Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

How is there not due process when this has been through a trial and worked its way up to the state Supreme Court?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't just make stuff up to get someone you hate thrown off the ballot. He didn't incite an insurrection, hence he was never charged, nor was he convicted.

If you truly believe this, then you need to get news sources of information. The ones who lied to you about a stolen election, Seth rich and Vince foster are also lying to you about this.

From NPR, your favorite news source:

The U.S. Senate on Saturday acquitted former President Donald Trump on an impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection.

The acquittal comes more than a month after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers were counting the electoral results that certified Trump's loss.

“Senate Acquits Trump In Impeachment Trial — Again”

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again

It wasn’t a court of law. It was a vote by partisan politicians, not neutral judges, to remove or not remove him from office based on his conduct and actions in that office. The vote neither absolved him from being guilty of those actions nor made a definitive judicial statement about the nature of his actions, only that the majority of senators from his own party decided not to remove him from office.

You can say the same thing about the House that voted to impeach him. And the J6 committee. Neither were courts of laws but highly partisan bodies. And it must also be admitted many courts are becoming highly partisan bodies themselves too, which is also disappointing. You can't accuse a certain court like SCOTUS of being partisan without acknowledging other courts are also highly partisan in favor of the Democrats. Nonetheless, regarding the Colorado court and many of the posts on here, it is worth noting on that count that the criminal indictment of Donald Trump over January 6, filed in Washington DC in the summer, did not include an insurrection charge — focusing instead on his ‘conspiracy to defraud the United States’ over the 2020 election.

The J6 committee was bi-partisan, no matter how much you want to claim the GOP members were somehow not GOP.

Snorts with laughter.

Pelosi handpicked the few Republicans on the committee and blocked the ones the GOP wanted to recommend. It was not bipartisan by any stretch of the imagination. All the Republicans on the committee (three?) were defeated in their subsequent primaries or redistricted out or didn't run again because they knew they would lose. Cheney herself was blown out in a hugely embarrassing defeat.

Hard to call that bipartisan when the Democrats blocked the Republicans from appointing their own preferred people to the committee. It was no more bipartisan than the Republicans' decision to shut down the committee once they took control of Congress. J6 was utterly and thoroughly partisan.

This is why your party no longer exists.

You know this thread has run its course when people post stuff like this. Who controls Congress? Which party is leading in the polls for the presidency?

I don't know why I waste my time being pragmatic and realistic on the political forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't just make stuff up to get someone you hate thrown off the ballot. He didn't incite an insurrection, hence he was never charged, nor was he convicted.

If you truly believe this, then you need to get news sources of information. The ones who lied to you about a stolen election, Seth rich and Vince foster are also lying to you about this.

From NPR, your favorite news source:

The U.S. Senate on Saturday acquitted former President Donald Trump on an impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection.

The acquittal comes more than a month after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers were counting the electoral results that certified Trump's loss.

“Senate Acquits Trump In Impeachment Trial — Again”

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again

It wasn’t a court of law. It was a vote by partisan politicians, not neutral judges, to remove or not remove him from office based on his conduct and actions in that office. The vote neither absolved him from being guilty of those actions nor made a definitive judicial statement about the nature of his actions, only that the majority of senators from his own party decided not to remove him from office.

You can say the same thing about the House that voted to impeach him. And the J6 committee. Neither were courts of laws but highly partisan bodies. And it must also be admitted many courts are becoming highly partisan bodies themselves too, which is also disappointing. You can't accuse a certain court like SCOTUS of being partisan without acknowledging other courts are also highly partisan in favor of the Democrats. Nonetheless, regarding the Colorado court and many of the posts on here, it is worth noting on that count that the criminal indictment of Donald Trump over January 6, filed in Washington DC in the summer, did not include an insurrection charge — focusing instead on his ‘conspiracy to defraud the United States’ over the 2020 election.

The J6 committee was bi-partisan, no matter how much you want to claim the GOP members were somehow not GOP.

Snorts with laughter.

Pelosi handpicked the few Republicans on the committee and blocked the ones the GOP wanted to recommend. It was not bipartisan by any stretch of the imagination. All the Republicans on the committee (three?) were defeated in their subsequent primaries or redistricted out or didn't run again because they knew they would lose. Cheney herself was blown out in a hugely embarrassing defeat.

Hard to call that bipartisan when the Democrats blocked the Republicans from appointing their own preferred people to the committee. It was no more bipartisan than the Republicans' decision to shut down the committee once they took control of Congress. J6 was utterly and thoroughly partisan.

This is why your party no longer exists.

You know this thread has run its course when people post stuff like this. Who controls Congress? Which party is leading in the polls for the presidency?

I don't know why I waste my time being pragmatic and realistic on the political forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

You think the SC will overrule this "so quickly". Ball's in their court, so good luck. Maybe you get the result you want, but I wouldn't count on it.

unless the Create new precedent like due process isn’t required here, this is an obvious case of being overturned

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't just make stuff up to get someone you hate thrown off the ballot. He didn't incite an insurrection, hence he was never charged, nor was he convicted.

If you truly believe this, then you need to get news sources of information. The ones who lied to you about a stolen election, Seth rich and Vince foster are also lying to you about this.

From NPR, your favorite news source:

The U.S. Senate on Saturday acquitted former President Donald Trump on an impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection.

The acquittal comes more than a month after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers were counting the electoral results that certified Trump's loss.

“Senate Acquits Trump In Impeachment Trial — Again”

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again

It wasn’t a court of law. It was a vote by partisan politicians, not neutral judges, to remove or not remove him from office based on his conduct and actions in that office. The vote neither absolved him from being guilty of those actions nor made a definitive judicial statement about the nature of his actions, only that the majority of senators from his own party decided not to remove him from office.

You can say the same thing about the House that voted to impeach him. And the J6 committee. Neither were courts of laws but highly partisan bodies. And it must also be admitted many courts are becoming highly partisan bodies themselves too, which is also disappointing. You can't accuse a certain court like SCOTUS of being partisan without acknowledging other courts are also highly partisan in favor of the Democrats. Nonetheless, regarding the Colorado court and many of the posts on here, it is worth noting on that count that the criminal indictment of Donald Trump over January 6, filed in Washington DC in the summer, did not include an insurrection charge — focusing instead on his ‘conspiracy to defraud the United States’ over the 2020 election.

The J6 committee was bi-partisan, no matter how much you want to claim the GOP members were somehow not GOP.

Snorts with laughter.

Pelosi handpicked the few Republicans on the committee and blocked the ones the GOP wanted to recommend. It was not bipartisan by any stretch of the imagination. All the Republicans on the committee (three?) were defeated in their subsequent primaries or redistricted out or didn't run again because they knew they would lose. Cheney herself was blown out in a hugely embarrassing defeat.

Hard to call that bipartisan when the Democrats blocked the Republicans from appointing their own preferred people to the committee. It was no more bipartisan than the Republicans' decision to shut down the committee once they took control of Congress. J6 was utterly and thoroughly partisan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

You think the SC will overrule this "so quickly". Ball's in their court, so good luck. Maybe you get the result you want, but I wouldn't count on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

so the due process clause doesn’t apply? That’s your argument ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless the Think the insurrection clause does not require due process (ie a conviction FOR insurrection) this will be overruled so quickly . Honestly the judges ruling this way should be removed from the bench and disbarred. Despite what you think of trump everyone is entitled to due process

The clause mentions nothing about a conviction, and was designed to bar former confederates who wouldn’t have been convicted of anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't just make stuff up to get someone you hate thrown off the ballot. He didn't incite an insurrection, hence he was never charged, nor was he convicted.

If you truly believe this, then you need to get news sources of information. The ones who lied to you about a stolen election, Seth rich and Vince foster are also lying to you about this.

From NPR, your favorite news source:

The U.S. Senate on Saturday acquitted former President Donald Trump on an impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection.

The acquittal comes more than a month after a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers were counting the electoral results that certified Trump's loss.

“Senate Acquits Trump In Impeachment Trial — Again”

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impeachment-trial-live-updates/2021/02/13/967098840/senate-acquits-trump-in-impeachment-trial-again

It wasn’t a court of law. It was a vote by partisan politicians, not neutral judges, to remove or not remove him from office based on his conduct and actions in that office. The vote neither absolved him from being guilty of those actions nor made a definitive judicial statement about the nature of his actions, only that the majority of senators from his own party decided not to remove him from office.

You can say the same thing about the House that voted to impeach him. And the J6 committee. Neither were courts of laws but highly partisan bodies. And it must also be admitted many courts are becoming highly partisan bodies themselves too, which is also disappointing. You can't accuse a certain court like SCOTUS of being partisan without acknowledging other courts are also highly partisan in favor of the Democrats. Nonetheless, regarding the Colorado court and many of the posts on here, it is worth noting on that count that the criminal indictment of Donald Trump over January 6, filed in Washington DC in the summer, did not include an insurrection charge — focusing instead on his ‘conspiracy to defraud the United States’ over the 2020 election.

The J6 committee was bi-partisan, no matter how much you want to claim the GOP members were somehow not GOP.

Snorts with laughter.

Pelosi handpicked the few Republicans on the committee and blocked the ones the GOP wanted to recommend. It was not bipartisan by any stretch of the imagination. All the Republicans on the committee (three?) were defeated in their subsequent primaries or redistricted out or didn't run again because they knew they would lose. Cheney herself was blown out in a hugely embarrassing defeat.

Hard to call that bipartisan when the Democrats blocked the Republicans from appointing their own preferred people to the committee. It was no more bipartisan than the Republicans' decision to shut down the committee once they took control of Congress. J6 was utterly and thoroughly partisan.