2024

[randylahey]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

[TDub]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

whose reality?

[Overlander]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

No, it isn't.
It is actually pretty simple to see.

[zsn]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Doesn't matter who the candidate is, it should be frowned upon in any country

So, by your logic, running for office, by any candidate, in any country, is sufficient to be immune from consequences?

Is there ANY reason that a candidate can be disqualified from running for office?

By your logic any answer to the previous question would be undemocratic!

[jfish26]

I see a couple plausible middle-ground outcomes here.

I could see the Court simply declining to review (or something similar), and keeping powder dry for a state that matters (Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, etc.).

I could also see the Court saying “not yet” on the basis that there are, presently, multiple prosecutions in play (to which Trump is a direct party) that could serve as a legal basis for this conclusion…when resolved.

[Cassandra]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

The same people who took 4 covid boosters, the same people who thought George Floyd was murdered, are the same people who believe that there was an insurrection. The doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in. No one died, aside from a man who had a heart attack outside and a poor woman who was shot by a police officer. The judges in Colorado probably have blue hair and operate on feelings. What's funny though is that they don't realize that this will be overturned by the real supreme court. You can't just delete a candidate because you feel like it.

[Overlander]

Great, another dipshit joins the herd.

[randylahey]

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

The same people who took 4 covid boosters, the same people who thought George Floyd was murdered, are the same people who believe that there was an insurrection. The doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in. No one died, aside from a man who had a heart attack outside and a poor woman who was shot by a police officer. The judges in Colorado probably have blue hair and operate on feelings. What's funny though is that they don't realize that this will be overturned by the real supreme court. You can't just delete a candidate because you feel like it.

Aka the brainwashed cult who never knows when to shut their mouth and open their eyes

[randylahey]

"But the highly politicized and agenda driven media says this is what happened"

"If you question anything that obviously doesn't add up then you are just a racist fascist!"

Buckle up folks 2024 is gonna be a bumpy ride. A lot at stake

[jhawks99]

DDD, "don't believe what you see with your eyes, believe what I tell you."

[twocoach]

Even if said candidate tried to throw Democracy away because he was butt hurt?

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

The same people who took 4 covid boosters, the same people who thought George Floyd was murdered, are the same people who believe that there was an insurrection. The doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in. No one died, aside from a man who had a heart attack outside and a poor woman who was shot by a police officer. The judges in Colorado probably have blue hair and operate on feelings. What's funny though is that they don't realize that this will be overturned by the real supreme court. You can't just delete a candidate because you feel like it.

Setting all the stupidity of this post aside, they are simply following their state laws and Constitution. I would think that the Party of Law & Order would be OK with that but they only seem to be OK with it when it punishes people they disagree with.

[jfish26]

If trump truly tried to throw away democracy then yeah. Remove him. But that's a horribly manipulated narrative of 2020 is isn't based on reality

The same people who took 4 covid boosters, the same people who thought George Floyd was murdered, are the same people who believe that there was an insurrection. The doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in. No one died, aside from a man who had a heart attack outside and a poor woman who was shot by a police officer. The judges in Colorado probably have blue hair and operate on feelings. What's funny though is that they don't realize that this will be overturned by the real supreme court. You can't just delete a candidate because you feel like it.

Setting all the stupidity of this post aside, they are simply following their state laws and Constitution. I would think that the Party of Law & Order would be OK with that but they only seem to be OK with it when it punishes people they disagree with.

There are a number of plausible, intelligent, good-faith arguments against the Court upholding the Colorado ruling.

"It was tourists!" isn't one.

[twocoach]

The same people who took 4 covid boosters, the same people who thought George Floyd was murdered, are the same people who believe that there was an insurrection. The doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in. No one died, aside from a man who had a heart attack outside and a poor woman who was shot by a police officer. The judges in Colorado probably have blue hair and operate on feelings. What's funny though is that they don't realize that this will be overturned by the real supreme court. You can't just delete a candidate because you feel like it.

Setting all the stupidity of this post aside, they are simply following their state laws and Constitution. I would think that the Party of Law & Order would be OK with that but they only seem to be OK with it when it punishes people they disagree with.

There are a number of plausible, intelligent, good-faith arguments against the Court upholding the Colorado ruling.

"It was tourists!" isn't one.

"...And then we have a dust-up at the Capitol, nothing burned down – and we're gonna make that a major deal?"

People are so hopelessly brainwashed. They will believe anything that helps them contort reality into something that fits into their narrative.

And "the doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in" doesn't make it less of a big deal. It confirms that we also have a major problem in this country when some members of law enforcement sworn to uphold the law and safeguard the US Capital are participating in an insurrection against our own government.

[Overlander]

It seemed like those Capitol Police weren't particularly welcoming while they were being beaten and bear sprayed.

At least, to this highly trained set of eyes.

[jfish26]

Setting all the stupidity of this post aside, they are simply following their state laws and Constitution. I would think that the Party of Law & Order would be OK with that but they only seem to be OK with it when it punishes people they disagree with.

There are a number of plausible, intelligent, good-faith arguments against the Court upholding the Colorado ruling.

"It was tourists!" isn't one.

"...And then we have a dust-up at the Capitol, nothing burned down – and we're gonna make that a major deal?"

People are so hopelessly brainwashed. They will believe anything that helps them contort reality into something that fits into their narrative.

And "the doors were unlocked and they invited the protesters in" doesn't make it less of a big deal. It confirms that we also have a major problem in this country when some members of law enforcement sworn to uphold the law and safeguard the US Capital are participating in an insurrection against our own government.

What were Joe and Josephine Capitol Police Officer supposed to do? Fend of hundreds or thousands of armed MAGAs with riot shields and batons?

It's almost like someone with the power to mobilize the National Guard to protect the Capitol from the rioters/insurrectionists...should have done so. Do with this what you will: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/21/us/p ... -riot.html

(It's here I'll note that it's highly UNDESIRABLE for us to HAVE to lock people out of the Capitol. But, games/prizes etc.)

[DCHawk1]

Once again, the California education system covers itself in glory...

[jfish26]

Once again, the California education system covers itself in glory...

YOU MUST BE THIS TALL TO RIDE

[jfish26]

Meanwhile: every day is a good day, but these next few dozen days in particular would be good days for a compromised Supreme Court justice to recuse himself from matters he shares a bed and checkbook with.

[jfish26]

Removing an opposition candidate from a ballot is what an actual attack on democracy looks like

Doesn't matter who the candidate is, it should be frowned upon in any country

This is as good of a place as any.

Jan. 6 Rally Organizers Lied About Plan to March to the Capitol, Report Finds

Women for America First, which planned the rally on the Ellipse, knew of President Donald J. Trump’s plans to have his supporters march to the Capitol but repeatedly denied it to federal permitting officials.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/18/us/p ... ticleShare

According to the investigation, Women for America First, which is run by Amy and Kylie Jane Kremer, a conservative mother-and-daughter team, repeatedly told Park Service officials there would be no march to the Capitol while privately planning for one.

When shown private text messages indicating there would be a march, a park ranger involved in the permitting process told investigators it “bl[ew her] mind,” the report said. The Park Service had repeatedly asked Women for America First whether there would be a march, and the organization “was just adamant there was gonna be no march.”

A White House liaison to the rally organizers sent a text message on Jan. 3 to Women for America First regarding a demonstration at the Ellipse. “POTUS expectations are intimate and then send everyone over to the Capitol,” the message said, according to the report. Katrina Pierson, a Trump spokeswoman, had sent an email on Jan. 2, 2021, with nearly identical language.

Also on Jan. 3, Women for America First, which had received a permit on Jan. 1 for a 5,000-person rally, expanded the number of attendees to 30,000 while continuing to deny to Park Service officials that there would be a march.

On Jan. 4, Kylie Jane Kremer wrote in a text message: “POTUS is going to have us march there/the Capitol.” She added: “It can also not get out about the march because I will be in trouble with the National Park Service and all the agencies, but POTUS is going to just call for it ‘unexpectedly.’”

Shown the texts by the inspector general’s office, a National Park Service permit specialist put it this way: “So, um, basically she lied to all of us,” according to the report.

[...]

Since the Capitol attack, Mr. Trump and his defenders have described the violence as a freewheeling, peaceful protest gone awry. His former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, even claimed that Mr. Trump “ad-libbed” his remarks at the Ellipse calling for a march to the Capitol. But the report is further evidence that the former president and his supporters planned in advance to direct the crowds to Capitol Hill and worked to hide their intentions.

At 12:25 p.m. on Jan. 3, Women for America First sent a widely disseminated email stating: “Jan. 6 is going to be a historic day. All the rallies in the cold, all of the thousands of miles and all of the stress has all been for SAVE AMERICA from a hostile globalist takeover.”

The folks sure were frisky, if really shitty at covering tracks (and covering up the giver(s) of marching orders). Bonus points for a silly-except-that-people-died-and-the-election-was-nearly-stolen-from-80-million-voters reference to a "hostile globalist takeover."

[Sparko]

It wasn't cool to try to stay in office to avoid criminal penalties by staging an insurrection. This isn't hard to understand.