Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Trump Disqualified in Colorado

Trump Disqualified in Colorado

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
167 Posts 12 Posters 3.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #124

    She seemed skeptical in her questioning

    Only non-witches get due process.

    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by
      #125

      I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

      Only non-witches get due process.

      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
      JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

        I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

        JollyJ Offline
        JollyJ Offline
        Jolly
        wrote on last edited by
        #126

        @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

        I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

        What's the end result in the long run?

        Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

        HoraceH jon-nycJ 2 Replies Last reply
        • 89th8 Offline
          89th8 Offline
          89th
          wrote on last edited by
          #127

          Hopefully it does.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • JollyJ Jolly

            @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

            I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

            What's the end result in the long run?

            Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

            HoraceH Offline
            HoraceH Offline
            Horace
            wrote on last edited by
            #128

            @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

            @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

            I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

            What's the end result in the long run?

            Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

            If Trump had been a lot more serious in his attempt to steal our democracy via paperwork filed by faithless electors, it would have gotten to the Supreme Court and shot down summarily. So the fact that SCOTUS will actually have to shoot this down summarily, means that the anti-Trump crowed made a more legit attempt at subverting our Democracy via paperwork, than Trump ever did. Those are just facts. Or, they will be, when SCOTUS shits on this attempt.

            Education is extremely important.

            jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
            • JollyJ Offline
              JollyJ Offline
              Jolly
              wrote on last edited by
              #129

              Another 2 cents...I can't remember Trump thumbing his nose and ignoring a court decision, Scream, kick, curse, appeal, use every piece of legal tactic available and be dragged to compliance, but he complied.

              The Biden Administration seems like they can ignore what they don't like.

              “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

              Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

              LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
              • JollyJ Jolly

                Another 2 cents...I can't remember Trump thumbing his nose and ignoring a court decision, Scream, kick, curse, appeal, use every piece of legal tactic available and be dragged to compliance, but he complied.

                The Biden Administration seems like they can ignore what they don't like.

                LuFins DadL Offline
                LuFins DadL Offline
                LuFins Dad
                wrote on last edited by
                #130

                @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                Another 2 cents...I can't remember Trump thumbing his nose and ignoring a court decision, Scream, kick, curse, appeal, use every piece of legal tactic available and be dragged to compliance, but he complied.

                The Biden Administration seems like they can ignore what they don't like.

                How so?

                The Brad

                1 Reply Last reply
                • JollyJ Jolly

                  @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                  I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                  What's the end result in the long run?

                  Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #131

                  @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                  @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                  I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                  What's the end result in the long run?

                  Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                  Yeah it’ll be dead, assuming at least 5 sign on to the same reasoning that kills it, such as the enabling legislation argument. Which I think they will.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • HoraceH Horace

                    @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                    @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                    I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                    What's the end result in the long run?

                    Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                    If Trump had been a lot more serious in his attempt to steal our democracy via paperwork filed by faithless electors, it would have gotten to the Supreme Court and shot down summarily. So the fact that SCOTUS will actually have to shoot this down summarily, means that the anti-Trump crowed made a more legit attempt at subverting our Democracy via paperwork, than Trump ever did. Those are just facts. Or, they will be, when SCOTUS shits on this attempt.

                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #132

                    @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                    @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                    @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                    I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                    What's the end result in the long run?

                    Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                    If Trump had been a lot more serious in his attempt to steal our democracy via paperwork filed by faithless electors, it would have gotten to the Supreme Court and shot down summarily. So the fact that SCOTUS will actually have to shoot this down summarily, means that the anti-Trump crowed made a more legit attempt at subverting our Democracy via paperwork, than Trump ever did. Those are just facts. Or, they will be, when SCOTUS shits on this attempt.

                    This is just wrong. He attempted to overturn an election. These two states attempted to keep a single name off a ballot.

                    Only non-witches get due process.

                    • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                      @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                      What's the end result in the long run?

                      Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                      If Trump had been a lot more serious in his attempt to steal our democracy via paperwork filed by faithless electors, it would have gotten to the Supreme Court and shot down summarily. So the fact that SCOTUS will actually have to shoot this down summarily, means that the anti-Trump crowed made a more legit attempt at subverting our Democracy via paperwork, than Trump ever did. Those are just facts. Or, they will be, when SCOTUS shits on this attempt.

                      This is just wrong. He attempted to overturn an election. These two states attempted to keep a single name off a ballot.

                      HoraceH Offline
                      HoraceH Offline
                      Horace
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #133

                      @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      @Jolly said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                      I think it will be unanimous-light. Same result with different reasoning. Some will say it requires enabling legislation. Others will point to technicalities in the wording (eg definition of ‘officer’), etc.

                      What's the end result in the long run?

                      Does this eternally squelch this legal argument?

                      If Trump had been a lot more serious in his attempt to steal our democracy via paperwork filed by faithless electors, it would have gotten to the Supreme Court and shot down summarily. So the fact that SCOTUS will actually have to shoot this down summarily, means that the anti-Trump crowed made a more legit attempt at subverting our Democracy via paperwork, than Trump ever did. Those are just facts. Or, they will be, when SCOTUS shits on this attempt.

                      This is just wrong. He attempted to overturn an election. These two states attempted to keep a single name off a ballot.

                      According to the polls, that single name not being on the ballot is likely to change the results of the next election.

                      Education is extremely important.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #134

                        In 2020 Colorado went for Biden by 13.5.

                        Maine splits their electoral votes and Biden got 3 to Trump’s 1.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                          In 2020 Colorado went for Biden by 13.5.

                          Maine splits their electoral votes and Biden got 3 to Trump’s 1.

                          HoraceH Offline
                          HoraceH Offline
                          Horace
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #135

                          @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                          In 2020 Colorado went for Biden by 13.5.

                          Maine splits their electoral votes and Biden got 3 to Trump’s 1.

                          So we're quibbling over price, when precedent is obviously the important thing here. If it works in CO and ME, then what?

                          Education is extremely important.

                          George KG 1 Reply Last reply
                          • HoraceH Horace

                            @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                            In 2020 Colorado went for Biden by 13.5.

                            Maine splits their electoral votes and Biden got 3 to Trump’s 1.

                            So we're quibbling over price, when precedent is obviously the important thing here. If it works in CO and ME, then what?

                            George KG Offline
                            George KG Offline
                            George K
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #136

                            @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                            So we're quibbling over price, when precedent is obviously the important thing here. If it works in CO and ME, then what?

                            Exactly. This is a dangerous precedent. What’s to stop Texas from disqualifying Biden because he’s ignoring immigration laws?

                            And, it doesn’t even matter if he is. All they have to do is say that he participated in an insurrection is.

                            "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                            The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nyc
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #137

                              From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule. I just don’t think that using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot is on the same level as trying to overturn a presidential election.

                              The constitution doesn’t guarantee Trump a right to try it again.

                              Only non-witches get due process.

                              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                              HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                              • MikM Offline
                                MikM Offline
                                Mik
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #138

                                In any event it is a sad state of affairs we are in.

                                “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                  From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule. I just don’t think that using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot is on the same level as trying to overturn a presidential election.

                                  The constitution doesn’t guarantee Trump a right to try it again.

                                  HoraceH Offline
                                  HoraceH Offline
                                  Horace
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #139

                                  @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                  From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                  Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                  using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                  Then why should scotus overrule?

                                  Education is extremely important.

                                  jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                  • CopperC Offline
                                    CopperC Offline
                                    Copper
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #140

                                    It's ok with me if they keep insurrectionists off the ballot.

                                    Before he is kept off the ballot, Mr. Trump would have to be convicted of insurrection, or at least have some kind of due process that condemns him.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • HoraceH Horace

                                      @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                      From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                      Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                      using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                      Then why should scotus overrule?

                                      jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nyc
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #141

                                      @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                      @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                      From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                      Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                      using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                      Then why should scotus overrule?

                                      Because it’s unworkable and vague as written, at least without enabling legislation.

                                      Only non-witches get due process.

                                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                      HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                        @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                        @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                        From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                        Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                        using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                        Then why should scotus overrule?

                                        Because it’s unworkable and vague as written, at least without enabling legislation.

                                        HoraceH Offline
                                        HoraceH Offline
                                        Horace
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #142

                                        @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                        @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                        @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                        From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                        Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                        using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                        Then why should scotus overrule?

                                        Because it’s unworkable and vague as written, at least without enabling legislation.

                                        Strange to call it vague, when your wording of it and as it applies to Trump is not vague at all. Is there something vague about whether Trump is an insurrectionist, or is the vagueness in the constitution itself and how it uses the term "insurrectionist"?

                                        Just food for thought.

                                        Education is extremely important.

                                        CopperC 1 Reply Last reply
                                        • HoraceH Horace

                                          @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                          @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                          @jon-nyc said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                          From the beginning I’ve said this is unworkable and scotus should overrule.

                                          Yet that doesn't ameliorate your disgust at Trump's electors plan. That too was unworkable and would have been smacked down by scotus.

                                          using a constitutional provision designed to keep insurrectionists off the ballot to keep an insurrectionist off the ballot

                                          Then why should scotus overrule?

                                          Because it’s unworkable and vague as written, at least without enabling legislation.

                                          Strange to call it vague, when your wording of it and as it applies to Trump is not vague at all. Is there something vague about whether Trump is an insurrectionist, or is the vagueness in the constitution itself and how it uses the term "insurrectionist"?

                                          Just food for thought.

                                          CopperC Offline
                                          CopperC Offline
                                          Copper
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #143

                                          @Horace said in Trump Disqualified in Colorado:

                                          Is there something vague about whether Trump is an insurrectionist

                                          Neither Mr. Trump nor anyone has been convicted of insurrection in connection with the 1/6 doofuss affair.

                                          I don't believe anyone has even been charged either.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups