December 19, 20231 yr 39 minutes ago, Boogyman said: It's just another normal one... Trump doesn't paint or like dogs.
December 19, 20231 yr 44 minutes ago, Boogyman said: It's just another normal one... Directly quoting Hitler at a consistent clip sounds like a smart general election strategy. 4-D chess.
December 19, 20231 yr 2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Directly quoting Hitler at a consistent clip sounds like a smart general election strategy. 4-D chess. Maga loves it.
December 19, 20231 yr 1 minute ago, jsdarkstar said: Maga loves it. Of course but Maga's irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
December 19, 20231 yr 23 minutes ago, mr_hunt said: Wouldn't it be great if Trump appeals this ruling to the US Supreme Court, who upholds the ruling? That would (should) mean game over for Trump; it's the US Supreme Court ruling on the US Constitution. Disqualified in Colorado, disqualified everywhere. If he appeals, he'd better know the result. Big gamble, considering he lost Colorado in 2020 anyway. He really shouldn't appeal unless a swing state or Republican held state disqualifies him.
December 20, 20231 yr 14 hours ago, mr_hunt said: I am all for due process. I feel Colorado may have jumped the gun here... But really, Trump is unfit for the office. When are people going to wake up and realize it?
December 20, 20231 yr I get the feeling this is not going to end well. The SCOTUS may end up having to rule on the 14th amendment. The MAGAs and other morons that support him will argue their right to vote for who they want, and since orange man will never STFU, it's a recipe for more violence.
December 20, 20231 yr The 14th Amendment, Clause 3 is clear, it's the law of the land, Trump engaged in insurrection and is an Officer who took and oath. There is precendent in its application with the Confederacy. It applied to them all. This is also common in other democracies around the globe. Also, even though its a conservative court, Trump's track record in Court is stunningly poor. He's an all time loser in Court. Over and over again. Even the dissent in Colorado found him to be an insurrectionist. That point is clear. They only dissented over State Law. Nothing that Scotus can use there. They can't tell a state how to interpret it's own law. Interesting that Colorado 200 pg. Opininon quoted directly Justice Gorsuch in the Hassan case as saying that it is "a state's legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process" that "permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office."
December 20, 20231 yr 3 minutes ago, DiPros said: I get the feeling this is not going to end well. The SCOTUS may end up having to rule on the 14th amendment. The MAGAs and other morons that support him will argue their right to vote for who they want, and since orange man will never STFU, it's a recipe for more violence. This is one last chance for the Republican Party to do the right thing, and they don't even need to do it in public view. Someone made the point last night that this SCOTUS tends to rule along Republican lines, not necessarily Trump lines. Perhaps the billionaire Republican donors make it clear to folks like Clarence Thomas and Alito that they want Trump out. People like McCarthy and McConnell stood up in public session in 2021 and said that Trump was responsible for what happened on January 6. We also know that Ginny Thomas was actively involved in the January 6 B.S. and Clarence Thomas should recuse himself -- but he won't. Either SCOTUS votes as per the US Constitution and Trump is disqualified, or they vote along partisan lines. Even if the Court is partisan, their ruling is final; there is no arguing from MAGA. I'm not so sure SCOTUS would save Trump -- Nixon appointed 4 of the Justices that ultimately ruled he had to surrender the tapes relating to Watergate.
December 20, 20231 yr 3 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: The 14th Amendment, Clause 3 is clear, it's the law of the land, Trump engaged in insurrection and is an Officer who took and oath. There is precendent in its application with the Confederacy. It applied to them all. This is also common in other democracies around the globe. Also, even though its a conservative court, Trump's track record in Court is stunningly poor. He's an all time loser in Court. Over and over again. Even the dissent in Colorado found him to be an insurrectionist. That point is clear. They only dissented over State Law. Nothing that Scotus can use there. They can't tell a state how to interpret it's own law. Interesting that Colorado 200 pg. Opininon quoted directly Justice Gorsuch in the Hassan case as saying that it is "a state's legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process" that "permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office." My guess is, if SCOTUS ultimately votes on this matter, it would come out 6-3 to disqualify Trump. Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh would vote Trumpism/MAGA instead of the Constitution. Perhaps Coney-Barrett as well. I think Gorsuch and Roberts would vote seriously. I'm still not convinced Trump actually appeals to SCOTUS by January 4. Presidents have been elected before without being on all states' ballots.
December 20, 20231 yr 10 minutes ago, Alphagrand said: My guess is, if SCOTUS ultimately votes on this matter, it would come out 6-3 to disqualify Trump. Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh would vote Trumpism/MAGA instead of the Constitution. Perhaps Coney-Barrett as well. I think Gorsuch and Roberts would vote seriously. I'm still not convinced Trump actually appeals to SCOTUS by January 4. Presidents have been elected before without being on all states' ballots. Couldn't they also just kick it back to the states, thereby validating the ruling in CO, but then leaving it up to the rest of the state courts to make their own rulings? Which is bascially what they did with Dobbs. If so, bet money that any swing state won't disqualify him. They're called swing states for a reason, after all.
December 20, 20231 yr 9 minutes ago, Alphagrand said: My guess is, if SCOTUS ultimately votes on this matter, it would come out 6-3 to disqualify Trump. Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh would vote Trumpism/MAGA instead of the Constitution. Perhaps Coney-Barrett as well. I think Gorsuch and Roberts would vote seriously. I'm still not convinced Trump actually appeals to SCOTUS by January 4. Presidents have been elected before without being on all states' ballots. Yep, it's gonna be hard for Gorsuch to rule against his own prior opinion. 6-3 is probably accurate. The law is plain on it's face. Using Originalism and a plain reading of the text, lead to only one conclusion. He is disqualified from holding office. There maybe an out for them on Due Process grounds. But Trump was represented at the Trial level, presented his case and still lost. Also, I recall watching some of the legal arguments In Wisconsin/Minnesota. They didn't want to be the first to decide this. They also seemed to indicate that they didn't want to bar him from the Primary process. A hint to the State Lawyers that once the primary is over they can refile to bar him from the ballot of the Presidential election. Look for more states to rule on this in the future.
December 20, 20231 yr 36 minutes ago, DiPros said: I get the feeling this is not going to end well. The SCOTUS may end up having to rule on the 14th amendment. The MAGAs and other morons that support him will argue their right to vote for who they want, and since orange man will never STFU, it's a recipe for more violence. The right to vote and election interference are not a defense to the 14th Amendment clause 3. Of Course he will still make the argument. He will throw the kitchen sink at the Court hoping something sticks.
December 20, 20231 yr 12 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Couldn't they also just kick it back to the states, thereby validating the ruling in CO, but then leaving it up to the rest of the state courts to make their own rulings? Which is bascially what they did with Dobbs. If so, bet money that any swing state won't disqualify him. They're called swing states for a reason, after all. First. Trump actually has to file an Appeal. It may be a wise strategy to not file one. And remained banned only in Colorado. Problem with this is Other States, Wisconsin, Minnesota etc. may rule against him as well. 2nd. If the Court acutally Grants Certiorari, and hears the case and Affirms Colorado decison that bans him in all 50 States. It's clearly a risk for him if they can do this. 3rd. The Court can hear the case and overturn Colorado. If they do this the decision won't be based on the law, but rather it will be a political decision. 4th. The Court can refuse to accept and hear the case, and let the State decision stand and then it would be only Colorado that he's not on the ballot. Again he may face more State challenges.
December 20, 20231 yr 3 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: First. Trump actually has to file an Appeal. It may be a wise strategy to not file one. And remained banned only in Colorado. Problem with this is Other States, Wisconsin, Minnesota etc. may rule against him as well. 2nd. If the Court acutally Grants Certiorari, and hears the case and Affirms Colorado decison that bans him in all 50 States. It's clearly a risk for him if they can do this. 3rd. The Court can hear the case and overturn Colorado. If they do this the decision won't be based on the law, but rather it will be a political decision. 4th. The Court can refuse to accept and hear the case, and let the State decision stand and then it would be only Colorado that he's not on the ballot. Again he may face more State challenges. Maybe, maybe MN, but I highly doubt WI does, and MI already ruled for him. It's a pipe dream, dude.
Create an account or sign in to comment