« first day (4107 days earlier)      last day (355 days later) » 

User1865345
User1865345
01:55
MAGA melts down after Trump loses his first GOP primary to Nikki Haley
 
11 hours later…
User1865345
User1865345
12:53
Trump takes credit for legislation signed by Obama
►
 
2 hours later…
User1865345
User1865345
14:48
Republicans Struggle to Explain Away Their Hypocrisy on IVF
‘Mean girl on a revenge tour’: Kevin McCarthy has knives out for his ‘Gaetz 8’ tormentors
User1865345
User1865345
15:04
Supreme court allows Trump to remain on Colorado's presidential ballot
Nothing unusual from a compromised, right-wing, partisan court.
Basically it can't be applied to federal office. Wow.
CDJB
CDJB
@User1865345 The ruling was unanimous rather than on party lines, however - supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf
User1865345
User1865345
I know @CDJB. Read it as my lament. It was clear during the hearing it would be unanimous.
There was no doubt on that.
CDJB
CDJB
I've only skimmed it, but the point seems to be that as it's a federal office, only Congress can decide to disqualify on that basis rather than individual states? Is that correct?
I only dipped into the hearings, downside of being 5 hours out of sync with the US :P
User1865345
User1865345
@CDJB you read it correctly
@CDJB although if I remember it right, it was more of whether Presidency was considered to be an office in US government.
In any case, the framers of this law considered it for federal purpose. What the Supreme Court wants to say is that a state court can't make it as basis for federal offices. But I need to check the details.
> BIG WIN FOR AMERICA!!!
- Trump.
Ex-Trump CFO to plead guilty to perjury in civil fraud trial
►
Dec 21, 2023 at 12:10, by User1865345
Original records leave no question that the 14th Amendment applies to Trump
►
@CDJB, if you have time, you can check this video above.
> The Supreme Court was united on the idea that Donald Trump will remain on the ballot in Colorado and that the state cannot unilaterally dump him off the ballot, in their opinion issued Monday.

But the justices were divided about how broadly the decision would sweep. A 5-4 majority said that no state could dump a federal candidate off any ballot – with four justices asserted that the court should have limited its opinion.
CDJB
CDJB
15:26
Ah lovely, I'll check it out later. Thank you :)
User1865345
User1865345
Sure.
AI-generated images of Trump with Black voters being spread by supporters
User1865345
User1865345
16:22
While no members of the court’s three-justice liberal minority dissented, they make clear in their concurrence that they aren’t happy with the conclusion reached by the majority.
‘60 Minutes’ Confronts Moms for Liberty Co-Founders on Book Bans
> Although only an individual State’s action is at issue here, the majority opines on which federal actors can enforce Section 3, and how they must do so. The majority announces that a disqualification for insurrection can occur only when Congress enacts a particular kind of legislation pursuant to Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.
> In doing so, the majority shuts the door on other potential means of federal enforcement. We cannot join an opinion that decides momentous and difficult issues unnecessarily, and we therefore concur only in the judgment.
> By resolving these and other questions, the majority attempts to insulate all alleged insurrectionists from future challenges to their holding federal office.
Does this have any implications on the Jan 6 case?
User1865345
User1865345
17:09
Former Trump organization finance chief enters guilty plea to perjury charges
 
1 hour later…
User1865345
User1865345
18:13
France makes abortion a constitutional right in historic Versailles vote

« first day (4107 days earlier)      last day (355 days later) »