Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from 2024 ballot based on 14th Amendment’s ‘insurrectionist ban’

[Smyrna]

@Publius

Not meeting the eligibility requirements for the highest office in the land is neither a criminal case nor deprivation of life, liberty, or property.

You can’t convict him of “insurrection” without it going to a court first and that court convicting him of insurrection.

[WuWei]

@Ben_Natuf

completely wrong, the house “indicted” him, The trial, as per the Constitution, was in the Senate

Ok

[WuWei]

@Smyrna

@Publius

Not meeting the eligibility requirements for the highest office in the land is neither a criminal case nor deprivation of life, liberty, or property.

You can’t convict him of “insurrection” without it going to a court first and that court convicting him of insurrection.

I sort of agree with that. In order to disqualify a candidate on the grounds of insurrection, there must first be a legal determination that an insurrection occurred.

[Ben_Natuf]

@TheDoctorIsIn

Only if you’re real creative with your definition of “trial.”

Creative?

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

pretty creative bunch

[Smyrna]

@WuWei

I sort of agree with that. In order to disqualify a candidate on the grounds of insurrection, there must first be a legal determination that an insurrection occurred.

It’s in the Constitution;

Constitution of the United States
Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[Ben_Natuf]

for all those who want to say “there was a trial” and claim “due process was served”

How would you feel about instead of trials with Juries we just have anyone off the street accuse someone of a crime and then go straight to a sentencing hearing where the Judge will determine if they actually did the crime? No need for juries, no need for testing evidence. All neAt and tidy!

[Ben_Natuf]

@WuWei

Not this Congress.

has this Congress overturned the verdict?

no

He remains not guilty in the only trial he ever had

[Ben_Natuf]

when did I say they did?

He was found “not guilty” which carries the presumption of innocence. When did anyone ever have to be found “innocent” of anything?

[Oldandtired]

He supported them during his campaign, and he supports them today. His vice president bailed them out of jail. He and his vice president supported rioters, looters, assaulters and killers. Biden could not even condemn antifa or blm after he was elected.
No need to be mealy mouthed and try to run cover for your traitor. He supported what the rioters did.
We also have the fact that he allowed the country to be invaded. In fact, he encouraged illegals to come over the border.
Then we can add on the fact that he sold the office he held to the highest foreign bidder.
Plus, the fact that he used the DOJ to try and keep his son out of prison.
It is fun watching you defend your traitor while pointing your finger at the people you hate.

[Publius]

@WuWei

@Smyrna

@Publius

Not meeting the eligibility requirements for the highest office in the land is neither a criminal case nor deprivation of life, liberty, or property.

You can’t convict him of “insurrection” without it going to a court first and that court convicting him of insurrection.

I sort of agree with that. In order to disqualify a candidate on the grounds of insurrection, there must first be a legal determination that an insurrection occurred.

A determination that the CO Supreme Court made, explicitly.

[Oldandtired]

Look at you saying things that are not true about little old me. I dislike jbiden because he is a senile old crook and always has been.
Jbiden avoided the draft by saying he had asthma. But his asthma sure did not stop him from playing football. He got five deferments.
We have jbiden who slept with a married woman and can’t seem to keep his creepy hands-off young girls. He has also assaulted and defamed one young woman.
biden who had to end his campaign for stealing other people’s works.
Jbiden who stole classified documents as a senator as well as a vice President. When in both cases he was not allowed to remove classified documents from the place they were kept.
Jbiden who used his office to rake in money from foreign countries.
Jbiden who has says everyone but his family must pay their fair share.
Jbiden who has told so many lies he no longer knows what the truth is.
And this is just a few things the senile old pervert you defend has done.
You have no moral high ground here because you defend every sick dirty thing the old pervert has done. While I don’t even support trump.
Biden is a disaster, a sociopathic narcissist and an authoritarian hell bent on stripping away our democracy by locking up and silencing all those who do not worship him. He has gone on national tv and called half the voters in the United evil terrorist who must be destroyed.
He is threat to our democracy and you support him. While I don’t support trump.
Think about it. I defend the rights of the American voters to make their own choices and you want to control who they vote for. Think about what you have become all to support a sick man.

[Ben_Natuf]

and for which they have zero authority to make sans a guilty verdict in a criminal trial or a declaration of the Congress or the President in the case of insurrection.

[Camp]

Looks like he was as President.

What are we missing?

[FreeAndClear]

@Ben_Natuf

to disqualify requires more than an accusation and more than a prepondernce of evidence. At a miinimum to take away an American’s privilges and immunities would require strict scrutiny. You ain’t gonna get there with a verdict in a criminal trial.

Further, as I’ve stated more than once, it is NOT possible to be ineligible in one state without being ineligible in all states. It is a federal issue.

This x 100 gazillion.

This is why the supreme court going to overturn it imo

[Rodeo]

@Ben_Natuf

so a court can now just decide you were guilty without an actual trial to determine guilt?

No

I’m reading through this thread and it appears to me libs have all the answers for what this is not, not impeachment not criminal not a due process situation…

Can someone tell me what the ■■■■ this is other than a group of left wing democrats on a court selected after other states had declined this stupid 14th amendment claim…New Hampshire for example considered this trainwreck and, from townhall.com…“New Hampshire also considered these 14th Amendment arguments to remove Trump from their ballot possibly. They backed down for a good cause: it’s a baseless legal argument. You don’t need to be a lawyer to know that Trump hasn’t been charged with igniting an insurrection. Second, you’re not guilty by default in this country, which has a little thing called due process of law. Sure, whatever happens after that is lawyer’s work, but even the most disengaged voter knows that you have your day in court before anyone is convicted of a crime, barring a plea deal.”

As Johnathon Turley wrote on Twitter…“…This ends a string of losses for advocates of this dangerous novel theory. They finally found a court that would embrace what the court admits is a case of “first impression.” My first impression remains that same. The court is dead wrong in my view…”

From ABC.com…“Judges in Michigan and Minnesota over the past two weeks have ruled that Trump, the 2024 Republican primary front-runner, can be on the ballot in both states, dismissing lawsuits filed by citizens and watchdog organizations that claimed the former president should be barred because of his actions around the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol and efforts to reverse his 2020 election loss.” 14th Amendment challenges to Trump's campaign fail in 2 states with Colorado case pending - ABC News

So now apparently a group of four democrats in one state gets to try to dictate to the entire nation based on a case that’s been rejected in multiple other venues…with a bunch of hannity board libs telling us all what the case isn’t but none of those same libs can seem to define what it is.

Do you lib Democrats get how ridiculous you sound.

[Rodeo]

@Smyrna

It’s in the Constitution;

Constitution of the United States
Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Members of today’s liberal Democrat party don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution…

They are the same people who keep claiming the Constitution was written by a bunch of old dead racist white guys…The people claiming to defend Democracy (it’s a republic) by actively working to destroy it.

[Samm]

@toreyj01

@Samm

@toreyj01

This isn’t a matter of criminal liability when it comes to whether a candidate is eligible to run for office, it is a disability. Same as being younger than 35, or not being a natural citizen. No one is entitled to run for office, you have to qualify for it and some simply don’t. And it doesn’t take a conviction of anything to be disqualified. This disability, this disqualification, has been left to the states to decide, and their court systems. (Article IV, Section II of the Constitution) It is automatic and self executing.

Engaging in an insurrection is a criminal act. Unless an individual is duly convicted of such, they are innocent. It’s in the Constitution. In order to invoke section 3 of the 14A, the individual must be convicted of the crime.

To date, the only legal proceedings to consider 1) that an insurrection occurred, and 2) that Trump engaged in it, has been the second Impeachment. That process concluded with a not guilty verdict.

That isn’t true. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires someone be tried and convicted prior to disqualification.

Baloney. If an accusation alone was all that was required to disqualify an individual it would be an open season and soon nobody would be qualified. Just because the 14th Amendment does not specifically state that does not mean the 5th Amendment is not in full affect.

[Samm]

@toreyj01

@Oldandtired

Then according to you biden and Camela should both be impeached and banned from ever being able to run to office since they supported the blm rioters. Who attacked federal and state buildings.

When did the BLM riots take place and what office did Biden hold when they occurred? You have to be holding public office for the 14th to apply. And how did they support the BLM rioters? Did they support the basic tenet that “Black Lives Matter” or did they support violent rioting?

To play your game, Biden had previously taken the oath of office and, therefore, did not have to currently be in an elected office to be disqualified for inciting and/or engaging in an insurrection. All it takes is having once sworn allegiance and then be accused to be disqualified. Those are your rules, right?

[Samm]

@biggestal99

@Smyrna

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

not a criminal case.

We’ve been over this Allan. Insurrection is a crime … potentially a Capital crime.

[Samm]

@biggestal99

@Ben_Natuf

Thats the first lie, every American Citizen is entitled to it

entitlement is not a right.

there is no right to hold public office.

Stop the parsing Allan. Everyone is entitled to their Rights.