The SCOTUS live broadcasting of Trump vs Colorado the appeals from CO supreme court saying he is not eligible to run LIVE

[smokey]

Thomas now taking apart her argument that section 3 is a qualification. She cited laws on write in candidates, but not on party candidates

 

[AssMan]

Thanks for the updates, guys. I'm in spreadsheet hell for the next few hours, so I can't really pay attention.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Lolz it's official, Brett Kavanaugh is currently on mdshooters. He just brought this up.

When I see local "celebrities" in our neighborhood I just leave them alone.

Next time I'll have to introduce myself to him.

Thanks for the play by play.

 

[Triggerfinger]

Shannon Stevenson said we should have faith in the system in regard to other states possibly barring Biden, the same faith that she failed to uphold. LOL

 

[smokey]

Alito brought up that if Colorado gets away with this, that other states will follow suit. It was to get Stevenson to identify why the SC should just stop this pandoras box now. Her response was essentially "nahhh, that's not a thing that will happen"

 

[smokey]

Mitchell back up. Bringing up the problem with banning someone from running based on an uncertain viability in the future when they would HOLD office. Otherwise wrapping up his argument. Adjourned to 16th of Feb @10

 

[brianns]

Shannon Stevenson said we should have faith in the system in regard to other states possibly barring Biden, the same faith that she failed to uphold. LOL

I thought Alito was going to ask, "Then why are we here right now if the system is working?"

 

[RFBfromDE]

I thought Alito was going to ask, "Then why are we here right now if the system is working?"

A: Because those deplorable King MAGAs are trying to stop us!

 

[welder516]

I'm still trying to figure out how the events of January 6th actually qualify as an attempted insurrection, or how Trump was directly involved with it.

You would have to be a liberal progressive numbskull to be able to do the exercise

 

[gtodave]

I just checked in...are we on break?

 

[brianns]

A: Because those deplorable King MAGAs are trying to stop us!

Remember the guy answering if the legality of a potential name on a ballot could be figured out later after the election. That would just prove that we're being ruled by feelings police if a court or election system can get it right for the day of the election.

 

[trickg]

I just checked in...are we on break?

I think oral arguments are over.

 

[Boondock Saint]

I just checked in...are we on break?

See above/below.

Mitchell back up. Bringing up the problem with banning someone from running based on an uncertain viability in the future when they would HOLD office. Otherwise wrapping up his argument. Adjourned to 16th of Feb @10

 

[Afrikeber]

Sounded to me like Colorado lost their argument with ALL of SCOTUS.

 

[gtodave]

I think oral arguments are over.

See above/below.

Damnit...PERFECT timing on my part once again. Thanks guys.

 

[brianns]

You would have to be a liberal progressive numbskull to be able to do the exercise

I don't get it so that just proves I'm not that kind of numbskull!

 

[RFBfromDE]

Sounded to me like Colorado lost their argument with ALL of SCOTUS.

It would be nice if at least one of the three Usual Suspects go along.

 

[smokey]

Luckily that's not even relevant to this because trump isn't "an officer" and isn't able to be removed from a national ballot in the way he was.

Thomas is obliterating the current anti-trump witness.

This was funny.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Thomas; "....the radical Republicans"

 

[Boondock Saint]

This was funny.

With Roberts approximating no worse than the center of the court as viewed from the conservative angle, Roberts' comments at the end of that clip felt like the last few nails in the coffin of Colorado's case.