How Shenna Bellows is defending her decision to keep Donald Trump off Maine’s ballot

[Deluge]

Stoopid b*tch is peddling the bullshit notion that this isn't political. She must think Americans are as dumb as the Left. lol

AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows stepped into the national spotlight when she became the country’s first top elections official to rule former President Donald Trump is ineligible for the state’s 2024 Republican primary ballot.

She’s done scores of television and radio interviews with national and regional outlets since her Dec. 28 decision, including chats with conservatives who have pushed her to explain how she found the Republican frontrunner violated Section 3 — the so-called insurrection clause — of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Bellows has focused less on her finding that Trump violated the Constitution by inciting the Capitol riots of Jan. 6, 2021, and more on the requirement under Maine election law for her to rule on challenges to the eligibility of candidates. Her emphasis on the process rather than politics of the decision has done little to blunt the sharp Republican criticism she has faced.

https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/01/03/politics/how-shenna-bellows-defending-donald-trump-off-maine-ballot/

[Rebound]

8 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Stoopid b*tch is peddling the bullshit notion that this isn't political. She must think Americans are as dumb as the Left. lol

AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows stepped into the national spotlight when she became the country’s first top elections official to rule former President Donald Trump is ineligible for the state’s 2024 Republican primary ballot.

She’s done scores of television and radio interviews with national and regional outlets since her Dec. 28 decision, including chats with conservatives who have pushed her to explain how she found the Republican frontrunner violated Section 3 — the so-called insurrection clause — of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Bellows has focused less on her finding that Trump violated the Constitution by inciting the Capitol riots of Jan. 6, 2021, and more on the requirement under Maine election law for her to rule on challenges to the eligibility of candidates. Her emphasis on the process rather than politics of the decision has done little to blunt the sharp Republican criticism she has faced.

https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/01/03/politics/how-shenna-bellows-defending-donald-trump-off-maine-ballot/

It was her job to rule on the objection. She held a hearing and she ruled. The ruling is subject to appeal. She said she will abide by whatever the final appeal determines. Nothing wrong with that. Basically, this issue will head to the US Supreme Court, they are heavily biased towards Trump. 

Whether she ruled for or against Trump is irrelevant; the issue is going to the US Supreme Court either way, so don’t get your panties all twisted up over her ruling.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, Rebound said:

It was her job to rule on the objection. She held a hearing and she ruled. The ruling is subject to appeal. She said she will abide by whatever the final appeal determines. Nothing wrong with that. Basically, this issue will head to the US Supreme Court, they are heavily biased towards Trump. 

Whether she ruled for or against Trump is irrelevant; the issue is going to the US Supreme Court either way, so don’t get your panties all twisted up over her ruling.

There is much wrong with that.  Sorry.  And while the appeal will straighten that out the fact is that doesn't make her attack on democracy right.

If the police catch a thief and put back something the thief stole from your house, the thief is still in the wrong.

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

It was her job to rule on the objection. She held a hearing and she ruled. The ruling is subject to appeal. She said she will abide by whatever the final appeal determines. Nothing wrong with that. Basically, this issue will head to the US Supreme Court, they are heavily biased towards Trump. 

Whether she ruled for or against Trump is irrelevant; the issue is going to the US Supreme Court either way, so don’t get your panties all twisted up over her ruling.

No, she thinks it's her job, but what she's really doing is trying to derail Donald Trump's Presidential campaign. 

There's no reason for Bellows to rule on anything. The SCOTUS is here to make rulings that actually matter, not serve as a blockade against left-wing radicals. The desperate b*tch is wasting everyone's time. 

Edited January 4, 2024 by Deluge

[ironstone]

22 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Whether she ruled for or against Trump is irrelevant;

It is relevant when her decision to remove Trump was based on an extreme interpretation of the law. It's an abuse of power.

 

[WestCanMan]

When someone has to explain how, "in their opinion an insurrection occurred and someone was involved in it", there wasn't an insurrection.

The Jan 6th committee had to alter video to make it seem like an insurrection: case closed. 

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Deluge said:

No, she thinks it's her job, but what she's really doing is trying to derail Donald Trump's Presidential campaign. 

There's no reason for Bellows to rule on anything. The SCOTUS is here to make rulings that actually matter, not serve as a blockade against left-wing radicals. The desperate b*tch is wasting everyone's time. 

Your opinion of what she thinks is baseless. She has told you what she thinks. Accept THAT.

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, ironstone said:

It is relevant when her decision to remove Trump was based on an extreme interpretation of the law. It's an abuse of power.

 

Douchowitz was Trump's lawyer in the impeachment hearing and also took OJ's side in that murder trial.

IOW, a gun for hire,  who will promote ANY legal theory which DEFENDS HIS CLIENT.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

When someone has to explain how, "in their opinion an insurrection occurred and someone was involved in it", there wasn't an insurrection.

The Jan 6th committee had to alter video to make it seem like an insurrection: case closed. 

You obviously KNOW NOTHING about all the planning that went into Jan 6th, cause you've never been shown the sworn testimony by WH insiders presented in the BIPARTISAN Select Committee Hearing and to Jack Smith's Grand Juries.

Of course no one has seen the latter, cause GJ are secret.

Just google Trump WH meeting Dec 18th 2021 to find out what happened

[Caswell Thomas]

5 hours ago, Deluge said:

Stoopid b*tch is peddling the bullshit notion that this isn't political. She must think Americans are as dumb as the Left. lol

AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows stepped into the national spotlight when she became the country’s first top elections official to rule former President Donald Trump is ineligible for the state’s 2024 Republican primary ballot.

She’s done scores of television and radio interviews with national and regional outlets since her Dec. 28 decision, including chats with conservatives who have pushed her to explain how she found the Republican frontrunner violated Section 3 — the so-called insurrection clause — of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  There's nothing "so-called" about it, it IS in the U. S. Constitution. 

Bellows has focused less on her finding that Trump violated the Constitution by inciting the Capitol riots of Jan. 6, 2021, and more on the requirement under Maine election law for her to rule on challenges to the eligibility of candidates. Her emphasis on the process rather than politics of the decision has done little to blunt the sharp Republican criticism she has faced.

https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/01/03/politics/how-shenna-bellows-defending-donald-trump-off-maine-ballot/  oh gee, what a shame. Some GOP fake electors won't be happy this time around because they won't get a chance to try again. 

 

[Deluge]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Your opinion of what she thinks is baseless. She has told you what she thinks. Accept THAT.

And she thinks removing Trump from the ballot is the most democratic thing a democrat can do for the residents of Maine, even though there are Trump supporters in Maine. 

She's wrong, of course, because she's a f*cking communist and she hates this country just as much as you do. 

[Rebound]

2 minutes ago, Deluge said:

And she thinks removing Trump from the ballot is the most democratic thing a democrat can do for the residents of Maine, even though there are Trump supporters in Maine. 

She's wrong, of course, because she's a f*cking communist and she hates this country just as much as you do. 

Not her fault that you hate the United States Constitution, you communist pig! 

[Deluge]

12 hours ago, Rebound said:

Not her fault that you hate the United States Constitution, you communist pig! 

Democrats hate it when true Americans show them how much they actually hate freedom and democracy.

"We're saving you from your own choices, Maine. Trust us; you'll thank us later".  

-- democrat party. 

Edited January 5, 2024 by Deluge

[CdnFox]

26 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Democrats hate it when true Americans show how much they actually hate feedom and democracy.

"We're saving you from your own choices, Maine. Trust us; you'll thank us later".  

-- democrat party. 

Sadly true - they actually think taking away choice is a kindness.

[Deluge]

11 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sadly true - they actually think taking away choice is a kindness.

Yes. Democrats feel that freedom and democracy are best served when they are dictating the conditions. 

[ironstone]

16 hours ago, robosmith said:

Douchowitz was Trump's lawyer in the impeachment hearing and also took OJ's side in that murder trial.

IOW, a gun for hire,  who will promote ANY legal theory which DEFENDS HIS CLIENT.

Dershowitz is also a classical liberal. Meaning he actually supports things like free speech and equal application of the law.

You pointing out that Dershowitz 'took OJ's side' in that murder trial really sounds childish. Can you not comprehend that every defendant, no matter what you may think of them, is entitled to legal representation?

[robosmith]

14 hours ago, Deluge said:

And she thinks removing Trump from the ballot is the most democratic thing a democrat can do for the residents of Maine, even though there are Trump supporters in Maine. 

She's wrong, of course, because she's a f*cking communist and she hates this country just as much as you do. 

Nope. Unlike YOU she supports the Constitution and ruled according to THAT.

She OPPOSES the guy who tried to DESTROY democracy. Duh

 

[Deluge]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Nope. Unlike YOU she supports the Constitution and ruled according to THAT.

She OPPOSES the guy who tried to DESTROY democracy. Duh

Nope. Just like you, she wants rigged elections and forced vaccinations for everyone. It's what you communists cream about more than anything else.  

[robosmith]

33 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Nope. Just like you, she wants rigged elections and forced vaccinations for everyone.

NO ONE "FORCED VACCINATIONS" here, lDIOT.

Removing the PRIVILEGE of serving as POTUS is in THE CONSTITUTION'S 14th A. AKA NOT "rigged," LIAR.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Deluge said:

Yes. Democrats feel that freedom and democracy are best served when they are dictating the conditions. 

Well as you know, their motto is that democracy is WAY too important to be left to the people

Just now, robosmith said:

NO ONE "FORCED VACCINATIONS" here, lDIOT.

Removing the PRIVILEGE of serving as POTUS is in THE CONSTITUTION'S 14th A. AKA NOT "rigged," LIAR.

LOL - the right to choose what candidates will run for public office is now a privilege - and one held by the democrats

Sorry - WHO was trying to overthrow democracy in the us?

[Deluge]

22 minutes ago, robosmith said:

NO ONE "FORCED VACCINATIONS" here, lDIOT.

Removing the PRIVILEGE of serving as POTUS is in THE CONSTITUTION'S 14th A. AKA NOT "rigged," LIAR.

It's what you want, stoopid, not what's been "FORCED". Pay attention. 

Sorry, pervert, the Constitution doesn't give you degenerates the right to remove Trump from the ballot. That is banana republic shit and has no place in our Constitutional Republic. You're just going to have to pack your shit and move to Cuba. 

[Rebound]

On 1/4/2024 at 2:32 PM, Deluge said:

No, she thinks it's her job, but what she's really doing is trying to derail Donald Trump's Presidential campaign. 

There's no reason for Bellows to rule on anything. The SCOTUS is here to make rulings that actually matter, not serve as a blockade against left-wing radicals. The desperate b*tch is wasting everyone's time. 

Are you an expert on Maine’s election laws?

When Trump claimed that Obama’s birth certificate was fake, it was the Secretary of State of Hawaii who was the final authority on the subject. He issued a formal letter stating that he had visited the State Archives, that he personally inspected the original birth certificate, and that it was genuine. 
 

Secretary of State had the job of establishing Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to be President. Not Congress. Not the Supreme Court. 

Edited January 7, 2024 by Rebound

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, Rebound said:

When Trump claimed that Obama’s birth certificate was fake, it was the Secretary of State of Hawaii who was the final authority on the subject. He issued a formal letter stating that he had visited the State Archives, that he personally inspected the original birth certificate, and that it was genuine. 

Sure - and that record keeping duty is clearly spelled out as being their responsiblity

It is not the responsibility of the state to determine who's an insurrectionist or to remove people's rights without trial.

Again- don't complain when the republicans twist laws to screw with your candidates in the future  

[independent thinker]

On 1/5/2024 at 1:23 PM, robosmith said:

NO ONE "FORCED VACCINATIONS" here, lDIOT.

Removing the PRIVILEGE of serving as POTUS is in THE CONSTITUTION'S 14th A. AKA NOT "rigged," LIAR.

this is going to be a real problem for the SCOTUS they have to rule on the 14th but then it gets them into a predicament, they have to look at article 2 where it says the state legislatures have the duty to appoint the delegates to the EC in any manner they may see fit.

now when it comes to article 2 of the Constitution the SCOTUS will have to decide are primaries part of the system to choose delegates to the EC or not.

IF they are then it is up to the state legislature to say how they will be run those primaries and who can run.

under Article 2 state legislatures don't even need to hold elections they can just appoint who ever they want and tell them who to vote for at the EC.

of course IF they did this I am sure the people of their state would be really mad and they would not have a job for too long

GOD BLESS AMERICA

[Fluffypants]

13 hours ago, Rebound said:

Are you an expert on Maine’s election laws?

When Trump claimed that Obama’s birth certificate was fake, it was the Secretary of State of Hawaii who was the final authority on the subject. He issued a formal letter stating that he had visited the State Archives, that he personally inspected the original birth certificate, and that it was genuine. 
 

Secretary of State had the job of establishing Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to be President. Not Congress. Not the Supreme Court. 

Its amazing she took the ONLY state that ruled to remove Trump from the ballot, while every other challenge has been shot down to remove him from the ballot.

I will be willing to bet she wants to run for higher office and this was a good way to get her name in the news.