The Constitution Prohibits Trump From Ever Being President Again

[Libby von H]

SHIT PANTS IT is a legal finding my small worm friend, the Colorado supreme court decided that he Trump cant be on the ballet because he is guilty of being a insurrectionist, which of course we all know that already. THat small worm says it is a legal derision. You idiots think you can come up with a fake version of a law and then think you can demand that the courts have to abide by your fake definition. That shows what a pile of shit you people are made of , doesn't it.

CO has been rebuked several times for illegal actions by the SCOTUS. Keep up with things

 

[Delldude]

Trump cant be on the ballet because he is guilty of being a insurrectionist

To be found guilty of insurrection, Trump would have to have been impeached on charges of insurrection in the house and convicted in senate.....then criminally charged after leaving office.

A civil court finding the president guilty of violating federal law is quite laughable.....

He supports people who forced their way into the capital and shit on the floors and he support a candidate that shits his pants, wears diapers and doesn't ever change them, He stinks so bad that he is like standing next to a open sewer.

You shouldn't be posting after a night of drinking....you suddenly became a good boy.............and now reverted back to your old self....

Oh, and thank you for the kind words.

 

[Dagosa]

Don't let patently false statements stand. CO has no right at all. Constitution gives that right to the Feds.
Despite what Tobfranksays, we are dual citizens, of state and Federal jurisdiction
BTW Lincoln won the Presidence BECAUSE he had been struck illegally off state ballots

Read section 3 amendment 14 in its entirety. Read it….

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.”

Simply put, states have the right and the obligation to enforce election laws within their borders, even when they involve federal electors. Read the FEDERAL guidelines given to states for national elections.

Election Management Guidelines | U.S. Election Assistance Commission

www.eac.gov

 

[Faun]

To be found guilty of insurrection, Trump would have to have been impeached on charges of insurrection in the house and convicted in senate.....then criminally charged after leaving office.

A civil court finding the president guilty of violating federal law is quite laughable.....


You shouldn't be posting after a night of drinking....you suddenly became a good boy.............and now reverted back to your old self....

Oh, and thank you for the kind words.

Not at all true. Impeachment is not required to file legal charges. And a criminal conviction is not needed to prevail in civil court. See: Goldman v. Simpson

 

[Delldude]

Impeachment is not required to file legal charges.

True, I showed the standard in the COTUS for a sitting president.

In this case insurrection has to be proven in federal court via indictment to file criminal charges.

In this specific case there is/was no evidence to show 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that Trump had committed an act of insurrection, or DOJ would have gone after Him.

Saying He did doesn't cut it.

See: Goldman v. Simpson

Two totally different scenarios.

 

[Concerned American]

SHIT PANTS IT is a legal finding my small worm friend, the Colorado supreme court decided that he Trump cant be on the ballet because he is guilty of being a insurrectionist, which of course we all know that already. THat small worm says it is a legal derision. You idiots think you can come up with a fake version of a law and then think you can demand that the courts have to abide by your fake definition. That shows what a pile of shit you people are made of , doesn't it.

Before you start lecturing on election law, it would be advisable to learn the difference between a BALLOT and a dance.

 

[Dagosa]

True, I showed the standard in the COTUS for a sitting president.

In this case insurrection has to be proven in federal court via indictment to file criminal charges.

In this specific case there is/was no evidence to show 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that Trump had committed an act of insurrection, or DOJ would have gone after Him.

Saying He did doesn't cut it.


Two totally different scenarios.

You showed nothing. Pretty much what you always don’t.
not only does amendment 14 section 3 apply to federal electors, which are chosen by the state, they apply to state officials as well. The state is answerable to the federal govt.
Obviously
you can’t read the entire section 3 A14, Trump had a hearing and he was adjudged ineligible just like state courts do for a plethora of both civil and criminal offenses.

 

[Delldude]

Trump had a hearing and he was adjudged ineligible just like state courts do for a plethora of both civil and criminal offenses.

Blah blah blah.....looky here, another FEDERAL JUDGE rules plaintiff lacks standing.

You better get used to this as it will be the way it rolls at SCOTUS.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot​

In its ruling, the District Court said "Because Castro does not have standing to challenge Trump’s eligibility to run for president, the Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on the merits of this case."

The district court also cited dismissals for lack of standing in several other federal courts where Castro had filed similar suits.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot

 

[WorldWatcher]

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24355318/castro-trump-us-district-court-nv-decision.pdf

For anyone that wants to read the full decision and just not point fingers saying none of the challenges are valid.

Castro filed multiple opposition claims in various states by paying the filing fee to get on the ballot but publicly admitted that he did it only to challenge FPOTUS#45.

The court rejected his "Competitor Standing" claim of injury because of his public statements about the reason for running and the courts have not ruled on the merits of the A14S3 claim.

So FPOTUS#45 and his supporters will of course claim victory and shout it from the roof tops. But if Haley or DeSantis were to file such a claim they would have standing for federal court review of the merits. And to be honest, I'm surprised Christie (who would have standing) hasn't filed such a motion.

How the courts would rule? Don't know. But that question has not been answered by the rulings pertaining to Castro.

WW

 

[Delldude]

But if Haley or DeSantis were to file such a claim they would have standing for federal court review of the merits.

They'd have to show how Trump running has/will hurt or harmed them to have standing.

And to be honest, I'm surprised Christie (who would have standing) hasn't filed such a motion.

SOURCES: CHRIS CHRISTIE LEAVING THE RACE

Campaign has reportedly briefed allies about a 5pm announcement today in New Hampshire

markhalperin.substack.com

 

[WorldWatcher]

They'd have to show how Trump running has/will hurt or harmed them to have standing.

SOURCES: CHRIS CHRISTIE LEAVING THE RACE

Campaign has reportedly briefed allies about a 5pm announcement today in New Hampshire

markhalperin.substack.com

Interesting thanks.

Speculation at this point true, and I can't say I'm totally surprised. I thought he'd wait until after New Hampshire.

But it could be a tactical decision. If he drops out before New Hampshire it will not help FPOTUS#45 because Christies base is pretty solid never-Trumper's. So if it does happen I think it's because it frees up many of those that would have voted for him to vote for Haley.

That would give her a stronger showing.

I mean let's be honest, Iowa is pretty much a write off because of the evangelical vote.

WW

 

[jbander]

Don't let patently false statements stand. CO has no right at all. Constitution gives that right to the Feds.
Despite what Tobfranksays, we are dual citizens, of state and Federal jurisdiction
BTW Lincoln won the Presidence BECAUSE he had been struck illegally off state ballots

Bullshit, every state has a legal choice.

 

[jbander]

They'd have to show how Trump running has/will hurt or harmed them to have standing.

SOURCES: CHRIS CHRISTIE LEAVING THE RACE

Campaign has reportedly briefed allies about a 5pm announcement today in New Hampshire

markhalperin.substack.com

Stupid Shit from Shitpants Dell

 

[jbander]

CO has been rebuked several times for illegal actions by the SCOTUS. Keep up with things

Bullshit, The fed supreme court has said nothing about co high court decision to not let the piece of shit have his name in the election.

 

[jbander]

Latest on Shitpants Trump , he not only shits in his pants and doesn't clean up and is like standing next to a open sewer but now they got information that this piece of shit is s drug addict. Lots of his videos look like that is the truth, The guy is a absolute idiot wacko in front of a camera.

 

[Dagosa]

True, I showed the standard in the COTUS for a sitting president.

In this case insurrection has to be proven in federal court via indictment to file criminal charges.

In this specific case there is/was no evidence to show 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that Trump had committed an act of insurrection, or DOJ would have gone after Him.

Saying He did doesn't cut it.


Two totally different scenarios.

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.

Blah blah blah.....looky here, another FEDERAL JUDGE rules plaintiff lacks standing.

You better get used to this as it will be the way it rolls at SCOTUS.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot​

In its ruling, the District Court said "Because Castro does not have standing to challenge Trump’s eligibility to run for president, the Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on the merits of this case."

The district court also cited dismissals for lack of standing in several other federal courts where Castro had filed similar suits.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot

Nevada isn’t Colorado, dah

 

[Faun]

True, I showed the standard in the COTUS for a sitting president.

In this case insurrection has to be proven in federal court via indictment to file criminal charges.

In this specific case there is/was no evidence to show 'beyond a reasonable doubt' that Trump had committed an act of insurrection, or DOJ would have gone after Him.

Saying He did doesn't cut it.


Two totally different scenarios.

Nope, two similar situations.

OJ lost a civil case even though he was never convicted in a criminal case.

Trump is losing a civil case even though he was never convicted in a criminal case.

 

[Faun]

Blah blah blah.....looky here, another FEDERAL JUDGE rules plaintiff lacks standing.

You better get used to this as it will be the way it rolls at SCOTUS.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot​

In its ruling, the District Court said "Because Castro does not have standing to challenge Trump’s eligibility to run for president, the Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on the merits of this case."

The district court also cited dismissals for lack of standing in several other federal courts where Castro had filed similar suits.

Federal Judge Rules Donald Trump Can Appear on Nevada Ballot

Every state is different. There's a law in Colorado which allows people to file suit in such cases. So the plaintiff had standing. All you're showing is that Nevada has no such law.

 

[Delldude]

Trump is losing a civil case even though he was never convicted in a criminal case.

No due process.

 

[Delldude]

There's a law in Colorado which allows people to file suit in such cases.

There's law in almost every state similar.......when it goes federal is where they won't have standing.