It will be interesting to see which states remove Biden from the ballot
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 00:49 (two years ago)
thanks to hunter's nude freebasing
― Andy the Grasshopper, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 00:55 (two years ago)
Might as well be
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 00:59 (two years ago)
I think even the most right-wing supreme court judges won't work towards reducing, even giving up their own judicial power, to suit a very strange nazi period of republican party history - that probably isn't that strange in the context of the history of US fascism, exceptions like Aileen Cannon seem like in a tiny minority.
i'd say both that yours is a very reasonable take but that unfortunately, no, recent history has shown that it's not a tiny minority: there are many judges who are just completely fraudulent pieces of shit and everyone knows it. clarence thomas couldn't possibly have more conflicts of interest. he'll be one of the votes that delivers trump
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 00:59 (two years ago)
He wasn’t going to win colorado anyway so I’m the end does this even matter
― I? not I! He! He! HIM! (akm), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:05 (two years ago)
If it flies in Colorado I assume other states will be lining up to disqualify him.
― henry s, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:06 (two years ago)
Doesn't this also remove him from the primary or no?
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:09 (two years ago)
The appeal will probably outlast the primary contest, at least.
― henry s, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:11 (two years ago)
it's bad news at any rate (i'm actually in a very good mood right now, for jobseeking reasons (i can't pay my rent and i may have just landed a decent job), so please don't take this as doomer shit. i am typing this in as good of a mood as you can be in while paying even a minimum amount of attention to what is happening in the world). it's bad news because one outcome is that the supreme court says it's fine that trump is now openly trying to be a dictator (or authoritarian/dictator/fascism/useful fool/whatever), which seems to be yet another milestone on in the collapse of democracy (or however long ago you think that's in the rearview now). the other outcome is that the supreme court does disallow trump from being on the primary ballot. i'll just note at this point that there's a new A24 movie called civil war which appears to try to be apolitical
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:13 (two years ago)
that 'civil war' movie from the little I've read sounds like sci-fi, which if that's the case I'm down for
― Dan S, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:16 (two years ago)
The fight isn't really about Colorado — the suit was under the U.S. Constitution, if SCOTUS upholds it presumably it applies nationwide right? If you're violating the 14th Amendment in Denver, you're violating it in Des Moines.
This is pretty much it. I’d like to think the three justices selected by that fascist asshat would recuse themselves, leaving at least a 3-3 ruling (or perhaps 4-2 with Robert’s joining) upholding the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling, thus sending other states to make similar rulings in accordance with the law, and finally putting this shit show away. It would be doing us all a solid and leaving a great start to the New Year. Whatever, we’ll see I guess.
― birdistheword, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:26 (two years ago)
*Roberts
Rudy, Colorado, what’s the third
The Ghost of Christmas Future, IIRC.
― an icon of a worried-looking, long-haired, bespectacled man (C. Grisso/McCain), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:33 (two years ago)
Just based on how aligned the conservative justices are with the GOP, they will do whatever they think is necessary to preserve the GOP. It is the primary instrument of power for conservatism. Since Trump has recreated the party as his fiefdom, denying Trump ballot access would mean exploding the power base of the party. They will not be any more principled or any less craven than the Congress has been.
I agree with tipsy that the Senate's failure to convict will be their excuse. They can't really duck the responsibility of settling the primary constitutional question that's been raised. It's the whole reason the SCOTUS exists.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:44 (two years ago)
^ And I hope like hell I'm wrong.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 01:47 (two years ago)
I do think you’re wrong but we’ll see. I think that for better or worse the justices are lifetime appointees and realize that Trump will be dead soon and another nutiob republican will then seek power and the justices would rather align themselves with long-term movement than with the unseemly Trump. Alito and Thomas may not cooperate with this approach but I don’t think the others will further ruin their legacies on behalf of Trump. But we’ll see!
― tobo73, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:00 (two years ago)
I think they will overturn the Colorado Supreme Court decision
and I don't think their legacies will be ruined because of it, they will just go on as before, and we will bow down to them when they die
― Dan S, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:22 (two years ago)
I just don’t see how the SC could kick him off the ballot. He hasn’t been convicted of insurrection in the Senate or in a Court. I suppose they could make up a new power, but that would be pretty iffy.
― Beyond Goo and Evol (President Keyes), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:35 (two years ago)
https://i.imgur.com/CDToKFX.png
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:45 (two years ago)
we are FUCKED if people don't know this
god fucking dammit, section 3 of that. just skip to that
FUCK
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:46 (two years ago)
not to be sheeple, but sheeple, fuck, read the goddamn constitution so you can see them lie to you about it to your face
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:47 (two years ago)
Eye of beholder basically
― Beyond Goo and Evol (President Keyes), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:49 (two years ago)
oof yeah, that's going to be a moment, when they argue their way out of section 3, but yes. honestly my view is hold on tight, holy shit
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:50 (two years ago)
this whole case is basically a referendum on whether you believe in complete bullshit or not
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:51 (two years ago)
Not sure what you mean tho. No one has convicted Trump of insurrection. The SC would have to decide he was guilty.
― Beyond Goo and Evol (President Keyes), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:54 (two years ago)
It seems like it says the remedy to the situation is for congress to remove by ⅔ vote, which they already had the opportunity to do.
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:57 (two years ago)
The flip of that, I wonder, is that these pending trials accusing him of insurrection, if the supreme court says he is not an insurrectionist, does that invalidate all these January 6 cases?
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 02:57 (two years ago)
Anyway, they should definitely impeach Trump.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/colorado-supreme-court-disqualifies-trump-from-gop-ballot
So far, other courts to have addressed the question of Trump’s eligibility in light of the Disqualification Clause’s ban on former officials who engaged in insurrection have rejected efforts to bar him from seeking office on grounds of jurisdiction. The Colorado Supreme Court, in a case brought by good government nonprofit CREW, has now made a landmark, first-ever ruling in the country’s history: disqualifying a candidate from the presidency for having violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.The ruling ratifies the lower court finding that Trump engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, under a measure used to keep Confederate officials away from power.
The ruling ratifies the lower court finding that Trump engaged in insurrection on Jan. 6, under a measure used to keep Confederate officials away from power.
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:00 (two years ago)
Yeah the fact that he hasn’t been convicted seems like it’ll be a sticking point
― frogbs, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:01 (two years ago)
it doesn't say he has to have been convicted of it, simply that he took part in it. that seems incontrovertibly true to me but then I am not a brain damaged SC justice
― I? not I! He! He! HIM! (akm), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:02 (two years ago)
if the supreme court says he is not an insurrectionist, does that invalidate all these January 6 cases?
i think there's a judicial process answer to this question, which many are likely to defend all the way up until it happens, and then there's the practical answer, which will likely be violent
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:03 (two years ago)
i am actually still in a good mood so i'm going to stop dwelling on this for now, sorry! but i will suggest the possibility of pretending like we just heard that our favorite guy joe biden is off the ballot in colorado, and it's because of some republican judge bullshit. biden is off the ballot and now republicans win colorado. that's why it would or will get violent.
in that situation we would think it was absurd that biden get kicked off a ballot while trump, demonstrably corrupt to the bone and a will to fascism, gets to run free. that's how conservative people, the kind that actually vote for them, think. the sliver of 'reasonable' conservatives is gone now. those that figured it out post 2016 and especially 2017 and especially any year after that can fuck off for the rest of their lives. so instead all that's left of conservatism is the dogmatic kind. all they see is trump is off the ballot in colorado, and it's because of some democratic judge bullshit. trump is off the ballot and now democrats win colorado. that's why it would or will get violent. what actually happened is becoming something like a curiosity
things are escalating and people are listening to other people who suggest that there
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:15 (two years ago)
...be hugs
ok be well but in general i think it's going to be a time of reckoning with real fascism, incoming, soon. i realize that's on the more negative side of thoughts about the future but it seems real to me, and (sorry, i know, i know) growing up in a pentecostal church, i have seen these fuckers and what they want, it's not good
― z_tbd, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:17 (two years ago)
I think disqualifying one of the major candidates by decision of politically appointed judges is a great way to bring about that reckoning real fast. No matter how much it feels right, it is going to feel like cheating to many millions of people who staged a violent insurrection under far more clear cut circumstances.
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:36 (two years ago)
But what if the disqualified candidate is a real asshole?
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:43 (two years ago)
right as much as he deserves to be booted off the ballot whatever happens next is not gonna be good for the country. personally I feel like "Trump should be disqualified as per the Constitution but he wasn't because he got to appoint 3 Supreme Cort judges so yes fascism is coming you idiots" might be something the Dems could run on
― frogbs, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:43 (two years ago)
No, it’s gonna be fine, Trump is a moderate, I am assured.
― Expansion to Mackerel (Boring, Maryland), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:48 (two years ago)
I think SCOTUS is not going to want to rock the boat too hard. They'll do the minimum necessary to let the status quo prevail, which is to just keep Trump on the ballot. (I don't know what that legal contortion will look like, but they'll figure it out.)
NB: Maybe 5 of them will actually want him gone, that is an outside possibility.
― a man often referred to in the news media as the Duke of Saxony (tipsy mothra), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:55 (two years ago)
I think they'll say you can't remove him for insurrection when he hasn't been convicted by congress or in court.
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:56 (two years ago)
No one has convicted Trump of insurrection. The SC would have to decide he was guilty.
The text doesn't say "shall be found to have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the state," it says "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the state." And, you know, there's video. Call C-SPAN, they could burn you a copy, I bet.
― Tahuti Watches L&O:SVU Reruns Without His Ape (unperson), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 03:56 (two years ago)
You realize this isn't self-evident to a massive portion of the country, right?
― Muad'Doob (Moodles), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:01 (two years ago)
all they see is trump is off the ballot in colorado, and it's because of some democratic judge bullshit.
atm the SCOTUS has 6 justices appointed by republicans and 3 by democrats. this includes 3 justices appointed by Trump himself. so even a 5-4 split would necessarily include at least 2 republican nominees.
however, if there were a decision upholding the ballot invalidation in Colorado, one would hope for a 6-3 or 7-2 court in order to partially neutralize the backlash from Trump's cult.
― more difficult than I look (Aimless), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:03 (two years ago)
its too bad this won't happen in time for primaries because something like this might actually put the nomination in doubt if cards fall the right way and the RNC actually thinks this would severely damage his chances of winning. I know there are a lot of crazies in this country but I think the majority of Republican voters are not Jan 6ers but rather people scared of change who wish we could go back to the 1950s. once Trump is off TV for a few weeks they'll forget about him.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:05 (two years ago)
Yes, I am aware that most people are fucking morons, thanks.
― Tahuti Watches L&O:SVU Reruns Without His Ape (unperson), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:11 (two years ago)
I think the safest thing (in a covering their own asses kind of way) the SC could do is refuse to take the case, allowing CO's ruling to stand but not necessarily establishing that other states have to follow. If they take it and affirm CO, it'll be Jan. 6 every day for millions of MAGAs even if the federal govt sort of limps along thereafter. If they overturn CO and force Trump onto the ballot, welp, there goes the country.
― that's when I reach for my copy of Revolver (WmC), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:15 (two years ago)
like even look at J6 itself there were like 10,000 people there despite Trump getting like 80 million votes. yea some real loonies but not enough that there's more than a handful of now-famous faces in the crowd. a bunch of them were like, real-estate agents. probably like a hundred podcast hosts. they're people who broke a pretty serious law not because they are Nazis but because they are stupid and only capable of hearing the things they want to hear.
― frogbs, Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:16 (two years ago)
Though I suppose if they refuse to take the case, they're affirming the CO ruling. xp
― that's when I reach for my copy of Revolver (WmC), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:16 (two years ago)
yeah it's like if it's taken, he stays on the ballot in CO pending decision.
so it doesn't sound like the "political question" dodge will work here well enough. i have to guess they'll do a "no conviction by court yet or by congress."
once Trump is off TV for a few weeks they'll forget about him.
ooooh my i want what you taking
― digital chirping and whirring (Hunt3r), Wednesday, 20 December 2023 04:21 (two years ago)