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

[Slade3200]

Have you read the dissent? One of the justices said that in 33 years on the bench he never saw such a travesty. There will be plenty of advisory briefs against the ruling, including from justices on the case. None in support.

The grounds, as stated in the dissent was that the trial was completely unfair and Trump was denied due process all throughout the trial. The reason is simply to stop people from voting for him.

Can you give an example of how Trump was denied due process?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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

“Election Interference”

That’s a lie.

The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling is perfectly warranted and Constitutional.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Can you give an example of how Trump was denied due process?

You should do your own research. That works better than anything I could tell you. After all I was not there. Those that were there have plenty to say.

Dissenting Judge on CO Supreme Court Says Trump Denied Due Process, ‘Like Nothing I’ve Seen in 33 Years’.

Dissenting justices on the Colorado Supreme Court have warned the court's decision to remove Donald Trump from the state primary ballot for "insurrection"

thenationalpulse.com

Perhaps you could contact this justice. A clerk could probably help you.

 

[Slade3200]

You should do your own research. That works better than anything I could tell you. After all I was not there. Those that were there have plenty to say.

Dissenting Judge on CO Supreme Court Says Trump Denied Due Process, ‘Like Nothing I’ve Seen in 33 Years’.

Dissenting justices on the Colorado Supreme Court have warned the court's decision to remove Donald Trump from the state primary ballot for "insurrection"

thenationalpulse.com

Perhaps you could contact this justice. A clerk could probably help you.

I thought you and I were having a good exchange. When you stop backing up your points and tell me to go research thats giving up on the argument. Are you done?

 

[Faun]

Perhaps they couldn't and that's why the provision was never used. Someone wrote this as a good idea at the time. Yet it could never be actually used.

False. It was used.

The precedent for 14th Amendment disqualification - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.

www.citizensforethics.org

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.​

 

[Faun]

That link says 4 leftist hacks, not "Colorado".

Dumbfuck, theirs is the 2nd highest voice for the state on legal matters.

 

[Faun]

Once again you can't show where I said any such thing. You have to make it up, liar.

Nope, I showed that you couldn't defend your idiocy because your position was utter bullshit.

 

[Faun]

Which ones ran for office? Got any names?

No names. See post #1387

 

[EvilCat Breath]

False. It was used.

The precedent for 14th Amendment disqualification - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.

www.citizensforethics.org

​

At least eight public officials have been formally adjudicated to be disqualified and barred from public office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment since its ratification in 1868.​

Never used against a presidential candidate.

 

[Faun]

Have you read the dissent? One of the justices said that in 33 years on the bench he never saw such a travesty. There will be plenty of advisory briefs against the ruling, including from justices on the case. None in support.

The grounds, as stated in the dissent was that the trial was completely unfair and Trump was denied due process all throughout the trial. The reason is simply to stop people from voting for him.

You know this ruling was nearly the conclusion to a trial, right?

 

[Faun]

Never used against a presidential candidate.

Office doesn't matter. It's beyond nuts to assert an insurrectionist or supporter can become president of the United States when their ineligible just to be an elector for P/VP.

And besides, you claimed it had never been used. It has been and a conviction for insurrection was not needed.

 

[Nostra]

Dumbfuck, theirs is the 2nd highest voice for the state on legal matters.

So? 4 people, not Colorado, Simp.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Office doesn't matter. It's beyond nuts to assert an insurrectionist or supporter can become president of the United States when their ineligible just to be an elector for P/VP.

Nevertheless, there is substantial opinion that this provision cannot be used against an elected president. Your personal feelings don't count.

 

[Nostra]

Nope, I showed that you couldn't defend your idiocy because your position was utter bullshit.

Hmmmm…..still can’t quote me, huh.

FAIL!

 

[Faun]

So? 4 people, not Colorado, Simp.

They speak for their state on legal matters.

 

[Slade3200]

Never used against a presidential candidate.

Did you read the article?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

An accusation? No actions, facts, events… just like confederate officials in a civil war. No need for a criminal conviction to disqualify them per the 14th amendment. It was their actions and participation in rebellion.

Because they were uniform wearing combatants in an opposing army. Which is why two presidents issued blanket pardons and no Confederate was ever tried for treason.

 

[Faun]

Nevertheless, there is substantial opinion that this provision cannot be used against an elected president. Your personal feelings don't count.

Well now your abandoning your defense from, the 14th Amendment can't be used in this case because it was never used before ... to ... the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to the president anyway.

 

[Faun]

Hmmmm…..still can’t quote me, huh.

FAIL!

I quoted you NOT defending your bullshit claim.

 

[Nostra]

I quoted you NOT defending your bullshit claim.

How does one quote someone not saying something? You are a raving lunatic.