testtest

supreme court audio of colorado v trump case

powerboatr

Professional
listened to to both sides this morning as well as some justices actually asking intelligent questions
i would urge people to go listen on cspan, vice the talking heads

even the liberals asked some tough questions of both lawyers
very very educational

some things that caught my eye or ear
were the fact pres has to be 35 to be president , but does that mean he or she has to be 35 before the election or inauguration day?
technically he or she is not president until he or she is sworn in, so he or she could turn 35 at midnight the day of swearing in.
this was brought up a few times in circles
so does a state have authority to restrict a person from being ballot based on not being old enough prior to election??? NO
but somehow they want to restrict trump based on a FUTURE date. like he is tried for treason or insurrection prior to inauguration day, even if found guilty . he is not ineligible to be president until swearing in day at noon. NOT NOW, not next week as the round of statements went
colorado says he guilty of the Insurrection, even though no charges have been filed and no conviction of the FEDERAL crime.
but his attorney never brought that up
any who
great listen for 2 plus hours
 
Last edited:
listened to to both sides this morning as well as some justices actually asking intelligent questions
i would urge people to go listen on cspan, vice the talking heads

even the liberals asked some tough questions of both lawyers
very very educational

some things that caught my eye or ear
were the fact pres has to be 35 to be president , but does that mean he or she has to be 35 before the election or inauguration day?
technically he or she is not president until he or she is sworn in, so he or she could turn 35 at midnight the day of swearing in.
this was brought up a few times in circles
so does a state have authority to restrict a person from being ballot based on not being old enough prior to election??? NO
but somehow they want to restrict trump based on a FUTURE date. like he is tried for treason or insurrection prior to inauguration day, even if found guilty . he is not ineligible to be president until swearing in day at noon. NOT NOW, not next week as the round of statements went
colorado says he guilty of the Insurrection, even though no charges have been filed and no conviction of the FEDERAL crime.
but his attorney never brought that up
any who
great listen for 2 plus hours
Better be 9-0 to protect a future Prez from this crap happening now.
 
Was listening to the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show while running some errands. They had on Julie Kelly who writes on DoJ corruption and who observed the Colorado case. She and others had the opinion Colorado got torched in the hearing. It's entirely possible it could be a 9 - 0 and pessimistically an 7 - 2 in favor of Trump. We'll see.
 
Was listening to the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton show while running some errands. They had on Julie Kelly who writes on DoJ corruption and who observed the Colorado case. She and others had the opinion Colorado got torched in the hearing. It's entirely possible it could be a 9 - 0 and pessimistically an 7 - 2 in favor of Trump. We'll see.
It will be in favor of DT. The Presidency must be protected. If were treason, or what the Constitution lays out? Our system of government would be in shambles
 
Lord I pray your right. As it should be. My fear is,
7-2.
Then Roberts gets a reminder of what ever dirt Obama has on him, 6-3. Sandra Day O'Connor redux AKA Amy Coney Barrett decides that she has to sit this one out because trump appointed her, 5-3. Too Damn Close.
 
Lord I pray your right. As it should be. My fear is,
7-2.
Then Roberts gets a reminder of what ever dirt Obama has on him, 6-3. Sandra Day O'Connor redux AKA Amy Coney Barrett decides that she has to sit this one out because trump appointed her, 5-3. Too Damn Close.
roberts IIRC is the adopted child thing...it was shady or ?? roberts could counter with; barry the girls are not yours and mikes

barret actually asked some great questions, overall it was very educational and exciting to be able to really hear live and how relaxed, yet professional the justices were and how they interacted with the attorneys .

they even made a joke once
 
Back
Top