Skip to content

This isn’t good

Colorado’s highest court has ruled Donald Trump is disqualified from holding office and removed him from the state’s 2024 ballot due to his incitement of the Jan 6 insurrection.

It is the first time a state court has found the Republican frontrunner should be barred from the ballot because of a US constitutional provision disqualifying people from federal office if they have engaged in “insurrection”.

Yes, yes, of course, Trump is literally a fascist and if he wins the next election that will be the last one ever. But democracy realloy is supposed to be the will of the people. So, banning people from running on political grounds – and no one sane believes this is anything but a political claim – means exactly that end of democracy feared.

No, not a good decision.

44 thoughts on “This isn’t good”

  1. How does this end? Can Trump-favouring states respond by dreaming up reasons to disqualify Democrat contenders? The US is looking increasingly rackety from my ill-informed perspective.

  2. The US Constitution and government is full of checks and balances to prevent “tyranny” yet they completely forgot to control the political biases of the judiciary.

  3. It will end up in a Supreme Court with a Trump appointed majority and be judged on his actions not his policies. It is sometimes necessary to hang one admiral for the encouragement of the others.

  4. I see also that Peter Bone has been recalled in his constituency on a 13% petition.

    He is bleating that 87% didn’t vote and that it shouldn’t count.

    I think that Recalls are a good idea, it keeps the corrupt pervets in Westminster on their toes. But again how can this method be prevented from becoming “weaponised” ?

  5. @Lurker

    It doesnt sound like it really matters or does anything

    What is does is allow the corrupt US media to deploy the phrase ‘Trump banned from standing for insurrection’ over and over and over again.

    The absolute best case for Trump (I’d vote for De Santis, personally) is that (if it’s overturned and he stands) it hardens support for whoever stands for the Dems, and keeps some number of naive Republicans who stupidly pride themselves on ‘playing by the rules’ in a game they don’t realise is completely fixed, and thrown by the GOP, from voting.

    Might be enough in the key states, though even if not they’ll fiddle it anyway.

    The fact that it is transparent bollocks and will be overturned in the Supreme Court just

    i) allows them to keep the story going

    and

    ii) allows them to push the idea that the Supreme Court is politically biased for Trump, because it includes a number of judges nominated by him) and to push for its expansion to ‘combat’ this ‘bias’, which will move the only remaining part of the US system which is (reasonably) reliable to the left.

    It may also be that some lunatic takes out a judge or two, which will also have the same effect.

    Everything – but everything – these cunts do, and have done for years, is motivated by divide and rule, and it has been facilitated by the stupifying education system in the west, our relative (hitherto) affluence (which breeds laziness and complacency), and the mainstream media, which is the enemy of the people.

    Same here in the UK – it’s all over the Telegraph, Guardian, Times, Mail, BBC this morning, majoring on the decision and not really going into the detail of why it is the most egregious assault on ‘democracy’ in the history of the US.

    The US is not a democracy, and neither are we; I don’t think anyone is. I was such a fool to believe in any of it, be it the system, the actors in it, the process, any of it.

  6. Off topic but congratulations to the SNP who will have tax/NIC rates on salaries in Scotland in 2024-25 as follows:

    £12,571 – £14,876 29%
    £14,877 – £26,561 30%
    £26,562 – £43,662 31%
    £43,663 – £50,270 52%
    £50,271 – £75,000 44%
    £75,001 – £100,000 47%
    £100,001 – £104,610 66%
    £104,611 -£125,140 67%
    Over £125,140 50%

  7. You could argue (and I will because I’m a contrarian) than democracy isn’t *just* the will of the people (who’d elect Boaty McBoatFace if they could), but also a test of the candidates’ ability to play the game. Can they do interviews? Can they present a cogent argument? Can they shine a light on their opponents’ failures? Are they a sufficiently organised person to run a campaign?

    There are a *lot* of barriers to entry that aren’t anything to do with the will of the people.

    And one of those barriers is: Can they avoid doing something so mind crushingly stupid that their opposition can run rings around them in court? In my mind, Trump (and a number of other leading figures in America) are Wile-E-Coyote-ing themselves off the edge of various cliffs, and the only thing that’s stopping gravity from fully asserting itself is that a bunch of people so desperately want “that kind of person” to be successful that they’re willing to completely ignore the lack of solid ground. Trump gets support because he represents a viewpoint, not because of his innate competence.

    Sure, every political view should be presented to the electorate – that’s the will of the people stuff – but we also need the people who’re doing it to be at least base level competent, and not relying on snake oil and distractions to hide serious flaws in their abilities. Ignoring those flaws will mean that if/when they fall, their supporters and the ideas they put forward will also be discredited by association. There is a huge risk in knee-jerk support for someone just because they’re wearing the right shade of rosette.

  8. My, aren’t we all “progressive” now? I believe what ever happens in the USA eventually happens here so what happens in Dumbo Corrupt Demented v The Dodgy Donald will happen here.
    Labour, encouraged by the successes of the Dems, will seek to block the Tories ever running again.
    Or, wishy washy wanker that he is, he might just drag us back into the European Uberfiddle and try to be made Pressy of the Commission, which would satisfy his ego and nicely supplement his speshul pension.

  9. So, banning people from running on political grounds – and no one sane believes this is anything but a political claim – means exactly that end of democracy feared.

    Um, yes. Hence the last 3 years?

    Labour, encouraged by the successes of the Dems, will seek to block the Tories ever running again.

    Have you noticed how pro-Brexit MPs have the worst possible luck with rules and standards committees and getting reselected? Or, indeed, remaining Prime Minister – or doing anything Blair wouldn’t approve of – with a theoretical majority of 80.

  10. This provisional judgement only affects the Republican primary ballot in that state although the usual suspects, led by the bbc naturally, are getting awfully excited.

    Trump is hardly going to need Colorados 104 (?) state delegates to get nominated. Anyway, even in the unlikely event that the ruling stands he will still get the nod via write-ins – at which point the same four judges will probably reinterpret the law to prevent the delegates from being seated or whatever.

    It’s just four more in a long list of politicised judges seeking attention and, in all probability , hardening the resolve of Trump voters still further.

    I suppose technically the Supreme Court needs to slap this down in early January to prevent any important states from following suit. It should be a slam-dunk 9-0 ruling but with some of the clowns on the current SCOTUS I wouldn’t put money on it.

  11. Bloke in the Fourth Reich

    Similar shenanigans are currently planned in the Reich, where the only party of sufficient size to break the Uniparty (AfD) has been determined by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, to be “far right”, but only in certain states. Your reminder that the AfD started life as the euroskeptic wing of the (once classically liberal) FDP, but has somewhat expanded its remit since then.

    The Office for the Protection of the Constitution is really the Office for the Protection of the Right Flank of the Union, which having merrily abandoned Strauss’ principle that the Union should leave no space on its right flank for another non-extremist party to emerge, is also a shadow of its former self, both politically and in terms of share of the vote.

    Rumour has it that bans will be enacted in those states where said party is considered “far right”, at precisely the right time relative to the next election when it is no longer possible to overturn the ban in court in time, or establish and register a new party, in those states and get it on the ballot.

    The goal will have to be to have a sufficiently widespread ban that the AfD vote, which is otherwise likely to exceed 30% by the time of the next federal election, cannot change the shape of the Uniparty’s desired next coalition, which is probably Union/SPD/Green.

  12. Interested – good find:

    The absence of discovery, the absence of a fair trial, a rushed process, a process that disregards evidence and the actual law against insurrection, “substandard due process of law.” To protect democracy, of course.

    Watch how many legal and societal norms are destroyed in the effort to stop Trump. These maneuvers will take us to dark places, quickly

    Thing is, it’s been dark out there since 2020.

    They weaponised Covid to kill democracy because they hate and fear us. They’re now going for kamikaze waves of Third World migration to dispossess whites everywhere they can be found in a community bigger than a hamlet. Net Zero and Infinity Immigration is intended to be a double tap to our chest and skull.

    Wonder what the urgency is, that requires the deliberate murder of every Western nation at the same time.

  13. Steve, the urgency is the impending collapse of the Ponzi scheme we call our economy.

    The elites* are in a bad place.

    They run everything, and everyone knows who they are, and everyone will know who to blame when the shit hits the fan.

    Given that there is no way to stop the inevitable collapse they have two options.

    Both of them are bad (for the elites, they don’t give a shit about the rest of us), but one of them is very bad.

    The very bad one is everything collapses at a point in time when there are still enough people left with the systemic understanding, native intelligence and tradition of broad solidarity to see what’s been done and to band together to punish those who did it.

    Who might such a people be?

    Clue: not stupid and/or uneducated people from the third world riven by tribal and religious rivalries.

    The bad one is: everyone else is in the sack fighting and the elites give themselves a chance to somehow escape the sack and watch from a safeish distance.

    *I hate this word for them as they are actually not elite.

  14. This isn’t a US decision, it’s a state decision. The US constitution says very little about how member states constitute and run themselves, it is up to individual states to decide for themselves. About the only requirement is “a republican form of government”, which is why the Hawaiian monarchy had to be overthrown.

  15. Bloke in North Dorset

    @BiFR,

    The problem for the Uniparty is that the AfD is already losing support to Sahra Wagenknecht‘s new party according to some surveys, so if they ban the AfD she’s just as likely to get the votes.

  16. Bloke in the Fourth Reich

    BiND,

    That might happen if Wagenknecht ever gets a party off the ground. That’s looking less and less likely. There is already a “left wing” AfD, called DieBasis, basically Corona objectors, and they polled about 2% at the last GE. Being run by pompous collector of other peoples’ money Fuellmich (currently in prison, I think) doesn’t help.

  17. Bloke in the Fourth Reich

    I’m not promoting AfD as the solution, they aren’t the solution, at least not in their current form, but they are the only big party saying “enough is enough”.

    There isn’t much of a policy platform other than “not this”. They are not (beyond the highly competent Weidel) Millei or even Thatcher liberals, they aren’t really socialists, or national socialists either, though enough prominent members lean in the latter direction to cause concern.

    The most effective AfD campaign in history is currently being run by the government itself.

  18. “The US is looking increasingly rackety from my ill-informed perspective” Bison

    I can see why you might say that, but there are advantages to keeping the pols busy chasing their tails. Some states in the US are doing very well, and they’re not crediting Biden for it.

  19. Some of my best friends

    The US Constitution unambiguously bars from the Presidency any person who has given aid or comfort to its enemies. There’s no reasonable doubt that Trump is thereby barred – there’s a prominent paper by two Federalist Society lawyers which says so. Legally speaking, SCOTUS should uphold this ruling 9-0.

    However, it’s not a good thing in a would-be democracy for a popular candidate to be prevented from standing.

    The 14th Amendment does contain a get-out: a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress can remove the disability. Perhaps the Ds might have voted for that if the Rs had shown any recent sign of wanting to play fair, over the appointment of Supreme-Court judges in particular.

  20. There’s no reasonable doubt that Trump is thereby barred – there’s a prominent paper by two Federalist Society lawyers which says so. Legally speaking, SCOTUS should uphold this ruling 9-0

    The grandeur of delusion.

  21. >Some of my best friends
    December 20, 2023 at 3:41 pm
    The US Constitution unambiguously bars from the Presidency any person who has given aid or comfort to its enemies. There’s no reasonable doubt that Trump is thereby barred – there’s a prominent paper by two Federalist Society lawyers which says so. Legally speaking, SCOTUS should uphold this ruling 9-0.

    Wow. Trump didn’t aid or comfort the US’s enemies. There was no insurrection.

  22. >John
    December 20, 2023 at 10:24 am
    This provisional judgement only affects the Republican primary ballot in that state although the usual suspects, led by the bbc naturally, are getting awfully excited.

    >Trump is hardly going to need Colorados 104 (?) state delegates to get nominated. Anyway, even in the unlikely event that the ruling stands he will still get the nod via write-ins – at which point the same four judges will probably reinterpret the law to prevent the delegates from being seated or whatever.

    There’s two things here though

    1. While a President doesn’t need *any* one state to get elected, this opens up for other states to do the same thing.

    2. Given that there was no insurrection, Trump never called for insurrection, he called for people to calm down, and Clinton et al have been ‘election denying since 2016 – this just opens us up to tit-for-tat from now on, weakening what little national unity we have remaining.

    These people have TDS and they’re willing to destroy the country to get at the man.

  23. Paintings by Hunter Biden

    These people have TDS and they’re willing to destroy the country

    Consider the possibility they have already succeeded.

  24. Bloke in the Fourth Reich

    Otto, don’t get your hopes up. It wouldn’t happen.

    Sarah is more into blokes old enough to be her granddad.

  25. I wonder if the 4 judges who ruled on this realise they are set up to be martyrs?
    Once one or more of them is targetted, then the Dems will really claim to have cause to suspend democracy.

    After all, it’s only democracy if you vote the way I tell you to!

  26. Some of my best friends

    If you want to take this question seriously, read the Federalist Society discussion. That’s the Federalist Society – no one there is remotely leftist.

  27. Dennis, Pointing Out The Obvious

    Once again, the ruling elite class in the USA has handed Donald Trump the priceless gift of martyrdom.

    These people are morons.

    The ruling is easily sidestepped (Colorado Republicans caucus), and it forces all of the Republican presidential candidates to suspend their attacks on Trump and show solidarity. No Republican challenger can gain traction against Trump as things now stand.

    If Trump wins, it will be the Democrat Party, large parts of the federal government (especially the Biden Administration, Merrick Garland and the DOJ, as well as the FBI) and some useful idiots in several states (GA, CO and NY) he will need to thank most.

  28. In the USA the will of the people is expressed in various documents, including the federal constitution. The people are free to vote to have it changed, in exactly the same way that they are free to vote on any other issue. That’s just as much democracy as we ever have. Anything following those rules cannot be the end of democracy as those rules have been present for a long time.

    However, a lot of how the president is elected is a matter for the states to handle internally. It would be quite possible for the US supreme court to refuse to intervene on the grounds that it is not a federal matter.

    @Agammamon – “There was no insurrection.”

    Those who have been convicted and sentenced for their part would have to agree that there was – or at least that American courts believe that there was, which is all that matters.

  29. @Charles…

    May I suggest that you take a look at the very informative summary of the situation that was linked much earlier in this thread? See:-

    @Lurker – December 20, 2023 at 9:26 am

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/12/19/the-colorado-supreme-court-4-3-decision-is-pure-nonsense-and-can-be-laughed-at-they-even-admit-it-on-page-9/

    Your grasp of law seems rather similar to Richard Murphy’s grasp of Economics (or almost anything else it would appear)

  30. It’s quite funny to read about the Federalist talking heads earnestly debating the minutiae of “is a person qualified to hold office”.

    Perhaps someone will shoot down my cynicism by assuring me they were equally concerned (and vocal) about uncovering the truth birthplace of another recent president. Or, as I suspect, are we dealing with yet another bunch of “conservatives” who only piss on their own team.

  31. Donor-funded Conservative

    Guys, Democracy has always meant allowing a handful of judges appointed by your political enemies to decide who’s on the ballot while making up the law as they go along.

    This is a known thing.

    Please read this article by some lawyers in the Federast Society which proves that up is down and black is white.

  32. Who are these enemies to which he gave aid and comfort? Is the US at war with anyone, or was it in 2020-21? Against what president was the insurrection aimed? Why did all those insurrectionist rebels turn up at the Capitol unarmed?

  33. Dennis, Pointing Out The Obvious

    There’s no reasonable doubt that Trump is thereby barred – there’s a prominent paper by two Federalist Society lawyers which says so. Legally speaking, SCOTUS should uphold this ruling 9-0.

    That’s one of the funniest things I’ve read in a long time, and I read Richard Murphy almost daily.

    If you think SCOTUS gives a shit about what two Federalist Society lawyers think, I have land in Florida to sell you.

    One more thing: There is no such thing as a “prominent” Federalist Society paper. Publishing via the Federalist Society is a virtual guarantee of anonymity. There are classified government documents that get more circulation that Federalist Society papers. It’s chattering class jerk-offs jerking off, nothing more.

  34. “Perhaps the Ds might have voted for that if the Rs had shown any recent sign of wanting to play fair, over the appointment of Supreme-Court judges in particular.”

    Lisa Khan, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Gigi Sohn, Philip Washington, Ann Carlson, Dale Ho, David Crane, Adeel Abdullah Mangi, Sarah French Russell

  35. Some of my best friends

    ‘There is no such thing as a “prominent” Federalist Society paper.’

    Quite possibly not, no one said there was. The Baude & Paulsen paper was published in U.Penn. Law Review.

    All the six R members of SCOTUS are associated with the society (and none of the Ds). It’s a thoroughly right-wing organization.

  36. Dennis, Clear-Eyed As Always

    Quite possibly not, no one said there was. The Baude & Paulsen paper was published in U.Penn. Law Review.

    Ah yes, U. Penn Law. The home of Liz Mcgill, everyone’s favorite anti-semitic tenured law professor. Now there’s prestige for ya. That’ll get the masses on the side of banning Trump.

    All the six R members of SCOTUS are associated with the society (and none of the Ds). It’s a thoroughly right-wing organization.

    If you really think all six of the “Republican” justices are “right-wing”, you either don’t know much about the individual justices, you’re simple-minded, or you’re full of shit… Or any combination of the three.

    Affectation isn’t a reasoned argument. Nor is it proof of knowledge. Therefore, it doesn’t impress.

  37. Steve,

    “Have you noticed how pro-Brexit MPs have the worst possible luck with rules and standards committees and getting reselected? Or, indeed, remaining Prime Minister – or doing anything Blair wouldn’t approve of – with a theoretical majority of 80.”

    Look, they elected a leader who thought it was his place to comment on whether WH Smith sells discount chocolate or not. And wasn’t being kicked out as leader 5 minutes after by MPs. So what does that tell you about the MPs?

    You know, it’s only chocolate, but it says something about the philosophy of a man, of a party. Do you believe people should be free to live their life or interfere in it? I think there are some arguments for protecting people from harm with regulation, but when you go as far as chocolate, you’re a fascist in my book. I’m not the slightest bit surprised that we still have a highly taxed, nannying, bloated state with the Conservatives running things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *