Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from the ballot

Perhaps "obstruction of an official proceeding."

And again, this standard you mentioned applies to Gore. SCOTUS ruled that the recount in Florida, which had already commenced, was unconstitutional.

 

Don’t hurt yourself twisting into a

 

Gore engaged in an unconstitutional recount to prevent the transition of power to a lawfully elected successor.

Doesn't require any twisting at all frankly.

 

If Trump is entirely untethered from reality, that's it's own problem, but I don't think that's the case.

Trump told the world in advance that if he lost, the election will have been rigged simply based upon the result. We knew he was going to claim fraud whether there was any evidence of it or not. Bannon stated publicly that Trump would claim victory and then allege fraud, which is exactly what happened. It was evident from Trump's call with Raffensperger that Trump had no interest in the facts about what was being alleged in Georgia. He demonized poll workers and others. He failed to offer any additional data supporting his claims. It got to the point that he had nothing to argue and began threatening an elected official for doing his job. Despite all of that, Trump apparently told people in the DOD that the next administration could handle a certain issue. Makes sense to me that he didn't want to raise any alarms in the DOD about his scheme to maintain power. If, on the other hand, Trump was simply using legitimate means, why keep the military in the dark? Why were the fake electors kept a secret?

This and much more is consistent with the fact that Trump knew what he was doing. That does not mean the Colorado courts had the authority to keep him off the ballot (my gut is that they probably didn't). It doesn't even mean that Trump will be found guilty of a crime, particularly given the very high standard applied in criminal court. But the notion that Trump was confused or just not in his right mind doesn't pass the smell test.

 

My standard carries zero legal weight anywhere. The Colorado Supreme Court standard is active participant in an insurrection. You may think Trump had nothing to do with Jan 6 and the illegal fake elector scheme, but to do so, you need to ignore the evidence and fake elector convictions already on the books.

And the Colorado standard doesn't require a conviction. It just states there was an attempt to overthrow the government and the person in question was an active participant. Wien did Gore actively attempt to overthrow the government? He used the legal means available to him, the court system, to legally pursue a change in outcome. Once those avenues were closed, all challenges stopped.

 

Gore hasn’t been on a ballot in Colorado since then either.

 

Nor has he ever been called or treated as an insurrectionist.

 

Which is why I shouldn't bother continuing to waste my time with you. Good day.

 

Yes, but not based on whether or not he believed he won the election.

What is the Colorado Supreme Court standard you disagree with?

They do a great job of walking through the decision step by step. Here is a link to their explanation of their decision so you don't have to take my word for it:
https://www.courts.state.co.us/user...ation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf

 

LOL. It's funny how all the board's rightie "constitutional scholars" (chuckling as I type that) are strict constructionists (i.e. no federal right to privacy) until that posture no longer suits them. Then, they are willing to "write" in any additional language they want until their desired interpretation makes sense.

Y or N question: Can an employee legally be terminated for cause be the emplyer for stealing without the first criminal charge having been filed? Of course the answer is "yes." Now try to spin that into how the 14AS3 requires a conviction...cite the specific language.

No due process? Trump and the Republican Party intervened and became parties in the case. Trump actively litigated, he didn't just get a judgment in the mail one day.

 

Bullshit as to Gore.

No due process? Trump and the Republican Party intervened and became parties in the case. Trump actively litigated, he didn't just get a judgment in the mail one day.

Lifted right from the opinion itself. Trump intervened.:

"Attorneys for Intervenor-Appellee/Cross-Appellant Donald J. Trump:
Gessler Blue LLC Scott E. Gessler Geoffrey N. Blue
Greenwood Village, Colorado"

 

I do like when the conservative come in to debate the topics but it sure is uncomfortable watching them get their butts kicked so thoroughly that they start posting nonsense. Gore. Is. An. Insurrectionist.

 

What did Gore do after the court ruled against him?

 

Conclusions that are true that you happen not to like are not bullshit.

 

What court ruled against Trump's theory of Pence counting electors?

 

Seriously though, what's to stop say the Pennsylvania Supreme Court from saying that Joe Biden violated the 14th Amendment in providing aid to enemies abroad, and removing him from the ballot?

I don't think you guys realize what a nasty pandora's box the Colorado Supreme Court just opened up.

 

Have you read the ruling yet? Can you explain to us why the court said Trump was an insurrectionist?

I don't think you've read the actual ruling, or you wouldn't be saying most of what you've written in this thread.

 

I already said they unilaterally decided that he was one. Do you care to rebut?

Again, I've read enough of it.

Why don't you actually rebut what I've said rather than simply accuse me of not reading the entirety of the 133 page ruling.

I don't have to read the full ruling to recognize bullshit when I see it.

 

It's like children who hear a curse word on the playground and start yelling it out at home without knowing what it means.

 

Why did the court find Trump to be an insurrectionist?