Kevin OMalleyNov 18, 2023
Brandi Buchman

Judge finds Trump can remain on ballot in CO but ALSO that he ENGAGED IN INSURRECTION, but *NOT* as an "Officer" of the US under Section III of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Link:
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/judge-rules-trump-can-remain-on-ballot-in-colorado/

Judge rules Trump will remain on ballot in Colorado

Judge Sarah Wallace ruled that Donald Trump will remain on the ballot in Colorado for 2024.

Law & Crime
Nov 18, 2023 at 12:55amWeb
Show threadCorry342Nov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman I thought you were signed off for the day? Welcome back, but return to enjoying your weekend.
Show threadScenarioNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman @_L1vY_ Fucking bullshit. Did he take the Oath of OFFICE or not?!
Show threadHans van ZijstNov 18, 2023
@Brandi Buchman @Gatekeeper Wait, what?

Wallace agreed that Trump did engage in insurrection, but Section III did not apply to him. The clause does not explicitly name the presidency, the paper reported.

So if you're president of the US, a law against insurrection has to explicitly mention that it also applies to you?

Some are more equal than others?
Show threadGatekeeper..Nov 18, 2023
@hans
Well what the fuck is a Commander in Chief?
Show thread@IanAMartin HAS MOVED!Nov 18, 2023
@hans This logic dovetails perfectly into Nixon’s assertion that ❝if the President does it, it can’t be illegal.❞ Much of the PotUS45 administration was predicated on this principle.
Show threadDiamond JoyNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman
Well, f**k.
Show threadSSFC KDT (MOVED)Nov 18, 2023

@Brandi_Buchman
"[Judge] Wallace agreed that #Trump did engage in #insurrection"

this is kind of #YUGE though

Show threadSex Crazed SaltShaker of DeathNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman
Then charge him with insurrection and lock his ass up.
Show threadJesse PohlmanNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman What an absolutely batshit insane ruling. How is the President not an officer, again? Presidents tend to operate out of, yanno, an office!
Show threadKanaMaunaNov 18, 2023

@Brandi_Buchman

SMH. I am not a lawyer but "any office, civil or military, under the United States" probably includes the President.

Show threadMichael BuschNov 18, 2023

@Brandi_Buchman @b_cavello Here in Minnesota, the state supreme court decided that Donald Trump could still appear on the ballots because there is no rule saying that a candidate for POTUS has to be eligible to actually hold the office.

Thus permitting a whole new variety of constitutional crisis.

Show threadGatekeeper..Nov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman
Commander in Chief?
Show threadKim Spence-Jones 🇬🇧😷Nov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman So that’s the loophole that MAGA judges will try to pretzel themselves into to create a reason to ignore the 14th Amendment. 🤔
I hope Fulton County closes that loophole firmly!
Show threadMercurius GoldsteinNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman
Guys guys hey guys listen okay no wait
[huge bong rip]
it was an insurrection but not, you know, an *insurrection* insurrection
Show threadArtemesiaNov 18, 2023

@Brandi_Buchman

I expect(ed) the various courts to duck and dodge any attempt to rule on a 14th amendment disqualification, but this one is beyond inane. Because the president is not among the enumerated offices in Section 3, he is not subject to this law? What does this phrase mean:

> or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States

Is that supposed to be just for federal dogcatchers?

Regardless, it is my opinion that a disqualification for having insurrected should require a prior conviction for an insurection-flavored crime. Disqualifying without the full due process of law (including a prosecutor getting a grand jury to indict), and getting a court/jury to convict, is an extremely bad precedent and slippery slope we don't want to engage with.

Show threadSouprMattNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman LOL The President is not an officer of the US? The myth of “wise” judges has been completely shattered.
Show threadAnne OminousNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman this country sucks.
Show threadDavid PeningtonNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman Those outraged by this decision should read @Teri_Kanefield excellent thread. Her appelate lawyer expertise is always helpful for Trump cases.
https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_Kanefield/111429259971844484
Teri Kanefield (@[email protected])

Answering this question: https://law-and-politics.online/@[email protected]/111429189190084052 Nobody really knows what is meant by "officer of the government." It might include the president. It might not. A president occupies a unique position under the Constitution. Basically what the judge did was punt the issue to the appellate court. The judge found that Trump incited an insurrection (a finding of fact) but didn't find that he was an officer of the federal government (a matter of law). Here's why the distinction matters . . . 1/

Mastodon
Show threadChris Lilley 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿Nov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman WTAF
Show threadTed_CvilleNov 18, 2023
@Brandi_Buchman She is really splitting hairs!