Zone1 Trump braces for Supreme Court hearing on whether he can stay on 2024 ballots: Live

[peacefan]

Trump braces for Supreme Court hearing on whether he can stay on 2024 ballots: Live
Oral arguments to be heard today as highest court weighs Republican’s eligibility to run for White House again amid ‘insurrection’ allegations pertaining to Capitol riot

Remote : Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:25:19 GMT
Local : 2024-02-08(Thursday) 11 : 25 : 19
Found via World Headlines on nicer.app

to me, it seems Trump had a direct hand & voice in the Jan 6th events.
what do you all think about it?

 

[pknopp]

He will be able to stay on the ballot.....................unless or until he gets convicted of something.

(which he most likely will)

 

[Curried Goats]

I actually think there's a chance the Supreme Court upholds the ban and goes further and affirms that Trump is an insurrectionist and not just bars him from the ballot but from office. The Court is facing a lot of pressure and it's from respected Republican lawyers, historians, constitutional law professors.... and Trump's argument is just bad. How badly do they want to embarrass themselves agreeing with any of it? If they don't have the balls to ban him the next thing they're likely to do is just sit on a decision until after the election and throw their hands up and say it'll apply next time.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Trump braces for Supreme Court hearing on whether he can stay on 2024 ballots: Live
Oral arguments to be heard today as highest court weighs Republican’s eligibility to run for White House again amid ‘insurrection’ allegations pertaining to Capitol riot

Remote : Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:25:19 GMT
Local : 2024-02-08(Thursday) 11 : 25 : 19
Found via World Headlines on nicer.app

to me, it seems Trump had a direct hand & voice in the Jan 6th events.
what do you all think about it?

I think you are a fucking idiot.

FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number: ex-official

The FBI had so many paid informants at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, that they lost track of the number and had to perform an audit to determine how many “Confidential Human Sources” wer…

nypost.com

 

[DGS49]

The whole campaign to take Trump off the ballot is the greatest recent example of Democrat duplicity. While Democrats constantly claim that Trump and the Republicans are a "threat to democracy," they use this bullshit legal claim to prevent HALF THE FUCKING COUNTRY from voting for the candidate they manifestly want to vote for. More than half, if the current polling is correct.

Now who is the threat to democracy?

Everyone knows that the "legal" arguments for this case are a joke but the Leftist mob fervently takes them seriously.

 

[JGalt]

They would be setting bad precedence if they ruled against Trump. If Trump could be kept off the ballot, anyone could be kept off it in the future.

 

[SavannahMann]

The whole campaign to take Trump off the ballot is the greatest recent example of Democrat duplicity. While Democrats constantly claim that Trump and the Republicans are a "threat to democracy," they use this bullshit legal claim to prevent HALF THE FUCKING COUNTRY from voting for the candidate they manifestly want to vote for. More than half, if the current polling is correct.

Now who is the threat to democracy?

Everyone knows that the "legal" arguments for this case are a joke but the Leftist mob fervently takes them seriously.

What if half the country wanted to elect a 26 year old man from Guatemala as President? Would you be screaming for Democracy then? Or would you be screaming that the guy isn’t qualified according to the Constitution?

 

[SavannahMann]

They would be setting bad precedence if they ruled against Trump. If Trump could be kept off the ballot, anyone could be kept off it in the future.

Anyone engaged in insurrection who had previously taken an oath to serve. Sure. Anyone not a Natural born Citizen, or at least 35 years old. Absolutely. Those are the standards according to the Constitution.

 

[JGalt]

Anyone engaged in insurrection who had previously taken an oath to serve. Sure. Anyone not a Natural born Citizen, or at least 35 years old. Absolutely. Those are the standards according to the Constitution.

That's idiotic. There was no "insurrection."

Nobody from the protest has even been charged with "insurrection."

 

[JLW]

This case should be a slam dunk. Trump is obviously ineligible to run under Article XIV, Section III of the Constitution. Trump has “engaged in insurrection and rebellion” against the United States of America. He incited the riot that stormed the capital in order to halt the peaceful transfer of power. Whether you are a “strict constructionist” or “originalist” Trump disqualification is the only interpretation of that provision you can have if you are honest in your beliefs.

Now to make the issue of presidential eligibility understandable to the MAGA base that the people should have a say whether to elect the treasonous Trump, let us look at MAGA favorite V. Putin. V. Putin can not run for president because he is not a “natural born citizen” under the U.S. Constitution. Since he is ineligible, he can not run. End of story. Same as Treasonous Trump. He is ineligible and disqualified to run because of his actions against the US government and constitution. End of story.

If the conservative members of SCOTUS are true to their beliefs they will find against Trump. LOL. I would not hold my breath. Hypocrisy is rampant in conservative SCOTUS decisions.

 

[Moonglow]

The whole campaign to take Trump off the ballot is the greatest recent example of Democrat duplicity. While Democrats constantly claim that Trump and the Republicans are a "threat to democracy," they use this bullshit legal claim to prevent HALF THE FUCKING COUNTRY from voting for the candidate they manifestly want to vote for. More than half, if the current polling is correct.

Now who is the threat to democracy?

Everyone knows that the "legal" arguments for this case are a joke but the Leftist mob fervently takes them seriously.

Duplicity? Why do want to allow insurrection by a president in the US?

 

[Moonglow]

That's idiotic. There was no "insurrection."

Nobody from the protest has even been charged with "insurrection."

Just seditious conspiracy.

 

[buckeye]

I think the SC is going to slap this down and it could be 9-0. I sure hope it is.

Since no one has charged, let alone convicted Trump of insurrection, they have no basis in which to rule otherwise.

 

[BULLDOG]

They would be setting bad precedence if they ruled against Trump. If Trump could be kept off the ballot, anyone could be kept off it in the future.

Well, anybody who did something to disqualify himself could be kept off the ballot.

 

[Dekster]

Trump braces for Supreme Court hearing on whether he can stay on 2024 ballots: Live
Oral arguments to be heard today as highest court weighs Republican’s eligibility to run for White House again amid ‘insurrection’ allegations pertaining to Capitol riot

Remote : Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:25:19 GMT
Local : 2024-02-08(Thursday) 11 : 25 : 19
Found via World Headlines on nicer.app

to me, it seems Trump had a direct hand & voice in the Jan 6th events.
what do you all think about it?

I think when you let My Pillow guy be running your response, you get what you pay for.

 

[dudmuck]

That's idiotic. There was no "insurrection."

Nobody from the protest has even been charged with "insurrection."

an insurrection is a violent uprising against the government or other authority. That's the only standard.

 

[1srelluc]

Go ahead SCOTUS, rule against Trump and let's get this party started.

I suspect you would have all manner of states tell the feds to fuck right off.

The feds are useless anyway because they have forgot who they work for.

 

[White 6]

Trump braces for Supreme Court hearing on whether he can stay on 2024 ballots: Live
Oral arguments to be heard today as highest court weighs Republican’s eligibility to run for White House again amid ‘insurrection’ allegations pertaining to Capitol riot

Remote : Thu, 08 Feb 2024 10:25:19 GMT
Local : 2024-02-08(Thursday) 11 : 25 : 19
Found via World Headlines on nicer.app

to me, it seems Trump had a direct hand & voice in the Jan 6th events.
what do you all think about it?

Was trump a part of an insurrection or one of the organizers? Sure. Will the Supreme Court do some broad ruling that allows individual states to make the determination in a National Election, without a conviction of any kind in a Federal court? NO.
I don't like him, either, but The Supremes will not allow hayhem to be decided willy-nilly from state to state, bases on state charges, especially state charges for an action that did not occur in their state.

 

[rightwinger]

to me, it seems Trump had a direct hand & voice in the Jan 6th events.
what do you all think about it?

Congress has already determined that he incited and participated in an insurrection

 

[peacefan]

The whole campaign to take Trump off the ballot is the greatest recent example of Democrat duplicity. While Democrats constantly claim that Trump and the Republicans are a "threat to democracy," they use this bullshit legal claim to prevent HALF THE FUCKING COUNTRY from voting for the candidate they manifestly want to vote for. More than half, if the current polling is correct.

Now who is the threat to democracy?

Everyone knows that the "legal" arguments for this case are a joke but the Leftist mob fervently takes them seriously.

Jan 6th was 'a slap in the face of Lady Liberty'.

now she (or rather : those Dems, on her behalf) are returning the "favor".
i see nothing wrong with that.