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

[Fuzzy1975]

**I'm not saying nothing happened on J6. What I'm saying is that "an insurrection" needs to be more than someone's opinion based on political ideology.

your right, there needs to be a conspiracy, physical violence, an attempt to disrupt or take control over Government.

Oh wait, all those things and more happened on Jan 6th.

 

[icanhelp1]

Yes, and let us count the reasons why

It doesn’t matter!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It doesn’t matter!

Your right, political processes are often overruled or disregarded by the courts.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

If you want to discuss Smith and his case, there are several threads about him. This thread is about Colorado finding Trump took part in an insurrection.

Pending Trump’s appeal, SCOTUS will review CO court’s finding that Trump took part in an insurrection. It is a weak argument. Smith knows it. That’s why he didn’t file insurrection charges and why SCOTUS is unlikely to swallow the CO court’s finding.

 

[cox_man]

We'll see how this goes but there is no doubt Trump caused an insurrection attempt.

Of course there is doubt.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Pending Trump’s appeal, SCOTUS will review CO court’s finding that Trump took part in an insurrection. It is a weak argument. Smith knows it. That’s why he didn’t file insurrection charges and why SCOTUS is unlikely to swallow the CO court’s finding.

I know you want to talk about Smith, and there are plenty of other threads on it. This thread is about Colorado’s SC finding that Trump is guilty of insurrection.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Anyone still supporting or defending trump are idiots.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Of course there is doubt.

Amongst idiots there is.

 

[cox_man]

Amongst idiots there is.

And the true idiots just accept the party positions.. so just continue to bend over. No need to think for yourself.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

And the true idiots just accept the party positions.. so just continue to bend over. No need to think for yourself.

What “parties”? Courts are independent of political party’s.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Special Prosecutor Jack Smith didn’t even attempt to include an insurrection charge. He knew how weak of a case it would have been.

Well you have not posted this in any of the threads about Jack Smith, so I guess the only reason you threw it in here was to deflect on Colorado’s courts rulings on Trump.
Nice fail!

 

[cox_man]

What “parties”? Courts are independent of political party’s.

Really? You believe that?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

I know you want to talk about Smith, and there are plenty of other threads on it. This thread is about Colorado’s SC finding that Trump is guilty of insurrection.

I know you don’t want me illustrating the fallacy of the CO court’s finding by referencing a decision made by prosecutors in related case. Sorry. What’s done is done. The post has been made.

 

[RobDownSouth]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1737529791031496905

 

[Philthy_Phil]

And the true idiots just accept the party positions.. so just continue to bend over. No need to think for yourself.

So you agree you're an idiot for accepting trump's lies. Good.

 

[icanhelp1]

What “parties”? Courts are independent of political party’s.

 

[cox_man]

So you agree you're an idiot for accepting trump's lies. Good.

I agree, you're an idiot.

 

[icanhelp1]

I agree, you're an idiot.

He’s an argumentative, fake contrarian, odhominem slinging Canadian POS. He’s irrelevant.

 

[jomar]

It doesn’t matter!

If that’s your attitude then quit your bitchin’ about whatever it is you think the dems are up to whenever you think they’re up to something.

 

[Rightguide]

The more I read the Colorado decision and dissents, the more impressed I am with the textualist slant of the decision and the weakness of the dissent. SCOTUS is basically going to tie themselves in knots if they want to use a textual argument to strike it down.

Gorsuch basically would have to argue against his own words.

Ahahaha, what a dunce. For openers, what is so hard about saying Colorado has no constitutional authority to enforce the provisions of the 14th Amendment?

 

[ll74]

Ahahaha, what a dunce. For openers, what is so hard about saying Colorado has no constitutional authority to enforce the provisions of the 14th Amendment?

So states don't decide their elections.

Lol...got it.

Kinda seems weird ....that whole certification of elections thing then, eh?

 

[ll74]

Ahahaha, what a dunce. For openers, what is so hard about saying Colorado has no constitutional authority to enforce the provisions of the 14th Amendment?

But to ad, my point wasn't about Colorado having authority to do anything. It was about their argument and the argument of the dissenters

 

[Rightguide]

RussiaGuide is having problems with the definition of “testimony”.



RussiaGuide

There has been no court trail proceeding taking sworn "testimony" of Trump committing insurrection and no official charge of insurrection by the DOJ. Insurrection is a federal crime that Colorado has no authority to pursue or judge. So, it's you who has confused unfounded accusations, slander, wishful media thinking, and libel for "testimony."

 

[Rightguide]

Rachel Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar from Stanford. I sincerely doubt your education measures up to that.

She's a crazed leftwing polemicist and a proven liar.

 

[Rightguide]

But to ad, my point wasn't about Colorado having authority to do anything. It was about their argument and the argument of the dissenters

Their decision was a political one with no basis in law. Their finding that Trump committed insurrection had no basis in law or fact and was completely outside their purview.