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

[beautress]

I suspect you are correct. The only question really is if they rule on the 14th not applying to the POTUS or if not being found guilty in a criminal court means it does not apply

To show how dirty political behavior is, the Colorado dirge was picked up out of the sewer by the great state of Pelosi California to do as much damage to the election process as possible:

California Lt. Gov. calls for state to ‘explore every legal option’ to remove Trump from ‘24 ballot

Eleni Kounalakis said California 'must stand on the right side of history' when it comes to removing Trump from the state's ballots

www.foxnews.com

​

The trouble with allowing election interference against conservative America, is that turnabout is possible that the next up could be a really good liberal candidate getting the fartish little deal as they gave to a Conservative by making up another "good for me but not for thee."
Laws should be built upon stopping wrongs, not multiplying them with unequal tolerance of one over the other. A court that finds the victim of illegitimate politics not guilty of the lying claim, it must be considered exoneration. Otherwise, unequal justice is no justice at all if the left can pull it off against the right and vice-versa.

 

[beautress]

Tell your orange boy, to STOP STALLING AND DELAYING his court trial dates....

Just as long as your deep staters stop their crummy lies to malign a man who has been found innocent time after time, innocent inquiry after inquiry, innocent fake impeachment after fake impeachment imposed upon the innocent man by power-hungry, insane deep state creepsisters and creepbrothers. This whole bullshit pie is as ridiculous as the self-serving, phrase "Justice for ME but not for thee."

 

[Cellblock2429]

Criminal charges are not Required to bar someone from running for public office under the fourteenth amendment. It can be done purely on a civil basis. A lawsuit was filed by citizens of colorado to remove him from the ballot under the fourteenth amendment. And their state supreme court Rules in their favor. It does not matter whether or not he was ever charged or convicted.
Just like it didn't matter of that none of the Members of congos who were removed for their part in the confederacy, wherever convicted of a crime.

/——/ Better read this first, Spanky, before you celebrate anymore.

What Colorado's Supreme Court refuses to understand about Trump and the 14th Amendment

On Tuesday, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a decision to block former President Trump from the ballot in the 2024 election.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Cellblock2429]

Just as long as your deep staters stop their crummy lies to malign a man who has been found innocent time after time, innocent inquiry after inquiry, innocent fake impeachment after fake impeachment imposed upon the innocent man by power-hungry, insane deep state creepsisters and creepbrothers. This whole bullshit pie is as ridiculous as the self-serving, phrase "Justice for ME but not for thee."

/——/ We understand democRATs can’t win in the arena of ideas. All they can do is seize power by force.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The Colorado court used evidence THEY ADMIT IS HEARSAY.

Trump was not convicted of sedition.

This is a legal and criminal infraction.

NO CONVICTION FOR TRUMP. THEREFORE THE DECISION IS BULLSHIT.


How exactly did the lower court determine Trump committed sedition or insurrection? Where can we see or read about the criminal court case against Trump for sedition?

 

[ThisIsMe]

The law suit filed was the charge and the civil trial was held. Evidence was heard, a defense was mounted and Trump was found to have engaged in insurrection.
As a result he was adjudicated to be ineligible to be on the CO ballot for president.

It was the Colorado Supreme Court. There was no “trial”. There was a representative for those seeking to remove him and a representative for those against that. Much like the USSC, arguments were heard and the COSC took those arguments and made a decision. There was no jury, there were no witnesses, there was no “trial”. There was no charge of insurrection under the appropriate statute.

It was simply a group of activists saying “trump committed insurrection!”, the COSC agreed.

Once again, NOBODY has been charged with 18 US 2383, NOBODY has been charged with insurrection…WHY?? Why is it that the relevant statute is one they WONT charge him with? Again, if it’s a clear and cut case, WHY is nobody being charged with it? All they have to do is just file a charge against trump under 2383, have the trial and get a conviction. That should be easy for the left to do, since every day they say he is guilty of insurrection. The only thing I can figure is, they know they can’t get a conviction on that that will hold up on appeal, so they are going for other charges, and trying to work around the system to achieve disqual.

 

[Curried Goats]

/——/ We understand democRATs can’t win in the arena of ideas. All they can do is seize power by force.

You people are hopelessly ignorant. Trying to seize power is what got your boy disqualified. The Supreme Court of Colorado is the final legal say for the laws in the state of Colorado just as the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of Constitutionality at the federal level. When Trump didn't get the relief he wanted from them he decided to engage in a fraudulent election scheme and then a violent insurrection. You Bingos are similarly invited to fuck around and find out.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

So if Trump was convicted of insurrection, what was his punishment? HINT: She let him remain on the ballot.

WTF, retard?
WHERE in my reply, states that Trump was convicted of insurrection?
Trump doesn't have to be convicted of insurrection, read the comments.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The trouble with allowing election interference against conservative America

what does this have to do with the OP. Neither Trump nor any of his followers are conservatives

 

[Frankenstein]

I'm afraid all thinking people disagree with you.

No all people looking to disqualify a former President from running again disagree, because he will expose them!

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

Great precedent. Convicted without any trial.

These judges should all be impeached.

we need to post their addresses, call their offices, have gangs of people screaming and marching in front of their homes

 

[Cellblock2429]

You people are hopelessly ignorant. Trying to seize power is what got your boy disqualified. The Supreme Court of Colorado is the final legal say for the laws in the state of Colorado just as the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of Constitutionality at the federal level. When Trump didn't get the relief he wanted from them he decided to engage in a fraudulent election scheme and then a violent insurrection. You Bingos are similarly invited to fuck around and find out.

/——-/ You create scandal out of thin air with zero proof.

 

[ColonelAngus]

This should be a 9-0 or 8-1 decision by SCOTUS.

Colorado had to make shit up.

THEY USED ADMITTED HEARSAY IN THE DECISION.

 

[Cellblock2429]

WTF, retard?
WHERE in my reply, states that Trump was convicted of insurrection?
Trump doesn't have to be convicted of insurrection, read the comments.

/—-/ So you’d be ok with every Red state barring any democRAT from the ballot based on an unproven accusation? Maybe you want that chaos to destroy our electoral process.

 

[Curried Goats]

/——-/ You create scandal out of thin air with zero proof.

What scandal? A court ruled. Try not to be an emotional bitch about it.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

/—-/ So you’d be ok with every Red state barring any democRAT from the ballot based on an unproven accusation?

Sure.....................give it a shot.

Maybe you want that chaos to destroy our electoral process.

Like the teabagger congress is doing?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Sure.....................give it a shot.

Like the teabagger congress is doing?

/——/ At least the Republicans have actual evidence. democRAT Congress not so much.

 

[Cellblock2429]

What scandal? A court ruled. Try not to be an emotional bitch about it.

/—-/ They ruled on unproven accusations and didn’t even have the balls to sign it.

 

[Curried Goats]

/—-/ They ruled on unproven accusations and didn’t even have the balls to sign it.

The 14th Amendment doesn't say anything at all about a person needing to be convicted of anything. They found that the President engaged in insurrection and that this bars him from holding office under section 3 of the 14th Amendment. They wrote a ruling over a hundred and twenty pages long defending that ruling. As I said, feel free to be a bitch about it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Only the house and Senate can give permission to reinstate an insurrectionists to office....

Otherwise the house and Senate are not involved in section 3.

Well dumbass why does section 3 specify the house and Senate?
Furthermore no insurrection accord in the state of Colorado l. The supposed event happened in federal property 2000 miles from Colorado