I just don't get it!  I have not heard a single person talk about the possibility of an 8 to 0 decision by the Supreme Court that would "disqualify" the "el trumpo" from running for President.  Instead, all the talk is about why Nikki Haley is hanging around--mostly for future good reasons.  But, nobody is talking about the Supreme Court, who will quickly have to decide which way it wants to swing.

------

But the thing is, the more i think about it, i just don't see how the Supreme Court could decide any way other than 8 to 0.  Think about it.  Do you think the Supreme Court in 1868 would have sat out of the decision process if Robert E. Lee had put his name up for President?  Do you think the 1868 Supreme Court would have said it was not their choice to make, but instead, it was the voting public's right to decide whether Lee was a seditionist or not?  And you all know the answer to this last question.

------

The 8 to 0 decision will in one "swift move" fix much that has been wrong in our Government these past 20 to 30 years, and only enhanced even more so by the "el trumpo" in the last ten years.  

An 8 to 0 decision would be like "the sky opening up to a bright shiny day".  Yeah, it may anger some people, but most of those people will recover once they come to realize that they had been "duped" for the last ten years by a "conman who had years of practice in doing the con".

You say, the Supreme Court doesn't want to get involved in politics--akin to the 2000 election.  Bullshit.  2000 is nothing like what we are talking about today.  And besides, as well as i remember, 2000 happened, people accepted the decision, and we moved on from there--right or wrong.  So, 2000 is not a reason for the Court to address the real question in this case.  In fact, this 2024 case is even more clear cut than the 2000 case was.  

-----

The Supreme Court cannot afford to escape the question in front of them today!  And here is the question:

Is "el trumpo" qualified to run for President in 2024 after taken the oath of Office for the President of the United States in 2017, then performing seditious acts while serving in the Oval Office in 2020 and 2021?

If they do balk, it would be another sign of how far are three-layered Government (i.e., executive, legislative, judicial) has fallen away from the principles that our Founding Fathers had hoped would lead us in the right direction.

I am counting on John Roberts on this one!  Big time!  I have always thought it was a shame that his seems to be the court that went off the tracks.  He deserves better than that.  Roberts is not the reason the Supreme Court is looked upon with disgust, but it is responsibility to regain some of that respect that has slowly leaked away.   

So, John?  What's it going to be?  Are you going to make the pitch or are you going to balk?  I am pretty sure it's going to be a unanimous vote either way.  But there is only one way to get the batter out.

-----

ps.  Last week (i think it was President's Day) one of the cable stations ran the John Adams series.  I didn't notice this until about two-thirds through the first episode, but then i taped all the rest, and have been watching about one episode a night.  What a great series and i am learning a lot.  I remember seeing this series before but that was several years ago.  Anyway, series like the John Adams one gives you a better sense of what the "close to real history" was like.

I love the way the different players, played the game:  Washington, Franklin, Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson--and you can see the good, bad, and various rivalries that were going on at the time.  

I especially found the "diplomacy" part interesting.  Franklin, "the diplomat", played it the laissez-faire French way of doing diplomacy.  Adams was more like a "bull dog" when it came to diplomacy--more in your face, quit stalling, that kind of guy.  Frankling gets credit for his diplomacy and Adams gets little.  But that happens a lot in life, and we will never know whether one approach to diplomacy was better than the other.  Things turned out fine using Franklin's approach, but i think the question still remains whether Adams method of diplomacy couldn't have worked just as well.

The reason i point this out is this:  I feel like Adams' bulldog approach is more akin to my own, and the Biden approach is more akin to Franklin's.  And we will never know whether things couldn't have happened two-years earlier than they did.