Listen Live: Supreme Court hears case on 'insurrection,' Trump eligible to be president again

Just the News ^ | 2/8/24 | staff

[CFW]

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday morning on whether former President Trump is eligible to be on the 2024 presidential ballot. Listen Live

[Ronaldus Magnus]

He focused on the strongest arguments and didn’t get sidetracked.

His entire case was threaded through tenuous, ancient precedents. This would have been the correct approach for a complex regulatory case, but not for one which could unweave the fabric of our democracy. Thankfully, even some of the liberal justices made the bigger, more pertinent arguments for him.

[VideoDoctor]

Trump's attorney Jonathan Mitchell was either unqualified for the task or compromised by outside forces.

You're either a DIM-BULB LIBERAL.. or you're doing some HALLUCINOGENIC DRUG!

[circlecity]

It will be 9-0. The libs will hold their powder to decide the the bigger questions if and when Trump gets elected.

[circlecity]

The strongest arguments here were article 3 and 5 of the 14th amendment and Trump’s attorney hammered on them. Colorado tried to dance around them.

[Jane Long]

about to go to NV

He could get more than 96% at the caucuses

---

Hoping he gets that!!

The lying MSM are such lying jackals.

[HYPOCRACY]

I agree. The lower courts have no such power either. Colorado should lose its votes in the electoral college for even attempting this and have to reapply in a decade.

[HYPOCRACY]

Show me where wiseass.

[Tennessee Nana]

I was thinking about how Joe crowed over his 96% when he was about the only one on the ballot...

Thats why I want President trump to get as much and even more

If nobody can beat Nikki in an NV primary where there were probably Ds and Is voting for her, then President Trump should be able to crush her in the caucuses of only Rs

:)

[CFW]

“I’m believing that Trump will DEFLECT ALL CHARGES and remain under GOD’S “hedge of protection.””

---

I pray daily that God keeps Trump in that “hedge of protection”. I pray that God surrounds him constantly with angels that thwarts the left’s every action against him.

[Fury]

Show me where wiseass

You can start with Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137

[circlecity]

God favors the side with the most artillery - Napoleon.

[frog in a pot]

Gorsuch - “who decides what is insurrection”?

Did you catch counsel's response to that question? I wasn't able to listen.

It was an intentionally obvious question in the context of the 14thA and should have been an obvious answer.

Thanks.

[Michael.SF.]

I’ve been predicting a 7-2, but after listening to the last hour of the hearing I’m leaning towards a 9-0 probability. Kagan and KJB sound unconvinced.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

The strongest arguments here were article 3 and 5 of the 14th amendment

The strongest arguments in President Trump's favor were the implications that every state would be able to arbitrarily remove presidential candidates from their ballots. Even Justice Kagan noted that. Aside from needlessly conceding many decisive points, Jonathan Mitchell's argument was profoundly myopic. He was the wrong attorney for this case. Sadly, President Trump has a long history of putting unqualified and compromised people in critical positions. Hopefully he will do better in his second term.

[V_TWIN]

“Sadly, President Trump has a long history of putting unqualified and compromised people in critical positions”

Yep. If he’s got an achilles heel.....that would be it.

[OneVike]

After Obama won the 2008 election, I wrote a commentary asking the question, "Women's Right to Vote, the Beginning of the End for America? (FReeper link w/comments) (this is the link to the original FReeper thread from 3/29/09)

I must admit it generated a lot of support and negative responses from our fellow FReepers. Today, I believe many more would be more in agreement than they were after the 2008 election.

The link to the original commentary I wrote is no longer working, but the almost 600 comments still exist at the link above in the FR archive and are worth reading.

The link below will take you to the full article, I saved it to my own personal website, (trfmf.com) after the Chico Enterprise Record newspaper removed me from their staff with the newspaper. The newspaper systematically removed all trace I ever wrote for them in 2012. However, I found it and other things I wrote using the Wayback Machine via archive.org if you are interested in reading the original commentary.

Women's Right to Vote, the Beginning of the End for America? (full commentary via trfmf.com)

[circlecity]

And Trump’s attorney argued that in support of article 5.

[bitt]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5H12JnUVbE4

DJT’s response to the SC hearing

scroll ahead

[Magnum44]

Just a guess, but I am thinking that the bigger issue here, as stated earlier, is jurisdiction. A ruling that CO has no jurisdiction in Federal elections prevents other challenges later on that might not rely only on the candidate being charged with insurrection.

This would be a broader ruling that states cant deny candidates from ballots.

[M. Thatcher]

Trump's attorney Jonathan Mitchell was either unqualified for the task or compromised by outside forces

LOL