Colorado Secretary of State Thinks She's Smarter Than Everyone, Including All Nine Supreme Court Justices

[surada]

Meh, to me she sounded like the typical leftist dem asshole.

Quick facts
…
Born: October 2, 1984 (age 39 years), Toledo, OH
Party: Democratic Party
Office: Colorado Secretary of State since 2019
Education: Penn Carey Law (2002–2006), University of Pennsylvania, Estes Park High School

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

It's pretty simple. Let America decide on election day.

 

[1srelluc]

Quick facts
…
Born: October 2, 1984 (age 39 years), Toledo, OH
Party: Democratic Party
Office: Colorado Secretary of State since 2019
Education: Penn Carey Law (2002–2006), University of Pennsylvania, Estes Park High School

Yep, I looked that up before I made my post.....Over-educated Halfrican minion but dumber than a box of rocks in a practical sense.....The type of person that relishes in wasting everyone's time.

I don't know what it cost us for SCOTUS to kick her in the pussy but CO should be on the hook for the total cost.

 

[Burgermeister]

It's pretty simple. Let America decide on election day.

The Dems are saying that would be undemocratic.

 

[Burgermeister]

Quick facts
…
Born: October 2, 1984 (age 39 years), Toledo, OH
Party: Democratic Party
Office: Colorado Secretary of State since 2019
Education: Penn Carey Law (2002–2006), University of Pennsylvania, Estes Park High School

Is your point that Ivy League schools don't produce typical leftist dem assholes?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Phactotum is triggered bigly.

 

[Flash]

`Liberal in general and Democrats specifically don't know any more about the Constitution than they know about Economics, History, Biology, Climate Science or Ethics.

I am surprised as hell that the two dingbats and one DEI low IQ Negro on the Supreme Court got this one right.

 

[Concerned American]

Colorado Supreme Court is an official body

Without the authority to make the determination that there even was an insurrection (there wasn't) or to carry out this action according to the US constitution. SCOTUS made that clear.

The only things he escaped so far are the consequences, not the determinations.

The final decision has not been made. IOW The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

Well when your CFO admits to perjury before the appeals process really kicks off you kinda get the sense of how that one is going.

We'll see, won't we.

Like the erroneous one above where you claimed no official body has found him to be an insurrectionist?

Again, you are mistaken. CO had no authority to make that determination. So, no official body has made that determination.

No, I thought Roberts desire for a positive legacy would prevail.

So where is the blame for Sotomayor, Kagan and Brown-Jackson. Roberts is only one vote--I know democrats believe that one person, one vote only counts for republicans. 9-0!

You accept that, right?

Nope, not the highest court in the land--nor the appeals court.

 

[westwall]

The object of her effort always says and does Double Down. I think it is standard on both sides of the aisle, now.

She, as an individual, thought that her hatred of Trump was enough to deny the millions of citizens of her state the ability to choose for themselves, their president.

She is a traitor to the Constitution.

 

[Curried Goats]

Without the authority to make the determination that there even was an insurrection (there wasn't) or to carry out this action according to the US constitution. SCOTUS made that clear.

Who said they didn't have the authority to adjudicate him as an insurrectionist? That's not what SCOTUS said. What SCOTUS made clear is that whether or not Trump is an insurrectionist only Congress has the power to disqualify him. That's it. They didn't say Colorado was wrong in its finding that Trump is an insurrectionist, just that they lack the authority to do anything about it.

The final decision has not been made. IOW The fat lady hasn't sung yet.

We'll see, won't we.

Sure, you hold out hope. Again, his CFO just turned himself in for perjury.

Again, you are mistaken. CO had no authority to make that determination. So, no official body has made that determination.

No, you are mistaken. You don't even know what the SCOTUS ruling actually says.

So where is the blame for Sotomayor, Kagan and Brown-Jackson. Roberts is only one vote--I know democrats believe that one person, one vote only counts for republicans. 9-0!

Blame for what? I've tried to explain to you that legal opinions are just that, opinions. I don't have any blame for any of the Justices, just a better understanding of their legal reasoning. The liberal justices took this issue as an opportunity to weaken States rights and the Republican Justices, eager to pass on deciding whether Trump was an insurrectionist, punted the issue to Congress. What thus ruling actually does is take the issue if insurrection from the legal process to the political process. That means this ruling leaves out the far out possibility that a big liberal win in Congress could see Trump disqualified from Office, even if he wins the election. The new Congress gets sworn in on the third so they could potentially act in time to keep Trump from the presidency. Not that that is likely to happen, (a big liberal win in Congress that gives them the majority to act) I'm just explaining to you the legal implications of what SCOTUS has done.

Nope, not the highest court in the land--nor the appeals court.

So you don't believe any criminal conviction until all those appeals are exhausted?

What a silly, childish argument that no one believes. Until another court overrules the previous one, their ruling is the legal ruling. Your feelings need not apply.

 

[Independent thinker]

Just another sad, TDS-whipped leftoid. She believes in her own mind that she's the greatest Constitutional scholar ever.

Contrite, after losing 9-0? Not these types.

TDS is a horrible disease with no cure.

 

[AMart]

 

[Rawley]

Just another sad, TDS-whipped leftoid. She believes in her own mind that she's the greatest Constitutional scholar ever.

Contrite, after losing 9-0? Not these types.

Not every day you get bitch slapped by the Supreme Court. 9-0

 

[Concerned American]

Who said they didn't have the authority to adjudicate him as an insurrectionist?

The reciprocal of the US congress has the responsibility pretty much covers that. You're beginning to get triggered and running off the rails again. Come back when you settle down. I guess I was premature in deciding that you could be objective.

 

[marvin martian]

She did not sound contrite. Sounded like she took an oath to the constitution, gave her best shot and was overruled by highest court. So what? You were expecting some lame apology for doing her job as she saw it? What fantasy world are you from?

I can't imagine being so radicalized, you're far to the left of even Justices Jackson, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

 

[Curried Goats]

The reciprocal of the US congress has the responsibility pretty much covers that. You're beginning to get triggered and running off the rails again. Come back when you settle down. I guess I was premature in deciding that you could be objective.

I'm OK. Are you OK? This is like Trump being adjudicated a sexual assaulter in civil court. Just because they lacked the remedy to lock him up doesn't mean they aren't a legal body that found him to be a sexual assaulter. The Colorado Supreme Court is a real legal body that adjudicated Trump to be an insurrectionist and no higher court has found that judgement to be erroneous. SCOTUS punted on that issue. The Supreme Court only said that they lacked the ability to do anything about it, not that they were wrong about Trump being an insurrectionist, which they could have.

 

[White 6]

She, as an individual, thought that her hatred of Trump was enough to deny the millions of citizens of her state the ability to choose for themselves, their president.

She is a traitor to the Constitution.

No, I am pretty sure she took the action as attorney general, as not nearly the traitor to the constitution in actuality as trump. Her actions, far more legal than trump, trying to overthrow the election, after he lost it, and 62 court cases on the election.

 

[White 6]

I can't imagine being so radicalized, you're far to the left of even Justices Jackson, Sotomayor, and Kagan.

In what way? I accurately predicted they would not let one state control voting for the country, on their own, and I was not only correct, but made my prediction on here, when it first came out, they would hear the case.
You did notice, the breif from team trump wanted them to rule he was not guilty of insurrection, by they ignored it, 9 to nothing, to simply rule, some authority above state level had to make that decision, right? Gee, looks like we will hear testimony in the last 3 months to election day. Cool.

 

[AMart]

No, I am pretty sure she took the action as attorney general, as not nearly the traitor to the constitution in actuality as trump. Her actions, far more legal than trump, trying to overthrow the election, after he lost it, and 62 court cases on the election.

Her actions were 9-0 against. How is that far more legal than muh Trump? Trump didn't try to overthrow the election and neither did the protestors.

 

[White 6]

Her actions were 9-0 against. How is that far more legal than muh Trump? Trump didn't try to overthrow the election and neither did the protestors.

They refused to hear or rule on that. She would have liked them to rule on that also, but they would not rule on it for her either. This was simply, her state does not get to rule for the country. Kind of like, when they told Texas, they did not have standing to rule on other state's election procedures, when the Texas Attorney General thought he could throw his weight and opinion around.