Trump Banned From The Ballot In Colorado in 2024
- Thread starter Keystone19250
- Start date
they are not that smart.
Hammer67
Professional
The State Supreme Court in CO decided that he was guilty of insurrection. That's how they paved the way for this decision.
I realize that four liberal appointed (not elected) judges made that unsupported claim, but that's hardly evidence, at least in my book. Doubtful anyone of them has seen the recorded speech by President Trump on January 6th. But they do like msnbc and cnn.
Hammer67
Professional
I'm not making any sort of argument in support of their decision, by any means. I'm just responding to your post saying that he hadn't been found guilty of insurrection. Agree with it or not, he was found guilty of it in CO. Just sayin.
bc22wm
Custom
Smart enough maybe, guts enough no way in hell.
Talyn
SAINT
Talyn
SAINT
There was no trial (i.e. no due process) in CO. A violation of the 14th Amendment.
Trump was not charged with anything in CO, but private parties petitioned the CO court to remove his name from the primary ballot based on their personal opinions.
Therefore, it was a political decision.
Just sayin.
Hammer67
Professional
Once again, I'm not defending their decision in any way, I'm actually strongly against it. I was just pointing out that it happened as a way to open the door to the ballot decision. As far as the State Supreme court is concerned, he was found guilty.
Talyn
SAINT
What was the Colorado Supreme Court decision?
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Trump is disqualified from holding the presidency under the Constitution's so-called insurrection clause.
Disqualified is not the same as guilty.
For the purposes of disqualification, “guilty” means that a person was found guilty following a trial, entered a guilty plea, entered a no contest plea accompanied by a court finding of guilty, regardless of whether there was an adjudication of guilt (conviction) or a withholding of guilt.
Whenever an offender is convicted of an endorsable offence, the court has a discretionary power to disqualify.
Trump has never been tried for insurrection because there is no evidence he did, beyond political gamesmanship, and there was no due process.
Hammer67
Professional
Jeezus, I don't know how clear I need to make it, but you're trying to argue with the wrong person here, bud. Find someone else to debate semantics with. I merely pointed out that as far as the state is concerned, that's the deal.
uspatriot1960
Custom
100% facts. He has not been found guilty of insurrection because he hasn’t even been charged with insurrection in a criminal court. This is nothing but politics…
Talyn
SAINT
Hammer67
Professional
Btw, if anyone is so motived to read the court ruling, here it is:
Talyn
SAINT
Scroll down to the dissenting opinions by the three CO Supreme Courts judges (one of which was the Chief Justice) that did so.
www.cbsnews.com
Read the Colorado Supreme Court's opinions in the Trump disqualification case
The decision by the Colorado Supreme Court's 4-3 majority tees up a high-stakes showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court over the constitutional provision at the center of the case.
www.cbsnews.com
Bassbob
Emissary
They also spent the first 3 pages re-defining the word "insurrection".
When judges do this kind of crap there should be a mechanism to remove them. And I don't mean the ballot box, which in this case wouldn't do it anyway since the CO SC justices are appointed. A legal mechanism. When judges rule in an unconstitutional manner they should be removed from the bench. As it is they can rule as they see fit with no ramifications whatsoever.
When judges do this kind of crap there should be a mechanism to remove them. And I don't mean the ballot box, which in this case wouldn't do it anyway since the CO SC justices are appointed. A legal mechanism. When judges rule in an unconstitutional manner they should be removed from the bench. As it is they can rule as they see fit with no ramifications whatsoever.
Judges need a little “skin in the game”. Unconstitutional rulings, and they get fired or better yet.. fines or open to being sued by those hurt by their errors.
That would be all well & good, except in my state, ALL of the illegal (by state constitution) election activity will continue because nothing was done to stop any of the lawless activities. If you don't have to worry about the election, why not go for broke?