Very sad Colorado would go down that road, but not surprising with what it's become lately. Shame!

And a bogus, losing decision besides.

Trump needs to campaign in every state, regardless of how blue it is. Never let your opponent get an uncontested victory. Make them work for every state or blue bastion, make them expend more resources.

Expect the commies' ruling to be shot down by SCOTUS.

quote:

Originally posted by spunk639:
Four unelected judges have just taken the democratic right to vote for who you choose from millions of citizens in Colorado.

Not to mention arguably throwing the U.S. Constitution under the bus (5th and 6th Amendments) in the process <smhs>

Ultimately, this will be beneficial for Donald Trump

https://twitter.com/VivekGRama.../1737290316527370495

Excellent, Vivek!

From Powerline

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...-from-the-ballot.php

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment precluded those who were federal officials before the Civil War, and then served in the Confederacy or its army, from again holding federal office after 1865. I have written that the theory that this provision somehow applies to Donald Trump is idiotic and ahistorical. The January 6 protest, which certainly did get out of hand, was not an “insurrection”–insurrectionists would have remembered to bring at least one firearm–and Trump urged those who were present in Washington that day to go forward and protest peaceably and legally. Not exactly Fort Sumter.

But the Colorado Supreme Court has struck its blow for the Democratic Party:

¶4…

• The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting portions of Congress’s January 6 Report into evidence at trial.

• The district court did not err in concluding that the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, constituted an “insurrection.”

• The district court did not err in concluding that President Trump “engaged in” that insurrection through his personal actions.

• President Trump’s speech inciting the crowd that breached the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, was not protected by the First Amendment.

¶5 The sum of these parts is this: President Trump is disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three; because he is disqualified, it would be a wrongful act under the Election Code for the Secretary to list him as a candidate on the presidential primary ballot.

These findings started with the district court judge. I haven’t researched his or her provenance, but that will no doubt emerge soon. He or she made the critical findings which the Colorado Supreme Court now holds to be properly with that court’s discretion. In my opinion, they were obviously wrong.

So, where do we go from here? We are in uncharted waters. Never before have we confronted a situation when one political party, that controls a particular state or its highest court, has tried to prevent a candidate of the opposing party from running for president. One cannot overstate what a watershed moment this is. The Democratic Party has staked a claim to permanent control of our federal government, regardless of the will of the American people. This has never happened before in our nation’s history.

Sadly, I think today’s Colorado Supreme Court decision increases the likelihood of violence in connection with the 2024 presidential election. We are rapidly descending to the status of a third world country, and partisan decisions like this one will accelerate that descent. Liberals hate democracy, and this is their latest assault on it. How Americans will respond to this attack on democracy remains to be seen.

The author, John Hinderaker, also wrote that he thinks it is extremely unlikely that the U.S. SC will take by action to stop the decision of Colorado Supreme Court. I can only pray for our Country that the U.S. Supreme Court does take such action.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment

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.

Good analysis from sundance at Treehouse on this -

The Colorado Supreme Court 4-3 Decision is Pure Nonsense and Can Be Laughed At, They Even Admit It on Page 9

yes Sundance has some excellent points

"Trump is not a former “officer of the United States,” as that term is used in the Constitution, meaning Section 3 does not apply. As the Supreme Court explained in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010), an “officer of the United States” is someone appointed by the President to aid him in his duties under Article II, Section 2. The term does not apply to elected officials, and certainly not to the President himself."

In response to Ramaswamy's pledge, the Colorado Republican Party on Twitter responded, saying "You won't have to because we will withdraw from the Primary as a Party and convert to a pure caucus system if this is allowed to stand."

Honestly, the leftists may have well just indicted Trump again for some bogus crime, because it appears the reaction of the people is the same. This mistake by the Colorado SC will only strengthen Donald Trump by making yet more people support him and further motivating those who already do support him.

quote:

Originally posted by spunk639:
Four unelected judges have just taken the democratic right to vote for who you choose from millions of citizens in Colorado.

State Supreme Court Justices are elected. At least they are here.

They're appointed by the governor in CO.

"Democratic governors of Colorado appointed all seven justices to the state’s highest court. To remain on the bench, six of the seven judges went on to win statewide retention elections. The seventh has not yet been put to the vote since she was appointed in 2021."
https://conservativebrief.com/..._medium=ProTrumpNews

God Bless

Rekieta's take. "support the Constitution" is not in the Presidential oath among other interesting interpretations.

John Bolton (who in no way can be described as a Trump fan) lays it out for this empty-headed CNN twit.

https://twitter.com/CitizenFre.../1737367220446023951

The one thing we can ALWAYS count on the Left doing, like they just can't help themselves, is their tendency to overstep and not know or understand when to quit when they are ahead.

Good job! You just made Trump's polling go up even more, you Democrat dumbasses! LMAO

Trump is now 'MORE likely to beat Biden' after Colorado ruling: Top pollster says controversial state Supreme Court decision will lead to a huge surge

The balls on this RINO son of a bitch

Incredible. This guy is thoroughly confused.

https://twitter.com/DanCrensha.../1737317164690850171

^^^ We have disavowed Dan Crenshaw long ago.
Unfortunately, we haven't found a suitable replacement yet.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...they-failed-n2632647

Democrats' Anti-Trump Ballot Stunt Isn't Going As Planned

When Colorado's Supreme Court decided, in a decision already being appealed by the Trump campaign, that the 45th president was ineligible to be president and therefore should be removed from the state's ballot, Democrats did a few things.

Democrats validated Trump's claims of election interference against him , galvanized Trump's supporters, and gave him loads of earned media attention that further amplified his message. What Democrats did not do: divide the Republican party or poison the GOP against the former president by kicking him off the ballot.

Instead, it caused Republicans to rally behind Trump at a level not seen since the FBI's raid of Mar-a-Lago and again make him the center of the political universe weeks before the Iowa caucuses. If Democrats wanted to debunk Trump's claim that Team Biden is engaging in election interference to rig 2024 for Biden, this was certainly not the way to do it.

Rather than being some sort of wake-up call for Republicans or whatever Democrats thought kicking Trump off the ballot would do, it was a rallying cry for the GOP.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) called the Colorado ruling "nothing but a thinly veiled partisan attack" and a "reckless decision."

"This lawless, cynical ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court will not stand," declared Senator Mike Lee (R-UT).

Calling the ruling "an unprecedented and illegal action by liberal Colorado judges," Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) said he plans to "send a letter to the US Supreme Court asking them to immediately reverse this blatant election interference for the sake of our democracy."

"This is what tyranny looks like," declared Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-WY). "An activist court has denied Americans the right to vote for the candidate of their choice in Colorado. I trust that the U.S. Supreme Court will remedy this nonsense."

"Apparently democracy is when judges tell people they're not allowed to vote for the candidate leading in the polls?" asked Senator J.D. Vance (R-OH) of the "disgraceful" ruling that amounts to an "assault on American voters."

Senator Eric Schmitt (R-MO) called the situation a "joke" that "once again will backfire" on Democrats who are "afraid of voters actually voting for their preferred candidate."

"Four partisan Democrat operatives on the Colorado Supreme Court think they get to decide for all Coloradans and Americans the next presidential election," remarked House GOP Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY). "This is unAmerican and Democrats are so afraid that President Trump will win on Nov 5th 2024 that they are illegally attempting to take him off the ballot." Stefanik also observed that, as with "the rest of the unprecedented, constant, and illegal election interference against President Trump, this will backfire and further strengthen President Trump’s winning campaign to Save America."

Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) called the ruling "an unprecedented level of election interference and political sabotage" and declared that the "Left will stop at nothing to silence their opponents; right now, it’s President Trump. Soon, it will be you. Never surrender," he urged.

"This is insane," observed Senator Rick Scott (R-FL). "In the US, we don't allow political hacks to kick their 'enemies' off the ballot because they disagree with them," a tactic the Florida Republican said makes the U.S. "no better than the socialist regimes in [Venezuela] & Cuba."

Indeed. As Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) reminded, the United States has "put sanctions on other countries for doing exactly what the Colorado Supreme Court has done. "

"The very same Democrats who scream about 'DEMOCRACY,' just took an open flame to the very concept," remarked Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-TX).

"Democrats in Colorado are removing President Trump from the ballot because the 'Democrat' Party opposes democracy, which is a system where voters get to select their elected leaders," emphasized Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL). "If Biden and the 'media' actually believed in democracy, they would denounce this immediately."

Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) rightly noted that Democrat attempts to remove Trump as a choice for voters "won't work" and "only emboldens those of us who know America is worth fighting for and that Donald Trump is the fighter we need back in the White House to save America. Bring it on!" he added.

"This is blatant disenfranchisement of millions of voters from the Colorado Supreme Court," noted Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL). "Trump says it best: They’re not after me. They’re after you. I’m just in the way."