The courts will do what the courts will do, but in the real world, we all know Trump was intimately involved in an insurrection against the US government, and very likely led it. I happen to think this is treason, and that actual treason, as written in our criminal code, is very, very weak tea indeed, and should be revised. Not only should Trump not be permitted to run for any office ever again, he should be stripped of his citizenship and treated on the level of the 9/11 terrorists. I don’t mean to offend anyone personally affected by 9/11, but an argument can be made that 1/6, and all of Donald Trump’s machinations in general, have done more damage to our democracy than 9/11 did. And think of the lengths we went to, the new laws drawn up, and the changes in our society as a direct consequence of that dreadful day on 9/11.
Just my uninformed opinion but I believe Leonard Leo is currently having the majority opinions written for both the presidential immunity case and the colorado dq case. Harlan Crow will pay any delivery expenses.
I think they’ll hem and haw on immunity, not giving tfg everything he wants but also insisting their decision not be used as precedent in future cases. In the dq case I think they’ll put tfg back on the primary ballot because of no actual conviction for insurrection at this point.
In spite of their attempts not to seriously damage to the fascist cult I still believe that Biden wins in November - so I’ll focus on that happy thought.
I might’ve missed this yesterday, but I hope there are a whole lot of very nervous men out there:
Jeffrey Epstein List of Associates Sparks Conspiracy Theories (msn.com)
According to the rules of nominative determinism, Scott Perry is polarizing.
I thought I read that CREW was involved, but they are not the only plaintiffs.
Feckless letter is feckless.
Wake me up when they pledge to only support Democratic candidates in the state.
Who do you think ranted it out? Alex Jones, Steve Bannon, or Steven Miller?
In the ruling, Gorsuch was cited, from his time on the Court of Appeals
The court cites former Supreme Court Judge Neil Gorsuch in Hassan v. Colorado, saying, “it is ‘a state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process’ that ‘permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.’”
I read that too, but I wonder if they were representing the plaintiffs or the plaintiffs themselves. I don’t want the Dems getting blamed!
“You should punish in the same manner those who commit crimes with those who accuse falsely.”
― Thucydides
That’s a given.
- 3 going on 4 presidential impeachments;
- 2 winning presidential candidates losing the popular vote;
- 1 going on 2 presidential elections decided by the Supreme Court;
- 1 attempted coup; and
- 4 criminal prosecutions of an ex-president.
And a partridge in a pear tree!
C’mon, guys. I mean seriously. It’s the right time of year and everything!
That’s correct. I believe the plaintiffs were 2- 3 four never-Trump GOPers and an two independents. The SCoCO (Scocoa…I kinda like that…now I wish I’d gone to law school and was buddies with Gov Hickenlooper…) decision appears to go farther than the primary though. The excerpts I’ve read would appear to exclude him from the Colorado ballot in November, too.
CREW filed the lawsuit, but CREW is a non-partisan organization.
ETA: Corrected numbers.
I had a student who chose Mein Kampf for a non-fiction assignment and used audiobook. Then he sped it up so that he could get through it faster, so I’m assuming it sounded like the chipmunks reading it.
It was not the best choice as far as comprehension is concerned, but to be fair, comprehension was not high on his list. He ended up struggling to do any of the assignments.
Herman Cain’s tax plan?
About time. Out them all, let the chips fall where they will.
Check the ears… that cat is a Vulcan!