Colorado Supreme Court rules insurrectionist Trump ineligible

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

So what? Dissenting opinion LOSES by DEFINITION. You don't even know the basis for that dissent.

Clearly there is a basis in the 14th Amendment.

Again; no conviction is required. The court determined at a hearing that Trump "engaged in insurrection." Nuff said.

I think you'll find none of that is true   When it gets appealed i think they'll probably find the judge was wrong.

[robosmith]

44 minutes ago, Deluge said:

If that's the case then we'll have to go ahead and remove Joe Biden from the presidency for treason. His border policies and relationship with foreign entities is suspicious as f*ck, therefore he needs to go. 

There is NO EQUIVALENT election qualification for a "treason" conviction, nor "engaged in treason."

Your desperation is getting much worse.

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

There is NO EQUIVALENT election qualification for a "treason" conviction, nor "engaged in treason."

Your desperation is getting much worse.

Sure there is.  I mean - it's not like you need a court to prove it first, right?

Or are you still too afraid of me to answer 

[Deluge]

30 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Sorry DELUGINAL, ^this OPINION means NOTHING, in comparison to the LEGAL EXPERTS I CITED. 

Come back when you have ACTUAL EVIDENCE from LEGAL EXPERTS. 

Sorry robotool, but you're not fooling anyone. Your "legal experts" are anti-Trumpers, and everyone knows it, including you.

Edited December 20, 2023 by Deluge

[Deluge]

30 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

This is the problem. 

This is obviously just a stunt, trump will be running in colorado.  And the trump supporters will use this as more proof that biden friendly officials will use any means necessary, legal or otherwise, to try to keep trump out.

So - trump wins anyway and then pulls a similar trick and gets friendly states to deny the next dem candidate on some charge or another, claims their language is insurrectionist or the like.  Now we've weaponized the system to be a tool AGAINST democracy.

Or trump loses and his followers go bat crap crazy because the corruption of the dems is "obvious" to them and we have ongoing disruptions there.

The dems basically put a bullet into the entire democracy of the us when they created the 'fake' dossier and wepaonized the FBI against their political opponent, and it's gone down hill from there, and at this point ii don't know that it's recoverable.

I agree. The dummycrats are playing a game and Trump is going to use it.  It's going to be fun to see this all play out. 

[WestCanMan]

Did you know that they grow bananas in Hawaii and Florida?

100% true.

That makes the US is the world's largest, most powerful banana republic. 

You're welcome.

[Deluge]

28 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Why do you bother posting ^this deranged foolishness? Your OPINION means NOTHING.

Because I'm right and you are wrong, and we both know it. 

You walk into the wrong guy when you try to gaslight me, robodeceptivefulness.  

[Deluge]

29 minutes ago, robosmith said:

There is NO EQUIVALENT election qualification for a "treason" conviction, nor "engaged in treason."

Sure there is. I just gave it to you. 

Now stfu, and chew on that for a while. You have a big mouth, but not that big.

[Deluge]

51 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Conviction is NOT REQUIRED by the Constitution, 

Hence the need to remove Joe Biden for treason.  

I hope you perverts are ready for Trump's return to the WH. 

[robosmith]

21 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Sorry robotool, but you're not fooling anyone. Your "legal experts" are anti-Trumpers, and everyone knows it, including you.

"anti-Trump" plays NO ROLE in their LEGAL ARGUMENT. ^Total FAIL.

[suds]

18 hours ago, Hodad said:

Colorado Supreme Court has the backbone to enforce the law.

I'm skeptical that the Trump-packed SCOTUS will have the same integrity, but these are thinking people rather than politicians and perhaps they've had enough of his destructive anti-democratic nonsense.

If the Colorado Supreme Court was really that interested in democracy, they'd let the people decide.  JMO

Edited December 20, 2023 by suds

[robosmith]

16 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Because I'm right and you are wrong, and we both know it. 

Sorry but ^these stupid Trumpian declarations about what I "know" mean NOTHING.

Except that you're loyal to the MAGA CULT. LMAO

16 minutes ago, Deluge said:

You walk into the wrong guy when you try to gaslight me, robodeceptivefulness.  

You make the weakest responses, so very much the easy guy to refute.

2 minutes ago, suds said:

If the Colorado Supreme Court was really that interested in democracy, they'd let the people decide.  JMO

The people will decide, just not including those who "engaged in insurrection." As SPECIFIED by the CONSTITUTION.

[robosmith]

8 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Hence the need to remove Joe Biden for treason.  

I hope you perverts are ready for Trump's return to the WH. 

Cite where it says there is a Constitutional ballot disqualification for "treason."

Joe is already POTUS, so if you have evidence of "high crimes" your CULT can TRY to impeach him.

But that will take EVIDENCE YOU DON'T HAVE.

[Deluge]

16 minutes ago, robosmith said:

"anti-Trump" plays NO ROLE in their LEGAL ARGUMENT. ^Total FAIL.

Anti-Trumpism is the ONLY reason for that ruling, and it's weak sauce to begin with. The 14th Amendment doesn't do sh*t for that diaper doping SC. 

[Deluge]

13 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Cite where it says there is a Constitutional ballot disqualification for "treason."

§2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter115&edition=prelim#:~:text=Whoever%2C owing allegiance to the,not less than %2410%2C000%3B and

Check the link as well, stoopid. I want you to read until all 17 of your brain cells have gotten the picture, understood? 

[Rebound]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

§2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter115&edition=prelim#:~:text=Whoever%2C owing allegiance to the,not less than %2410%2C000%3B and

Check the link as well, stoopid. I want you to read until all 17 of your brain cells have gotten the picture, understood? 

It is unlikely that prohibition would be Constitutional, because the Constitution establishes qualifications.

[Deluge]

1 minute ago, Rebound said:

It is unlikely that prohibition would be Constitutional, because the Constitution establishes qualifications.

What's unlikely is Colorado's ability to keep Trump off their ballots. 

[Rebound]

6 minutes ago, Deluge said:

What's unlikely is Colorado's ability to keep Trump off their ballots. 

Well, the US Constitution looks pretty clear to me.

If you aren’t 35 years old, you can’t run for President. Doesn’t require an act of Congress. The Constitution says what it says, but we shall see what the Trump-friendly SCOTUS says. 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Rebound

[CdnFox]

56 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I agree. The dummycrats are playing a game and Trump is going to use it.  It's going to be fun to see this all play out. 

it'll be fun for a bit but in all seriousness it has a good chance of leading to very very bad consequences for the us where nobody has faith in the gov't or rule of law. We've seen that in history as empires fell in the past, including the romans and others.

It is a very dangerous path, but once that thread starts to unravel i'm not sure what you can do about it.

[Deluge]

1 minute ago, Rebound said:

Well, the US Constitution looks pretty clear to me.

If you aren’t 35 years old, you can’t run for President. Doesn’t require an act of Congress. The Constitution says what it says. 

Somebody please let Rebound know that his translator is malfunctioning. 

[Rebound]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

it'll be fun for a bit but in all seriousness it has a good chance of leading to very very bad consequences for the us where nobody has faith in the gov't or rule of law. We've seen that in history as empires fell in the past, including the romans and others.

It is a very dangerous path, but once that thread starts to unravel i'm not sure what you can do about it.

People don’t have faith in the government because Donald Trump is doing all he can do to destroy all faith in the government. Dude… the man lies almost every time he opens his mouth, although he was telling the truth when he said he will become Dictator on Day One. You vote for a dictator… the results go REALLY bad. Just look at the Germans… didn’t go well. The Venezuelans who elected Hugo Chavez weren’t too happy with the results. When somebody says they’ll be a dictator, BELIEVE THEM.

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, Deluge said:

§2381. Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter115&edition=prelim#:~:text=Whoever%2C owing allegiance to the,not less than %2410%2C000%3B and

Check the link as well, stoopid. I want you to read until all 17 of your brain cells have gotten the picture, understood? 

That is NOT a CONSTITUTIONAL prohibition; it is US criminal code, dummy.

26 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Anti-Trumpism is the ONLY reason for that ruling, and it's weak sauce to begin with. The 14th Amendment doesn't do sh*t for that diaper doping SC. 

I was talking about MY CITE.  The Conservative Legal Roadmap to Disqualify Trump From Office 

You can't even keep the argument straight.

[Deluge]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

it'll be fun for a bit but in all seriousness it has a good chance of leading to very very bad consequences for the us where nobody has faith in the gov't or rule of law. We've seen that in history as empires fell in the past, including the romans and others.

It is a very dangerous path, but once that thread starts to unravel i'm not sure what you can do about it.

This is a really good point. 

Trump is great, but he can be a loose cannon at times, and that rolls into what you're talking about here. 

I think that's why I've been leaning more towards Vivek Ramaswamy - he would have a much better chance at uniting this country. 

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Somebody please let Rebound know that his translator is malfunctioning. 

Please call for an ambulance to take you to the hospital cause it seems you're having a stroke.

[robosmith]

8 minutes ago, Rebound said:

People don’t have faith in the government because Donald Trump is doing all he can do to destroy all faith in the government. Dude… the man lies almost every time he opens his mouth, although he was telling the truth when he said he will become Dictator on Day One. You vote for a dictator… the results go REALLY bad. Just look at the Germans… didn’t go well. The Venezuelans who elected Hugo Chavez weren’t too happy with the results. When somebody says they’ll be a dictator, BELIEVE THEM.

Trump wasn't telling the truth when he said, "ONLY on day one." He just had to backtrack to get the chance.