Unanimous ruling by SCOTUS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden needs to understand that the courts are not going to take Trump out of the running.

His effort at Lawfare are not going to work.

Trump didn't have the votes last time and he doesn't have the votes this time. You can blather about "lawfare" but what you actually mean is the rule of law.

This decision isn't terrible, for several reasons. But as someone posted upthread, if an insurrectionist is elected, they would not be seated. This doesn't apply to Trump because he doesn't have the votes and won't be elected. But we need to start examining other current and future lawmakers for their participation on January 6.

What needs to happen on Jan 6, 2025 is even though Trump will have lost the election, Congress should vote to reject the electoral votes cast for him because he is not eligible. The Supreme Court just said it is up to Congress alone to interpret the insurrection clause.

+1

Trump is leading in almost all polls.

NYT: “The majority opinion did not explicitly address that possibility, but it cautioned against the “chaos” of a postelection disqualification. Its insistence that legislation is necessary would seem to rule out that option since no statute says that Congress can refuse to count Electoral College votes for a candidate whom lawmakers deem an oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

They made up that legislation standard.

Doesn’t matter. Congress is free to craft legislation to resolve enforcing this amendment, and that will be subject to judicial review. But it can’t refuse to count votes absent such legislation.

If a person is disqualified from holding the office, Congress can and should reject any electoral votes cast for that ineligible candidate. This decision opens that possibility by refusing to provide for judicial review of the disqualification before the election. Legislation is not needed. The disqualification standard is sufficiently defined in the Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Judge Luttig on Court's Colorado ballot decision.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4507849-judge-luttig-reacts-to-supreme-court-colorado-decision/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden needs to understand that the courts are not going to take Trump out of the running.

His effort at Lawfare are not going to work.

Trump didn't have the votes last time and he doesn't have the votes this time. You can blather about "lawfare" but what you actually mean is the rule of law.

This decision isn't terrible, for several reasons. But as someone posted upthread, if an insurrectionist is elected, they would not be seated. This doesn't apply to Trump because he doesn't have the votes and won't be elected. But we need to start examining other current and future lawmakers for their participation on January 6.

What needs to happen on Jan 6, 2025 is even though Trump will have lost the election, Congress should vote to reject the electoral votes cast for him because he is not eligible. The Supreme Court just said it is up to Congress alone to interpret the insurrection clause.

+1

Trump is leading in almost all polls.

NYT: “The majority opinion did not explicitly address that possibility, but it cautioned against the “chaos” of a postelection disqualification. Its insistence that legislation is necessary would seem to rule out that option since no statute says that Congress can refuse to count Electoral College votes for a candidate whom lawmakers deem an oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

But it’s obvious in the real world that Trump has much less support now than he had four years ago.

Unfortunately that’s also true for his opponent and the only option is one of the two of them.

Democrats still have majority support in the country. Republicans have lost support.

The presidential election isn’t for “democrats.” It’s Biden vs Trump.

Right? And no one cares about Dobbs. Why won't everyone stop caring about Dobbs?!? Stop caring about Dobbs!!!

Tamron Keith was in NC and says abortion and a woman's right to choose was no. 1. You are delusional if you think women do not care about this.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone believe that the five justices would have said Congress needs to pass legislation to interpret the insurrection provision if Democrats had the House majority with Pelosi as Speaker? It is a disingenuous dodge written specifically to avoid ruling on the merits while protecting Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Judge Luttig on Court's Colorado ballot decision.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4507849-judge-luttig-reacts-to-supreme-court-colorado-decision/

Luttig is correct. SCOTUS majority showed itself to be political hacks and displayed unprecedented judicial overreach. They just eviscerated part of the Constitution.

The majority didn’t even pretend to uphold its recently implemented “originalism” standard. Such blatant partisan hypocrisy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CO took the biggest L in court history.

State should be called LOLARADO now because they lost so bad.

Not really. Colorado got Trump's Insurrection entered into the Supreme Court's historical record. None of the justices wanted to actually attach themselves to the insurrection itself and just said it was the job of Congress to deal with him. It was a predictable outcome because they couldn't risk candidates being thrown off the ballot for other reasons not akin to Trump's Insurrection, but Trump doesn't come out of this looking great.

Actually he did, and the democrat party takes another L as well.

They took took the leading opposition candidate off of the ballot like a thrived world banana republic does, the SCOTUS smokes the state of LOLARADO and says they can’t. Trump looks like a guy who the deep state hates, the majority of real Americans hate the deep state.

The state of LOLARADO looks like it’s involved in election interference (which it is), bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe has attempted to weapons the DOJ to get anyone he disagrees with.
The Fannie what’s her face from GA is going to be impeached because she’s corrupt.

The NY ruling looks corrupt to the point even the bank who lended the money to Trump was like “he didn’t do anything wrong, in fact we’d do business with home again in a second”.

All of this out together along with the lefts seething hatred of a man that most of middle America and blue collar people like is going to get home elected.

LOLRADO and bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe take the huge Ls, MSNBC and CNN look like idiots again…Trump gets more support.

I’m telling you and I hope this post gets marked, Trump will landslide into 2024 victory. PA, MI, OH will swing to Trump. Wisconsin will you most likely. It will be a victory almost as big as Reagan’s.

The majority of "real" Americans hate the deep state. Nice, too bad that's not going to be enough for him this fall. Haley is pretty badly embarrassing him by pulling as many votes as she is from the presumed nominee. Aside, the New York banks are free to lend money to him related to his fraud disgorgement. Let's see what happens there. How many days left on that? And, of course, SCOTUS said it was the job of Congress (and not them or the states) to deal with Trump's Insurrection.

lol…Haley hasn’t won a primary. It only that she’s lost hugely.

Trump will win

Haley won a primary yesterday.

I like Haley but winning DC is…not a flex.

Haley is democrat's darling, no surprise she won democrats populated city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden needs to understand that the courts are not going to take Trump out of the running.

His effort at Lawfare are not going to work.

Trump didn't have the votes last time and he doesn't have the votes this time. You can blather about "lawfare" but what you actually mean is the rule of law.

This decision isn't terrible, for several reasons. But as someone posted upthread, if an insurrectionist is elected, they would not be seated. This doesn't apply to Trump because he doesn't have the votes and won't be elected. But we need to start examining other current and future lawmakers for their participation on January 6.

What needs to happen on Jan 6, 2025 is even though Trump will have lost the election, Congress should vote to reject the electoral votes cast for him because he is not eligible. The Supreme Court just said it is up to Congress alone to interpret the insurrection clause.

+1

Trump is leading in almost all polls.

NYT: “The majority opinion did not explicitly address that possibility, but it cautioned against the “chaos” of a postelection disqualification. Its insistence that legislation is necessary would seem to rule out that option since no statute says that Congress can refuse to count Electoral College votes for a candidate whom lawmakers deem an oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

But it’s obvious in the real world that Trump has much less support now than he had four years ago.

Unfortunately that’s also true for his opponent and the only option is one of the two of them.

The only option is "one of the two of them"? Ha! We don't live in Russia. We can certainly choose to send a message to the RNC and DNC by not rewarding them with a vote for their awful candidates. You are not an American if you think Trump and Biden are our "only" options. Real Americans have had enough of this garbage.

And what exactly makes you "real"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Judge Luttig on Court's Colorado ballot decision.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4507849-judge-luttig-reacts-to-supreme-court-colorado-decision/

Luttig is correct. SCOTUS majority showed itself to be political hacks and displayed unprecedented judicial overreach. They just eviscerated part of the Constitution.

The majority didn’t even pretend to uphold its recently implemented “originalism” standard. Such blatant partisan hypocrisy.

lol…so 9 justices who make or are supposed to make ensuring the laws are constitutional are the hacks? Even the two most leftist judges?

No…what is the truth is it was a 9-0 decision and what CO did was so egregious they were smacked down handedly.

But of course some SAHM on an anonymous message board knows better than 9…count them…9 judges who all came to the same conclusion with NO difference in opinion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CO took the biggest L in court history.

State should be called LOLARADO now because they lost so bad.

Not really. Colorado got Trump's Insurrection entered into the Supreme Court's historical record. None of the justices wanted to actually attach themselves to the insurrection itself and just said it was the job of Congress to deal with him. It was a predictable outcome because they couldn't risk candidates being thrown off the ballot for other reasons not akin to Trump's Insurrection, but Trump doesn't come out of this looking great.

Actually he did, and the democrat party takes another L as well.

They took took the leading opposition candidate off of the ballot like a thrived world banana republic does, the SCOTUS smokes the state of LOLARADO and says they can’t. Trump looks like a guy who the deep state hates, the majority of real Americans hate the deep state.

The state of LOLARADO looks like it’s involved in election interference (which it is), bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe has attempted to weapons the DOJ to get anyone he disagrees with.
The Fannie what’s her face from GA is going to be impeached because she’s corrupt.

The NY ruling looks corrupt to the point even the bank who lended the money to Trump was like “he didn’t do anything wrong, in fact we’d do business with home again in a second”.

All of this out together along with the lefts seething hatred of a man that most of middle America and blue collar people like is going to get home elected.

LOLRADO and bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe take the huge Ls, MSNBC and CNN look like idiots again…Trump gets more support.

I’m telling you and I hope this post gets marked, Trump will landslide into 2024 victory. PA, MI, OH will swing to Trump. Wisconsin will you most likely. It will be a victory almost as big as Reagan’s.

The majority of "real" Americans hate the deep state. Nice, too bad that's not going to be enough for him this fall. Haley is pretty badly embarrassing him by pulling as many votes as she is from the presumed nominee. Aside, the New York banks are free to lend money to him related to his fraud disgorgement. Let's see what happens there. How many days left on that? And, of course, SCOTUS said it was the job of Congress (and not them or the states) to deal with Trump's Insurrection.

lol…Haley hasn’t won a primary. It only that she’s lost hugely.

Trump will win

Haley won a primary yesterday.

I like Haley but winning DC is…not a flex.

Haley is democrat's darling, no surprise she won democrats populated city.

Trump got 600 and she got 1000 in a 95% democrat party owned city.

Yeah that’s not a flex.

The average American is lukewarm in her at best, most real Americans dislike her and see through the rouse. She’s a big corporate owned Democrat who is beholden to the defense lobbyists and the swamp. People see it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden needs to understand that the courts are not going to take Trump out of the running.

His effort at Lawfare are not going to work.

Trump didn't have the votes last time and he doesn't have the votes this time. You can blather about "lawfare" but what you actually mean is the rule of law.

This decision isn't terrible, for several reasons. But as someone posted upthread, if an insurrectionist is elected, they would not be seated. This doesn't apply to Trump because he doesn't have the votes and won't be elected. But we need to start examining other current and future lawmakers for their participation on January 6.

What needs to happen on Jan 6, 2025 is even though Trump will have lost the election, Congress should vote to reject the electoral votes cast for him because he is not eligible. The Supreme Court just said it is up to Congress alone to interpret the insurrection clause.

+1

Trump is leading in almost all polls.

NYT: “The majority opinion did not explicitly address that possibility, but it cautioned against the “chaos” of a postelection disqualification. Its insistence that legislation is necessary would seem to rule out that option since no statute says that Congress can refuse to count Electoral College votes for a candidate whom lawmakers deem an oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

They made up that legislation standard.

Doesn’t matter. Congress is free to craft legislation to resolve enforcing this amendment, and that will be subject to judicial review. But it can’t refuse to count votes absent such legislation.

If a person is disqualified from holding the office, Congress can and should reject any electoral votes cast for that ineligible candidate. This decision opens that possibility by refusing to provide for judicial review of the disqualification before the election. Legislation is not needed. The disqualification standard is sufficiently defined in the Constitution.

Except he’s not guilty of anything. We did this in 2021 and he was found to not be guilty and therefore qualified.

Si your argument is moot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone believe that the five justices would have said Congress needs to pass legislation to interpret the insurrection provision if Democrats had the House majority with Pelosi as Speaker? It is a disingenuous dodge written specifically to avoid ruling on the merits while protecting Trump.

Hey…not sure you were aware but it was 9-0…

9-0…

That means all nine of them agreed.

Let’s try again.

[Anonymous]

I find it funny that in order to “save Democracy” the left wants to use a weaponized court system to stop voters from deciding who they want to vote for using the democratic method of voting in a democracy.

The CO AG was like..guess we have to let the voters decide….yeah..they were always able to decide. They should be able to decide…

The only threat to democracy is the democrat party trying to remove opposition candidates from the ballot similar to Hitler. He used the legal system to remove opposition from the ballots as well before they went ahead seized power indefinitely.

I’m willing to bet if Trump wins…Biden will suspend elections and won’t step down. He’s not mentally competent enough to do that himself so his handlers behind the curtain will do it and use Biden as the figurehead to seize power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find it funny that in order to “save Democracy” the left wants to use a weaponized court system to stop voters from deciding who they want to vote for using the democratic method of voting in a democracy.

The CO AG was like..guess we have to let the voters decide….yeah..they were always able to decide. They should be able to decide…

The only threat to democracy is the democrat party trying to remove opposition candidates from the ballot similar to Hitler. He used the legal system to remove opposition from the ballots as well before they went ahead seized power indefinitely.

I’m willing to bet if Trump wins…Biden will suspend elections and won’t step down. He’s not mentally competent enough to do that himself so his handlers behind the curtain will do it and use Biden as the figurehead to seize power.

Pure projection. You don’t know anything about Democrats if you actually believe bullshit like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CO took the biggest L in court history.

State should be called LOLARADO now because they lost so bad.

Not really. Colorado got Trump's Insurrection entered into the Supreme Court's historical record. None of the justices wanted to actually attach themselves to the insurrection itself and just said it was the job of Congress to deal with him. It was a predictable outcome because they couldn't risk candidates being thrown off the ballot for other reasons not akin to Trump's Insurrection, but Trump doesn't come out of this looking great.

Actually he did, and the democrat party takes another L as well.

They took took the leading opposition candidate off of the ballot like a thrived world banana republic does, the SCOTUS smokes the state of LOLARADO and says they can’t. Trump looks like a guy who the deep state hates, the majority of real Americans hate the deep state.

The state of LOLARADO looks like it’s involved in election interference (which it is), bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe has attempted to weapons the DOJ to get anyone he disagrees with.
The Fannie what’s her face from GA is going to be impeached because she’s corrupt.

The NY ruling looks corrupt to the point even the bank who lended the money to Trump was like “he didn’t do anything wrong, in fact we’d do business with home again in a second”.

All of this out together along with the lefts seething hatred of a man that most of middle America and blue collar people like is going to get home elected.

LOLRADO and bumbling, stumbling dementia Joe take the huge Ls, MSNBC and CNN look like idiots again…Trump gets more support.

I’m telling you and I hope this post gets marked, Trump will landslide into 2024 victory. PA, MI, OH will swing to Trump. Wisconsin will you most likely. It will be a victory almost as big as Reagan’s.

The majority of "real" Americans hate the deep state. Nice, too bad that's not going to be enough for him this fall. Haley is pretty badly embarrassing him by pulling as many votes as she is from the presumed nominee. Aside, the New York banks are free to lend money to him related to his fraud disgorgement. Let's see what happens there. How many days left on that? And, of course, SCOTUS said it was the job of Congress (and not them or the states) to deal with Trump's Insurrection.

lol…Haley hasn’t won a primary. It only that she’s lost hugely.

Trump will win

Haley won a primary yesterday.

I like Haley but winning DC is…not a flex.

Haley is democrat's darling, no surprise she won democrats populated city.

Very bad optics for a GOP candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden needs to understand that the courts are not going to take Trump out of the running.

His effort at Lawfare are not going to work.

Trump didn't have the votes last time and he doesn't have the votes this time. You can blather about "lawfare" but what you actually mean is the rule of law.

This decision isn't terrible, for several reasons. But as someone posted upthread, if an insurrectionist is elected, they would not be seated. This doesn't apply to Trump because he doesn't have the votes and won't be elected. But we need to start examining other current and future lawmakers for their participation on January 6.

What needs to happen on Jan 6, 2025 is even though Trump will have lost the election, Congress should vote to reject the electoral votes cast for him because he is not eligible. The Supreme Court just said it is up to Congress alone to interpret the insurrection clause.

+1

Trump is leading in almost all polls.

NYT: “The majority opinion did not explicitly address that possibility, but it cautioned against the “chaos” of a postelection disqualification. Its insistence that legislation is necessary would seem to rule out that option since no statute says that Congress can refuse to count Electoral College votes for a candidate whom lawmakers deem an oath-breaking insurrectionist.”

But it’s obvious in the real world that Trump has much less support now than he had four years ago.

Unfortunately that’s also true for his opponent and the only option is one of the two of them.

The only option is "one of the two of them"? Ha! We don't live in Russia. We can certainly choose to send a message to the RNC and DNC by not rewarding them with a vote for their awful candidates. You are not an American if you think Trump and Biden are our "only" options. Real Americans have had enough of this garbage.

You can throw away your vote however you want, but the winner of the election will be Biden or Trump unless Biden withdraws for some reason. My point stands.