GOP To Withdraw From Colorado Primary If Trump Disallowed

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The decision is not long for this world.
SCOTUS cannot let it stand as a Unilateral action unless Colorado wants to secede.

Yes they can.

 

[justoffal]

Yes they can.

But they won't.... Now if there was a conviction..... Which is doubtful but not impossible.....I'd say they might.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But they won't.... Now if there was a conviction..... Which is doubtful but not impossible.....I'd say they might.

Easy to say.

Now argue it.

That's tougher.

 

[justoffal]

Easy to say.

Now argue it.

That's tougher.

Arguments are fun....but too time consuming. I won't debate anything that also includes a prediction. My post above does.
Predictions are notoriously unfaithful.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Arguments are fun....but too time consuming

Not the kind of argument where two people are arguing with each other.

A formal argument to back up a claim. As is expected of a functional, educated adult.

If you don't have time for that, then you are of low intellectual character and effort. At the very least.

 

[justoffal]

Not the kind of argument where two people are arguing with each other.

A formal argument to back up a claim. As is expected of a functional, educated adult.

If you don't have time for that, then you are of low intellectual character and effort. At the very least.

Your opinion.... You are entitled to it. Doesn't phase me or change mind. Sometimes education means not pursuing the futile.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your opinion.... You are entitled to it

No, it's not my opinion that functional, educated adults are expected to be able to support their claims With reason and evidence. If you think that, then you have been hanging around in low IQ circles.

 

[Dekster]

That doesn't impact who can run. At most States can require signatures to be on a ballot, and not many signatures at that.

Voting and running are two different things, and when it comes to federal office, the Constitution is clear on who is eligible to run for what.

It's why all those tax return disclosure attempts on Trump to be on the ballots in some States fell flat.

State courts don't decide federal law. Sorry. No matter how much you hope this holds, it will be up to the federal courts all the way up to the SCOTUS to decide.

 

[justoffal]

No, it's not my opinion that functional, educated adults are expected to be able to support their claims With reason and evidence. If you think that, then you have been hanging around in low IQ circles.

No, it's not my opinion that functional, educated adults are expected to be able to support their claims With reason and evidence. If you think that, then you have been hanging around in low IQ circles.

Much easier to shove it up your butt later when it gets overturned....because it will be.
The rest would be for your benefit not mine. I already know what I think....don't need to explore it and not obligated to debate it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Much easier to shove it up your butt later when it gets overturned.

Yet you can't say why it would be overturned.

You are basically admitting that you believe something with no good reason or evidence.

So basically you don't know this, it's just on your christmas wishlist.

 

[justoffal]

Yet you can't say why it would be overturned.

You are basically admitting that you believe something with no good reason or evidence.

So basically you don't know this, it's just on your christmas wishlist.

Stay tuned for my after comment when it happens.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Stay tuned for my after comment when it happens.

Why would you be proud of that? You have no idea why it's true. That would be pure luck on your park.

You're like the guy who wakes up everyday and claims it's going to rain. Then when it does rain you run around and tell everybody I told you so.

 

[Darkwind]

That wasn't an argument. Repeating your opinion is not an argument.

You have no argument.

It is an argument, your denial of it does not make it less true.

There is no 14th Amendment attachment to Trump. Full stop.

The quoted section refers to the Confederate armies and politicians. In addition, there has been no charge nor any conviction, anywhere, of Trump being involved in an insurrection or rebellion.

On top of that, the entire notion that the 14th applies today is rendered moot by the fact that those who did server in the Confederacy were actually allowed to serve in Congress. John Kennedy wrote about it in his book, "Coming of Age in the American Century.".

The SC of Colorado is in violation of the Constitution, and the SCOTUS will spank them soon.

 

[Crepitus]

Taking your ball and going home is just the cowards way of doing things.

Appeal the Court ruling up to the ONLY branch of government still dedicated to our Republic, the SCOTUS.

SC(r)OTUS is devoted to nothing other than pandering to their billionaire "sponsors" and collecting more cash.

 

[Darkwind]

SC(r)OTUS is devoted to nothing other than pandering to their billionaire "sponsors" and collecting more cash.

THIS SCOTUS is doing nothing but following the Constitution as it is written.

It is a shame that just 10 years ago, and going back as far as 50 years ago, they didn't.

 

[Crepitus]

THIS SCOTUS is doing nothing but following the Constitution as it is written.

That's not even close to true.

 

[Darkwind]

That's not even close to true.

It is true. Deal with it as you must, but denial is not healthy on your part. /thread

 

[Crepitus]

It is true. Deal with it as you must, but denial is not healthy on your part. /thread

Nope. Look at the legal opinions on the Dobbs decision. Every legal scholar on the planet was and is telling us how bogus that was.

 

[DGS49]

A conviction at this time would not have any impact on the dastardly act of the Colorado SC. Trump has not been accused of "insurrection," so he cannot be convicted of it.

The "snowball's chance in hell" that this decision will be upheld would be based on States' latitude to run Presidential elections, of which we have 50, not one.

 

[DGS49]

Nope. Look at the legal opinions on the Dobbs decision. Every legal scholar on the planet was and is telling us how bogus that was.

Dobbs was bogus? Find one reputable Constitutional "scholar" who had not been expecting the overturn of RvW since approximately 1974.