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

[Slade3200]

ORLY?...When did Trump stand in a Colorado court, or any other one for that matter, under that charge?

Colorado state can’t charge Trump with a federal crime.

Congress impeached him for it but the senate kicked it with the excuse that it was a case for the courts

 

[Slade3200]

Because it is clearly unconstitutional.

Duh....

How so?

 

[BluesLegend]

This isn't vigilantism, it is outright election interference.

These are the end times of the Dem party, RINO's and the corrupt Washington establishment. It's clear the American people have had enough of this shit and are about to clean house. A bunch of the rats in congress have already fled. The people have sent multiple House speakers packing. The corruption, bribes, selling out America for personal gain is surfacing.

My fellow Americans, hold on tight we will emerge from this stronger and greater than we ever have been. MAGA!!!!!!!!!

 

[BluesLegend]

This isn't vigilantism, it is outright election interference.

I love the arrogance of these shit stains. That will make our victory all the sweeter.

 

[Arlette]

Okay my fellow MAGAs and law abiding citizens. Should they be given the treatment like Kavanaugh and Amy Barrett got outside their homes by radical leftists? They've been identified. They've committed treachery!

Election Interference: Here are the Four Colorado Justices Who Voted to Exclude Donald Trump from the 2024 Ballot | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

The unelected justices of the Colorado Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the people of Colorado cannot vote for former President Donald Trump on the ballot for the 2024 presidential election.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Jim Hoft doesn't know. Somebody should club him like a fucking seal.

 

[excalibur]

Why would it apply to every officer who has sworn an oath except the Office of the President?

The President is not an officer.

Is the President an “Officer of the United States” for Purposes of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment? — NYU Journal of Law & Liberty

www.nyujll.com

 

[excalibur]

Anyone who goes on MSNBC is a failure. Luttig has no idea what he's talking about.

He seems either senile or controlled by the deep state.

Since SCOTUS has already ruled c.2010 that the President is not an officer, and since the President is not listed in Section 3, what the ell can one think about Luttig other than the above?

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

He seems either senile or controlled by the deep state.

Since SCOTUS has already ruled c.2010 that the President is not an officer, and since the President is not listed in Section 3, what the ell can one think about Luttig other than the above?

Precisely, excalibur! Luttig is most likely both of what you say above but he's definitely confused on this. I didn't think he thought this all through.

 

[Mac-7]

I understand playing the lefts game the same as they do, but not at someone’s house…

If the left does it - and they do - then the other side will do it too

 

[Mac1958]

What do you think? Should they be tormented outside their homes?

You know the answer to that. And, no doubt, they'd like to see worse.

I guess we'll see.

 

[Slade3200]

You know the answer to that. And, no doubt, they'd like to see worse.

I guess we'll see.

I like to see them say it out loud

 

[Mac1958]

I like to see them say it out loud

They're getting closer by the day, just as they're getting closer to telling us that they want their own Pinochet-type dictator.

They cheer when their Orange Lamb of God™ talks like one, so it's coming. I do wish they'd just get it over with.

 

[the watcher]

 

[Faun]

200 pages can't paper over the fact that he hasn't even been charged with insurrection, let alone convicted.

Punish first, then let the law shake it all out, right uncle Josef?

Doesn't have to be charged or convicted. There's precedent where Confederate leaders, never charged, were denied a seat for public office.

 

[Faun]

I’d love to debate the merits of the decision if anybody is up to it

I will.

The 3rd paragraph of the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to a president. The president is not an officer of the United States.

 

[Slade3200]

They're getting closer by the day, just as they're getting closer to telling us that they want their own Pinochet-type dictator.

They cheer when their Orange Lamb of God™ talks like one, so it's coming. I do wish they'd just get it over with.

If it walks like a cult and talks like a cult…

 

[Slade3200]

I will.

The 3rd paragraph of the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to a president. The president is not an officer of the United States.

This is how the CO Supreme Court saw it…

When interpreting the Constitution, we prefer a phrase's normal and ordinary usage over "secret or technical meanings that would not have been known to ordinary citizens in the founding generation."District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 577 (2008). Dictionaries from the time of the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification define "office" as a "particular duty, charge or trust conferred by public authority, and for a public purpose," that is "undertaken by . . . authority from government or those who administer it." Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language 689 (Chauncey A. Goodrich ed., 1853); see also 5 Johnson's English Dictionary 646 (J.E. Worcester ed., 1859) (defining "office" as "a publick charge or employment; magistracy");United States v. Maurice, 26 F. Cas. 1211, 1214 (C.C.D. Va. 1823) (No. 15,747) ("An office is defined to be 'a public charge or employment,' . . . ."). The Presidency falls comfortably within these definitions…..

 

[Faun]

Pure evil. Just let Trump run and let the voters decide. Or else democracy dies.

Democracy was attacked by Trump who tried to steal the election he lost. Really, for that alone he should be ineligible.

 

[excalibur]

Precisely, excalibur! Luttig is most likely both of what you say above but he's definitely confused on this. I didn't think he thought this all through.

TDS claims another victim in Luttig.

 

[Mac1958]

This is how the CO Supreme Court saw it…

When interpreting the Constitution, we prefer a phrase's normal and ordinary usage over "secret or technical meanings that would not have been known to ordinary citizens in the founding generation."District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 577 (2008). Dictionaries from the time of the Fourteenth Amendment's ratification define "office" as a "particular duty, charge or trust conferred by public authority, and for a public purpose," that is "undertaken by . . . authority from government or those who administer it." Noah Webster, An American Dictionary of the English Language 689 (Chauncey A. Goodrich ed., 1853); see also 5 Johnson's English Dictionary 646 (J.E. Worcester ed., 1859) (defining "office" as "a publick charge or employment; magistracy");United States v. Maurice, 26 F. Cas. 1211, 1214 (C.C.D. Va. 1823) (No. 15,747) ("An office is defined to be 'a public charge or employment,' . . . ."). The Presidency falls comfortably within these definitions…..

... and their lives are now in danger.

We'll see if the Manson Girls succeed. If the Supreme Court dumps this ruling -- and I suspect that group will -- maybe that would take some heat off.