Categories
Trump’s WH2024 bid looks set to be decided by the Supreme Court – politicalbetting.com
Trump’s WH2024 bid looks set to be decided by the Supreme Court – politicalbetting.com
A big question that will surely come before the US Supreme Court is whether Trump could be stopped from being on the WH2924 ballot because of what he did on January 6 2021 when there was an attempt to storm the Congress building in Washington which was overseeing the finalisation of WH2020
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Colorado Lower Court ("Trump committed insurrection but the amendment doesn't apply because the president isn't an officer")
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/02nd_Judicial_District/Denver_District_Court/11_17_2023 Final Order.pdf
Colorado Supreme Court ("WTF, the president is totally an officer")
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/Supreme_Court/Opinions/2023/23SA300.pdf
Maine Secretary of State ("^ this")
https://www.maine.gov/sos/news/2023/Decision in Challenge to Trump Presidential Primary Petitions.pdf
We should also get more from the courts in Maine, assuming SCOTUS don't jump in there first.
However, to OGH's point that three Supreme Court justices were Trump appointees, ironically they are not Trump's bankers. Alito and Thomas are the locked in votes. In the unlikely event of a decision against Trump, it's be a combination of Roberts and a Trump appointee (most likely Kavanaugh but potentially another).
The assumption that a President's appointees are blindly loyal is perhaps a mistake. Trump's appointees are pretty likely to be on the bench long after he is dead. They are certainly conservatives, and will probably demonstrate it here. But they don't necessarily like him, and have got what they want from him (and he can't take it away).
https://polymarket.com/event/will-trump-appear-on-maine-primary-ballot?tid=1703988455619
The main thrust of OGH header is “ The big question is how much was Trump responsible for what happened and those against him are said to be building up a strong case that he was.” And at first glance you are right, it was in essence a riot by Trump supporters, hard to pin on Trump as full fledged sedition. However, if we look for evidence of sedition beyond the Capital Hill riot, how hard can the investigations in places like Georgia make it for the Supreme Court, if turns up lots of evidence of criminality in trying to get a different result from the state. That could be plenty enough evidence of sedition from Georgia alone.
And how long will the Supreme Court have in order to rule, with clock ticking, and evidence building all the time. Can their judgement be on the other side of the election?
I still think the former is more likely. I think the Colorado Supreme Court argument was interesting to the extent that there could be reasons why the President is not expicitly mentioned in the 14th Amendement but is intended to be covered, and I get that it ought to be covered. But I do think this remains quite a likely off ramp for SCOTUS conservatives.
On the latter, it seems more tricky. The text doesn't mention "conviction", and quite a large majority of Senators found Trump guilty of inciting insurrection following his second impeachment, just not enough to convict. So conservatives would need to read something into the Constitution that just isn't there, and they find that problematic. It also begs the question of what conviction would suffice, given a potentially relevant conviction is far from being out of the question.
Trump tried to argue against this by saying the committee were biased against him, but he couldn't really substantiate that with stuff like "they refused to hear this witness that would have shown I didn't do it" or "they took this fact and drew this conclusion, which is obviously wrong". He also doesn't seem to have made an argument that he didn't do what committee report said he did.
That may not matter in Colorado and Maine as they probably won't be pivotal, and the primaries may not matter if Trump maintains his large polling lead. But it does matter if the GOP primaries start getting competitive, or the issue spreads to more competitive states.
Realistically, I think they need to grasp the nettle and decide it quite promptly.
Repeat, Trump is on Colorado ballot UNLESS the US Supreme Count says otherwise.
Including IF the Court just declines to take the case.
https://x.com/handfordsteven/status/1741050734378930241?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
On that last part the statement says
"The Colorado Republican Party has appealed the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson v. Griswold to the U.S. Supreme Court. With the appeal filed, Donald Trump will be included as a candidate on Colorado’s 2024 Presidential Primary Ballot when certification occurs on Jan. 5, 2024, unless the U.S. Supreme Court declines to take the case or otherwise affirms the Colorado Supreme Court ruling."
So if SCOTUS says they won't take the case then Trump will be off the ballot, but they'll have to tell us by Friday.
In fact, he seems to indicate he things Essequibo is Venezuela's.
Too often, as we see over Ukraine, Guyana and elsewhere, the left's agenda is not about right or wrong, or morality; it is about supporting those who are against us.
(That is not to say the far right don't have similar blindspots...)
much better.
The British hard left has been Pro-Russian for a century, its a hard thing to move on from.
At least Tsar Nicholas II cared about his people on an emotional level even if he was too dim-witted to do things that would actually benefit them.
When you read the Maine judgement, it is hard to believe the SC can do anything other than find against Trump. I would expect it to be 8-0, with Thomas recusing himself because of his wife's support for the ex-President.
Then you get the likes of @Dura_Ace - who seems to dislike everyone - who is all too keen to fall back into Ukrainians-are-lesser-Russians rhetoric that could come straight off Telegram.
And this is a real problem: Ukraine is the victim in this, and has done f-all to 'deserve' the beating Russia is giving it. Putin has full agency, and trying to blame 'us' for his evil is tantamount to excusing that evil.
In this, as is often the case, the far left and far right find common cause.
Edit - also, remember he didn't recuse himself from tossing the DC appeal. That is almost certainly a sign he won't recuse himself from any later case.
They may well be partisan, indeed they have regularly shown that they are, but they are also judges and they value their place in the Constitution and in history. Their decision will have the gravest implications for democracy in the USA. They cannot be sacked.
I think they will call the case on its merits, and Trump will lose 8-0.
This isn't Facebook. This is the north face of the Eiger for trolls.
Roberts and Kavanaugh may value their dignity more. We will see.
I am starting to think this will actually only come to an ending when he dies. And even though he is old and clearly not well, that could be a long way off yet.
I say at least six judges will vote against Trump. Loser buys the winner a pint of Brains beer.
On?
https://twitter.com/concaveasitwere/status/1741093461145608285
But can we make it a modest lunch (sandwiches fine) because I never drink when I'm driving (and never drink beer anyway)?
If I lose, that lunch I buy will be the sweetest tasting lunch I've ever had, believe me!
It’s also not impossible that whoever replaced him as the nominee might get some sort of sympathy vote in the GE if it looks like their side has been nobbled?
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4641772#Comment_4641772
Can we have a legendary modesty KLAXON here?
CCHQ has done to Rishi what it did to Theresa May and what Labour did to Gordon Brown: force them into stunts designed for their more charismatic predecessors and in doing so trash their reputations as stoic technocrats.
I’m not sure what the best outcome is. If he were to lose, only Blue States would keep him off the ballot. In Red and purple States, his supporters would turn out in droves.
I know some Labour staffers read this blog. If any of them pass it on to Bridget Phillipson I hope she will find it if interest too.
Brexit isn't working.
That said, I don't think that the SCOTUS would keep Trump off the ballot. That would be judicial overreach even for America.
If Trump is to be defeated, it will have to be at the ballot box. If Trump is selected as Republican candidate then Sleepy Joe will get a second term.
I get the impression US Supreme Court judges use a lot of discretion in setting their own terms of reference. If they go purely on States rights, they will strike it down. I suspect they will want to keep the judgment focused on those
Right wing media and social media keeps telling them stories about a corrupt elite/EU/immigrants/woke/(insert algorithmic preferred scapegoat here) damaging their life chances and robbing their families future.
For these voters electing Trump or Boris is a rational choice. Who better to burn it all down than an agent of chaos.
The right need to defeat Trump, Boris and Farage. They created them
pigs flySCOTUS does decide the 14th applies to Trump, one amusing side effect of that is even if he accepts a pardon it would have no effect on his later ability to run for office. The 14th specifically requireshell to freeze overa two thirds majority in both houses of Congress to remove that disability.Trump will need to be beaten at the ballot box . Even then he will say it was another rigged election .
(That said, the Christmas Day one was funny).
PS US universities are going to get absolutely screwed on the donation front given a lot of their donors are not exactly enamoured with their equivocal stance on the Middle East. Maybe time to look for another sources for your wages…
For the avoidance of all doubt, I am on the left and the Communist Party is no more representative of my views than the BNP is of the average Tory. I also am very supportive of Guyana, as someone who knows and loves the Anglophone Caribbean very well. I also love my country and probably have less time for our enemies like Mr Putin than many of our right-wing posters do. This idea that people on the Left are all quislings and traitors is bollocks.
What they won’t do is act as neutral arbiters of the law.
In the UK, if a judge was set to rule on the person who appointed them, would they recuse themselves?
https://youtu.be/4xneuMaUbKs?si=jw450OFIg-GBqyUC&t=878
We already have one prolific poster on here (at least) who would quite happily ban one of the two main political parties in the US, so convinced is he of his moral superiority. If you want to start a Civil War in the US, there is no better way to do that than follow that route.
If SCOTUS declines to hear the case, what is the justification for setting aside the CO court decision?
https://conservativehome.com/2023/12/31/badenoch-leads-mordaunt-in-our-first-next-tory-leader-poll-in-two-years/
The top male, Cleverly, is in fourth place and he's done little recently to help his chances.
Yes, a political judiciary is a bad idea, as we see in the US and EU. The British system is considerably more independent than most around the world, even if many of us will disagree with their judgements from time to time.
They would be better off never mentioning the B-word again and pretending it never happened rather than banging on about how the new hard won freedoms mean we can now buy Tizer in gills.
None of the ones calling for Trump to be not on the ballot believe it will actually happen. They are all doing it to enhance their own standing within the Democrat party * without thinking of the consequences. Hence why, in California, Colorado and Maine, the reaction from other Democrat politicians has generally been tepid to say the least
* Seriously, who the f*ck had heard of the Maine SOS until she ruled on this?
From a personal, selfish, perspective the reputations benefits of voting against Trump will be immense
(Defenders of the Constitution! The last line when all else failed!)
I also proudly claim that I believe criminals should face justice through the courts. Not through rigged trials determined by Congress to get at their relatives, or through mythical 'twisting' of the law.
I appreciate that you don't care about either of those. But I also therefore claim moral superiority over you.
But one of the subtler ones* is back, and posting his usual nonsense, so I can annoy him.
*For a given value of 'subtle.'
If this got further politicised, as this government has done, we would go further down the track of the USA. Which looks more and more like a nation in the early stages of rule by intimidation; a state of affairs to which Godwin's law no doubt applies.
So if he continues to toxify the GOP it just means Democrats have an easy ride (with the disadvantage of a lack of competition)
Of course, the big problem the GOP has is its system - presidential with direct voting for the candidate with no screening, which allowed Trump to capture the nomination, and threaten other GOP politicians into submission. It's noteable that his most significant internal opponent, Mitt Romney, was immune from Trump's threats because he was unassailable in Utah where he is more popular than Trump. It's regrettable that Romney is standing down from the Senate - the US really needs some senior rightwing politicians who have maintained their independence.
The logistics, surveillance/intelligence, training, basic ammunition, integration etc all cost actual money, but not close to the numbers talked about by politicians and media.
Even if hundreds of billions had been spent, that’s small fry compared to allowing the threat of Russia to encroach on Europe. Like it or not, Europe needs to stop relying on the American military and sort out their own forces, as the US will increasingly start to look towards China as the bigger threat over the next decade.
Off topic: Is there any difference with broadband reliability these days between provider. BT contract is coming to an end, we currently have 100 Mbps Fibre To The Premises (fttp), just need it to be cert reliable as my other half works full time from home.
Is the reliability basically pasu since it's all Openreach ?
The easy action, I guess, is to leave him on the ballot and to defer the decision until later. Events may settle the matter. Events settled the matter of whether McCain was eligible.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/30/international-students-shun-british-courses-ministers/
“[Sunak] pledged to close loopholes as he cited the “staggering” eight-fold rise in the number of dependants brought into the UK by foreign students, up from 16,000 to 135,788 since 2019.”
“Ucas figures show there was a decline in the number of accepted international students in 2023 to 71,570, down 3 per cent from 73,820 last year and 7 per cent from 76,905 in 2019.”
So in 2019, c.77k foreign students bought with them 16k ‘dependants’, but last year c71.5k foreign students bought with them c.136k ‘dependants’, nearly two each!
Which gives one perspective on their flexibility regarding electoral matters.
But there are 3 reasons why broadband can go wrong, between you and the exchange (openreach), hardware in the exchange (Openreach / your provider) or a subsequent network error (your provider). The advantage of someone like youfibre / cityfibre etc is that they own everything.