XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican
On 2024-03-06 16:19, AlleyCat wrote:
On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 17:34:30 -0800, Alan says...
They didn't overturn the finding of fact, loser.
They didn't address that. They weren't there to "overturn" anything Colorado's
Kangaroo Courts may have decreed or "find".
Not overturning it means it stands.
If that finding wasn't overturned, then it still stands as fact.
LOL... more bullshit liberal semantics crap... yes, THAT Colorado courts "found" whatever they "found" on Trump IS fact, I never said they didn't, but they have ZERO jurisdiction in FEDERAL election affairs, when it comes to whether they can, unilaterally, keep someone off their ballot.
So you agree that Trump engaged in insurrection.
Got it.
The SCOTUS spanked them pretty hard on this, ski bunny. YOU just can't accept it, so like you saying "we" don't believe in something, because "we don't like
it"... this applies to you, as well.
I accept that the USSC twisted the plain language of the US
constitution, loser.
YOU don't like it that the SUPREME COURT followed the LAW.
Just like YOU being a pansy about guns and not liking the 2nd amendment, you don't like what the SCOTUS did, so your pissing, moaning and crying abut it.
LOL
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GH1_aMHXMAA1YzO?format=jpg&name=large
LOL... poor baby.
Colorado could have decree till the cows came home, and they could de-cry all they wanted to, like you are... but that doesn't change the FACT that they have
NO JURISDICTION in a CRIMINAL case involving Trump at the FEDERAL level and can't use the 14th Amendment Section 3 Disqualification Clause, in a FEDERAL elections case.
Too bad, so sad.
Oh... and was there a CONVICTION in this Colorado Kangaroo Court?
Where in the US constitution does it state the NEED for a conviction?
Nope. So they couldn't do anything anyways, because only THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES has jurisdiction. THEY have to decide whether someone can be on a
ballot or not.
Nope. As the language of the constitution makes clear, the US Congress
has the ability to remove the disability of being disqualified by having engaged in insurrection:
"But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
That language necessarily implies that the disability exists WITHOUT congressional action and prior to such a vote.
So how can that work under your and the (bought-and-paid-for) USSC's
opinion?
It's simple. You psychos are throwing everything at Trump trying to make something stick. Colorado probably knew they couldn't get away with it, but seeing how the wheels of justice grind very slowly, they were hoping they could
keep Trump off their ballot till it was election day.
Fail.
Trump could ONLY be barred and banned from ballots if he was CONVICTED, and then STILL, only CONGRESS can decide on the matter.
Wrong and wrong...
...loser.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)