Washington’s ‘HATRED’ for Donald Trump explained: ‘He has a better everything!’

Washington’s ‘HATRED’ for Donald Trump explained: ‘He has a better everything!’

Mike Davis explains Washington's 'HATRED' for Trump

Mike Davis
Ben Chapman

By Ben Chapman


Published: 20/12/2023

- 20:13

It comes after a Colorado Supreme Court ruling removing the former US President from the ballot

A former Supreme Court law clerk says Washington “hates” Donald Trump, with factions from both the Democrats and the Republicans holding him in disdain.

Mike Davis told GB News that Trump “not needing” the White House plays into their thinking.


Mike Davis and Donald Trump

Mike Davis says Washington 'hates' Trump

GB NEWS / GETTY

It comes after a Colorado Supreme Court ruling removing the former US President from the ballot for the next election.

The court ruled 4-3 that Trump was not an eligible candidate because he had engaged in an insurrection over the US Capitol riot nearly three years ago.

Davis said there is a concerted effort to wipe the former US President off the ballot, with both Republicans and Democrats being in on the act.

“It’s both parties [that hate Trump]”, he said.

TrumpDonald Trump does not need to win Colorado in the November 2024 electionReuters

“The unit party in Washington hates President Trump so much because he doesn’t need them.

“He’s a billionaire. He has a better house, he has a better aeroplane, he has a better car, he has a better everything.

“He doesn’t need that job, and they can’t control him.”

Nigel Farage waded in on the discussion by offering his two cents on the Democrat-backed court ruling against Trump.

“This is very, very worrying”, he said.

“The same people that accused Donald Trump of damaging democracy are literally trying to take it away from Americans.

“It cannot be allowed to happen.”

The justices wrote in their ruling: "We do not reach these conclusions lightly. We are mindful of the magnitude and weight of the questions now before us.

"We are likewise mindful of our solemn duty to apply the law, without fear or favour, and without being swayed by public reaction to the decisions that the law mandates we reach."

The decision reverses an earlier one from a Colorado judge, who ruled that the 14th Amendment's insurrection ban did not apply to presidents because the section did not explicitly mention them.

You may like