The Colorado Supreme Court Admits Decision is Pure Lawfare Nonsense & Can Be Laughed At On Page 9

By Sundance

Three main points before getting to the substance of this ruling.

1. It was a 4-3 decision. Meaning the politics of the court, literally the political makeup and perspective therein, which determined the outcome of the decision.  This is showcased in point #3, which is the funniest part.

2. The entire framework of the case against Trump in the Colorado decision is predicated on this: “[the complainants] asserted that he was ineligible under Section Three because he engaged in insurrection on January 6, 2021, after swearing an oath as President to support the U.S. Constitution.”  [pdf, page 6]  REMINDER – President Donald Trump was not charged with “insurrection,” is not accused of “insurrection,” does not fit the complaint under the definitions of “insurrection,” and has never been found guilty of insurrection.  The complaint is moot before the court. But hey, it’s lawfare, and we all know lawfare is created for public media consumption, so that takes us directly to the biggest point.

3. Instead of me writing it, let me screengrab it so we can all laugh together.

Wait, What?

Yup. As long as President Trump appeals the decision to the Supreme Court, the appeals court stays their own ruling – indefinitely.  The Colorado primary ballots printed, and the primary election will be over, before the Supreme Court puts this on their docket.

In addition to the virtual guarantee the high court will overrule this political nonsense, SCOTUS can make the entire issue moot before them by following their own normal schedule for submissions, arguments, deliberation, and opinions delivered by the court.

The Colorado appellate court knows this, that’s why they put this self-stay into their 4-3 ruling.  It’s a politically correct way of giving the optics of telling their tribe, ‘hey we’re with you,’ without the ramifications of the political backlash.  In other words, psychological lawfare stuff – intended for media consumption.

Making the issue that much better for Donald Trump, the efforts of the Prescott-Bush clan will backfire bigly.  The public backlash against a judicial ruling that interferes with the right of the citizens to determine their own election candidates plays perfectly into the sunlight operation against the lawfare left. This backlash will be epic, albeit hidden by MSNBC and the rest of the insufferable media. Why? Because it doesn’t fit the Lawfare narrative.

I’m not even going to highlight the nonsense from the leftists who are in a frenzy over this one.  Just smile, pretend it’s the end of the world, eat your favorite foods and live your best life while trying not to laugh.

Seriously, this is just that level of goofy. Remember what I said about Ron DeSantis in 2022 and everyone looked at me funny.  Well, this is way more predictable than me saying DeSantis will collapse in sunlight. That said, Vivek Ramaswamy is not silly, and he sees a great opportunity.

VIA TWITTER – This is what an *actual* attack on democracy looks like: in an un-American, unconstitutional, and *unprecedented* decision, a cabal of Democrat judges are barring Trump from the ballot in Colorado. Having tried every trick in the book to eliminate President Trump from running in this election, the bipartisan Establishment is now deploying a new tactic to bar him from ever holding office again: the 14th Amendment.

I pledge to *withdraw* from the Colorado GOP primary unless Trump is also allowed to be on the state’s ballot, and I demand that Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie, and Nikki Haley to do the same immediately – or else they are tacitly endorsing this illegal maneuver which will have disastrous consequences for our country.  

Today’s decision is the latest election interference tactic to silence political opponents and swing the election for whatever puppet the Democrats put up this time by depriving Americans of the right to vote for their candidate of choice.  

The 14th Amendment was part of the “Reconstruction Amendments” that were ratified following the Civil War. It was passed to prohibit former Confederate military and political leaders from holding high federal or state office. These men had clearly taken part in a rebellion against the United States: the Civil War. That makes it all the more absurd that a left-wing group in Colorado is asking a federal court to disqualify the 45th President on the same grounds, equating his speech to rebellion against the United States.

And there’s another legal problem: Trump is not a former “officer of the United States,” as that term is used in the Constitution, meaning Section 3 does not apply. As the Supreme Court explained in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010), an “officer of the United States” is someone appointed by the President to aid him in his duties under Article II, Section 2. The term does not apply to elected officials, and certainly not to the President himself.  

The Framers of the 14th Amendment would be appalled to see this narrow provision—intended to bar former U.S. officials who switched to the Confederacy from seeking public office—being weaponized by a sitting President and his political allies to prevent a former President from seeking reelection. Our country is becoming unrecognizable to our Founding Fathers. (read more)

I mean, c’mon, man.  Have we forgotten when Trump won the Colorado primary in 2016 and the delegates all promised to vote for Ted Cruz at the convention anyway? The Colorado GOP is Prescott-Bush. This is silly lawfare.