answer the question contained within the title of this thread. So it remains unanswered.

Trump will be on the BALLOT in all 50 states. That much is true. But that is simply because no one with the authority to decide this question actually wants to answer it.

[Ken]

… the “business records” case is about activity long before 2016. Which is why it’s rather concerning. Trump was a public figure and if this really was a big deal and the DA is also politically impartial, why wasn’t he prosecuted back then?

You are wrong. The business records case is about Trump's attempt to fraudulently hide his hush money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels and those payments happened in October 2016.

All of the other felony indictments that Trump is currently facing in Federal and State courts are about acts he committed in 2020 or 2021.

Trump is clearly a habitual criminal and there are no doubt many other felonies that he committed prior to 2016. But he isn't actually being charged with any of those older crimes.

So why wait until 2024 to prosecute it?

You know the answer to that question. Most of the legal delays have been engineered by Trump and his legal team, not the various prosecutors. None of these cases were filed in 2024.

[RZehr]

Trump is legally qualified to be a presidential candidate, because he meets the age, and birth requirements, and no one has proven that he is legally disqualified.
And because he is innocent until proven guilty, he is not disqualified. And there is no burden on him to prove a negative, none of us, nobody, can conclusively prove a negative either. So the accusers have to prove it, that is where the burden rightly sits, and until then, he is innocent and legally meets the qualifications for the office.

[barnhart]

So I suppose this topic is over then.

My prediction is the things rich and powerful people want to do usually turn out to be legal eventually.

[Ken]

You are wrong. The business records case is about Trump's attempt to fraudulently hide his hush money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels and those payments happened in October 2016.

All of the other felony indictments that Trump is currently facing in Federal and State courts are about acts he committed in 2020 or 2021.

Trump is clearly a habitual criminal and there are no doubt many other felonies that he committed prior to 2016. But he isn't actually being charged with any of those older crimes.

As I said in a prior post, I was reprimanded by you and Boot for calling the Biden Family a criminal (crime) family when they had not been tried and convicted for any crime. Yet it is okay to call Trump a criminal When he hasn't been convicted either.

"Making rules for me, but not for thee." There are very descriptive words for that, which shall be left unsaid. .

Trump has been found guilty of crimes many times. So it is factually accurate to label him a habitual criminal.

He was found guilty of sexual harassment and defamation in a court of law and has been ordered to pay $83.3 million in damages.
He was found guilty of running a fraudulent university and was ordered to pay $25 million in damages
He was found guilty of running a fraudulent charity and ordered to pay $2 million in fines
He was found guilty of fraudulently inflating the value of his properties and deceiving lenders in a court of law and has been ordered to pay $454 million in fines.

Those are textbook examples of white collar crimes. Should I go on?