I’ve spent my fair share of time and done plenty of business in Colorado but this anti-Democratic shit show from their Supreme Court has put Colorado as a state right in line with China. I will not patronize the state with any tourism dollars and will avoid businesses and products that domicile or come from the state. My own little personal line in the sand that will help me sleep better at night.

I’m confident this will be overturned by SCOTUS, but the implications of such a blatant anti-democratic action moved our country closer to a line we won’t return from.

quote:

Originally posted by dking271:I’m confident this will be overturned by SCOTUS, but the implications of such a blatant anti-democratic action moved our country closer to a line we won’t return from.

Not without real violence.

The Emperor Truly Has No Clothes.

Special counsel in Trump case unconstitutional, former Reagan AG says.

Former Attorney General Ed Meese has presented arguments to the Supreme Court that they should reject Special Counsel Jack Smith’s requests because he was unconstitutionally appointed in the first place.

Meese, along with law professors Steven G. Calabresi and Gary S. Lawson, filed a friend-of-the-court brief Wednesday to present the case that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Smith — a private citizen — is in violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.

"Not clothed in the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor," the brief states.

"Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos," they argued.

The brief was filed in response to Smith’s request to the court to expedite former President Donald Trump’s case arguing presidential immunity for his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, which are connected to criminal charges brought by Smith.

Meese argues that the "illegality" of Smith’s appointment is "sufficient to sink Smith’s petition, and the Court should deny review."

Messe and company noted in the brief that Smith was appointed "to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity [including former President Donald Trump] violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021."

While Garland cited as statutory authority for this appointment, Meese argues that "none of those statutes, nor any other statutory or constitutional provisions, remotely authorized the appointment by the Attorney General of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement power under the title of Special Counsel."

"Second, even if one overlooks the absence of statutory authority for the position, there is no statute specifically authorizing the Attorney General, rather than the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint such a Special Counsel," the former AG wrote.

"Under the Appointments Clause, inferior officers can be appointed by department heads only if Congress so directs by statute… and so directs specifically enough to overcome a clear-statement presumption in favor of presidential appointment and senatorial confirmation. No such statute exists for the Special Counsel," he added.

Meese, who served as attorney general under former President Reagan, said "the Special Counsel, if a valid officer, is a superior (or principal) rather than inferior officer, and thus cannot be appointed by any means other than presidential appointment and senatorial confirmation regardless of what any statutes purport to say."

Earlier this month, Smith petitioned the high court to decide Trump’s immunity claims in his case facing charges related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Smith asked for expedited consideration of the case to essentially have the high court take over jurisdiction before the lower federal courts have fully decided the matter.

Smith wants the court to expedite the claims in hopes to keep Trump’s Washington, D.C., trial — scheduled to begin March 4 — on track.

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...ormer-reagan-ag-says

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
Truly embarrassed that this shit is happening in my state.

I left 10 years ago and I’m glad I did. That place is falling apart since the influx of Californian’s and their shit politics. The cartels have taken over the pot operations and it doesn’t seem that any of the politicians care (most were probably in on it to begin with). You can keep that shit. Beautiful place but now it’s full of whackaddodles

quote:

Originally posted by 1967Goat:
The Emperor Truly Has No Clothes.

Special counsel in Trump case unconstitutional, former Reagan AG says.
<snip>

Thanks for the excellent post sir.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
If he's not on the Colorado ballot write him in. Truly embarrassed that this shit is happening in my state.

Apparently write-in votes wouldn't be counted for the same BS reason he can't be on the ballot

Colorado state laws on write-in clvotes says “a vote for a write-in candidate shall not be counted unless the candidate is qualified to hold the office for which the elector’s vote was cast.”

Todd told VERIFY in an email that “write-in candidates have to meet the same eligibility criteria that named candidates do” and “if the Courts say he is not eligible for the ballot, that applies to both a named and write-in candidacy.”

https://www.9news.com/article/...mpaign=snd-autopilot

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
If he's not on the Colorado ballot write him in. Truly embarrassed that this shit is happening in my state.

I thought I read that write-ins weren't allowed in Colorado.

Write him in anyway. Defy them. Conservatives are rule followers by nature and progressives have figured this out: they beat us within the confines of rules (which they feel no loyalty towards) then watch as we argue amongst ourselves or grudgingly obey the rules. They burn down police stations when they get angry.

quote:

Apparently write-in votes wouldn't be counted for the same BS reason he can't be on the ballot

Colorado state laws on write-in clvotes says “a vote for a write-in candidate shall not be counted unless the candidate is qualified to hold the office for which the elector’s vote was cast.”

If this stands, the Colorado GOP will go to a caucus system and cancel the primary.

The leftists have screwed up big time this time. Their sick obsession with Donald Trump has really done them in. Several states are now exploring removing Biden from their primaries, due to Biden's abdication of his duties, with his wide open southern border.

It doesn't matter if they are successful in their efforts; the whole shebang will probably be shut down by the Supreme Court, but they have finally opened Pandora's Box with their insane obsession with Trump.

^^^^
I wouldn’t say that they’re insane. The leftists correctly recognize that President Trump is their mortal enemy, and an extremely dangerous one.

As the overused saying goes: "Breaking"

https://twitter.com/TheLeoTerr.../1738281892229886028



It seems to me that this ruling is quite significant.

https://lists.youmaker.com/lin...UuHpYMhQc/ciGWPD2tYc

House Judiciary Seeks Documents From Jack Smith Over Trump Cases

'Based on publicly available information, the Committee has significant concerns about your commitment to evenhanded justice.'

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and House Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance Chairman Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) have demanded documents from special counsel Jack Smith seeking information about his investigation of former President Donald Trump, and threatening a subpoena if the Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to ignore similar requests they submitted earlier this year.

"Based on publicly available information, the Committee has significant concerns about your commitment to evenhanded justice," the House Republicans wrote on Thursday in a letter to the special counsel.

Mr. Jordan and Mr. Biggs are asking for documents, including communications between the special counsel and the U.S. Attorney General's office regarding investigating and prosecuting President Trump, salaries and travel costs incurred by special counsel staff working on the Trump case, and hiring criteria for the team.

They gave a deadline of Jan. 4 for the requested materials.

Mr. Smith is prosecuting former President Donald Trump in two separate federal criminal investigations, one alleging mishandling of classified documents and another alleging interference in the 2020 elections. He was appointed special counsel last November to investigate matters related to Jan. 6, 2021.

The committee chairs pointed out that this is a prosecution by the Biden administration of "President Biden's chief opponent in the upcoming presidential election," and that a record showing partiality has emerged.

"You have a record of attempting to criminalize political discourse, as evidenced by your reported interest in how the Justice Department could prosecute conservative tax-exempt groups engaging in constitutionally protected political speech," the letter reads.

They called into question Mr. Smith's appointment as special counsel, raising questions of "fairness and justice."

cont...

quote:

They called into question Mr. Smith's appointment as special counsel, raising questions of "fairness and justice."

As pointed out by Ed Meese (more on the last page)... no authority to begin with:

Former Attorney General Ed Meese has presented arguments to the Supreme Court that they should reject Special Counsel Jack Smith’s requests because he was unconstitutionally appointed in the first place.

^^^I believe this was pointed out by Jonathan Turley (along with Alan Dershowitz AND others!) back when Smith was first 'appointed'! Crickets in the media though...

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
As the overused saying goes: "Breaking"

...and owned.

The corrupt leftofascists can't even get their agenda past a left-dominated state supreme court

quote:

Michigan supreme court rules that Trump will stay on state ballot

Ex-president can participate in state primary despite accusations of insurrection stemming from the January 6 Capitol attack

Carter Sherman
Wed 27 Dec 2023 09:50 EST

Donald Trump will remain on Michigan’s state ballot after a ruling from the Michigan supreme court on Wednesday, which upheld a lower court order.

The move sets the stage for the former president to participate in the Michigan primary despite accusations that he led an insurrection against the United States.

The court’s decision not to move forward with a case against Trump sets the court in sharp contrast to the Colorado supreme court, which recently ruled to strip Trump from its state primary ballot because of his role in the January 6 riot at the US Capitol.

Full article:Michigan supreme court rules that Trump will stay on state ballot

Melania Trump spends Christmas with ailing mother, missing Mar-a-Lago celebration

video at link

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...istmas-ailing-mother

.