USCC Oral Arguments did not Go Well for the Dump Trumpers

[Seymour Flops]

Even Justice Kagan asked them why one state should be able to decide who is on the ballot "it sounds awfully national."

The media's reaction went from stunned grieving to forced laughter to cover up the grieving

 

[Seymour Flops]

Sotomayor brought up that Trump has not had any due process, either to be ruled an insurrectionist, nor to be taken off the ballot.

 

[DGS49]

It appears that there are only two questions remaining: (1) Will the decision be 9-0 or 8-1 (Sotomayor), and (2) Will be decision be broad enough to let the other 11 states know that they are pissing in the wind?

Now let's start checking out the pundits who have been saying for the past several months that Trump was going to be removed from the ballot because they "knew" the 14th Amendment provision disqualified him.

 

[JGalt]

It appears that there are only two questions remaining: (1) Will the decision be 9-0 or 8-1 (Sotomayor), and (2) Will be decision be broad enough to let the other 11 states know that they are pissing in the wind?

Now let's start checking out the pundits who have been saying for the past several months that Trump was going to be removed from the ballot because they "knew" the 14th Amendment provision disqualified him.

As usual, John Roberts will probably be the one and only dissenting judge.

 

[Seymour Flops]

It appears that there are only two questions remaining: (1) Will the decision be 9-0 or 8-1 (Sotomayor), and (2) Will be decision be broad enough to let the other 11 states know that they are pissing in the wind?

The 2nd question is probably more important than the 1st. A 6-3, or even a 5-4 decision, broadly written, should suffice. Unless the Democrat state organization are so deranged that they don't mind losing case after case.

Now let's start checking out the pundits who have been saying for the past several months that Trump was going to be removed from the ballot because they "knew" the 14th Amendment provision disqualified him.

Great idea! Here are some:



Even Justice Brown-Jackson - who does not know what a woman is - had sense enough to say, "if there is ambiguity, why should we construe it against democracy?"

Look how sad those "unbiased journalists" look. I'd love to play poker with them. They wear their emotions all over their faces, all seven of them. The looks on their faces is the looks we should have expected when we lost those soldiers in Biden's disastrous Afghanistan pullout, not when "their side" will likely lose a case in which they tried to thwart democracy - according to progressive heroine Brown-Jackson.

 

[Oddball]

When even the affirmative discrimination hire questions your premise, you know you're having a bad day.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The pundits above are hoping against hope for a narrow ruling.

But if they are correct that the USSC is "looking for an off-ramp" (which they said about a hundred times in that one clip, then why would they pick a narrowly constructed off-ramp that would have many more cases brought before them.

No . . . I think they will spank the whole idea of Trump being disqualified for "being an insurrectionist" in an opinion that five of them will sign at least, with the remaining justices signing a narrow opinion about this case from Colorado only. I don't see anyone writing in Colorado's favor.

I cannot imagine any one justice standing alone with an opinion that oh yeah . . . any state can disqualify any candidate it wants. Even the most radical of progressives wants some credibility.

 

[Oddball]

Dorkhota best have a big stack of crying towels for when the verdict comes in.

 

[August West]

Trump` real problems begin when he gets to Georgia. He could be locked up by, get this,....a Black Woman who most MAGAS don`t consider to be human beings. Ouch!

 

[Seymour Flops]

Trump` real problems begin when he gets to Georgia. He could be locked up by, get this,....a Black Woman who most MAGAS don`t consider to be human beings. Ouch!

You really think that bowlegged fanny and her married boyfriend are going to be able to defeat Trump?

 

[Smokin' OP]

Republicans: "STATES RIGHTS!!"
Colorado: "OK, then we'll exercise our right to kick Trump off the ballot".
Republicans: "NOT LIKE THAT!!"

 

[August West]

You really think that bowlegged fanny and her married boyfriend are going to be able to defeat Trump?

Trump`s recorded phone calls will dump Trump. Fani is irrelevant.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Trump`s recorded phone calls will dump Trump.

Why? What crime did he commit over the phone?

Fani is irrelevant.

You were the one so happy that a black woman is going to put Trump in jail. Now she’s irrelevant and not human, you racist?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Even Justice Kagan asked them why one state should be able to decide who is on the ballot "it sounds awfully national."

The media's reaction went from stunned grieving to forced laughter to cover up the grieving

Only because we have a senate half full of embarrassing cultists. With a normal senate, he world have been disqualified long ago, and States wouldn't have to try to take it upon themselves to protect our democracy.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

This the Orange Perv will escape.

The immunity case, far more important, will be refused and allowed to stand sending Trump to trial after trial after trial.

 

[Richard-H]

The SCOTUS justices couldn't say that they'd already decided this case by the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021. Nor could they go into this hearing with an obvious preconceive bias.

They needed to press the Colorado attorney in every way possible so that there would be a record showing that they had played the 'devil's advocate' and thoroughly investigated the issue before deciding the obvious.

The Colorado attorney did a great job of answering their questions. Just the fact that they practically ignored Trump's attorney and spent most of the time questioning Colorado bodes well for Colorado.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The SCOTUS justices couldn't say that they'd already decided this case by the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021. Nor could they go into this hearing with an obvious preconceive bias.

They needed to press the Colorado attorney in every way possible so that there would be a record showing that they had played the 'devil's advocate' and thoroughly investigated the issue before deciding the obvious.

The Colorado attorney did a great job of answering their questions. Just the fact that they practically ignored Trump's attorney and spent most of the time questioning Colorado bodes well for Colorado.

9-0

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf

Never be a legal analyst. You missed the fuck out of this one.

Wake up, cultist.

 

[Nostra]

Republicans: "STATES RIGHTS!!"
Colorado: "OK, then we'll exercise our right to kick Trump off the ballot".
Republicans: "NOT LIKE THAT!!"

Supreme Court: Smokin’ Dupe, sit down and STFU.

 

[Nostra]

The SCOTUS justices couldn't say that they'd already decided this case by the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021. Nor could they go into this hearing with an obvious preconceive bias.

They needed to press the Colorado attorney in every way possible so that there would be a record showing that they had played the 'devil's advocate' and thoroughly investigated the issue before deciding the obvious.

The Colorado attorney did a great job of answering their questions. Just the fact that they practically ignored Trump's attorney and spent most of the time questioning Colorado bodes well for Colorado.

Imagine that, Richard-H full of shit yet again.

 

[Smokin' OP]

Supreme Court: Smokin’ Dupe, sit down and STFU.

A corrupt "supreme court" Q-NUT.
Sit down and STFU.