By DUARDO PAZ-MARTINEZ
BROWNSVILLE, Texas |...There are hours and hours and hours of independent video. Countless news reports with pertinent quotes. Reviews after the fact. Investigations by Congress. Looksees into law-breaking. Indictments.
Donald Trump was there, and he was the instigator of the January 6, 2021 riot on the U.S. Capitol building.
No one disputes that it happened.
The argument raging across the country from sea to shining sea is whether the countless of seditious convictions of many of those who stormed the Capitol should rest at the feet of Trump, the former president now again seeking the office.
That ruling in Colorado that disqualified him from being on the state ballot quickly drew anger and wild, weird responses from his fellow Republicans- some even saying the decision is the spark to the coming Civil War.
Balderdash!
Civil war? By those same armed brave ones who trashed the Capitol, were arrested and then cried mightily in court, begging for forgiveness and lesser prison sentences? Uh, no. No one is going to do squat, it says here. Rednecks love McDonald's too much to throw the country into wanton bedlam.
Maybe a loose-brain yahoo, or two. And perhaps a judge or Democrat politician will be assassinated for show, but, no, don't count on overland coast-to-coast battlefields. If it starts, it will be put down quickly and viciously. Most Americans have had it with this Trump Bullshit. He's like shit, everywhere.
Word has it that the Colorado Ruling will be overruled by the U.S. Supreme Court, that the conservative-led body will not allow the courts to decide a national election, that Trump has not been tried, much less convicted, of staging the Capitol insurrection, that the people will decide Trump's fate at the ballot box.
That would be wrong as Hell is wrong for Christians.
Trump made his renegade bed after he lost the 2020 election to Democrat Joe Biden, lost by almost 3 million votes. He labeled it a "rigged" election and did his damndest to overturn the vote by way of public discourse that emboldened yahoos to the point of law-breaking.
He's still with the wacko idea of killing Democracy by way of racism and bigotry, and, well, his allegiance to dead and living dictators - as if to alert America of his intent to become one if elected.
Trump will NOT be elected president ever again.
Bank it.
He's got his fans and followers, but they are simply not enough. Government machinations are such that threats such as this one usually find a solution. The United States is not going Russia or China anytime soon.
Plus, the Supreme Court would be setting itself up to be mightily embarrassed. Federal prosecutor Jack Smith has a huge amount of evidence he will soon present about Trump's efforts to subvert the election. There is going to be testimony by ex-Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's own texts and phone calls, testimony from staff.
It will show he committed insurrection.
So, were the Supreme Court to say Trump didn't know...they would look damned foolish.
But Trump does have three of his appointees on the country's High Court (three of nine), so prankster games are not necessarily out of the realm of possibility. He expects loyalty from everyone but himself. A vote endorsing the Colorado Ruling would surprise many, although, for this particular court, it would be the beginning of a return to credibility.
Trump is NOT above the law.
He will be told, and he will be shown...
-30-
I hope more states follow Colorado’s lead. The fact that they will face death threats from MAGA and still move forward makes them the true patriots.
ReplyDeleteAgree entirely.
ReplyDeleteThe same people entrusted with the protecting the reputation of the court have blundered into being wholly responsible for protecting democracy. Not one thing suggests they will take the latter any more seriously than they took the former.
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court's ruling on this one will be telling. It has been a useless partisan body to date, however. As we keep saying, its credibility, shitty at present what with all the bribery of justices by elites, is on the line...
DeleteThe Founders knew someone like Trump was inevitable. After all, they had just overthrown a monarch to win their freedom. So they set up a system of checks and balances. What they did not count on, is that when someone like Trump inevitably arrived, he would be aided, abetted, and enabled by half of Congress. That's why we are in this mess.
ReplyDeleteThank you for using your talents as a writer to surface this. Your blog is entertaining, intelligent, and relevant. I am a big fan!
ReplyDeleteThe interpretation of the 14th amendment, section 3 "shall have engaged in insurrection" will be the key deciding factor at the Supreme Court. I am not as confident that the highest court will do the right thing and hold him to account for what is, at the end of the day, a failed attempted coup. And given the current state of how people in this country are feeling, rooted in their economic/social insecurities, I give Trump a better than 50/50 chance of winning again, which would be tragic for our nation. This is why it is so important to call him out for what he is and to demand accountability for his actions.
BTW, Biden won the popular vote by over 7 million (81.2M vs 74.2M) in 2020. -AntonioG
Yes, but it's all about where you source stuff. I went with the lesser number for some reason. Hillary beat Trump by some 6 million votes in 2016, but lost the anachronistic Electoral College. Thanks for the info you provide. I remember you from your run at a TSC trustee's post. You should get back into things...A dude like Trump, soiled from a host of socio-political angles, cannot be president. Our youth will revolt!!!!....
DeleteMr. Editor, while campaigning in 2016, Trump was telling Republicans that he was invincible, did not need to be vetted, and was above the law. They have only themselves to blame for validating his misguided beliefs.
DeleteThis is my first comment to your intelligent blog.
You are wrong on the deciding point. The authors of the 14th Amendment instead of just saying any elected official started with Senator or Member of Congress. It later said any elected official. Why say Senator or Member of Congress, but not say president or vice-president? Did Congress intentionally leave it vague or never intended it to include the president or vice-president? The argument can go many ways to even include it means the president Trump is above the law because they listed Senator and Congress and not President. The answer is in the archives and notes from the debate at the time at the national level and each state. Remember not all the states agreed in the beginning, it a few years. I am certain the clerks at the Supreme Court are very busy digging up both the federal and state archives which is where you will find the answer. If a majority of the states in their archives indicate they approved it because it did not list the president or vice president, then what? This could come down to the view of each state upon passage and the view of the original authors.
DeleteI hear you, anonymous commenter. But your point clashes with the NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW edict we all live by and have always lived by. The president is most certainly included. Why wouldn't he be there on the minds of the Founders, when they all had lived under the rule of the King of England - a despot forever ready to whip the colonists? It strikes me that this argument is going the way of all "partisan" discussion - Republicans all say Trump is innocent of everything and Democrats say he's guilty on all counts. How long can America self-whip itself? Settle it and let's get on with Life...My U.S. Navy days taught me that living under daily dictators (my ranking officers) is not fun. I loved serving, but there were days when I didn't. The U.S. cannot "fall" to a lifelong loser...
DeleteIf it is so obvious as you say, and is clearly in the Declaration of Independence, which every federal court of appeals has declared as not being law, then why did the authors choose not to list President and Vice-President, but Senators and Members and Congress? You cannot ignore this because it is obvious to you. I want Trump hung in the public square, but I have no legal basis to justify what I want. If in the written archives it is clear the majority of the states approved the Amendment because it did not say President or Vice-President, then how do you justify your opinion? And for the record I think the Court should take it ASAP SO WE CAN SETTLE IT. I have no use for people who say the President is above the law. If this is the case, then he could have taken a gun and killed Pence for not stealing the election. So those who argue he is above the law, are just arguing like you because you want a result. I want the archives searched so we know what the majority of the states believed. Look until the Supreme Court ruled no state had immunity while using the King reference, no state was immune from suit. With the exception of the 11th Amendment which followed the above decision. immunity only applied if one citizen sued another state. The Supreme Court expanded that simple language. to so many forms of immunity they are forced to debate it every year. As to no one is above the law, that is pure fiction. The Supreme Court has ruled judges are immune from civil suit even if you can prove they took a bribe from the defendant to ensure the corporation won. Yes, they ruled judges are immune from civil suit even for criminal conduct. But for that same criminal conduct they can go to jail and the victim cannot receive restitution.
DeleteGood points, although ranging, Bobby. But staring at all of this solely with a legal eye waters down the reason for how and why this nation was founded. If you must find the word "president" in the context offered here, well, good luck. Law can be quirky, as "settled" as some people may believe it is and as open to interpretation by any lawyer looking to justify his position. I have no fight with most of what you write, except that I stand by the "No one is above the law" belief. It may exist somewhat in the world of federal judges, but we have seen some impeached and removed from office, i.e. Judge Alcee L. Hastings of Florida in 1989 comes to mind (allegations of bribery and perjury). Acquitted in a criminal trial, he was nonetheless kicked out by a vote in the Senate, one Hastings questioned in his unsuccessful bid to overcome the expulsion. I say, it behooves us to have a "No One Is Above The Law" country, as, we all know, our criminals - including politicians - can be wildly creative. Parsing and prostituting the U.S. Constitution has become a sport for the legal community, as you may know. Thanks for the thoughtful comment...
DeleteThis is what I believe they will find in the archives, President and Vice President were not included because it would be too easy for a group of states to control who can run for President, whereas a Senator or Member of the House would not be as political or impact the entire country. You must remember at the time there were no term limits for President. By your own words, the legal community treats the courts like sport. Here is a great example of how we know for sure the Supreme Court is a joke. In 1868, they found Texas never left the union because by the terms of the Constitution they could not. [No such language exists in the Constitution. But it the exact opposite in the Declaration of Independence.] Based on Texas v. White, Texas had to pay White to reimburse him for the Confederate Bonds. If it is so in 1868, Texas had never left the Union, why then did Congress have to readmit Texas in 1870? The one thing I know for sure is the Supreme Court is the biggest sport arena in the world and will never let the law get in its way. Here is a paraphrase you will see in the Supreme Court opinion. It is used all the time in statutory law. "The authors of the 14th Amendment knew to add President and Vice President if they intended them to be included, and the fact they did not means they never intended for them to be barred from running for office, for the reasons stated." I am always procedure driven and not objective driven.
DeleteJust read a great article discussing the Constitutional issue with the preeminent Constitutional Republican former Federal Judge who has advised the Senate on trumps' impeachment and other matters who states that the 120 page opinion published by the Colorado State Supreme Court is unassailable in its' conclusions and that if the Supreme Court follows the Constitution in this matter, that they will uphold the judgement unconditionally and fully. I'm hopeful they do.
ReplyDeleteSo far, Trump is above the law. That's not right, not with all he's done.
ReplyDeleteRudi Giuliani has filed for bankruptcy protection, citing some $500 million in debts. Rudy's life is ruined. He did it all for Trump.
ReplyDeleteWhat a dope.