Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot

[mtrycrafts]

As I have posted before, the ones who want the job aren't the ones we need and the ones we need don't want the job.

Isn't that relative to each voter?

 

[highfigh]

Isn't that relative to each voter?

It was a general comment.

 

[Cos]

Elections are a horror

 

[Dude#1279435]

Can't see this being upheld. Without proof of motive there's no way to move forward. Albeit I don't think anyone (including Republicans) really believes he's innocent.

 

[Mikado463]

Question, what has he been convicted of .............

 

[Trell]

Question, what has he been convicted of .............

You could try reading the link in the first post in this thread.

 

[Dude#1279435]

You could try reading the link in the first post in this thread.

I think you need a conviction for it to uphold in court. I don't like it, but I think the law has to be followed.

 

[Trell]

I think you need a conviction for it to uphold in court. I don't like it, but I think the law has to be followed.

Trump was found to have engaged in an insurrection and that part was not overturned by the Colorado Supreme Court but confirmed.

Apparently, it’s not needed to convict Trump in a jury trial, if that’s what you mean.

From the link in the OP there this, among other things, from the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

>>>“We conclude that the foregoing evidence, the great bulk of which was undisputed at trial, established that President Trump engaged in insurrection,” the opinion added. <<<

 

[highfigh]

No president will ever be perfect, but I really don't understand how Biden can be so unpopular.
Joe Biden's underrated presidency - by davidrlurie (publicnotice.co)

I'm not Black, but I was surprised when there was no big response to him saying "If you don't vote for me, then you ain't Black" during the 2020 election.

 

[Dude#1279435]

I'm not Black, but I was surprised when there was no big response to him saying "If you don't vote for me, then you ain't Black" during the 2020 election.

As a starting point conservative news needs to cover it.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Trump was found to have engaged in an insurrection and that part was not overturned by the Colorado Supreme Court but confirmed.

Apparently, it’s not needed to convict Trump in a jury trial, if that’s what you mean.

From the link in the OP there this, among other things, from the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

>>>“We conclude that the foregoing evidence, the great bulk of which was undisputed at trial, established that President Trump engaged in insurrection,” the opinion added. <<<

It will likely be struck down. I think what you have to hope for is Jack Smiths angle of Trump false claims of election interference LED to Jan 6th riots. It's impossible to pin motive, but you might say he's still resposible regardless. Or was trying to steal it and yer outta here fred-o.

 

[Trell]

It will likely be struck down. I think what you have to hope for is Jack Smiths angle of Trump false claims of election interference LED to Jan 6th riots. It's impossible to pin motive, but you might say he's still resposible regardless. Or was trying to steal it and yer outta here fred-o.

The conservative legal scholar and former judge J. Michael Luttig on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit disagrees with you.

Below is a quote from an interview with him.

>>>In fact, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is self-executing, which means that congressional action is not required. Nor is it required that the former president be convicted of the criminal offense of an insurrection or rebellion against the United States under Title 18 USC 2383.<<<

‘The Opposite of Politics’: A Conservative Legal Scholar Says Kicking Trump Off the Ballot Is ‘Unassailable’

J. Michael Luttig explains why he thinks the 14th Amendment should prevent Trump from running for president again.

www.politico.com

 

[Trell]

As a starting point conservative news needs to cover it.

Apparently, Biden did not say exactly that.

>>>“You’ve got more questions?” Biden replied. “Well I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”<<<

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-tha-god-you-aint-black/index.html

 

[Teetertotter?]

Good for Colorado! Republican's are NOT for Democracy. They love taring things down. And then twisted it around. They have nothing better to do in THE HOUSE!

 

[Dude#1279435]

Apparently, Biden did not say exactly that.

>>>“You’ve got more questions?” Biden replied. “Well I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”<<<

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-tha-god-you-aint-black/index.html

Basically the black vote.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Interesting take on what the SC will do.

 

[isolar8001]

Meanwhile....

 

[Mr._Clark]

The conservative legal scholar and former judge J. Michael Luttig on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit disagrees with you.

Below is a quote from an interview with him.

>>>In fact, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is self-executing, which means that congressional action is not required. Nor is it required that the former president be convicted of the criminal offense of an insurrection or rebellion against the United States under Title 18 USC 2383.<<<

‘The Opposite of Politics’: A Conservative Legal Scholar Says Kicking Trump Off the Ballot Is ‘Unassailable’

J. Michael Luttig explains why he thinks the 14th Amendment should prevent Trump from running for president again.

www.politico.com

Personally I agree with Luttig, but that doesn’t mean the Supreme Court will uphold the Colorado decision.

Having said that, if they do strike down the Colorado decision I doubt that it would be on the basis that the 14th Amendment requires a separate criminal conviction. The Supreme Court normally avoids ruling on a legal issue that is not necessary to reach a given result and I suspect they’d prefer to avoid the criminal conviction issue if they do strike down the Colorado decision. This is of course just a best guess.

If they uphold the Colorado decision they would need to conclude that a separate criminal conviction for insurrection is not required.

 

[Mikado463]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/21/opinions/colorado-removes-trump-from-ballot-linker/index.html

 

[mtrycrafts]

Interesting times we live in. Making history.
I want my name in there that I was living in this historical time.