Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [39 views]


Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (10 comments) [399 views]


The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [109 views]


Trump, Giuliani, Meadows are unindicted co-conspirators in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 4:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [65 views]


Turley: The "haymaker" in Supreme Court arguments. Chief Justice Roberts. "Openly mocking of DC Circuit."
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 5:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (8 comments) [189 views]


The latest general election polls from this weekend reveal something interesting.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 22, 2024 11:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (10 comments) [423 views]


So Ukraine got money.
Military by oldedude     April 24, 2024 3:58 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (6 comments) [92 views]


Donna may be getting her wish granted: Gateway Pundit to file for bankruptcy
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:28 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [37 views]


James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [85 views]


Russia is even more furious over vote by Congress to support Ukraine than MTG.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 21, 2024 6:09 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (11 comments) [646 views]


Law selectors, pages, etc.
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

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)


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


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "If you want to speak intelligently about the recent SCOTUS decison read this:":

  1. 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.


  2. 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.


  3. 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.



  4. 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

Comment on: "If you want to speak intelligently about the recent SCOTUS decison read this:"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page