Компромат on Biden Will Eventually Make Him Persona Non Grata. 

YOU CAN LAUGH OR CRY, but it’s neither funny nor sad. It’s appalling. It’s appalling when news proclaims something as mis- or disinformation simply because it doesn’t comport to its desired narrative. This has been the case with Dems since, at least, 2015: probably longer, if I cared to examine the facts more closely. Such is definitely the case when on Tuesday, MSM described allegations made by an F.B.I. informant about Joe and Hunter Biden as ‘discredited’ because the informant allegedly has high-level ties to Russian intelligence, and those alleged ties are, ipso facto, all it takes to put a definitive kabosh on his veracity. MSM simply parrots the government’s propaganda without meaningful scrutiny or thoughtful analysis.

Alexander Smirnov, 43, is the individual whose credibility is at stake. He is a former confidential human source for the F.B.I. who told his handler he had had meetings with several Russian officials linked to the country’s intelligence services, according to special counsel David Weiss and his team of prosecutors. Smirnov apparently told his handler that the Russian Intelligence Service had intercepted several cellphone calls initiated from a hotel “by prominent U.S. persons the Russian government may use a ‘kompromat’ in the 2024 election.” Smirnov had reported contacts with “Russian Officials 1 and 2.” 

Essentially, Smirnov said these Russians passed a story about Hunter Biden, according to a detention report filed by Weiss after Smirnov’s his arrest and indictment for allegedly providing false information about Joe and Hunter Biden as well as obstruction, both felonies. (His indictment is here. That report can be viewed here.) The allegedly false statement was to the F.B.I. in June 2020 when Smirnov said that officials with the Ukrainian energy company Hunter was involved in, Burisma Holdings, paid the Bidens $5 million each in 2015 or 2016.

“During his custodial interview on February 14, Smirnov admitted that officials associated with Russian intelligence were involved in passing a story about Businessperson 1,” prosecutors said, adding, “Businessperson 1 was described as “the son of a a political figure who ran for president in 2020,” and since it is one whose name cannot be uttered, I guess it would be fair to simply point at Hunter Biden and whistle, so long as we don’t blow that whistle.

Prosecutors further stated that on that same day, Feb. 14th, Smirnov was arrested in the District of Nevada when he was returning to the U.S. on an international flight. Two days later, he was supposedly scheduled to fly out of the U.S. for a lengthy multi-country trip involving more such meetings with foreign intelligence agencies and officials, prompting a need for his continued detention. However, the court disagreed, releasing Smirnov contingent on his being subject to GPS monitoring and his surrendering of his American and Israeli passports. And prosecutors’ latest complaints concern Smirnov’s “actively peddling new lies that could impact U.S. elections after meeting with Russian intelligence officials in November.” The old Russia meddling and collusion narratives meet 2024…

The National Science Foundation Files

ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE that happened on Friday, the U.S. Department of the Treasury confirmed to Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) that it has used political watchwords in searches throughout its surveillance of Americans’ financial transactions. The admission was made in a letter to Scott, who is ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee. Examples of the watchwords used by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, include “MAGA,” “Antifa,” Trump,” “Biden,” “Kamala,” “Schumer,” or “Pelosi.” Banks were to surveil private financial transactions after Jan. 6, 2021 protests at the Capitol, according to a letter Fox News Digital received. 

The terms weren’t used in isolation, but instead, used alongside other data that banks regularly use as part of their anti-money laundering (AML) programs to detect and report suspicious activity. That such surveillance has been ongoing isn’t new, but what the search terms are is. It is clear they were based on political ideology alone, which is what makes it particularly pernicious and offensive. That such acts by the government violate Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights under the Constitution was ignored, perhaps because it wasn’t expected to ever be discovered. 

Only days before, on Tuesday, we learned more about just how far-reaching the government has become in our collective lives. It’s not only surveillance (such as with Homeland Security or FinCEN), it’s also censorship (such as with Twitter or Amazon) and propaganda (as with Ukraine or Russia.) Under Joe Biden’s regime, we now know the National Science Foundation expended vast millions into artificial intelligence-powered censorship and propaganda ‘tools’ in order to suppress online speech ‘at scale.’ The NSF further went to serious efforts to conceal its censorship from the media. We only learned this from a report issued by the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. 

The report states the NSF granted multi-millions of dollars to university and non-profit research groups, ostensibly to quell alleged ‘misinformation’ regarding Covid-19 and the 2020 election. In a press release, the Judiciary Committee said: “The purpose of these taxpayer-funded projects is to develop A.I.-powered censorship and propaganda tools that can be used by governments and Big Tech to shape public opinion by restricting certain viewpoints or promoting others.” 

The Judiciary Committee reached its conclusion through non-public documents it, and the Select Subcommittee in the Weaponization of the Federal Government, obtained. These documents also indicate the researchers and non-profit organizations knew very well that their acts constituted ‘content moderation’ and ‘censorship,’ but continued the work anyway. They have also stonewalled efforts by the House committees to obtain further information for literally years. At this point, Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has subpoenaed the NSF to obtain communications it had with the private companies and non-profit groups. 

Lee Fang is an investigative journalist who has reported extensively in surveillance and censorship. He also presented his views in the Weaponization committee on Tuesday, which he called, ‘Examining the threat to the First Amendment posed by artificial intelligence and the federal government.’ In his presentation, he said a British A.I. firm named ‘Logically’ came to the U.S. market looking for “contracts to monitor and remove alleged social media misinformation in the upcoming 2024 presidential election.” The company reportedly conducted censorship for Great Britain during the pandemic, and wanted to expand its market. It bragged about its relationship with Meta, parent of Facebook and Instagram, and how it could automatically suppress ‘misinformation.’ 

In other words, the government was contracting out its desired censorship to private concerns in order to try to evade detection and culpability. This is expressly unconstitutional, however. After reports surfaced on what the NSF was doing, it strategized means to obfuscate its actions and developed a media strategy to blacklist media outlets reporting on it. 

The Daily Caller’s Supreme Court reporter, Katelynn Richardson, testified about this, and  something it has cryptically named ‘Convergence Accelerator:’

“After I reported on Convergence Accelerator grants shortly after their announcement, the NSF devised an official media strategy instructing research teams to highlight the ‘pro-democracy’ nature of their projects. I only know this thanks to emails unveiled in a report this committee put out today.”

Greg Lukianoff, President an C.E.O. of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), believes leftist bias is inherent in existing A.I. and generates a “massive body of official facts that we can’t actually trust.” He, too, testified:

“[T]he most chilling threat that the government poses in the context of emerging A.I. is regulatory overreach that limits its potential as a tool for contributing to human knowledge. A regulatory panic could result in a small number of Americans deciding for everyone else what speech, ideas, and even questions are permitted in the name of ‘safety’ or ‘alignment.’” 

He did a show-and-tell to illustrate his point. He asked Chat GPT to write a poem about why certain members of the Weaponization committee were the best politicians in the country. Chat GPT did so for Democrats, but not for Republicans. (Lukianoff self-describes as left-leaning.) FIRE, he added, is filing a brief with SCOTUS warning of the perils of ‘jawboning,’ or using government pressure to coerce social media platforms to censor speech.

The report by the Weaponization committee, called ‘The Weaponization of the National Science Foundation: How NSF is Funding the Development of Automated Tools to Censor Online Speech ‘At Scale’ and Trying to Cover Up its Actions,’ can be read here.

Trump Docket Update

TUESDAY WAS A BIG NEWS DAY concerning 45th President Donald Trump’s legal trials and tribulations. First, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel (as predicted by most) nixed his presidential immunity defense in Jack Smith’s four criminal counts against him. More on this later, but the Opinion is here.

Second, U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing the documents case against the president in the Southern District of Florida, ruled after an in camera review, that some of the unclassified discovery materials Smith wanted to keep under seal would have to be disclosed out “of the the strong presumption of public access in criminal proceedings.” She simply did not find a “sufficient factual or legal basis warranting deviation” from that presumption. 

Cannon also denied Smith’s request to keep the identity of certain persons sealed. Although she conceded “witness safety and intimidation” can be legitimate reason to keep identities under seal, she did not find Smith’s “sparse and undifferentiated response” compelling enough to warrant it. She also laid out rules for requesting such review as the case proceeds. She is a Trump appointee.

Third, far-left New York Judge Arthur Engoron was in a tizzy when he demanded information about possible perjury by the Trump Organization’s Chief Financial Officer, Allen Weisselberg, who testified in the civil fraud case against the 45th president which has yet to be decided. Engoron was referring to a report from the reliably unreliable rag known as The New York Times, which suggested a plea deal Weisselberg had reached with the Manhattan District Attorney’s office that would require him to admit he lied on the witness stand in Engoron’s court, as well as to Letitia James’ investigators. (Prosecutors have turned the heat up on Weisselberg so much, he’s practically radioactive.)  Engoron has ordered attorneys in the case to provide information that might show possible perjury before rendering his diktat in mid-February.

Then, on Wednesday, it was reported Jack Smith might seek to have Judge Cannon removed over her granting Trump’s defense team access to some of the unclassified discovery she reviewed in camera and found to be appropriately made available to them in unredacted form. It’s unlikely to succeed, but Smith’s probably paid hourly, so for him—why not try? There again, I’m not up to speed on the Classified Information Procedures Act these days…

And also on Wednesday, Judge Lewis Kaplan, a Clinton appointee, denied Trump’s motion for a mistrial in the E. Jean Carroll defamation scam, despite the fact she had deleted evidence that had been properly subpoenaed. Trump has a $83.3 million judgment at stake because he was found civilly liable for defending himself against her false rape accusations from decades ago. As for the deleted discovery, Kaplan seemed to think Trump should’ve proferred his own attempts to recover it. (Some of the testimony about it is here and here.) That’s new to me when a defendant is to be his own persecutor and executioner, but things have changed in recent years…

Trump in the Legal News: A Status Report

DONALD TRUMP had a couple of pieces of good news when the Illinois Board of Elections voted, 8-0, to keep him on the 2024 ballot, and a Massachusetts judge ruled he would remain on the Bay State’s ballot. The Illinois petition to remove him originated from an innocent-sounding Free Speech for People. In Massachusetts, Supreme Judicial Court Judge Frank Gaziano denied the petition to keep Trump off based solely on the issue of ripeness.

More good news for the 45th president is his nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, for the fourth time, for his unrivaled accomplishment in securing peace in the Middle East, specifically in creating the Abraham Accords which secured a diplomatic treaty between the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Israel.

New York Rep. Claudia Tenney (R) nominated him.The news comes in the aftermath of a tragic drone strike another Biden f^ckup in Jordan that took the lives of three U.S. soldiers and injured 40 others on Monday. President Trump extended sincere condolences to the families of the fallen warriors and called for a return to “peace through strength.” (Cf. Biden White House spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre said of the terrible error by her boss: “Our deepest, obviously our deepest condolences go out, and our heartfelt condolences go out to the families who lost, uh, three, three brave, uh, three brave, uh, three brave, three folks who are military folks, who are brave, who are always fighting, who are fighting on behalf of, uh, this administration…” Why does NOBODY ever get fired in that damn WH?)

On another bright side, Fulton County GA District Attorney Fani Willis will have to answer some questions about her involvement with paramour, Nathan Wade, and their joint efforts to derail the 45th president’s political future. The Epoch Times reports Willis now faces 22 articles of impeachment in response to House Resolution 872 submitted by Georgia State Rep. Charlice Byrd (R) on Friday.

Essentially, the articles rest on Georgia Code 16-10-01 regarding willful or intentional violations by a public officer of his oath of office. This is an impeachment, not a criminal trial, but if Willis were tried and convicted, she could face one to five years imprisonment for each violation. VoterGA is surely happy with this development as is President Trump and his MAGA voter base. 

Despite the flurry of good news, however, is the specter of yet another exorbitant judgment any day in the New York civil trial on the heels of the Carroll defamation case. Representing the president, Alina Habba’s civil fraud trial trial by ordeal under New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engeron has concluded, but the record is reportedly replete with error. This is due in part to a recent report from a court-appointed independent monitor regarding the Trump Organization’s finances, here, as well as the adoption by the court of disputed established real estate and accounting practices.

The verdict is anticipated to be devastating and will likely push Trump and his organization into bankruptcy court. Even though he will appeal the Carroll case, he will have to provide $90 million in cash or bond to be held in escrow within 30 days post written judgment. This could be tied up with the bankruptcy court and trustee for years.

Look Who Is Obstructing Justice Now!

THE JAN. 6th COMMITTEE is now under investigation for allegedly deleting over 100 encrypted files prior to the G.O.P. gaining control over the House of Representatives, according to the House Administration Committee’s Oversight Subcommittee Chairman, Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.). He told Fox News that he has begun an investigation into the matter. He said:

“It’s obvious that Pelosi’s Select Committee went to great lengths to prevent Americans from seeing certain documents produced in their investigation. It also appears that Bennie Thompson and Liz Cheney intended to obstruct our Subcommittee by failing to preserve critical information and videos as required by House rules. The American people deserve to know the full truth, and Speaker Johnson has empowered me to use all tools necessary to recover these documents to get the truth, and I will.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has committed additional resources for this investigation. Pursuant to House rules, the prior select committee was required to relinquish the documents from its investigation to the new one led by the new G.O.P. majority after the 2022 midterms. That prior select subcommittee had been chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) who assured Loudermilk he would hand over “four terabytes of archived footage.” He got only two.

Apparently, a digital forensics team found that “117 files were both deleted and encrypted” on Jan. 1, 2023, immediately prior to new committee receiving the data it was promised. Apparently, the digital forensics team also recovered the 117 files. Loudermilk is now demanding answers—and passwords. Loudermilk further explained:

“One recovered file disclosed the identity of an individual whose testimony was not archived by the Select Committee,” Loudermilk wrote. “Further, we found that most of the recovered files are password-protected, preventing us from determining what they contain.”

This has become a bit of a pissing contest. Loudermilk had been accused by the original subcommittee of participating in the orchestration of events on Jan. 6, 2021 with a tour he gave the day before. Tours are routinely given by House members to constituents or other guests, though.  Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger doesn’t think Loudermilk was in any way involved.

Pissing contest aside, the crucial point is that it appears Thompson and others obstructed justice, and perhaps conspired to do so, in an attempt to hide evidence that may be exculpatory, not just to Loudermilk, but any of a number of others in the orbit of Jan. 6th. Thompson et al. may have also amplified inculpatory evidence against certain other partisans inappropriately. I guess we may find out—someday. 

Close, But No Crack Pipe

HUNTER BIDEN CAME CLOSE to being held in Contempt of Congress, but on Tuesday, he escaped that fate because he and his attorneys agreed to negotiate with House Republicans, according to an announcement by the House Rules Committee. The agreement was reached after an exchange of letters between the committees and lawyers.

Since last month, Hunter has been defying the G.O.P.’s subpoenas about his shady business dealings, believed to have enriched his father in a pay-for-play scheme. Over time, the Biden story has changed. At first, Joe Biden said he knew absolutely nothing about his son’s foreign business dealings. Then he knew just a little, Then some more. And so on.

Last Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee approved a resolution to hold Hunter in contempt. The first subpoena, he had just blew off, technically ‘appearing’ outside the Capitol, but where he delivered a public speech instead of sitting and answering questions privately. 

Last week, Hunter strolled into an Oversight Committee hearing that was debating whether to hold him in contempt, according to Rep. Marjorie TaylorGreene (R-Ga.). He mocked the committee in what the Gateway Pundit described as “a choreographed stunt reportedly filmed for an upcoming documentary.” Hunter wanted to grandstand, and actually got away with it. (Don’t even speculate what would happen if Trump did that—it’s too unthinkable.)

Hunter finally agreed to testify before Congress. On Sunday, the G.O.P. said it would issue a deposition subpoena to Hunter. It would be the second. Apparently, Hunter’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, found the earlier subpoena wanting, or deficient in some way. That could be true. After all, Congress only enacts laws, it doesn’t try cases, find facts, or argue law. Still, the support staffs should have this stuff down pat and Hunter, a grown man, should realize arrogance might not be the best approach here. 

Still, Hunter is a crack-addict, so sound judgment obviously isn’t his strength. He doesn’t need it, though, given the Big Guy’s position as a top oligarch in the U.S. kleptocracy. The Biden Justice Department would never prosecute any Congressional contempt referral of Hunter, and could simply pardon the younger Biden even if it did. It doesn’t matter that the same Justice Department prosecuted two former Trump advisors, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro for the same thing: they had refused to testify before the House Select Committee about Jan. 6, 2021. Nor does it matter that Trump’s adult children had to appear before Congress for various ‘investigations’ into and against the 45th president.

Nathan Wade Goes to Washington

ONE OF THE TRUMP CO-DEFENDANTS, Michael Roman, has accused Fulton County, GA District Attorney, Fani Willis, of having an improper romantic relationship with a special prosecutor she appointed, private attorney Nathan Wade, to work on her racketeering case against Donald Trump and 18 of his associates. Allegedly, the two have also improperly financially benefitted from their roles. Wade is currently obtaining a divorce from another woman. 

Roman, a special assistant and director of special projects and research for 45th President Donald Trump, including his Election Day operations, which involved assembling alternate electors. He was charged with seven counts: violation of the Georgia RICO Act, conspiracy o impersonate a public officer, conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree (two counts), conspiracy to commit false statements and writings (two counts), and conspiracy to commit filing false documents. Needless to say, he and his legal team are looking to defend him against the criminal persecution Willis promised her constituents when she ran for office.

Roman’s attorneys assert the relationship between Willis and Wade began before his appointment and that Willis approves Wade’s salary, which, by the way, is a jaw-dropping $650,000 since Nov. of 2021. The two have apparently travelled together extensively at taxpayer expense in that period, too, in violation of the state’s public money laws and their oaths of office. 

Among the travels are two 2022 meetings that allegedly occurred between Wade and White House employees. One, on 5/23/22 was called “travel to Athens: Conf[erence] with White House Counsel” that Wade billed $2,000 for the total of eight hours. The second was on 11/18/22 for “interview with DC/White House” where he billed $8,000 at $250 per hour. The bills can be viewed here. Why would Wade meet with White House counsel?  Guess…

Roman seeks to dismiss all charges based on the assertion Willis “never had the legal authority to appoint the special prosecutor” under the state and federal Constitutions. He wants Willis and Wade disqualified from prosecuting the case. The well-drafted Motion to Dismiss is here.

Trump noted on his Truth Social website that he thought his case should be dropped, too, and he receive monetary compensation and an apology. The whole imbroglio is a miscarriage of justice. Given the high degree of partisanship in the desire to quash Trump’s political future—not only by the biased mainstream media, but by the state and federal legal/judiciary communities—it would be optimistic to hope for more than a polite scolding and minor slap on the wrists from the bar association on these facts, but you can’t blame them from trying. Add to the equation that the Biden regime is protected by the Deep State, one can be certain no fault will be found at the White House, either.

The ‘2023 Festivus Report’ Cost Taxpayers’ Nearly $1 Trillion

EVERY YEAR for nearly a decade, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) issues his Festivus Report showing taxpayers where their money was squandered by oh-so-many self-serving, oh-so-few self-sacrificing lawmakers in the D.C. Swamp. This year’s grand total was $900,000,000,000, and Paul has the receipts. You can view them here in the report, since you and I paid nearly $1 trillion for it.

Breitbart chose to highlight expenditures of the National Institutes of Health using part of a $2.4 million grant to study Russian cats on treadmills, and Barbies being used to prove identity for Covid Paycheck Protection Program funds. Money was wasted by the Dept. of Defense to the tune of $169 million because they didn’t take care of the equipment they were entrusted with. The Small Business Administration generously provided much-needed funding of over $200 million to wealthy and successful music artists such as Post Malone, Chris Brown, and Lil Wayne. And tourism in Egypt received $6 million from something called the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

My own personal favorite, due to its unabashed blatant corruption, is the $400 million pot of gold at the end of the 1040 rainbow. It’s that box you check on a tax return designating $3 to go to presidential campaigns, but which never does because no candidate of any significance has accepted the funds since 2008. (The $400.6 million remaining in the fund must have John Anthony Castro’s name and account number on it!) Another good one is the $3.8 million used by National Institutes of Health for ‘studying’ Covid-19 ‘misinformation’ on social media, which really sounds like a front for taxpayer-funded government propaganda.

Last year’s Festivus Report revealed $482,276,543,907 in government waste, fraud, or abuse. Paul noted the national debt last year was $30 trillion, but is nearing $34 trillion this year. Paul singled out Dr. Anthony Fauci for dishonorable mention. (Did you notice the good doc’s work on ‘transgender’ monkeys and other cruelties?)  It is certainly possible some incidental value to the field of medicine can be mustered from this expensive science, but to quote the White House occupant: “C’mon, man!” Just in case you were thinking things might get better soon, let me dissuade you of that notion. The U.S. House left for Christmas break with a nearly $1 trillion military spending bill, the NDAA. Not only does it reward neocons with big bucks for pet projects, it extends §702 of FISA for yet another four months—long enough to surveil you, me, and Trump through the primaries!

Trippin’ in the Mile-High City

FOUR ‘MILE-HIGH CITY’ JURISTS made complete asses of themselves on Tuesday when the state Supreme Court ruled that 45th President Donald Trump was ineligible to be on the 2024 Colorado ballot because in some sort of bad acid trip they apparently had, Trump had committed “insurrection.” In their judgment, §3 of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution therefore barred him from not only taking the office if elected, but prevented him from even being on the ballot in the first instance. Yes, four of the seven Dem jurists were that high. 

The decision wasn’t a surprise, however. By whatever means necessary (à la Malcom X), Trump cannot ever set foot in the Oval Office ever again according to this ilk, and it is just the latest gambit before the unthinkable happens, if necessary.

The absurdity of it all is beyond embarrassing. The court held Trump not only had incited, but led an “insurrection” on Jan. 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol. He did nothing of the sort, and no one in their right mind has ever even bothered to charge Trump with “insurrection,” meaning further that no jury has ever even considered convicting him of such. 

And it’s not as if there has been any dearth of prosecutors asses champing at their bits to attempt it, not even hostile and determined bulldog bullshitter Special Counsel Jack Smith. Nor could the Senate in their second impeachment hoax of President Trump because, it turned out, they just couldn’t prove the claim. 

The 14th Amendment’s §3 was drafted post-Civil War to prohibit the Confederacy from causing further mischief and mayhem. It was never contemplated to be resurrected for denying a technically qualified and largely beloved man from holding office because bureaucrats, administrators, and possibly compromised politicians fear that man would rain on their patriotically deficient parade. 

Even if §3 of the 14th was relevant today, it wouldn’t be applicable to Trump as a president because presidents aren’t even mentioned in it and they take a distinct pledge from the elected officials who are named. It seems like a highly unlikely oversight or omission by the drafters. Indeed, it seems like a specific act of admission that §3 does not apply to presidents.

Don’t even mention the First Amendment. It’s just put first so you can skip over it more easily. And I’m not sure what to make over a state court ruling on this specific issue, anyway. 

But even before reaching these arcane questions of law, how on Coloradan earth did the lower state court get to be the fact-finder in a case or controversy where there was so much at stake for a party never tried? (Final Order here.) How does the state’s highest court uphold this egregious error? 

For this embarrassment of a court, the ‘facts’ it found were merely pronouncements by activists and partisans in the press—what some might generously call ‘lay opinions.’ Or they were Democrat propaganda and ‘talking points,’ which are not admissible in any properly held trial. 

Or they were the product of the equally inane Jan. 6th Committee formed by then-Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and her appointed hacks, who held so-called hearings on the matter and then apparently destroyed the evidence. (The state Supreme Court ridiculously claimed the Committee couldn’t have erred because there were two nominal Republicans on it, hand-picked by Pelosi for their anti-Trump biases.) 

All this means is that, once again, Trump has been denied due process by a party that once considered itself a proponent of, and accused the G.O.P. of being opponents of it. Once he was denied due process, he was subjected to archaic and inapplicable law. 

The decision can be read here. It’s off to the U.S. Supreme Court where there may be some adults left in that courtroom. Meanwhile, a stay is in effect until SCOTUS rules, or the deadline for when ballots must be printed, whichever occurs first.  

Harvard constitutional law professor emeritus (and Democrat) Alan Dershowitz called the Colorado decision “so anti-democratic and so unconstitutional, it is absurd,” adding, “The idea that the 14th Amendment was supposed to substitute for the impeachment provision, carefully drafted by the framers, is wrong.” Jonathan Turley concluded the 14th Amendment simply didn’t apply because there was no insurrection. They are both adamant the SCOTUS will overrule this ruling.

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton called it “incoherent,” which may be generous. Newsmax conservative reporter, Grant Stinchfield, urged President Trump to rally ASAP in the Centennial State to signal he will not be deterred (and to troll his opponents there).