Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed the lawsuit in Colorado state court on behalf of four Republican voters and two unaffiliated voters in September, arguing that Trump’s actions related to the Jan. 6 assault disqualified him under Section 3.
From CBS News
At least New Mexico has already set the tone for being willing to disqualify an insurrectionist.
I’ll bet Clarence Thomas has already sent the link to his Venmo account to TFG’s campaign while waiting on the SCOTUS to take up the case.
This is terribly mean but since I may not actually be a nice person it made me laugh.
Hope you’re all safe and sound. We got about 2.5" of rain here in northern Vermont. The Lamoille River backed up onto our back pasture and flooded the road just to our north. I’m not sure how many people on our street evacuated due to the high water. The water was still rising slowly as it got dark last evening. It went out overnight.
I saw a sticker on a parked car’s rear fender yesterday, a new one to me: “Pro-Choice, Pro-Women.” MA plate, vanity of some kind – a color picture (I couldn’t make out of what), taking up the left quarter of the plate. I’d never seen such a vanity plate before. Young, “clean-cut” couple with maybe 7-month-old baby in carseat in back. She was in the driver’s seat but half out of the car so the cigarette she was smoking wouldn’t affect the baby. Strange scene. Then I read Ann Coulter in the article linked to here: “Last week, Coulter tweeted, ‘The prolife movement has gone from compassion for the child to cruelty to the mother (and child).’”
Connected? Maybe not directly, but it seems likely that some so-called prolifers are trying to rescue their movement by claiming concern for women/mothers.
“No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”
Any plain reading of the insurrection clause in its entirety, and particularly the bolded portion thereof, mandates an inclusive reading, one that includes the president. Else why do we refer to the office of the president, or refer to the president as the chief executive officer? If the framers of the 14th amendment had somehow wished to exclude the president, they would have made him a specific, named exception.
Chump: “Here are their names and addresses, you know what to do MAGAts! Do something!”
Critics note that the results often seem bizarrely inconsistent. The same December survey that found 60% of 18-24 year olds believed Israel was committing “genocide” in Gaza found 70% also believed Israel was “trying to avoid civilian casualties.” Majorities of 18-24 year olds apparently think that all of Israel should be surrendered to Hamas (51% agree) — but also that Hamas is a group that “would like to commit genocide” (58% agree) and should be “removed from running Gaza” (58% agree as well). Covering the results, the Times of Israel called the responses “muddled.”
You mean Mark Penn might be ratf*cking the public with his obviously flawed polling?
Who could have known? 
I hate to be the one to tell you this, Viv, but DT would probably get more votes as a write-in than you would with your name on the ballot.
Yes, the three dissenters were elevated to the Colorado Supreme Court by Dem governors, but each was initially appointed to the (lower court) bench by Republican governors.
And under Colorado’s selection process, governors filling a vacancy must choose from a list of three complied by a large commission.
I don’t mean to suggest that the three dissenters are partisan hacks, but I do think the situation is more nuanced than the “appointed by Dems” narrative.
Nitpicking over with, for now.
The current SCROTUS isn’t bound by the Law of Large Numbers, the actual text of statues, Congress’ explicitly stated rationale for said statues, nor consistent consideration of precedent.
They will invent arguments not brought by either Plaintiff nor Defendant, cherry-pick facts (or create them from whole cloth should the need arise), give amicus curiae briefs equal weight as long-established law and otherwise twist themselves into a veritable Gordian knot in order to construct a ruling that delivers the desired objectives of their corporate and/or Federalist Society masters (which, arguably, are one and the same).
Since the PGA is run by Saudi princelings, we know how ethically proper it all is.
It was read to him at bedtime when he was a boy.
Yes, the POTUS (especially in R hands) is thoroughly imbued with Heisenberg properties which allow it to blink in and out of our mundane dimension as required.
“I didn’t have any choice. That’s where my accountability partner is located.”