Effort in Colorado to keep Trump off ballot fails

[Xzi]

do you have a source on that? if so, you and i need to become good friends so you can tell tell me the future.

...This is all stuff that happened in the past. The evidence is exhaustive whether we're talking about video footage, tweets, whatever. The ruling has been made, and I'm even willing to bet SCOTUS won't touch on that part of it. If they want to side with Trump they're more likely to argue semantics when it comes to the word "officer." Imagine ending US democracy over semantics.

 

[lolcatzuru]

...This is all stuff that happened in the past. The evidence is exhaustive whether we're talking about video footage, tweets, whatever. The ruling has been made, and I'm even willing to bet SCOTUS won't touch on that part of it. If they want to side with Trump they're more likely to argue semantics when it comes to the word "officer."

ill be honest with you, and you will probably insult me on this as you really seem to do that regardless, but i dont know why they would even argue the term " officer" though it would be a pretty funny meme moment if trump told them he wasnt their president like they said for so long. It comes down to the word " engaged in". Since you claim that you are from colorado, ill assume you are familiar with colorado law regarding disorderly conduct laws, and more specifically how they specifically mention that one is being disorderly by discharging a firearm ( which is fair ) EXCEPT those ENGAGED in legal target practice. So, you could argue as to what constitutes being " engaged in" target practice means, but ill give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you have a rational/reasonable assessment of it. The way this relates back to trump is, that trumped was not part of the "riot" or "rebellion", if he had been there, thats totally completely fine then and id be out of an argument, but unless you can pin determining the meeting place, date,time, website URL or anything SPECIFICALLY to trump, then yes, its an abuse of that phrase, otherwise from now on anyone can discharge a weapon and say they are engaged in target practice even if theres no real way to connect those dots.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

By changing your text to gibberish I improved it, it seems.

 

[lolcatzuru]

By changing your text to gibberish I improved it, it seems.

who are you talking to, you didnt quote anyone.

 

[Chris2055]

Bro can't remember what he posted 50 minutes ago.

 

[x65943]

Yeah, that's what Trump and his braindead cronies did on January 6th. Actions have consequences.


It depends on their willingness to put their own necks on the line by publicly wiping their asses with the constitution. Trump has everything to gain here, and the justices have everything to lose. I'm not going to say it's a done deal that they'll side with Trump, because self-preservation will weigh heavily on them too. This particular amendment cannot be ignored without beginning to unravel the entire constitutional order. Their lifetime appointments aren't worth a flaming bag of dog shit if that falls apart.

If it was putting their necks on the line or as obvious as you say then 3 Democrat judges from Colorado would not have dissented

You are disingenuous at best and absolutely out of touch with reality at worst

I fear the latter

 

[tabzer]

Guys. It's not a popularity contest. You all suck. Go for the next thing.

 

[KingVamp]

Apparently, it was Republicans that brought up the lawsuit, in the first place.

 

[Marc_LFD]

Even if you don't like Trump you have to admit and realize this is undemocratic which the left and the media are always saying "Democracy is under attack" and then this happens.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Even if you don't like Trump you have to admit and realize this is undemocratic which the left and the media are always saying "Democracy is under attack" and then this happens.

Enforcing the constitution is undemocratic?

 

[Taleweaver]

Guys. It's not a popularity contest. You all suck. Go for the next thing.

Yeah, the other candidates aren't exactly stellar. But if argue that the election (or republican nominee, I this case) is about as popularity contest as it gets.

Post automatically merged: Dec 20, 2023

Even if you don't like Trump you have to admit and realize this is undemocratic which the left and the media are always saying "Democracy is under attack" and then this happens.

What do you want me to say?
"Yeah... It sucks to have a constitution that is upheld.", perhaps? Or "maybe he shouldn't have incited an insurrection after swearing an oath to uphold democracy"?

It would've been a different thing if this was ruled after the Republicans picked their nominee. But it isn't. As it is, they can just nominate someone else to represent them.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

"Yeah... It sucks to have a constitution that is upheld.", perhaps? Or "maybe he shouldn't have incited an insurrection after swearing an oath to uphold democracy"?

they only like the constitution when it allows them to line their pockets and let innocent kids die for the benefit of the NRA and 2nd amendment nutjobs

 

[Xzi]

If it was putting their necks on the line or as obvious as you say then 3 Democrat judges from Colorado would not have dissented

If Trump is allowed on the ballot, loses, and then causes mass rioting and violence by claiming the election was again stolen from him, those justices who sided with him will have to be held responsible (impeached). If Trump is allowed on the ballot, wins, and cancels all future elections, those justices who sided with him will have to be held responsible (impeached by the sharp end of a guillotine).

They couldn't possibly pick a worse person to gamble their futures and the future of the country on. The red flags don't get any bigger than verbatim Hitler quotes.

 

[x65943]

If Trump is allowed on the ballot, loses, and then causes mass rioting and violence by claiming the election was again stolen from him, those justices who sided with him will have to be held responsible (impeached). If Trump is allowed on the ballot, wins, and cancels all future elections, those justices who sided with him will have to be held responsible (impeached by the sharp end of a guillotine).

They couldn't possibly pick a worse person to gamble their futures and the future of the country on. The red flags don't get any bigger than verbatim Hitler quotes.

Would you also impeach the 3 Democrat Colorado supreme Court justices who dissented???

It's not as black and white as you think and you can't jail judges just because you disagree with them

 

[Jayinem]

Do Democrats forget that Nancy Pelosi and others were on TV in the Summer of 2020 encouraging Black Lives Matter to riot and cause chaos? Where's their charges? Oh that doesn't fit the agenda huh.

I guess to some of you it's cool to attack innocent businesses and people just as long as you don't go in the Capitol. I remember when Democrats didn't worship Government they rebelled against it. Now you all pander to the Democrat Party many of you supported Ukraine when you probably never heard of Ukraine before the war. Grow some balls, fuck the Government.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Do Democrats forget that Nancy Pelosi and others were on TV in the Summer of 2020 encouraging Black Lives Matter to riot and cause chaos

Never happened.

 

[Xzi]

Would you also impeach the 3 Democrat Colorado supreme Court justices who dissented???

If theirs was the final decision which allowed Trump on the ballot, and he did either of those things as a result, absolutely. For the twentieth time, this isn't about political affiliation. It's about enforcing a very important part of the constitution which maintains democracy.

It's not as black and white as you think and you can't jail judges just because you disagree with them

It is black and white. No running for office after you've demonstrated a willingness to use violence and terrorism to get what you want. Why? Because you're guaranteed to use it again, duh. If the Supreme Court justices "disagree" with enforcing the constitution, then they have no business being on the bench in the first place, and they're still entirely responsible for the fallout caused by their negligent decisions.

 

[Jayinem]

Never happened.

Dare you to click play watch it and say it never happened again. Yes of course it happened, either you weren't paying attention or hoped some of us would forget.

Post automatically merged: Dec 20, 2023

Another video



That's one thing you never do is claim something definitively when you can be proven stupid doing it.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Dare you to click play watch it and say it never happened again. Yes of course it happened, either you weren't paying attention or hoped some of us would forget.

Dumb video built ad hoc, never happened IRL. 5 minutes away from edgy channels would show so.

 

[Jayinem]

You didn't even have time to watch it before replying. I guess you're claiming the video used AI and that wasn't Nancy Pelosi and company doing that. Some of us remember it, your desperation is showing.

I'd prefer someone be honest and just say they DGAF what Democrats do they only care what Trump does. At least it's honesty.