(12-19-2023 11:28 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 06:56 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  To anyone who thinks this stops with Trump moving forward, you’re wrong. It will be used again if this is allowed to stand. Yet another slippery slope ruling that will destroy the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

Well looky here. A lawyer, who is very much in love with what he sees in the mirror, believes a person is guilty until proven innocent. Or is it just he’s guilty cause someone says so? You have jumped the shark Clarence. Fade softly into irrelevance. Good buy.

Some pretty simple common sense guidelines to stay out of the aim circle of 14-3 above. Boy that seemingly triggers you.

(12-19-2023 10:25 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 10:08 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:55 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:40 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Maybe read 14th 3rd clause with equal vigor.

Dummy….He was the President at the time and cannot engage in insurrection against himself. Plus it explicitly states it’s a congressional matter not a state matter

Section 3

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.

This isn't hard...it's right there in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment as you posted. Surely you understand that President of the United States is an office under the United States? The President is NOT the United States, merely the head of state and head of government. As Judge Chutkan said, "presidents are not kings, and plaintiff is not president."

Insurrection is a matter of interpretation especially in this case. Out of the hundreds and thousands charged most were held to disrupting an official proceedings, which currently is being litigated in the Supreme Court whether or not that in and of itself is a proper legal matter to charge these people with; they were protesting and being disruptive others say which they say is a far cry from being a insurrection. The President didn’t tell them to storm the Capitol and once again just merely ‘interpreting’ he meant that makes a mockery of the law as it depends on hurt feelings

In sort everything is still up in the air on what happened on J6 legally 3 years later outside of partisan rhetoric within days of those events definitely being a insurrection’ so knocking someone off the ballot because of interpretation isn’t democracy or due process

Some might say that when a violent mob breaches the inner sanctum of the Capitol while Congress is performing a core Constitutional function, with the intent of stopping that function, that could very well be a poster child for an insurrection.

And you state that this must be the subject of interpretation.

Well….. both the CO district court *and* the CO Supreme Court did such interpretation you call for. Fairly thorough ones in fact.

The issue is *you* disagree with the end result of the interpretation you clamor for, then try and act as though there was none. And then demand more interpretation I guess….

I’ll admit to being disappointed, tanq. Until now, I was often puzzled - -but also intrigued - - by your legalistic spin on contentious issues. But I never thought you were among those driven by a hatred for the American political system.

There is nothing okay about your current argument. It is purely results-driven nihilism. Not that you care. In fact I am sure that you don’t. But I think less of you for it.

cya in SCOTUS, honey!

These people don't care about "democracy", and they know this will fail one way or the other. What they are seeking is a roadmap or mechanism to be created to do this all over the country in the future.

It'd be hilarious if it's allowed to stand and say, South Carolina/Mississippi/Tennessee/Alabama removes Biden from the SC ballot this way

(12-20-2023 06:05 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  cya in SCOTUS, honey!

What did I tell you and Shere about the problem with Trump's nomination? I said I feared that he would be tied up in court from the primaries through the general election. This is step #1. Then an appeal in January, then to the Federal District Court, then to the SCOTUS where foot dragging throughout the process means if elected he would be disqualified, then 4 more years of the shite show would happen.

I truly like Trump's policies, both in promise in the primaries of 2015 and the election of 2016, and then what he attempted to do before the impeachment BS started.

Clearly our nation's elective process is broken and the Justice System has been mobilized by appointee to become a weapon for a philosophy alien to our founding. It's what fools in this country should have recognized when historical markers and statues came down under this corporatist backlash at Brexit and Trump posing as a neo-Marxist/Maoist movement began.

Now with Trump outshining the rest of the potential Republican nominees he will win the nomination, and quite possibly the general election, and then the courts are set up to overturn his election and hand the party in power the White House over the will of the people AGAIN!

We as a people are facing the fight of our lives for our way of life and the right to own anything. Those rights are more important than any single man or woman. And Trump thinks it is about him. It's not. It's about freedom and rule of law in the hands of those still capable of actually blindly weighing the evidence and rendering a fair decision. But the feckless imposters of our democracy exercised within a Free Republic must be turned out and tried for their crimes against the Constitution. That's what it is about. Not one man's struggle for recognition.

The Colorado ruling is but the first kangaroo court set out to thwart what freedom loving American's want. It has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with globalism.

This ruling will be dragged out now in endless appeals and in the end will be overturned if it looks like the damage to Trump's election has been done and the polls are close enough for another cheat to win it. That way they will continue to pretend that justice has worked. They will only risk a ruling against him at the SCOTUS level should he actually win, and having revealed their true face things will get overbearing quickly. I read somewhere yesterday, maybe here, that participation nationwide at the High School level has dropped 17% and the decline is accelerating. And that is true everywhere but in the South & Southwest, Ohio and Pennsylvania. The sport will survive where it is culturally supported and not so much elsewhere. The collapse of the PAC 12 had many reasons, but participation relates to viewership as people who play a sport tend to watch it and their viewer numbers certainly didn't help them land a competitive contract, and their dwindling supply of athletes spread them a bit thin on local talent as well. This trend is growing.

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 06:56 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  To anyone who thinks this stops with Trump moving forward, you’re wrong. It will be used again if this is allowed to stand. Yet another slippery slope ruling that will destroy the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

You're so full of shite it aint even funny. When was Trump convicted of those "crimes". Off to ignore you go, you aren't even worthy of serious consideration as a rational person. All that alcohol has you unhinged.

(12-19-2023 08:23 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 06:56 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  To anyone who thinks this stops with Trump moving forward, you’re wrong. It will be used again if this is allowed to stand. Yet another slippery slope ruling that will destroy the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

Those are all very good and sound reasons for an American citizen to decide for himself or herself not to vote for Donald Trump in 2024.

Those are not good reasons for a state, by judicial fiat, to exclude an non-convict from appearing on the ballot.

If you had an ounce of intellectual integrity, tanq., you’d acknowledge that. Sadly, you do not.

This ^

You stated it much better than I was able to.

(12-19-2023 09:29 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  It is written in the Constitution, and it is up to the states to see how they run their elections. Other states could follow suit and disqualify Trump as well. It is in the Constitution that Clinton and Obama can't run for a third term, and it is also in the constitution that Arnold can't run since he was born in Austria. This suit that was brought to get Trump off the ballots was done by Republicans.

Dude, just stop. You make yourself look incredibly stupid with baseless claims like this far too often.

(12-19-2023 09:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 08:23 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 06:56 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  To anyone who thinks this stops with Trump moving forward, you’re wrong. It will be used again if this is allowed to stand. Yet another slippery slope ruling that will destroy the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

Those are all very good and sound reasons for an American citizen to decide for himself or herself not to vote for Donald Trump in 2024.

Those are not good reasons for a state, by judicial fiat, to exclude an non-convict from appearing on the ballot.

If you had an ounce of intellectual integrity, tanq., you’d acknowledge that. Sadly, you do not.

Where does the 14th require a conviction, Adopted?

Considering all the other stuff you gloss over as well, I find pretty fing funny you are whining about 'intellectual integrity here.

Lol.

More BS from you? Does it ever end? I wouldn't hire you to handle a speeding ticket.

(12-19-2023 09:40 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  8 years of consequences are coming to fruition. Hope you're all ready to see the downfall of nearly two centuries of political prestige

At least you're self aware enough to understand the danger that you and your progressive compadres represent. You maroons are the only true threat to our "democracy".

(12-19-2023 09:43 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:33 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Wonder how high Trump's numbers will increase because of this? Everything he said is coming true. And they say HE will be the dictator. Most powerful POTUS ever. Prove me wrong.

Doesn't matter how high in CO it seems

Like this will stand. SCOTUS will shoot this down and with it your hopes of seeing Trump destroyed. GTFO.

(12-20-2023 06:50 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 08:23 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 06:56 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  To anyone who thinks this stops with Trump moving forward, you’re wrong. It will be used again if this is allowed to stand. Yet another slippery slope ruling that will destroy the system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

Those are all very good and sound reasons for an American citizen to decide for himself or herself not to vote for Donald Trump in 2024.

Those are not good reasons for a state, by judicial fiat, to exclude an non-convict from appearing on the ballot.

If you had an ounce of intellectual integrity, tanq., you’d acknowledge that. Sadly, you do not.

Where does the 14th require a conviction, Adopted?

Considering all the other stuff you gloss over as well, I find pretty fing funny you are whining about 'intellectual integrity here.

Lol.

More BS from you? Does it ever end? I wouldn't hire you to handle a speeding ticket.

Brother, there are a number of people on this board who just want to disrupt factual discussions by agitating posters in the discussion to break the discussion to chase their rabbits. Don't. Ignore his obtuse ass and move on! If anyone reads these threads looking for hope, or those who hold their positions, or offer positive ideas or insights, the endeavor is short lived as soon as the nanny nanny boo boo crap gets started by half a dozen or so who simply want to render earnest opinions and positions moot by covering it up in B.S.

The sooner those among us realize this and simply ignore them the better off we will be. Then moderation can hold each thread accountable to its topic, warn those who disrupt it, and keep it on topic. But when both sides engage in taunting and deflection and chasing rabbits there is no damned point in moderating the threads. And therein resides the central issue facing the Spin Room. You can't have a reasonable, readable, discussion when there are gaps sometimes a page long which involves pooh slinging among two or more posters. That is all about half a dozen are here to accomplish, covering up things their party cannot answer, and don't want discussed with a never ending pile of shite tossed on the points.

(12-19-2023 10:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 10:00 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:57 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:55 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  14th Amendment. The CO supreme court violated Section 1. Therefore Section 3 cannot be satisfied.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 3.

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.

LOL.

Your rando piles of stuff musings ate quite amusing.

Whatever Lawyer. lol

False advertising

Saul Goodman is a better lawyer than tanked.

(12-20-2023 06:56 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-20-2023 06:50 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 09:38 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 08:23 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-19-2023 07:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Easy fix.

1. Don’t tell people to go to the Capitol and fight the counting of the electoral votes —- expect problems when they breach the voting floor and stop it.

2. Don’t tell your VP to use your votes instead of those certified by the state.

3. Don’t tell your VP when he won’t substitute the uncertified votes in place of those certified by the state to simply throw out the certified votes.

Those are all very good and sound reasons for an American citizen to decide for himself or herself not to vote for Donald Trump in 2024.

Those are not good reasons for a state, by judicial fiat, to exclude an non-convict from appearing on the ballot.

If you had an ounce of intellectual integrity, tanq., you’d acknowledge that. Sadly, you do not.

Where does the 14th require a conviction, Adopted?

Considering all the other stuff you gloss over as well, I find pretty fing funny you are whining about 'intellectual integrity here.

Lol.

More BS from you? Does it ever end? I wouldn't hire you to handle a speeding ticket.

Brother, there are a number of people on this board who just want disrupt factual discussions by agitating posters in the discussion to break the discussion to chase their rabbits. Don't. Ignore his obtuse ass and move on! If anyone reads these threads looking for hope, or those who hold their positions, or offer positive ideas or insights, the endeavor is short lived as soon as the nanny nanny boo boo crap gets started by half a dozen or so who simply want to render earnest opinions and positions moot by covering it up in B.S.

The sooner those among us realize this and simply ignore them the better off we will be. Then moderation can hold each thread accountable to its topic, warn those who disrupt it, and keep it on topic. But when both sides engage in taunting and deflection and chasing rabbits there is no damned point in moderating the threads. And therein resides the central issue facing the Spin Room. You can't have a reasonable, readable, discussion when there are gaps sometimes a page long which involves pooh slinging among two or more posters. That is all about half a dozen are here to accomplish, covering up things their party cannot answer, and don't want discussed with a never ending pile of shite tossed on the points.

You're right yet again. Good advice.

Is insurrection a crime? Yes. Can you be punished for a crime if you haven't been tried, found guilty and convicted of that crime? No.

(12-20-2023 06:21 AM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  These people don't care about "democracy", and they know this will fail one way or the other. What they are seeking is a roadmap or mechanism to be created to do this all over the country in the future.

It'd be hilarious if it's allowed to stand and say, South Carolina/Mississippi/Tennessee/Alabama removes Biden from the SC ballot this way

Thus is a very good point. But I would not have used the word "hilarious". I would instead have said "disastrous".

Yet that is exactly what tanq. and his America-hating running mates on the left are inviting. These people are beyond repulsive.

(12-20-2023 07:14 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-20-2023 06:21 AM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  These people don't care about "democracy", and they know this will fail one way or the other. What they are seeking is a roadmap or mechanism to be created to do this all over the country in the future.

It'd be hilarious if it's allowed to stand and say, South Carolina/Mississippi/Tennessee/Alabama removes Biden from the SC ballot this way

Thus is a very good point. But I would not have used the word "hilarious". I would instead have said "disastrous".

Yet that is exactly what tanq. and his America-hating running mates on the left are inviting. These people are beyond repulsive.

To destroy any democracy all the left or far right has to do is disrupt freedom of assembly, the January 6th myth, and disrupt free speech, which is done on this board daily. Where ideas are exchanged freely lies dissipate. They can't win without controlling a narrative of lies. Yes, they hate our system because the few and wealthy can't dictate policy and law to the rest of us. People need places to exchange opinions and ideas and formulate them. Bog it down in dislikes, censorship of ideas, or needless ad hominem attacks and you disrupt the exchange of information and ideas, the coalescing of those who think similarly, and then the only source of information is from sources that their cadre control.

Disastrous is the correct word, but then we've been ignoring that disaster since Obama and Too Big to Fail.

(12-19-2023 06:57 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Simply remove colorado's EV's from the count and lets move on.

Isn't Colorado one of the states that basically joined a pact that says their EVs will go to the candidate who wins the popular vote? Not what their citizens vote, but what others vote..

Colorado is the next California because several Californians have homes there.

(12-20-2023 07:14 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(12-20-2023 06:21 AM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  These people don't care about "democracy", and they know this will fail one way or the other. What they are seeking is a roadmap or mechanism to be created to do this all over the country in the future.

It'd be hilarious if it's allowed to stand and say, South Carolina/Mississippi/Tennessee/Alabama removes Biden from the SC ballot this way

Thus is a very good point. But I would not have used the word "hilarious". I would instead have said "disastrous".

Yet that is exactly what tanq. and his America-hating running mates on the left are inviting. These people are beyond repulsive.

You and I have our differences when it comes to Trump but your position on him - which I have accepted and moved beyond - hasn't interfered with your common sense or your conservative values.

There are 4-5 people here whose opinions I value over most every other persons here, you are in that group.