Over a dozen more states look to ban Trump from 2024 ballot
WE APPRECIATE IT. “FOX & FRIENDS” RIGHT NOW DONALD TRUMP BOWING TO FIGHT BACK AFTER ON THE BALLOT IN COLORADO. STATE SUPREME COURT RULING THAT TRUMP VIOLATED THE 14TH AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE OF JANUARY 6TH. >> THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT CONFIRMED THAT THE DISTRICT COURT GOT IT RIGHT, THAT HE DID ENGAGE IN INSURRECTION. SECTION 3 OF THE 1ST AMENDMENT HAS TO APPLY TO THE PRESIDENCY BECAUSE, IF NOT IT’S A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD. >> LITERALLY, JACK SMITH, WHO WOULD CHARGE DONALD TRUMP ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING, INCLUDING JAY WALKING IF HE COULD GET AWAY WITH IT,
DIDN’T EVEN CHARGE DONALD TRUMP OR MOST OF THE RIOTERS ON JANUARY 6TH WITH INSURRECTION. >> PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND FORMER GOVERNOR — CURRENT FLORIDA GOVERNOR RON DESANTIS CALLING IT AN ABUSE OF POWER AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SHOULD REVERSE THE DECISION. >> Katie: THE WHITE HOUSE HOPEFUL VIVEK RAMASWAMY TAKING THINGS A STEP FURTHER. LISTEN TO THIS. SAYING I PLEDGE TO WITHDRAW FROM THE COLORADO G.O.P. PRIMARY BALLOT UNTIL TRUMP IS ALSO ALLOWED TO BE ON THE BALLOT. THE FORMER PRESIDENT SPOKE YESTERDAY IN IOWA. THEY WANT TO SILENCE ME BECAUSE I WILL NEVER EVER LET THEM SILENCE YOU.
IN THE END THEY ARE ARE NOT AFTER ME. THEY ARE AFTER YOU. I JUST STAND IN THE WAY. STEVE TRUMP TEAM WANTS THE MATTER SETTLEZZED BEFORE
OTHER STATES THAT ARE EVALUATING THIS SAME ISSUE. SO I THINK THAT THE DECISION IN THE STATE OF COLORADO IS SOMETHING THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS TO WEIGH IN ON BECAUSE DEFEND THIS IS SOMETHING OF A POLITICAL NATURE. WHO GOING TO BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? IS THAT A QUESTION OF THE PEOPLE OF THIS GREAT COUNTRY OR QUESTION FOR STATE COURTS THAT HAS YET TO BE DONE EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY? >> Lawrence: ANDREW, IN THE OPINION, IF YOU READ IT. THEY USE PHRASES AND THEY USE JANUARY 6TH, THE REPORT AS
A BASIS FOR THIS AS WELL. THEY CITE THINGS LIKE FIGHT LIKE HELL. GO TO THE CAPITOL. GO BY DIFFERENT RULES AND THAT TRUMP SUPPORTERS AND THIS IS THEIR QUOTE THE PRESIDENT SAYS THEY LISTEN TO HIM LIKE NO ONE ELSE. SO THE PRESIDENT’S LEGAL TEAM FOUGHT AGAINST THAT AS A PRETEXT. THE COURT SAID THAT THEY DISAGREE. BUT THEN YOU GO TO THE DISSENT. AND I THINK THIS IS THE BIG QUESTION HERE. THE DISSENT SAID. THIS. HOW IS THE RESULTS OF THIS FAIR? HOW CAN WE EXPECT COLORADOENS TO EMBRACE THIS OUTCOME AS FAIR? BELOW, PROTECT — HOW
DOES THIS PROTECT THE INTEREST OF COLORADOENS IN VOTING FOR THE CANDIDATE OF THEIR CHOOSING? SO, HOW DO YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION? HOW IS THIS FAIR TO THE PEOPLE OF COLORADO? AND IS THIS REALLY DUE PROCESS? >> WELL, IT’S NOT FAIR. AND THERE’S ABOUT HALF A DOZEN REASONS WHY. THE OPINION FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO WAS OVER 200 PAGES LONG. IT’S EASY TO GRAB A HEADLINE FROM THAT BUT, AS WE GET DEEP INTO THE LEGAL ISSUES. ONE OF THE LEGAL ISSUES IS THAT THEY — THE STATE COURT THAT ACTUALLY REACHED THE RULING THAT AN INSURRECTION OCCURRED
USED JANUARY 6TH CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS. THAT’S SOMETHING THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE CONSIDERED HEARSAY IN A COURT OF LAW. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS A STATE COURT JUDGE MAKING A DETERMINATION THAT THERE WAS AN ACTIVE INSURRECTION RELYING UPON THE HIGHLY PARTISAN JANUARY 6TH COMMISSION TO MAKE THAT FINDING IN A FIVE-DAY TRIAL THAT EFFECTIVELY WILL CHANGE THE 145EU7 OF THE ENTIRE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY. THIS CASE IS BASED ON TWO QUESTIONS AND ONE IS DID TRUMP COMMIT THIS INSURRECTION AND THE OTHER IS DOES SECTION 3 OF ARTICLE — OR THE 14TH AMENDMENT CAN
THAT BE APPLIED TO THE PRESIDENCY. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT SECTION 3 OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT IS. THAT’S GOING TO COME UP A LOT I’M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THAT. DO YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT INCITED AN INSURRECTION. >> THE IDEA OF SECTION 3 OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT WAS A CLAUSE THAT WAS PUT IN AFTER THE CIVIL WAR. AND WE HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT THAT MEANS. THE CIVIL WAR WHERE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS TOOK UP ARMS AGAINST EACH OTHER, TRYING TO CREATE TWO SEPARATE NATIONS HERE. THAT’S THE NOTION OF
INSURRECTION AT THE TIME THAT THAT CLAUSE WAS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION. AND THEN TO ASK THE QUESTION OF WHETHER AN INSURRECTION TOOK PLACE HERE. WELL, IN A NIGHTMARE SCENARIO WHERE A PRESIDENT WHO IS LEAVING OFFICE ATTEMPTED TO CREATE AN INSURRECTION, THAT’S THE IDEA OF RAISING ARMY. THAT’S THE IDEA OF BLOOD IN THE STREETS WHERE THERE IS A REAL CIVIL WAR TYPE EVENT THAT TAKES PLACE. THE IDEA OF JANUARY 6TH WHERE THERE WAS AN ANGRY MOB OF FOLKS WHO HAD A MOMENT OF SPEECH WHERE THEY STARTED TO SCREAM AND YELL AT POLITICIANS AT THE STATE —
OR NATIONAL CAPITOL, WHILE THAT IS SOMETHING A TERRIBLE EVENT TO HAVE TAKEN PLACE, WHO CALL THAT AN INSURRECTION MISS RAT WITH WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE CIVIL WAR, IS SOMETHING THAT I SIMPLY DO NOT SEE. AND I DON’T SEE THERE HAVING BEEN A DUE PROCESS TYPE SYSTEM TAKING PLACE TO GIVE DONALD TRUMP THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO FIGHT THAT ALLEGATION. >> Brian: COULD YOU TELL ME HOW THIS LOOKS? YOU HAVE 13 SEPARATE STATES. THEY HAD NINE — GOT NINE OF THESE STATES GOT THEIR COURT CASE DISMISSED. NOT VALID. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE
ON. THERE IS 13 OTHER STATES THAT ARE LOOKING TO DO THE SAME THING AS COLORADO. THEY ARE LOOKING TO HAVE THEIR CASE HEARD AND SEE WHAT THE STATE COURT SAYS. SO, IS THERE A SCENARIO WHERE TRUMP JUST WON’T BE ON CERTAIN BALLOTS? AND WOULD BE ON OTHER BALLOTS? OR IS THE SUPREME COURT GOING TO RULE ONE TIME ON COLORADO AND IS THAT GOING TO RIPPLE DOWN TO ALL THESE OTHERS? >> THERE ARE AWFULLY SMART FOLKS ON THE SUPREME COURT. I THINK THEY ARE VERY WELL AWARE OF THE MESS THAT HAS BEEN CREATED HERE. I THINK
THEY ARE GOING TO BE VERY QUICK TO ANSWER THE MAIL ON HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS. THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE SUPREME COURT COULD ISSUE A RULING IN ALMOST A SUMMARY FASHION. BECAUSE THE SUPREME COURT HAS A WHOLE HOST OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT THEY HAVE TO ADDRESS WITH DONALD TRUMP BEFORE THE UPCOMING ELECTION. THIS BEING ONE OF THEM. RECENT CASE ABOUT THE INTERFERENCE WITH GOVERNMENT ACTIONS GOING ON NOW. THAT’S NOT DIRECTLY DEALING WITH DONALD TRUMP BUT IT HAS AN EFFECT ON THE. >> Janice: 6TH CASE. DONALD TRUMP’S IMMUNITY CLAIMS THAT JACK SMITH WANTS THE
SUPREME COURT TO HEAR IN SHORT ORDER. AND THERE IS ALSO OTHER ISSUES THAT LIKELY WILL BE HEARD BY THE SUPREME COURT. SO, HOW THEY SLICE AND DICE THIS IS YET TO BE SEEN. THEY WILL LIKELY SPEAK LOUDLY. >> Brian: CLARIFICATION ON THAT. IF THEY RULE COLORADO WAS WRONG, IS THERE A REASON FOR THE OTHER CASES TO GO FORWARD? BECAUSE IT’S THE SAME CASE. >> WELL, THAT’S AN INTERESTING QUESTION. BECAUSE HOW THE SUPREME COURT ADDRESSES THIS AND YOU A WHO THEY APPROACH IT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON ALL OF THESE CASES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE QUESTION OF
IMHUMANITY IS PRESIDENT TRUMP IMMUNE FROM ALLEGATIONS OF INSURRECTION BECAUSE IT’S CONNECTED TO HIS TIME IN OFFICE? OR ARE THEY SIMPLY GOING TO MAKE A DECISION THAT THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT DIDN’T APPROACH THIS APPROPRIATELY? THAT THE FINDING OF INSURRECTION WASN’T DONE USING APPROPRIATE DUE PROCESS MECHANISMS? MANY DIFFERENT WAYS FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO APPROACH. THIS SOME OF THEM SIMPLY COULD QUASH PROSECUTIONS GOING ON. >> Lawrence: JUSTICE ENDS IT WITH HIS DISSENT. EVEN IF WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE CANDIDATE COMMITTED DARYL ACTS IN THE PAST, DARE I SAY INSURRECTION. THERE MUST BE PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS BEFORE WE
CAN DECLARE AN INDIVIDUAL IS DISQUALIFIED FROM HOLDING PUBLIC OFFICE. PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS ONE OF THE ASPECTS OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY THAT SETS THIS COUNTRY APART. DEMOCRATS HAVE ONE ON DEMOCRACY FOR ABOUT TWO YEARS NOW. HOW CAN THEY SAY THEY ARE FOR DEMOCRACY AND NOT GIVE A CANDIDATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE HIS CASE IN COURT BEFORE THEY TAKE HIM OFF THE BALLOT? >> WELL, IT SEEMS LIKE THEIR COMPLAINT ABOUT JANUARY 6TH WAS THAT THERE WAS INTERFERENCE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. BUT, YET, HERE WE ARE, INTERFERING WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. THE PEOPLE OF THIS GREAT COUNTRY ARE ABLE
TO SPEAK THROUGH THEIR VOTES. THEY ARE ABLE TO MAKE THEIR DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED ON JANUARY 6TH AS WELL AS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S PRIOR PRESIDENCY AND HIS PRIOR ACTIONS. LET DEMOCRACY WORK. NOT THE COURTS DETERMINE WHO IS GOING TO BE ON BALLOTS AND WHO IS NOT. I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE WELL-EDUCATED TO MAKE THAT DECISION. >> Carley: REALLY QUICKLY BEFORE WE LET YOU GO. IT LOOKS LIKE COLORADO GAVE THE SUPREME COURT UNTIL JANUARY 5TH TO RULE ON THIS CASE. IS THAT ENOUGH TIME AND WHAT HAPPENS IF A RULING DOESN’T COME DOWN
UNTIL AFTER JANUARY 5TH? WHAT HAPPENS THEN? >> WELL, THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT GAVE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT UNTIL JANUARY 5TH TO EFFECTIVELY TAKE ACTION ON THIS. AND SO I EXPECT THE SUPREME COURT WILL ACCEPT THE CASE BY THEN AND ISSUE A STAY BY THEN. AND THAT WILL EFFECTIVELY KEEP THIS ON HOLD UNTIL THE SUPREME COURT SPEA
