Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft said that while he didn’t want to do it, he had to remind people of how “severe” the situation is.
A top Republican official in Missouri is threatening to remove President Joe Biden from appearing on the ballot as retaliation for the determination in two other states that Donald Trump doesn’t qualify because he “engaged in insurrection.”
“What has happened in Colorado & Maine is disgraceful & undermines our republic,” Missouri Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft wrote on the social media site X on Friday. “While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!”
Ashcroft’s post came shortly after the Supreme Court agreed to review a decision by Colorado’s high court that found Trump could be barred from the state’s primary ballot because of his actions leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
So yeah, if Biden commits insurgency, then his should be off the ballot. But last time I checked he hasn’t come anywhere close.
But, Republicans would have you believe “fair is fair.” Trump got impeached, so Biden should get impeached. Trump got kicked off the ballot, so Biden should get kicked off the ballot. This has nothing to do with pesky things like details and rule of law, it’s just about my side vs your side, unless my side is winning, then I’ll take the law into consideration again.
The logic of “We’re going to punish your guy for what our guy did” makes me laugh… until I cry.
it’s just about my side vs your side
That’s what authoritarians literally believe. It’s a tribal mentality. “Might makes right.” “The ends justify the means.”
Still waiting for Harris to become a secret trans woman like Obama.
You’re forgetting that for these people, “commit insurgency” means “supports things I don’t like”.
The real question is what Thomas’s dissenting opinion would be when the SC rules otherwise, and if he gets paid by the word.
Excuse me? Are you just going to ignore his wanton use of the word “malarkey”?
He committed an insurgency… against the road when he got into his Mustang and put it in gear back in the 70s.
Eventually, we will have no one on the ballot.
I am really tired of Republicans threatening lawlessness in response to application of lawful consequences.
At this point, they deserve to have some lawless consequences applied to them, if that’s what they crave so badly.
Why would you give them what they want?
He means a crowbar to the knees.
*Tonya Harding enters the chat*
Some men you just can’t otherwise reach.
I mean, good luck, you’ll have to provide better justification than revenge to keep it from being overturned.
They don’t care. It’s all about the grandstanding.
I almost want to see them try though, just to get smacked down in court.
As though having the rules applied to them won’t reenforce their victim complex.
If they lose - even thanks to a GOP judge (a wild concept) it’ll be because of the elites… You know - the Jews.
They’re somehow both moronic and evil.
Fully expected, and if smacked down, thoroughly entertaining.
Is that some of that librul virtue signalling I hear so much about?
While I expect the Supreme Court to overturn this, if not, Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!
If it applies equally to both, Biden shouldn’t be taken off since he hasn’t been found guilty of sedition ya dipshit.
Because he didn’t engage in, not found guilty of.
Trump hasn’t been found guilty of sedition either.
Yes, I’m prepared for the down votes from a bunch of idiots who hate reality.
Article 14 doesn’t stipulate guilt, just engaging in which the Colorado court determined he did. His removal is the result of due process. So if they can show in court that Biden did the same then sure…but they cannot.
Not the same, purely partisan BS.
Article 14 doesn’t stipulate guilt,
Nor did I say it did.
No, but you said Trump has not been found guilty which is not required for him to be precluded from running for office. It’s an artificial bar some are trying to set unsupported by the text in the Constitution.
In any rational timeline SCOTUS would agree but with these justices who knows.
He was responding to another poster who said not being found guilty should make Biden immune to being taken off.
That’s the context in which that was said, and you’re ignoring that context. There’s a big difference between saying it’s also true of trump, for consistencies sake, and someone bringing it up out of the blue to advocate for trump.
You either have poor reading comprehension or you are responding in bad faith.
I understood it perfectly - my point which applies to both comments is that nothing in the 14th stipulates or indeed even mentions conviction, it does specifically exclude insurrection which applies, as determined by the Colorado court, solely to Trump.
The original response was flawed in its premise, agreed, but the guilt angle is Constitutionally irrelevant regardless - that was my point.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Trump hasn’t been found guilty of sedition either.
Not in a court of law; but given all the evidence you have to be willfully ignorant to believe he isn’t guilty of it and wouldn’t receive a conviction if/when there actually is a trial.
I think he’s guilty of it. But we shouldn’t be talking about guilt because it’s not part of the amendment.
But we shouldn’t be talking about guilt because it’s not part of the amendment
That’s just being pedantic. What’s a better word to use to say “he fucking did it?”
So what, you’re suggesting the reality is it was staged? Because we all observed reality with our real eyes in real time.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Correct. Trump hasn’t been found guilty of sedition. He has been found guilty of insurrection by the Colorado supreme Court. He also hasn’t been criminally convicted of insurrection, because this isn’t a criminal case.
Sedition and insurrection are different, and parts of different laws. Criminal and civil guilt are also different mechanisms of our laws, but the 14th amendment doesn’t state someone needs to have a criminal conviction to be considered ineligible for office.
He has been found guilty of insurrection by the Colorado supreme Court.
An interesting thing I hadn’t thought about. Thanks.
You’re not wrong. However by the text of the Constitution a guilty verdict isn’t required to invalidate candidacy.
Technically that is true. However, he was impeached for incitement of insurrection by the House of Representatives. The majority of the Senate then voted to remove him after impeachment, but not the 2/3s majority required.
So no, not “found guilty of sedition”. But he was impeached for inciting insurrection.
deleted by creator
They’ll sacrifice their lives for a person who is demonstrably the actual biggest loser in history, and he just gets more loser-y, folks, okay… If any of you are starting to have your memories fade, here’s a quick refresher to read this morning and then copy and send to your aunt karen in Missouri.
- 0 re-elections won
- 1 term president
- 2 times impeached
- 3 marriages
- 4 inch lifts in his shoes
- 5 kids, from 3 different mothers
- 6 bankruptcies
- 7 US Capitol police suing him for Jan 6 terrorist insurrection and murder of police
- 8 trillion + dollars added to the US debt in a single term
- 9 trump lawyers sanctioned by federal judge for lying in frivolous election fraud lawsuits and ordered to pay defendant’s legal fees
- 10 years that trump paid $0 in income taxes between 2000 and 2015. ($0 to cops, teachers, roads, prisons, disaster relief, etc)
- 11 trump associates charged with serious crimes over the past 5 years
- 12 million votes (the big lie) - trump claims he won the 2020 election by 12 million votes when in reality, he lost by about 7 million votes.
- 13 of August, 2021 - one of multiple days that trump was supposed to magically become president again according to Qanon and a crack addicted pillow salesman (the two most respected information sources in the gop)
- 14 year old girl in a youth choir that trump approached in 1992 to say, “Wow! Just think - in a couple years I’ll be dating you.”
- 15 originally confirmed cases of COVID in the US trump said would soon be, “down to close to zero.” followed by, “like a miracle, it will disappear.” - over 1,000,000 Americans have since died of COVID and it continues to kill 4 years later.
- 16 years old - age of daughter ivanka when she hosted “miss teen” pageant and, according to long time trump associate Noel Casler, “trump called her over in the middle of a rehearsal and had her give him a lap dance while he leered at the crew.”
- 17 known trump and russia investigations from local, state and federal prosecutors
- 18 gop senators that ignored trump threats / warnings and supported Biden admin’s infrastructure bill.
- 19 as in COVID19 - trump was verified as the single largest source of disinformation on the virus, with a Cornell study claiming that 38% of the “misinformation conversation” originated with trump
- 20 the day in January, 2021, when Biden was sworn in despite trump inciting a violent insurrection to stop election verification at the US Capitol.
- 21 gun salute that trump ordered for himself when he left office after a humiliating defeat, even though he never served in the military, famously called military members “losers” and “suckers” and actively avoided the draft with a cowardly “bone spurs” excuse.
- 22 date in August, 2021, when Alabama hate rally crowd booed trump for finally saying people should get vaccinated, only after 700,000 Americans have died due mostly to his failure as president
- 23 as in wrestlemania 23 in 2007 where trump, a cartoon level failure with no other prospects, participated in a fake bet that a proxy wrestler would win a fake fight on his behalf or he would shave his wig and hair plugs off.
- 24 day in August, 2021, when trump actually filed a lawsuit in Florida court against YouTube, a private company, demanding that they reinstate his YouTube channel like a desperate, irrelevant embarrassment with no platforms left to abuse.
- 25 plus credible sexual assault allegations against trump, spanning decades and with accusers starting as young as 13 years old at time of assault.
And a partridge in a pear tree!
Anytime Trump is held slightly accountable, You can count on Republicans to threaten some type of payback.
It’s basically Animal Farm.
“We believe in democracy for all… but some are more democratic than others”
“We believe in free speech… but some speech is more free than others.”
Animal Farm is one of their guidebooks. Unsurprising since they’re a bunch of swine.
The Republicans are using a book based on communism as their guidebook?
Based on a book about how to corrupt a gullible group by selling them a utopia but actually just enriching themselves.
Also, I’m not sure why you would be surprised that Republicans would use such a thing as a guidebook. Despite all their boogeymanning of Saul Alinsky, Republican strategists love Rules for Radicals. They used to distribute it before they decided to associate it with Obama.
Animal Farm is about totalitarianism.
I think you need to do a couple lessons on reading comprehension first then maybe try reading Animal Farm again
Well yes because that means they will be accountable too. And they don’t wanna take personal responsibility over anything.
Responsibility would mean that they acknowledge being dumbasses in an uniroinic sense
Honestly at this point someone just needs to end Trump for the sanity of us all. There stupid fucks won’t get over his dick in their ass otherwise.
I feel like Trump’s ideology has taken over so much of right-wingers even he is out of the way, it will continue.
On fucking twatter
Straight out of the Russian playbook. And for the same reason we can’t let Putin win, these people can’t be allowed to win.
Yes if Joe Biden engages in insurrection then he should be excluded from the ballot. I just don’t think that’s particularly likely.
Secretaries of State will step in & ensure the new legal standard for @realDonaldTrump applies equally to @JoeBiden!"
It does. The legal standard does apply equally to everyone. And in fact the same standard has applied for 155 years.
Doublespeak. Republicans actively work to twist the meaning of words to their base to fit their agenda, so that the other side playing by the rules and being fair looks like political cheating. That way Republicans can engage in political cheating themselves and claim self defense.
In today’s flavor, “legal standard” means “the ability to make us lose” so they want to apply their own “legal standard” to democrats.
It sounds dumb to anyone paying attention, but their voters will eat this up.
>The legal standard does apply equally to everyone. And in fact the same standard has applied for 155 years.
under the law, in it’s fairness, it is just as illegal for the billionaire to sleep under a bridge as it is for the homeless
fuck laws
also, fuck politicians.
Waaaahhhh my candidate got kicked off so I’m going to retaliate and try to kick the other guy off. Good luck at the Supreme Court.
With how stacked the Court is for righties, I wouldn’t be surprised.
It’s literally all the GOP really has been trying to accomplish since Nixon. They did it to our guy so we have to get them back somehow.
The reason the government is called a republic is because it follows laws and established proceedures.
Now Team Trump is advocating pure mob rule.
And people think its cool.
They’re not actually advocating for mob rule, mob rule is only acceptable if it’s the mob rule that accomplishes what they want.
Mobs are usually told what to want.
📢 “and when do they want it?!?!”
The DOJ should investigate this guy for supporting insurrection, too.
I’m voting Biden. But if the Democrats would suggest maybe someone else from the 150million rational thinking American population who are not Republican, I would vote for that person. Joe has done a good job. I just don’t wanna be sitting here in my toilet writing about how terrible the situation is 2 years from now when we loose Joe to stress and need a new president. So obviously not Trump or any other rock-like object or non-human organic matter composition. But any human who loves this country and wants us to do even better would be nice.
- 124 million. People old enough to be president who don’t vote for Trump.
Yeah I get invited to all the parties.
He’s actually made of compressed Cheeto dust.
I’ll volunteer. Am eligible, and was president of an HOA at some point, I’m sure those skills scale. Also, not a Cheeto, nor rock, nor non-human organic matter composition.
I’ll vote for you 😉.
Kindergarten recess is more mature than US politics.
It’s intentional. Jerry Springer Goes To Congress.
I assume you know he was a politician as well?
Yes.
Neat, I didn’t know Biden also engaged in insurrection. This guy seems very wise!
You don’t, but they are certain of it. It’s clearly been an insurrection all these years, since when the democrats colluded with the lizard people to administer the vaccine and steal the elections. It’s obvious if you think about it.
He should be wise. 44 years old and his entire career has been political appointments to cosplay as a lawyer.
Insurrection doesn’t seem to be very strongly defined.
Maybe simply running against an incumbent president is insurrectionalist.
The current SCOTUS claims to be using the “common meaning of words” as their interpretation mechanism for the Constitution.
Assuming they have any bit of consistency whatsoever, the common meaning of words gives at least prima facie argument against Trump being able to run with zero argument against Biden being able to run.
And lucky us, the current SCOTUS has not really shown loyalty to Trump as a person. Here’s hoping that sticks around.
the current SCOTUS has not really shown loyalty to Trump as a person
I’m more worried about future legitimate candidates being excluded. I’m not defending Trump in particular.
You should actually be more worried that violent insurrection becomes the norm.
Historically, if take away someone’s democratic option to express themselves then they become more likely to turn to violence.
Actually, the far right are more likely to turn to violence every time they lose, period. That’s always been the way of things. You’re conflating the Left’s values with the Right. The Right do not care about Democracy. Have you never sat through one of those fascist fucks “we’re not a Democracy, we’re a Republic” defense of minority tyranny? They care about winning at all costs. They’re as likely to turn violent is they lose 90/10 as if they lose because their leader was convicted of a felony or taken off a ballot for legitimate reasons.
If fascist win after having Trump removed from the ballot then it makes it even harder to legitimately argue that a particular candidate should stay on a future ballot.
Whose democratic options to express themselves is being taken away?
Statistically it is non-white people, so why is it white people who are turning to violence?
Whose democratic options to express themselves is being taken away?
MAGA voters.
why is it white people who are turning to violence
Because they are MAGA voters?
Unfortunately, Republicans don’t need Democrats to invent ways for them to be fascist, they’re quite capable of finding opportunities on their own
Let’s not make it even easier for them in the future.
It won’t. It’s a trick we’ve fallen for. We withhold Justice from the corrupt out of fear they use our justice against us illegitimately. Yet what we miss is that it only works if they have the ammo to do the same without using our justice against us. It’s a game to them to wrap their horrors in our good deeds, but they can’t actually commit more horrors because we do good.
We withhold Justice from the corrupt out of fear they use our justice against us illegitimately.
And if we incorrectly apply false justice then it’s likely to come back and bite us in the ass.
The case against Trump must be watertight. The Senate and courts in two states don’t believe this is the case.
That’s like if you assaulted someone, and then claiming you didn’t assault them because you think assault isn’t strongly defined.
It’s just a very stupid and slimy way of saying you think laws shouldn’t apply to you.
No, assault is strongly defined with a large amount of case law to back it up. It is also obvious who committed it.
Violent storming of the Capitol is insurrectionalist and obvious (like assault)
Incitement to insurrection is lacking in case law, and open to interpretation.
I don’t know why you think this law is applicable to me personally.
Violent storming of the Capitol is insurrectionalist and obvious (like assault)
That was not your original statement but it’s a lot more correct now, and if we can agree that an obvious insurrection is an insurrection, that’s a very good start.
We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore
I don’t see any honest case to be made that this isn’t incitement of insurrection.
Additionally, the 14th Amendment does not require you to prove it was an incitement, it’s enough to provide aid or comfort to the insurrectionists. Of which there are numerous examples, including Trump repeatedly offering to pardon the insurrectionists.
I don’t see any honest case to be made that this isn’t incitement of insurrection.
Trump also said “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
The phrase “fight like hell” can be used non violently.
Although it sounds like I’m defending Trump, I’m actually attacking future fascist, because…
the 14th Amendment does not require you to prove it was an incitement, it’s enough to provide aid or comfort to the insurrectionists.
This can be read in such a way that almost anyone can be struck off the ballot.
I’ll give an hyperbolic example. “Instagram star breaks DC window” = followers are insurrectionists. Anyone liking a post is barred from the ballot.
Trump also said “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
If you shake someone’s hand and also punch them, does the handshake cancel out the punch?
You’re being slimy and dishonest again. Trump is a politician, he talks out both sides of his mouth. Talking out both sides of your mouth does not cancel out.
I’ll give an hyperbolic example. “Instagram star breaks DC window” = followers are insurrectionists. Anyone liking a post is barred from the ballot.
You can’t tell the difference between double tapping an Instagram post and offering a presidential pardon?
You’re being slimy and dishonest again.
I’m playing devil’s advocate.
You can’t tell the difference between double tapping an Instagram post and offering a presidential pardon?
I can, but maybe a good lawyer can equate them. Is the law well defined enough to tell the difference?
You mean to tell me John Ashcroft’s son is a bit of a douche, too?!?
Why are you being so nice to Jay Ashcroft by calling him a bit of a douche?
My bad. Full douche. Just like his daddy. Feel free to come up with a more descriptive term if you’re feeling creative, too!
A douche bag full of Trumps excrement.
