Comments by "MrEkzotic" (@MrEkzotic) on "Former Trump attorney says Colorado ruling 'ignores' federal law" video.

  1. Trump hasn't even been charged with insurrection. Further, that clause doesn't even apply to the President.
    7
  2. ​ @JamesMartin-bz3lq No. We have representatives, not rulers.
    5
  3.  @DoRC  How did he participate in an insurrection against himself? His speech incited no violence, and in fact, he told people to "peacefully and patriotically" make their way to the Capitol. Trump has not been charged with insurrection, and to use this as justification to remove him from the ballot is a violation of his Constitutional due process rights. Judge's can't simply assert that he is guilty of a criminal act without a trial and without providing an opportunity to defend himself. You are supporting and defending fascism.
    2
  4. "Laws? We don't have to follow no stinkin' laws. Laws are for everyone else." -Biden Regime
    1
  5. 🤡
    1
  6. LOL. Nonsense.
    1
  7. Sorry, but everything you said is just bloviating nonsense and hyper-biased hyperbole.
    1
  8.  @DoRC  Did you read the ruling by the Colorado district court? The President is not an officer, and he takes a different oath than federal officers.
    1
  9.  @DoRC  Nobody has been charged or convicted of insurrection.
    1
  10.  @DoRC  Because the office of the President is the embodiment of the executive branch, and as such, the president cannot engage in an insurrection against himself. My sister used to teach Constitutional law at Georgetown, and her opinion is that it does not apply to the president, although it's an open question that should be settled by the SCOTUS. Many Constitutional lawyers are split on this issue.
    1
  11.  @diegojines-us9pc  The Confederate states removed Lincoln in violation of the Constitution. States still have to follow the US Constitution. States can't remove people from the ballot for just any reason they choose.
    1
  12.  @diegojines-us9pc  In the ten southern slave states, no citizen would publicly pledge to vote for Abraham Lincoln (wouldn't become electors for Lincoln), so citizens there had no legal means to vote for the Republican nominee...it was different than it is today.
    1
  13.  @diegojines-us9pc  Thank you. Your challenge to try harder forced me to do some more research and I learned something. Much appreciated.
    1
  14.  @diegojines-us9pc  There were no people willing to serve as electors in those ten states, so there was no way for him to even be on the ballot. That's very different than having judges remove him.
    1
  15. Maybe I missed something. When was Trump convicted of insurrection, let alone even charged?
    1
  16.  @yinshah3303  Alternative electors are perfectly legal and supported by precedent.
    1
  17.  @yinshah3303  I heard his speech. I'm not the technicality guy, I'm the guy who understands the Constitutional right to due process and the innocent until proven guilty standard.
    1