you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HiddenFox 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The fact that it was a unanimous ruling says it all. The people who tried to remove him should now be considered political puranas, showing just how far they are willing to spin the system for their agenda. They should all lose their jobs.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

No

A finding that Trump had himself engaged in insurrection would have been required for keeping the former president off the ballot. The clause says that a person could be disqualified from holding office again if they had “engaged in insurrection or rebellion”.

Although:

In Colorado, the state supreme court had concluded that he incited his followers to engage in insurrection, which met the definition for engaging in insurrection.

This has not been confirmed yet in the legal proceedings, which Trump's lawyers have been able to push down the judicial road.

The US Supreme Court decided too early on this case, because the official legal proceedings have not concluded. The best SCOTUS could do was to judge the Colorado Supreme Court's decision, which they deemed insufficient, before the January 6 legal proceedings were complete.

It's OBVIOUS Trump led an insurrection against the US and has been a traitor in other ways. That level of treachery against the US - by Donald and Jared - should be punishible with the death penalty, as per older traditions.

[–]GuyWhite 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Huh?

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Perhaps ask someone to explain my reply and the following to you:

Jan. 6 committee issued criminal referrals against Trump on Jan 6, 2024:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/the-jan-6-committee-says-trump-broke-these-laws-heres-a-guide

The DOJ should decide on these referrals.