It is going to be interesting to watch how the most brilliant political and legal minds of this century lie their way out of upholding the Constitution their genius forefathers wrote, and they claim is the greatest document on earth.
Seeing how the last president violated one of the amendments in broad daylight, in cold blood, and before the eyes of millions of viewers who watched him do it on live television; how will these people perform the greatest magic trick in history and acquit someone who committed a crime that the average person would be jailed for.
“The 14th Amendment says that anybody who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection is disqualified,” Bookbinder told The Hill.
Easy, they will perform what is called a great delusion and a lying wonder right before the eyes of the public. They will lull the people to sleep while they justify a crime written and denounced by their forefathers for the simple reason of placing a false idol in the highest position of power to rule their land for the wealthy.
As God is witness to this abomination, if the last president returns to the White House, let alone is even on the ballot to be elected, after committing a clear violation of the written Constitution, this country will face its final fall into the history books of ruined nations.
In their latest effort to pull the compete wool over the eyes of the nation, according to fourth estate of American government – the mainstream media – it reports, “Attorneys for former President Donald Trump moved a lawsuit seeking to bar him from running again for the White House from state to federal court in the first step of what promises to be a tangled legal battle that seems destined for the U.S. Supreme Court.
The liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed the initial lawsuit on Wednesday in Colorado state court, arguing a Civil War-era clause prohibiting higher office for those who once swore an oath to the Constitution and then engaged in “insurrection” prevents Trump from running in 2024.
“Plaintiffs’ challenge to Colorado’s ability to place Donald Trump on the presidential ballot depends solely on the Fourteenth Amendment,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. “Trump’s basis for removal of the state court action is federal question jurisdiction under Section 3 of Fourteenth Amendment.”
Trump on Friday slammed the liberal organization, contending it’s affiliated with a number of his critics and people with whom he clashed as president. He called the group “TRUMP DERANGED CREW” on his social media network Truth Social said it was “ridiculously” and “Unconstitutionally” trying to disqualify him.
“The 14th Amendment says that anybody who swore an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection is disqualified,” Bookbinder told The Hill.
While Trump has railed against the effort as “another ‘trick’ being used by the Radical Left Communists, Marxists, and Fascists,” the renewed look at the little-used provision was sparked by a law review drafted by two conservative law professors.
While some legal experts and lawmakers have argued the clause clearly applies to Trump over his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, others cast more doubt and note any challenges are likely to be tied up in court.
The two wrote in a piece for The Atlantic that Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the resulting attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 place him “squarely” within the scope of the clause.
“It disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election,” William Baude and Michael Paulsen wrote of Section 3 of the amendment.
However, Michael McConnell, director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School, expressed doubts about the likelihood of efforts to remove Trump from the ballot being successful.
“This is uncharted territory. Any lawyer or scholar who tells you confidently one thing or the other is making it up. No one really knows,” McConnell said. “I think it’s pretty unlikely that these challenges are gonna succeed.”
Further, McConnell argued that the claim that Trump himself “engaged in insurrection,” as stated in the amendment, could be difficult to prove based on his role in Jan. 6.
During his second impeachment trial, Trump’s attorney’s sought to make that case, arguing Trump’s speech that day didn’t meet the criminal bar for incitement.
“How we view the law is that engaging in insurrection is quite broad. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re involved in hand-to-hand combat. It can be organizing and inciting and inspiring and normalizing and some of those kinds of things,” Bookbinder said. Brian Kalt, a law professor at Michigan State University, noted that some have argued that a conviction should be necessary for any disqualification from the ballot, but that is not settled. He added that a conviction would “certainly strengthen” the case for disqualification.
DISCLAIMER: The content of Pro Liberation is firmly opinionated and is not meant to be interpreted as official news. We glean facts and quotes from mainstream news websites and abridge its meaning for readers to relate. We do not indulge in misinformation, conspiracy theories, or false doctrine but choose to express our right to free speech as citizens of this country and free born under God the Creator. We represent Nu Life Alliance Inc. a non-profit organization in the battle for social and economic justice. Donate to our cause at the following link. DONATE
