Forget the Trump trials. He might already be ineligible for 2024.

[JWBooth]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html

No way should the insurrectionist Trump be allowed ever again to hold public office!

This ain't rocket science; the 14th Amendment is very clear. Bigly!!!

 

[Billo_Really]

Try again
Neither insurrection nor rebellion

Everyone who has seen a video of the events on Jan 6th KNOWS it was an insurrection.

 

[Thinker101]

Long before you get to the point of having stretched the Fourteenth Amendment to support this dubious premise, you get way past the point where nearly every Democrap that has taken the side of the foreign criminals invading our country across our southern border is ineligible, on the basis of having acted in exactly the manner that Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution defines as treason.

Nobody on your side, if they have any sense, will want to go anywhere near this Pandora's box, as your side is poised to be bitten much harder by it than any of your opposition.

Key phrase being "if they have any sense".

 

[Tunafish]

Everyone who has seen a video of the events on Jan 6th KNOWS it was an insurrection.

everyone that has seen Tuckers video disagrees.

 

[whitehall]

If it's true, the banana republic strategy worked and you are home free. So what are you whining about?

 

[Billo_Really]

Long before you get to the point of having stretched the Fourteenth Amendment to support this dubious premise, you get way past the point where nearly every Democrap that has taken the side of the foreign criminals invading our country across our southern border is ineligible, on the basis of having acted in exactly the manner that Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution defines as treason.

Nobody on your side, if they have any sense, will want to go anywhere near this Pandora's box, as your side is poised to be bitten much harder by it than any of your opposition.

The border issue is just right wing bullshit; Trump is unfit to serve as Presidrnt.

 

[Hellokitty]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html

No way should the insurrectionist Trump be allowed ever again to hold public office!

This ain't rocket science; the 14th Amendment is very clear. Bigly!!!

What's with the lib whining about TRUMP not being able to hold office ever again? You guys having trouble training your illegals to steal the 2024 election? Even though you all can define woman, your acknowledging TRUMP will win in 2024 shows you haven't lost touch with all reality, so I guess that's a positive.

 

[Billo_Really]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, most all Democrats believe Trump will be the nominee in 2024. Where have you been?

That just means we have 74 million AINO's.

Americans in Name Only!

 

[Billo_Really]

everyone that has seen Tuckers video disagrees.

What video?

 

[Donald H]

One thing you've overlooked is that proof must be provided and a conviction must be obtained before any of section three would be appropriate. Nice try though.

Rules that are applied my friend, are subject to the political climate. Now is the time for Trump to preserve his political popularity if he wants to save his carcass.

If he can somehow promote the threat of a revolution then the corrupt courts in America will do their part.

His biggest threat is going to be the Generals taking action to stop a traitor!

Remember the reason why Americans need to bear arms!

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

It just got real...

But there’s a serious argument that, separate from any criminal charges, Trump is constitutionally disqualified from returning to the White House because of his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol. And if the Constitution bars him from the presidency, then he’s not entitled to be on the ballot, and it becomes the job of state election officials to keep him off.

Two prominent conservative scholars have added their voices — and, more important, their extensive analysis of the relevant historical record — in support of this argument. They conclude that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was adopted after the Civil War to prohibit former federal officeholders who joined the Confederacy from holding office again, applies broadly to any “insurrection or rebellion” against the United States and not solely to the South’s secession from the Union.....

These scholars explain in a forthcoming law review article that the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol was an insurrection within the meaning of this clause and, crucially, that Trump engaged in this insurrection within the clause’s meaning, by both fomenting it and failing to exercise his presidential powers to stop it once it was underway. Refuting the view that the president is not an “officer” to whom this provision applies, these scholars cogently note that John Tyler was a former president and John Breckinridge a former vice president who both joined the Confederacy, and surely the framers of the 14th Amendment intended its disqualification from future office to apply to the likes of them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e-14th-amendment-unconstitutional-presidency/

Two prominent conservative law professors have concluded that Donald J. Trump is ineligible to be president under a provision of the Constitution that bars people who have engaged in an insurrection from holding government office. The professors are active members of the Federalist Society, the conservative legal group, and proponents of originalism, the method of interpretation that seeks to determine the Constitution’s original meaning.


The professors — William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas — studied the question for more than a year and detailed their findings in a long article to be published next year in The University of Pennsylvania Law Review.

Conservative Case Emerges to Disqualify Trump for Role on Jan. 6

This is the Federalist Society - the litmus test of any GOP nominee for a judgeship or leadership of the DoJ. They have provided Trump with the list of names from which someone helps him find a nominee.

Check any conservative federal judges bio of the past 25 years, and they will be members.

This is a very public split....it appears as if the Society is reapplying for admission into Civil Society by establishing a distance between themselves and the zombie cult that the GOP has become.

Well, I disagree..simple as that. Jan. 6 was a protest that got out of hand and morphed into a riot...what follows is a great assertion as to why this is a total non-starter--it's a long read, and I know that some will simply dismiss it, because of the author--however, it pretty much puts the 14th amendment pipe-dream to rest:

The disqualification of Donald Trump and other legal urban legends

There is a simpler and more obvious explanation for what occurred on January 6, 2021: A political protest became a political riot, and a constitutional theory became constitutional legend.

thehill.com

Democrats have long pushed this theory about the 14th Amendment as a way of disqualifying not only Trump but also dozens of Republican members of Congress. From some, it is the ultimate Hail Mary pass if four indictments, roughly 100 criminal charges and more than a dozen opposing candidates fail to get the job done.
I have strongly rejected this interpretation for years, so it is too late to pretend that I view this as a plausible argument. However, some serious and smart people take an equally strong position in support of the theory. Indeed, conservative scholars William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen have argued for the interpretation and insist in a recent law review article that “the case is not even close. All who are committed to the Constitution should take note and say so.”
But some of us like to believe that we are committed to the Constitution and, for that same reason, we say no.
Despite my respect for these academics, I simply fail to see how the text, history or purpose of the 14th Amendment even remotely favors this view. Despite the extensive research of Baude and Paulsen, their analysis ends where it began: Was January 6 an insurrection or rebellion?
There is a simpler and more obvious explanation for what occurred on Jan. 6, 2021: A political protest became a political riot, and a constitutional theory became constitutional legend.

Now, it's no secret that I'm strongly anti-Trump, however, without an actual conviction for Sedition--there is simply no basis for this Lefty pipe dream~

 

[Donald H]

All of America's amendments will be interpreted according to the holder of political power.

In a normal country's situation Trump would have been stopped by summary application of justice on Jan.6!

The leader of a failed coup attempt must never be allowed access to the country's justice system.

One he/she has gained access, the future of the country's system of government becomes a crapshoot!

 

[Concerned American]

Led an insurrection- check

Please link to any person that has been charged with insurrection. So much for #2 and that also takes care of #3

Wrong! The Constitution does not stipulate conviction.

I guess you missed the section on DUE PROCESS. Dry your eyes and go howl at the moon.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Well, I disagree..simple as that. Jan. 6 was a protest that got out of hand and morphed into a riot...what follows is a great assertion as to why this is a total non-starter--it's a long read, and I know that some will simply dismiss it, because of the author--however, it pretty much puts the 14th amendment pipe-dream to rest:

The disqualification of Donald Trump and other legal urban legends

There is a simpler and more obvious explanation for what occurred on January 6, 2021: A political protest became a political riot, and a constitutional theory became constitutional legend.

thehill.com

Democrats have long pushed this theory about the 14th Amendment as a way of disqualifying not only Trump but also dozens of Republican members of Congress. From some, it is the ultimate Hail Mary pass if four indictments, roughly 100 criminal charges and more than a dozen opposing candidates fail to get the job done.
I have strongly rejected this interpretation for years, so it is too late to pretend that I view this as a plausible argument. However, some serious and smart people take an equally strong position in support of the theory. Indeed, conservative scholars William Baude and Michael Stokes Paulsen have argued for the interpretation and insist in a recent law review article that “the case is not even close. All who are committed to the Constitution should take note and say so.”
But some of us like to believe that we are committed to the Constitution and, for that same reason, we say no.
Despite my respect for these academics, I simply fail to see how the text, history or purpose of the 14th Amendment even remotely favors this view. Despite the extensive research of Baude and Paulsen, their analysis ends where it began: Was January 6 an insurrection or rebellion?
There is a simpler and more obvious explanation for what occurred on Jan. 6, 2021: A political protest became a political riot, and a constitutional theory became constitutional legend.

Now, it's no secret that I'm strongly anti-Trump, however, without an actual conviction for Sedition--there is simply no basis for this Lefty pipe dream~

Do you recall Jonathan Turley being upheld by consequent events a lot?

Do you understand why?

His record as an analyst cannot be squared with his reputation as a legal scholar...because he tells you, not necessarily what he believes, but what you want to hear.

It's what he is paid to do.

 

[Independentthinker]

That just means we have 74 million AINO's.

Americans in Name Only!

What the hell does that mean? The fact is democrats think Trump is going to be the nominee, therefore, your post is nothing but rubbish.

 

[Concerned American]

In a normal country's situation Trump would have been stopped by summary application

In a COMMUNIST country, duck. Glad we could clear that up for you. In the US we don't believe in summary judgements. We have this thing called the 14th amendment that has a clause that deals with something you commies overlook--it is called due process. Now run along. You aren't a Canadian lawyer and it is abundantly clear that you know nothing of the American constitution, legal system or politics. Go spread your ignorance among the democrats--they are familiar with the landscape.

 

[The5thHorseman]

What the hell does that mean? The fact is democrats think Trump is going to be the nominee, therefore, your post is nothing but rubbish.

Never use the term "therefore"...

 

[Concerned American]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/19/politics/donald-trump-fourteenth-amendment-2024-race/index.html

No way should the insurrectionist Trump be allowed ever again to hold public office!

This ain't rocket science; the 14th Amendment is very clear. Bigly!!!

More crying and hollering at the moon. LMAO, tissue?

 

[Billo_Really]

What the hell does that mean? The fact is democrats think Trump is going to be the nominee, therefore, your post is nothing but rubbish.

It means, people who support Trump hate America!

 

[Tunafish]

What video?