This was predictable.

Republican secretary of state threatens to kick Biden off the ballot as Trump payback

A top Republican official in Missouri is threatening to remove President Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot as retaliation for the determination in two other states that Donald Trump doesn't qualify because he "engaged in insurrection."

"What has happened in Colorado & Maine is disgraceful & undermines our republic," Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft wrote on the social media site X on Friday. "While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!"


Ashcroft's post came shortly after the Supreme Court agreed to review a decision by Colorado's high court that found Trump could be barred from the state's primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...retary-of-state-biden-trump-ballot-rcna132600

This follows House Repub's tit for tat, petulant move to impeach Joe as retribution for Trump's two impeachments. It is "disgraceful & undermines our republic." If policy disputes become the standard by which presidential candidate's names are removed from state's ballots there will never be another two term prez again.

 

Another Dem 'clever scheme ' blows up in their face.

Lolololl

 

Yes, its about as predictable as predicting that rain makes things wet.

 

Blows up how? By some Repub moron making a fool of himself by openly admitting he thinks fabricated charges should be made against Biden as retribution.

 

And when, exactly, did Biden engage in an insurrection that would allow Ashcroft to kick him off the Missouri ballot? Waiting for some false equivalency of something Biden did to 1/6 from the Trump camp.....

BTW: I am not in favor of single people being able to enforce the 14th. This should be left to the courts.

 

Call me when you find someone charged and convicted of an insurrection.

The bottom line is the left used gutter tactics to go after Trump and it's been going on since 2016. Now that the shoe is on the other foot and the GOP is walking through the door the left opened, the left doesn't like it.

 

Ask Ashcroft. You may not think so, but your cronies think a Secretary of State has the power to declare somebody an insurrectionist.

 

Well that's what a Democrat fool did first.

 

Considering the charges against Trump are fabricated why not do it back? YOU guys started this insanity back in 2016 calling Trump a Russian spy and it’s snowballed ever since.

 

Taking Biden off some red state ballots, predictable, yes. Impeaching Biden, again very predictable. I thought the GOP controlled house would impeach Biden as payback long before now. I wonder what took them so long. I’ve been saying this since the Democratic controlled house first impeached Trump. That once the GOP takes control of the house, they’d impeach the first democratic president that they can.


As for Missouri and or Texas taking Biden off the ballot for payback, revenge, whatever. I think one needs to remember that all the states have automatic ballot access in some form or another for both major parties. But not for independents or third parties which have to jump through a million and one hoops designed to keep them off the ballot. Both major parties don’t want their monopoly on our electoral system challenged.


Right now, each state controls their own ballot access through each state’s laws. Primary laws differ from general election laws. Usually a state just prints up ballots with the names that each party gives them, although some states have filing fees and deadlines to meet those filing fees for their primaries. I don’t know Colorado’s, Maine’s, Missouri’s or Texas’s primary laws. It may be much harder to take Trump off the general election ballot without first eliminating the automatic ballot access, whichever form for both major party’s general election nominees. Could a state eliminate one major party’s automatic ballot access without eliminating the other major party? I’d guess yes, the state legislature would need to pass a new election law in order to do that. Ballot access is a state process since our presidential election is that of 50 state elections, not one mass election. I suppose if Missouri or Texas changed their election law regarding automatic ballot access, they could keep Biden off the ballot.


You could end up with a handful of states with only Biden on the ballot and another handful with only Trump on the ballot. Depending on how the SCOTUS rules on this and what their reasoning is and if their ruling applies to only Colorado or to all of the United States. Remember, we are dealing with ballot access. A ruling for Trump would in my opinion ensure both the Republican and Democratic nominees are on all 50 state ballots, that the automatic ballot access is still intact. But a ruling for Colorado would let each state pick and choose whether or not to allow both major party nominees on their ballot, no more automatic ballot access regardless of the form. So, we’ll see how the SCOTUS rules on this. How they decide this, their reasoning could have major complications and perhaps chaos far into the future.

 

You guys are so full of trump-hate you don’t even see what ALL the corrupt politicians (on both sides) are doing to our country.

 

They dont have to prove anything. Nothing in the 14th 3 requires a conviction, remember?

 

I believe he said he was going to use immigration as a pretense to disqualify Biden. You know, the problem Repubs refuse to participate in fixing.

 

False equivalence noted. But do be sure to get back to us the moment Biden, or any Dem, hatches a plan to overturn the result of a presidential election and end the constitutional order as we know it.

 

Yes, it's a critically important decision they are facing - with significant long-term ramifications.

 

Allow me to clear something up for you. The Kabuki theater presently going on in the House isn't really about impeachment. It's a vehicle by which The Crazy can keep making unproven allegations against Joe the same way they've been making them for months. Because the point isn't finding evidence.........IT'S CHARACTER ASSASSINATION...........leading in to the election cycle.

 

Exactly. As it is now, each state determines their own ballot qualifications, rules, laws. But the Constitution gives congress the power, authority to change that and make it nationally. With Trump, Colorado, another question is, can a state on its own determine what is and who is an insurrectionist? The 14th is moot on this. History could give us some guidance, but who knows if history will be taken into consideration by the SCOTUS. Another question along the same lines, can the SCOTUS decide what is an insurrection or who is an insurrectionist?

There are so many questions with no answers, at least until the SCOTUS rules on this. Then their reasoning behind their decision and whether their ruling is narrow, applying only to Colorado or nationwide. Then too, how will the SCOTUS look at section 5 in conjunction with section 3? The bottom line is we’ll just have to wait and see.

Then there will be the immunity ruling, sooner or later which could has far reaching ramifications. My own thinking on this is a president should have immunity for anything dealing with official business. But not for anything that isn’t official presidential duties or the job as president. Not job related shouldn’t have immunity.

 

Of course SCOTUS can decide. Any judge can decide if that is what's before the court.

How does Sec. 5 line up with Sec. 1?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Congress has used this in the Civil Rights Act. And states have used it in state civil rights law.

 

I’ve always looked at impeachment, be it Bill Clinton, both Trump’s, if Biden is impeached as a waste of time, energy and money. There’s no way anyone is going to get the senate to vote guilty for removal which requires 2/3rds of the senate voting guilty. It’s a waste. Impeachments are nothing more or being used to placate one or the other party’s base. If it were me, I’d never both impeaching any president unless I had a decent chance of succeeding.

As for Biden, no need for character assassination, his job approval numbers and the percentage of Americans who view him favorably are about as low as they can get. Perhaps the Republicans are trying to bring Biden’s numbers down to Trump’s. Which makes impeachment a waste once again as they already are. Biden 39.1% favorable, 55.4% unfavorable, Trump 40.2% favorable, 55.1% unfavorable.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/other/FavorabilityRatingsPoliticalLeaders.html

Fact is both are disliked and neither one is wanted to become the next president by most Americans. This is why a quarter of Americans are stating they’d voted third party or not vote at all if the rematch occurs.

 

biden, the dems, AND repubs have already started to end the constitution.

That’s the problem here, you trust only the dem side of the corrupt politicians in charge.

Fact is, both sides are watching out for each other and NOT the taxpaying citizens of our country.

They knew people would fight with each other instead of addressing the OBVIOUS problem.

Politicians on both sides couldn’t care less about the taxpaying citizens of this country.

The last 3 years makes that obvious.

Now watch as gas prices come down, the illegals coming through the border slows, and prices for goods may even come down.

Then after the election it will be business as usual, prices will go back up and, etc, etc, etc…..

 

So you're saying Congress has the authority to, for example, change the voter suppression laws passed in red states?

 

Article I, section 4. If what you describe as voter suppression laws falls under manner of holding elections, certainly. It also states congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations. We seen this with the Voting Rights Act which made every state adhere to that act even if it meant changing, repealing, disregarding state election law which wasn’t in conformity with the Voting Rights Act.


It's this act that made Alabama draw up a second majority black district along with Georgia adding an additional majority black district. I’m sure if congress were to pass more of a national standard for voting that it would be challenged all the way to the SCOTUS. Then the SCOTUS would have to decide what is included in the word manner. The original intent of the framers was to let each state run their own elections as they see fit. Hence, most state legislatures for this nation’s first 50 years or so awarded their electoral votes to which ever candidate that state legislature wanted without a popular vote. The popular vote for awarding electoral votes in all states didn’t happened until after the civil war. The state legislatures were deemed representatives of the people of that state. The state legislatures also chose senators until ratification of the 17th amendment in 1913.

 

Wasn't the Repub objection to HR-1 that it was an infringement on the rights of states to establish their own election procedure standards? Including things like voter ID and voter registration.

 

I don’t know. Congress if it had a mind to could do away with gerrymandering along with a bunch of other differences which now belongs to the states. But neither party wants that. Parties usually use this nationwide reform as PR with no intention of going through with it. Well, the party being gerrymandered the most always proposes legislation to do away with it, but doesn’t push it as when that party gets control, they then can gerrymander to their hearts content.

It's my opinion congress could do quite a lot to ensure a certain standard for redrawing districts, also for election laws across all 50 states. But the party in power in the states don’t want anything to do with a national standard. They want the ability, the power to give their party an advantage.

 

All they have to do is demonstrate that Biden participated in an insurrection.

Obviously this is political demagoguery intended to fool gullible MAGAs. But it's funny that they don't even realize that by SAYING this (as opposed to just doing it) they are admitting that the only reason is "pay-back". It wouldn't pass mustard in ANY court even if they REALLY intended to do it.

Ah... but how MAGAs will eat it up!