Colorado Secretary of State Thinks She's Smarter Than Everyone, Including All Nine Supreme Court Justices

Luckily, I am Independent and said on the board last week, the Supremes would not rule in favor of Colorado. So, I was right again, as usual.
As was I. I am from Dinétah, which I am sure none of the Supremes have ever visited, and the home land told me they were not completely Merican crazy. The earth was right, as always.
 
only in your own addled mind. Your disdain for the UNANIMOUS ruling is very evident. Were you right, when you chose "right" instead of "write"?
No. Totally expected. I am sorry you feel it anti-climactic the Attorney General felt no need to apologize to you for doing what she thought was right. Normal people did not expect it. You will just have to live without it. Or you can send her a nasty gram and bitch at her, if you think it will help you get what you want. You should be more like me, saying yep. Figured. Unless you are simple enough to actully be breathing some goofy sigh of relief. Most people did not expect the Supremes to rule in favor. I didn't hear a single mainstream news service or pundit predicting it. You must be living in an echo chamber of your own mind. Now, you whine, because you didn't get an apology? Grow up.
 
WTF. RIGHT her a nasty gram? There has only been one of you democrats on this board that accepted that they were wrong to his credit and that was Curried Goats. Your plate of crow is there, bon apetit.
I was wrong on what I thought the court would do. I'm not really surprised, I just thought Roberts would of wanted a better legacy for his tenure. Simply having a different opinion than the court doesn't make anyone objectively wrong, that's the thing about opinions, there is no real objective right or wrong. The opinion of the court is just that, an opinion. Albeit the one that carries the highest legal authority. I don't really think you understand the legal arguments either way. And to be clear the Supreme Court didn't decide that Trump wasn't an insurrectionist, they punted on that issue, they merely said the decision to remove him from the ballot should go to congress. Either way, I've always fully expected him to lose the election and be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law which I still see no reason to doubt. I wouldn't start beating your chest just yet. It's going to be a bad year for Trump, legally speaking. He owes NY half a billion by the end of March. Right around when his criminal fraud trial starts and there's still a chance his D.C. court case starts by the end of the summer and this is all after Trump was adjudicated in civil court as defaming the victim of his sexual assault. Not a lot of good news going on for Trump legally. :dunno:
 
the Supreme Court didn't decide that Trump wasn't an insurrectionist,
They didn't say he was and insurrectionist either. As a matter of fact, NO official body has made that determination. Since we live in a society that believes "innocent until proven guilty" that would suggest he is not.
It's going to be a bad year for Trump, legally speaking.
Tsk, tsk, tsk, should I prepare another crow?
He owes NY half a billion by the end of March.
Escrow account, not NY, until the appeals process is exhausted. Those interest payments work both ways should the appeal go against NY, those taxpayers will have another reason to detest their elected officials.
Trump was adjudicated in civil court as defaming the victim of his sexual assault.
Again, we'll see what the appeals court decides.
Not a lot of good news going on for Trump legally. :dunno:
Not as bad as you and the democrats would like. Ask Jack Smith.
I wouldn't start beating your chest just yet.
I haven't been beating my chest--just stating facts. Democrats, you being one of them, have been doing that. I simply referred to the fact that you folks were so sure that your hatred would prevail. I am just pointing out what was evident to so many of us. Thank you for being honest enough to admit your opinion was not the legal opinion of the SCOTUS' unanimous decision.
 
Last edited:
Concerned American will beat his chest and say "woe is me" when the denial is appealed.

No, he won't, just that the fix was in.
 
Luckily, I am Independent

Unluckily, you are a fake. So gtfohwt INDEPENDENT bs... You are anti-Trump, so you are down with the Democrats. You are NOT voting for Trump, you are likely voting for Biden in November --so please GTFOH with your word trickery... save it for your authority-abuse moments lol bc it aint working here regarding your unfair disdain for Trump's upcoming Presidency.

You are also, faking, by playing word trickery regarding what "crying" means in terms figurative speech and the Colorado Secy of State. You didn't predict a thing. As you certainly didn't predict that she'd be take that 9-0 spanking and use it on tv today "crying" that now ---what can happen? Is only the EXACT SAME THING that was going to happen if she'd never took Trump off of the ballot in the first place lol.

Yep, that Corpulent-Cheeks Heffa was on TV today, bragging, about her own mea culpa! lol
And I bet your sorryA$$ gulped down her cyanide laced Kool-Aid, eh? As she sat there, eggyolk on face, saying EXACTLY what she would have said if she had never taken Trump off of the ballot to begin with.
Video starts riiight at those haunting words where she imploded her own unconstitutional actions:

 
Last edited:
Just another sad, TDS-whipped leftoid. She believes in her own mind that she's the greatest Constitutional scholar ever.

Contrite, after losing 9-0? Not these types.







Again

Can't share a nation with these people. Don't even want to.

Dennis Prager is now saying the same thing. Too many people are.

America is over. Hope you're happy, Leftists.
 
She did not sound contrite. Sounded like she took an oath to the constitution, gave her best shot and was overruled by highest court.

A great example of why I declined to mod this site and will never give another dime. Not one red cent. This atrocity was struck down 9-0 and yet here we are, with a so-called "mod" saying oh hey, she took an "oath to the Constitution" and "gave it her best shot".
 
That's not her job. And she's out there now, crying over her 9-0 spanking.

I mean let's take just a moment to absorb the fact that a mod on a site called "US Message Board" is not giving full-throat opposition to Americans being robbed of voting choices by unelected bureaucrats.

This place is getting worse, and believe me, that's a low bar
 
She did not sound contrite. Sounded like she took an oath to the constitution, gave her best shot and was overruled by highest court. So what? You were expecting some lame apology for doing her job as she saw it? What fantasy world are you from?
Any person with half a brain would realize two can that game and Joe Biden could be removed from ballots in red states.

There seems to be plenty of evidence that Joe was peddling influence to foreign nations with is definitely unethical if not illegal.

You might argue that Joe Biden was never convicted of committing a crime but then Trump was not convicted of leading an insurrection.
 
They didn't say he was and insurrectionist either. As a matter of fact, NO official body has made that determination. Since we live in a society that believes "innocent until proven guilty" that would suggest he is not.
Sure they did. Colorado Supreme Court is an official body and this Supreme Court didn't find that they erred on that determination, only that insurrectionist candidates need to be dealt with by Congress.
Tsk, tsk, tsk, should I prepare another crow?
Feel free to prepare whatever you like. Like I said, your candidate was already adjudicated a defaming sexual assaulter and an insurrectionist. The only things he escaped so far are the consequences, not the determinations.
Escrow account, not NY, until the appeals process is exhausted. Those interest payments work both ways should the appeal go against NY, those taxpayers will have another reason to detest their elected officials.
He's still giving up half a billion and praying to win on appeal in a case where his longtime CFO just admitted to and surrendered to the DOJ for perjury during that trial.
Again, we'll see what the appeals court decides.
Well when your CFO admits to perjury before the appeals process really kicks off you kinda get the sense of how that one is going.
Not as bad as you and the democrats would like. Ask Jack Smith.
Jack Smith is doing just fine. He's got a judge in Chutkan who's eager to have this case adjudicated before the election so even if she has to start her trial in August I think we'll be seeing that one before the end of the year.
I haven't been beating my chest--just stating facts.
Like the erroneous one above where you claimed no official body has found him to be an insurrectionist? Im soooo impressed by your command of them. :lmao:
Democrats, you being one of them, have been doing that. I simply referred to the fact that you folks were so sure that your hatred would prevail.
No, I thought Roberts desire for a positive legacy would prevail.
I am just pointing out what was evident to so many of us. Thank you for being honest enough to admit your opinion was not the legal opinion of the SCOTUS' unanimous decision.
And the legal opinion of the court that found Trump to be a defaming sexual assaulter? You accept that, right?
 
She did not sound contrite. Sounded like she took an oath to the constitution, gave her best shot and was overruled by highest court. So what? You were expecting some lame apology for doing her job as she saw it? What fantasy world are you from?
On the other hand, she seems to be an entitled leftist who cares not a whit for the Constitution. She is just a portion of the angry, retrograde left that despises everything that is in opposition to leftist authoritarianism.
 
She did not sound contrite. Sounded like she took an oath to the constitution, gave her best shot and was overruled by highest court. So what? You were expecting some lame apology for doing her job as she saw it? What fantasy world are you from?
What fantasy world is she from? Like Tazbro says, they were simply trying to get their names in the paper.
Best shot? Hahahahahahahahahaha
 
Any person with half a brain would realize two can that game and Joe Biden could be removed from ballots in red states.
There seems to be plenty of evidence that Joe was peddling influence to foreign nations with is definitely unethical if not illegal.
You might argue that Joe Biden was never convicted of committing a crime but then Trump was not convicted of leading an insurrection.

And the evidence, or at least solid appearance, of criminal behavior on Biden's part is much more compelling and damning than anything against Trump; in spite of all the blatant efforts to weaponize and abuse the processes of justice against Trump.

There literally is nothing being used against Trump, that could not very easily be turned back to greater effect against Biden, and against most other Democraps that are in office.
 

Forum List

Back
Top