OUR SIGNS FOR TOMORROW:
Education by Ponderer     April 18, 2025 5:39 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Ponderer (6 comments) [87 views]

Trump's egg lie today is ridiculous, but typical.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 18, 2025 9:50 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [11 views]

OK, let's go ahead and lose 500 electoral votes
Politics by ROB3RT     April 17, 2025 6:21 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: ROB3RT (8 comments) [132 views]

Letitia James. In her own words.
Crime by HatetheSwamp     April 17, 2025 6:07 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (6 comments) [204 views]

Yes, justice does take time. Signal leakers escorted out of Pentagon
News by oldedude     April 16, 2025 8:54 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (17 comments) [177 views]

Liberals Warn Enforcing Immigration Law Is A Slippery Slope That May Lead To Enforcing Other Laws
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 17, 2025 4:22 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [55 views]

An anonymous comment
Religion by Curt_Anderson     April 18, 2025 8:36 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [53 views]

After four years of Joe Biden, Freedom of the Press is reinstated
Media by HatetheSwamp     April 18, 2025 9:51 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [57 views]

SelectSmart.com Members' Resource Page
How-to by Curt_Anderson     February 27, 2020 8:05 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Ponderer (3 comments) [1721 views]

Riley Gaines. The new face of Old-school feminism
Media by HatetheSwamp     April 18, 2025 6:45 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (3 comments) [34 views]

If you want to speak intelligently about the recent SCOTUS decison read this: By islander March 6, 2024 12:07 pm Category: Law (0.0 from 0 votes) Rules of the Post Write A New Article How To Post Here

Teri Kanefield's piece will explain how and why the court reached the verdict they did.

If you get your information from cable media news stations, political pundits, celebrity lawyers etc.You will be glad you clicked on the link and took the time to read Teri's excellent explanation of the FACTS of this extraordinarily complex case. No matter what side you are on this is a must read.

Cited and related links:

1. terikanefield.com

Comments Start Below

by Curt_Anderson on March 6, 2024 12:38 pm I am under no illusions that a conservative-heavy Supreme Court would have ever ruled against Trump on the 14th Amendment issue. But the liberals placed too much emphasis on the prospect of "chaos" had Trump been disqualified on some state ballots. They shouldn't have given into explicit, implicit or imagined threats. Justice Kagan was wrong to worry that one or two states would have an outsized impact on a national election. We have an electoral college, not a popular presidential election vote. In truth, a handful of states, the swing states, decide every election. Those purple states have an outsized impact. The presidential votes of voters in blue or red states don't matter. Americans are constitutionally denied the right to vote for Arnold Schwarzenegger (foreign) or Rep. Max Frost (too young) for president. We all accept that reality. That said, I prefer that Trump's return to the White House is stymied by millions of patriotic, democracy-loving voters rather than a Supreme Court decision. by HatetheSwamp on March 6, 2024 1:08 pm It is more about the rabid reactions (the "outrage") to the decision than the decision itself. But, the analysis of the opinion of the concurrences is helpful. Good stuff. And, if you don't mind my saying, Teri's noting that subjectivity is truth and that we pay a price when we don't check the preferences and prejudices that we bring with us to every moment of our lives. by Ponderer on March 7, 2024 5:56 am Curt, I never put a lot of emphasis on the Colorado case or whether or not Sec 3 of the 14th should prevent Trump from being on ballots. I have said all along that the real issue with that regulation will come in the future if he wins the election. The real chaos will come around January 20, 2025 if that happens, since Sec 3 of the 14th clearly states that an oath-breaking insurrectionist like Donald Trump is not eligible to actually "hold" the office of president. That's gonna be when the real shitshow will ensue. by HatetheSwamp on March 7, 2024 6:15 am Re: "Curt, I never put a lot of emphasis on the Colorado case or whether or not Sec 3 of the 14th should prevent Trump from being on ballots." po Bull$#!t From the beginning, you proclaimed, from the EFFINbeginning, that state bureaucrats and state judges could bump Trump from the ballot and that due process wasn't required. You mocked OD repeatedly and shamefully over that! Don't lie. The real chaos will come around January 20, 2025 if that happens, since Sec 3 of the 14th clearly states that an oath-breaking insurrectionist like Donald Trump is not eligible to actually "hold" the office of president. Have you had the Supreme Court decision splained to you by EFFINanyone who doesn't suffer from the "outrage" that's at the core of Teri's take on the decision. Because, that outrage calls your metaphorical Rachel its home. Knowing what the Court decided, what could possibly happen on January 20, 2025, IYO? Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page