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

[Synthaholic]

I think they'll agree with my position he had due process. Otherwise, they would have to ignore about a century and a half of precedence. I believe if they overturn this decision, it will be on grounds of the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to the president. Not on grounds he was denied due process.

If they do, they will be ignoring the evidence that CO SC uncovered, and that Alex Wagner broadcast: the actual words of the two Senators who wrote the 14th, Section 3.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Of course it matters. It matters because the Dems / Socialists are willing to lie, cheat and steal in order to subvert the electoral process.

It matters? Really?
Democrats are doing this?
While in reality it is Trump who is currently under indictment for lying, cheating and trying to subvert the electoral process?

 

[Robert W]

It includes all who have taken an oath of office.

The judges reviewed the amendment section 3 and all the correspondence among the writers of the amendment from back in the 1860s and how the term 'officers' was used freely and artisicly to include the president and vice president at the time, and the writers intent for the amendment section, and determined it clearly included the president, in order to meet the writer's goal and intent for the amendment...

Here is what pisses me off.
1. Al Gore declared he won the election vs Bush. Gore was never prosecuted.
2. Hillary Clinton still insists she won the election vs Trump. Hillary never had to hire a lawyer to defend her.
3. Trump declared he won and he is being tried in courts with the intent to put him in prison.

Do you see something wrong in that?

 

[Hollie]

No, that was Trump. He was willing to lie, cheat and steal to take the election in 2020.

Dems didnt lie in their case. They argued that Trump is responsible for the riot and that constituted insurrection. The court agreed.

What Dems / Socialists argued that Trump was responsible for a riot that constituted an insurrection? Was that argument presented in court?

I’ve been hoping the TDS addled could identify when Trump or anyone else was charged with insurrection™ Or, do we assume Dem / Socialist appointees can now decide that people are guilty of a crime without due process?

 

[Hollie]

It matters? Really?
Democrats are doing this?
While in reality it is Trump who is currently under indictment for lying, cheating and trying to subvert the electoral process?

Really? Did you read on the interweb?

 

[Robert W]

If they do, they will be ignoring the evidence that CO SC uncovered, and that Alex Wagner broadcast: the actual words of the two Senators who wrote the 14th, Section 3.

A lot of citizens who want illegal drugs to be made legal, however that is, want Trump put into prison though he did not commit crimes. Strange bunch of citizens.

 

[Synthaholic]

When was the trial date?

December 6, 2023

Colorado Supreme Court hears arguments in Trump 14th Amendment case - Colorado Newsline

In a two-hour hearing, the justices of the Colorado Supreme Court challenged both sides about a wide range of legal issues raised by the case.

coloradonewsline.com

 

[Robert W]

What Dems / Socialists argued that Trump was responsible for a riot that constituted an insurrection? Was that argument presented in court?

I’ve been hoping the TDS addled could identify when Trump or anyone else was charged with insurrection™ Or, do we assume Dem / Socialist appointees can now decide that people are guilty of a crime without due process?

I am with you on that Hollie. I would say democrats are crazy because of their hypocrisy.

 

[Marener]

What Dems / Socialists argued that Trump was responsible for a riot that constituted an insurrection? Was that argument presented in court?

I’ve been hoping the TDS addled could identify when Trump or anyone else was charged with insurrection™ Or, do we assume Dem / Socialist appointees can now decide that people are guilty of a crime without due process?

Yes, the argument was presented in court.

Trump wasn't charged with insurrection. Everyone knows that. He's not criminally convicted. He's not going to jail for insurrection.

But he can't be on the ballot for now.

 

[Faun]

Are you ever not a Dumbfuck? Ever?

Assault Incidents and Officers/Agents Assaulted

Securing America's Borders

www.cbp.gov

Oh, Dumbfuck? Are you asserting that was insurrection?

 

[Hollie]

Yes, the argument was presented in court.

Trump wasn't charged with insurrection. Everyone knows that. He's not criminally convicted. He's not going to jail for insurrection.

But he can't be on the ballot for now.

Trump wasn’t charged with insurrection™ but that argument was presented in court?

Seems strange that a defendant would need to defend himself in court against a crime he wasn’t charged with.

 

[Marener]

Trump wasn’t charged with insurrection™ but that argument was presented in court?

Seems strange that a defendant would need to defend himself in court against a crime he wasn’t charged with.

Yep. He wasn't charged with insurrection, but the argument was presented in court. Sorry if this is too complicated for you.

 

[Faun]

Do you think Republicans filed this action? Can you name them? I can name the group of democrat donors that actually filed the lawsuit. They are

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington helped bring the lawsuit against former President Trump on behalf of 6 voters.​

Did you know this? If not why not?

Imbecile...

Colorado Supreme Court bars Trump from ballot - CREW | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

www.citizensforethics.org

WASHINGTON—Donald Trump is disqualified from serving as president and barred from appearing on ballots for president in Colorado under the 14th Amendment, according to a Colorado Supreme Court ruling issued today in a case brought on behalf of six Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the firms Tierney Lawrence Stiles LLC, KBN Law, LLC and Olson Grimsley Kawanabe Hinchcliff & Murray LLC.​

 

[Hollie]

Yep. He wasn't charged with insurrection, but the argument was presented in court. Sorry if this is too complicated for you.

Sorry if the legal process is complicated for you. Courts deal with specific charges. That’s part of due process. Were arguments also presented about Trump posting tweets that hurt the feelings of Dems / Socialists?

 

[Faun]

It’s in your earlier post. Do you forget what you post after falling down and bumping your head?

Quote me saying he was on trial for insurrection...

You do realize a trial for insurrection would be a criminal trial, right? And this was not that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Not really. The popular view is that proof of guilt or conviction is not required. Opinion is all that's necessary.

After listening to many lawyers, judges, professors and scholars, the Supreme Court will gut the entire provision. Democrats are already looking at using the same argument against other Republicans running for office. We are indeed looking at the end of the two party system and the imposition of tyranny.

I said nothing of a criminal conviction.

Evidence is still required for civil ruling. The evidentiary standard is the preponderance of evidence. The only opinion is when the judge rules whether or not the plaintiffs met that standard.

 

[Faun]

So he is not guilty.

Got it.

Of course he's not guilty. No one is found guilty in a civil trial. Don't you even know the basics, Dumbfuck?

 

[Faun]

I said nothing of a criminal conviction.

Evidence is still required for civil ruling. The evidentiary standard is the preponderance of evidence. The only opinion is when the judge rules whether or not the plaintiffs met that standard.

These freaks literally have no idea what they're arguing about.

 

[Lisa558]

Yes, the argument was presented in court.

Trump wasn't charged with insurrection. Everyone knows that. He's not criminally convicted. He's not going to jail for insurrection.

But he can't be on the ballot for now.

Well why not? He wasn’t even charged with insurrection. He certainly wasn’t convicted of of it. But four leftwing Democrat judges THINK he’s an insurrectionist, and he’s being punished for it.

You think that’s in keeping with American’s values? If so, I say we get four rightwing judges to say they THINK you incited a murder, and toss your butt in prison - without a trial.

In America, we do not punish people for crimes they’re not even charged with - even if they’re a Republican you don’t like.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The intent of the actual authors was not to have Confederates in office.

Nope. Insurrection or rebellion.
Section 3 never once mentions confederates.