Not reading the post that you are replying to?
Just reflexively pushing at those keys.
Actually, I was thinking about Jackson. But you are right, the vote could go 7-2.
Jackson actually made some comments that made her sound against taking Trump off the ballot but who knows how she will actually vote.
Sotomeyer hasn’t given herself away at all.
Who knows? 
I always hold my guesses when commentators suggest a Justice is leaning this-way or that-way based on the questions they are asking. A justice could just be asking devil’s-advocate questions to craft the appearance of balance.
1 Like
Reminds me of some decades ago when I was involved in negotiating a contract. On one cost elements I provided evidence to the contractor that it might not be considering all the costs. The contractors assistant said “he’s saying we might not have asked enough”, to which his boss said “He’s just trying to create the illusion of impartiality”.
Can’t say if I recall if that was true or not.
Yeah you never know. I suspect it will be no closer than 6-3 though.
Surely the left members of the court have to consider other states could use this against Democrats.
2 Likes
Maybe a couple of them. I suspect Sotomeyer will be a knee jerk vote to take Trump off the ballot.
I’d settle for that.
But I’ll reiterate what I said earlier. It should be 9-0. There is no Constitutional basis for declaring Trump an insurrectionist, given that he has never been charged with it, never mind convicted of it. Any judge who says otherwise is a politician, not a judge.
3 Likes
I agree.
democrats - party of democracy….
1 Like
Party of law and order.
It’s not our fault that you guys want to vote for an insurrectionist con man.
Clinging to the insurrection word won’t make it real.
Try the Easter Bunny instead.
4 Likes
when did you move on from “russian plant”?
remember, 50 ex cia agents….
3 Likes
So much of their pretense about “save our democracy”. Most don’t want it as long as they get their way.
6 Likes
of course. as with everything else with them, it’s all narratives and fiction
1 Like
The fear is palpable.
I agree trying to get Trump off the ballots is idiotic and I hope he prevails in all of these legal cases and the idiots are left with huge legal bills.
Why is Rasmussen saying its democrats when they stated they asked “likely US voters”? Genuinely interested, what am I missing in the linked story,
I agree with you that it should be 9-0. But judges can declare him an insurrectionist. Bench trials happen all the time. Even in criminal cases or in civil like this one. What they can’t do is use their limited purely subjective finding to keep him off ballot. Especially so when the standard of proof is civil in nature
And most likely it’s upto Congress anyway. The Roberts quote was perfect - The 14th was meant to limit state actions.
1 Like
