re: Colorado is trying to disqualify Trump from the ballot

quote:

---

The plaintiff is seeking specific relief from the SoS

---

and how is that 'relief' defined??
ie - how was the plaintiff HARMED by the actions of the accused??

I am imagining a guy walking down the street and overhearing what sounds to be a 'plan to rob a bank' - he then sees the suspects walk into a bank where he has an account - and have a discussion with a teller. But the suspects walk out and with no money - he asks the teller 'what did they ask you?' - the teller says 'they wanted to know about how the safes worked and I told them I didn't know.'

NOW - the person THINKs they were talking about a robbery - they even apparently asked the teller something they would need to know about the bank. But they didn't actually rob the bank. And made no threatening actions. (could they have just been discussing a movie they'd seen - or be writing a script for a movie - or ??? does it matter?" Would it matter if some uninvolved other person in the bank started a heated argument with another teller?

How was the person harmed - what could the officials possibly do to them??

Surely things like this have been discussed in your moot court cases - or not???

how is this scenario different than the 'insurrection' that never happened - it only happened in the interpretations from the minds of easily frightened known liars.

look = I am proudly unaquainted with the 'art of law' - it treat the law as something that should be totally fact based and with actual relevant actions being required to 'break' some law.

I do not think 'thought crimes' of any sort are actually unconstitutional. I can "think" any damned thing I want - and I should be able to share those 'thoughts' with others. I "might" even go so far as to try to "trick" someone I didn't like into 'believing' I was going to do something that I was actually trying to 'set him up' for disappointment and ridicule.

I think my last example was an attempt to describe a 'false flag' scenario - btw - is it ILLEGAL to conduct a 'false flag' operation???? should it be????? can the FBI get away with conducting 'false flag' operations when their only objective is to coax someone they didn't like into breaking some arbitrary law => think of "u no hu" when you answer that one.