The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots

[SkepticThinker]

Biden got 92% of the vote in DC.

He believes he won, what people do with that is not his responsibility. Just like HIllary believes she won.

Ok

The constitution sets up how the electors are chosen, not the executive branch. There is no DOD or attorney general in the constitution. The constitution sets up a political process to choose electors. Each party is free to sent a slate of electors and the constitution says it is up to congress to decide which electors to choose. No one has ever been criminally prosecuted for this and it has been done many times in the past, Hawaii 1960, Ohio 2004 for example. Congress has the only say in what electors are chosen and that is what happened in 2021. A grand jury, prosecutor, attorney general, executive branch have no say in the process. This is because of what is happening to Trump. He is being criminally prosecuted by the opposition party for a political process. That leads to tyranny, in fact that is what we are seeing.

This is just more reading into Trump's statement as negatively as you can. No where did he say to anyone to do anything illegal. I bet you believe Trump told people to drink bleach. Here is the transcript, where did he ask for anyone to do anything illegal. He explained why he thought he had at least 11,780 votes legally cast that were not counted. He never asked anyone to create votes.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

Ok

"The memo was dated exactly one month before Jan. 6, 2021, when Congress would meet to count the Electoral College votes and seal Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election.

It detailed a scheme in which groups of Trump supporters in six contested states won by Mr. Biden could organize to cast alternate electoral votes one week later on Dec. 14, when the legitimate members of the Electoral College would meet and certify their states' results. The alternate slate of electors, the memo says, would submit their own certifications. Chesebro said the vice president could then count these electoral votes instead of the legitimate votes on Jan. 6 to upend the election results and potentially keep Trump in the White House.

t it is important that the alternate slates of electors meet and vote on December 14 if we are to create a scenario under which Biden can be prevented from reaching 270 electoral votes, even if Trump has not managed by then to obtain court decisions (or state legislative resolutions) invalidating enough results to push Biden below 270," Chesebro wrote.

The existence of the memo was mentioned in last week's federal grand jury indictment against the former president, charging him with conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against rights. He has pleaded not guilty and denies wrongdoing."

Newly unveiled memo cited in Trump indictment detailed false electors scheme

A newly revealed memo authored by a Trump-allied attorney laid out a strategy for organizing fake electors in the wake of the 2020 election.

www.cbsnews.com

"PROSECUTORS DISCOVERED A previously unknown memo drafted by a lawyer allied with former President Donald Trump, which outlined a plan to overturn the 2020 election, according to the New York Times on Tuesday.

According to a copy of the memo obtained by the Times, lawyer Kenneth Chesebro — identified as Co-Conspirator 5 in the government’s case against the ex-president — admitted that he was proposing a “a bold, controversial strategy” that the Supreme Court ultimately would reject. Chesebro argued that even if the plan failed to pass, it would bring attention to claims of voter fraud and “buy the Trump campaign more time to win litigation that would deprive Biden of electoral votes and/or add to Trump’s column.”

The Dec. 6, 2020 memo was unearthed during Trump’s third indictment last week, and shed a light on how the former president’s allies developed their plot to overturn Joe Biden’s win.

The document, which prosecutors described as a “fraudulent elector memo,” revealed that Chesebro proposed the appointment of fake electors, and detailed a “messaging” strategy to portray them as evidence if legislatures later concluded Trump as the victor in those states."

Uncovered 'Fraudulent Elector' Memo Reveals Details of Plot to Overturn 2020 Election: Report

Prosecutors discovered a previously unknown memo drafted by a pro-Trump lawyer, which outlined a plan to overturn the 2020 election, NYT reported.

www.rollingstone.com

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

You were the one that did not properly support your claim. I have to go with the evidence presented so far and it goes against you.

Yet, you won't tell me how I did not support it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yet, you won't tell me how I did not support it.

You could have at least linked to the alleged name calling.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

So he was never convicted or charged with insurrection. presidents need to have immunity after holding office. If not they cannot function in the office.

They can function in the office without immunity: they have to be thoughtful and abide by the standards of the position.

This box may be opened and if it is we will see every ex president indicted by the opposition party. They will find a statute, just like all these prosecutors have done to Trump to charge them with. Is that healthy for democracy?

Yes it is. If the President does not break the law and abides by the standards of the office, then it should become obvious when prosecutors are being politically motivated. Without adequate evidence and cause, they will likely not be indicted.

Trump's problem isn't politically-motivated prosecutors, it is his penchant for breaking the law. He gets indicted because there's evidence of wrongdoing.

If Trump wins he would be within his rights to have his DOJ charge Biden with crimes that illegal immigrants have committed because he did not enforce current border laws. Would that be ok?

If Biden has committed crimes, he should be investigated.

What border laws has he not enforced that warrant charging him for another person's crimes?

 

[F1fan]

Biden got 92% of the vote in DC.

Why is this a problem? They are citizens of the USA and qualified to be on a jury.

Could it be that you would prefer someplace with more MAGA voters and hope one might sneak through the jury selection process (by lying) and not convict Trump regardless of the evidence to cause a mistrial? I can't of any other reason why you are biased against citizens.

He believes he won,

Yet there are statements that indicate Trump understood he lost soon after the election. It was once he started lying about fraud, and conspiring with others to overturn some swing states, that he denied the results. He exploited the stupidity and devotion of his followers to such a degree that they joined a protest (against a fair and secure election result) and attacked the Capitol, which resulted in well over a thousand get arrested and convicted for various crimes.

what people do with that is not his responsibility.

He knew his influence over his followers, and he expoited them. He's taken millions from them to pay for the legal costs of his own actions. He knows his followers are suckers and he is still exploiting their gullibility.

Just like HIllary believes she won.

She believes no such thing. It's funny though you are making excuses for Trump, because Clinton lost the Electoral College vote (while beating Trump by nearly 3 million popular votes) and admits it. Trump can't. Clinton is rational while Trump is delusional.

The constitution sets up how the electors are chosen, not the executive branch. There is no DOD or attorney general in the constitution. The constitution sets up a political process to choose electors. Each party is free to sent a slate of electors and the constitution says it is up to congress to decide which electors to choose. No one has ever been criminally prosecuted for this and it has been done many times in the past, Hawaii 1960, Ohio 2004 for example. Congress has the only say in what electors are chosen and that is what happened in 2021.

There is a set norm for how electors are selected, and it is based on a state's popular vote. Some are winner tales all, and some assign a proportion. State's rights prevail here, and they have certified electors. In numerous swing states republicans assigned unofficial electors, and this was considered fraud by courts. These fake electors broke laws, and they even created fake certificates, and that is fraud.

A grand jury, prosecutor, attorney general, executive branch have no say in the process. This is because of what is happening to Trump. He is being criminally prosecuted by the opposition party for a political process. That leads to tyranny, in fact that is what we are seeing.

False. Trump has been indicted by independent prosecutors, and is facing 91 felony charges. None of this has anything to do with political parties. You are being duped by right wing disinformation media.

This is just more reading into Trump's statement as negatively as you can. No where did he say to anyone to do anything illegal. I bet you believe Trump told people to drink bleach. Here is the transcript, where did he ask for anyone to do anything illegal. He explained why he thought he had at least 11,780 votes legally cast that were not counted. He never asked anyone to create votes.

You can try to make excuses for Trump, but no other president in history has ever tried to personally get involved in any state running their elections. Trump talking to election boards members personally is highly unethical. Those election officials say they felt pressured, The audio of Trump suggests he was asking them to "find" extra votes.

I will give you the chance to explain what Trump really meant by "finding 11780 votes" only for him. Where were these extra votes supposed to come from?

Georgia wasn't the only state Trump called and tried to pressure into "finding" votes for him.

 

[Firenze]

Gee, I wonder how the Trump appointed and bought and paid for judges will rule.....

 

[Wandering Monk]

It should be remembered that in any jury trial lawyers for both sides get to reject jurors who they think may have a bias. Trump losing in DC is not because of a prejudiced jury unless Trump's lawyers are crap. So much for Trump being a 'stable genius' then.

 

[Laniakea]

Gee, I wonder how the Trump appointed and bought and paid for judges will rule.....

Is that your way of virtue-signaling that you're unwilling to accept the SCOTUS ruling if it doesn't go the way you like?

 

[Stevicus]

Supreme Court appears unlikely to kick Trump off Colorado ballot - SCOTUSblog

The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared ready to hold that Colorado cannot exclude former President Donald Trump from the ballot based on his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol. During an oral argument that lasted for more than two hours, justices of all ideological stripes questio

www.scotusblog.com

 

[Firenze]

Is that your way of virtue-signaling that you're unwilling to accept the SCOTUS ruling if it doesn't go the way you like?

No. I’m not a Trumper, and therefore have the integrity not to whine about an unwanted result. I might however, take issue with a ruling not supported by the Constitution.

 

[oldbadger]

How can a candidate be disqualified before he is actually convicted of the said disqualifying crime ? Trump has not been convicted. If the situation changes before or during the hearing, that is another matter.

I don't think Mr Trump has ever been arrested or charged with any serious criminal offence such as or connected to insurrection, let alone convicted.

Am I right,? (I'm a Brit)

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think Mr Trump has ever been arrested or charged with any serious criminal offence such as or connected to insurrection, let alone convicted.

Am I right,? (I'm a Brit)

He has been. Arrested and charged. He has not been found guilty yet. There is a law that specifically does mention insurrection, but aspects of it are of dubious constitutionality. It has free speech issues. To avoid those issues Jack Smith charged him with the elements of insurrection that did not have free speech problems.

Also, since this is a civil penalty a conviction is not needed.

 

[oldbadger]

He has been. Arrested and charged. He has not been found guilty yet. There is a law that specifically does mention insurrection, but aspects of it are of dubious constitutionality. It has free speech issues. To avoid those issues Jack Smith charged him with the elements of insurrection that did not have free speech problems.

Also, since this is a civil penalty a conviction is not needed.

So it is a civil case.....not criminal.

I still don't think that Mr Trump has been arrested, charged nor convicted of any criminal offence which is concerned with either insurrection nor attempted insurrection.

Even the pro Democratic Supreme Judges may well have to join with the other six about all this.

 

[Firenze]

So it is a civil case.....not criminal.

I still don't think that Mr Trump has been arrested, charged nor convicted of any criminal offence which is concerned with either insurrection nor attempted insurrection.

Even the pro Democratic Supreme Judges may well have to join with the other six about all this.

Right. His followers are happy to know that at this point he is merely a convicted sex offender....

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Why is this a problem? They are citizens of the USA and qualified to be on a jury.

Could it be that you would prefer someplace with more MAGA voters and hope one might sneak through the jury selection process (by lying) and not convict Trump regardless of the evidence to cause a mistrial? I can't of any other reason why you are biased against citizens.

Ok, it does matter where a trial takes place. Trials are sometimes moved because the defendant will likely not get a fair trial.

Yet there are statements that indicate Trump understood he lost soon after the election. It was once he started lying about fraud, and conspiring with others to overturn some swing states, that he denied the results. He exploited the stupidity and devotion of his followers to such a degree that they joined a protest (against a fair and secure election result) and attacked the Capitol, which resulted in well over a thousand get arrested and convicted for various crimes.

So what Trump never advocated for violence. He said peaceably protest.

She believes no such thing. It's funny though you are making excuses for Trump, because Clinton lost the Electoral College vote (while beating Trump by nearly 3 million popular votes) and admits it. Trump can't. Clinton is rational while Trump is delusional.

It doesn't matter that she received more popular votes.

“No, it doesn’t kill me because he knows he’s an illegitimate president, I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.” ~ Hillary Clinton

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you" ~ HIllary Clinton

There is a set norm for how electors are selected, and it is based on a state's popular vote. Some are winner tales all, and some assign a proportion. State's rights prevail here, and they have certified electors. In numerous swing states republicans assigned unofficial electors, and this was considered fraud by courts. These fake electors broke laws, and they even created fake certificates, and that is fraud.

False. Trump has been indicted by independent prosecutors, and is facing 91 felony charges. None of this has anything to do with political parties. You are being duped by right wing disinformation media.

You can try to make excuses for Trump, but no other president in history has ever tried to personally get involved in any state running their elections. Trump talking to election boards members personally is highly unethical. Those election officials say they felt pressured, The audio of Trump suggests he was asking them to "find" extra votes.

I will give you the chance to explain what Trump really meant by "finding 11780 votes" only for him. Where were these extra votes supposed to come from?

Georgia wasn't the only state Trump called and tried to pressure into "finding" votes for him.

If you read the entire phone conversation he explained that he wanted them to find the votes already cast for him. He did not believe all the ballots were counted.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So what Trump never advocated for violence. He said peaceably protest.

I'm tired of explaining why this is irrelevant. You know why those people were there, and you know what little he did to prevent violence. Stop pretending you don't.

It doesn't matter that she received more popular votes.

“No, it doesn’t kill me because he knows he’s an illegitimate president, I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did.” ~ Hillary Clinton

“You can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you" ~ HIllary Clinton

You also need to get over this. She conceded the election on election night. She never claimed, to thousands of rabid followers, that the election was EXPLICITLY stolen from them, and her words and actions did not lead directly to an insurrection in which six people died.

Again, stop pretending you don't understand the difference between these things, and stop extending endless nuance to Trump when you know for a fact that you openly dishonestly represent Hillary.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I'm tired of explaining why this is irrelevant. You know why those people were there, and you know what little he did to prevent violence. Stop pretending you don't.

Nowhere did Trump advocate for the to be violent.

You also need to get over this. She conceded the election on election night. She never claimed, to thousands of rabid followers, that the election was EXPLICITLY stolen from them, and her words and actions did not lead directly to an insurrection in which six people died.

So what, the argument is you cannot lie and say an election was stolen when it wasn't.

Again, stop pretending you don't understand the difference between these things, and stop extending endless nuance to Trump when you know for a fact that you openly dishonestly represent Hillary.

You can accuse me all you want but I quoted her words, not mine.

 

[Revoltingest]

Nowhere did Trump advocate for the to be violent.

If one considers artful language, then
it appears that he did encourage violence.
The lack of explicit language doesn't
defeat his having committed the crime.
Moreover, his language was in the context
of organizing fake electors to the EC in
several states, ordering Pence to over-turn
the election, & threatening more than 1
Secretary Of State.

 

[Wandering Monk]

Ok, it does matter where a trial takes place. Trials are sometimes moved because the defendant will likely not get a fair trial.

Why did Trump's lawyers not ask for a change of venue then?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Why did Trump's lawyers not ask for a change of venue then?

They did

Trump wants to relocate his D.C. criminal case. His judge has previously rejected his arguments.

Judge Tanya Chutkan, like other federal D.C. judges, has rebuffed attempts to move Jan. 6-related trials out of the District of Columbia.

www.politico.com