The Duran Podcast - Trump 9-0 win. Lawfare plan crumbles

Episode Date: March 6, 2024

Trump 9-0 win. Lawfare plan crumbles

All right, Alexander, we have a big win for the Trump campaign for Trump himself. And I also think a win for the American legal system, the legal system in the United States. And that is the Supreme Court decision unanimous, 9-20, throwing out the, effectively throwing out the Colorado, decision to remove Trump from the ballot. All these things need to be decided at the, at the congressional level. There needs to be legislation in order to pull stuff like this off. And there is no legislation in order to prevent Trump from being on the ballot. So what are your thoughts on the SCOTUS decision? I was entirely the correct decision. I think that most people who have been following this,

apart from the usual characters who are so consumed with hostility to Trump that they reinterpret all kinds of laws of constitutional enactments in all sorts of ways. But everybody else, all the people who, the lawyers, people like Jonathan Turley, Robert Barnes, who we know, all of these people, we say the same thing,

that what Colorado did is just straightforwardly wrong. And in fact, if we go back to the Colorado Court of Appeal, three judges out of seven, all Democrats also said this was wrong, including the Chief Justice of Colorado. I mean, they all said this is wrong. You cannot use the 14th Amendment to do what they, what to be straightforward about it, the Democrats have been wanting to do.

But this is actually not just a constitutionally and legally correct decision in the sense that it's basically said that the Colorado decision was wrong. And as you rightly say, all nine judges agreed it was wrong. The Supreme Court, as it was fully entitled to do

by the way, or I should say the majority of the Supreme Court, as they were fully entitled to do, went one step further and they said that it's not for the states to make this decision. It's not for the courts at the moment to make that decision. You know, as to how disqualification should take place. It is clearly for Congress to make that decision. Now, I am absolutely sure that is correct. I mean, I know a lot about this period of American history when the 14th Amendment was passed. I studied intensively this period of American history when I was at university.

So, I mean, I know all of the debates that took place then. I remember them very clearly. I remember all the personalities who were involved. I remember the impact, the input that people like Salman Chase, who was at that time the Chief Justice of the United States had. So there is no doubt at all that this was intended to be a matter to be decided by Congress. But in saying that, the Supreme Court has in effect done something which is very important, what is the majority of the Supreme Court, have said something which is very important,

which is that they have spiked this idea, that Jim Jatteras was talking to us about in a program that we did with him recently. You remember, if you go back to what Jim Jatteras said, they said, you know, at the moment, there are no grounds for disqualification. But the moment they get one conviction, one conviction, they will seize on that

and they will try to disqualify him on that basis. So what Congress is saying is, You can't do that. You can't use just a conviction here or a conviction there to disqualify someone from a federal election. You need to have some kind of enactment by Congress to make that possible. Now, that could be a new impeachment case. There's no way that that impeachment would succeed against Trump. not in this situation today, or alternatively, you would need legislation.

And there is no possibility that the House of Representatives would agree to that kind of legislation before the presidential election. So the Democrats are stuck, even if they were to get convictions against Trump, in one of the many cases that they're bringing against him, which is, you know, possible, likely some would say. This Supreme Court decision makes disqualification impossible before the election. Yeah, the Democrats are freaking out. It's his name Raskin from, I believe Maryland, Democrat from Maryland.

He said that he's now crafting legislation to try and remove Trump from the ballot. So, I mean, it's this is, they really. really, really took this loss very hard because I think, I think you're right and Jim Jatras was right as well, that they were very much hoping for the conviction in one state, just one state for this thing to hold, and then they would have carried this over to. But it wouldn't have needed that many states, Pennsylvania or just another state, and that would have been it for Trump in the election. Exactly. Exactly. Colorado, when too fast. That was the mistake that was made because Colorado made its decision before there was a

conviction. And that enabled Trump to go straight to the Supreme Court and the majority of the Supreme Court have closed off that whole option, that whole discussion. And notice how angry the three liberal judges on the Supreme Court were. They're furious that the majority said that it had to be decided that the issue really can only be decided by Congress. They say that the Supreme Court went too far

or shouldn't have gone there because that wasn't an issue before them. And notice also that Amy, whatever her name is Barrett, one of the Conservatives

seemed to Barrett, Bari, Amy Comi Barrett, Amy Kermie Barrett was edging towards that position of the three liberals as well. But the majority clearly and correctly and by the way as they're fully entitled to do said this has to be decided by Congress. So they can get convictions against Trump, but it won't take him off, won't prevent him standing for the presidency in every state in November. and given that that was what a lot of this lawfare was ultimately about, one big purpose of the lawfare has now gone.

They can't get a conviction that will remove him from the election. It can't be done. So do you think that the lawfare is as far as attacking? that they were betting on to to prevent Trump from running? Do you think that lawfare angle is starting to run its course and the Democrats and the permanent state is saying, okay, we have to change up strategies now? Or do you think they're going to stick with the lawfare angle? I don't think they can stop the law fair. I mean, they set this train in motion. And I mean, What did they do?

They can't just switch it off. They can't just say, well, you know, Supreme Court's made this decision. I mean, so they have to take these cases, even though the cases, as everybody now concedes, are making Trump electorally stronger. I mean, the lawfare has backfired disastrously, and the objective behind it, the ultimate plan for it, you know. I mean, I think this is, when we're not going too far, in saying that. The ultimate purpose of it has now been nullified by the Supreme Court. But I don't think they can stop the law firm. I don't think they can switch it off.

What they will probably try to do is downplay it or give it less attention from this time onwards. They haven't given up. They will look for other ways to stop Trump. I don't want to start getting into speculations about the kind of things they might do. but we saw what happened in 2016. We saw what happened in 2020. They weren't using lawfare then. In 2016, they started a whole campaign about, you know, Russia. That might come back.

Who knows? They're already sort of working around that in some kind of way or carry much less traction this time. In 2020, well, we're not going to discuss what happened in 2020 in detail in this program because it's a sensitive topic, as everybody knows. But they won't give up. They will look for some other means, some other way to go after Trump. But they've been foiled in what was their plan A.

Their plan A, which is the one that Jim Jatras had, get a conviction, get him disqualified, announced disqualification in various states there would have been difficulties. The Supreme Court, we can see that part of the Supreme Court, four judges, three definitely, perhaps four, might have gone along with the theory in that case that a conviction of that nature does disqualify the President,

does disqualify Trump from standing because, you know, a judicial decision is itself enough. could have got a judgment from some court somewhere, for example, say in one of the federal cases, say that because all these convictions have been mounting against Donald Trump, he's clearly guilty of the insurrection or something of that kind, and falls foul of the 14th Amendment, and then we can announce, and across the board disqualifications. That might even have happened. that cannot happen now.

So they're left now searching for their next, their next option. One of them, I suspect, is to run Nikki Haley as an independent. I mean, there's talk of this also, though I can't imagine that she's going to take votes from Trump. She's more likely to do them from Joe. But there we are. She'll definitely take money from donors. That's for sure. Yeah

This is a long way This is a long way to go I mean we're nowhere close to the election yet But this is a big way to call And for the American That was my comment And my next question to you

To wrap up the video is that The plan A lawfare And it was absolutely their plan A And they had high hopes On the lawfare working Yes, the cases Are now going to run their course but as you said, they're not going to have the bite that they were hoping for.

But there's a long way to go until November 2024, and there's no doubt that the Democrats in the permanent state are already planning their next moves. They may already have their plan B and C and D already set up and ready to go. Yes, and we can't discount that. I mean, there's a certainty that that is the case. It's impossible for us to try to guess what they're going to try and do. But they're going to try to do something. I mean, they're not just going to let this happen.

Would you have guessed Russiagate? Would you? I mean, you know. Well, you know, very mind, that article in the New York Times, you know, about the intelligence bases in Ukraine, effectively came back and said, you know, that Russia. Gay was true. I mean, you know, we know it's true because the Ukrainians provided us with information and evidence that show that it was true. So, you know, but I mean, that that is there in that article in the New York Times. I mean, don't pay any attention to what, you know, Mueller and all of the rest said. But, you know, we have we have the proof. We even know who the officer, the Russian military officer was who was behind, was it cozy bear or fancy bear or one of these agencies? because the Ukrainians have told us. So, you know, it's not impossible that they'll come back with something like that.

I don't know what they're going to do. I mean, you know, we mustn't, as I said, try and guess in advance because, well, for one thing, we don't want to put ideas into people's heads. But, you know, what we will do, as we did in 2016, as we will do in 2020 on the Duran, is we will take whatever thing they throw. at us and we will look at it and we will take it apart on these programs and and you know we will we will be able to explain to clarify what we think is going on that's all we can do but something else is coming as you absolutely rightly said today we're still in March

November is a long way off there's lots of things that could happen between then and now would renown that. Yeah. The one certainty is they are not going to just give up. They're not just going to say, okay, let Trump run and we'll run Joe or Gavin or Michelle, whoever, but they're not going to say, let's just allow Trump to run. No way. No, no way.

I agree. I completely agree. That's the one certainty. It's okay. We will end it there. But just just as if. finish, though, with your first point, irrespective of that, a victory for Trump, definitely, but a victory for the United States, for the Constitution of the United States, and for the

American people, and for the cause of elections, good elections in the United States. No doubt about it, but we're just starting. Oh. Yeah. Be prepared for more to come. You know, yeah. All right. We will add it there. The durand. Dot locals.com.

We are on Rumble Odyssey, bitch you, telegram, Rock Finn and Twitter X and go to the Duran shop 15% off all t-shirts. Take care.