RNC members say they do support committee using funds to help pay for Trump's legal bills

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/schwartzbCNBC/status/1765432063887356394?s=20

[Redban]

They won't be getting a dime from me this election cycle

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Funny thing is, this would barely even help Trump considering how much cash they have on hand, and that this would put a damper on fundraising (see post above mine.)

[Duke 🇺🇸]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

Luckily for Trump, there are plenty of fools out there.

[Duke 🇺🇸]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

Luckily for Trump, there are plenty of fools out there.

I'm sure some of his supporters would sell their belongings to give money to him.

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

Luckily for Trump, there are plenty of fools out there.

But not ones willing to part with their money over this. Trump has never been strong at fundraising nor Trumpy candidates, look at how much of a basket case the Mastriano campaign was financially.

[President Johnson]

The Republican Party of 2024 is rotten to the core.

[Hollywood]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

[DrScholl]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

The hospital really shouldn't let you use the computer.

[heatcharger]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

How much did Jeb! and Birdbrain donors spend in SC only to get demolished by TRUMP? The party of fiscal responsibility…

[heatcharger]

TRUMP will have a plenty of earned media on his side.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

[Hollywood]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

There was no finding of facts for insurrection.  That's just one of the reasons Democrats lost all 9 judges.  And that CO Judge may have F-ed you guys in the next Supreme Court dispute, because he doesn't understand Constitutional Law.  lol.

Soon I'll hear whining about how Biden should expand the Supreme Court.  Rig the Courts.  lol

[GeorgiaModerate]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

There was no finding of facts for insurrection.  That's just one of the reasons Democrats lost all 9 judges.  And that CO Judge may have F-ed you guys in the next Supreme Court dispute, because he doesn't understand Constitutional Law.  lol.

Soon I'll hear whining about how Biden should expand the Supreme Court.  Rig the Courts.  lol

You do realize that it was REPUBLICAN voters who sued to keep Trump off the REPUBLICAN primary ballot in Colorado? 

And yes, there WAS a finding of fact by Colorado, and that part of their ruling was not overturned by Colorado.  Your asserting otherwise does not change that.  In the initial Colorado district court ruling:

In her decision, Wallace said she found that Trump did in fact “engage in insurrection” on Jan. 6 and rejected his attorneys’ arguments that he was simply engaging in free speech.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055

And in the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2

[DrScholl]

It's definitely important to remember that the court ruled that Congress has to enforce the insurrection clause, not that insurrection didn't occur.

[Hollywood]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

There was no finding of facts for insurrection.  That's just one of the reasons Democrats lost all 9 judges.  And that CO Judge may have F-ed you guys in the next Supreme Court dispute, because he doesn't understand Constitutional Law.  lol.

Soon I'll hear whining about how Biden should expand the Supreme Court.  Rig the Courts.  lol

You do realize that it was REPUBLICAN voters who sued to keep Trump off the REPUBLICAN primary ballot in Colorado? 

And yes, there WAS a finding of fact by Colorado, and that part of their ruling was not overturned by Colorado.  Your asserting otherwise does not change that.  In the initial Colorado district court ruling:

In her decision, Wallace said she found that Trump did in fact “engage in insurrection” on Jan. 6 and rejected his attorneys’ arguments that he was simply engaging in free speech.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055

And in the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2

It doesn't matter if Chris Christie or Liz Cheney filed the case.  It doesn't matter.  Not relevant.  The case doesn't carry more weight just cause it receives support from some Republicans.  That's the kind of argument ignorant talking heads repeat on television for idiots that automatically think bipartisanship means something is good or correct.   

Yes. A majority of CO Court doesn't understand basic Constitutional and Criminal Law.  You can't hold someone liable without a trial in the lower courts.  Duuuhhhh!!!!  If he wasn't convicted, then those CO Judges wrongly concluded that Trump had conducted an insurrection.  You should really go listen to the oral arguments instead of rotting your brain with CNN.   

Additionally, the Constitution strongly suggests that those courts wouldn't have jurisdiction over the crime committed while Trump was President, given his acquittal in the Senate.  Smart Move. 

[GeorgiaModerate]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

There was no finding of facts for insurrection.  That's just one of the reasons Democrats lost all 9 judges.  And that CO Judge may have F-ed you guys in the next Supreme Court dispute, because he doesn't understand Constitutional Law.  lol.

Soon I'll hear whining about how Biden should expand the Supreme Court.  Rig the Courts.  lol

You do realize that it was REPUBLICAN voters who sued to keep Trump off the REPUBLICAN primary ballot in Colorado? 

And yes, there WAS a finding of fact by Colorado, and that part of their ruling was not overturned by Colorado.  Your asserting otherwise does not change that.  In the initial Colorado district court ruling:

In her decision, Wallace said she found that Trump did in fact “engage in insurrection” on Jan. 6 and rejected his attorneys’ arguments that he was simply engaging in free speech.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055

And in the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2

It doesn't matter if Chris Christie or Liz Cheney filed the case.  It doesn't matter.  Not relevant.  The case doesn't carry more weight just cause it receives support from some Republicans.  That's the kind of argument ignorant talking heads repeat on television for idiots that automatically think bipartisanship means something is good or correct.   

Yes. A majority of CO Court doesn't understand basic Constitutional and Criminal Law.  You can't hold someone liable without a trial in the lower courts.  Duuuhhhh!!!!  If he wasn't convicted, then those CO Judges wrongly concluded that Trump had conducted an insurrection.  You should really go listen to the oral arguments instead of rotting your brain with CNN.   

Additionally, the Constitution strongly suggests that those courts wouldn't have jurisdiction over the crime committed while Trump was President, given his acquittal in the Senate.  Smart Move. 

Oral arguments?  Constitution suggests?  Those aren't court decisions.  You claimed that there was no finding of fact that Trump engaged in insurrection.  I provided citations that proved you were wrong and that there WAS such a finding by the Colorado courts.  If you can find a court finding reversing that element of the case, then by all means cite it.

(P.S. I don't watch CNN.)

[Hollywood]

Why not?  Democrats and their media clowns lost 9-0 in case in which they tried to rig an election by illegally eliminating an opposing party's candidate from the ballot based on their erroneous claim that Trump attempted an 'insurrection'. They couldn't provide any foundation for the argument to support the alleged 'insurrection' claim because they waited until an election year to bring a case in front of a left-wing jury.  However, both left and right-wing justices suggested during oral arguments that it wouldn't even matter since Trump was acquitted by the Senate.  All this with the added benefit of polls demonstrating that the Trump 'Trial Heat' (as YouGov calls it) is helping him.  

I hate to break it to you (well, actually, I don't) but SCOTUS did NOT overturn the Colorado court's findings that Trump did, in fact, engage in insurrection.  Trump remains an insurrectionist per the courts.

There was no finding of facts for insurrection.  That's just one of the reasons Democrats lost all 9 judges.  And that CO Judge may have F-ed you guys in the next Supreme Court dispute, because he doesn't understand Constitutional Law.  lol.

Soon I'll hear whining about how Biden should expand the Supreme Court.  Rig the Courts.  lol

You do realize that it was REPUBLICAN voters who sued to keep Trump off the REPUBLICAN primary ballot in Colorado? 

And yes, there WAS a finding of fact by Colorado, and that part of their ruling was not overturned by Colorado.  Your asserting otherwise does not change that.  In the initial Colorado district court ruling:

In her decision, Wallace said she found that Trump did in fact “engage in insurrection” on Jan. 6 and rejected his attorneys’ arguments that he was simply engaging in free speech.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-amendment-2024-ballot-colorado-5b6e40f069abc1b8604ec37c46621055

And in the Colorado Supreme Court ruling:

“A majority of the court holds that Trump is disqualified from holding the office of president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment,” the court wrote in its 4-3 decision.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2

It doesn't matter if Chris Christie or Liz Cheney filed the case.  It doesn't matter.  Not relevant.  The case doesn't carry more weight just cause it receives support from some Republicans.  That's the kind of argument ignorant talking heads repeat on television for idiots that automatically think bipartisanship means something is good or correct.   

Yes. A majority of CO Court doesn't understand basic Constitutional and Criminal Law.  You can't hold someone liable without a trial in the lower courts.  Duuuhhhh!!!!  If he wasn't convicted, then those CO Judges wrongly concluded that Trump had conducted an insurrection.  You should really go listen to the oral arguments instead of rotting your brain with CNN.   

Additionally, the Constitution strongly suggests that those courts wouldn't have jurisdiction over the crime committed while Trump was President, given his acquittal in the Senate.  Smart Move. 

Oral arguments?  Constitution suggests?  Those aren't court decisions.  You claimed that there was no finding of fact that Trump engaged in insurrection.  I provided citations that proved you were wrong and that there WAS such a finding by the Colorado courts.  If you can find a court finding reversing that element of the case, then by all means cite it.

(P.S. I don't watch CNN.)

Wrong.  You didn't provide me s##t.  Here is the Court Case from CO that the AP negligently fails to cite as evidence in their article.  I've read.  The AP article is disseminating falsehoods about the court's decision to fit their narrative.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/file/Court_Probation/02nd_Judicial_District/Denver_District_Court/11_17_2023%20Final%20Order.pdf

Simply put, a proper finding of facts that affords Trump procedural and substantive due process was never conducted in a trial court within a proper jurisdiction.  You don't just start a F-ing federal criminal trial in the middle of a state appeal that doesn't even have jurisdiction.  If the Supreme Court over-ruled the case, then judgment on Insurrection is overturned. 

Trump has not been charged with insurrection in any jurisdiction, and state courts can't just summarily declare him guilty of a Federal Crime.  Putting aside those jurisdictional issues, there are important due process issues under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. For Trump to be guilty of the crime of insurrection, he would have been entitled to confront his accusers, present exculpatory evidence and mount a robust defense - as well as to appeal the findings. The Colorado court held a hearing where they found Trump guilty of insurrection, but it doesn’t work this way…a State court doesn’t get to pick a Federal crime and declare someone guilty of it. 

Additionally, a piece of the Colorado decision is the Court's claim that Trump’s comments on January 6th do not constitute an exercise of free speech. As in the case above, none of this has ever been tested or adjudicated in any Federal court…the Colorado court simply wipes away Trump’s rights to free speech because it fits their narrative.

For this, and other reasons, other Courts didn't rule on the claimed 'insurrection', because they knew such a conclusion would violate the Constitution. 

[Progressive Pessimist]

Does this count as "wealth redistribution?"

[Nyvin]

The RNC has $8 million cash on hand roughly (from early Feb anyway), and Trump owes over $450 million in court ordered fines.

Ted Cruz better start cold calling.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The RNC has $8 million cash on hand roughly (from early Feb anyway), and Trump owes over $450 million in court ordered fines.

Ted Cruz better start cold calling.

With Cruz's personality?  He'd end up losing money.

[ProudModerate2]

Of course. One has to be a fool to donate money to Trump or the RNC this election cycle.

Luckily for Trump, there are plenty of fools out there.

I'm sure some of his supporters would sell their belongings to give money to him.

I am not sure if you are joking or not, but your comment is completely valid.