If any state has ballots that won't have trump option, is that like communist style?

[strateguy632]

a president can't be too young but everyone equal to vote and if old enough also equal to get elected.

Updates

+1 y

"All seven of the Colorado high court justices were appointed by Democrats." that is how democrat party use their power. like stalin, violating the principle "voters choose leaders" but they say we can't choose.
meanwhile in Michigan judges don't agree trump did insurrection. "Michigan Supreme Court rejects bid to keep Trump off 2024 primary ballot".

Updates

+1 y

without "due process" that found that anyone did real insurection, that law would not even apply to anyone!

[goaded]

No. It's called following the law, and upholding the constitution. (Remember when Republicans used to claim to be for that, and states' rights?)

Michigan's government doesn't have the right or duty to keep anyone off a primary ballot for being ineligible, even a Chinese toddler could be put forward. The decision has nothing to do with whether Trump engaged in insurrection, which has been established by a court in Colorado and upheld on appeal.

The judge in Michigan wrote that the Colorado ruling "was preceded by a lengthy evidentiary proceeding in a trial court that developed the factual record necessary to resolve the complicated legal questions at issue,", but also "appellants have identified no analogous provision in the Michigan Election Law that requires someone seeking the office of President of the United States to attest to their legal qualification to hold the office."

And one of the appellants pointed out: "the Michigan Supreme Court did not rule out that the question of Donald Trump’s disqualification for engaging in insurrection against the U. S. Constitution may be resolved at a later stage"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/michigan-supreme-court-rejects-attempt-remove-trump-ballot

[Bricealan]

@goaded Have no idea what you said in this lengthy response. "Following the Law" What law?
"States Rights" do not include withholding any person from being on a primary ballot, that is legally entitled to be there. You quote some leftist judge that will do anything to disqualify Trump and everyone knows that will not happen... Yes maybe in Communist China or the old USSR

[goaded]

@Bricealan So you're going to comment without reading what you're responding to?

What law, you ask? The constitution, specifically the 14th amendment. And states have the right to run elections their own way.

Michigan law doesn't require primary candidates attest to their legal qualification to hold the office, Colorado's requires candidates to be eligible. People have already been blocked from standing for office based on their actions on Jan 6.

[RealMarek]

I’m curious about how one can disqualify a person who has not been charged, much less convicted, of insurrection from the ballot for…insurrection. Innocent until proven guilty is law, no?

[goaded]

@RealMarek The judge who decided it didn't seem to have a problem, nor did the concurring state supreme court. You do understand that not all trials involve a jury, especially civil cases like this one? Are you going to pretend Trump didn't have due process, when his lawyers (and those of the Colorado Republican State Central Committee) were there, arguing his side?

Here's the law: https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_1-1-113

"The matter proceeded to a five-day trial beginning on October 30, 2023
and concluding on November 3, 2023 (the “Hearing”). On November 15, 2023, the
parties presented their closing arguments."

From the the District Court Order: www.courts.state.co.us/.../...%20Final%20Order.pdf

[Twalli]

@RealMarek also Trump has been charged.

[RealMarek]

@Twalli Where is he charged specifically with insurrection?

[RealMarek]

@goaded I’m well aware that not all trials are jury trials. I’m not for the minute going to pretend that these courts are apolitical. You can think what you want, but for the other half of the country our courts are politicized and we have a two-track justice system. Furthermore, just because a judge makes a decision doesn’t mean it is necessarily correct. Trump has not been found guilty of insurrection, so removing him from the ballot is beyond the pale in that it anticipated a verdict before it has been rendered.

[goaded]

@RealMarek If you're so sure it was political and not based on the law, tell us what the flaws are in the findings of fact that the judge made. The order is here: www.courts.state.co.us/.../...%20Final%20Order.pdf

Anything else is simple ad hominem.

[Twalli]

@RealMarek there's a federal case against him for inciting an insurrection. That's the only federal charge. Although considering the charges in Georgia and New Yo

[Twalli]

*New York, he'll probably leave those with s criminal record, even if he isn't incarcerated.

[RealMarek]

@Twalli incorrect. These are the federal charges:

2 felony counts (including one conspiracy count) of obstructing an official proceeding under 18 U. S. C. § 1512 1 felony count of conspiracy to defraud the United States under 18 U. S. C. § 371 1 felony count of conspiracy against rights under 18 U. S. C. § 241

Even if he was charged with insurrection he is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the actions in Colorado and Maine presume guilt of insurrection.

[RealMarek]

@goaded Let’s keep this simple. Americans have a right to trial by jury before they are deemed guilty of a crime. Insurrection is a criminal, not civil offense. Therefore assuming Trump is guilty of insurrection without a criminal trial is a violation of due process. If the Supreme Court overturns these state-level rulings, will you be as accepting of their ruling as you are of the state rulings?

[strateguy632]

reminder at the time trump was decided innocent on 2021. just dnc ugliness now.

[goaded]

@RealMarek It already is simple; civil cases have different burdens of proof than criminal cases. In this case, a civil court decided that he engaged in insurrection and the result is that it would be invalid for the secretary of state to include Trump on the ballot, same as if he were a Chinese toddler. He's not yet been convicted of crimes related to his attempt to steal the presidency (because he's doing everything he can to delay the trials), but the state courts are at liberty to make findings of fact and impose civil consequences.

He could, of course, have demanded a speedy trial and be out free of the baseless charges having been found innocent by now. I wonder why he didn't. Strange, since he and you think he's so obviously innocent.

It might have something to do with his main defence being "if a president does it, it's not a crime".

[goaded]

@strateguy632 What court case found Trump "innocent" in 2021?

[Twalli]

I think he is confusing the impeachment with a court case. Yet impeachment only happens after they've determined that something happened.

[goaded]

@Twalli You mean the one where a significant majority of senators voted to convict?

[Twalli]

Well, they can't actually convict him, they can just expel him from political office.

[goaded]

@Twalli It's called a trial and conviction, but it's not a criminal trial or conviction. Many of the Republicans who voted against convicting Trump claimed it was up to the justice system to punish him for Jan 6 (although many couldn't afford protection from Trump supporters for them and their families).

[Pterodon]

Definitely. Now the left wants to control who you can vote for

[Jennz6]

Yes, also like a banana republic

[strateguy632]

well said, also look at the timing, but back in 2020 no court thought trump did insurrection. just now politicized judges stretching laws for their desired preference, all 7 appointed by democrats.

[Jennz6]

@strateguy632 that’s not an insurrection when all he did was tell his followers to go peacefully and patriotically to be heard. Didn’t you see the news report?

[Bricealan]

@Jennz6 Correct... anybody that is not a leftist Communist, knows what you said is correct, but they will twist it any way they can to get what they want. Anybody that heard what he said at the time, knows that, but chose to ignore what really happened and it is sickening to see how it has been twisted in our 'evolving Banana Republic"

[Jennz6]

@Bricealan they already have twisted it and the more they say it the more likely that more people will believe it. Makes me ill. GO TRUMP!

[Bricealan]

Jennz6 For me, it scares the hell out of me to see this kind of thing continue in this country.

[Jennz6]

@Bricealan I feel the same, get Biden out

[Jennz6]

@strateguy632 Thanks for the MHO baby 💕💯

[Jennz6]

@strateguy632 The Chop Zone in Portland or Seattle? That’s an example of an Insurrection. They took over the police department and court house… and nobody was even arrested

[goaded]

Yes, it is. Don't you think that the federal government is more important than a local city government?

[bolverk]

The Democrats would certainly claim that it is not a totalitarian move to to block anyone from a ballot but rather that they are "protecting democracy" but the act of the Colorado Supreme Courts Justices have shown them to be acting to further a political policy,
BUT Colorado's Secretary of State Jena Griswold said that with the appeal filed, Trump will be included as a candidate on the state's primary ballot unless the U. S. Supreme Court declines to hear the case or upholds the state supreme court's ruling.

[strateguy632]

i enjoyed your sophisticated presentation of your idea. tnx.

[Bricealan]

You know that won't happen... no state has the legal right do tell me I cannot vote for a candidate, and we all know that is bull shit. So, any person who wants to vote for Trump cannot do so, if some STATE "Authority" says he will not be allowed to be on that state's ballot... WTF... That would occur in a Communist Dictatorship, Red China, Russia, Mexico maybe.

Those morons in Maine and Colorado have no legal right to do that, and they fucking well know it ! It is incredible to see the absolute idiotic limits some leftists will go to to keep the man from getting elected. Really, it is frightening to see that happen in the United Staates

[goaded]

It's amazing to me that people like you can blithely dismiss the judicial branch of government and decide that you know better what the law is. Then you have Republican leaders stating they'd do the same to Biden, despite knowing without a slightest doubt that he has never done anything that could conceivably be considered an insurrection.

[RealMarek]

Future histories after the fall of the current regime will write: The more deeply involved the US got in Ukraine, the more Ukraine became like the US and the more the US became like Ukraine.

It’s not just the legal system becoming arbitrary that is reminiscent of the Soviets, but Larry Fink acting as a de facto economic controller via ESG policies, the dominance of the Fed and the big-three asset management firms as the source of investment in the economy, the aggressively anti-Christian animus held by the elites (may they be cleared out!).

[goaded]

There's nothing "arbitrary" about it; Trump sent an armed mob to the Capitol to stop the count and steal the presidency for him. In any sane country, that would have been enough for him to have been taken away in handcuffs the day he left office.

[RealMarek]

@goaded You really believe the MSM propaganda. I don’t. I don’t believe there is proof that Trump organized an armed mob with the intent to overthrow the government. There is strong evidence to suggest FBI assets were there to stage incidents and escalate tensions. You and I will never see eye to eye on this because you trust your sources and I trust mine.

[goaded]

I believe the (Republican) witnesses that told the Jan 6 investigation what happened. I believe the evidence in the indictments. I don't believe the serial liar who has been trying to destroy confidence in the electoral system for over a decade, who claimed Obama was ineligible for president, and who was the only president in US history not to oversee a peaceful transition of power to his successor.

[goaded]

Even IF there were FBI assets there "to stage incidents and escalate tensions" (there weren't, but there were some informers); what would they have been able to do if Trump hadn't called an angry mob to DC and sent them to the Capitol with hie lies ringing in their ears?

We now have documentary evidence that the protest planners intended to march on the Capitol and lied about it to the authorities. Yet another solid piece of evidence against the conspiritors.

[RealMarek]

@goaded If this was an armed insurrection why were the arms not used? Why don’t we see a bunch of armed people on video? The only firearm related death was that of a protestor. If it was an armed insurrection, it was the most incompetent insurrection in history.

[goaded]

They were. Didn't you notice? If you get robbed at knifepoint, you've been robbed by an armed person. Clubs, flag poles, bear sprays, even crutches are arms if they're used to attack people. (And there were people there with firearms, almost certainly more than were caught because people were allowed to leave unhindered.)

[goaded]

Again, in case you missed the question: Even IF there were FBI assets there "to stage incidents and escalate tensions" (there weren't, but there were some informers); what would they have been able to do if Trump hadn't called an angry mob to DC and sent them to the Capitol with hie lies ringing in their ears?

[DARKCLOUD1945X]

You forget we are controlled now by THE DEMOCRATIC COMMUNIST PARTY OF AMERICA Joe Biden President. There is no such thing as innocent until proven guilty. Trump was pronounced GUILTY by the Democrats of being a Russian spy for 5years until it was proven that Hillary Clinton bought and paid for the bogus paperwork claiming that Trump was a Communist Spy. Trump impeached twice by Democrats and a few Rhinos. His peers were all Democrats and Rhinos. The Judges presiding over his trials are Democrats the prosecutors are all Democrats. The Democrats now do not even try to obscure the truth, they just outright lie about everything.

[goaded]

Ah, I had a feeling that you were a right-wing nutter, but I assumed you were reasonably talking about Republicans when you talked about re-writing history. I should have known better since your username indicates you think something went wrong in 1945.

[DARKCLOUD1945X]

@goaded You are THE DEMOCRATIC COMMUNIST PARTY OF AMERICA The party that has not told the truth in years and the left has been rewriting history a lot longer than anyone else

[goaded]

Of course I am.

[Twalli]

As a historian (I have a degree in history, so by law I am one), history is rewritten as new evidence is revealed.

[RedInnocent68]

No, because if individual states have the right to conduct their own federal elections (which is stupid, but they do), the Supreme Court should respect states’ rights over their own election processes. It has nothing to do with Communism and everything to do with the rule of law, and constitutional law in particular.

[strateguy632]

states decide "how" but when they decide "who" that is like the communist style. i do not mean economic communism but single party and prevent opposition. not just against the principle that voters must choose leaders but like communist style suppression of opponents.

[exitseven]

Yes, any one party system will rig the election in their favor. If the democrats continue with this I do not think it will end well. They are trying to suppress a majority. History shows it always ends in bloodshed.

[Twalli]

If the state sees a candidate as a clear and present danger, they can vote to remove him from the ballot. It's in our laws, so unless you think our laws are communist, no.

[strateguy632]

nope, only for real rebellion.

[Twalli]

So if a violent, sociopathic, mass murderer ran, you think he should still be on all states ballots?