Election Interference: Here are the Four Colorado Justices Who Voted to Exclude Donald Trump from the 2024 Ballot

[otto105]

Let's discuss this AFTER you digest the article. There was no suppression attempt, just a factual information form of campaigning.

Very much a voter suppression operation when the dude brags about efforts to do so.

 

[BS Filter]

And?

So try Trump on insurrection with a jury. Dumb fuck.

 

[BS Filter]

By "facist," you mean in accordance with existing precedence.

No. I mean your words. You're a fascist.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So you don’t know.

I just told you.
Do you have something more to offer?
Don’t be shy.

 

[otto105]

Let's discuss this AFTER you digest the article. There was no suppression attempt, just a factual information form of campaigning.

Sure, this from a guy who served as a fake elector for the humper in state.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You just don't realize how totally fucking stupid you sound.

I’m sure reality is often unsettling to you as you seldom seem to hear it.

 

[BS Filter]

What about it? You need to be more specific.

Not my fault you're stupid.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

So try Trump on insurrection with a jury. Dumb fuck.

Why?
It’s already done.
You try it on, Shirley.

 

[Lesh]

Sure, this from a guy who served as a fake elector for the humper in state.

Robert!!!!

Did you do that?

And you claimed not to be a Trumper

Lying fuck

 

[BS Filter]

Why?
It’s already done.
You try it on, Shirley.

Spoken like a true fascist. I'm gonna thoroughly enjoy it when the US Supreme Court knocks you fuckers down.

 

[Leo123]

I just told you.
Do you have something more to offer?
Don’t be shy.

No, you referred to a court that has no specific evidence of Trump doing anything wrong. You blindly believe because of your silly TDS.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Spoken like a true fascist. I'm gonna thoroughly enjoy it when the US Supreme Court knocks you fuckers down.

You do you.

 

[Lesh]

No, you referred to a court that has no specific evidence of Trump doing anything wrong. You blindly believe because of your silly TDS.

They don’t? I believe they said they reviewed Trump’s action on Jan 6 and before and that informed their ruling

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No, you referred to a court that has no specific evidence of Trump doing anything wrong. You blindly believe because of your silly TDS.

Strange you would say that.
Obviously they do as three separate courts all ruled they did. If they hadn’t, SCOTUS wouldn’t be tee’d up to rule on it.

 

[Leo123]

They don’t? I believe they said they reviewed Trump’s action on Jan 6 and before and that informed their ruling

So, they had no real evidence of any wrong doing.

 

[BS Filter]

They don’t? I believe they said they reviewed Trump’s action on Jan 6 and before and that informed their ruling

Their opinion is unconstitutional. You still don't understand why, do you.

 

[BS Filter]

You do you.

The Constitution. Not personal opinion.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The Constitution. Not personal opinion.

You are hilarious in how you can’t follow your own post from literally just a few minutes ago.
You are off topic from your own post.

 

[BS Filter]

You are hilarious in how you can’t follow your own post from literally just a few minutes ago.
You are off topic from your own post.

Nope. 4 judges declared Trump guilty of insurrection without due process. Remember that when your decision gets slammed.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Nope. 4 judges declared Trump guilty of insurrection without due process. Remember that when your decision gets slammed.

So… appealing it all the way to the Supreme Court involved no process?