2y ago

Historic hearings begin on whether 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump from 2024 race

abcnews.go.com

Hearings began this week on whether the 14th Amendment disqualifies Donald Trump from running for president in 2024 because of his actions around the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

On Monday morning in Denver, a historic five-day evidentiary hearing began for a lawsuit filed against Trump by six Republican and unaffiliated Colorado voters represented by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

A similar hearing is set for Thursday in Minneapolis.

CREW President Noah Bookbinder has said that his organization brought its suit in Colorado because "it is necessary to defend our republic both today and in the future." The group's complaint accuses Trump of inciting and aiding the mob at the Capitol two years ago, which he denies. He was impeached on similar charges but acquitted by Republicans in the Senate.

69 comments

I think this is the courtroom, it's under Judge Wallace. Anyone know if we can hear it or when it starts?
https://live.coloradojudicial.gov/?streamId=35b1db1b-2ccc-47e8-9f59-33cd656391f9
Edit: Sound just started.
Edit 2: wtf is the defense lawyer doing, trying to get his Etsy paintings sold? I want to support that guy now.
Edit 3: They're on break and will be back, I didn't catch how long the break is.
Edit 4: They're back but it sounds like it will be short and then break for the day.
Edit 5: It is not short, it's still going.
That's a wrap, they'll start at 8:00 tomorrow morning.
- These updates were gripping
  
  I know you're being sarcastic, but it was for people who came into the thread to see if they wanted to click the link or not, there are no recordings. Basically, trump's lawyers are unsurprisingly smug, want to block everything the people bringing the suit want, and the judge is being ultra fair. If you watched the impeachment trial or Jan. 6th commission, it was very similar to the police testimony there. Meaning, it was really, really bad for the police. Also, I didn't know about this:
  https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial
- In case you did want to buy some of his art:
  https://www.etsy.com/shop/winstonwatercolors
  
  Those are quite the homoerotic cowboys.
- Just wanted to say thanks for posting that link.
  
  NP, it's hard to believe it's not an old timey TV show. You got the shitty defense lawyer and the noble policeman and a very dramatic testimony.
- What county to select?
  
  Denver Courtroom 209
  
  Denver, the link should take you right there.
Block him. He belongs in jail.
Think of all the seditionists who will also be disqualified, once #45 sets the precedent.
- Everyone who provided aid, as well.
  
  Which is why getting this conviction right is so important.
Similar efforts need to be launched in every battleground state for it to stand a chance of blocking his path through the EC
- Not just battleground states. Every state should do this. The more the better, imo
  
  In fairness, thanks to the electoral system all we would need is like 6 specific states and he effectively never win. Iowa, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina, and Missouri would be 79 electoral votes, there are only 538 total, 241 are already virtually unobtainable by conservatives, losing those 79 would mean the most that trump could get would be 218, meaning he could never get the 270 he would need to win and those aren't even removing states like Florida and Texas because that would never happen.
Specific intent is what she just said.
Scott Gessler is an absolute asshole here in the Colorado suit.
A triall to decide if the American justice system works? Aren't they currently cosigning a genocide?
Yeah ok. I'll hold my breath.
Probably no consequences for him out of this hearing either. Did he even pay on any of his civil trials yet? The executive branch is failing to back up the judicial branch.
Be careful what you wish for. You shouldn’t be able to disqualify someone who hasn’t been convicted yet. Otherwise this will be weaponized, and each side will start using it to remove people from ballots using frivolous lawsuits.
- Trump performed a failed coup, I'm okay with going after others that perform coups.
  
  There's no conviction so we can't legally says he's culpable.
  The 14th says nothing about a conviction being necessary.
  It's a bit sticky. But yeah, I'd find him in violation of the 14th in 1.433 seconds flat.
- Except, that's not what the constitution says.
  None of the people disbarred from office by the 14th were ever convicted of anything.
  The whole point of the 14th amendment is that it is self-executing. No conviction is necessary.
  And everyone who has sworn an oath (or otherwise has a duty) to uphold the constitution must abide by it.
  You might find that unreasonable, but if so, then you must amend the constitution to remove the 14th, otherwise it remains the Supreme law of the land.
  
  Trump probably unironically believes he has tried to uphold the constitution. Ignorance of the law is only a crime for plebs like you and I, not police or presidents.
- Are you saying he had no involvement in it? If someone, Republican or Democrat was involved in a coup I think it is fair to not give them chance to do it again. Frankly some congressmen are also breaking this amendment, one is even a speaker.
- The overwhelming majority of people who have been disqualified under the 14th amendment were never charged with a crime. That's simply not how it works.
- I don't know why you're being downvoted. This absolutely will be weaponized, same way impeachment is being weaponized now.
  
  Weaponized against people who break the oath to defend the constitution? Good. Trump and all the people part of the failed coup should be removed from office. They are text book traitors.
- I'm inclined to agree. It's obvious that Trump is guilty of attempting a coup, however he has not yet been legally convicted of that.
  People, please stop downvoting the above comment because you don't like Trump. I wish all of the world's ills on Trump, but that doesn't make reddig33 wrong. Nobody should be able to be stripped of their rights without a conviction. Our justice system works achingly slow - especially when this situation is without precedent.
  
  Qualification for an elected office is not a right. There are other constitutional requirements which must be met in order to be qualified to run for office. For President, the person must be at least 35 years of age, for example.
  Another qualification is that you have not engaged in insurrection or rebellion, or given aid or comfort tp the enemies of the United States, after having taken an oath as an elected official to support the Constitution.
  Disqualification from office is not punishment for a crime.
  
  I think you forget that he was impeached for it.
  No action was taken because his party controlled that, but he was nevertheless impeached.
  
  And he won't be. The J6 indictment accuses him taking advantage of it, not starting it. The likely reason why Jack Smith did that was because Trump would start appeal that because of impeachment that's a double jeopardy and delay everything further.
  If someone involved in insurrection while being in the office they should not have privilege of running again.

69 comments