MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > Trump Disqualified From Illinois Ballot

Trump Disqualified From Illinois Ballot


Trump is disqualified from Illinois ballot, judge rules
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-is-disqualified-illinois-ballot-judge-rules-2024-02-29/

An Illinois state judge on Wednesday barred Donald Trump from appearing on the Illinois' Republican presidential primary ballot because of his role in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but she delayed her ruling from taking effect in light of an expected appeal by the former U.S. president.
Cook County Circuit Judge Tracie Porter sided with Illinois voters who argued that the former president should be disqualified from the state's March 19 primary ballot and its Nov. 5 general election ballot for violating the anti-insurrection clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.

The final outcome of the Illinois case and similar challenges will likely be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments related to Trump's ballot eligibility on Feb. 8.
Porter said she was staying her decision because she expected his appeal to Illinois' appellate courts, and a potential ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The advocacy group Free Speech For People, which spearheaded the Illinois disqualification effort, praised the ruling as a "historic victory" in a statement.


STATES RIGHTS!!!!! Or not?

reply

Good! Let them keep stacking up! What other states do you think might also do this? I am thinking that Oregon and Washington might disqualify him. New Hampshire and Vermont maybe.

reply

The GOP needs to nominate someone with a better chance of winning in November.

reply

Well THAT'S not gonna happen.

reply

Yeah, they're stuck with Trump and it's their own fault.

reply

So do the Dummycraps.

It really is a reflection of how bad Biden is seeing how he has a chance to lose to Trump and pathetic when all he has is, "Hey, at least I am not the Orange Guy," and weaponizing his DOJ to go after him and these ballot removal tactics.

reply

No kidding. A choice of which fossil to choose, is a poor choice indeed.

Why is law enforcement enforcing the law something you are opposed to? Trump claims he is entitled to violate the law, surely you don't agree with him?

reply

I don't agree that Trump violated all the laws or charges they are bringing against him.

reply

I think you're being evasive. Why is law enforcement enforcing the law something you are opposed to?

Which of the indictments are unjust? Which laws has Trump been accused of violating in those indictments, do you think he did not do? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictments_against_Donald_Trump

reply

If biden wins, and his margin of victory is becasue he was stopped from being on the ballot in a state or two,

a. would you support that?

b. do you expect Trump and Trump supporters to accept that?

reply

Trump is not on the Primary Ballot in three states.

This is not related to Biden. The ballot for the General Election is a different conversation.

reply

And they don't have the right to keep him off the ballot in a National Election so even without those states he will still get the nomination and then be on the ballot in all states in November.

All this is doing is getting more people behind him because of the ploy by the left to try and skew the election in their favor.

reply

It really does show the dems in a bad light. The willingness to corrupt and abuse any and every office they have contol of...

reply

Tell us that you don't understand this controversy without telling us you don't understand this controversy!



Also, if Biden wins I wouldn't expect Trump and Trump supporters to accept that anyway...

reply

You up for going back to the voting rules of the 1990s?

reply

I can't answer that question unless you tell me exactly which "voting rules of the 1990s" you are speaking of...


reply

YOu know, limited mail voting, one day of voting, paper ballots, ect.

I mean, if you are concerned about elections being accepted, I would think that would be... something you would support.

reply

I live in rural Vermont, so we actually still do the paper ballot thing here in my town! Also, absentee ballots have always been a thing, are you saying you would support disenfranchising our troops overseas? Because that's not very patriotic...

reply

Do you really believe that that is what I meant?

reply

I wouldn't presume to understand the thoughts that course through the confused minds of you delusional Trumptwats!

reply

Nope. you don't. That was just some shit talk.

You pretend to care about elections, but when asked a serious question, you spout shit.

reply

There are rules for who is allowed to be on the ballot. If you want to be on the ballot, comply with the rules. It really is that easy. Trump is trying to make it hard. The rulers apply to everyone, sucks for Trump is he does not want to play by the rules.

I expect Trump supporters to want whatever Trump wants. Some Trump supporters will claim that Trump won in 2024 even if he dies prior to the election.

reply



If the dem strategy to win the election is to use the courts to stop their opponent from running, that is not democracy.

reply

Decades ago there were far more onerous methods of keeping the "wrong people" off of the ballot. About the only people who did not have to worry about that were the white guys with money, everyone else was a threat to democracy.

If the GOP strategy to win the election is to use fake electors, that is not democracy.
If the GOP strategy to win the election is to interfere with the electoral vote count, that is not democracy.
If the GOP strategy to win the election is to place ineligible candidates on the ballot, that is not democracy.

Why is it your opinion that only GOP methods are democratic?

reply

Your race card play is noted and dismissed.

"Fake electors" does seem to have been part of the system. If not, then why did they change the rules to not allow it?

reply

Of course you dismiss racism when it was present. That is why it is allowed to continue in other forms.

Can you link to and explain the laws that allowed fake electors?

reply

They are not fake electors; you are regurgitating MSM and propaganda talking points.

They are called alternate or competing slates of electors.
They are not new nor nefarious nor fake. (3 U.S. Code § 15).

They have used alternate electors in the past.

Btw, John Podesta role played Joe Biden in Transition Integrity Project's summer 2020 simulation to ensure a Biden presidency even if Trump won the election, openly plotted sending a separate elector slate.

You should be able to find it on X with highlights and includes an external link to the 22-page document outlining the Democrat’s plan using the third scenario to clear a Trump win on page-17 bullet points three and four.

9. NTFEC was a sort of 'sister organization' to a notoriously shady outfit also created at the same time called the Transition Integrity Project (TIP). TIP spent summer 2020 wargaming how to overturn election results if candidate Trump won the election:

reply

Then perhaps you can explain why the electors selected last year were not accepted like you claim they were in the past. Why is least one of them pleading guilty to a crime?

If you're going to claim a document exists, then post a link here like most of the adults do. You should not act like a child all of the time. Time of the time is okay though.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/22/trump-fake-elector-scheme-case-tracker

reply

"Then perhaps you can explain why the electors selected last year were not accepted like you claim they were in the past."

They were not accepted because Trump is not a member of the DS like the Bushes, Clinton's, Biden, Obama, etc.

"Why is least one of them pleading guilty to a crime?"

He was coerced to turn against Trump.

The blockquote I provided is enough for you and the lurkers to research and verify the info.

reply

Is it really a requirement these days, to have the ability to fold like a lawn chair at the drop of a hat in order to prove that you're really a MAGA? Are the MAGA required to have their spines removed in order to prove their loyalty to Trump?

Your blockquote is crap. Come up with a link; be like a person who is not afraid of their own reflection.

reply

No, but it is an effective method of exposing the traitors.

reply

It is optional, but they're doing it anyway? Why do the MAGA have so little respect for themselves?

reply

I am not impressed nor do I care about your race baiting.

reply

I'm not impressed by your fake concern over any alleged racial issue.

reply

What are you talking about? What racial issue?

reply

You bitch about a race card, and then claim ignorance? Is this the best you can do?

reply

Your race card play was my complaint. There was not an actual racial issue, that I was concerned about.

YOur attempt to confuses the issue, was just dumb.

reply

So you're claiming to be completely ignorant of history then?

reply

How is it "playing the race card" to acknowledge that white supremacy is part of this nation's history?

How is it "playing the race card" to state that until 1870, only white men had the right to vote?

How is it "playing the race card" to state that for almost 100 years, some white men did everything they could to prevent anyone except white men from voting?

reply



It is the weaponiziation of an irreelvant and at least partiallly false accusation of racism, ie a race card play.

Something only a bad person does.

reply

Please explain how any of the three examples I gave include “irrelevant” or ”partially false” information.

reply

WHining about past presidential elections and saying "white males", is irrelevant becasue the current situation is a recent development that has nothing to do with them.

Claiming that only white males were allowed to run was false for many of hte decades mentioned. Hell, Obama was elected, and this country was ready for that long before he came along. He was no "jackie robinson" model who smashed barriers. Thee barriers was long gone before he cake walked into the room.

reply

That was a very intelligent well thought out argument. I'm impressed. It was refreshing to read an honest answer that did not include petty insults.

WHining about past presidential elections and saying "white males", is irrelevant becasue the current situation is a recent development that has nothing to do with them.

Claiming that only white males were allowed to run was false for many of hte decades mentioned.


True, but if you read what my post again, you'll see that I said "until 1870, only white men had the right to vote." That's not the same thing as what you said.

Would you mind reading my post again and responding to that? Here it is below, just to save you some time:

How is it "playing the race card" to acknowledge that white supremacy is part of this nation's history?

How is it "playing the race card" to state that until 1870, only white men had the right to vote?

How is it "playing the race card" to state that for almost 100 years, some white men did everything they could to prevent anyone except white men from voting?

reply

My initial post was to another poster's post, fyi, but moving on.

1 Because the supposed w.s. has no relevance to the current issue.

2 See above.

3. Because those white men are long dead and irrelevant to the topic.

reply

supposed w.s.


That's very concerning that you would say
supposed w.s.
Are you saying you don't believe white supremecy is a part of this nation's history? Whether you think it's relevant to this conversation or not, surely you're not trying to claim it didn't exist???

Because those white men are long dead and irrelevant to the topic.


Well ... not really ...

You might not believe any of Trump's actions are racially motivated, but that was not the point of the comment you responded to. The point of the comment was that there are plenty of examples in history of the GOP trying to control which US Citizens are permitted to vote and which one were prevented from voting.

For the record, I don't know that Trump is racists or sexist or really falls into any of those categories. At least not in the traditional sense. It's much more accurate to say he's narcissistic and only interested in himself. He really has no loyalties. He'll turn on anyone who doesn't kiss his butt and do whatever is in his best interest. If he's done anything to help anyone, it's only because he determined that helping someone would be better for him than not helping them.

I don't think the man has one altruistic bone in his entire body.

reply

I think "w.s" as currently defined and used by modern liberals, is... such a buzzword that it can mean anything, thus actually means nothing.

This nation, when itt was founded was a beacon of freedom in a world of empires and kings. People flocked here, for a REASON.

reply

I think "w.s" as currently defined and used by modern liberals, is... such a buzzword that it can mean anything, thus actually means nothing.


No, White Supremacy is not a "buzzword." There's no need for that. White Supremacy is the belief that Caucasians are superior to other races. That belief exists today. There actually are people who believe that. There's no need to pretend that it exists when the belief is far to prominent in our society today (never mind how prominent it has been in history).

This nation, when itt was founded was a beacon of freedom in a world of empires and kings. People flocked here, for a REASON


Absolutely! And it still is. People come here in search of a better life for themselves and their family.

I'm missing your point. What does that have to do with White Supremacy?

reply

This nation has had a bi-partisan concensus on racial equality since the mid 60s. This has been expressed in national policy, and culture and education and everything, for generations.

To claim that w.s. is "prominent" in our society today, is insane.

AND, btw, insanely disrepectful of everyone who worked for civil rights, ever in this country. After all you just shit all over everything they ever did.

reply

Doesn't mean white supremacy doesn't exist today.

reply

it does mean that it is not "prominent", which is hte claim being made.


You know that, which is why you tried to move the goal posts.

reply

It's more prominent than you are claiming. I can pull up many current killers with that ideology.

reply

The context was presidential elections.

The last time an actual w.s. ran for the presidency, he got .04% of the national vote.

That is the reality of w.s. that lefties want to hide. It undermines their panic mongering.


reply

In that case I can accept. But in society it's more prominent than conservatives want to admit.

reply

The primary function of w.s. is a foil to justify lefty panic mongering.

They are an irrelevant fringe.

reply

To claim that w.s. is "prominent" in our society today, is insane.


No one here claimed that. A few of us have made mention of white supremacy throughout history and that fact that it still exists today. But no one claimed it was prominent. Huge difference!

There are laws and regulations regarding racial equality. That doesn't mean everyone follows them, and that certainly doesn't mean there don't exist those who still try to impose rules to ensure minorities will "stay in their place."

I'm sorry you think that pointing out the truth is "disrepectful of everyone who worked for civil rights," but it isn't their fault that no everyone chooses to follow the law or chooses to do the right thing. In fact, I think most of the people who fought for civil rights in this country are just as frustrated, if not more so, about the racial inequality that currently exists.

reply

Tread carefully corbell is an ignorant lad.

reply

And an angry one, too!

reply

NOt angry today. Heavily caffinated, but not angry.

I get angry sometimes when people are rude to me...

Is that odd to you?

reply

I've been very civil to you.

reply

It's not a state decision, its a Congressional decision. It also does not include the office of the President. If you believe original intent, the 14th was intended for Confederates, and shortly after the Civil War almost all Confederates were given amnesty.

The 14th Amendment is being used by Democrats as an excuse to block their political opponents. That cannot be allowed to stand. The idea that Jan 6 was an "insurrection" is ludicrous and pathetic, plus Trump has not been charged with insurrection much less convicted. It's just political lawfare..

reply

The starts decide how to run their elections for the most part. Who are you to decide otherwise?

The 14th Amendment says "No person". It is stupid to think that it only applies to Confederates. If a state does not want someone on their ballot because they think they are an insurrectionist, then fine. Is there some law that says a conviction is required?

It is not only Democrats that are using the 14th to deny Trump a place on the ballot. GOP are doing it too. Can you allow that to stand? Who are you to allow anything or not?

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/judge-orders-trump-off-illinois-republican-primary-ballot-but-puts-ruling-on-hold-to-allow-for-appeal
https://www.newsweek.com/we-sued-knock-trump-off-ballot-heres-why-well-win-opinion-1826729

Your post is the height of stupidity here. How is it that you are completely clueless as to who is trying to keep Trump off of the ballots in various states?

reply

If you want to give January 6th a different name other than "insurrection," ok, but those who entered the Capitol Building did so in an effort to stop the certification. That's hardly "ludicrous and pathetic." It actually goes against the very core of Democracy.

While the officical charges against Trump may not include the word "insurrection," but he has been charged with:

one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States applies to Trump's repeated and widespread efforts to spread false claims about the November 2020 election while knowing they were not true and for allegedly attempting to illegally discount legitimate votes all with the goal of overturning the 2020 election, prosecutors claim in the indictment.

one count of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding was brought due to the alleged organized planning by Trump and his allies to disrupt the electoral vote's certification in January 2021.

one count of obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding is tied to Trump and his co-conspirators' alleged efforts after the November 2020 election until Jan. 7, 2021, to block the official certification proceeding in Congress.

one count of conspiracy against rights refers to Trump and his co-conspirators alleged attempts to "oppress, threaten and intimidate"

https://www.npr.org/2023/08/01/1191493880/trump-january-6-charges-indictment-counts

reply

You and Ranb citing fake news and propaganda as usual.

Which one of the four indictments are accusing or charging Trump of insurrection?

Was he found guilty of insurrection at the senate hearing for the second impeachment? Yes or No?

reply

NPR is fake news? Really? Do you know what NPR is?

reply

Yes, propaganda. Don't deflect with semantics.

And you didn't answer my questions.

reply

Oh that is just so sad. You need to educate yourself. NPR is about as unbiased as they get. The link is not about opinion. This isn't about whether Trump has been convicted of anything or whether he actually commuted a crime. The article simply lists the indictments.

reply

NPR unbiased? LMAO

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/npr-media-bias

All bogus indictments.

reply

Your “proof” comes from a website using terms like “media bias” and “fake news,” and uneducated people (such as yourself) are gullible enough to trust them. Remember, Trump only “loves the poorly educated” because it is so easy for him to manipulate them.

Whether you agree with the charges or not, they still exist.

reply

That's an independent source, but nice try at deflecting...again.

reply

Any source that uses that terminology is neither independent nor unbiased. If you can’t make your point without attacking and insulting, then you have a very weak point.

Also, you originally responded to me because I said that Trump is facing charges related to January 6. Rather than dispute the facts, you attracted one of the most reputable, unbiased sources this country has.

I’m just saying, you chose to start an argument you can’t win because it’s not based on opinion. I stated a fact. Those charges have, in fact, been filed.

reply

NPR is so left-biased they are useless as a news source. They are nothing more than an instrument of the woke element of the Democrat party.

reply

Please explain how “woke” is a bad thing.

reply

Please explain how “woke” is a bad thing.

reply

NPR is one of the most leftist-biased news outlet in existence. You need to educate yourself. Unfortunately, you allow NPR to educate you, so you are informed with lies.

reply

If by leftest you mean educated so they understand the issues and are capable of more than regurgitating bullet points, then well, can’t argue with that.

It’s important to remember that ignorance is not something to be proud of.

reply

^^^This

reply

It’s so sad that you remain ignorant and refuse to learn when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

NPR interviews people who are highly regarded experts in their field. They show multiple sides of every issue, not just Democrat or Republican.

Anyone who claims NPR is progressive or left leaning is simply afraid of the facts. It’s easier to claim “fake news” and “woke” and “media bias” than it is to learn about the issues and admit you may have been wrong.

reply

I guess they figure this is the way to stop Trump thinking his voters are too dumb to spell his name to write him in.

reply

A write-in does not guarantee that the vote will count.

reply

I think they may toss out write in votes for Trump if his name is not on the ballot.

Heck, they might even toss those out anyway seeing at how the DNC is doing all they can to steal the election from him even before the voting booths open.

reply

These disqualifications is confirmation that they were desperate enough to rig the 2020 election.

The Dems spent four years screaming and whining about how voting machines can be hacked because Trump won in 2016, and then after the '20 election, they censored and suppress election deniers, and now they are trying to kick him off the ballots. Election interference.

reply

In some cases they figure correctly, I think.

reply

Good. Hope he will end up in prison where he belongs.

reply

I would like someone to give me a good, sensible reason as to why Donald Trump should be the President of the United States. Why would anyone want this man in?

And to be clear, I'm not a fan of his, but by the same token, I'm not really a fan of Biden either. I don't care about politics and I never have - I believe in self reliance and making your own way. My life is going to continue to go on wherever my own will takes it - regardless of who is President. I have nothing personal against Donald Trump.

OK, having said that - here is the problem with TRump - look at ALL the baggage this guy has. He has multiple dilemmas. He's a walking briefcase full of messes. Problem after problem after problem. He's got enough to deal with on his own plate - let alone be the President of the United States. I don't know how anyone could deal with everything Donald Trump has to deal with - and govern the United States of America at the same time.

This is what bothers me, having someone whose entire life is one big mess being the most powerful man in the world. This guy apparently can't govern himself. I feel it's a big mistake to put him back in the Oval Office.

This how I feel. But, it doesn't mean I'm right. As I said at the beginning of this post - if someone can provide a good reason why Donald Trump should be back in the Oval office in 2024 - I'm all ears....

reply

The people who hate the same people that Trump hates, want Trump to be president. The people that Trump doesn't like include, military, women, immigrants (like his wife and her parents), people who depend upon others for medical expenses (like his own family), rape victims, people with military family members (like Nikki Haley). That is a long ass list.

The only people finding common ground are the gun grabbers. Most Democrats approve of Trump's gun grab and some even don't mind that he was pushing for gun confiscation without due process. Why do the MAGA side with the democrats on this? The MAGA's who acknowledge that the gun grab happened use typical Democrat anti-gun talking points to support the notion that "no one should own those kinds of guns". The other MAGA's simply deny the gun grab happened even though they can watch video of Trump on Fox News bragging about it and read the amendment to the CFR in which he ordered it.

Trump belongs in prison more than he belongs in the White House.

reply

Yeah I don't disagree with the prison part.

Somehow, someway he keeps skating on all of his bad behavior.

He's got more than enough on his own plate to deal with. Speaking for myself - it bothers me if I have one single, solitary problem. The problem will stay on my mind until I solve it. Can you imagine having the multitude of problems Trump has? And how mentally consuming it would be? We don't need a person like this in The White House.

reply

Those mentally consuming problems are just one of a long list of reasons why I don't want Trump in the White House.

reply

I'll give you my two reasons why I prefer Trump over Biden at this point.

1) I judge presidents on their war records.
Trump did not get us involved in any new wars when he was Pres.
Biden has gotten us involved in at least two which have both been big mistakes.
The bigger one is the Ukraine/Russia conflict where he rejected working out peace deals and it has brought us closer to WW3.
I still have a hard time believing that it is a Dem and not a Repub. who has done this but there it is.

2) Age.
Biden is just too old.
Yeah, so is Trump but Biden shows more and more how he is unfit and very well may have early stages of dementia with blunder after blunder of so many senior moments.
(A caller said to him, "Let's go Brandon," and he agreed!)
Trump has his share of blunders and gaffes but he just seems more fit and stable.

There should be mandatory retirement ages for politicians.
Esp. for the one that has the top job of the country.

reply

Thanks for the reply. I don't disagree with what you said - but I still think Biden is a better option.

Trump has way too much baggage. Look at it this way - I'm assuming you are male as am I.

You meet a girl. You find out she has problem after problem after problem. You know if you get involved, her problems are going to become your problems. So what do you do? Well I know what I would do...

"It's been a pleasure meeting you. Best of luck".

And so would end that. We in the United States get to pick who runs this country. I'm not getting involved with anyone whose life is a catastrophe. Biden, even with his shortcomings, IMO - is a better choice.

reply

All that "baggage" is propaganda and fake news about Trump since he was not a member of the DS, the swamp or the cabal like most of them (UniParty).

They tried to get him to join and he rejected their globalist agenda.
The number one reason that they hated Trump was because he was against wars.

Everything they accused and charged Trump for is what they are guilty of.

reply

If you have your mind made up then I don't see a point in arguing.
(But you're wrong and here's why.... Blah, blah, blah.)
That's cool if you have your viewpoint and I have mine.

You asked and I shared why I prefer Trump over Biden.

Overall I really wish we had a better choice than those two.
If this is really supposed to be, "The greatest country on earth," then how come we get lousy presidents and lousy choices for president all the time and the same two morons twice in a row?
We should be better than this.

reply

No argument at all.

In fact I agree with you (your last paragraph).

I suppose Joe Biden would be - how does it go...

The lesser of two evils?

NOt saying these guys are evil, just saying, well, saying what you said

Is this the best we can do in The United States of AMerica?

Incredibly, for the second time around.

reply

There was no insurrection.
There was no attempt at insurrection.
Trump has not been convicted of involvement in insurrection.
Trump has not even been charged with involvement in insurrection.

The Supreme Court will rectify this additional attempt by desperate Democrat zealots to rig the election.

reply

If a judge said Trump was an insurrectionist, then too bad for Trump. Trump knows even less about the justice system than you do.

reply

And that would make the judge a liar.

reply

That would simply be slander and that's all the Left really has on the subject.

reply

Considering the U.S Supreme Court just ruled unanimously in favor of Donald J.Trump moments ago that YES, he can remain on the Colorado Ballot which also means he can remain on Illinois, Maine as well.. Karma's a Bitch Zoomer!!!

https://giphy.com/gifs/partylegends-party-legends-3o6ZtmaN0jo2xuFEic

reply

As long as the SCOTUS rules the way that Leftists would prefer, the Court is described as "the supreme law of the land."

When it rules otherwise, however and especially when it does so frequently, it is "illegitimate."

reply

And to remain on the ballot for all states. A preemptive decision.

reply

Karma is a bitch. The GOP is cutting their own throat by insisting upon Trump as their candidate. Trump will lose big, then cry like a little bitch about how the election was stolen from him.

reply

It took you all day to finally drag your Gen Z ass out to finally comment about this?? Didn't get your way now did you?? Tough shit

reply

i have far better things to do than surf the internet. If this forum is the highlight of your day, then you need to try to live a little better. I'm a boomer.

I'd rather be doing stuff like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmwS1qrzy_0

reply