The Fourteenth Amendment says, “No person shall be a Senator or Representative to Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same…But Congress may by a two-thirds vote of each House, remove such disability.”
When the Fourteenth Amendment was written, there were no government-printed ballots. Therefore, it is obvious that what the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment did not envision anyone stopping any voter from voting for anyone he wished to vote for. There would have been no enforcement mechanism to stop a voter from voting for someone who had “engaged in insurrection.” Instead, in the context of a presidential election, it is obvious that the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment was for Congress to decide in December of presidential election years whether to count the votes of any presidential elector who might have voted for an insurrectionist for President. The precedent was set in 1868 when Congress refused to count the vote of three presidential electors who had voted for Horace Greeley in the electoral college. Congress rejected these three votes because there were cast for a deceased person.
Yes, but that’s not the main reason why.
First of all, J6 was not something Trump did. A few of his supporters and some agents provocateurs trespassed. Trump himself called on people to protest peacefully and asked them to stop trespassing after they trespassed.
Secondly, a riot is not an insurrection. There was no military uprising or anything approaching a real plan for a coup or civil war or secession. BLM riots were much bigger, caused a lot more destruction, and many leading and elected demoRats expressed support.
Third, it makes no sense to claim someone can be penalized without conviction of a crime. Anyone can claim anything. There were plenty of demoRats claiming the 2000 and 2016 elections were not legitimate. Can they all be barred from getting electoral votes for life? What about everyone who aided and abetted the Russia hoax and the rest of the failed plots to delegitimize President Trump the whole time he was in office? Many of us believe the 2020 election was stolen, so can we say that makes Beijing Biden and Cumala Herass insurrectionists and ban them from getting electoral votes without a court finding?
When was Trump convicted?
The 14th amendment doesn’t require a criminal conviction.
The communist professors are claiming that a conviction is not needed, and their accusations / mischaracterizations are enough. That’s a bizarre and absurd claim if you think about it.
How can you tell if someone is guilty without a conviction? Many of us believe Beijing Biden and his whole regime are traitors. Is that tantamount to a conviction?
Show any proof that Trump did or ordered anyone to do anything illegal. How can there be legal proof with legal consequences without a conviction?
Shouldn’t Biden be ineligible for taking bribes from foreign governments?
Biden should be ruled mentally incompetent, but that hasn’t happened yet. Can we say his electors can’t be counted because it doesn’t require a ruling?
Notice that the 14th amendment also applies to electors.
Interesting, also, note that it does not specifically bar such a person from being elected President, only generally to any office holder.
Because Congress has the power to grant an amnesty for insurrection, however Congress defines it, they also have the power to adjudicate and enforce it. The Article 3 courts need not be involved at all.
So anyone who aided and abetted the election theft of 2020 or the BLM insurrectionists can be barred from any office forever?
I guess commies don’t believe in presumption of innocence. They said it so that’s proof in itself. Like Stalin show trials but without even the pretense of a trial.
Congress has the power to impeach and remove, which is analogous to the congressional power to determine how to handle insurrection. Courts are not involved in either instance.
14-3 ENGAGED IN — AS DETERMINED BY WHO ??? —
SOME PARTY HACK ??? SOME LAW SKOOOOL PROF ??? SOME MEDIA HACK ??? A BAN POSTER ??? SOME FOREIGN TYRANT ???
—
NOOO JUDICIAL POWER IN CONGRESS HACKS TO DETERMINE LEGALITY OF VOTES FOR PREZ ELECTORS IN 12 AMDT.
NOTE 20-3.
—
WHAT 14-5 LAW ENFORCES 14-3 — 18 USC 3231 ??? [ DERIVED FROM 1789 USA JUDICIARY ACT ]
18 §3231. District courts
The district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of all offenses against the laws of the United States.
Nothing in this title shall be held to take away or impair the jurisdiction of the courts of the several States under the laws thereof.
—
NOTE ALSO CONST DEFINITION OF TREASON 3-3 [DUE TO CENTURIES OF VAGUE BRIT LAWS ABOUT TREASON]
14-3 LIKE 3-3 ??? — BUT CONGRESS 2/3 INSTEAD OF PREZ PARDON 2-2-1 ???
—-
SCOTUS ON SUPER-ALERT — DEFCON MAX ???
P-A-T
This is as much a hail mary as Trump’s post-election legal strategy, but the problem to me is you have to have a list of “who committed insurrection/rebellion?” I google searched codified insurrection, and it’s actually in the U.S. Code what it is. Surprised me.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title18-section2383&num=0&edition=1999#:~:text=Whoever%20incites%2C%20sets%20on%20foot,holding%20any%20office%20under%20the
Title 18, paragraph 2383:
“2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
You can make an argument for “against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof”, but it actually requires conviction of said item.
Sounds like Biden.
So based on the part of the U.S. Code AZ shared, which might be the first time he shared something of value, a federal court has sole right to determine whether an individual was engaged in insurrection/rebellion according to paragraph 2383 of Title 18.
The first sentence of 2383 can be updated in modern terms to:
Incites-self-explanatory, applies to social media bros, TV hosts, people making speeches
Sets on foot-the putsch, i.e. sets on foot means you’ve not done the rebellion yet but you’re planning to
The impeachments against Trump resulted in acquittal. You can say he can be barred by congress or courts, but neither has happened. Court of globalist elitist opinion doesn’t count. Neither does court of burn loot murder mobs.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/commission-fulton-county-georgia/2023/08/22/id/1131576/
The commie Mau Mau broad will be thrown out on her ear.
So, presumably, if any of Trump’s substitute electors from 2020 are convicted in connection with their activity, they can not be electors again.
There’s no shortage of willing Trump electors.
Actually, it was in 1872 that Horace Greeley passed away.
Fani Willis? Lock her up!
ALSO- DOES 14-3 REQUIRE A USA GRAND JURY INDICTMENT —
IE ANY ENGAGE IN INSURRECTION / REBELLION AS AN *INFAMOUS* CRIME
— DUE TO THE *PERMANENT* *PUNISHMENT* IN 14-3.
ANY CONVICTIONS OF ABOVE 18-2383 ??? — AND ANY SCOTUS CASES ABOUT SUCH SECTION ???
ANY NON-SENILE NON-PARTISAN FOLKS ON SCOTUS ???
NO SLEEP FOR SCOTUS CLERKS UNTIL AFTER NOON 20 JAN 2025 ???
ALSO – MILITIA TO SUPPRESS INSURRECTIONS IN 1-8 —
NOOOOO POWER IN THE MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER CONGRESS TO DEFINE MOST WORDS / PHRASES IN THE USA CONST ???
SEE CONGRESS LAW ABOUT 14-2 AMDT IN 2 USC 6
§6. Reduction of representation
Should any State deny or abridge the right of any of the male inhabitants thereof, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, to vote at any election named in the amendment to the Constitution, article 14, section 2, except for participation in the rebellion or other crime, the number of Representatives apportioned to such State shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall have to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
(R.S. §22.)
Editorial Notes
Codification
R.S. §22 derived from act Feb. 2, 1872, ch. 11, §6, 17 Stat. 29 .
THANKS TO JUSTICE RYAN — LOOKING UP 18-2383 — BEFORE I DID.
NOT SURE IF SUCH SECTION WAS DERIVED FROM AUG 1861 LAW AFTER UNION DEFEAT AT BULL RUN IN JULY 1861.
—-
CONST DEFINITION OF ELECTOR-VOTER IN USA [AND STATE ???] ELECTIONS –
USA CITIZEN, 18 PLUS YEARS OLDE – REGISTER BY 28 DAYS BEFORE USA ELECTION DAYS — ALSO TO BE PUT INTO USA CONST.
NOOO MENTAL/ CRIME / PHYSICAL / ETC STUFF —
LIABLE TO GET KILLED IN USA WARS / CRIME ARRESTS – USA MARSHAL POSSE / SERVING ON GRAND AND TRIAL JURIES.
P-A-T
If an accusation, no matter how baseless, is all it takes to reject electors, no electors for anyone can ever be accepted. Accusations have to be adjudicated somehow – Congress, Courts, Supreme Court. The latter has 6 GOP appointees, 3 by Trump. Not looking good for Beijing Biden and commie profs and their bizarro world funhouse mirror circular argument.
Not surprised that mentally ill AZ, supporter of mentally incompetent criminal Biden, wants the mentally ill and incompetent and criminals serving on juries, voting, etc.
man, this is becoming quite a right-wing site. Probably tells us something of their fears. Is supposed to be about independent third parties
Fears? What fears? God is great and righteousness shall prevail!
BIT MORE –
SOME OF THE 1794 WHISKEY REBELLION FOLKS WERE CHARGED WITH TREASON — POSSIBLE DEATH PENALTY- HANGING. 1790 USA CRIMES ACT.
—-
IT WAS NOT UNTIL AFTER THE CIVIL WAR STARTED — ACT OF 17 JULY 1862, C. 193, SEC. 2- 12 STAT 590 — THAT AN INSURRECTION / REBELLION CRIME BY INDIVIDUALS WAS ENACTED — MERE JAIL TIME, FINE, DISQUALIFICATION TO HOLD ANY USA OFFICE.
14-3 LANGUAGE IS A VARIANT OF 1862 SECTION.
1862 SECTION BECAME SEC 5334 IN USA 1878 REVISED STATUES — THEN INTO 1909 USA CRIMES ACT – THEN INTO 1926 US CODE – THEN INTO CURRENT 18-2383.
Looking forward to 2nd Trump Administration!
@AZ,
Why was a definite article in front of rebellion added in 2 USC 6? Was it in the 1872 legislation?
Trump Term 2 cabinet suggestions, anyone? I shared mine in IPRX open thread.
ACT JULY 17, 1862, CHAP. CXCV, 12 STAT. 589
AN ACT TO SUPPRESS INSURRECTION, TO PUNISH TREASON, AND REBELLION, TO SEIZE AND CONFISCATE THE PROPERTY OF REBELS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Sec. 1. REVISED TREASON SECTION.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That if any person shall hereafter
incite, set on foot, or engage in any rebellion or insurrection against
the authority of the United States, or the laws thereof, or shall give aid
or comfort thereto, or shall engage in, or give aid or comfort to, any such
existing rebellion or insurrection, and be convicted thereof, such person
shall be punished by imprisonment for a period not exceeding ten years,
or by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars, and by the liberation of
all of his slaves, if any he have; or by both said punishments, at the
discretion of the court.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That every person guilty of either
of the offenses described in this act shall be forever incapable and dis-
qualified to hold any office under the United States.
Sec. 4. [no effect on prior treason cases]
Secs. 5 – end >>> Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation sept 1862 of Jan. 1, 1863
———-
OBVIOUSLY — 14-3 Amdt is a combination of Secs 2 and 3 of the 1862 Treason / Rebellion / Insurrection / Confiscation Act.
— CRIMINAL CONVICTION REQUIRED IN A USA COURT.
TOO MANY SUPER DANGEROUS CORRUPT / IGNORANT LAW SKOOOL PROFS AND OTHER HACKS TO COUNT.
—
P-A-T
JR-
ASK THE OLDE CONGRESS OR MORON EDITORS OF THE OLDE 1878 R.S. / LATER US CODE – ABOUT 2 USC 6 ???
TITLE 2 — NOT ENACTED INTO *POSITIVE* LAW.
MERELY INVOLVING USA ELECTIONS OF USA REPS / USA SENS.
GERRYMANDER HACKS SPENDING THEIR TIME ATTACKING EACH OTHER, MESSING WITH TAXES / FEES / BORROWING AND SPENDING FOR SPECIAL INTEREST GANGS. IGNORING FATAL DEFICITS AND NATIONAL DEBT.
—-
P-A-T
JR – 1872 ACT HAS *THE* REBELLION ETC — 17 STAT. 29
1872 HACKS COULD NOT EVEN CORRECTLY COPY 14-2 AMDT — NOOOO *THE* BEFORE REBELLION
https://www.yahoo.com/news/roger-stones-hubris-exposes-trumps-100002282.html
STONE AND 6 JAN. RIOT MACHINATIONS
You were doing good for a minute, and then the fake news of course.
It was refreshing to see AZ post something that didn’t suck, but you knew it couldn’t last.