The Duran Podcast
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 9-0, throwing out the effectively throwing out the Colorado decision to remove Trump from the ballot. All these things need to be decided 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 have been following this apart from the usual characters who are so consumed with hostility to Trump, that they reinterpret all kinds of laws and constitutional enactments in all sorts of ways. But everybody else, all the people who, the lawyers, people like Jonathan Turley, Robert Barnes, whom we know, all of these people were saying 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 Colorado's. I mean, they all said this is wrong, and you cannot use the 14th Amendment to do what they, what the, 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 started 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 know, 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, I mean, 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, or it is the majority of the Supreme Court has said something which is very important, which is that they have spiked this idea that Jim Jattress was talking to us about in a program that was done, we did with him recently. You remember, if you go back to what Jim Jattress said, they said, you know, that 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 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, they really, really took this loss very hard, because I think you're right, and Jim Jotras was right as well, that they were very much hoping for the conviction in one state, just one state for this thing to halt, and then they would have carried this over to. And 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 went 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 said 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 be Barrett, Comey Barrett, Amy Comey 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 law fair was ultimately about one big purpose of the law fair 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 law fair is as far as a tactic that they were betting on to prevent Trump from running? Do you think that law fair angle is starting to run its course in the Democrats and the permanent state is saying, "Okay, we have to change up strategies now." Do you think they're going to stick with the law fair angle? I don't think they can stop the law fair. They set this train in motion, and what do they do? They can't just switch it off. The Supreme Court has made this decision. They have to take these cases, even though the cases, as everybody now concedes, are making Trump electrically stronger. I mean, the law fair has backfired disastrously, and the objective defined behind it. The ultimate plan for it, 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 fair. 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 law fair then. In 2016, they started a whole campaign about Russia. That might come back. Who knows? They're already working around that in some kind of way. We'll carry much less traction this time. In 2020, well, we're not going to discuss what happened in 2020 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 Jattress had, get a conviction, get him disqualified, announced his qualification in various states that 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 it disqualify Trump from standing, because a judicial decision is itself enough? You 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 force foul of the 14th Amendment. And then we can announce, and across the board disqualification, see, that might even have happened. That cannot happen now. So, they're left now searching for their next option. One of them, I suspect, is to Ron Nikki Haley as an independent, I'll make this talk of this. Also, though, I can't imagine that he's going to take the Trump, he's more likely to do them from Joe, but there we are. So, definitely take money from donors, that's for sure. Yeah. This is a long way to go. I mean, we're nowhere near close to the election yet. But this is... That was my comment. And for the American... That was my comment, and my next question to you to wrap up the video is that the Plan A law fair, and it was absolutely their Plan A, and they had high hopes on the law fair 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 to 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. So, yes. And we can't discount that. In fact, 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 Russia gate? Would you? I mean, you know... Well, you know, very mind that article in the New York Times, you know, with about the intelligence bases in Ukraine, effectively came back and said, you know, that Russia gate 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, I mean, 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 the proof. We even know who the office of 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, the, 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 we will, we will be able to explain to, 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, between now and then. Yeah. The one cert, 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 way. I agree. I completely agree. That's the one certainty in all this. Okay. We will end it there. But, well, just to finish, though, with your first point, irrespective of that, a victory for Trump, definitely, with 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 up. Yeah. Be prepared for, for more to come. Yeah. All right. We will, yeah. We will end it there. Thedaran.locals.com. We are on Rumble Odyssey, Bitchute Telegram, Rockfin, and Twitter, X, and go to the Daran Shop, 15% off all t-shirts. Take care. [Music]