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

[Faun]

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…..

I suspect the SCOTUS will overturn that given there's already been a SCOTUS decision that ruled officers of the United States are appointed positions, not elected.

 

[Faun]

Great precedent. Convicted without any trial.

These judges should all be impeached.

Of what was he convicted?

 

[Slade3200]

I suspect the SCOTUS will overturn that given there's already been a SCOTUS decision that ruled officers of the United States are appointed positions, not elected.

When did SCOTUS make that ruling?

 

[tyroneweaver]

It was a Supreme Court ruling. Over 200 pages. Did you read them? Sounds like you’re making a lazy dismissal calling it all Political

ya I'm sure 200 pages makes it all right

 

[Slade3200]

ya I'm sure 200 pages makes it all right

I Didn't say it did. But it shows that theres plenty of detail and explanation supporting the decision. Have you looked at it or are you just trusting the medias interpretation of it?

 

[Faun]

When did SCOTUS make that ruling?

Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Bd., 561 U.S. 477 (2010)

Petitioners also challenged the Act under the Appointments Clause, which requires “Officers of the United States” to be appointed by the President with the Senate’s advice and consent.

[...]

The people do not vote for the “Officers of the United States.” Art. II, §2, cl. 2.

Article II, Section 2, clause 2

He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law

 

[Nostra]

Does somebody need to be convicted of insurrection for the amendment to apply to them? I don’t think that how the amendment is written. Where would they need to be charged and convicted?

So you think it’s right to find someone guilty of a crime with no trial.

How fascist of you.

 

[maybelooking]

ive never wanted Trump to be POTUS again more in my life. At this point even if I thought he sucked and would do a terrible job I would want him to win just to see the reaction from the idiot leftists in this country!! Trump will be awesome, just like the first time. He will get things back to the way they were before covid. But the reaction of the libs will be beyond comical.

 

[SeaMajor7]

The Stalinist Struggle is REAL......


really PATHETIC!!!!

 

[wamose]

There is no election interference. The election will be held. Republicans will be on the ballot.

Democrats know they can't beat Trump, and rightfully so. That's why the Democrat party decided to direct the Colorado SC to throw a monkey wrench into the Trump election. This election fraud is being done on a national scale. Colorado was chosen to be the battleground because the braindead stoners that live there are easily manipulated. In the end, all Colorado is doing is making themselves look like clueless, Marxist assholes with no common sense or understanding of the US constitution. Back to MAGA

 

[Nostra]

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

You are quite the fascist.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

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

well, what are you waiting for, why are you not there doing it yourself?

 

[22lcidw]

You can almost sense that these judges were spoken to y their master's and fellow Prog Socialists to do this. Of course, the beauty of the Prog hive mind is they think near identical in these things. We used to have Democratic politicians who were on the conservative, moderate and left-wing sides of their party. Now they are radicals to the left of left.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

No they didn't.

"The 14th Amendment was part of the “Reconstruction Amendments” that were ratified following the Civil War. It was passed to prohibit former Confederate military and political leaders from holding high federal or state office. These men had clearly taken part in a rebellion against the United States: the Civil War. That makes it all the more absurd that a left-wing group in Colorado is asking a federal court to disqualify the 45th President on the same grounds, equating his speech to rebellion against the United States.

And there’s another legal problem: Trump is not a former “officer of the United States,” as that term is used in the Constitution, meaning Section 3 does not apply. As the Supreme Court explained in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010), an “officer of the United States” is someone appointed by the President to aid him in his duties under Article II, Section 2. The term does not apply to elected officials, and certainly not to the President himself. “

BS.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

The president took an oath January 20 2017.



Trump violated the oath.

Trump makes fresh bid to toss Georgia election ...​

The Hill
https://thehill.com › regulation › court-battles › 43660...
2 days ago — Attorneys for former President Trump on Monday formally asked a judge to toss Trump's Georgia 2020 election criminal racketeering case on ...

Trump fake elector scheme: where do seven states' ...​

The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com › us-news › oct › trump...
Oct 22, 2023 — Several states are investigating the scheme created by Trump allies to cast fake electoral votes in 2020 election.

 

[Hollie]

Some really good information...

Takeaways from Colorado’s historic ruling that Trump is ineligible for office based on 14th Amendment’s ‘insurrectionist ban’​

Information showing the failures of the Dem / Socialist clown show in Colorado.

 

[Seymour Flops]

This nonsense will go to the Supremes quickly, and will be overturned, likely summarily (or whatever the USSC calls it when they don't even need to hear arguments). Then the wokesters will cry until their mascara runs into their five o'clock shadows about the "Trump Court."

 

[Father O'Blivion]

ive never wanted Trump to be POTUS again more in my life. At this point even if I thought he sucked and would do a terrible job I would want him to win just to see the reaction from the idiot leftists in this country!! Trump will be awesome, just like the first time. He will get things back to the way they were before covid. But the reaction of the libs will be beyond comical.

Spoken like a true patriot.

 

[kyzr]

BS.

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office​

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The president took an oath January 20 2017. Trump violated the oath.

Who said Trump engaged in insurrection? Did Jack Smith? NO. Did the US Senate during the impeachment trial? NO

So Trump did NOT engage in any "insurrection", period. The CO vote was 4-3, so its a very weak claim and needs to be overturned.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Who said Trump engaged in insurrection? Did Jack Smith? NO. Did the US Senate during the impeachment trial? NO

So Trump did NOT engage in any "insurrection", period. The CO vote was 4-3, so its a very weak claim and needs to be overturned.

'"or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof"..

 

[kyzr]

'"or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof"..

So who besides these 4 judges said that Trump engaged in an insurrection?

Trump is entitled to what we call "due process" in a court of LAW.