You are attempting to change the facts for what purpose?
Election Interference: Here are the Four Colorado Justices Who Voted to Exclude Donald Trump from the 2024 Ballot
- Thread starter MAGA Macho Man
- Start date
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Oh I think the commentators are playing the same gotchya games that the right plays on a daily basis.
WEATHER53
Diamond Member
- Apr 13, 2017
- 39,388
- 28,007
- 2,915
Look at that half dozen real scary people that were taking over the government
Lib 101
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
I was just asking a question. What facts do you think I’m trying to change?
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Possibly that a state court isn’t a proper judicial forum to charge federal crimes.
This is especially true when the state doesn’t even bother to charge the crime.
We know you’re retarded. But still, you and your fellow shallow libturd hacks can never quite answer the obvious question:
If the 14th Amendment says a candidate is disqualified when he has engaged in an insurrection, what is required to legally and properly establish that the challenged candidate did ever “engage” in an insurrection?
Some random judge after considering some alleged “evidence” in a mere hearing? Morons like you are presently contending exactly that. That our U.S. Constitution allows a one mere state lower court judge to make a call affecting the possible disqualification of a major federal office candidate based on dubious “evidence” in a mere hearing.
Sure. That’s what the framers of the 14th had in mind.
Over an order that for all practical purposes does not exist? It is in a hold position. It simply is noise now.
Dragging in a distant past event as were it like that ruling. I could illustrate if you do not know what I mean.
There is nothing to threaten. I am not concerned as I believe the ruling at CO will be overturned in DC.
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Nobody was trying to charge a federal crime in a state court
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
Yes, exactly that. A court case where arguments are made, evidence collected and deliberations made. That’s exactly what the framers have in mind.If the 14th Amendment says a candidate is disqualified when he has engaged in an insurrection, what is required to legally and properly establish that the challenged candidate did ever “engage” in an insurrection?
Some random judge after considering some alleged “evidence” in a mere hearing? Morons like you are presently contending exactly that. That our U.S. Constitution allows a one mere state lower court judge to make a call affecting the possible disqualification of a major federal office candidate based on dubious “evidence” in a mere hearing.
Sure. That’s what the framers of the 14th had in mind.
Dress it up with whatever belittling insults you want. In the end it’s our legal system. That’s how it works
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Right. No criminal charges were filed.
So without the benefit of even the protections accorded to actual criminal defendants, a state court has now ruled that Trump engaged in an “insurrection.”
Not even after a trial. After a mere civil case pre trial hearing.
And you’re fine with that. We all know why. You’re a hack.
Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 73,012
- 18,699
- 2,190
It’s the foundation of the constitutional amendments are you saying that isn’t relevant in how it’s applied in todays courtrooms??
BS Filter
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2018
- 47,146
- 30,272
- 2,615
Trial by jury.
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Nope. For people other than confederate soldiers and leaders, they likely don’t have any of this crap in mind. But, still, if they had even contemplated such a use of the 14h, they wouldn’t have imagined that such a determination could be made in a State court at all for a federal office. And they absolutely would have envisioned a trial. Here, as you’ve been informed, there was no trial. Just a pre-trial “hearing.”
Wrong. That is not how our legal system works nornianithow it is supposed to work.
Your spin is based on your fantasy and on your ignorance.
What happened in Colorado is a disgrace to the name of the American judicial system. Thank God we have a SCOTUS to overturn that abomination of a ruling.
Are you selling the con job that on January 6 power changes? Why then have the change happen 2 weeks later? Who believes that Biden got in by his minions fighting anybody else?
You changed the topic to being about Confederates. So now lets hear why you did that.
If you want to tie in the SC decision known as Dred Scott v Sandford case, be my guest. This case nailed the lid on the notion that slavery was then legal.
bigrebnc1775
][][][% NC Sheepdog
Section 3 numbnuts but you knew what I was saying"Suction 3"....
Let's discuss that should it ever happen.
Similar threads
