Trump barred from being President of Colorado.

Nope

Your turn.

 

Yes you are wrong thanks for agreeing.

 

Why does this keep happening


A federal judge dismissed three of five civil counts brought against former President Donald Trump and his codefendants in a Jan. 6 case related to the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick.



Oh yes, big smoke and mirror games being played to keep y'all distracted, that's why.

 

because it doesn't exist.
Next...

 

I won't be surprised that more states follow suit and there probably will be more states eliminating Trump from their ballots.

 

The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots (msn.com)

I hope the Supreme Court makes the right decision on this matter and it's done right. I don't want a President that is going to put the people in jeopardy. Trump was President and caused havoc and if he were to get in again, will there be more havoc to be caused? Let's hope this doesn't happen again.

 

It makes total sense that this is a "Judicial Watch"( LOL) filing on behalf of Aaron Babbitt.

https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...n-6-rioter-ashli-babbitt-wrongful-death-suit/

"the lawsuit read, adding that she "did not go to Washington as part of a group or for any unlawful or nefarious purpose".




'Ashli Babbitt's family files $30 million lawsuit over Jan. 6 shooting death'
Source: CBS News

January 5, 2024 / 9:05 PM EST


The family of a 35-year-old California woman who was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer during the Jan. 6 insurrection has filed a $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against the U.S. government.

Ashli Babbitt was shot and killed Jan. 6, 2021, while she tried to climb through a broken door into the Speaker's Lobby outside the House Chamber, as a mob of dozens of supporters of then-President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol while lawmakers were preparing to certify the results of the 2020 election. The shooting was captured on cell phone video. Babbitt later died at a hospital.

In the lawsuit, which was filed Friday in federal court in Southern California, Babbitt's family claimed that she was unarmed and had her hands in the air when she was shot once by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.

"Ashli posed no threat to the safety of anyone," the lawsuit states, going on to claim that she was "ambushed" by the officer. The lawsuit also argued that Byrd was "not in uniform," "did not identify himself as a police officer" and did not issue a warning before opening fire.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ashli-babbitt-january-6-capitol-shooting-wrongful-death-lawsuit/

 

I have no doubt this is correct, but this is MAGA's default position. And it never wavers. They are the world's ultimate victims, and Trump is the god of victimhood. You know, being nailed to a cross an' all.

If Trump is allowed to run, then Sec. 3 of the 14th becomes useless. As well, I have to wonder whether such a ruling would affect the NM decision removing Couy Griffin from office.

Either there was an insurrection or rebellion, and/or comfort and aid given. We all saw what happened. A legal ruling which defies reality won't be unexpected, but it won't change reality, either. I hope reality wins.

 

Until Dobbs, this Court actually had a pretty rational record that was in line with public opinion. Dobbs was the most convoluted decision I've ever witnessed, so this case of eligibility may serve to amaze.

If the Court can somehow find a requirement for criminal conviction (I don't see it), then Trump would remain eligible, and Sec. 3 would evolve from a textualist interpretation. How will the textualists and originalists rule? Will the conservative Court abide by what the words say and what the Founders thought? Any ruling for Trump would require twisting of text and ignoring everything George Washington ever said. It will be interesting.

 

SCOTUS already gutted the Voting Rights Act to benefit Republicans. I'm not sure they'll hesitate to gut a Constitutional Amendment. I can't imagine why they believe a petty little creature like Trump is worth going down as the most activist court in History. But it looks like that's what will happen. Alito and Thomas already refused to recuse themselves from the decision to take up the case. So we know how THEY will vote.

 

I will stand with what I say. Thank you

 

You apparently misquoted.

You stand by what?

 

So Babbitt was armed.

"She was 35 years old. Some media reports described Babbitt as "unarmed" at the time of the shooting; according to a January 11, 2021 crime scene examination report by the D.C. Department of Forensic Sciences, the police "recovered a 'Para Force' folding knife in Ms. Babbitt's pants pocket" after she was shot."

Killing of Ashli Babbitt - Wikipedia

Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Killing_of_Ashli_Bab..


Prohibited Items, US Capital Complex

• Weapons (to include but not limited to): Black jack, sling shot, sand club, sandbag, knuckles, electric stun guns, knives of any size including razors and box cutters, martial arts weapons or devices. Staff may possess knives with blades 3" or less.
• Pointed objects to include but not limited to knitting needles, letter openers, and other pointed objects deemed a possible threat. Pens and pencils are permitted. This restriction does not apply to staff."

https://www.uscp.gov/visiting-capitol-hill/regulations-prohibitions/prohibited-items

 

Time for leftists to demand all pocket knives be outlawed! It's the way to stop the carnage.

 

Wear ya self out cause Babbitt was still armed, dangerous and beyond stupid.

 

Unless she planned on sneaking up on LEOs there's not a chance for her to be much of a threat with a folding pocket knife. A sharpened pencil would be just as dangerous.

 

What I said was that about the Supreme Court making the decision of Trump ruled ineligible to run for President or the United States. It would be up to them to make the right decision and it is in their their hands to do so. That is what I meant. Just so you would know and that was a fact.

 

What I said was that about the Supreme Court making the decision of Trump ruled ineligible to run for President or the United States. It would be up to them to make the right decision and it is in their hands to do so. That is what I meant. Just so you would know and that was a fact.

 

I noticed no answer to this either.

 

Can you provide the direct quote?

 

Here's your answer.

The day after the riot, Trump claimed that he “immediately deployed the National Guard and federal law enforcement to secure the building and expel the intruders.” But Trump’s claim that he acted quickly is contradicted by news reports citing unnamed sources who say the president initially resisted efforts to bring in the National Guard at the outset of the Capitol riot.

The New York Times, citing unnamed Defense Department officials, said it was Vice President Mike Pence, not Trump, who approved deployment of the D.C. National Guard that afternoon. The Times also cited a “person with knowledge of the events” who said Trump “initially rebuffed and resisted requests to mobilize the National Guard “and that the “mobilization was initiated with the help of Pat A. Cipollone, the White House counsel, among other officials.”

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/01/timeline-of-national-guard-deployment-to-capitol/


Fact check: Trump repeats false claim that Pelosi rejected request for National Guard ahead of Jan. 6.

Trump’s claim was debunked by fact-checkers in March, after he first made the statement during a Fox News appearance, and it’s still not true. There is no evidence Trump made any formal request about deploying 10,000 National Guard troops before the rally.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-request-10000-guard-troops-jan-6/8929215002/


But oh yeah, Trump did call for National Guard troops! Trump wanted National Guard troops in Washington DC to protect his supporters at the January 6 riot!

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05...al-guard-to-protect-capitol-rioters/100137144

 

Can you consult legitimate news sources?

 

If it existed, I'm sure you'd quote it rather than respond with this.

 

Fact checkers who are rated as biased and receive questionable funding?

Owner: Annenberg Public Policy Center



About FactCheck.org's Bias Rating
FactCheck.org is a fact check source with an AllSides Media Bias Rating™ of Lean Left.

What a "Lean Left" Rating Means
Sources with an AllSides Media Bias Rating of Lean Left display media bias in ways that moderately align with liberal, progressive, or left-wing thought and/or policy agendas. A Lean Left bias is a moderately liberal rating on the political spectrum.

Learn more about Lean Left ratings


FactCheck.org Moved from Center to Lean Left in AllSides August 2023 Small Group Editorial Review
In August 2023, the AllSides team conducted a Small Group Editorial Review of FactCheck.org in which we moved FactCheck.org’s bias rating from Center to Lean Left.

A small group of AllSides reviewers — one person each with a bias on the left, center, and right — reviewed content from FactCheck.org for media bias. The team noted that FactCheck.org displayed bias in terms of its story choice and the other outlets it commonly referenced, which were mostly on the left. The team also noticed FactCheck.org was more likely to fact check former President Donald Trump and other Republicans than Democratic officials, however, it did periodically fact check President Biden also.

Additionally, as of August 2023, over 16,000 AllSides readers voted on the AllSides Media Bias Rating for FactCheck.org. On average, those who disagreed with the rating of Center thought FactCheck.org showed a bias of Lean Left. The AllSides team did not review this data before conducting its Small Group Editorial Review, but readers’ sentiments appear to confirm the team’s findings.

FactCheck.org Shows Story Choice Bias
At the time of review, topics frequently covered by FactCheck.org included Donald Trump, the August 2023 GOP Debate, claims made by conservatives, COVID-19, vaccines, and climate change.

The panel noted FactCheck.org frequently analyzed claims made about vaccines or pharmaceutical companies, and it often showed favor of perspectives held by elites.

Additional Information
Established in 2003, FactCheck.org is a nonprofit owned and operated by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, a political advocacy center that is part of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. In addition to Annenberg’s headquarters at the university in Philadelphia, it also has an office in Washington D.C.

According to Annenberg’s website, President Joe Biden is a faculty member at the school.



Third-Party Accusations of FactCheck.org Bias
Some, including nonprofit Capital Research Center, have accused FactCheck.org of being biased to the left.

"[FactCheck.org's] parent organization, the Annenberg Public Policy Center, was established by Walter H. Annenberg, the former publisher of TV Guide and the Philadelphia Inquirer, President Richard Nixon’s ambassador to Great Britain, and a Republican. But over time the organization moved to the left," Capital Research Center writes in an article about "Dishonest Fact Checkers."

Capital Research Center writes that Annenberg Public Policy Center’s director, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, recruited Brooks Jackson (a former reporter for Associated Press, Wall Street Journal, and CNN) to found FactCheck.org. Jamieson "has also served on the board of the Center for Public Integrity, a left-leaning investigative journalism nonprofit that receives funding from left-wing hedge fund manager George Soros."

Capital Research Center says that FactCheck.org has "not been brazenly partisan, despite being very much a creature of the mainstream media. It has taken Democrats to task on a number of fronts," but that both FactCheck.org and Politifact go "far beyond what they say they do, claiming to fact-check subjective things like political rhetoric that are not susceptible to fact-checking."



and "Un named" sources from the "new york times"??

What's next, community notes on twitter?

 

There are people in the United States that don't want Trump to be President again and they have their reasons for this. The people want to hold on to their democracy for as long as they can. There is no real chance if Trump were to getr in there again. I don't blame the people for feeling this way.