Colorado Will Not Be Allowed To Deny Trump Access To Their Presidential Ballot

[PaxNurgle]

It was intended to prevent people committing treason against the United States Government from holding the election. Regardless of political party, Republican or Democrat, or whether they were literally part of the Confederate States in the 1860s.

The Civil War inspired that clause but it wasn't intended solely to be used against southern Confederates. Rather, it was intended to be invoked in the event that another similiar movement were to happen that would threaten the integrity of the country, it's people, it's government, and the Constitution.

Which is exactly what happened in January of 2021.

 

[Bray123]

So far no one has convicted him there fore the law does not have any standing. YOU NEED A CONVICTION. Turn in that sears law degree other wise screwballs like you woiuld contest every election. The amendment was intended to prevent only the confederates from holding office, not Republican.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

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.


My eyes must be on their way out, I cannot see 'conviction' anywhere.

 

[rainsol]

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

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.


My eyes must be on their way out, I cannot see 'conviction' anywhere.

Obviously you fucking cant read or interpret. Wait for the 40000 fucking hours of tapes are public and you will see you have swallowed the bait like a good little democrat

 

[dmallord]

The judge wrongly concluded Trump was guilty of insurrection but stated he could not be removed from the ballot in Colorado. This is why unstudied left-wingers should never be allowed to sit on the bench. She's absolutely stupid and ideologically bent.

I believe she sounds fair to me. If I sat on his jury for the January 6th riot and insurrection attempt – I would vote him guilty based on everything I witnessed on television. The same for the fake electors crap attempts. And I'd throw in the classified document cover-up also. She is letting them put his name on the ballot and see if he gets the vote. If so, well, shame on America.

The judge reached the same conclusion as I did. I'm honest and reasonably good at determining the truth based on observation, and I believe she is too. So my thoughts and vote cancel your vote, so you and I balance the scales of democracy on this opinion. But, really you and I don't live in Colorado, so that's a problem for those who live there.

 

[Bray123]

Obviously you fucking cant read or interpret. Wait for the 40000 fucking hours of tapes are public and you will see you have swallowed the bait like a good little democrat

Oh, you've seen Tucker's tape of an empty corridor and that proves it was all lies.

But, as you're an expert on reading, help us out here. Where in that section does it say 'conviction'?

 

[YDB95]

He was at the time his alleged crime of "insurrection" took place, so using the 14th Amendment as a basis to deny his candidacy is legally incorrect nd will not pass constitutional scrutiny.

Nothing in the 14th amendment says it doesn't apply to current officeholders. You're probably thinking of "having previously taken an oath". It doesn't say anything about whether or not that oath is still in effect.

 

[dkovic77]

So far no one has convicted him there fore the law does not have any standing. YOU NEED A CONVICTION. Turn in that sears law degree other wise screwballs like you woiuld contest every election. The amendment was intended to prevent only the confederates from holding office, not Republican.

Ohhhh so it has a qualification that republicans are excluded? That is your legal theory?

Surprised the Cheetos attorneys haven’t floated that as an option.

With regards to the matter, it seems poised to go to the SC- can see the truth social posts now… “back stabbers!”

 

[dkovic77]

Obviously you fucking cant read or interpret. Wait for the 40000 fucking hours of tapes are public and you will see you have swallowed the bait like a good little democrat

Ohhh the footage. We don’t need the footage, we saw it live on tv.

 

[icanhelp1]

I seem to recall people saying similar about Roe vs Wade (both sides). Anyone who has noticed, is aware a ruling is only valid as long as it is valid. It can be repealed and replaced it seems. nothing seems settled in law south of the border.

R vs W was a ruling, never settled law. Congress makes laws not judges.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

It was not a criminal case. Trump was not charged with any crimes, there was no trial, no plea bargain, no conviction, no acquittal. It was a civil case to determine if Trump is eligible to be on the ballot. As Michigan, Minnesota, and now Colorado courts have established, the answer is yes, he is indeed eligible and will appear on the ballots in those states. The groups pursuing this cause are 0-3.

So then Trump is 0-3. If he’s on the ballot, he can’t be president.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

R vs W was a ruling, never settled law. Congress makes laws not judges.

No Congress writes laws, the courts determine if those laws are constitutional. Fuck did you even take Civics? But i'll admit you're close, so you do get half credit.

 

[Bray123]

No Congress writes laws, the courts determine if those laws are constitutional. Fuck did you even take Civics? But i'll admit you're close, so you do get half credit.

It turns out the GOP were playing the long game when they took Civics off the school syllabus. They knew the day would come when there were enough poorly educated people out there with guns that they could just over-rule the Constitution.

 

[icanhelp1]

No Congress writes laws, the courts determine if those laws are constitutional. Fuck did you even take Civics? But i'll admit you're close, so you do get half credit.

That’s why they call congress critters lawmakers. Once again you remain on the top of the heap of the galactically stupid.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

That’s why they call congress critters lawmakers. Once again you remain on the top of the heap of the galactically stupid.

Again, Congress writes the laws, the courts determine if those laws are constitutional. Period end of story. No wonder you can't make fryboy of the week, you can;t even comprehend the mechanism on which your country's legal system runs on.

 

[icanhelp1]

Again, Congress writes the laws, the courts determine if those laws are constitutional. Period end of story. No wonder you can't make fryboy of the week, you can;t even comprehend the mechanism on which your country's legal system runs on.

When it comes to idiots you are a pedigree!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

When it comes to idiots you are a pedigree!

in the United States, laws are enacted, interpreted, and enforced at the federal, state, and local level. All three levels contain some form of constitution, laws enacted by a legislative body, and rules promulgated by bureaucratic agencies, panels, boards, and commissions.

Where Congress enacts a statute that conflicts with the Constitution, state or federal courts may rule that law to be unconstitutional and declare it invalid.

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest authority in interpreting federal law, including the federal Constitution, federal statutes

When it comes to you, you're just a fucking idiot.

 

[dkovic77]

The judge wrongly concluded Trump was guilty of insurrection but stated he could not be removed from the ballot in Colorado. This is why unstudied left-wingers should never be allowed to sit on the bench. She's absolutely stupid and ideologically bent.

Wow, as opposed those those who espouse your views… they are not ideologically bent. sure they aren’t.

 

[HisArpy]

I believe she sounds fair to me. If I sat on his jury for the January 6th riot and insurrection attempt – I would vote him guilty based on everything I witnessed on television.

And you would commit juror misconduct by doing so.

As a juror you're required to render your verdict based on the evidence presented at trial. Not the bullshit spread all over the TV and social media.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Not the bullshit spread all over the TV and social media.

Here in lies the problem with drinking carbon based water. The firat thing that consumption does to one's brain is change the meaning of the word "bullshit".

Once you understand this dramatic mental change, you can then begin to understand why our Carbon based water consumer known as HisArpy frequently posts laughably factually incorrect words...

 

[rainsol]

Ohhhh so it has a qualification that republicans are excluded? That is your legal theory?

Surprised the Cheetos attorneys haven’t floated that as an option.

With regards to the matter, it seems poised to go to the SC- can see the truth social posts now… “back stabbers!”

Sorrry asshole, the 40000 hours of tapes are going to be public and you will get the truth, not that you would believe in your shit hate filled head. Orange hair is coming back or have you missed the polls?

 

[rainsol]

Ohhh the footage. We don’t need the footage, we saw it live on tv.

Once again, the hate in your head is showing in your stupid remarks. Scotus is reviewing the convictions and they likely will all be thrown out

 

[DeluxAuto]

Sorrry asshole, the 40000 hours of tapes are going to be public and you will get the truth, not that you would believe in your shit hate filled head. Orange hair is coming back or have you missed the polls?

Your anti-American hero won't even be on the ballot, dullard.

 

[lovecraft68]

No worries, they'll just sabotage the machines in red districts

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Once again, the hate in your head is showing in your stupid remarks. Scotus is reviewing the convictions and they likely will all be thrown out

Then that would be the end of Trump politically.

 

[Rightguide]

I believe she sounds fair to me. If I sat on his jury for the January 6th riot and insurrection attempt – I would vote him guilty based on everything I witnessed on television. The same for the fake electors crap attempts. And I'd throw in the classified document cover-up also. She is letting them put his name on the ballot and see if he gets the vote. If so, well, shame on America.

The judge reached the same conclusion as I did. I'm honest and reasonably good at determining the truth based on observation, and I believe she is too. So my thoughts and vote cancel your vote, so you and I balance the scales of democracy on this opinion. But, really you and I don't live in Colorado, so that's a problem for those who live there.

What she didn't consult was the law. Trump did not encourage insurrection. He wasn't charged with insurrection by a Trump-hating DOJ because there was no actual evidence he did. There was a lot of emoting by the ignorant and the mentally vulnerable on the left however who were lied to that he did. Trump was no more of an insurrectionist than Al Gore and the Democrats were when they contested the 2000 presidential election.

There was never a chance that a removal of Trump from a state ballot based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment would ever survive the appellate level of American jurisprudence, and I posted the reasons why.