Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows lost another attempt to force review of her disqualification “decision” before the United States Supreme Court hears arguments on the issue on Feb. 8th. The Maine Supreme Court declined to review the matter. With other states like Massachusetts ruling this week against disqualification, Colorado will remain the outlier as the only state supreme court willing to embrace this dangerous and anti-democratic theory.
I have previously written about my criticism of this unfounded theory. Advocates have been rejected in a dozen states, but have continued to seek judges willing to accept this novel argument. They knew that they had Bellows at hello given her prior public comments.
Bellows previously declared that “the Jan. 6 insurrection was an unlawful attempt to overthrow the results of a free and fair election…The insurrectionists failed, and democracy prevailed.” A year after the riot, Bellows was still denouncing the “violent insurrection.”
The decision is poorly written and conclusory in virtually every respect. A couple weeks ago, Maine Superior Court Justice Michaela Murphy deferred judgment in the case given the upcoming argument over the Colorado decision.
Bellows appealed but the justices noted that Murphy had only deferred judgment. He had not ruled. Thus, “because the appeal is not from a final judgment, we dismiss the appeal as interlocutory and not justiciable.”
So the Maine event will not happen.
That leaves Colorado where, on a court entirely composed of Democratically appointed justices, advocates could only secure a 4-3 ruling with a vigorous dissent. Courts in ultra liberal states like Massachusetts and Michigan have ruled against disqualification.
In the meantime, over half of the states have now filed to denounce this theory and ask the Supreme Court to reverse Colorado.
At least two of the January 6 insurrectionists were convicted of the federal insurrection law. Trump responded that he “loved” those convicted of insurrection.
Trump has still not denounced these disloyal Americans convicted of insurrection.
If that is not giving aid & comfort to the enemies of the U.S. Constitution – what is?
Citation please.
You seem to believe that loyal and compliant mean the same things, they don’t, but we all understand why lefties believe that.
PS: The election was rigged, deal with it.
Deal with the facts that republican judges, SOS, local republican officials could NOT find any “rigging” DEAL WITH THAT. Hell, not even Bill Barr could find anything…DEAL WITH THAT
We are dealing with it and trump will be re-elected. we don’t care if you run obamma’s stand in zombie corpse again or his husband. DEAL WITH THAT.
Bill Barr, lololol…
the dnc is crooked and evil and has nothing to offer sane americans. DEAL WITH THAT.
F’in useless commies.
Conviction of a Republican of
a political crime by a DC jury means about as much as the conviction of N. Bukharin for treason by one of Stalin’s tribunals.
This is an ignorant comment. They were convicted of seditious conspiracy, which includes mere interference with the execution of a law. It is not the same crime as insurrection.
Daniel,
Thank you for correction.
I appreciate it when people with actual law backgrounds chime in.
You do understand that most people do not treat a DC jury convicting a republican as evidence of anything.
Stone was convicted of things there is ZERO doubt that he did not do.
Colorado is a family state for me, and it is sad beyond belief to me what has happened there, especially on the eastern slope. Another beautiful place that has become a playground for the rich, and the rich always seem to vote for democrats that will not endanger their ivory towers or their wealth. I am so tired of the the left and their hate, their ignorance, their chutzpah (not a positive thing, though internet dwellers seem to have been convinced that it is) – may SCOTUS rain down thunder and lightning on them. I am so over emotionally stunted adults imposing their wills because the thought of their losing even a modicum of personal comfort feels like death to them, up to and including circumventing law. Screw these people. Change, my a**. It is preserve what we have by any means possible for the elites, and they can go to the fiery place. I am done with them. Chickens are about to come home to roost, and these people will suddenly be screaming at the top of their lungs, like the emotional toddlers they are. Dragging people in their 50s who have been hiding in their bubbles since 1992 into actual adulthood is not going to be fun, but it is going to be necessary. It will likely not be pretty. And heaven help their progeny. 🫤
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
MAKE AMERICA AMERICA AGAIN
There is only one imperative: That the clear meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights hold dominion.
The problem is the communist judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court, that legislates at its whim and convenience.
American constitutional freedom was terminated in 1860, which America must return to and begin the herculean task of imposing corrective action.
Jonathan: So what else is in the news? Alina Habba, who has a Faustian bargain with her client, keeps insisting DJT will testify in his own defense in the E. Jean Carroll case finishing this week before Judge Kaplan. Legal experts split on whether he will actually testify. But if DJT does testify they recommend he apologize to Carroll, the Judge and ask for forgiveness from the jury. But we know that won’t happen. “Repentance” is not in DJT’s DNA. He will use his testimony to continue to attack Carroll and the “unfair” Judge. It will be a circus and a car wreck. The jury will be unpersuaded by DJT’s antics. Stay tuned because the second jury is going to award Carroll a whooper in punitive damages!
In other news DJT is campaigning on a promise to pardon the J.6 insurrectionists he falsely claims are being held as “hostages”. One of those “hostages” is Marc Bru, another member of the Proud Boys. He was sentenced on Wednesday to 6 years in federal prison for his role in the insurrection.
Like DJT, Bru is also unrepentant. Acting pro se, Bru repeatedly interrupted his trial proceedings before Judge Boasberg–calling him a “clown” and “fraud”. “You can give me 100 years and I’d do it all over again”, Bru shouted while handcuffed and shackled. Bru was restrained because he absconded before the trial and boasted on Twitter while in hiding that the FBI would have to capture him–which they did, bringing him back in shackles.
Bru and DJT are birds of a feather. Both are defiant, unwilling to accept responsibility for their criminal acts. And this is why, if given a second term, the first name on his pardon list will probably be Marc Bru!
Putting aside the overheated rhetoric, what did Marc Bru DO on J6 that deserves as lengthy imprisonment? Try to be specific.
Edward Mahl: Don’t be lazy, Ed. Check the court record or any of the reporting. I could provide you with links but I won’t because I don’t want to waste my valuable time!
Dennis: thank you. Trump and Habba are trying their best to get sanctioned by the Judge because they believe this will feed into the Trump “victimhood” trope, which will resonate with Trump’s base. The Judge understands that this is their agenda and won’t give them what they want. What they ARE doing, however, is showing disrespect for the rule of law, the judge, and our court system, and THAT should be intolerable to any American. How on earth can the MAGA-ites reconcile Trump’s immaturity, lying, disrespect for the rule of law, his misogyny, islamophobia, xenophobia and racism with American values? What are children supposed to learn about American values when the leading candidate of a major political party is a malignant narcissist who vows revenge, who aspires to be a dictator, who praises dictators like Victor Orbahn, who constantly lies about losing an election because of his ego, who has been found responsible for sexually assaulting a woman, who brags about sexually assaulting women, who consorts with adult actresses, and who fomented an insurrection by lying to his fans? The first words out of Trump’s mouth after his poorer-than-predicted “victory” in the NH primary was to lie about “winning” NH in the 2016 and 2020 general elections. He LOST–both times! He insulted Nikki Haley’s dress, as if this matters. Why doesn’t all of the lying, pettiness and immaturity matter to Maga-ites? Does Trump display the values children are supposed to be taught–anything to get your way–literally anything–lie when you lose, stir up trouble to force others to give you your way even after you lost, take what you want–i.e. grab a woman’s genitals because you can get away with it, call anyone who doesn’t support you names, insult judges and prosecutors when they try to hold you accountable for your conduct, lie about your “accomplishments”, lie on tax forms, lie on loan applications, and promise vengeance if you ever get power again. Side with America’s enemy–i.e. Russia, over American intelligence. Why are MAGA-ites blind to how dangerous Trump is and why don’t they perceive the threat that giving power to someone as unbalanced, needy and arrogant as Trump is an existential threat, not just to America, but the world? Why do they believe lies on alt-right media about the economy being bad when the last quarter saw 3.3% growth in GDP and unemployment is at the lowest level in 50 years? Why don’t MAGA-ites see that Trump is pushing Republicans not to agree on the best border security deal ever struck just so he can deny Joe Biden another bipartisan victory and use the border crisis for political gain? Trump doesn’t care about the border crisis–all he cares about is getting POWER! Why isn’t this obvious? Someone explain these things to me because I am bewildered.
If Judge Kaplan sought to have the rule of law and his court respected – he should have followed the rule of law and dismissed this garbage like myriads of similarly weak claims against Trump and many many others.
His lies on tax forms and loan applications were proven and reduced to judgment. Obviously, you believe alt-right media, but could you or I get away with exaggerating the size of a house, for example, by tripling the size, like Trump did when he lied about his apartment being 33,000 sq. ft. when it’s really less than 11,000 sq. ft, and then using the exaggerated size to fluff up its loan value? That’s just ONE example in the NY fraud case. The Judge there knows Trump is baiting him and he’s not taking the bait.
His lies on tax forms and loan applications were proven and reduced to judgment.
Never lied on a tax form. And the party that wrote the Loan application, testified there were no lies on the application.
The reason that most people do not by the claim that Trump is dangerous – is because he is NOT.
He is the only president since Ford to NOT start a new military conflict involving US troops.
He did NOT weaponize government againts his political enemies.
He did not spy on journalists, Senators, congressmen, political enemies.
He did not spy on catholics, parents of school kids. political opponents.
He did NOT release SWAT teams against his political opponents – or ordinary citizens with no history of violence.
John Say,
Absolutely correct.
All this Trump is a danger to democracy is nothing more than a fevered TDS dream.
Compare their actual track records, not what MSM aka ARM media feeds, and we all see the Trump admin was a much better one whereas the Biden admin is a gross display of incompetence. From the economy, to the border, to starting new wars the Biden admin encourages our enemies and our friendenemise to take advantage of that weakness.
Who do you think Russia, China and Iran want to win in 2024?
Biden.
The Biden admin weakness only plays into their hands.
Know who might be Trump supporters? The Ukrainians. If he can make a peace treaty happen, like the late March 2020 one that both the Ukrainians and the Russians agreed to, but Biden the butcher vetoed, those people just might be thankful to Trump. Not to Biden who is forcing them into the meat grinder.
Biden didn’t START any “new military conflict”, nor did he “weaponize government” against Trump or any of the other lies pumped out by the alt-right media you believe. Trump tried to steal Georgia’s Electoral College votes, first by bullying the SOS, and then getting citizens to falsify Electoral College documents, which is a felony. WHY did these people do this when they knew the actual vote totals that had been recounted and confirmed over and over again? When did JOE Biden “release SWAT teams” against a political opponent–WHAT “political opponent”? Trump’s lies resulted in the attack on our Capitol, the death of Ashli Babbitt, 5 Capitol Police officers dying from injuries inflicted by Trump supporters who believed the Big Lie, not to mention those who were battered and beaten trying to defend members of Congress from accepting Joe Biden’s victory. Because he still continues to lie about losing in 2020, he still has a massive number of followers who believe him–WHY? Trump’s loss in 2020 has been proven over and over again–WHY do these disciples keep believing? WHY don’t they see the sick narcissist, hungry for power, who is selfish, immature and deceitful and who treats women like trash?
There is no reason for Republicans to strike any border deal with Biden or democrats.
The history of such deals all the way back to 1986 is that Democrats refuse to uphold their side of the agreement.
The Border wall has been authorized in its entirety since 1986. It could have been completed 10 times over since.
Biden can complete it right now – without any new legislation.
Biden can secure the border right now – without more money or any other reseouces.
And EVERYONE knows it. How do we Know ? Because Trump did and could in short order.
Democrats can solve the fact that voters are defecting from the democratic party over border security trivially.
Do exactly what was being done from 2017 through 2020.
Biden does not need a single Dime, or a single Republican vote to get out from under a problem of his own making.
Republicans should not agree to any deal on the border – no matter how good it sounds that Biden can choose to ignore.
And frankly they should not strike any deal until Biden PROVES he WILL enforce the laws we already have.
To repent -= you have to have done something wrong.
Many of us have pointed out the myriads of errors you have made in your posts.
When have you ever even corrected an error ?
The Carroll rape claim is a farce. The first jury refused to conclude there wasw a rape.
New evidence reveals that Carrol has lied repeatedly – under oath and in public.
Kaplan falsely asserted that Trump had been found to have Raped Carrol – despite this having been rejected in his court.
He has repeatedly failed to follow the law.
Trump should not apologize for anything. He will likely win on appeal.
The purpose of his testimony is to supplement the appeal.
Every single J6 defendant that has not been convicted of actual violence should be pardoned immediately.
Everyone that has not been charged with violence should be released immediately.
For those who have been charged or convicted of violence those cases should be reviewed to assure that the DC jury actually decided based on evidence, and if not pardoned. For those who actually committed acts of violence – their sentences should be reviewed and commuted to match similar conduct of Kavanaugh rioters.
Dear Prof Turley,
‘The Ballot’. No sooner those words out than a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi clouds my sight. First, any legitimate candidate must establish an appropriately well-funded political action organization and file with Federal Election Commission. By tradition, and that leaves only the Republican and Democrat (well-funded political organizations) ‘candidates’, a few wealthy individuals ‘running’ as ‘independents’ (i.e. ‘spoilers’ lol) .. . notwithstanding any Sec of States like Ms Bellows who boldly take matters into their own hands.
That’s who is on the ballot.
You know things are bad- beyond FUBAR when the argument before SCOTUS is how to keep someone like Trump (or Biden) ON the ‘ballot’. Tbh, it wouldn’t surprise me if Trump v Biden 2024 redux-ballot has ‘all the classic earmarks’ of another Putin plot. What more could Putin/Russia do to interfere in the 2024 elections, than have a Trump v Biden redux on the ballot?
Pick a card, any card. Russian roulette. It doesn’t matter how you vote, if only Trump v Biden are on the ballot.
*The people I want running things are not on the ballot.
Unless something surprisingly happens, pretty sure most Americans know who they are voting for or opting out.
Election interference like we are seeing with the CO SC and Maine is more likely than anything Russia could or would do.
Who do you think Russia, China, Iran would like to see win in 2024? Based off their track records, they would want to see Biden win vs Trump.
Bellows is neither a Judge nor an elected official. In DC, she’d be called a swamp dweller. In Maine, she’s just a nobody lost in the deep woods on the Canadian border. Neither her original screed or the follow up are worth notice nor – in my opinion – is the whole issue worth the Supreme Court’s time since it is only one state saying you can take him off the ballot and it was not even unanimous. Making a SCOTUS case out of this is worse than some lonely Republicans in CO not being able to vote for Trump (they could have written him in like the Dems that didn’t vote for Nikki did in NH)
The question raises four separate issues that SCOTUS cannot possibly handle thoroughly in a few weeks:
– What does that clause mean by insurrection
– Was Jan 6 such a thing
– Did Trump have anything to do with whatever they come up with as a definition
– Can anyone other than Congress — or the States — even opine about such a thing
But similar litigation is taking place in many other states, to remove Trump and to remove Biden. If the Colorado court was wrong then hundreds of thousands of voters have been illegally disenfranchised. And the calendar is fast approaching the November election. It would be difficult to imagine a more appropriate case for Scotus to step into.
This only applies to primaries and they are all over for all intents and purposes by March 3, not giving enough time for SCOTUS to carefully answer all those questions.
In the November election, you vote for electors not Biden or Trump so this issue does not even apply (presumably on January 6, 2025 the Democrats in Congress could argue that Trump’s Electors cannot be counted while at the same time a far left wing Soros-funded Antifa rally is going on the National Mall – which is as close as any demonstrator should have been allowed to get to the Capitol on 1/6/2021)
While many of the issues you note ought to be addressed – they are not – atleast initially issues for SCOTUS.
Nowhere in the constitution is there a grant of power without either a delegation of that power or a delegation of the power to make law to effectuate that power.
The constitution does not as an example say “Taxes are constitutional”. It say Congress can pass laws imposing taxes, or States can mint coins, or state legislatures can make election laws.
A14S3 Does not delegate a power anywhere. But it DOES have some constraints.
Congress can remove the disability. In the only 5 times A14S3 has even been applied – it has been to members of congress after they were elected and before they were seated. The Text of A14S3 bars HOLDING office not being elected.
It is pretty solid that A14S3 does not apply to elections.
It is also fairly solid that it does not apply to presidents.
It is also fairly solid that it was not intended to be used broadly.
A14S3 was only invoked 5 times and it was rejected 2 of those. Hundreds of Confederate soldiers and politicians who previously held office, were part of state and federal governments post war. Filling every federal office elected or appointed except president.
One was a House representative, a senator and a supreme court justice.
Outside the immediate aftermath of the Civil war the clause was never used again.
Further after ratification Congress passed laws putting A14S3 into effect and that law subsequently quietly faded into oblivion with restructuring of federal code int he 1950’s – so there is no effectuating law today.
It is arguable that Congress can refuse to certify the election of Trump in Jan 2025.
But that is an argument the left does not wish to make, because it completely undercuts the claim there was an insurrection.
If Congress can refuse to certify Trump’s election on A14S3 grounds then unarguably congress can refuse to certify an election.
If the actions of congress on J6 2021 were not proforma, Then all of the efforts to influence them are legal and constitutional – short of the use of actual force.
Regardless SCOTUS can easily decide that only Congress can decide this after Trump has been elected.
But I suspect that is not what they will do.
The easiest alternative is to decide correctly,
That there is no enabling legislation for A14S3, and until Congrss passes such legislation the clause is without effect.
That kills this nonsense quickly, and it stops using it against Trump and other congressmen.
And it is a decision that could be reached quickly, and decided 9-0
No one has been disenfranchised. The CO opinion is stayed while SCOTUS considers the case.
Don’t move to Maine.
My ancestors moved there in 1607, landing at Popham Beach.
Dennis there are a few simple ways SCOTUS can dispatch this quickly.
The first and the least satisifying is to draw the easy conclusion that A14S3 does not apply to the president.
That is constitutionally correct, but it still leaves the issue alive with regard to congressmen – and the left is still waging lawfare against 210 republicans running for election.
The 2nd is to decide the obvious – that A14S3 is not self executing – no constitutional delegation of a power is,
and that both normal constitutional interpretation and A14S5 require congress to pass laws putting A14S3 into effect.
In those Laws Congress can establish the answer to the questions you list.
If a subsuent issue arrises THEN scotus can decide whether the law Congress passed conforms to the constitution
And that is when – if ever the issues you raise would get determined.
I do not beleive Bellows is even an attorney.
Jonathan: You say the theory propounded by constitutional scholars, like Michael Luttig and Lawrence Tribe and others, is “dangerous and anti-democratic”. Hardly a constitutional analysis that you have yet to fully explain. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is neither “dangerous” nor “anti-democratic”. The framers of Section 3 feared a former member of the Confederacy might try to run for federal office and they intended to preclude someone like Jefferson Davis, who engaged in “insurrection and rebellion” from doing just that–to protect our Democracy.
SCOTUS is going to have to address three basic issues. Whether DJT engaged in “insurrection and rebellion” on Jan. 6, 2021 and thereafter, whether DJT is an “officer” within the meaning of Section 3 and whether the president takes the same oath as other “officers”.
The lengthy factual record of the Colorado district court and the CO SC found DJT did engage in “insurrection and rebellion” by trying to use force to overturn the 2020 election. Appellate courts rarely overturn the factual findings of lower courts unless there is “clear error”. So it is unlikely SCOTUS will want to revisit the events of Jan. 6th.
So SCOTUS will be faced with two other possible off-ramps ,i.e., that the President is not an “officer” as the term in used in Section 3 and the President does not take the same “oath” as other officers. Both are arguments DJT’s lawyers will make to the SC. The historical record of the debates over the language of Section 3 shows shows the framers did not intend to exclude the Presidency as an “officer”. As to the “oath” the president takes the slight difference in language is a distinction without a difference.
Whatever SCOTUS decides it will have long range consequential affects for our Democracy. If the conservative majority holds for DJT it will a declaration that a President can engage in “insurrection and rebellion” but still be on the ballot. That is something I don’t think the framers of Section 3 had in mind. If the “originalists” on the Court are consistent they should find DJT is disqualified. But consistency is not the hallmark of the conservative majority on the Court these days.
Your statements about what SCOTUS has to decide are too far down in the weeds. The issues for SCOTUS are:
– What does that clause mean by insurrection
– Was Jan 6 such a thing
– Did Trump have anything to do with whatever they come up with as a definition
– Can anyone other than Congress — or the States — even opine about such a thing
SCOTUS is going to have to address three basic issues. Whether DJT engaged in “insurrection and rebellion” on Jan. 6, 2021 and thereafter, whether DJT is an “officer” within the meaning of Section 3 and whether the president takes the same oath as other “officers”.
Only congress can remove the disability of Sec 3. That REQUIRES a person is elected. States jumping in to override the Power of Congress? No that wont work.
“The framers of Section 3 feared a former member of the Confederacy might try to run for federal office and they intended to preclude someone like Jefferson Davis, who engaged in “insurrection and rebellion” from doing just that–to protect our Democracy.
Sec 3 makes no reference to “run for federal office.” You are always forced to lie, because the facts are against you . Sec three mentions “holding office, or being a member of a state legislature. Stupid trolls don’t know elections are never mentioned.
“That leaves Colorado where, on a court entirely composed of Democratically appointed justices, advocates could only secure a 4-3 ruling with a vigorous dissent. Courts in ultra liberal states like Massachusetts and Michigan have ruled against disqualification.”
*************************************
All that the all-Democrat Colorado Supreme Court has proven is that the Dims hate democracy and freedom. So what else is new?
This issue has not come before any court here in Massachusetts. It was discussed by a quasi-advisory board called the Ballot Law Commission which met for 10 minutes to discuss it on 1/18/2024 and ruled 1/22/2024 that it had no jurisdiction in the matter. The Massachusetts Secretary of State had previously ruled that who makes a ballot was strictly a party matter
*Democrat appointed justices, not “Democratically” appointed justices. You wouldn’t say “Republicanly appointed justices.”
Shenna Bellows is basking in her 15 minutes of fame. She’ll have a slot on the View if she keeps up the charge.
Who? 🙂
Trump spearheaded an illegal two month long effort to overthrow and election and install an unelected president. Of course he is ineligible for office. 14AS3 is quite clear.
The only place where an effort to overthrow the election is in your fevered mind.
The real action isn’t in the courts, it’s Texas.
Armed Federal Agents vs Texas National Guard with real weapons of war. Will Texas back down? Not likely.
Are we going to ignite a Fort Sumter Battle?
The Communist want Civil War/Upheaval.
I personally think Roberts and Barrett have been threatened by the Communist. Roberts is simply compromised.
Just as in any cult of fanatics, there is always one jihadi who is willing to strap on a backpack of explosives “for the cause”; so too, is there always a few progressives who have become a little unhinged from reality in their zeal to accomplish their utopian goal at any cost – because they have been indoctrinated to believe that their cause is “the true cause” and the path to paradise on earth if they are just given the chance to control everything. Isn’t that just like any utopian fanatic that you have ever met?
Michigan is not “ultra-liberal.”. We have only temporarily strayed from the Right path. Remember that two prosecutions of “terrorists” for trying to kidnap our beloved governor failed here. That would not have happened in Massachusetts.
Edwardmahl,
Yeah, does not help when half of the “terrorists” are paid FBI informants.
Such total idiocy. The democrats and the RINO wing of the Republican Party are terrified of Mr. Trump. And it’s not because he is a threat to democracy. He is a threat to their way of monopolizing power. He is a threat to the World Economic Forum, He is a threat to ESG, He is a threat to DEI, He is a threat to Banking by Social score , He is a threat to the Elites of this Country and the world and their strangle hold on economic and political power and their attempts to reshape the world into an oligarchy ruled by Davos.
Our constitution is our salvation but we need to cull away the administrative state that has grown up around D.C. and return it to the most minimal of Federal Governments. The Progressive point of View first really shown by Woodrow Wilson and then carried through by his Acolyte FDR needs to be removed. We have the Supreme Court (for the most part) but we need the senate and a larger majority in the House and then we can return our nation to what it can truly be.
It may require hard choices but it can be done. The constitution, as magnificent as it is can be improved.
1-line item veto,
2-term limits that also limit families inheriting seats
3-balanced budget amendment (which nearly every state has)
4-all bills are published on a House or Senate Website and updated daily as changes are made and voted upon. Sounds like a good job for AI.
5-personal responsibility of officials in their official acts and offices
GEB
Let’s add the following
Federal Judges should be elected and not appointed
Strip Federal prosecutors and Federal Law Enforcement of arrest powers of American citizens. Leaving that authority with Sheriff’s whom are accountable to an electorate
I believe Trump and the Republicans should set up a Nuremberg like Trial to root out the Fascists Democrats across Government who have committed thousands of crimes and Jail them by the THOUSANDS!
Also absentee ballots should be outlawed in all but very limited cases…like VIRTUALLY every country in the world!
Time to jail Fascist Democrats using government for their Party!
“Colorado will remain the outlier as the only state supreme court willing to embrace this dangerous and anti-democratic theory.”
Anti-democratic? The constitution is clear. It is right there in the 14th amendment for all to read in plain language. Partake in an insurrection and you are disqualified from holding office. Many (especially on this site) do not think Jan 6 was an insurrection. Many (both on this site and all across the country) think it was. Insurrection – an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government. On Jan 6, well over a thousand people tried to keep a man in power that lost an election. That is the very definition of insurreciton.
But go ahead, put the dufus trump on the ballot, he will loose like he always does. He is a looser.
did you give up on the Russian Hoax lies….moved on to insurrection?
Russian hoax? I know of no Russian hoax.
Are you really that dumb to post something like that?
How would I have any idea what this is? MAGAs keep bringing it up but never provide any facts to back it up.
Oh, honey, no.
As we have all seen, it was a protest that became a riot.
Not an insurrection.
What was the objective of the “riot”? Why cause were they trying to perpetuate?
Whoever tells you what to think is an idiot.
Nothing.
As the recently released videos, the ones the clown show Jan6th Committee tried to keep from the public, show the protest was much more peaceful then the the Jan6th Committee framed.
Bob, your lack of critical thinking skills is unbelievable. The protestors were there to voice their belief that the election was lawless rightfully. That belief is proven almost every day, but you wouldn’t know that because you are told what to think because of the absence of such an ability.
The BLM riots were insurrectionist acts. They tried to burn a federal building down while people were inside. They took over part of a city. Lots of people were hurt physically and financially, with many deaths. That is something you call peaceful because someone else told you what to think. You choose to play the part of the dope, and since that is your choice, you should not be insulted being called one.
I agree with you, but you have fallen into a MAGA trap. Trump’s attempted coup was much more then just J6. It started before the election. The House Report has it all laid out. Focusing on J6 and ignoring the rest is a straw man.
The only attempted coup is the one in your TDS fevered mind.
“Many (especially on this site) do not think Jan 6 was an insurrection. Many (both on this site and all across the country) think it was.”
So you’re going with the latter group. Why? Because that mob satisfies the Left’s desires (to “get Trump”).
Because their stated purpose was to keep the person in power that lost the election. Like I said, the very definition of insurrection. It is not my words, It is their words. The insurrectionists have stated they did it because trump told them to come because of all the fraud and he really won the election. He didn’t win, there was not massive fraud, they were duped, perhaps you were duped, in any event, they were there to keep the person in power who had just lost an election. It matters not one twit what I think, Facts, and those involved in the “riot”, speak for themselves. The “riot” was an attempt to keep trump in power. That is the very definition of insurrection.
No.
Based off the facts that have exposed the Jan6th Committee clown show for what it was, more and more people do not see or believe it was a insurrection. Even common sense Democrats, not the ones with TDS like you and Sammy, see it.
That is why you keep repeating the same lies over and over again. It is desperation on your part. The insurrection narrative is falling apart. We all see.
Prove that what I said is false.
Sammy, Upstate has a reputation he protects. You have none. Therefore, one assumes Upstate’s statements to be factual while yours are false.
But false statements are not the only things you provide. You and Bob are part of the idiocracy component of the blog.
As, the classic “Appeal to authority” fallacy. You got nothing.
S. Meyer just owned you.
In your cult mindset, you are too brainwashed to see it.
See what? MAGAs are great at throwing insults but lacking in facts and rational arguments.
As I have stated many times before on the good professor’s blog, I did not vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020.
S. Meyer and I had a good conversation about the 2016 election and my choice to vote third party.
In 2020, I donated to the Tulsi Gabbard campaign, twice. Was going to a third time, but she dropped out. But she outlasted the so-called top tier Harris by far. I believe it was either E.M. or Edwardmahl who said that Tulsi Gabbard should be the Republican VP candidate. I agree.
If anyone is lacking in facts and rational arguments, it is you and Bob.
It is not an appeal to authority. Upstate is not an authority and neither am I. However, we have reputations for honesty and fact. You fail in that regard. Your status is below a nobody.
Trump is going to be handed a digital dystopian nightmare by the time he is sworn in January 2025!
In less than 3 minutes Jim Rickards clearly explains how Joe Biden’s executive order 14067 is expediting the replacement of cash with a digital token equivalent!:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTntNMyyAq8
We are in the 3rd year of this timeline folks!:
https://sumofthyword.com/2016/10/04/the-rapture-of-the-church-is-after-the-tribulation/
The supreme court is bought and paid for as their decree against Texas of no standing in the election fraud and now telling Texas to let the federal government tear down the wall proves this harlot is riding her UN~beast!:
https://sumofthyword.com/2021/01/07/mystery-babylon-the-great-and-her-beast/
Didn’t SCOTUS effectively just grant a stay pending a full Appeals Court hearing on the original first level Federal court ruling that what Biden was doing was illegal but he could keep doing it until the trial? No one – even the first level court – has even begun to try the facts and the law on this issue; everything subsequently has just been pro and con what to do until the trial
Still favor the Issue to be used by the SCOTUS to disqualify the Electoral College and then have the Congress dissolve it completely.
you support fascism?
heck move State Capitals to the largest cities….and only give Federal money to the richest cities. Import another 100 millions illegals…and print their ballots for the Dictator while you are at it!
The intent of the Electoral College is not being used that way (to level the playing field as you suggest).
It had a purpose it’s time, and now that time has past. Imaginary lines drawn boundaries on a Map to segregate the population into 50+ States and then use a Calculus (The Electoral College) to ‘equalize’ the whole is an archaic method, when it is entirely possible to validate a consensus by gross means (popular Vote).
Yet because we have this archaic method still in-place, every Election Cycle we have the same Party Battles to gerrymander the electoral count (Delegates) and game the Electoral System. In addition to this, We now have the State(s) at the command of the Parties gaming the Electoral System through Candidate elimination schemas thus eliminating equitable distribution of the State’s Electoral Delegates.
Flawed System – time to get rid of it.
Should we also get rid of the Senate? States?
“Should we also get rid of the Senate? States?”
Following that line, the real question becomes:
Do We even need a System of Congressional Representation?
Given that it is rife with; Corruption (K-Street – Hunter Biden’s’ abound), Economic Favoritism (Corporatocracy), and Political Bias .
Citizens can vote on items directly- We have the technology, and given the Country is currently 247 years old. It time for an Upgrade,
America 2.0
In order to get to America 2.0, you are likely going to have to go through Civil War 2.0 to get rid of the corruption, corpratocracy, and well, the swamp.
Are you willing to go there?
“Are you willing to go there?”
Not a matter of “willing” to go there. it a matter of time until ‘They’ go there, i.e.: cross the line.
Control has it’s price, and that price is to be extracted at some point.
Recent examples: Slobodan Milosevic, Ho Chi Minh, Nicolae Ceaușescu, Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, Hu–Wen, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, … King George III in 1776 … all paid the price.
As they say, Nothing last forever. Got to say that those Pyramids are standing the test of time though.
How much you want to bet that Volodymyr Zelenskyy won’t be living on the 35th Floor of a spacious Miami Condo after all this?
When the time is right, They’ll Whack Him. He will pay the price like the rest.
Play with Fire, You get burned.
segregate the population into 50+ States and then use a Calculus (The Electoral College) to ‘equalize’ the whole is an archaic method, when it is entirely possible to validate a consensus by gross means (popular Vote).
Thats just gibberish.
The States preceded the Constitution by centuries. The People were not clamoring for a centralized government. They risked their lives and treasure, to escape a centralized government dictated to, and abused, the People. When the leaders of several States experienced the limitations of each state trying to engage in foreign trade, and tried to fiqure out how to defend themselves, they saw a value of having a National government to do what the States, individually, struggled to accomplish.
The Constitution is structured to take a multiple generations of history into account.
The nation was to be run by two entities. The States, and the People.
Thats why Senators were selected by the States, and not the People. The Senators were supposed to look out for the interests of the States.
The People elected the House. The Peoples House. The House is supposed to answer to the People. That's why each State has two Senators. To put Delaware and Alabama on the same footing as New York and Pennsylvania. States with equal power, with the fed despite Disproportional populations.
It is a truly beautifully constructed Constitution.
You should take some to understand the design and purpose.