Over in Colorado, where voters are petitioning to have Trump removed from the ballot under Sect 3 14A for his insurrectionist activities, Trump's lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss with a few ..interesting.. theories around whether POTUS supports VS protects Constitution. 😕
The bit above was part of Trumps reply supporting his motion to dismiss the CREW petition in CO on grounds that it violates his 1A rights. The crux of his anti-SLAPP argument below and lots of additional context in my earlier feature linked here: https://lawandcrime.com/trump/trumps-fight-to-stay-on-2024-election-ballot-threatens-to-turn-constitutions-insurrection-clause-into-historical-ornament-experts-say/
The language of insurrection: Legal bids to remove Trump from 2024 ballot barrel forward

Two years after the tradition of America’s peaceful transfer of presidential power was broken, the question of whether Donald Trump should remain on the ballot in 2024 looms large.

Law & Crime
As for unpacking Trumps latest arguments in CO, my colleague at Law&Crime, Colin Kalmbacher will have the report.
As for me, I'll have a feature next week, so stay tuned!
Trump claims the insurrection clause 'does not apply' to the president

Trump's latest argument seeks to stake out new territory as to what, exactly the insurrection clause demands in a broader constitutional context, as well as who it demands such things from.

Law & Crime
@Brandi_Buchman Somebody put a cat’s cradle on that guy’s hands!