Posted on 01/01/2024 12:39:42 PM PST by libstripper
Maine has now become the second state in as many weeks, following a December 19 Colorado Supreme Court decision, to make the determination that President Donald Trump cannot appear on the ballot in the 2024 election.
In a unilateral decision, the unelected secretary of state and far-left activist, heretofore unknown Shenna Bellows, disqualified from her state’s ballot the leading presidential candidate and presumptive nominee for the GOP. Rejecting any pretense of acting in accordance with due process or the rule of law, Bellows reasoned that our “sacred” democracy would only be preserved if she took it upon herself to reject Trump’s primary petition. Those in Maine who otherwise sought to cast their ballot for the former president vying for a second term this year would, by implication, have unknowingly been co-conspirators in a grand anti-democratic plot but for Bellows’ brave intervention, so her December 28 opinion read. Even her fellow Maine Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden, thought her conclusions went a bit too far, criticizing the ruling as an affront to the democratic norms that ostensibly still undergird our nation’s elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at amgreatness.com ...
"A truly objective legal analysis would render Section 3 of the 14th Amendment null as it relates to the events of January 6, 2021. How do we know? President Trump has never been charged criminally with insurrection, and he was indeed acquitted of that very impeachment charge by the Senate in February 2021. As a result, the matter is res judicata. Further, taking this latter argument to its logical conclusion can have significant implications as well. This argument is not unlike the one offered by Trump’s defense in Jack Smith’s D.C. indictment: there, his legal team offered that because he has already been acquitted for a charge arising out of the same course of conduct identified in the indictment, the impeachment and double jeopardy clauses should bar retrial."
That's excellent reasoning as far as it goes, but the argument can go much farther to immunize President Trump fully because the effect of the impeachment causes of the Constitution is exactly that.
The last Paragraph of Article 1, Section 3 states:
"Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."
Thus, any criminal punishment of a president for impeachable activities is constitutionally conditioned on that President being first impeached and then convicted by the Senate. In other words the Senate conviction is a an essential ticket for the prosecutor to get into court and prosecute the President. Also, since impeachable offenses are limited to "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors," and there is no other provision for prosecution of the President for other offenses, the president is immune from prosecution for anything that is not an impeachable offense, for which the President has been both impeached and convicted by a Senate trial.
There are no Rules.
There is only Power.
Dems seem to think that winning by removing Trump from the ballot will succeed.
It will succeed only in igniting an armed revolution if it works.
Yes.
Stay out of their way, unless you want to be on the menu, too.
Absolutely. I can’t stand Trump and there’s no way I’d vote for him (because of the shutdown and his abandonment of the J6ers) but he MUST be on the ballot.
Everything about what they’re doing is wrong, on every level.
However, is anyone paying attention to the fact that what happened in Colorado and Maine was just 10lbs of sh*t slung against the wall?
And that he’s not off the ballot in either state. And that the Colorado court and clown in Maine have tossed up Hail Mary’s in an attempt to get SCOTUS to rule on something that hasn’t worked its way through any court. So, how can SCOTUS rule on something that hasn’t seen a courtroom?
Each of these “decisions” state, way down on the bottom of the last page, something to the effect....if SCOTUS doesn’t agree with us, the Pres Trump will be on the ballot.
When the government stops working correctly, it’s the responsibility and duty of the American people to fix it.
Life can still have some good in it , even when under control of a wicked evil government like this.
it is glaringly obvious they are trying to stir up violence by taking the ability to vote away. I hope no one takes the bait
I don't even like poking my head up and posting this sort of thing, they would snuff me out if I mattered
You go first. I will be in hiding , avoiding the "news", let me know how it went, I abhorr violent revolutions which is the only solution to the current loss of peaceful political representation and all politics is just a means of building coalitions ( armies)
The leftists took out a New Mexican official on this pretext.
They then tried to take out Trump on the same pretext.
The key difference remains that Trump is a man of peace and the New Mexican man was not.
January 6th had a riot, not an insurrection or rebellion.
Trump started January 6th on top as President of the United States and that’s the way the day ended. There was no higher person in the land. Rebellion or insurrection was impossible for a man in his #1 position.
It will be interesting if the Deep Blue states all successfully remove Trump from the ballot and Trump wins anyway with the electoral College. He would then be winning with an apparently tiny minority of the popular vote as the millions in the Blue States are disenfranchised or the few that vote do so for various other non Democrats.
Absolutely. I can’t stand Trump and there’s no way I’d vote for him (because of the shutdown and his abandonment of the J6ers) but he MUST be on the ballot.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was hoping stupid would not reappear here for 2024...guess it was too much to hope for...
BELLOW was APPOINTED-—NOT ELECTED.
SHE DOES NOT HAVE A LAW LICENSE.
Might as well have had the trash truck driver make the ‘decision’.
The theft won’t be very sneaky this time at all. Actually it was pretty openly done in 2020 but the Government Press and the Republicans refused to see it.
If they successfully take the vote away then it will be time to consider drastic options.
It is up to the courts to act.
About half of Americans who voted voted for the demented tyrant. I assume they can live with him.
Others are so well off they have to tolerate tyranny.
Others are so poorly off that they will stick around to get their handouts.
A few million might have to emigrate. They should have a skilled person in their household such as a nurse, doctor, military officer, aircraft/weapons maintainer, gunsmith, engineer, architect, machinist, etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was hoping stupid would not reappear here for 2024...guess it was too much to hope for...”
I agree with mlitefan. Looks like stupid is once again rearing its ugly head. She had to get her “I can't stand Trump…” dig in. Idiot American and dumb and ignorant voter. There I said it.
Both decisions are stayed, so Trump is NOT off the primary ballot in either State (and, BTW, how private organizations like the RNC and DNC run their affairs is not a State matter in any case).
Because he stays on the ballot and the DNC and RNC are free AFAIK to do as they please with the results - this case is moot and the Court should not rule on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.