State election officials prepare for efforts to disqualify Trump under 14th Amendment

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Yet.

 

The timing of the charges thus far are not accidental.  

If you were the prosecutor, when would you have charged Trump for theft of classified materials?

[JonnyF]

16 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

If you were the prosecutor, when would you have charged Trump for theft of classified materials?

Probably when his political opponents told me to. 

 

Kerching!!

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Probably when his political opponents told me to. 

 

Kerching!!

So you admit to being persuadable by political considerations and project that weakness on others.

[Danderman123]

9 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Probably when his political opponents told me to. 

 

Kerching!!

That's trolling.

 

When should the prosecutor have charged Trump for the stolen vlassified documents?

 

Please don't troll by replying "never".

[FritsSikkink]

21 hours ago, BusyB said:

By the time that circus is over he'll have had another 4 years in the WH ????

 

But I see. what you're saying.

Trump won't get enough votes, he needs a lot more people than the die-hard Republicans. Most of those people now see Trump for the disgusting low life he is.

[BusyB]

13 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Trump won't get enough votes, he needs a lot more people than the die-hard Republicans. Most of those people now see Trump for the disgusting low life he is.

The problem is that with the archaic and not fit for purpose US electoral system he didn't get enough votes the first time either.

 

Instead he was 'selected', not elected, despite losing the election. Not the first time, and probably not the last time but I see no move to reform it either.

[newnative]

1 hour ago, BusyB said:

The problem is that with the archaic and not fit for purpose US electoral system he didn't get enough votes the first time either.

 

Instead he was 'selected', not elected, despite losing the election. Not the first time, and probably not the last time but I see no move to reform it either.

     Yes, that's what scares me--the cursed Electoral College.  He was very badly beaten in the popular vote in 2020--by 7 million votes-- but could have still won the election had he strongly  embraced early voting and vote-by-mail, as Biden did, and won some of the close states he lost. 

    He might have 'found' 12,000 more voters, in Georgia, for example, and gotten their votes in before election day, had he embraced early voting.  Instead, he lost Georgia by about 12,000 votes  and ended up breaking the law after the election by coercing Georgia officials to 'find' him those 12,000 votes.  Toooo late.   Hopefully, Donnie will be just as brainless in 2024, should he be the nominee, but can we count on him being that major league stupid twice?

[jerrymahoney]

Lawsuit contends Constitution’s ‘insurrection’ clause bars Trump from running again for president

Updated 3:23 AM GMT+7, September 7, 2023

 

DENVER (AP) — A liberal group on Wednesday filed a lawsuit to bar former President Donald Trump from the primary ballot in Colorado, arguing he is ineligible to run for the White House again under a rarely used clause in the U.S. Constitution aimed at candidates who have supported an “insurrection.”

 

The lawsuit, citing the 14th Amendment, is likely the initial step in a legal challenge that seems destined for the U.S. Supreme Court. The complaint was filed on behalf of six Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters by the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

 

While a few fringe figures have filed thinly written lawsuits in a few states citing the clause, the litigation Wednesday was the first by an organization with significant legal resources. It may lead to similar challenges in other states, holding out the potential for conflicting rulings that would require the Supreme Court to settle.

 

 https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-constitution-2024-election-primary-ballot-19ca3f17881e8818302cb1260e7c2aed

[impulse]

Dems better be careful what they wish for.  If all it takes is one activist judge (and no conviction) to kick someone off the ballot, a case could be made that willful failure to secure a border against an invasion is "insurrection".  That would be just as wrong, of course.  As would getting kicked off a ballot for evidence of bribery with no conviction.  But what a mess we'd be in if one activist judge on either side could negate the will of millions of voters. 

 

Or even further down the road, 12 extremely partisan jurors...in DC for example, where the majority of people polled want Trump found guilty even before the trial starts.  Which is really a gift for Trump, because that's gonna give him a change of venue.

 

Edited September 6, 2023 by impulse

[jerrymahoney]

Trump lawyers move ‘insurrection’ clause lawsuit aiming to bar him from the ballot to federal court

Updated 5:09 AM GMT+7, September 9, 2023

DENVER (AP) — Attorneys for former President Donald Trump moved a lawsuit seeking to bar him from running again for the White House from state to federal court in the first step of what promises to be a tangled legal battle that seems destined for the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

The initial state judge in Denver assigned the case recused himself for an unspecified conflict of interest, and then Trump’s attorneys on Thursday moved the case to federal court — asserting that the matter should be adjudicated at the federal level since it raises a constitutional issue. The plaintiffs in the case will argue it should first go back to state court, but both sides anticipate that ultimately the top echelons of the federal system will have to consider the issues the lawsuit raises.

 

CREW said it will ask a federal judge to return the case to state court. It has also requested a speedy ruling on the issues before Colorado’s Republican primary ballot is finalized on Jan. 5.

 

https://apnews.com/article/trump-2024-amendment-insurrection-ban-ballot-lawsuit-de06bca85bfe233368d6c6f6042c7290

 

 

Edited September 10, 2023 by jerrymahoney

[thaibeachlovers]

On 9/4/2023 at 1:58 AM, Toolong said:

I wonder if those AN members in TH and familiar with recent political gangsterism here have, like me, wondered sadly at how the (very) apparent collapse of democracy in the west only serves the interests of those utterly opposed to it here. Those whose will have tragically prevailed. 

 

The so-called 'models of democracy' in the west were models only in the alternative sense of being dressed-up mannequins. 

 

If you are saying that "democracy" as practiced in the west is a sham, I agree with you.

Far as I'm concerned it's only used to perpetuate a professional political class that does not have the benefit of the populace at it's heart.

 

BTW, if there never was actual democracy, then it can not collapse. All that is happening IMO is that the reality is being exposed.

[Purdey]

Love him or hate him, I would prefer that Trump is found guilty of insurrection or aiding an insurrection before they throw the 14th amendment at him. Are they even able to use the 14th if he hasn't been found guilty yet?

[jerrymahoney]

Opinion
It’s not up to secretaries of state like me to keep Trump off the ballot
By Jocelyn Benson
September 13, 2023 at 12:18 p.m. EDT

 

Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, is Michigan’s secretary of state and the author of “Secretaries of State: Guardians of the Democratic Process.”

Is it up to secretaries of state to determine whether Donald Trump can ever serve in elective office again?

 

That seems to be the nearly universal view of those who say the former president is disqualified from such service under the 14th Amendment and want state secretaries of state to unilaterally keep him off the ballot.

 

But that view is misguided. Whether Trump is eligible to run for president again is a decision not for secretaries of state but for the courts.

 

As secretary of state in a key battleground state — and a former election law professor and law school dean — I am keenly aware of the responsibility that secretaries who serve as their states’ chief election officers bear in reassuring voters that our democracy is secure, fair and accessible, and that election results are an accurate reflection of their will.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/09/13/secretaries-of-state-trump-disqualification/

 

https://archive.ph/tU3yW

[newnative]

On 9/7/2023 at 6:07 AM, impulse said:

Dems better be careful what they wish for.  If all it takes is one activist judge (and no conviction) to kick someone off the ballot, a case could be made that willful failure to secure a border against an invasion is "insurrection".  That would be just as wrong, of course.  As would getting kicked off a ballot for evidence of bribery with no conviction.  But what a mess we'd be in if one activist judge on either side could negate the will of millions of voters. 

 

Or even further down the road, 12 extremely partisan jurors...in DC for example, where the majority of people polled want Trump found guilty even before the trial starts.  Which is really a gift for Trump, because that's gonna give him a change of venue.

 

    Or, even worse case, possibly the worst, you could have the Supreme Court step in and decide that counting every vote isn't really that important and, instead, 5 Supremes will award the presidency to one candidate over another one.  God forbid that would ever happen.   Oh, wait.

[jerrymahoney]

Trump to appear on Minnesota ballot after 14th Amendment challenge dismissed
 11/08/23 5:53 PM ET
 

Former President Trump will now appear on the Minnesota ballot after the state Supreme Court dismissed a challenge arguing the former president should be disqualified from the primary ballot under the 14th Amendment.

 

The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed the case in an order Wednesday, saying neither the courts nor election officials in the state have the authority to prevent the Republican Party from placing Trump as a candidate on the GOP primary ballot. Five Minnesota Supreme Court justices weighed in on the case after two others recused themselves.

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4300645-trump-minnesota-ballot-14th-amendment-challenge-dismissed/

 

(NB this decision involves the MN primary election ballot only)

[Danderman123]

On 9/7/2023 at 6:07 AM, impulse said:

Dems better be careful what they wish for.  If all it takes is one activist judge (and no conviction) to kick someone off the ballot, a case could be made that willful failure to secure a border against an invasion is "insurrection".  That would be just as wrong, of course.  As would getting kicked off a ballot for evidence of bribery with no conviction.  But what a mess we'd be in if one activist judge on either side could negate the will of millions of voters. 

 

Or even further down the road, 12 extremely partisan jurors...in DC for example, where the majority of people polled want Trump found guilty even before the trial starts.  Which is really a gift for Trump, because that's gonna give him a change of venue.

 

I agree with you.

 

Disqualification under the 14th Amendment should only happen after someone is convicted for insurrection.

[Danderman123]

Note that Trump has not even been charged with insurrection.