Colorado Supreme Court Disqualifies Trump on the 2024 ballot

[bobzilla]

This may be the answer to the question…

GOP Rep. Burchett: Conservative Lawmakers Are Being Blackmailed After Getting Drunk with an Attractive Stranger and Ending Up Naked in Hotel Room (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

GOP Representative Tim Burchett sat for an interview with Benny Johnson this week.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

A few years ago I would have scoffed at this as the latest in bs conspiracies. Sadly now, I cannot.

 

[indyblue]

This may be the answer to the question…

GOP Rep. Burchett: Conservative Lawmakers Are Being Blackmailed After Getting Drunk with an Attractive Stranger and Ending Up Naked in Hotel Room (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

GOP Representative Tim Burchett sat for an interview with Benny Johnson this week.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Sounds like these reps need Ray Donovan to step in.

 

[Cameramonkey]

This may be the answer to the question…

GOP Rep. Burchett: Conservative Lawmakers Are Being Blackmailed After Getting Drunk with an Attractive Stranger and Ending Up Naked in Hotel Room (VIDEO) | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

GOP Representative Tim Burchett sat for an interview with Benny Johnson this week.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

This makes perfect sense.

And also explains the lack of will to investigate insider trading concerns. They all do it, so nobody wants to start that snowball rolling down the hill because they are terrified they'll get stuck to it as it rolls by.

 

[Ingomike]

I’ll take a swing…although I do take umbrage with the TDS label.

I don‘t really have a strong opinion about the Colorado decision, to me it looks like it was designed to be challenged and end up in front of SCOTUS.

We can agree on that. It was a political stunt quite possibly to throw SCOTUS into conflict.

I think Trump‘s electors scheme should disqualify him from ever running for public office again…he took action to keep his legally-elected replacement from taking office…it stopped being a ”wacky legal theory” the moment he made any attempt at all to implement it in reality…and he did factually attempt to do so.

Should this also apply to those executives and or SOS that unilaterally changed the manner of selecting electors from what the legislature directed?

It is my opinion that people who don’t respect the outcome of elections should not be allowed to run in them…full stop.

So if one sincerely believes election fraud occurred, since the rape is inevitable just lay back and enjoy it until it is over?

Why is this such a big deal now but not the last 25 years and all of your party get to skate. You know, the old heads I win, tails you lose.

I am not a lawyer, and much of this maneuvering is well outside my level of understanding, but it seems to me that this question does belong in front of the state Court first, but ultimately it would be for the SCOTUS to decide. These proceedings carry all of the usual trappings of the full weight of law, and I see no reason to doubt the legitimacy or legality of the filings at this point in time.

“This question NOW but not to any of the lefties I support”. That is what you are saying.

I think it is well past time to start holding our elected officials accountable when they break the law, and I am tired of partisans excusing their guy because the other guy didn’t get the same treatment first…it has to start somewhere, and Donald Trump deserves to spend time under a prosecutor’s microscope more than just about anyone else I can think of.

Always easier to hold the other side’s candidates accountable.

Trump’s prosecution clears roadblocks for future prosecutions against people like the Clintons, Schumers, Pelosis and Bidens…and I am all for it.

This is an amazing statement! You post a list of high ranking dems that have all skated on actual crimes and hope prosecuting Trump cleans things up.

I don’t really care if a criminal investigation is politically motivated, I care whether or not the prosecution is factually-based and is tried in public in accordance with the law.

I will admit that Trump’s investigation had political origins, but the legitimacy of the charges are for the court to decide, and I think claims of a political prosecution of Trump are rooted more in partisanship than in fact. Trump could murder someone on live television and his supporters would claim that any prosecution was political, so I don’t see any legitimate reason to believe their protests against the current charges, honestly.

Got it, political prosecutions are good against the other people’s candidates.

 

[BugI02]

If the collective "we" knows when it's time, the collective "we" should be able to tell us ahead of time when it will be time. At least give us some idea.

My wing of the collective 'we' knows that most people won't know it's time until they are boxed in between unacceptable choices so that fight is the only option. They will hope that if they keep their head down and their opinions to themselves that it will somehow all work out. They don't know that normal isn't coming back

When it is on their doorstep, they will fight; but without leaders and direction they will be ineffective unless sheer numbers can carry the day. The stupid and foolish will die early, as will those who think a resistance ala WWII, using clandestine attacks on the enemy and fading back into the populace, can be mounted in the day of widespread universal surveillance

The clever and inventive ones will carry the day if it is to be carried at all. Even the Afghans, who were much closer to the minuteman sort of combativeness ideal, had to learn some bitter and bloody lessons at the hands of the USSR and the US before they became effective and I'm unsure what percentage of Americans will really have the stomach to fight unless and until the alternative is the boxcars, and maybe not even then

 

[Ingomike]

I don’t really care if a criminal investigation is politically motivated,

Trump is the most investigated President in history. Would you list the crimes he was found guilty of after all that investigation? Not indictments, what was he actually found quilt of after spending billions investigating him.

To you think that anyone should pay for the illegal surveillance of Trump by the FBI when he was was a candidate and newly elected? If yes, who?

 

[BugI02]

Oh, I'm sure there are more than a couple OnlyTrumpers [Hive members] out there stupid [indoctrinated] enough to make threats [on demand]

Likely why there are no examples, they don't want them traced back to the source

 

[Shadow01]

All snark aside…I am PERFECTLY content with barring every person who holds office now, or who has ever held office in the past from running ever again.

I would be even more content with a mandatory criminal audit of every elected officeholder at every level of government…a mandatory exit-investigation, if you will.

**** them all… right now.

Which DOJ will you use for this investigation? The current One clearly shows they don’t care to investigate or uphold all of the laws against everyone on both sides equally. So please show me the DOJ that would be used against all the politicians that would be leaving office.

 

[manifest destiny]

All snark aside…I am PERFECTLY content with barring every person who holds office now, or who has ever held office in the past from running ever again.

I would be even more content with a mandatory criminal audit of every elected officeholder at every level of government…a mandatory exit-investigation, if you will.

**** them all… right now.

I thought I felt the earth shift on its axis. Great post.

 

[KG1]

This whole thing for me all boils down to a trial by due process. The three dissenting Colo. Justices even wrote in their opinion that Trump should be afforded due process in a trial setting and a resulting conviction first on the grounds of "insurrection" before an unprecedented disqualification decision may be rendered.

I think what needs to be decided first though, all the way up to SCOTUS is the question of if the 14th amendment sec. 3 disqualifier applies to the POTUS. Then go from there.

This is rationally what I would be in favor of come what may. Give Trump due process. It's a Constitutional bedrock protection of a fair judicial system. That's all I'm asking for.

 

[Shadow01]

Red states need to come out together that they support the actions of Colorado because they intend to disqualify Biden on terms of treason and will keep him off enough general election state ballots so he has no path to 270 and tell SCOTUS that they will ignore any ruling by them until after election day in November. SCOTUS has no enforcement arm that can’t be kept from entering the state to enforce the ruling. Play their game better and to a higher and more detrimental outcome. Show the fed how easily their game can bring down the entire house of cards.

 

[Ingomike]

Show the fed how easily their game can bring down the entire house of cards.

Isn’t that the end game the left is playing to achieve?

 

[Shadow01]

Isn’t that the end game the left is playing to achieve?

But we have the 2A and the means. at this point in my life, I’m ready to either let them have their way or lets go all in and fix it permanently.

 

[indyblue]

Then there is this (stolen from a post on corvetteforum):

14th Amendment Section 3 was made null and void in 1898 - as documented in a previous thread. But they'll pretend it wasn't.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S3-1-1/ALDE_00000848/

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

The right to remove disabilities imposed by this Section was exercised by Congress at different times on behalf of enumerated individuals.1 In 1872, the disabilities were removed, by a blanket act, from all persons except Senators and Representatives of the Thirty-sixth and Thirty-seventh Congresses, officers in the judicial, military and naval service of the United States, heads of departments, and foreign ministers of the United States.2 Twenty-six years later, Congress enacted that the disability imposed by section 3 . . . incurred heretofore, is hereby removed.3

 

[Onebad06vtx]

Sounds like we need to send alot of ILLEGALS to Colorado!

 

[Tombs]

Why do you guys keep Kathy Newman-ing people. The subject is specifically, threatening violence against those CO justices. Being against that is not making any specific statement about the highlighted. It's not time to grab your musket and head to the town square. Just hold on. We'll tell you if it's time. Just keep your powder dry.

If SCOTUS upholds this ruling, I'd say it's a completely dysfunctional system. But as long as there are legal remedies left, such as SCOTUS doing the right thing, just calm down.

Trump will likely be on the primary ballot anyway, while this goes through the SCOTUS appeal process.

Define parameters for when "it's time."

At least then there's a consistent basis. Constantly saying not yet is how you end up in the gulag, or in a situation where you would give anything to have a time machine and decide to act sooner.

Unless you can describe the parameters, you're just bargaining against the universe. Reading between the lines it seems you're saying that if SCOTUS doesn't overrule it, then it would be time.

 

[Tombs]

I’ll take a swing…although I do take umbrage with the TDS label.

I don‘t really have a strong opinion about the Colorado decision, to me it looks like it was designed to be challenged and end up in front of SCOTUS.

I think Trump‘s electors scheme should disqualify him from ever running for public office again…he took action to keep his legally-elected replacement from taking office…it stopped being a ”wacky legal theory” the moment he made any attempt at all to implement it in reality…and he did factually attempt to do so.

It is my opinion that people who don’t respect the outcome of elections should not be allowed to run in them…full stop.

I am not a lawyer, and much of this maneuvering is well outside my level of understanding, but it seems to me that this question does belong in front of the state Court first, but ultimately it would be for the SCOTUS to decide. These proceedings carry all of the usual trappings of the full weight of law, and I see no reason to doubt the legitimacy or legality of the filings at this point in time.

I think it is well past time to start holding our elected officials accountable when they break the law, and I am tired of partisans excusing their guy because the other guy didn’t get the same treatment first…it has to start somewhere, and Donald Trump deserves to spend time under a prosecutor’s microscope more than just about anyone else I can think of.

Trump’s prosecution clears roadblocks for future prosecutions against people like the Clintons, Schumers, Pelosis and Bidens…and I am all for it.

I don’t really care if a criminal investigation is politically motivated, I care whether or not the prosecution is factually-based and is tried in public in accordance with the law.

I will admit that Trump’s investigation had political origins, but the legitimacy of the charges are for the court to decide, and I think claims of a political prosecution of Trump are rooted more in partisanship than in fact. Trump could murder someone on live television and his supporters would claim that any prosecution was political, so I don’t see any legitimate reason to believe their protests against the current charges, honestly.

The scheme with electors warrants a day in court with a charge clearly and plainly demonstrating that was criminal. In fact I have no issue with a legitimate and fair trial for any of these issues. Granted, with tensions as high as they are, IMO, these issues should wait until after the election for public safety.

The issue is, the ballot box is not a court room, and you do not get to remove a candidate from the election because of such. It would be entirely constitutional for him to serve life in prison for numerous felonies but still be on the ballot and even become president from prison.

Removing him from the ballot is another issue, entirely, that is directly declaring an end to elections by the party in power, as they are keeping their most favored opponent from being able to run against them.

As for opening the door to other prosecutions? Nope, it'll only apply to enemies of the DNC. Democrats don't answer for their crimes and never have, nor ever will. Republicans regularly end up behind bars unless they're a member of the uniparty.

 

[foszoe]

Define parameters for when "it's time."

At least then there's a consistent basis. Constantly saying not yet is how you end up in the gulag, or in a situation where you would give anything to have a time machine and decide to act sooner.

Unless you can describe the parameters, you're just bargaining against the universe. Reading between the lines it seems you're saying that if SCOTUS doesn't overrule it, then it would be time.

He can't articulate it

 

[actaeon277]

Definitely cannot wait for this election cycle to be over.

Why?

Used to be, you'd get a couple years after an election before you had to deal with it.
But anymore, it seems like there is no break.
You go straight into the next cycle.

 

[jamil]

"Schmucky" creeped me out well before this. He looks like a cross between a snake and a weasel.

That's an insurrection if Trump's was. No way his name gets taken off the ballot in NY