132 pages of garbage that will be overturned by rational justices. Yawn
SCOTUS TO BITCH SLAP COLORADO SUPREME COURT
- Thread starter PalmettoTiger1
- Start date
132 pages of garbage that will be overturned by rational justices. Yawn
I don’t believe in the constitution… it literally didn’t include freedom for black people lolz
I also don’t believe it’s the courts job to decide instead of the voters.
What’s your opinion on democrats bypassing a primary and using the convention to appoint someone? Love to hear how it’s to save democracy.
They probably would have tried it if not for Manchin and Sinema during Biden’s first 2 years. It’s absolutely in their plans if they win both houses and the presidency, which is why we need to nominate an electable GOP candidate.
Call me old fashioned, but I prefer it when the courts are balanced; 4 D, 4 R, and 1 Centrist. Also, purge all the corrupt justices, like Thomas, who are getting kickbacks and gifts from billionaire nutjobs.
There are plenty of Federalist Society judges who believe the orange one is disqualified by the 14th amendment. For example, Judge Luddig agrees with the Colorado decision. Of course I have no idea what the U.S. Supreme Court will decide, but I do think its funny as hell that a man who attempted for years to disqualify Obama for being born in a foreign country may now be disqualified from running. A perfect example of "what goes around comes around.a'
I wish no one knew the justices political affiliations. I wish they could judge on the constitution and its merits no matter what letter is next to their name or which party they claim to affiliate to. Why only 2 parties? There should be multiple parties for Americans to choose from.
We have a very good idea of what the Supreme Court will decide.
Probably but it won't be because he's not guilty, it will be because they'll use one of two off-ramps. Either they'll rule that he doesn't qualify as a federal officer of the United States or that it reads "while holding office" and not when "running for office". Though the thing that will be hard to get around is a previous ruling by Justice Neil Gorsuch himself, so he'd need to overturn his own decision. This will be interesting to follow.
"In Hassan v. Colorado, while serving on the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, future SCOTUS Justice Neil Gorsuch affirmed the state’s “legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process” by barring ineligible candidates from the ballot."
To really make this decision laughable the four judges that voted to purge Trump from the Ballot graduated from LAW SCHOOLS of YALE/HARVARD/PENN/VIRGINIA
More reason to not hire liberal crackpots from Ivy League Schools
There are many people that graduate from the Ivy League Schools that are very intelligent and make rational reasoned decisions.
I just cannot find any likeminded thinking with these judges or think they really thought it through.
The 4 just suffer TDS That is the whole thing . No fair judgement as they don't have the authority to do what they voted in my opinion as it is a political parties decision and NOT A PUBLIC DECISION as this is the primary voting of the Republican pARTY.
More reason to not hire liberal crackpots from Ivy League Schools
There are many people that graduate from the Ivy League Schools that are very intelligent and make rational reasoned decisions.
I just cannot find any likeminded thinking with these judges or think they really thought it through.
The 4 just suffer TDS That is the whole thing . No fair judgement as they don't have the authority to do what they voted in my opinion as it is a political parties decision and NOT A PUBLIC DECISION as this is the primary voting of the Republican pARTY.
If the courts can't keep a criminal traitor to our country off the ballot, who will? Republicans who previously decided not to impeach him said the courts should decide. Now they don't like it that the court has decided.
As far as bypassing the primary, that's just sideline speculation but not something I personally approve of. I would prefer that Biden drop out now, honestly.
LMAO, in fact it was a very thorough, thoughtful 132 page decision. Have you read it or you just trusting what Maria Bartiromo told you?
I agree, but there's no way the US gets rid of the 2 party system. It's too entrenched in our way of life, and there's too much money to be made by maintaining the status quo.
One of those Supreme Court justices has already ruled that a state has the right to do this and another should be required to recuse himself since his wife was a co-conspirator in the Insurrection. Of course we already know this is the most unethical Supreme Court in our history, so you're probably right about the way they will rule.
Last edited:
We have 2.5 parties right now. DEM. GOP, and MAGA
At some point i expect the left to break off into Woke Democrats and Rational Democrats.
Last edited:
I read the indictments, he's not being accused of insurrection which is what they are tossing him off the ballot for. He also isn't on trial in CO.
He also HASN"T BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF A CRIME......so how is that constitutional to remove him when his trial hasn't even started yet?
Dems are opening up a can worms and the lid's not going back on if they continue.
Disgraced NJ senator has to be found guilty before dems will remove him, unfortunately they don't give that courtesy to anyone not their own. Feckless
Menendez is being tried under the Democrat(ic) system while Trump is being charged under the Trump system.
Two justice systems, the fair one for dems, the biased one for pubs. This country is doomed
Are you deaf? The 14th amendement doesn't require that you be convicted of a crime, it states you can't hold office if you "engaged" in insurrection. They ruled that after a careful reading of the amendment, he should be kept off the ballot. It's no surprise that you will ignore the Constitution and any authority that rightly tries to uphold the law because you've decided you don't care if he has mutilated children , you will vote for him anyway and give the middle finger to anyone who gets in your way.
"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."
How do these two cases compare? Are there any Republicans in Congress asking Trump to resign?
Here are the Democrats who have called for Menendez to resign
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) is under pressure to resign from office after he was indicted on bribery charges Friday. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy leads the chorus of voices, which also includes…
thehill.com
Got it - if a court rules(not Biden) that an ex- President should be taken off the ballot if he engaged in insurrection, we should keep Biden off the ballot, even if he did not engage in insurrection, other than our made up, alternate versions of what constitutes an insurrection.
That is the whole point, you moron. We have courts to decide if people actually committed a crime(insurrection) so that complete idiot political hacks like the 4 that voted for this can not arbitrarily decide a person has committed a crime. If 4 people in Colorado can decide trump committed treason, when he has not even been charged with such, then why can a few people in other states not decide the same about Biden?
If not engaging in murder/rape/etc were specifically cited as prohibitive, how do you think we would decide if someone had "engaged" in any of theses?
Colorado showing the abject bias and absolute political partisanship of their leadership. Shocker!
When scotus throws this out, those 4 justices should be removed.
When scotus throws this out, those 4 justices should be removed.
Your complete lack of the grasp of the constitution is amazing. The constitution clearly states naturalized citizens can not be potus.
I didn't realize I was engaging with a constitutional scholar, such as yourself, who I'm sure has read the entire 132 page decision. It's no different than someone under 35 attempting to run for President - it's not allowed under the 14th Amendment, Section 3. AGAIN, he doesn't have to be CONVICTED for a state to decide that he "ENGAGED" in insurrection, which is exactly what they did. Does this need to be written in crayon for it to sink in with you???
Exactly, as it ALSO STATES you cannot be POTUS if you engaged in insurrection. Holy, moly just stfu....nobody has time for your squirrely ass pretzel logic today.
Didn't everyone say the same thing when Biden was elected the 1st time?
The economy was going to crash, all your guns were going to be taken away, taxes were going to be sky high, there was going to be a Green New Deal, and the stock market was going to crash. And yet here we are, 3 years later and NONE of that has happened.
The fact of the matter is that the President has pretty limited power to change things on a massive scale. I've been out in the Real World, working, paying bill, and eventually raising a family since 1991. Changing Presidents, even changing parties of Presidents never changed anything for me at all on a personal level.
If you think that Trump is going to drain the swamp, I've got a beach house in Tennessee to sell you on the cheap. If you think Trump is somehow going to be a dictator, well, ditto. Same thing for Biden. Very little is going to change if he get reelected.
Anyone who tells you different is full of shit.
Last edited:
You don't have to be a constitutional scholar, you just have to have a minimum of common sense or look at hundreds of years of evidence that shows you how we determine if someone has "engaged" in a crime.
Are you ok if conservative states keep Biden off the ballot bc they decide he has "given aid or comfort to the enemies" by selling political influence to foreign adversaries through his son?
Dem-appointed Colorado justice says Trump ballot ban undermines 'bedrock' of America in fiery dissent
Colorado Supreme Court Justice Carlos Samour had harsh words for the court's majority after it banned former President Donald Trump from state ballots.
Even the DEMOCTCRAT justices that heard the case disagree.
How would conservative states decide that when there is ZERO evidence to support that conclusion? You know, UNLIKE the OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE we have that Trump did engage in insurrection. It really is disgusting how you magats want to give a pass to the most corrupt, traitor of a president in our history. All your "but Biden" derping will never make it the same.
The majority disagreed and that's what matters here. Of course, a decision this monumental is not one to be taken lightly and the court did their due diligence by listening to all the evidence on both sides before coming to this decision. This wasn't willy nilly, it was a long and deliberate process and they thoughfully wrote a 132 decision explaining how they came to that conclusion - which if we're honest is unnecessary because we all know that it's true, even though you don't like it. But don't cry too hard because we all know that the 6 pro-trump justices on the court will overturn it.Dem-appointed Colorado justice says Trump ballot ban undermines 'bedrock' of America in fiery dissent
Colorado Supreme Court Justice Carlos Samour had harsh words for the court's majority after it banned former President Donald Trump from state ballots.www.foxnews.com
Even the DEMOCTCRAT justices that heard the case disagree.
The bold is the whole argument - if you have not figured that out yet.How would conservative states decide that when there is ZERO evidence to support that conclusion? You know, UNLIKE the OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE we have that Trump did engage in insurrection. It really is disgusting how you magats want to give a pass to the most corrupt, traitor of a president in our history. All your "but Biden" derping will never make it the same.
First, the fact that you say there is zero evidence is laughable. The simple fact that foreign corporations and politicians were paying hunter millions of dollars over extended periods of time is at least circumstantial evidence. Why would anyone continue to pay him for years if they were getting nothing in return? Having said that- I DO NOT think that is enough to determine he certainly "engaged" in criminal behavior.
However, if you are ok with a slight majority of all democrat justices deciding what constitutes engagement, for trump, you should have no objection to another states ability to determine if biden has engaged in disqualifying behavior.
You stated IF they decided " he has given aid or comfort to the enemies" by selling political influence to foreign adversaries through his son?" which there is ZERO evidence to support.
What policies were changed in return for those favors? Where is the proof that Joe was involved? Exactly, you got nothing UNLIKE what we all saw with our own eyes and heard directly from 35+ Republican witnesses to Trump's crimes, including many first-hand witnesses.
This is a red herring and again, you got nothing.
I am asking, the whole basis for the ruling is that Trump committed or participated in Insurrection?
7-2 0r 8-1 There are some LIBERAL Justices that are bat shit crazy that will vote against Trump no matter what
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
That was a terrible halftime show. Couldn’t understand a single word***- Latest: ChicagoTiger85