What it's all about

 Now that Trump has been convicted and is awaiting appeal, Liberals are already out in force saying he can't run for President (yes he can, the constitution says so) ,that he can't vote (more on that later in this blog post), That he can't own a gun (I don't recall Trump ever saying he owned a gun) or...wait for this...He can't get Security Clearance.

Let me address the Presidency issue...that was covered in my previous post (Trump is convicted, how can he still run for president?) 

Next is the vote issue, Florida will follow New York law since Trump was convicted there. New York law states a convicted felon CAN vote as long as they are not incarcerated. In other words, if he's not in prison, he can vote.) Trump has no previous felonies, so the likelihood of any prison time is pretty remote. More likely he would be fined and/or placed on probation. This would still give him the ability to vote.

I'm not even going to address the Gun issue because I don't think it matters here as (to my knowledge) Trump doesn't own a gun.

FINALLY we get to the security clearance. IF Trump wins the presidency (Which is still very much possible), He AUTOMATICALLY gets security clearance.

The very fact these liberals are saying all this just proves one thing. It's not about a crime being committed, it's about keeping Trump out of the White House.

Trump is convicted, how can he still run for president?

 Simple! Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution lays down the requirements for 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."

There's just three requirements, No part of the Constitution says people who have been convicted of crimes can't run for president.

Another thing to consider is the records could not have been falsified to defraud the voters in the 2016 election, because the Falsification was said to take place the following year in 2017. The election was over and the records were not made public.

The jury instructions given by Judge Juan Merchan dramatically favored the prosecution, telling them that while they had to unanimously conclude that Trump caused a false business entry to be made for the purpose of concealing "another crime."

They did not have to be unanimous as to what that other crime was. This will be one of the many issues that Trump’s legal team will raise on appeal. I would not be surprised if this conviction gets overturned, but that is not likely to happen before the election.

Calls for a SCOTUS Hearing

 A few years ago an upside down American flag was flown at Justice Alito's home. Many rather uninformed democrats referred to it as an "Insurrection Flag".

On twitter, I was quick to point out that there is no such thing as an "insurrection flag". Flying a flag upside down was a sign of distress. I also pointed out BLM protesters doing the same thing (but worse) during the "Summer of Love" protests as shown below:

These BLM Protesters viewed the death of George Floyd as a form of distress, so at least these people knew what it meant (Albeit, burning the flag and writing on the flag was going to extremes). Liberals would be the first to say BLM Protests were not insurrection. But yet liberals call Justice Alito's Flag, (Alito knows the laws better then these liberals), an "insurrection flag". The sole reason is his political leanings. He's a conservative, those pictured above are leftist Marxists who align with Democrats.

There are now calls made by some Leftists saying the Senate needs to hold hearings on the Supreme Court. This won't happen because the constitution states there are 3 separate but equal branches of federal government:, The Executive (President), The Legislative (Congress) and the Judicial (Supreme Court).  Article 1 of The Constitution lays out the roles and Responsibilities of Congress. It does not grant Congress the power to interfere with the Judicial (Supreme Court). Except in the process of CONFIRMING a justice, That's it!

Article 2 of the constitution lays out the roles and responsibilities of the President and Vice President. Like Congress, the President can name a Justice to fill a vacancy, then it goes to Congress to confirm it, Like Congress, that's the limit of their power with regard to the Supreme Court.

Article 3 Lays out the Roles and Responsibilities of the Judicial branch. Like the other two branches, they are limited in their power over the others.

In short, Congress makes laws, the President Passes or Vetoes a law and the Judicial INTERPRET the laws and rule according to the Constitution.

Here is a Link to the Constitution for review.

In summary there is no law in the Constitution denying the Justices or their families freedom of expression as guaranteed in the 1st amendment of the Constitution, no more then the same freedoms exercised by BLM protesters. and the constitution lays out separation of powers among the three branches to keep each one from overpowering the others.