Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 4:59 am

Page 7 of 12

Reply
3 replies

@lmcatech
34 minutes ago
If they determine the 14'th amendment doesn't apply, then sometime in the future another supreme court will decide the 2'nd amendment doesn't apply either. Maybe that will be a good thing.
Reply

@Mossyrocklove
1 hour ago
I realize we need a basis for our laws, but sometimes nit picking the constitution to make all rulings seems - not so good. I mean how about common sense - if he tried to overthrow the government, obviously don’t allow him to be President again? I heard the justices discussing what you mentioned (“officer” etc) and it just seems so absurd!!!
Reply

@karenborthick4909
1 hour ago
Then our Colorado now HAS to keep Trump on the ballot??
Reply

@rixter719
11 minutes ago
It's funny. When the cases are going against Trump, the Right speaks about the judge(s) getting it wrong. When the cases are going in favor of Trump, the Left speaks about the judge(s) getting it wrong.
Reply

@MisterTingles
1 hour ago (edited)
shocking turn of events, impossible to foresee he put half the feckers on the bench, are we still pretending America isn't already firmly in Banana Republic territory...
Reply

@user-em6ie2be7x
3 hours ago
If Republicans actually believed in "States Rights" Colorado's decision to Kick Trump off the ballot would be final.
50
Reply

@sammisequoyah6058
1 hour ago
Because they work for Trump... Glen you have the pretty to get the ball rolling on impeaching then judges why don't you do something? You know all kinds of lawyers and I'm sure you all are very capable of removing them off the bench. Just because it hasn't been done before does not mean that it can not be done!
Reply

@laralovesviolins6510
42 minutes ago (edited)
I thought that the argument that one state could decide who the president would be was so ridiculous and wrong (they know that's not how it works), and also ridiculous was the idea that states could randomly and capriciously decide who could and could not be on the presidential ballot. Colorado had a trial to determine their decision, it was well thought out and based on the fact that Trump did engage in insurrection. He himself even called it an insurrection, today.
Reply

@TheCjbowman
53 minutes ago
Getting pretty scary, actually.
Reply

@glenrose7925
42 minutes ago
I keep asking and no one answers.... PLEASE ANSWER...... "giving aid and comfort to the insurrectionists is enough to disqualify someone for ." Trump did that and continues to do so now. That standing alone is enough to disqualify him under the 14th amendment. Colorado's lawyers never brought that up. No one brings it up. WHY?
Reply

@susanlynn3613
48 minutes ago
Im so mad i can"t say anything. In fear that if i would go to jail because im not whats his name.
Reply

@user-mi1eb7iu1p
3 hours ago
Well, folk's, there goes our democracy!!!
122
Reply
4 replies

@chrisgreco4249
1 hour ago
As I listen to Mr. Kirschner's reflections on the contradictory and often myopic comments from the Justices I am reminded of words Christ spoke 2,000 years ago. He was speaking to the Pharisees, the judges of His day: "You bow down to the letter of the law and violate the spirit of the law. Justice. Mercy. You swat at a gnat and swallow a camel. You do not go in yourselves and you do not allow others to go in. You are all clean and bright without and inside full of bones and death and all corruption." The Justices have had ample time to read the 14th Amendment. (the letter of the law) They should know the violent history that led to it's adaption. (bones and death) To twiddle around with whether a President is an officer of the govt - seriously? Really?? (violate the spirit of the law) I thought all the Justices today failed utterly to rise to the deep significance of the matter before them. Why did they even bother holding a hearing if they were just going to push peas around on their plates like 6 year-olds who don't want to eat their vegetables? Pathetic lack of insight and vision. (you swat at a gnat and swallow a camel)
Read more
Reply

@cccro6228
1 hour ago
Glenn, I am sick over your assessment of how the Justice's nit-picked every aspect of how the language in the Constitution should or could be interpreted. So why don't they re-write the constitution so that everyone can understand the wording?
Reply

@greg9323
57 minutes ago
That is what they are going to do. Look at all of these cases, they are dragging them to give him an out.
Reply

@tonysnow2015
1 hour ago
If the state of Texas can ignore the Supreme Court on the barb wire and border issue, Colorado can ignore them on the Trump ballot issue. Full stop.
Reply
1 reply

@JamesAsbel-vu3pp
14 minutes ago
Why is Lincoln knocked over?
Reply

@waetos
2 hours ago
Like so many others, I'm a lot more than disgusted with SCOTUS - a bunch of hypocrites.
32
Reply

@SPRINGTIDECREATIVE
1 hour ago
I wish Glenn was arguing the case. The SCOTUS seems to have lost sight of what the question before it is. Is DT eligible to be president, or not? The potential consequences of ruling he is ineligible should not carry any weight. No one’s right to vote will be denied if Trump isn’t on the ballot. The GOP will just have to have an alternate candidate. This will be determined well before the election. Just answer the question!
Reply

@briarwoodimp
14 minutes ago
I listened to part of it. I was hoping the questions about the procedures followed might be used to affirm it was done properly, constitutionally. Kind of "tell me why there isn't a loophole here" sorts of things. It's hopeful thinking, but I guess I'll stick with it until we hear the final verdict. I'm so tired of the chaos, but fair and legal chaos, I think we can live with and grow through. FFS, nearly everything in government involving republicans is chaos. Why would more be a problem?
Reply

@kh-si5iq
27 minutes ago
Hi friends. Repeat after me: There was no insurrection There was no insurrection There was no insurrection There was no insurrection
Read more
Reply

@Michalis1948
1 hour ago
American judges 1. Must respect Constitutions. 2. Respect the country America. 3. Respect Americans people. 4. Respect the Law. If judges assist citizen trump to win, be very careful. Life can be cut short by an assault rifle.
Read more
Reply

@andrewhaydon
51 minutes ago
What a debacle it all is
Reply

@michaeljoseph2303
2 hours ago
Why’s Thomas even allowed to sit on this matter. GOP give us criminal trump. Not so SCOTUS OK
33
Reply

@doubledragon9530
1 hour ago
Like many I was disappointed with the thrust of the Supreme Court today and I believe they will reverse the lower court rulings. However, I cannot disagree with the idea that they put "detail over democracy." Their questions were valid and their points were valid. It always comes down to who has the power to enforce. The fact that the insurrection act far predates the amendment means that there is recourse to the charge for this crime, and also, the amendment does not give the States any role in preventing anyone from taking Federal office. Also, the amendment says nothing about running for an office, only about being seated in that role. The devil really is in the details. In actuality, I am most disappointed that the Constitution does not bar criminals from holding the highest office, even though it does bar Senators and Congressmen. On the other hand, I think it is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will even hear, much less reverse the immunity ruling, and so let's put the scoundrel in jail post haste.
Read more
Reply

@manuelseale4342
47 minutes ago (edited)
Why is everyone surprised? I am not, for obvious reasons. Let him stay!! Biden will permanently disqualify him at the polls
Reply

@cyndytodjo1798
13 minutes ago
So disgusting
Reply

@jannmutube
1 hour ago (edited)
---- < I listened to a portion of the arguments. The problem is that Colorado was arguing that Section 3 is "self-enforcing". a single person federal officer like the Secretary of State or a Legislative appointee making ballot determination. Historically, I don't think that's the way it was enforced. It was enforced through state courts and had the right to redress. ---- < I'd really like Trump to be off the ballot but his is looking like another swipe at something like the Unitary Legislature case.... which, fortunately failed.
Read more
Reply

@davidarchibald50
24 minutes ago
Mate, ask the people at Bhopal how they feel about American justice. America has this fantasy...
Reply

@theresa3
2 hours ago
I’m so done with the BS!!!! I HAVE NO FAITH IN the SUPREME COURT WHATS SO EVER Thank you Glenn Biden/Harris2024
61
Reply

@arjaygee
32 minutes ago
I frankly don't understand why anybody would have expected a different result. Amendment XIV Section 3 is poorly and incompletely written. I don't think Glenn is being very objective in this analysis.
Reply

@andrewburrell6381
37 minutes ago
I can totally sympathise with your comments Glenn. Yet even though the thought of Trump seeing this as a victory or sorts and added to that the fundamental issue that art 14 cl 3 has been almost overruled, part of me feels allowing individual states to apply the US constitution independently and more importantly differently seems illogical. And therefore on this specific situation I think Colorado has to stand down. I must admit I think I am only 51/49 this way out… as I say my biggest issue Trump may somehow see this as an all out victory. And also I hope that SCOTUS does not articulate its ruling ignoring the other very serious points raised by Colorado lawyer.
Read more
Reply

@julianluna9710
1 hour ago
Our country is going to the shitter!
Reply

@iainhunneybell
1 hour ago
A very bad day indeed. Worse, SCOTUS did not address the question. It is very simple: Are there, or are there not, restrictions/conditions of ineligibility to run for office or not? That is a Yes/No answer. Presuming you agree there are, because it is what is written, whatever they might be, the next question is: And so when and how does this disqualifications apply? Can all persons be on the ballot only to be disqualified after the plebiscite and a potential majority vote for an ineligible person? That is an absurd position, and how is allowing people to vote for an ineligible candidate “democratic”? The justices were putting forward absurd hypotheticals. This is just going to lead to a bigger train crash down the track. I could go on. Not a distinguished performance by SCOTUS
Read more
Reply

@johnandrews2768
1 hour ago
I'm not at all surprised by the direction they're going, I thought it was likely this is what they would do...but it's still absolutely disgusting to watch it happen
Reply

@onedominant
2 hours ago
Eff SCrOTUS. Incompetent. Shouldn't even be allowed to sit the bench in traffic court.
23
Reply

@curtisv5247
57 minutes ago
I wonder if they would feel the same way if Mike was actually hung! Also, they are opening the door to others!
Reply

@tracyheaslip8754
1 hour ago (edited)
I agree with you, however Trump has not been convicted of it yet. And if the Supreme Court decides that it can only be handled federally... where does that leave the states in charge of their own elections
Reply

@LisaAZBlue
2 minutes ago
I am far from a lawyer or scholar...but listening to that BS angered me so that I had to turn it off, cuz the questioning from the Justices was not about the basic text of the statute of the 14th Adm IT was like they were speaking and asking about something other than The 14th!! It was like they didn't know what Insurrection meant! DISAPPOINTED but ki da expected!!
Reply

@outtakontroll3334
1 hour ago
it was foregone they would allow him on the ballot. and there were some good points made in the questions. it may not be the last time they have to deal with the question, if he wins, which he wont. however it may be inconvenient though, the constitution must be followed, so he has to be ineligible.
Reply

@sharonbeckerle8735
22 minutes ago
This is only the beginning of the trial there might be better days ahead don’t lose hope in democracy
Reply

@user-hj7nv5oo9p
3 hours ago
Disgusting. They should be ashamed of themselves.
42
Reply

@tekkyk9272
1 hour ago
Does this not cause you to be disillusioned by a court system you have served for so many years? I feel for you :(
Reply

@naturalingredients
1 hour ago
Thank you.. as i listen to the court's decision could have used the facts that Trump has plenty of court cases therefore taken off the ballet this round until all courts are done..then after the 4 years would have all the answers to if he can be on the ballet..then court can definitely list all his wrong doing can not be denied..
Reply

@billygamer3941
1 hour ago
Law on its side as is Lincoln.
Reply

@greatpix
1 hour ago
Glen, do you know what my worry is, even if Trump ends up in prison? That he's created a blueprint for any President in the future to become a dictator. Congress needs to make changes to the Constitution to prevent that from ever happening again.
Reply

@ingridgrattidge5887
1 hour ago
Oh God noooo!!!!!!
Reply

@dannyspitzer1267
2 hours ago (edited)
They were splitting hairs instead of looking at the obvious...I'm so disgusted with our system
40
Reply

@georgehunter4525
1 hour ago
I was way off base! Looks like all the talking head legal experts are thinking 9-0 or 8-1. You summed up the case against Trump simply and clearly!
Reply

@uavman01
1 hour ago
Hey Glenn, thanks for keeping us informed and I have two questions one is this the final judgment of the United States Supreme Court? And the other question is are there any other steps or procedures that can be taken beyond What has already been done?
Reply

@diannetrotter5555
1 hour ago
Why didn't you go to the Supreme Court to explain to them like you are doing now. The justices are corrupt.
Reply

@englishwithteacheradgie4699
1 hour ago
They referred to what happened on January 6 as a “riot.” I looked up definition of insurrection and I got a list of “rebellions” in the U.S. going back before the revolution. These words appear to be synonymous. In addition, there is no process laid out because it sounds like everyone knows what an insurrection is and what it looks like kinda like a duck. Or like that scene in A Few Good Men where Tom Cruise asks a witness how he knew where the mess hall was. Was it in the manual and the man looked confused and said everyone knows where it is, you just follow the crowd.
Read more
Reply

@janetbleistein2820
1 hour ago
They saw the picture they wanted to see.
Reply

@dea6607
2 hours ago
I've lost all respect for the supreme court. Its sad.
66
Reply
1 reply

@videob1962
45 minutes ago
is there symbolic meaning to the statue behind you being on it's side? Is it of the Lincoln memorial?
Reply

@omavicmcmurray2893
1 hour ago
Either their bought off ( probably) or their afraid of the ripples from the mob boss ( possibly) but what’s for sure is the majority are sell outs, precisely.
Reply

@dorisporis8
1 hour ago
SCITUS shows its own faded colors. . .
Reply

@NESter422
1 hour ago
Interesting, three justices installed by an insurrectionist, one justice who’s wife who participated in the insurrection, who claim to be federalist having a hard time reading the plain text of the constitution. The justices are currently seeking to give Trump the relief of being able to run for an office he is not able to hold according to the constitution. These justices are now also in violation of their oath to uphold the constitution, to provide aide to the uncontested insurrectionist. If the justices do not uphold the constitution it will be plain to me that they are also engaged in the current attempt to usurp our democracy.
Read more
Reply

@paulasmith3590
24 minutes ago
I also watched today. So disappointed. I couldn't believe what they were saying. Trump should be in jail by now. Thanks to merrick garland, he is not. Again I say , there should be terms Limits for these judges.
Reply

@mariaa4572
3 hours ago
I can't BELIEVE how much this so called man is getting away with!!!!!...
38
Reply

@Barnacle25
1 hour ago
Glenn, I love you, man. I feel your pain. But Griffin rules. You know it, and I know it. The Trump Ship will sink. Just keep putting holes in the hull. Justice will prevail. "... a republic, if you can keep it." -- And Thanks.
Reply

@GKBryceVideos
1 hour ago
Is it not possible for the Supreme Court to decide that (a) Trump cannot run again for President because he engaged in an insurrection, but then (b) direct Congress to develop a mechanism to deal with future circumstances where an insurrectionist runs for a federal office rather than leave the process to individual states?
Reply

@middle_of_the_road
22 minutes ago (edited)
Glenn Kirscher advocating for chaos and ambiguity and to not support rulings by the highest court in the country.
Reply

@Moonewitch
1 hour ago (edited)
Someone more seasoned should've been arguing the case on Colorado's behalf. He was too meek & unpolished. There should've been a litigator who embodied the likes of: Luttig, Tribe, Conway & Kirschner, etc. He had enough time to be more polished & sound more well versed on the 14th Amendment's history & the history of its implemented, especially based upon its probable implications in today's society (political). This was Murray's first time presenting a case before the Supreme Court. This was NOT the case to be presented by a newbie. This wasn't it! Kaytal should've done it! He's presented many cases before the court.
Read more
Reply

@jimorgain63
1 hour ago
maybe this is purgatory, a sort of hell, so disapointing
Reply

@vernejacobs6019
3 hours ago
The surpreme court didn't mind disenfranchising voters when it ruled in favor of gerrymandering.
67
Reply

@msboncat1959
1 hour ago (edited)
It was clear the Justices did not want to have to deal with this question of whether Trump should be disqualified or not. I would agree they did ask hard questions but to both sets of lawyers. They did take a lot of time on details. {Like is the president considered to be an officer of the government. which was annoying.} One of the justices did issue a warning about what would happen if they decided Trump should be disqualified. Just because there were hard questions. I don't believe we should take it the ruling will be bad news for those of us who believe Trump should be disqualified. Perhaps we need to take a wait and see attitude. Let the Justices issue their ruling on this matter.
Read more
Reply

@user-fd1mv8dl9q
1 hour ago
If I understand the issue here, it’s that Trump is unqualified for office because he is guilty of insurrection. Sounds reasonable. When was that judgement handed down? In what court?
Reply

@sbk123411
21 minutes ago
Angry, but not surprised.
Reply

@brettjohnson290
30 minutes ago (edited)
I listened to the argument live. Colorado’s attorney argued Trump lost eligibility the moment J6th occurred and the 14th amendment was automatic. He lost the case when Goursich asked “then why wasn’t Trump removed as the sitting president” I agree Trump’s attorney was mediocre at best, but a bad argument is a bad argument. The bad argument being J6th is an insurrection. It was LOTS of things, but an insurrection was not one of them.
Read more
Reply

@imjustsayin109
1 hour ago
Okay let's have the courage here to say it out loud. Our Supreme Court simply did not have the ba**s to do this right. Anybody surprised??
Reply

@tinateixeira7118
2 hours ago
It was horrible. The Supreme Court needs to be real, Trump will fire all of them if he's in office again.
22
Reply
1 reply

@crabbyrat1972
53 minutes ago
So, it’s not an insurrection because it wasn’t “organized” ~ but ~ somehow they either had the materials to build a gallows or they brought a gallows with them (y’know, just in case) to the capitol. Just because the event wasn’t planned ahead of time with engraved invitations sent out doesn’t mean it wasn’t organized. Angry mobs organize on the spot fairly often, actually, and this turned into an organized, efficiently executed insurrection. The lack of blueprints or an organizational chart does not change that fact.
Read more
Reply

@PaulineMontagna
1 hour ago
The Justices were doing just what everyone was expecting them to do - finding a way to wriggle out of standing up against Trump. They care as little about the details as they care about democracy. Just as democracy was just a tool they used to get into the Supreme Court and for Trump to get into the White House, the details are just a tool they’ll use to assist Trump and save themselves from being targeted by MAGA. But just as you keep saying, Glenn, once Trump is in power he’ll have little use for them, so their reprieve will be short-lived.
Read
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 5:03 am

Page 8 of 12

Reply

@rosykatzCATS
1 hour ago
I knew they'd do that
Reply

@Soylntgrnisppl
1 hour ago (edited)
Let's not lose sight of the fact, that after the hearing today, Trump in his post-hearing remarks, said that what happened on Jan. 6 was Insurrection, only he's blaming Pelosi for the "Insurrection". I have to imagine that after Trump's Lawyers heard that statement and picked themselves up off the floor, they will be "counselling" him about the fact that he has now gone from characterizing Jan. 6 as a "great day for the Country" to "It was an Insurrection!" Of course, the question remains: "Will there be any real accountability for Trump"?
Read more
Reply

@kriskohnke3382
1 hour ago
SOOO DAMN FRUSTRATING
Reply

@User-uy9ko
2 hours ago
Why hasn't Ginny Thomas been held to account for her insurrectionist behavior? Why did her husband not recuse himself from this case?
43
Reply

@stevenwilgus5422
1 hour ago
The lifetime appointees that hold SCOTUS are enjoying another comfortable evening. They will rest easy. They do every day. They enjoy their position. They like the gifts, the vacations, the general perks of their elite status. The concerns of the nation are left to the political realm. It is not their concern. Never mind that in order to reach a resolution, one side will have to overwhelm the other through elections. It seems not to concern them in the least. They will continue to enjoy their lives until they pass away. Mean while, we struggle with MAGA. They will vote. They could prevail.
Read more
Reply

@greatpix
1 hour ago
While I'd like to see Trump not on any ballots the Supreme Court, conservative and liberal, had valid points about the control states would have over the election of a President. All it would take is even the smallest state in the Union taking a candidate's name off the ticket to make him or her lose even though they might have won in popular vote and electors otherwise.
1
Reply
1 reply

@PKing-px5dg
1 hour ago
We seem to be overthinking the 14th Amendment. The first line is clear and applies at the Federal lever to remove a Presidential Candidate from the Ballot for all States: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States! "No One" includes an ex-President! The second part applies to a States own government within the State: Under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States! The point the founding fathers were trying to make was, they don't want an Insurrectionist in the government at all. Federal or State Governments! Read the words: No Person ... under the United States vs. Under any State ...of the United States
Read more
1
Reply

@davidclark573
1 hour ago
No justice Kagan, your job is to rule if trump committed an insurrection and should be removed from the ballot. The case is not whether a state can remove a person from a ballot. In other words, is the decision of Colorado's court an accurate interpretation of the constitution? That is your job and you are avoiding it. The supreme court is afraid to make the right decision. I predicted the court would change the subject to avoid deciding the insurrection issue because insurrection was already established.
Read more
Reply

@lindataylor1127
1 hour ago
It figures
Reply

@paulhealy2286
3 hours ago
Hang in there, Glenn. We can't make this without you.
53
Reply

@EBR846
1 hour ago (edited)
Not going to lie, I have reduced the news I take in over the past year+ for a number of reasons, one being not using social media much, more than a bit of that due to boycotting Twitter and its awful owner. One source of news I still go to is Youtube, watching videos for entertainment or for some news, like this channel. For a while, over the course of '23, when the possibility of Trump being essentially dealt a knockout blow, by a very small number of people, spotlight shining, all-eyes-watching manner, not to mention a judicial body that from my limited POV, is not moderate and definitely not left-leaning or even reasonably unbiased, as we've found out with just one judge, Clarence Thomas---seemed HIGHLY UNLIKELY. Even if the judges were going to rule in a way that was sensible, I figured this a while ago: They were going to look for any out they could to NOT have a literal or figurative target on their backs. We already saw what Trump's followers were capable of on Jan. 6th. We've seen what his cult followers are capable of in Georgia in harassing election workers. In my view, at least in part, Trump has used his precedent and cult-like followers, and what they are capable, to potentially intimidate more than a few judges, indirectly, by riling up his strongest supporters and continuing to spin and lie and convince his followers that anyone coming after him legally is doing so for political reasons and not VALID legal reasons. Very few people want to be the ones largely responsible for delivering a huge blow to him, politically. On a financial front with the rulings in New York state (now three cases), with the human nature not changing, those rulings don't really directly impact Trump voters like the Supreme Court rulings would. It may anger them a tad, but it doesn't anger them or directly impact their vote. As I see it, even if the judges in the Supreme Court are concerned about Trump becoming a dictator, they figure the other safeguards in place will at least stop him from ultimately becoming a dictator, whether through other trials he is facing or simply being not voted and any insurrection attempts not being successful--he's not in power this time and I fully believe, that if he could have done so in a manner that was not blatant, Trump would have altered the security on Jan. 6th --in a country where our military budget borders on 1 TRILLION U.S. dollars, you mean to tell me that was the best they could offer on the security front where the election was being ratified? These judges are people with egos and sizeable compensation and who knows what other benefits they get under-the-table, even if only once in a while. None of them can work remotely exclusively and they sort of have to live in that area, seemingly, not live overseas or a secluded place in Montana or wherever. Then Glenn brought forth some limited but basic logical explanations for why he thought the Supreme Court would NOT rule in Trump's favor in hearing one of these cases and it seemed reasonable. I allowed myself to believe it but again was kind of limited. That a Supreme Court is not in the picture if a person like Trump gains power, who is even TALKING about being a dictator. I'm disappointed for allowing myself to believe this, because I again, thought there was almost NO way that the judges wanted to be the ones that would essentially, in the view of many strong Trump supporters, to be the ones to take their vote away and deliver a political knockout blow, essentially. I don't know if Glenn is simply a bit overly optimistic at times. Or if it's that in this case and other times, can be at least more than a little bit self-serving in fashion on Glenn's part. Is he presenting this pretty much always optimistic view because he wants people to continue watching his videos and makes a decent amount of money from them? I think the tone is often optimistic in his videos compared to other presentations of news in the world, which is not that positive and this is a competing tone that gives people a bit more hope. I hope it's not the latter but I don't see myself watching these videos as consistently after today.
Read more
Reply

@chong2389
11 minutes ago
One of the justices said that 14.3 states 'shall not hold office'. It does not say 'shall not be allowed on a ballot'. So, does that mean he can be on the ballot, potentially get enough elector votes, be declared the winner and then be prevented from taking office?
Reply
1 reply

@rossbeck7389
1 hour ago
Concur: like what kinda of twisted weak justis is this.
Reply

@mariannesteinmetz8132
9 minutes ago
Glenn, trump has not been proven by law to be an insurrectionist, but he is aiding and abetting insurrectionists & seditionists by offering pardons and singing "freedom songs" with them. That part of the 14th amendment seems to be most relevant.
Reply

@TonyaMorgan-jv4cj
1 hour ago
I was hopeful but not surprised. Shame
Reply

@guess2899
3 hours ago
There should be a mass protest to have those maga judges out of the Supreme Court, protest in front of the court
50
Reply

@brucegraner5901
52 minutes ago
So today the justices demonstrated more interest in parcing legal definitions than what seems the obvious intent of the 14th Amendment. The tone of this video makes it sound like justice lost today and it's all over. Can you please talk about whether or not you think this is true and what happens next and when? If things are as bleak as this take makes it sound like the Supreme's Court popularity with much of the country is about to drop into the negative numbers.
Reply

@maramunson336
1 hour ago
why didn't anyone bring up the argument about abortion throwing the states into chaos ( like you did) ? And the other point about dis-infranchising voters ( like you did)
Reply

@vikitheviki
2 minutes ago (edited)
The horror clown show is still going.. Smellvis for prison 2024!
Reply

@Robert-qw3lr
16 minutes ago
Yeah it was a rough day for your delusion. Stay strong! Hold faith in your delusion. I believe in you!
Reply

@user-pw1xf1rk4l
1 hour ago
No surprise to me whatsoever how today went with the questioning, not one little bit of a surprise at all!
Reply

@KateWitt
3 hours ago
Have never seen Glenn so mad. He's right to be so. Thank you for this.
64
Reply
1 reply

@supernaturalta6174
1 hour ago (edited)
Could it be plausible that the justices were playing devil's advocate? Why waste time quabbling over the facts the Colorado case already established? It's their job to see cases from every angle - even the most obtuse angles - before making a decision.
Reply

@Tryingtosurvive012
1 hour ago
It is imperative that one comprehends the fact that mere belief does not equate to accuracy. The majority of individuals possess a limited understanding, and oftentimes, base their opinions upon unsubstantiated sources such as CNN and MSNBC. There exists a frequent pattern wherein individuals regurgitate the words of these sources, without taking the time to conduct their own thorough investigations. The individual in question alleges that the former President of the United States engaged in an insurrection, yet simultaneously asserts that the same individual encouraged a march towards the capital. In this regard, it must be emphasized that the aforementioned statement is erroneous, as at the time said individual issued such words, the purported march had already transpired for a duration of thirty minutes. This individual is nothing more than a Democratic operative, whose speech consists of fifty percent deceit and the remaining fifty percent being mere bluster. Furthermore, in the same breath, it is argued that the current President, Mr. Biden, intends to fortify the border; however, these efforts are hindered by the Republican party. One cannot reasonably maintain that Mr. Biden has an earnest desire to secure the border when he, in fact, opposed such actions and defended this stance in the Supreme Court. The installation of razor wire serves as further evidence that Mr. Biden has not prioritized efforts to secure the nation's borders. Had he truly intended to implement measures to address this issue, he could effortlessly pass legislation to do so.
Read more
Reply

@joeboudre1667
1 hour ago
He probably paid them off!
Reply

@carolynmack4017
1 hour ago
I thought they were looking to appease the MAGA folks who carried giant Confederate flags on January 6, 2021. I feel Roberts' Court becoming the Taney Court and "compromising" wirh the insurrectionists with another Dred Scott. But after the DC Circuit argument, I thought that court might say they did not have jurisdiction and we got a strong opinion on lack of immunity. Maybe we will get a better opinion from the USSC than we think, but you are bolstering my pessimism.
Reply

@jimstubbs7230
1 hour ago
It was a disgrace the simple words and common sense were supplanted by reckless whatabout-ism and legal philosophy. Screw the legal high ground literalism. What use does a nation have for a scotus like this? NONE.
Reply

@slanier3486
17 seconds ago
It’s hard to see evil win. When scams and fraud succeed, or when a coworker uses lies and manipulation to get ahead, injustices make us want to do something. But instead of retaliating, and giving in to evil, the Lord calls us to trust Him and His timing. He is not blind to evil, and He will deal with it in time. So as we wait on Him He fills us with His peace, even in the midst of evil.
Reply

@dr.evelynj.nieves8270
3 hours ago
This is a National NIGHTMARE that does not stop! Thank you Glenn for all you do.
52
Reply

@Pavlovs_Dog
1 hour ago
we all have mitch mcConnell to thank for all of this.
Reply
1 reply

@AnnDavis-mk7lz
49 minutes ago
We the people will vote him out for good. On October 29th. I'm posting "C U Next Tuesday tRUMP" November 5th is election day and a Tuesday. Lol I'll be voting BLUE down the whole ballot.
Read more
1
Reply

@MsSavannasMom
1 hour ago
I miss Ginsburg.
Reply

@carlosestevam3620
3 hours ago (edited)
I don’t trust none of them!!!! We need justice for this criminal!!! It’s so frustrating!!!
22
Reply

@KaronBerg-wv4ty
1 hour ago
The Constitution is Crystal Clear.
Reply
1 reply

@martabubnich904
56 minutes ago
Yes Glenn it was really bad , no one but one judge mention the Insurrection, when everybody else ignored it.
Reply

@Brklyn_NuYawka
3 hours ago
It's a sad day when you actually don't have faith in the supreme court - considering the players that sit on the bench. smh
80
Reply

@johnholland1308
1 hour ago
I am disappointed but not surprised.
Reply

@SirCitizenJim
53 minutes ago
I called this days ago.
Reply

@rmsmith8098
2 hours ago
I have only had a shred of faith left in the Supreme Court. After today, that shred is falling apart I have no faith left in them at all. I feel sick. And scared.
34
Reply

@desmondisaacs8475
1 hour ago
I'm not shocked, money n power wins.
Reply

@phylis3917
1 hour ago
Thomas! Are you kidding.
Reply

@scottbracken1284
2 hours ago
I Don't trust my own supreme court at all any more!
29
Reply

@gabortoth5936
1 hour ago
Big trouble is coming
Reply

@G-S-D
45 minutes ago
And what do you think they're going to do about immunity?
Reply

@mooncake4234
3 hours ago
So hard to watch the USA drift further and further away from democracy.
28
Reply

@solaris808
44 minutes ago
Gilead
Reply

@BovisStercus
1 hour ago
Not surprised.
Reply

@user-fm1ki2pg2d
2 hours ago
It's VERY OBVIOUS that Supreme Court Justices(and I use that word lightly) should be term limited!!!
43
Reply

@steveburke7675
3 hours ago
I have very little trust in SCOTUS to put aside politics and decide to the benefit of the nation and democracy.
35
Reply

@sarge420
3 hours ago
Go figure. Vote Blue America. -Ret USAF
48
Reply

@Schiltax
3 hours ago
OMG I just want to scream and swear my head off!!! Is there anyone or anything that isn't corrupted?? I'm so glad I'm in my older years! What's going to happen to my grandchildren??
83
Reply
2 replies

@MsTdougherty
3 hours ago
Today was a disgusting day for Justice. The Supreme Court should be ashamed of themselves. And why the hell is Clarence Thomas still a justice? He’s bought and paid for.
37
Reply
1 reply

@justin169169
3 hours ago
They should be more concerned that if he stays on the ballot, they most likely won't have a job or any authority over anything.
34
Reply
2 replies

@tobi52
3 hours ago
My heart is broken to hear what the Supreme Court decided. Thank you Mr. Kirschner for the update. The Supreme Court should be ashamed of themselves.
67
Reply
4 replies

@thjbird
3 hours ago
The Supreme Republican Court found an easy way out seized it. They completely ignored the elephant in the room.
25
Reply

@karengossett1475
3 hours ago
It’s late and I am too old to watch this tonight and frankly I have had enough of Trump today!
26
Reply
1 reply

@fsu4031
2 hours ago
All those justices were despicable from top to bottom. Traitors!
16
Reply

@sixbladeknife44
3 hours ago
SHAME ON SCOTUS!
31
Reply

@rainbow6978
2 hours ago
These justices went in with their minds made up without a doubt.
40
Reply

@maryrobie4752
3 hours ago (edited)
My heart hurts. This is a very sad day for America and our Democracy. Our government is corrupt!
34
Reply

@armi4276
2 hours ago
How can these judges sleep tonight and the rest of the nights until they give their decision.
23
Reply
2 replies

@marilynkotnik880
2 hours ago
a black day for America...God help your country!
22
Reply

@AndrewHunter-ds5fj
2 hours ago
The supreme court have given trump the ok to do it again, madness
19
Reply

@user-pv1tn5sq1q
3 hours ago
Dismissing the rules of the Constitution 14th Amendment is disregarding the law. seeking an off-ramp is criminal and aiding a criminal.
30
Reply
1 reply

@LollieVox
3 hours ago
Hold office? Nah he can’t even touch or think about office!
38
Reply
2 replies

@paulapenna-loveyourvoice
3 hours ago
It was sickening to listen to today
26
Reply

@2024spellsfreedom
3 hours ago
THE MAJORITY IS NOT HAPPY!!
30
Reply

@jeffie8696
2 hours ago
A congressional hearing determined he is an insurrectionist , I remember a time when that would have been enough
29
Reply

@Sissymtz
3 hours ago
This is ridiculous, we all need to write to these judges!!!
24
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 5:07 am

Page 9 of 12

more
Reply
1 reply

@ScottHafferkamp
2 hours ago
What a disaster this SCOTUS is… they seem to be poised to absolutely fail in their duties… ugh…
15
Reply

@ferretfriend5458
3 hours ago (edited)
If it had been any different a decision than keeping him on I would have been shocked, we in Europe know trump has the supreme court in his pocket.. Just do the world a favour and not vote trump in again as your president, you did it once hope you learned your lesson. God save USA from trump
21
Reply

@jonathanchartrand3351
2 hours ago
Sorry Glenn I can't watch anymore. It's too disturbing to hear the corruption that the Supreme Court displays.
16
Reply

@Sitting8ull
2 hours ago
If Humpty Trumpty gets elected, then they'll see chaos.
18
Reply

@mariamadsen878
3 hours ago (edited)
I think the Thomas’s need to be investigated. Why hasn’t this happened? I don’t care who they think they are…
21
Reply

@cindypieterick9939
2 hours ago
It was so aggravating listening to the Lawyers and justices. I agree with you Glenn 100%
33
Reply

@snowrose101
2 hours ago
The reality is that the Supreme Court can not ignore The Constitution. This is set law. They MUST enforce it. That's their job.
19
Reply
3 replies

@scottryals3191
2 hours ago
This court is quickly losing its legitimacy.
15
Reply

@johnjeppson1754
3 hours ago
This is a perfect example of the fact that we do NOT have a “Justice System” (even though justice DOES matter)…we have a “Court System” instead.
23
Reply
1 reply

@steve29roses
2 hours ago
You are a treasure. It must be sooo frustratimg to see the Supreme Court behave like insurrectionists. Is America slowly rotting from the Supreme Court down?
26
Reply
1 reply

@2024spellsfreedom
3 hours ago
Can the corrupt supremes be charged and disbarred if they don't uphold the constitution? Also, for aiding and abetting a criminal and insurrectionist?
28
Reply

@Ann-of2xy
3 hours ago
Well, there's goes my faith in our justice system
36
Reply

@TheHungryHoneyBadger
3 hours ago
We need 18 year term limits on justices.
30
Reply
6 replies

@jennsprague6080
2 hours ago
As a Canadian, I'm scared for America today
14
Reply

@josephrapp
3 hours ago
It was 15 min. in, that I could discern the court was leaning heavily towards allowing T. on ballot. Yes, the tedious details became the total emphasis vs, the reality of a criminal who ought to be banned from any office after inciting an insurrection. Disgusting.
37
Reply
1 reply

@paulaortega3756
2 hours ago
Poor Lincoln behind you - rolling in his grave. "A house divided will not stand."
23
Reply

@babsjean9913
2 hours ago
Justice Ginny should have been removed from the case.
15
Reply

@tomhorsley6566
3 hours ago
If we should be able to vote for anyone we really like, then I should be able to vote for Obama again.
12
Reply

@marytomlinson4270
3 hours ago
even with all this, he still owns the courts
17
Reply

@angelaadams3615
2 hours ago
THIS IS WHAT HE WANTS He wants to "take a sledgehammer to our country's RULE OF LAW"... Somebody better stop him
12
Reply

@cindycharles8134
3 hours ago
They did everything they could to avoid the truth…They had no intention of doing the right thing..
24
Reply

@reginakelly1783
3 hours ago
Disappointing!!! Make most people blood boils! Shameful!!!
22
Reply

@GROUNDEDWEST
3 hours ago
Thank you for your presence. You and your team. Team Justice
85
Reply

@leslieschmitt7749
3 hours ago
There goes that spark of hope I saw momentarily! Shame on them!!
50
Reply

@gailnelson1152
2 hours ago
It is a sad day for our democracy but thank you Glen for being the sound and reasonable voice I always look forward to.
30
Reply
3 replies

@user-mo7cx9fm2h
2 hours ago
If the supreme court doesn’t grow a spine this country is fucked.
29
Reply
3 replies

@ednageddes1337
2 hours ago (edited)
I didn’t expect anything different from SCOTUS. It is a shame. All I can do is vote, send some donations to the Democrats, and pray like it’s a matter of life and death. Thank you always Glenn, I don’t miss a single day of your opinion and analysis.
32
Reply
1 reply

@ianandalisonstewart4710
2 hours ago
As a New Zealander in New Zealand I have come to the conclusion that allowing justice to be appointed by politics has to end badly. Love the reporting though, Glen.
25
Reply
1 reply

@daved2375
2 hours ago
from new zealand keep fighting for justice my thoughts are with u glenn
23
Reply
1 reply

@jakemoeller7850
2 hours ago
Term limits for SCOTUS judges.
10
Reply

@robg.8616
2 hours ago
True, A SAD DAY FOR AMERICA! What happened today puts me in “preparation” of acceptance to have The Criminal Orange Jesus as our president again!
11
Reply

@paulgilbert1954
3 hours ago
There is a guy who was accused of stealing tomatoes he won his case with the supreme court the accusation of not mentioning whether the tomatoes were red or green Bravo supreme court.
10
Reply

@Mr__Geno
3 hours ago
Anyone expecting Traitor Thomas to recuse himself was kidding themselves, and Garland should never have hesitated to make a move on Trump. This court was more worried about how they would look instead of ruling on the facts. Thanks for reporting on this Glenn.
20
Reply

@nancychannel8513
3 hours ago
I think we all knew the Supreme Court Justices would wimp out
19
Reply

@eileenmurphy1617
2 hours ago
Today I felt like Justice doesn't matter.
20
Reply

@MariaGonzalez-vv9xk
3 hours ago
Glen the true is that these judges dont want to miss a pay check from Donald trump period.
16
Reply

@mincretienyo
2 hours ago
I am baffled by the inconsistencies of the supreme Court justices!!!
12
Reply
2 replies

@calgal5752
3 hours ago
America definitely sets the bar low!
13
Reply

@raw1915
3 hours ago
The fly in the soup was the fact that injustice Thomas didn’t recuse himself from the case, given that his wife was materially involved in the insurrection. It’s not just an ethics violation, but also a law violation.
24
Reply

@AKGD
2 hours ago (edited)
"Details over democracy" well put. They were more focused on finding excuses to avoid being involved than on doing their job. I could almost hear Pontius Pilate applauding them from beyond the grave.
17
Reply

@johnburns2940
3 hours ago
Don't give up America! Despite your faults you have always been a beacon of hope and possibility for the world. Show us how to rise to the top once again.
13
Reply
2 replies

@MaverickneoGamer
2 hours ago (edited)
Question: If Texas gets to defy a Supreme Court ruling, why should Colorado abide by it?
48
Reply
1 reply

@augabby7
2 hours ago
What you had to say Glenn was spot on. What can we as the "people" can do to let the Supreme Court know we can see right through them. I am sooooo saddened by this.
24
Reply

@johnpatterson9219
2 hours ago
Glenn Kirschner’s, most profound and important commentary ever!
22
Reply

@1supermanprime
3 hours ago
if scotus is going to be useless like this then maybe we don't need the scotus at all, abolish scotus.
15
Reply
1 reply

@lex_hayes
2 hours ago
Please please please America wake up. I’m scared in Australia.
25
Reply
1 reply

@chadriffs
2 hours ago (edited)
Disqualified is obvious to any sane person
7
Reply

@janetmcclellen733
3 hours ago
I feel this never gives a chance to get rid of a criminal
6
Reply

@jimsalman7257
2 hours ago
We’d like to think our federal Supreme Court justices are fair, wise, and gifted with sharp legal minds. But I’m afraid most of them are nothing more than apparatchiks.
15
Reply

@lindamhubsch4153
2 hours ago
Justice didn't matter to the extreme Justices
11
Reply

@jamesharvey446
2 hours ago
HERE WE GO AGAIN. NO JUSTICE FOR THE COMMON MAN.
8
Reply

@kevinegan6311
2 hours ago
In all seriousness....I truly wish Glenn was on the presidential ballot.
7
Reply

@supermovietimebros6770
3 hours ago (edited)
This is why someone like Glen isn’t on the Supreme Court
21
Reply

@sylvielelievre3690
2 hours ago
REALLY DISAPPOINTING!!!! Im not looking forward to what's going to HAPPEN to the States!!!!
6
Reply

@zachcloutier3111
3 hours ago
Jackson and Sotomayor are the only justices on The SCOTUS who I like!
12
Reply

@jackiering
3 hours ago
They put hypothetical over FACTS!!
14
Reply
1 reply

@user-qs1ux3rs2d
3 hours ago
We need 3 more Supreme Court judges.
8
Reply

@jhill4874
2 hours ago
The GOP (including 2/3 of SC) believe in states' rights, except when they don't like the decisions of said states.
19
Reply

@kathibell2428
45 minutes ago
Would Nixon been allowed on the ballot?
1
Reply

@ronshattil7948
50 seconds ago
Is the sculpture of Lincoln on its side a statement of the dire status of our country?
Reply

@jeribryan5603
3 hours ago
He engaged in insurrection and gives aide and comfort to. Why are they refusing to hold him accountable for anything?
7
Reply

@mhupp751
16 minutes ago
They took trips and private jets, and cruises bribes are more important than the silly old constitution
Reply

@AzecTheButcher
2 hours ago
Ridiculous. It seems pretty clear to me. Supreme court has no guts.
5
Reply

@user-qx8ni8yz5d
58 minutes ago
Can we expect an insurrection every 4 years ?
Reply

@paulbilger3782
1 hour ago
The court will back Trump because their lives were not in danger on January 6th.
Reply

@davidg4058
2 hours ago
You knew the outcome when SCOTUS took the case without specifying what they were going to review. Politically motivated court can make up anything to justify their position.
13
Reply

@user-vp7sx3ft6z
24 minutes ago (edited)
I never expected the SCOTUS to spend so much time and effort delving into hyperbole. Absolutely avoiding facts and just proposing “what ifs” for two hours. I expected more intelligent responses, I’m Shocked and disappointed.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 5:21 am

Part 10 of 12

Reply

@Dragoninja
1 hour ago
Hopefully SCOTUS will come to its senses. LOL LOL
Reply

@mlthewi1287
3 hours ago
You should be a supreme court justice, sir.
10
Reply

@rachelb315
1 hour ago
What I didn't hear them say, it how they expect the 14th amendment to be used. They just made arguments why it is complicated.
Reply

@steveweing
1 hour ago
Dred Scott 2024
Reply

@barbaradamato3528
2 hours ago
SCOTUS wiggled out of stopping him. Okay. We can still, and must, VOTE him out!!!
5
Reply

@user-hj9mq6wm7m
23 minutes ago
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE look in to the money that trump received while he was president from other county's
Reply

@nickcirelli8453
50 minutes ago
Why is ABE tipped over?
1
Reply

@allisonharrison1173
3 hours ago
Beyond belief!!!! America is broken.
8
Reply

@maxrico6660
1 hour ago
Looks like the only way we're going to beat Trump is at the polls.
Reply

@missrafaelas
48 minutes ago
This is not a setback for democracy, the best is yet to come... We must learn that the wheels are turning not as fast as we may like, however they are turning in the right direction...
Reply

@JoanL-ox8yw
3 hours ago
It was a rough day for me. Thanks for addressing this. My heart is breaking. It is not like there was no investigation by the House, no determination by Colorado about the insurrection, no consideration of the ongoing DOJ investigation.. . .
14
Reply

@UserName-sj8fg
1 hour ago
Who is on trial, Trump or the Supreme Court? Both!
Reply

@yvonnewilburne7263
16 minutes ago
He’s disqualified & each state could ignore the supreme court all criminals Stupid is as stupid does
Reply

@orangeremediation5335
2 hours ago
They need to be Impeached!
7
Reply

@democratpatriot6752
53 minutes ago
Will SCOTUS consider that Trump wants to terminate the basis of our democracy?
Reply

@Malinski66
2 hours ago
Notwithstanding whatever the Supreme Court rules, cannot each state still enforce their own ballot controls? Is this not the ultimate 'states rights' issue of this time?
14
Reply

@tonyyarbray
1 hour ago
what does any one expect from the republiturd trumpie court?
Reply

@user-cr3py6py6j
1 hour ago
US is very disappointing. Having so many layers re justice and how layers can be stacked by partisan individuals there is something very wrong. Those systems are not thinking about the country but rather about protecting individuals.
Reply

@user-gr6xz7ri8b
3 hours ago
It means that there is no justice for America. It also tells me they put money over democracy.
9
Reply

@3dbadboy1
1 hour ago
Jack Smith's lawyers didn't say anything?
Reply

@user-xt2jp4mg9c
3 hours ago
They make me sick!
13
Reply

@dalekundtz760
1 hour ago (edited)
You need to change your closing to 'Justice USED to matter.!"
Reply

@BluegrassHighway
1 hour ago
Not happy
Reply

@brendajeanproffitt6919
3 hours ago
See they don't give a dam about laws or the Constitution see how wrong they are
8
Reply

@tamaraharrington6327
49 minutes ago

Reply

@ckcox
1 hour ago
It means that no one has a spine... Including our Supreme Court.
5
Reply

@JustAng1
1 hour ago
Trump is innocent.
1
Reply

@TheSageThrasher
3 hours ago
No one is coming to save us.
28
Reply
6 replies

@jonobester5817
54 minutes ago
My right-wing-nut friend says there was no due process in Colorado....?
Reply

@SilverSergeant
1 hour ago
What insurrection? There were no weapons.......and the Constitution states that only Congress can enact the 14th.
Reply

@pabobfin
1 hour ago
When we have to go to the Supreme Court to decide if an insurrectionist can run for a president again I think we are pretty much fucked
Reply

@garywait3231
19 seconds ago
Should the Supreme Court rule in favor of Trump and against Colorado, we have nothing but another partisan Dred Scott verdict, plunging both the Coirt and the Constitution into disrespect, and the Court into contempt, inviting civil disrespect for our so called democracy. As a life-long American political and Constitutional scholar, I am appalled at the possibility and prospect of the Court's ruling against Colorado and for insurrectionist Trump. JUSTICE MATTERS, and a ruling for Trump would be the grossest miscarriage of justice since Dred Scott !!!!!!
Read more
Reply

@lesliedavid1244
1 hour ago
Either states have rights or they don’t. They can’t have it both ways.
Reply

@donedeal8385
1 hour ago
I still have trouble believing you thought it would be any different.
Reply

@deathstalker0000
3 hours ago
Behind Glenn, Lincoln lays on his side...Powerful Imagery of this Farce and Disenfranchising Mess... Thanks for being a source of reassurance in these Unsure times Glenn...
14
Reply

@kathleenchu2775
2 hours ago
Its infuriating Glenn. Thankyou for all you do.
12
Reply

@transquantrademarkquantumf8894
41 minutes ago
Here are steps that near (. T. )
Reply

@michellem4287
3 hours ago
Why did CO send a first-time attorney to argue this case? They could have gotten plenty of seasoned attorneys. ##VoteBlue4Democracy
13
Reply

@cynthiadavis3102
1 hour ago
Even Sotomayor!
Reply

@user-sn2vy7pp3c
55 minutes ago
What did you expect a Republican led court to do?
Reply

@kandyturner6854
2 hours ago
I can’t stand to watch this train wreck. All I can say is the United States Government I learned about in Elementary, Jr. High, High School, and college must have been a lie.
5
Reply

@jeannehamm9016
54 minutes ago
Glenn, you are one of the few sane people. Is there really any justice alive in our nation? tRump Derangement Syndrome has spread so far. Im having panic attacks. Can nothing be done??
Reply

@taritabonita22
1 hour ago
Stupidity! Period! Shocking! Shame!
Reply

@mondoenterprises6710
3 hours ago
They don't want to jeopardize their Trump National Country Club memberships.
5
Reply

@frankjones3671
1 hour ago
Who paid justice s offs folks ?? That's the ??? Who bought there BS.
Reply

@lizlee8686
1 hour ago
I think it should be left up to the states!:Just like they did the abortion bans.
Reply

@lesleepetersen87
3 hours ago
Details over Democracy. PERFECT!!!
8
Reply

@sstarkey1695
1 hour ago
Yes, that's what they will do. They will give him immunity, too.
Reply

@joefrommontana252
3 hours ago
Being a Justice of the Supreme Court has got to be one of the easier jobs in law. You start with the answer, then just have to figure out how you reached that conclusion.
9
Reply

@timvala7577
1 hour ago
And what do we do now? Wait for November and vote him out. And when Donald loses again he’ll say I’ll concede. Right?
Reply

@1serious0mfr
1 hour ago
6:58 its all clear as day
Reply

@mimiolsen7676
3 hours ago
The right on the court was nice to Trump's voice. Snarky to Colorados attorney's.
4
Reply

@freekfaro5606
22 minutes ago
The good thing is, there's another couple of pages you can rip out of the Constitution, due to uselessness. And that's progress!
Reply

@xx8031
1 hour ago
"94"
Reply

@mrretrovampire
3 hours ago
Great ,clear and accurate breakdown ! Give em hell Glenn
13
Reply

@QDog736
42 minutes ago
it's the republican party it's not just trump vote blue
Reply

@skypilot2082
3 hours ago
Looks like we have to all work even harder to beat the Chump at the ballot box. I donated a couple of bucks today to Joe and money won't matter if Chump gets in the WH. Thanks Ginny. More justices are needed. Let's do this!!!!
7
Reply

@michellem4287
3 hours ago
Can we use their logic to end the Electoral College where states can overturn a Federal Election?
9
Reply

@MENDNZ
1 hour ago (edited)
How is it possible to have well-bribed Claremce Thomas whose wife was part of Jan6...deciding Jan 6 cases???
Reply

@geezzzwdf
1 hour ago
oral arguments can often seem rollercoaster like. hold up your hope it is not over yet.
Reply

@lindagoff5987
3 hours ago
P.S.. Glenn, quite a statement laying Abraham Lincoln on it's side!
13
Reply
1 reply

@robertvanruyssevelt7159
58 minutes ago
OK if not the states then who? Is the Supreme Court going to disqualify trump?
Reply

@bokchoylochoy3857
1 hour ago
To me SC credibility went caput...
Reply

@deborahharrison8407
2 hours ago
I hope Colorado acts just like Texas did an do their own bidding. If Abbott can ignore the court so can they
18
Reply

@johnbrowneyes7534
1 hour ago
People have to vote in November. Rejecting 45 a second time is the only way to go.
Reply

@NoahSpurrier
1 hour ago
I felt that this wasn’t a great move to make. It felt like a long shot and wasn’t worth it.
Reply

@desireeburton3923
1 hour ago
I'm patiently waiting but my stomach hurts. #scotus WON'T LOSE THEIR JOB! And ANY ONE of them SHOULD MOVE to #RUSSIA
Reply

@claytondenton2385
3 hours ago
We gotta keep together and stand strong. 24 is the year. We make a true difference with 2024s voting
7
Reply

@colleenbrady9675
1 hour ago
Have we waited too long to do something about Jan.6th? Is this going to be swept under the rug ? Is dt our soon 2 B Dictator?
Reply

@user-rk4gm6fw2u
56 minutes ago
When Donald Chump requested The initial application for running for president last year, they should had denied him then
Reply

@kylorenthehusky2584
3 hours ago (edited)
Glenn, did Colorado pick the right attorney? He did not seem seasoned enough to go up against the SC. If only we could multiply Jamie Raskin.
21
Reply

@paulbilger3782
1 hour ago
The court will back Trump because their lives were not in danger on January 6th.
1
Reply
1 reply

@Chode571Ops
1 hour ago
Or aid and comfort where was that. I they have done is praise those insurrectionist?!?
Reply

@zebbie09
3 hours ago
Keep on fighting the good fight brother! You have really helped me keep my sanity in these turbulent times….
7
Reply

@phylis3917
1 hour ago
Semantics yes. Think they forgot about right and wrong. Perhaps that simple concept too heavy. Fortunately it’s generational. Inconsistencies yes. Term limits! Higher conscience needed.
Reply

@namelessjedi2242
3 hours ago
Is anyone surprised? Will anyone do anything about it? Sadly, the answer to both is no.
9
Reply

@rdbeckett590
1 hour ago (edited)
horror movie. As Stephen king has said, “trump is more scary—than any book I’ve written.”
Reply

@joyannreiser4985
3 hours ago
Justice used to matter.
5
Reply

@beccagross1525
1 hour ago
Idk why the court would even allow him o. The ballot cause he even admitted he did a insurrection
Reply

@pimphandduke8447
2 hours ago
And still there are people who think that the lackeys he appointed will somehow have a sudden case of conscience and put law and order above and beyond their master's wishes.
6
Reply

@mm-tc3kt
26 minutes ago
That's just the Court's way of chickening out from calling a spade a spade. Hemming and hawing about the "details" to avoid doing the substantive--- in effect, theater. It's banana republic time.
Reply

@leefradkin9077
1 hour ago
This so on fucking target.
Reply

@randallbruursema7553
2 hours ago
respect for the S, court went out the window
6
Reply

@charliebonifacio2587
24 minutes ago
Can a Supreme Court decision be appealed ?
Reply

@marianagabel8361
3 hours ago
Don't lose hope! The decision was only in regards of being on the ballot, not including holding office. Important distinction.
9
Reply
3 replies

@user-ib5zk5jk2v
23 minutes ago
Thomases wife was an actively participating in the insurrection.
Reply

@user-uq4oh6sv5h
3 hours ago
I waited all day for your input Glenn.
46
Reply
2 replies

@buterrier2001
38 minutes ago
Glenn - fix Honest Abe!!
Reply

@tomb5372
2 hours ago
What's next? SCOTUS saying that the 1st amendment doesn't apply anymore?! Absolutely ridiculously if they say the 14th amendment doesn't exist...
4
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 5:25 am

Part 11 of 12

Reply

@AstraFulminous
1 hour ago
Technically what they are doing is helping an insurrection if they are trying to micro their way out him being caught.
Reply

@HollyMattson
3 hours ago
It turned out exactly like i.predicted . No big shocks here
8
Reply

@williamlay6981
1 hour ago
An that is the end of the story. We can get better odds at a casino.
Reply

@cjzito
2 hours ago
They're cowards. It's that simple.
5
Reply
2 replies

@sarahwilliams9310
1 hour ago
should they not have decided if he was guilty of insurrection first in wich case the 14 amendment would apply would it now ?
Reply

@loisbutler947
1 hour ago
There were Trump lawyers at the scotus, were there any other lawyers there also?
Reply

@jeffdroz5294
3 hours ago
Mueller, nope Colorado, nope Republican legislators, nope Georgia, doubt it Smith? Maybe Voting Americans? I have my doubts.
Read more
5
Reply

@telebubba5527
54 minutes ago
I basically said the same thing in a post today, although not as elaborate. But the kernel of the message was the same, with the same arguments. The only thing is that I left the conclusion open. We have to see what the Supreme Court decides on this and if they are willing to uphold the US Constitution or not. If they don't it will have far reaching consequences, taking away the freedom of the people to bring forward an insurrectionist and to block him/her from being elected to serve at the highest office. Being a president is about being able to serve America, not for America to serve the president! That is what will happen if they reject the Colorado Supreme Courts decision.
Read more
Reply

@user-nc4nw5jr7u
1 hour ago
Thank you but is so sad our Supreme Court not working for country when Supreme Court braking the law of constitution and with out taxpayer they are working for enemies of country for those peoples have money and power and crooks is sad day for our democracy
Reply

@jeanthehumanbean8265
2 hours ago
I KNEW they would nitpick the semantics!!! Can't see the forest for the trees ... Well, they can pick the fly doo-doo out of the pepper all they want, I guess. Folks, it looks like it's up to us citizens to make it UNMISTAKABLY KNOWN that WE DON'T WANT HIS TYPE IN THE PEOPLE'S HOUSE!!! VOTE BLUE!!!
6
Reply

@r1133rocco
58 minutes ago

Reply

@ronkean111
1 hour ago
Right! But, as the Justices spun their webs I was entranced in the mechanics of their reasoning.. And Yes ! Was horrified at their exclusion of the the Elephant..And rolled along their reasoning path towards... Individual States Cannot Decide ... Ugghhh!!! I’m gonna go listen to music I hate politics Best of luck
Read more
Reply

@grahamjl766
2 hours ago
We all know how this is going to end... We just have to get out and vote.
5
Reply

@lorischneider7100
2 hours ago
Would they still be turning a blind eye if the noise that was hanging in front of the Capitol been used? Great video Glenn Kirschner. I cannot believe it has been 3 years since I started watching your videos and we are still waiting for justice. Is justice coming? Hard to keep the faith.
5
Reply
1 reply

@patrickfry9282
1 hour ago
Bolivia beckons?!
Reply

@barbaram5787
2 hours ago
I was very disappointed in the lawyers for Colorado. They did not seem prepared and they didn’t bring forth their best arguments.
5
Reply

@rockerobertson4002
36 minutes ago
Spineless
Reply

@jamesharmon4994
3 hours ago
I've been saying SCOTUS would find some way to oppose disqualification.
7
Reply

@tourlounettetourlou8518
56 minutes ago

Reply

@timothyberglund2528
2 hours ago
Besides, Virginia Thomas was responsible for organizing the rioters to report to the Congress capitol building to raise the insurrection against our democracy and Clarence Thomas should be recused from taking part. In this situation there goes our democracy
7
Reply

@sammisequoyah6058
1 hour ago
If justice matters then do something about it.. money can be raised to pay for it because the legal system is all about making money above anything
Reply

@marci9983
3 hours ago
I wish Glenn had been there arguing before the SC!
9
Reply

@enmanueldelgado1348
3 hours ago
Listening to the hearing earlier...you can just tell how the justices were speaking and questioning that it wasn't going well. More concerned with being condescending.
6
Reply

@Ozworldz
1 hour ago
Shouldn't it be 8 million not 80 million
Reply

@GaryDean
6 minutes ago
bye bye, amerika. nice knowing you.
Reply

@omarkhoury3375
3 hours ago
Blue Tsunami !!!
7
Reply

@ceciliamarquesdicolla4274
14 minutes ago
Life Subscribe
1
Reply

@TheMamonti1
1 hour ago
Here is my problem.. justice delayed.... The day trump announced he was running was the day all the states should have complained and of course .................about a 2 year delay to appoint Jack Smit. But Justice will still come!
Reply

@jamesditsworth3845
2 hours ago
Damn, Glenn. I wish you had been arguing before the supreme court today.
5
Reply

@mjc0961
1 hour ago
Title made me said, then I said "OH NO!" out loud at the chair dude statue on its side instead of sitting atop some books (sorry I don't know what that statue is)
Reply

@kennethkilat1269
56 minutes ago
Insurrection, rather
Reply

@gregwalker6281
3 hours ago
I'm more concerned about him being immune from prosecution
4
Reply
2 replies

@kirkmanley3164
3 hours ago
Appreciate your thoughts and feel your frustration.
6
Reply

@lancenowicki7400
1 hour ago (edited)
Truth is this is Republican calling out a Republican so this should make that ruling that much easier. It would for sure be political if it was Democrat calling out this Republican. JS
Reply

@Anubisuicideify
2 hours ago
This is just another blow to SCOTUS credibility. It REALLY sucks everything always ends up at SCOTUS, seems unbalanced. Then again, unlike the other branches, it used to be apolitical.
4
Reply

@tommcfadden5232
1 hour ago
“What is the difference between office and officer?” Well, that depends on what your definition of is, is .
Reply

@jeannewebster4992
3 hours ago
If the Supreme Court is going to twist and turn the English language to suite their purpose, what is the point of the constitution?
5
Reply
2 replies

@PleaseDontEatTheAnimals
2 hours ago
I guess justice matters only to some of us...apparently not to SCOTUS.
8
Reply

@katc2345
1 hour ago
Thats why thatcmfer didnt show up at court, thomS probly called him n said dint worry don, we got your back!
Reply

@cwchar
3 hours ago
What happens to the Jan 6 case if SCOTUS rules he did not engage in insurrection?
12
Reply
1 reply

@Thor13332
2 hours ago (edited)
This is one of the reasons voting matters. The SCOTUS would not be in this state if people would have turned out and voted against the gop. This is not surprising.
5
Reply
1 reply

@slamaina
1 hour ago
Why is your Lincoln statue on its side?
Reply

@joegrizzle9482
1 hour ago
Bullshit they are owned by billionaires, every one of them.
Reply

@JohnMichaelOLearyakaWordman
2 hours ago
I listened to the proceedings and was a little disappointed in the caliber of thought expressed by the justices. I always thought these people were supposed to be among the smartest in the land. They don’t sound like they are.
5
Reply
1 reply

@sharpnote1480
3 hours ago
This is your best review of the court to date. Very good video.
5
Reply

@The6thelement9413
1 hour ago (edited)
VOTE BLUE 2024 . It’s all we can do because our Justices are sitting way to high in their ivory towers and not facing reality or Trump is paying off his appointees.
Reply

@robylove9190
3 hours ago
Hello SCOTUS. Goodbye democracy.
7
Reply

@nomore6167
1 hour ago
In the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court overruled Roe by declaring that "the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion", thus abortion is now a matter for each individual state. Well, the last time I checked (just now), the Constitution does not confer unto the federal government any rights to regulate a state's election for President and Vice President. Article I, Section 4, declares that Congress may make or alter regulations regarding "the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives", but it says nothing about the manner of holding primary or general elections for President and Vice President. As such, elections for President and Vice President are a matter for each individual state.
Read more
Reply

@robertcarrasco2504
3 hours ago
Thank you Glenn
7
Reply

@dannyspitzer1267
2 hours ago
You nailed it Glenn...
4
Reply

@jeffamero4082
2 hours ago
A very good review of a very sad day.
6
Reply

@JC-tp5lz
3 hours ago
Today was NOT a good day for justice! Very disappointing how the SC got caught up in irrelevant details instead of focusing on the REAL WORDING of the 14th Amendment. Looks like Trump will be staying on the ballot. I'm so frustrated and feel "beaten down". This seems to put Trump one step closer to the White House.
10
Reply
1 reply

@karldettling5981
1 hour ago
Wake up you republican voters! If you don't our life is going to be a real mess. And in more ways then you can imagine.
Reply

@samuelmartinez7418
4 minutes ago
Is there anything we can do glenn?
Reply

@MisterD0F
3 hours ago (edited)
With all due respect, I called everyone who said the Supreme Court would remove him a fool. This would be a 9-0 ruling.
17
Reply
2 replies

@fernalicious
3 hours ago
It was a lesson in slippery slope fallicy. Rough day for logical thought.
11
Reply

@12RColeman
1 hour ago
See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil it clear the law is not what matters so doom have been chose for electorates let have a good laugh Nero
Reply

@kimhuskey6115
3 hours ago
This opens a whole new can of worms. I’m convinced scotus will rule in trumps favor and it will then be up to congress to remove him or not seat him on Jan 06. Then what? Will his VP be seated instead or ? The other candidate? We learning a mega ton these days.
10
Reply
1 reply

@FrankGruden
1 hour ago
so tired of this bs. A country of laws for the wealthy and powerful. The rest of us, not so much. Justice matters? I don't think so.
Reply

@sjorlando7282
3 hours ago
I’m betting they give him the immunity he wants
6
Reply
1 reply

@ronward3949
45 minutes ago
Muk
Reply

@teofilorodriguez7116
14 minutes ago
It sound to me that the 14 amendment is not valid or it does not apply to future criminal candidate
Reply

@nato8597
1 hour ago
I just did a search, and I can't find a single court document where Trump has actually been "Charged" with an insurrection. Can someone here please post a link to that court document. Thanks
Reply

@gobigorange
1 hour ago
He’s still engaging in insurrection, I’ve said that since 01/06 an I’m not a legal scholar. It is, what is, it’s not a debate
Reply

@walterrumohr7090
1 hour ago
Long live America to become Trump Empire.
Reply

@AlStaClara
1 hour ago
Simple questions. 1. Did trump engaged in the jan 6 event? Yes 2. If jan 6 is not an insurrrection, what is it? 3. So if trump is guilty of insurrection, does the 14th amendment apply? THAT SHOULD BE THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED!
Read more
Reply

@vascodesena
59 minutes ago
"What's a word?-- can't get the grasp of it... What letter does it start with? I think I see an igorok!" (SCOTUS, looking in the mirror and finding... nothing to brag about-- just dust waiting to get poofed off the table, drunkards eyeing a fly on the stein).
Reply

@joanne2196
9 minutes ago
Did you expect anything different from the supreme court?
Reply

@user-jy4oo3pu8r
47 minutes ago
Do you really think the Supreme court is going to side against Trump?
Reply

@samuelmartinez7418
5 minutes ago
I told you guys he and tbey are being pId.
Reply

@dimicdragan5922
1 hour ago
I listened to the discussion... they have fully and completely missed the point... and this is your supreme court... what is their role again... ?? They seem not to understand the meaning of insurection... which is what was the whole point of the case
Reply

@bifbifler9657
1 hour ago
Trump sure did make the corrupt democrats mad.
Reply

@scottlancia3553
34 minutes ago
From what I heard, which was not all, was disappointing. It was pointed out that Senators and Representatives are NOT officers of the US and that was extended to the President and Vice President as elected positions. This is fundamentally wrong. Senators and Representatives (and electors) are not officers of the United States because they have no responsibility to citizens of other States. They are officers of their respective State. It is about constituency, The President and Vice President have the entire citizenry of the United States as their constituency, and are hence officers of the US in the context of the 14th amendment, its about who they serve. The 14th listed specific offices that were included that ARE not offices of the US, the fact that the presidency and vice presidency are not so listed is the most bare evidence that those that wrote it considered those positions to be officers of the US. Finally, if they intended those positions to be excluded here they would have said so, a simple sentence "The Presidency and Vice Presidency are exempt from this disability." All losing sight of the forest while arguing over the trees...
Read more
Reply

@anneparrish2247
1 hour ago
Well that will be a problem. Do they realize that one hundred years hence it will be seen as having set the law. Trump is not that important, no one is. But our country and the laws we have are. Wouldn’t a justice get that right off.
Reply

@doizece6002
1 hour ago
This is why they added the second amendment into the constitution.
Reply
1 reply

@fayskelley
34 minutes ago

Reply

@justrj1
1 hour ago
why is anyone surprised by this? I can't believe he has gotten this far, but billions of dollars can buy a lot of people. Just sayin...
Reply

@tymcfadden8496
1 hour ago
The end of our great experiment will come carrying a Bible and wrapped in The Stars and Stripes.
Reply

@ebeing2955
1 hour ago
why didnt you tell us about griffin.
Reply

@SilverSergeant
1 hour ago
Your dislike of mean tweets doesn't TRUMP the Constitution. The Constitution states that only Congress can enact the 14th.
Reply

@karenbarrett6734
1 hour ago
Does this court decision have any effects onJack Smiths case?
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Trump v. Anderson: Amici Curiae Briefs

Postby admin » Fri Feb 09, 2024 5:27 am

Part 12 of 12

Reply

@ronkean111
1 hour ago
I couldn’t agree with more!
Reply

@thomastynan2900
29 seconds ago
My Kingdom for an offramp. Oh, let us never mention Donnie's name. Parsing the law into a thousand pieces. Getting themselves off the hook. The reputation of the Supreme Court is rotten and corrupt to the core. What horrors this Court has wrought. On us all. Picked a President stopped an election. women's rights were reduced to domestic servants. Any money to politicians is free speech. Voter rights were taken away, and removed. The Supreme Court just participated in their own extinction. A shell with no power under the despot Donald J Trump.
Read more
Reply

@russellwilliams5065
1 hour ago
Tbh did anyone think they were gonna kick him off the ballot? Morally he should be off the ballot, but they are there for legal arguments not moral ones. It’s not good but that’s what they are going to do.
Reply

@eileencremin1007
23 minutes ago
You have lost your Country
Reply

@Dianegoe
1 hour ago
We are so fucked!
Reply

@larrylarry9278
1 hour ago
Republican judges enough said.
Reply

@mikemalloy1681
1 hour ago
I don't believe that the Supreme Court is seeing the big picture here. The arguments in part focused on whether or not Jan 6, was a "riot" or an "insurrection". A riot is an un focused expression of a crowd, a "public disturbance". This disturbance may or may not have a specific focal point. Whereas, an insurrection may begin as a riot, but can and will accelerate into a focused movement of a large crowd in-order to extract or obtain some gain, not other wise achieved by normal means. The whole purpose of Donald Trump summonsing the crowd to Washington, on 6 Jan was to, inhibit, stop, or prevent Joe Biden from being officially elected as President of the United States. This objective almost came to fruition. It appears that the Supreme Court does not understand the weight or gravity of this situation, and is focusing on tangential positions that at face value do not have significant merit. Do they not see that Democracy is on the line here? If they rule that Trump may stay on the ballot in Colorado, this conclusion will in effect negates the 14th Amendment.
Read more
Reply

@Yeahok-pc2jd
31 minutes ago
Abortion had been illegal in all states since the late 1800’s, it was legalized in 1973, then ruled illegal again in 2022 and now it varies between states. Weed was illegal in all states and now it also varies between states. Gay marriage was illegal in all states and now it’s legal in all states, even though in Maine it was put to a public vote and was struck down by We The People, but politicians waited a year or so, then without asking the people this time, made it legal, regardless of the fact that it was totally opposite of the way the majority of people had voted. Their voices that are not given the chance to speak often were silenced and spoken over. I hope that’s not legal according to the Constitution, but either way it already transpired. How many other states used/use the same tactic? The top tier of our Justice System, SCOTUS is blatantly corrupt, but not much more than many sitting politicians. (R)Santos was removed but (D)Menendez is still in office, charged with accepting bribes in exchange for lucrative political favors and what prosecutors described as efforts to derail criminal investigations, among other deceitful crimes. The entire R Party participated in the first insurrection against our country since the Civil War, or condoned it by way of their silence and not doing anything in an attempt to prevent it, and most of them protect the leader of it all, former POTUS D Trump, to this day. MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, Jordan and others of that ilk are sitting politicians… Biden does stumble while walking or talking often, but so does the seemingly delusional Donald, who is allowed to run for office again and is campaign promising to become a dictator. Our current VP is Kamala Harris, who was chosen for her race and gender more so than her qualifications. Who in their right mind would trust a system of government that does this and is in this state of affairs?? It’s past time to stop beating the dead horse that our system has become, but it’s still a cash cow and so it continues… ️ WTP need to take back the power we loaned them before they let autocrats among them convert our country to anti democracy and a dictatorship.
Read more
Reply

@elenademurias936
1 hour ago
why don't any of you scream about the corruption?
Reply

@charlesjlongh
1 hour ago
Your Supreme 'Court' is far too political
Reply

@user-bk8vg1gl1b
52 minutes ago
Vote blue in November
Reply

@premv401
24 minutes ago
why do you say "we fight on"
Reply

@nomore6167
1 hour ago
Fun fact -- you could make a credible argument that NOBODY is eligible to be President. Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." Well, nobody alive today was a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time the Constitution was adopted. Thus, nobody alive today is eligible to be President. Such a notion is obviously ridiculous, which is why you need to apply common-sense logic when reading the Constitution rather than taking a purely literal interpretation.
Read more
Reply

@nomad634
1 hour ago
Thwy didn't care about chaos when they handed the fascists the roe victory.
Reply
1 reply

@rosebud7951
27 minutes ago
Oh, Glenn, Glenn, Glenn - you are too sense full and let facts blind you from ignorance.
Reply

@lilstinker-xi4ln
54 minutes ago

Reply

@funksfunk
49 minutes ago
THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS BROKEN. I’m done listening to your bullshit of hope.
Reply
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36088
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Previous

Return to United States Government Crime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest