This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Democrats across America apparently have such a fear of President Donald Trump's presence on the 2024 presidential ballot they are trying in multiple ways to simply have him removed.

They calculate that a Trump NOT on the election ballot would be unable to defeat a Biden who IS on the ballot, so they've assembled a horror story about the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol that includes Trump orchestrating a full-scale insurrection, with plans and schemes to take over the American government, its economy, its military, its foreign relations and more.

Actually, it was a small-scale riot where a few hundred people scampered through the building and did some vandalism.

The idea that criticizing an election and its result is "insurrection" already has been pushed by Democrats in multiple states. Most judges have simply rejected the claims, but the state Supreme Court in Colorado and a bureaucrat in Maine have jumped aboard the campaign, saying Trump's name won't be on the ballot.

It will be, actually, since the fight already is pending before the Supreme Court, meaning the lower-level decisions are not final.

But now one lawmaker in Hawaii apparently believes his arguments, essentially the same as those used in multiple other states, are somehow better.

There, state Sen. Karl Rhoads, a Democrat who often lashes out angrily at Trump, is pushing for a bill that would ban Trump from the state's ballot.

His plan aims to "specify that election ballots issued … shall exclude any candidate who is disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment

A report from Fox News said the bill doesn't name Trump, but the target is apparent.

The plan would allow a candidate to be disqualified by any decision from any federal or state supreme court, regardless of whether there has been a conviction or even charges.

The proposal states:

The legislature finds that citizens of this State have the right to expect that public servants be people of integrity and not people who have committed actions that threaten democracy or undermine the vote of the people. Any challenge to the inclusion or exclusion of any candidate on a ballot issued by the chief election officer or clerk shall be in writing and, no later than the fifty-seventh day prior to the general election, shall be filed with the appropriate district court; provided that for any challenge to the inclusion or exclusion of a presidential candidate on a general election ballot, the appropriate district court shall be the district court of the first circuit. The challenge shall provide notice in a summary manner of the grounds that give rise to the complaint. No later than the fifty-fourth day prior to the general election, the district court shall hold a hearing regarding the challenge. The district court shall assess the validity of the complaint and shall issue findings of fact and conclusions of law no later than the fifty-third day prior to the general election. The party filing the challenge shall have the burden to sustain the challenge by a preponderance of the evidence unless a higher burden is required by constitutional law.

Other states where Democrats have attempted the strategy include Minnesota, Arizona, Michigan, and Oregon, and officials in Illinois still are reviewing a related plan there.