HCR's state of MAINE took a step forward today to help us all create a new future by disqualifying tfg from the ME ballot in a well reasoned 34:page opinion coupled with Maine state law findings that are very difficult to overturn on appeal.
In 1884, for the first time since before the Civil War, a President from a Party other than the Republicans was elected President, albeit narrowly. Grover Cleveland, not from Cleveland, but a former Governor of the Empire State, became President for the first but not the last time. He would run for reelection in 1888, losing controversially to both the Electoral College and Benjamin Harrison in 1888, but return to win re-election in 1892, becoming the first and only man to be elected President twice, in non-successive terms.
Famous for his handlebar mustache, Sultan-esque girth, and his much younger Gibson Girl wife he married in a White House ceremony, he defeated a former Speaker of the House in 1884, one James G. Blaine, who had he been elected President would have been the first President from the State of Maine.
Blaine was derided by his detractors as "The Continental Liar from the State of Maine".
It is only fitting, is it not, that the Inter-Continental Liar and Seditionist Sociopath is foiled at least for now, by the very same State of Maine
Well reasoned or not, throwing candidates off of ballots absent criminal convictions for crimes seems to me a slippery slope that could be used as precedent for nefarious purposes in the future. I realize our elections system is rife with all sorts of undue influence/corruption, but weтАЩve seen how the тАШactivist judgesтАЩ cudgel can be brought to bear to propagandize and inflame a population. Flirting with questionable tactics to counter a threat seems eerily similar to our response to 9/11, in which the courts often aligned with the national security state to curtail civil liberties.
I can see your point, and i believe you could be right. However, the world and I saw him commit the crimes with our own eyes. There are times to tip toe and there are times to stomp - this is stomping time. Democrats need to be less fearful, IMO. It's a risk/benefit analysis, and it seems to me that in this instance the benefit of action outweighs the risk of inaction. If Donald is not stopped it's going to be incredibly difficult to ever have real elections or a democracy here again. He and his mob are like a moving freight train. You have to get ahead of it and move the tracks because there are no brakes on this train.
Yes; and that's exactly the thing; We all saw with our eyes and heard with our ears what happened. There is no denying 'facts in evidence' that all the world saw and heard. As well, the wording of the Amendment is clear and simple and 'does not' require conviction; Only those that want to 'kick responsibility down the road' read 'more' into it than exists.
1. As Sarah said, we all saw the insurrection and its leader on TV. After how many hours?..."Stand down and stand by...we love you" to the fascist militias and their sucker followers. Dump him off any ballot possible.
2. Work with all our energy and smarts to get as many people into the voting booth as possible. Work on traditional "non-voters". Appeal to the young people who are turned off by an old guy - tell them about the Republican/Heritage Foundation Project 2025.
3. This part is just sort of spiritual (not my usual thing). Send whatever positive energy/vibes/light (blah.blah) to Willis and Smith and James - and to the judges who will decide history. Visualize "Orange is the New Prisoner". I have no idea.... if millions of people did that.... would it help? Can't hurt.
I was referring specifically to the states that are working to keep him off the ballot. If he cannot be on ballots he cannot be a candidate. It's a risky but builds tactic, but not fabricated. It's totally legit and necessary.
Tom, that statement violates Amendment 14, Section 3 of our Federal Constitution. I believe there have been 8 disqualified person post Civil War. HCR is the 19th Century expert.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is DQ'd as well because he is not a "natural born citizen".
Obama is DQ'd also because he has held the presidency twice.
Candidates are not 'thrown off" they are simply not qualified to be ON state ballots subject to all other procedural rules of law.
"Rule of law" is not a throw away line. All legal rules of law are subject Due Process.
Rule of law is not a throw away line; until it is. Slavery was legal, and subject to тАШdue process. IтАЩm not arguing the legal issues here, except as pertains setting a precedent, rather the political. Hillary Clinton spent a good bit of time hinting the тАШ16 election was fraudulent (because, you know, Russians); had some of her supporters called in a bomb threat to the Capitol during the certification, would she have been an insurrectionist? Trump enjoyed the 1/6 mayhem. Clinton could have responded similarly; see Libya.
Your disqualification examples, Arnold, Obama, are much more cut and dried than whether Trump is an insurrectionist, imo. I think we are already seeing the legal тАШdivideтАЩ manifest itself post-Colorado, just like our tribal political one. The public will remain in silos because the legal тАШexpertsтАЩ canтАЩt agree on what the тАШlawтАЩ is/says, and the approval/legitimacy of the SCOTUS and the judicial system is approaching the bottom feeder levels of the Congress and the media.
Commenters here are sick of Trump тАШgetting awayтАЩ with тАж. Pretty much everything his whole life without being held accountable. I share that sentiment. He should have been impeached under the Emoluments Clause within the first two months of his presidency, imo. But the national security state, the Dems, and the media overstepped with Russiagate, and took the lazy path to discrediting Trump when there was plenty of legitimate critique to be had.
Better to beat the guy at the ballot box; but the feckless Dems canтАЩt seem to figure out how to peel away enough of his support to landslide his sorry ass, which should be the case. Gaza, Gaza, Gaza.
The bottom line reality is that Trump, through his own unconditional actions, threw himself off the ballot! Leading an insurrection to overthrow our government isnтАЩt something to be swept under the rug!
Sure, but if he is consistent in anything, he will never take responsibility. He will hide behind everything he can, while playing the victim. We must dump the cretin at the ballot box if it comes to that. And even that will not stop his lust for power.
And yet, we know that is possible. We will see what our courts and prosecutors get done. If facts and the law don't prevail then it will be up us to dump the trump.
Conviction by the legal system is not the end all or be all. Too many guilty people have been freed by the legal system and too many innocent people have been found guilty. His guilt is not a technical issue for lawyers (especially SCOTUS) to decide.
The Constitution spells
out some qualifications for president (e.g age). As I read the language in the 14th amendment inciting, aiding and abetting insurrection is a disqualification.
Remember there was no television when the Constitution was written. We saw the whole thing with our own eyes. Anyone who says Trump didnтАЩt incite the insurrection is dishonest.
Inviting people to D.C. on January 6th-it will be wild-telling them to fight like hell, march to the capitol and take our country back is indeed тАЬincitementтАЭ.
We donтАЩt need the legal system to tell us heтАЩs guilty. We saw it all happen in real time. Given the ways Trump manipulates the legal system and public, itтАЩs about time he takes some of his own medicine-using the Constitution against him makes sense.
When John Brown endeavored to start an insurrection at the Harper's Ferry armory in 1859 it took the state of Virginia just six weeks to hang him. Donald Trump tried to start an insurrection at the US Capitol in 2021 and 3 years later he is still lying about it. I say he's getting off pretty light if he just gets removed from the ballot.
He should have been tried and convicted for treason a LONG time ago for aiding and abetting the Russian influence in the 2016 campaign and for everything That Effing Guy (TFG) has done since!
Hasn't he already challenged national security multiple times? Jared Kushner's denied clearance magically overturned, Lavrov in the oval office, zero witnesses to his Helsinki meeting with Putin (is that interpreter still alive?), top secret documents burned, flushed, stored willy-nilly all over the damn place...what's the CIA waiting for?
For him to threaten to defund/reform the CIA. All the things you mentioned are low totem pole items. The CIA has no interest in defeating Russia, nor China, for that matter. They are useful tools to keep the American populace distracted from the corporate (read MIC) control of our government, and in fear of тАШthe otherтАЩ. The only reason the intelligence services went after Trump was due to his continual ranting about тАШthe deep stateтАЩ. ThatтАЩs why they went all in on Russiagate; make both Trump and Russia into evil entities. Worked like a charm.
Agreed. I just hate to see the legal system used to тАШgetтАЩ a target, be it a terrorist or a Trump, by setting a legal precedent that could be used on innocent targets other than terrorists, or Trumps, that get swept up in a hit job because a powerful entity decides that would solidify a grip on power, or kill the legitimate messaging from a whistleblower. Blowback is a real thing.
When I was about 11 I obsessed about how I I could have killed Hitler before he did what he did, I would have. WeтАЩre not talking about extrajudicial killings, just stopping him with legal processes. He could be that dangerous.
He could be, but I seriously doubt it. The CIA will make sure he has an тАШaccidentтАЩ before heтАЩs allowed to challenge the national security state in a meaningful way.
IтАЩm much more concerned about corporate state totalitarianism, which we already live under, and a future technocracy in which every data facet of our тАШprivacyтАЩ is under the purview/ownership of government and big tech, which are joined at the hip.
I predict weтАЩll have a cyberattack before 2026, and the U.S. will blame Russia/China/Iran, without evidence, and institute an assault on civil liberties that will make the post-9/11 decade loss of privacy look quaint by comparison, all in the name of тАШsecurityтАЩ. If the past is any indicator, the American public will let it happen without much fuss, preferring to focus on tribal and identity politics, and the latest version of the iPhone.
I think you raise a good point in the implications of it being misused in future. That is why I think we are seeing different responses in different states including also close reading of decisions relating to those statesтАЩ election procedures.
It is hard to disconnect the two when your observations are based upon a field of study and experience. Technically, there are no "laws" in the constitution. It is not a "law" against cruel and unusual punishment, it is a prohibition on that conduct. I believe the same is true of the 14th Amendment; it grants a right, and does not make a law.
Wow! Once again,EXCELLENT post with a key conclusion. We must do all we can to create the future we want and need. Forward all.
HCR's state of MAINE took a step forward today to help us all create a new future by disqualifying tfg from the ME ballot in a well reasoned 34:page opinion coupled with Maine state law findings that are very difficult to overturn on appeal.
In 1884, for the first time since before the Civil War, a President from a Party other than the Republicans was elected President, albeit narrowly. Grover Cleveland, not from Cleveland, but a former Governor of the Empire State, became President for the first but not the last time. He would run for reelection in 1888, losing controversially to both the Electoral College and Benjamin Harrison in 1888, but return to win re-election in 1892, becoming the first and only man to be elected President twice, in non-successive terms.
Famous for his handlebar mustache, Sultan-esque girth, and his much younger Gibson Girl wife he married in a White House ceremony, he defeated a former Speaker of the House in 1884, one James G. Blaine, who had he been elected President would have been the first President from the State of Maine.
Blaine was derided by his detractors as "The Continental Liar from the State of Maine".
It is only fitting, is it not, that the Inter-Continental Liar and Seditionist Sociopath is foiled at least for now, by the very same State of Maine
Well reasoned or not, throwing candidates off of ballots absent criminal convictions for crimes seems to me a slippery slope that could be used as precedent for nefarious purposes in the future. I realize our elections system is rife with all sorts of undue influence/corruption, but weтАЩve seen how the тАШactivist judgesтАЩ cudgel can be brought to bear to propagandize and inflame a population. Flirting with questionable tactics to counter a threat seems eerily similar to our response to 9/11, in which the courts often aligned with the national security state to curtail civil liberties.
I can see your point, and i believe you could be right. However, the world and I saw him commit the crimes with our own eyes. There are times to tip toe and there are times to stomp - this is stomping time. Democrats need to be less fearful, IMO. It's a risk/benefit analysis, and it seems to me that in this instance the benefit of action outweighs the risk of inaction. If Donald is not stopped it's going to be incredibly difficult to ever have real elections or a democracy here again. He and his mob are like a moving freight train. You have to get ahead of it and move the tracks because there are no brakes on this train.
Yes; and that's exactly the thing; We all saw with our eyes and heard with our ears what happened. There is no denying 'facts in evidence' that all the world saw and heard. As well, the wording of the Amendment is clear and simple and 'does not' require conviction; Only those that want to 'kick responsibility down the road' read 'more' into it than exists.
Yes, but how do you suggest that we stomp and move the tracks?
Fight in every way possible.
1. As Sarah said, we all saw the insurrection and its leader on TV. After how many hours?..."Stand down and stand by...we love you" to the fascist militias and their sucker followers. Dump him off any ballot possible.
2. Work with all our energy and smarts to get as many people into the voting booth as possible. Work on traditional "non-voters". Appeal to the young people who are turned off by an old guy - tell them about the Republican/Heritage Foundation Project 2025.
3. This part is just sort of spiritual (not my usual thing). Send whatever positive energy/vibes/light (blah.blah) to Willis and Smith and James - and to the judges who will decide history. Visualize "Orange is the New Prisoner". I have no idea.... if millions of people did that.... would it help? Can't hurt.
Mostly, number 2.
A resounding yes to all three!
And if those, and all else fails:
4. Vote the S.O.B. out!
I was referring specifically to the states that are working to keep him off the ballot. If he cannot be on ballots he cannot be a candidate. It's a risky but builds tactic, but not fabricated. It's totally legit and necessary.
Oh I agree. The fewer ballots he's on the better. He's all about revenge and chaos.
Tom, that statement violates Amendment 14, Section 3 of our Federal Constitution. I believe there have been 8 disqualified person post Civil War. HCR is the 19th Century expert.
Arnold Schwarzenegger is DQ'd as well because he is not a "natural born citizen".
Obama is DQ'd also because he has held the presidency twice.
Candidates are not 'thrown off" they are simply not qualified to be ON state ballots subject to all other procedural rules of law.
"Rule of law" is not a throw away line. All legal rules of law are subject Due Process.
Rule of law is not a throw away line; until it is. Slavery was legal, and subject to тАШdue process. IтАЩm not arguing the legal issues here, except as pertains setting a precedent, rather the political. Hillary Clinton spent a good bit of time hinting the тАШ16 election was fraudulent (because, you know, Russians); had some of her supporters called in a bomb threat to the Capitol during the certification, would she have been an insurrectionist? Trump enjoyed the 1/6 mayhem. Clinton could have responded similarly; see Libya.
Your disqualification examples, Arnold, Obama, are much more cut and dried than whether Trump is an insurrectionist, imo. I think we are already seeing the legal тАШdivideтАЩ manifest itself post-Colorado, just like our tribal political one. The public will remain in silos because the legal тАШexpertsтАЩ canтАЩt agree on what the тАШlawтАЩ is/says, and the approval/legitimacy of the SCOTUS and the judicial system is approaching the bottom feeder levels of the Congress and the media.
Commenters here are sick of Trump тАШgetting awayтАЩ with тАж. Pretty much everything his whole life without being held accountable. I share that sentiment. He should have been impeached under the Emoluments Clause within the first two months of his presidency, imo. But the national security state, the Dems, and the media overstepped with Russiagate, and took the lazy path to discrediting Trump when there was plenty of legitimate critique to be had.
Better to beat the guy at the ballot box; but the feckless Dems canтАЩt seem to figure out how to peel away enough of his support to landslide his sorry ass, which should be the case. Gaza, Gaza, Gaza.
No criminal conviction required by the amendment. It is clear english just like the age requirement. Some things are just that simple.
I agree.
The bottom line reality is that Trump, through his own unconditional actions, threw himself off the ballot! Leading an insurrection to overthrow our government isnтАЩt something to be swept under the rug!
And if he is so damned innocent, he should stand up on those fake bone spurs in all court cases and stop appealing like the coward.
Sure, but if he is consistent in anything, he will never take responsibility. He will hide behind everything he can, while playing the victim. We must dump the cretin at the ballot box if it comes to that. And even that will not stop his lust for power.
I agree 100% If in fact he is innocent, as he professes, stand trial and prove it!!!
And yet, we know that is possible. We will see what our courts and prosecutors get done. If facts and the law don't prevail then it will be up us to dump the trump.
Love the тАЬDump TrumpтАЭ slogan!
As a Blues lover, I suggest this video from Rick Estrin and The Nightcats: "Dump That Trump"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOo1nQo2KYc&pp=ygUZZHVtcCB0aGF0IHRydW1wIG5pZ2h0Y2F0cw%3D%3D
Skillfully recorded during the height of the Covid lockdown....
It's a retread, but thanks for the compliment.
Conviction by the legal system is not the end all or be all. Too many guilty people have been freed by the legal system and too many innocent people have been found guilty. His guilt is not a technical issue for lawyers (especially SCOTUS) to decide.
The Constitution spells
out some qualifications for president (e.g age). As I read the language in the 14th amendment inciting, aiding and abetting insurrection is a disqualification.
Remember there was no television when the Constitution was written. We saw the whole thing with our own eyes. Anyone who says Trump didnтАЩt incite the insurrection is dishonest.
Inviting people to D.C. on January 6th-it will be wild-telling them to fight like hell, march to the capitol and take our country back is indeed тАЬincitementтАЭ.
We donтАЩt need the legal system to tell us heтАЩs guilty. We saw it all happen in real time. Given the ways Trump manipulates the legal system and public, itтАЩs about time he takes some of his own medicine-using the Constitution against him makes sense.
We all saw what Trump did on 1/6/21.
When John Brown endeavored to start an insurrection at the Harper's Ferry armory in 1859 it took the state of Virginia just six weeks to hang him. Donald Trump tried to start an insurrection at the US Capitol in 2021 and 3 years later he is still lying about it. I say he's getting off pretty light if he just gets removed from the ballot.
He should have been tried and convicted for treason a LONG time ago for aiding and abetting the Russian influence in the 2016 campaign and for everything That Effing Guy (TFG) has done since!
Hasn't he already challenged national security multiple times? Jared Kushner's denied clearance magically overturned, Lavrov in the oval office, zero witnesses to his Helsinki meeting with Putin (is that interpreter still alive?), top secret documents burned, flushed, stored willy-nilly all over the damn place...what's the CIA waiting for?
For him to threaten to defund/reform the CIA. All the things you mentioned are low totem pole items. The CIA has no interest in defeating Russia, nor China, for that matter. They are useful tools to keep the American populace distracted from the corporate (read MIC) control of our government, and in fear of тАШthe otherтАЩ. The only reason the intelligence services went after Trump was due to his continual ranting about тАШthe deep stateтАЩ. ThatтАЩs why they went all in on Russiagate; make both Trump and Russia into evil entities. Worked like a charm.
what does 'MIC' stand for?
Military Industrial Complex. Scroll down to section IV in IkeтАЩs farewell address linked below.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/eisenhower001.asp
Tom, I think there will be nefarious schemes no matter what we do or donтАЩt do. Nefariousness has been escalating no matter how nice we play.
Agreed. I just hate to see the legal system used to тАШgetтАЩ a target, be it a terrorist or a Trump, by setting a legal precedent that could be used on innocent targets other than terrorists, or Trumps, that get swept up in a hit job because a powerful entity decides that would solidify a grip on power, or kill the legitimate messaging from a whistleblower. Blowback is a real thing.
When I was about 11 I obsessed about how I I could have killed Hitler before he did what he did, I would have. WeтАЩre not talking about extrajudicial killings, just stopping him with legal processes. He could be that dangerous.
He could be, but I seriously doubt it. The CIA will make sure he has an тАШaccidentтАЩ before heтАЩs allowed to challenge the national security state in a meaningful way.
IтАЩm much more concerned about corporate state totalitarianism, which we already live under, and a future technocracy in which every data facet of our тАШprivacyтАЩ is under the purview/ownership of government and big tech, which are joined at the hip.
I predict weтАЩll have a cyberattack before 2026, and the U.S. will blame Russia/China/Iran, without evidence, and institute an assault on civil liberties that will make the post-9/11 decade loss of privacy look quaint by comparison, all in the name of тАШsecurityтАЩ. If the past is any indicator, the American public will let it happen without much fuss, preferring to focus on tribal and identity politics, and the latest version of the iPhone.
I think you raise a good point in the implications of it being misused in future. That is why I think we are seeing different responses in different states including also close reading of decisions relating to those statesтАЩ election procedures.
Bryan, Do you say that as a lawyer or just as an observer?
It is hard to disconnect the two when your observations are based upon a field of study and experience. Technically, there are no "laws" in the constitution. It is not a "law" against cruel and unusual punishment, it is a prohibition on that conduct. I believe the same is true of the 14th Amendment; it grants a right, and does not make a law.