Colorado case. To keep Trump off ballot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

You have trouble reading. So I’ll say it again.

If he’s convicted, yes, please take him off the ballot. Until then, there’s not much of a case here. You can’t take someone off based on feeling. This is the United States, we have due process. Innocent until proven guilty.

Again, I DESPISE Trump. But going about it this way will not end well and only will not only have SCOTUS overturn this, but will also have people who are on the fence, will support Trump.

This isn’t difficult to understand. The people cheering for this will have a rude awakening. This isn’t the way to go about this. Convict him first, then do it this way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

You have trouble reading. So I’ll say it again.

If he’s convicted, yes, please take him off the ballot. Until then, there’s not much of a case here. You can’t take someone off based on feeling. This is the United States, we have due process. Innocent until proven guilty.

Again, I DESPISE Trump. But going about it this way will not end well and only will not only have SCOTUS overturn this, but will also have people who are on the fence, will support Trump.

This isn’t difficult to understand. The people cheering for this will have a rude awakening. This isn’t the way to go about this. Convict him first, then do it this way.

The Constitution doesn't have "convicted" in its language, for a reason. It isn't suggesting a crime, it is saying that for the confederates post civil war and insurrectionists of of 1/6/21 are simply not fit to hold office. A crime is a different threshold.

Maybe YOU have trouble reading. Serious jurists agree that Colorado got it right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

Show where in the Constitution a "conviction" is the threshold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

Show where in the Constitution a "conviction" is the threshold.

It's surreal at this point. Expect every candidate from here on out disqualified on opinion and hearsay. JFC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

Show where in the Constitution a "conviction" is the threshold.

It's surreal at this point. Expect every candidate from here on out disqualified on opinion and hearsay. JFC

Where is the opinion and heresay? Stop listening to Fox News. There was a 5 day court case with evidence and testimony. That isn't opnion and heresay. No one on the Trump side disputed the facts presented. They had the chance for due process and are now complaining about it because it didn't go their way, and they have suckered people like you into their sympathy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

You have trouble reading. So I’ll say it again.

If he’s convicted, yes, please take him off the ballot. Until then, there’s not much of a case here. You can’t take someone off based on feeling. This is the United States, we have due process. Innocent until proven guilty.

Again, I DESPISE Trump. But going about it this way will not end well and only will not only have SCOTUS overturn this, but will also have people who are on the fence, will support Trump.

This isn’t difficult to understand. The people cheering for this will have a rude awakening. This isn’t the way to go about this. Convict him first, then do it this way.

Your argument has been addressed in this thread dozens of times. There has been due process. There was a five-day trial at the district court level, and Trump was subpoenaed but refused to testify. That court considered all the evidence and determined that he engaged in insurrection, and that ruling has survived two appeals. He is not being deprived of his liberty, so he doesn’t need to be proven guilty to be deemed ineligible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

You’re too simple for this.

[Anonymous]

Most Americans approve of of the Colorado Supreme Court ruling to disqualify Trump, a new YouGov poll shows.

54% approve. 35% disapprove.

Democrats:
Support: 84% / Oppose: 8%

Independents:
Support: 48% / Oppose: 35%

Republicans:
Oppose: 66% / Support: 24%



https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/12/20/edc6d/1

[Anonymous]

That poll is on brand. The GOP doesn't care what most Americans think. They want a tyranny of the minority.

[Anonymous]

Prediction: SCOTUS agrees with Colorado. (Remember this case was brought by Republicans using a legal theory advanced by conservative jurists). Trump loses one or more criminal cases. Trump tries to summon the same Jan 6 mob but they don’t show en masse, having seen their compatriots get criminal convictions, jail time, and big legal bills from Jan 6th (Trump’s been using J6 fundraising for his lifestyle, not to pay the legal defense costs of his supporters). Nikki Haley becomes nominee by offering to pardon Trump. Haley can and does beat Biden. Trump convicted in GA but pardoned by Republican governor. Trump pursued by civil litigants until his ultimate demise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That poll is on brand. The GOP doesn't care what most Americans think. They want a tyranny of the minority.

A quarter of them like it! That surprised me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prediction: SCOTUS agrees with Colorado. (Remember this case was brought by Republicans using a legal theory advanced by conservative jurists). Trump loses one or more criminal cases. Trump tries to summon the same Jan 6 mob but they don’t show en masse, having seen their compatriots get criminal convictions, jail time, and big legal bills from Jan 6th (Trump’s been using J6 fundraising for his lifestyle, not to pay the legal defense costs of his supporters). Nikki Haley becomes nominee by offering to pardon Trump. Haley can and does beat Biden. Trump convicted in GA but pardoned by Republican governor. Trump pursued by civil litigants until his ultimate demise.

If Trump is not the nominee, neither will Biden. He will step back and the Dem superdelegates will pick the slate for 2024.

I also do not think the GA Governor will pardon Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Prediction: SCOTUS agrees with Colorado. (Remember this case was brought by Republicans using a legal theory advanced by conservative jurists). Trump loses one or more criminal cases. Trump tries to summon the same Jan 6 mob but they don’t show en masse, having seen their compatriots get criminal convictions, jail time, and big legal bills from Jan 6th (Trump’s been using J6 fundraising for his lifestyle, not to pay the legal defense costs of his supporters). Nikki Haley becomes nominee by offering to pardon Trump. Haley can and does beat Biden. Trump convicted in GA but pardoned by Republican governor. Trump pursued by civil litigants until his ultimate demise.

Governors can’t pardon people in Georgia. 😀

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a trumper, but this ends badly for us citizens overall. Don’t care if Trump is the nominee or not, but you can’t just use courts to weaponize your opponents.

Had he been convicted of started an insurrection, I’d be onboard. But this is the worst way to do it. The ones who are ok with this are saying “hey I’m good with losing my rights and losing democracy to vote for who I want”. It has dangerous consequences.

Granted, Trump being elected is dangerous in itself. But at least the voters are making that decision. Not a handful of judges.

Be careful what you wish for…

So you are saying that someone who tried to steal an election and foment a coup shouldn't be held accountable under the terms of the US Constitution?

May as well ball up the document and toss it in the can.

He has not been convicted of what you're accusing him of. Is this super complicated for you?

It seems super complicated for you. The Constitution doesn’t say “convicted of.” He’s been found guilty by judges.