Trump Is Disqualified From the 2024 Ballot, Colorado Supreme Court Rules

They don't have to. It's being addressed by CO and by SC review.

Once the SC reviews, all those judges will be able to render sound decisions.

This is common. SC cases affect America and are usually based on single lower court cases.

 

It's absolutely not insurrection.

 

You don't think they would all pile on to put more presser on the SC to get this done?
Please

 

The reason to open this issue is stated in the 14th amendment section 3.

There is no requirement for a PRIOR conviction stated in the 14th amendment.

The case brought in CO is a legal venue for deciding the facts.

Yes - in a federal case the accused must waive their right to a jury trial.

And, that is what Trump did in at least one of his cases.

There are reasons that the accused could want a bench trial.

 

Well how was your Luttig scheme going to work then? Wait for the Supreme Court and then declare whoever, Biden or Bush, an insurrectionist?

Won't you have to wait until the Supreme Court rules that Trump committed "insurrection?"

 

Explain how, via Luttig, it isn't an insurrection.

 

There could be friend of the court contributions, but I suspect they wouldn't come from judges. They more commonly come from other sources where the "friend" represents an important ramification from a possible ruling or a specific constituency.

Look, I'm not particularly happy about this.

On the one hand, Trump IS an insurrectionist and the 14th amendment directly addresses this problem. Further, he is unquestionably a criminal multiple times over.

On the other hand, it is important to allow citizens to run for office, and our democracy demands a serious level of trust.

Unfortunately the impending election has made it possible for Trump to drag out his criminal cases to the point where he WILL argue that the cases aren't about his criminality, but are political. And, that is just flat out false.

America IS going to seriously suffer, no matter what happens.

 

NOT IMPEACHMENT!!! Georgia state representatives are working to remove Biden from the ballot just as Colorado did to Trump. Two other states have started work on removing Biden from their ballots as well. Removal from Georgia's ballot would seriously impact Biden's ability to win the state.

PS: Trump has the biggest lead in his entire career in the polls.

 

It's not a violent uprising against authority or government.

It's not even a peaceful uprising.

It's not even a disagreement on authority.

And, it is certainly no opposition to government. The processes of government are not being challenged in any way by a president who signs a bill that he thinks might not be constitutional.

 

I pointed to the impeachment being pursued by the House - where they got our system BACKWARDS. Impeachment comes AFTER finding evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor. But, the House Republicans don't even have an idea of where to LOOK for such crimes.

Colorado didn't "do something to Trump". They are simply carrying out our constitution. It is Trump who "did something" to Colorado (as being part of America).

I have no idea what the Republican crazes in Georgia are claiming Biden did that would justify him not being allowed to run for office.

Do YOU know? I'm guessing this is more like the "impeachment" - all politics, no facts.

 

Violence, or uprising isn't required per Luttig.

But if that's your requirement, than Trump isn't an insurrectionist either.

 

This just in: Pennsylvania and Texas are both also looking to exclude Biden from the ballot! ROFLMAO! Pennsylvania and Georgia are swing states so this is very big.

 

Do you have any idea of how they want that to change our government?

Autocracy is a form of government that has no tolerance for courts or legislatures.

Remember that the VAST majority of the decisions we live under today came from the legislature, not the presidency.

Do these MAGAs want a legislature?

 

Insurrection isn't a first person shooter game.

Trump was clearly involved in Jan 6, which absolutely was a violent insurrection.

Plus, Trump took a good number of illegal actions to change the vote count when he had been repeatedly informed by his direct advisors that he had lost.

He is involved in the multi-state fake electors scheme.

He pressured Georgia to change the vote count.

He pressured MI to refuse to certify their vote - which they did.

Etc.

These are ALL direct attempts to overthrow our government.

 

I'm aware that Republicans are embarrassed that they chose a criminal and insurrectionist as their best guess as presidential material.

But, they have other non-criminal candidates.

 

Well...that's crazy if you think those were attempts to overthrow our government, but on the other hand, I think we are well past the bend on that. Luttig's argument is that unconstitutionality is insurrection, not your imaginary 7 Days In May.

 

Do you really think SCOTUS is going to rule that Trump has immunity?

Seriously.

His sole aim is to save time.

But the end is inevitable.

 

Like the “presser” that has surrounded the Dobbs decision?

 

Did everyone sleep through the Colorado district court case?

 

Lols! They are not thinking it through because if Trump has immunity so does Joe! Lols!

 

Removing DFT's eligibility to hold the office of the Potus is not about DFT? If this were true then Pink Floyd wouldn't have needed to hire Hipgnosis to make a pig fly for the cover of Animals.

 

It's relatively uncommon for state courts to blatantly violate the Constitution. Usually when the Supreme Court overrules a state court it's on an issue that is living somewhere in the gray area of interpretation. Third world countries have been sanctioned for doing stuff like this. It's completely absurd that so many people defend it or write it off as "common."

 

hmmm wonder if the supreme court has recieved threats recently by lefties?

Ok let's break this down, trump's a criminal because you say so, he hasn't even gone to trial. Second, because Trump is running his cases should not give him due process and sped up because the idiots in charge waited three years to charge him? Must be a special kind of case of a dem not wanting their enemy to have their rights upheld. Shocked I am.

 

You think a colorado court of any kind can find Trump guilty of insurrection? Do tell I missed that and reading the appellate court decision the evidence they used was the highly partisan J6 findings where they wouldn't allow anyone to testify for Trump nor anyone to cross examine witnesses. You guys know, the world knows, this charade has zero chance of not getting overturned. Hell, even lefty WAPO says the SC needs to overturn this 9-0. Everyone can see what the fascists want and even the hardened left won't stand for this wacko courts BS. As usual, lefty gets over their skis and going to get f'ing trump elected, dumbA$$es.

 

Yes, Lutig's argument is that section 3 is self executing. In other words, it does not require some prior conviction or judgement.

More importantly, he says section 3 is about rebellion against the constitution, and is thus a pure matter of law. Trump attempted to upset the carrying out the legal process of the election and transfer of power.

He believes this will be clear to the SC.

I used sloppy language, not noting the difference between rebellion against the constitution and rebellion against our government in other ways.

This seems to me to make the CO decision significantly stronger, as it is certainly clear that Trump attempted (and somewhat succeeded) in a rebellion against the defined constitutional process.

Also, I think people are missing full the section 3 definition, which includes not just insurrection and rebellion, but also "or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof". This is still a matter of rebellion against the constitution and it's clear that violence is not necessary.


Thanks for helping me get straightened out!

Are there differences you would like to bring up here?3