Colorado invokes 14th Amendment in an attempt to remove Trump from ballot



Colorado is pulling out all the stops to get former president Donald Trump’s name off the 2024 GOP presidential ballot.

Trump’s legal team is back in court defending their client as the state attempts to use the Fourteenth Amendment to throttle his campaign.

Dr. Peter Simi, who is being heralded as an “expert,” took the stand against Trump to discuss his supposed “far-right extremism.”

Simi testified that Trump has actually called for violence, which is something he claims to have never seen a political figure do before.

To demonstrate Trump’s abhorrent, violent speech, prosecutors played a clip of him for the court.

In the clip, Trump is heard discussing election integrity, which he finishes with “we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Sara Gonzales is amused that the court thought that was violent.

“That couldn’t have been metaphorical, he clearly was calling for violence. And by the way, no one on the left has ever called for any sort of violence or taking to the streets or getting up in Trump supporters' faces,” Gonzales mocks.

BlazeTV contributor Jaco Booyens notes that it's not only leftist politicians, like Maxine Waters, who have blatantly called for violence but also celebrities, including Johnny Depp and Kathy Griffin.

However, this information was dismissed by the Colorado court.

Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, made sure to drive this point home.

“Having a court weigh in when there is reason to weigh in is exactly how our system should work. Filing a case because there’s questions about the US Constitution is not election interference; it’s abiding by a society that puts laws over strong men, insurrectionists, and rebellion,” she told Fox31.

Booyens is disgusted. “We’re just going to go to the court, never mind that the court’s completely swayed to the left, that the judge is bought off, yes, bought off, that the DA is as corrupt as Biden himself.”

“Where’s innocent until proven guilty?” he asks.


Want more from 'The News & Why It Matters'?

To enjoy more roundtable rundowns of the top stories of the day, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

More Than 100 Trump-Affiliated Lawyers Targeted By Dark Money Group

The 65 Project will spend millions this year trying to expose and disbar more than 100 lawyers who worked on Trump’s election lawsuits.

Report: Democratic dark money group seeks to get more than 100 Trump lawyers disbarred



A dark money group with ties to powerful Democratic Party figures will soon seek to get disbarred more than 100 lawyers who were involved in former President Donald Trump's legal attempts to overturn the 2020 election, Axios reported Monday.

What are the details?

The group — called 65 Project after the number of lawsuits filed seeking to invalidate the results — reportedly plans to spend millions over the next year to expose and discredit 111 lawyers involved to some degree in the post-election efforts, with the ultimate goal of forcing them out of their jobs.

Through TV and radio ads and political pressure on the American Bar Association as well as state bar associations, the group aims to deter right-wing legal talent from engaging in attempts to question the results of future elections, Axios said.

Ads in battleground states, such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, are set to start this week.

Furthermore, the group plans to push bar associations to codify rules prohibiting certain election challenges and adopt language stating that "fraudulent and malicious lawsuits to overturn legitimate election results violate the ethical duties lawyers must abide by."

What else?

But the initiative is expected to be even more bare-knuckles than that, as it targets the lawyers, some of whom work at large national law firms and others who work at smaller, regional firms.

One of the group's top advisers, Media Matters for America founder and Democratic fundraiser David Brock, told the outlet that the idea is to "not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but shame [the lawyers] and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms."

"I think the littler fish are probably more vulnerable to what we're doing," Brock added. "You're threatening their livelihood. And, you know, they've got reputations in their local communities."

Axios reported that other advisory board members "include former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.); and Paul Rosenzweig, a conservative and member of the Federalist Society who was former senior counsel for Ken Starr's Clinton-era Whitewater investigation and served in George W. Bush's Department of Homeland Security."

The project was reportedly devised by Melissa Moss, a Democratic consultant and former senior official in the Clinton administration.

Anything else?

In response to the news, some of the lawyers targeted decried the intimidation tactics espoused by the group.

"This move is nothing more than a desperate attempt by leftist hacks and mercenaries to neutralize anyone on the right with the ability to stand in the way of the left's efforts to hide malfeasance in the 2020 elections and to clear the path for a repeat of similar malfeasance in the 2022 mid-terms," said Paul Davis, a Texas attorney under the group's gaze for his presence at the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 riots.

Another targeted lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, said, "I'm betting Marc Elias isn't on the list," in reference to a story about the Democratic lawyer's challenge to the results of an Iowa House race last year, as well as his further claims of voting machine "irregularities" in New York.

"OK for Dem lawyers to file election challenges. Of course," she chided.

Ex-AG Barr reveals what led to him to publicly state that 'we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election'



Former attorney general Bill Barr told his boss, ex-President Donald Trump, that the legal team Trump had assembled in 2020 to prosecute his case claiming the presidential election was "stolen" and a "clown show" was feeding the American people "bulls**t," in a heated confrontation in December 2020.

The details of that conversation come from an excerpt of Barr's upcoming memoir shared by the Wall Street Journal. Before his account of the meeting with Trump and several of the president's senior advisers, the veteran Department of Justice chief gave reasons why he made the now-infamous comments to an Associated Press reporter on Dec. 1, saying, "To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election."

Back then, Barr's statement put him at odds with the president and members of Trump's legal team including Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who had made extraordinary claims of widespread voter fraud in the election that purportedly robbed Trump of victory. Trump's lawyers had asserted that a "national conspiracy" of voter fraud took place, including unsupported allegations that vulnerabilities in voting machine manufacturer Dominion Voting Systems hardware caused votes to switch from Trump to Joe Biden, tilting the outcome of the election. Dominion vigorously denied the allegations and has taken Giuliani, Powell, and others to court in a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit.

After the former attorney general said there was no evidence to support the accusations of widespread election fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election, his relationship with Trump and reputation with Trump's supporters was permanently damaged.

According to Barr's account, claims that the election had been stolen through fraud were grossly exaggerated, and the Justice Department lacked the authority to investigate state-level election issues when there was no evidence that a crime had been committed.

"I had no doubt there was some fraud in the 2020 presidential elections. There’s always some fraud in an election that large," Barr writes. "But the Justice Department had been looking into the claims made by the president’s team, and we had yet to see evidence of fraud on the scale necessary to change the outcome of the election."

He explained that data suggested Democrats had abused COVID-19 pandemic-related rules to make changes to state election procedures in order to boost turnout through extended voting periods and eased access to mail-in voting. Throughout 2020, Barr had been a consistent critic of mail-in voting, warning that widespread voting by mail could create "opportunities" for election fraud.

"There was also no question that, in some areas, state rules meant to guard against fraud—for example, the requirement that voters file applications for mail-in ballots—were not followed. This also increased the opportunity for fraud," Barr writes. "Still, the opportunity for fraud isn’t evidence of fraud."

He also explained that state governments and localities are responsible for developing election rules. The federal government cannot intervene when someone claims that local election rules aren't being followed. Those claims have to be brought to state officials and settled in state courts.

"The Justice Department does not have the authority or the tools to perform that function. Instead, its role is to investigate specific and credible allegations of voting fraud for the purpose of criminal prosecution. A complaint just saying the rules were not followed is not enough," Barr wrote.

In cases where there were specific criminal allegations, federal investigators found the claims to be "patently frivolous" or unsupported by available evidence, Barr said.

As for other allegations of election irregularities, the Justice Department lacked the authority to pursue them, which led to accusations from Trump that the DOJ was "missing in action." However, the responsibility to go after state election irregularities rested with Trump's lawyers, who in Barr's words, were "feeding his supporters a steady diet of sensational fraud claims, without anything resembling substantiation."

It was during a Dec. 1 meeting, after Barr had publicly commented on the lack of evidence of widespread fraud, that the attorney general gave the president his frank assessment of the competence of his legal team.

Barr was called to meet with Trump in the West Wing. The president's then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and White House counsel Pat Cipollone were also in attendance, as was Deputy Counsel Pat Philbin and White House lawyer Eric Herschmann.

The meeting was unpleasant. According to Barr's recollection, Trump angrily accused him of intentionally undermining the argument that Biden's win was illegitimate. The president allegedly accused Barr of hating him, which the attorney general denied, calmly explaining that federal law enforcement can't go hunting for election fraud where there isn't any.

"The department is not an extension of your legal team. Our mission is to investigate and prosecute actual fraud. The fact is, we have looked at the major claims your people are making, and they are bulls**t,” Barr said he told Trump.

He pointed out that the arguments Trump's lawyers were making in court didn't actually allege there was fraud, despite public statements from Giuliani and others saying there was. When Trump protested, Barr gave it to him straight.

"'Mr. President,' I said, 'the reason you are in this position is that, instead of having a crackerjack legal team that had its s**t together from day one, you wheeled out a clown show, and no quality lawyers who would otherwise be willing to help will get anywhere near it.'"

As it turned out, that assessment was shared by the courts. Trump's lawyers and his Republican allies in various states filed 62 lawsuits challenging the results of the 2020 election. They were defeated in 61 of those lawsuits, in some cases for lack of standing and in others for failing to substantiate the voter fraud allegations. The lone victory came from a Pennsylvania judge who ruled that approximately 2,100 mail-in ballots that were delivered after the deadline shouldn't be counted. Biden defeated Trump in Pennsylvania by roughly 54,000 votes.