Congress, Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Free Speech, Politics

North Carolina Board Asserts Right to Disqualify Madison Cawthorn as an “Insurrectionist”

The North Carolina elections board declared this week that it has the power to bar Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) from running for office due to his actions related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot. It insists that it can enforce Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment and declared that he is an insurrectionist. It is a position that, in my view, is wholly outside of the language and intent of this provision. Cawthorn is right to challenge any such action as unconstitutional.

In a filing to dismiss a lawsuit by Cawthorn, the board wrote

“The State does not judge the qualifications of the elected members of the U.S. House of Representative. It polices candidate qualifications prior to the elections. In doing so, as indicated above, States have long enforced age and residency requirements, without question and with very few if any legal challenges. The State has the same authority to police which candidates should or should not be disqualified per Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The asserted authority would invite partisan and abusive practices by such boards. It is also wrong on the purpose of this constitutional provision. Moreover, there is a vast difference between enforcing an objective standard on the age of a candidate and enforcing the subjective standard whether that candidate’s views make him an “insurrectionist.”

As I have previously written, (here and here and here), Democrats are playing a dangerous game with the long-dormant provision in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment — the “disqualification clause.” The provision was written after the 39th Congress convened in December 1865 and many members were shocked to see Alexander Stephens, the Confederate vice president, waiting to take a seat with an array of other former Confederate senators and military officers.

Ironically, it was Justice Edwin Reade of the North Carolina Supreme Court who later explained, “[t]he idea [was] that one who had taken an oath to support the Constitution and violated it, ought to be excluded from taking it again.” So, members drafted a provision that declared that “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in 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, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

The mantra that this was an insurrection does not meet the standard. The Constitution fortunately demands more than proof by repetition. In this case, it requires an actual rebellion. The clause Democrats are citing was created in reference to a real Civil War in which over 750,000 people died in combat. The confederacy formed a government, an army, a currency, and carried out diplomatic missions.

While Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell this week called it an “insurrection,” there are ample legal reasons to reject that characterization in court. (I agree with McConnell in his other comments criticizing the sanctions against Republicans supporting the House committee investigating Jan. 6th).

Jan. 6 was a national tragedy. I publicly condemned President Trump’s speech that day while it was being given — and I denounced the riot as a “constitutional desecration.” However, it has not been treated legally as an insurrection. Those charged for their role in the attack that day are largely facing trespass and other less serious charges — rather than insurrection or sedition. That’s because this was a riot that was allowed to get out of control by grossly negligent preparations by Capitol Police and congressional officials. While the FBI launched a massive national investigation, it did not find evidence of a conspiracy for an insurrection.  Only a handful were charged with seditious conspiracy, a broadly defined offense.

I still believe that Jan. 6 was a protest that became a riot. That is not meant to diminish the legitimate outrage over the day. It was reprehensible — but only a “rebellion” in the most rhetorical sense. More importantly, even if you adopt a dangerously broad definition of “insurrection” or “rebellion,” members of Congress who supported challenging the electoral votes (as Democrats have done in prior years) were exercising constitutionally protected speech.

Before the riot, Cawthorn declared “The Democrats, with all the fraud they have done in this election, the Republicans hiding and not fighting, they are trying to silence your voice,” he said. “Make no mistake about it, they do not want you to be heard.” While he later voted against certifying President Biden’s victory, he also later signed a letter congratulating Biden on the win.

That does not make Cawthorn an insurrectionist and this Board is not tasked with enforcing the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause. The board’s position is itself a threat to democracy and free speech. It is only the latest first anti-democratic measure being used in the name of democracy.

The board interpretation would allow partisan members to toss opponents from ballots to prevent voters from making their own decisions. That is something that has been a practice in countries like Iran, not the United States. Hopefully, a court will make fast work of any such effort in this case. If Democrats believe Cawthorn to be an insurrectionist, they are free to use that label in the campaign. However, the voters, not board members, should be the final arbiters of such questions in a democratic system.

325 thoughts on “North Carolina Board Asserts Right to Disqualify Madison Cawthorn as an “Insurrectionist””

    1. The extent of the collusion and intention of the insurrectionists is still being investigated, and there’s proof of meetings between some of the alt/right groups and Trump’s Campaign. The matter is not settled. The panel has gone after the low-hanging fruit first. The biggest players are yet to be charged.

      1. Natacha: If the “intent of the insurrectionists is still being investigated,” then why are you referring to them as “insurrectionists?” For the sake of comity, I will grant you this: I agree with “Sammy, who referred to the “Jan 6 trouble makers.” That’s what they were, and they sure made a big mess(literally and figuratively) for all of us to clean up. I agree with the type of charges that some deservedly have received.

        But pushing the idea that they were trying to “overturn the election” and “install Trump” is REALLY pushing it beyond credulity. In the same way that an appellate court will “stay” a decision by a lower court until the case can be reviewed, it is my opinion that the original intent of Jan 6 protesters was an attempt to “stay” election results pending review of the various outstanding claims of fraudulent voting. I do not defend the rioters at all. But I also believe there were outside actors attempting to foment a volatile situation..and that, they did.

        1. Out of one side of his mouth, Lin says:

          “But pushing the idea that they were trying to “overturn the election” and “install Trump” is REALLY pushing it beyond credulity.”

          And from the other side of his mouth:

          “But I also believe there were outside actors attempting to foment a volatile situation..and that, they did.”

          ———-

          By pushing the idea that there were outside actors fomenting a volatile situation, you are REALLY pushing that conspiracy theory beyond credulity.

        2. “there were outside actors”
          If by outside actors you mean the President, his lawyers, sitting Congressmen and Senators and a variety of right wing terrorist groups, I agree with you! The goal of the coordinators really was to overturn the election. That was the “right thing” they demanded for Mike Pence to do. What do you think they wanted Pence to do and why?

    2. No, the FBI has NOT said “that January 6 was not an insurrection.” Your memory is faulty.

        1. Yup, based on a single Reuters article that didn’t quote the FBI. I even emailed Turley about it, because Turley keeps misrepresenting what that article said. Sometimes Turley corrects his mistakes (and in his Corrections column, he asks people to let him know about errors, which is why I sometimes do that), but in this case, Turley clearly wants to stick with his misrepresentation instead of correcting it.

          1. While slightly broader, much of Turley’s base is Trump’s base. He notes minor disagreements in tone and language but cannot/will not go against Trump in any major way. Therefore, Turley cannot acknowledge any new information, guilty pleas for sedition and insurrection, or the planning intended to overturn the election that included top Trump officials and lawyers, and sitting members of Congress. To my knowledge, Turley hasn’t said one word in response to the RNC claim of “legitimate political discourse” or the attempts by Trump to get any government entity to seize voting machines.

          2. “Turley keeps misrepresenting “

            ATS, are you still trying to climb the ladder by pulling others down? A ladder has individual steps and you have yet to get on the first rung.

  2. Oh my the January 6 insurrectionist carried deadly weapons just like BLM and ANTIFA in Seattle. They set the court house on fire just like BLM and ANTIFA in Seattle. They trapped the Capitol Police in their Police Station and set it on fire just like BLM and ANTIFA in Seattle. A Continental Soldier had more fire power in his one shot musket than all of the D.C. rioters combined. Al Sharpton instigated the burning death of Jews in New York https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/08/01/al-sharpton-is-not-lifelong-fighter-justice/. Yet it was ok for Al Sharpton to run for President and Madison Cawthorn can’t run for office. Al Sharpton is another of JeffreySilberman’s and Joe Biden’s Democratic buddies.

      1. Based on your knowledge about most of the previous things under discussion, someone should inform you that Al Sharpton is not a razor blade.

  3. Does anyone know if the Free Biden crack pipes are commemorative collectibles or Vote Democrat in 2022 with Joe’s picture on the bowl?

  6. Iowan2 posts:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/02/08/president-trump-issues-an-important-statement-the-united-states-government-is-desperate-to-hide-the-truth/

    When I peruse this “Conservativetreehouse” lunacy, the lying Trumpists here don’t sound nearly as irrational! I now realize where they get some of their nutty ideas.

    Turley never fails to remind his readers that he called for Trump’s Congressional censure in order to make it abundantly clear that he is not a lying Trumpist. Why then do they gravitate to a NeverTrumper like Turley who explicitly rejects the election was stolen narrative?

    He has called Trump a “carnival snake charmer.” Do Trumpists truly believe that Turley sides with them?

    1. I don’t like to respond the retarded troll, but. Jeff, you got something in the conservative tree house that is not true, best pony up or shut up. All of the reporting pieces come complete with govt sourced documents attached.

    2. JeffSilberman, Turley doesn’t side with the Trumpist and he unlike you doesn’t side with the Bidenistas. He sides with The Constitution. Also unlike you.

      1. TiT,

        I’m glad you realize that Turley is a NeverTrumper! He does side with the Constitution AND law and order which does not bode well for Trump. He will never call a criminal prosecution of Trump a “witch-hunt” as do Trumpists, and he will abide by a jury’s guilty verdict and not support the Trumpists who will take to the streets to protest that the trial was rigged though he will defend your right to lie.

        1. Oh now JeffSiberman pulls out his crystal ball to tell us the future. Professor Turley also tells us that not one, let me repeat myself, not one of the January 6 protesters has been charged with insurrection or treason. So how does your crystal ball tell you that they will be found guilty of insurrection or treason when they have not been charged with such crimes. As usual the haziness of your crystal ball has become more and more apparent. Why don’t you try mirror mirror on the wall.

          1. TiT,

            I was referring to Trump being criminally prosecuted. I have stated before that I do not believe 1/6 was an insurrection. I would not give the Q-Anon supporters, Oathkeepers, Proudboys, and those rednecks that much credit to pull off a coup d’etat. It was more akin to a lynching party for Mike Pence.

            Predictions:

            1. *If* Trump is put on trial, Trumpists will claim it is a “witch-hunt”;

            2. *If* Trump is found guilty, Trumpists will claim the trial was “rigged”;

            3. Trumpists will take to the streets to protest and Trump will incite the mob;

            4. Turley will NOT denounce the verdict and will condemn Trump for his reckless speech;

            5. Trumpists on this blog will realize that they have misjudged Turley, and many if not most will leave this forum;

            6. I will get the last laugh.

              1. David,

                True, but I do believe that the Democrats and the MSM are jumping to conclusions that 1/6 was a real insurrection. Perhaps, the committee can show that there was a coordinated effort to get the mob to storm the Capitol to delay the count in order to buy some time to submit these fake State electors certificates. Who knows. I prefer to wait and see.

            2. TDS is a type of crazy behavior Jeff is afflicted with, proven by Jeff in his repetitive talk of a Trump crime. Jeff has the entire scenario worked out where Trump will be accused of a crime and what people say. The derangement goes further as he tells us the jury will convict and what Trump, Turley and Trump supporters will say and do afterward. The only thing he hasn’t worked out is what the crime is.

              That is what psychiatrists listen to all day.

  7. Cawthorn Invited Conservatives To Threaten Their Congressmen

    Mary Degree, a voter from Shelby, NC and registered Democrat, attacked Cawthorn for his role in what she called “an unconstitutional scheme to subvert the constitutional process of counting the electoral votes in Congress.”

    Degree further assailed Cawthorn for his close ties with Mark Meadows, the former NC congressman from the same congressional district who went on to serve as President Trump’s Chief of Staff.

    The complaint also cites several statements from Cawthorn, including to a Turning Point USA convention in Florida weeks before the January 6th riot.

    “Call your congressman and feel free – you can lightly threaten them,” Cawthorn is recorded as saying to the crowd. “Say, ‘if you don’t support election integrity, I’m coming after you. Madison Cawthorn’s coming after you. Everybody’s coming after you.'”

    Edited From:

    https://abc11.com/madison-cawthorn-lawsuit-state-board-of-elections-nc-primary/11546909/

    1. Anonymous, Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams still say they were cheated out of office. After Hilary lost the insurrection against Trump lasted for four years. Don’t you remember that they admitted that they were insurrectionist because they called themselves “The Resistance.” I understand, selective memory is a malady that you may have been born with rather than your choice. I’ll pass on the compassion

      1. Darren removed the long excerpt I posted on this topic, taken from the prologue of Mollie Hemingway’s book, “Rigged: How the Media, Big Tech and the Democrats Seized Our Elections” (Regnery, 2021). Since Darren removed my post, I am assuming I violated a blog rule and will not be infantile and re-post it. There is a good summary of Hemingway’s argument at Hillsdale College website. Link follows. Hemingway’s book is a must if one wishes to understand the long, documented history of Democrats crying “rigged” for every election they have lost. So yes, the Nov 2020 election was rigged, but not for the reasons Trump characterizes that election

        https://dc.hillsdale.edu/News/Latest-News/Mollie-Hemingway-Outlines-Rigged”-2020-Election-at/

        1. Estovir, I hate to disagree that the “Nov 2020 election was rigged, but not for the reasons Trump characterizes that election” I’ve listened to Hemmingway, spoken to her and was even given a signed copy of her book.

          Thank you for the Hillsdale review, something I must have missed. This is a good but short review. She says, “My book is about how Joe Biden won the 2020 election. Yet without the help of the media, big tech, election law changes, and even corrupt polling, it wouldn’t have even been close.” Those three things are repeated by Trump when discussing the election. I don’t think Trump has the same type of sophistication Molly has, so perhaps you are put off by his manner of speech and specific characteristics of his that neither you nor I agree with.

          We both heard was mostly spin by the left media or rallies where sometimes hyperbole was overwhelming. There is a lot more to Trump than that which you saw.

          I will copy 2 paragraphs from the book because this speaks to both Democrats and Republicans. (from pg. 75)

          “Republicans had very good reason to be wary of Democrats’ attempts to significantly change how elections were conducted in the middle of the election. Some horror stories in the run-up to November 3 would confirm their reservations.

          After the vote counting in the Iowa Caucus turned into a complete fiasco, even members of the Democrat Party were raising questions about whether Democrats were conducting elections fairly”.

          1. Congrats on meeting her. No one of any importance comes to my neck of the woods. I believe Mollie’s colleague, Margot Cleveland, is an attorney, ND grad. Mollie seems to shoot straight. I agree with her in that:

            However, Trump’s flaws must be weighed against the disturbing nature of the opposition arrayed against him—an army of corporate-funded left-wing activists who excused and encouraged violent riots across the country; technology oligarchs who made unprecedented efforts to normalize censorship; state and local officials who radically altered the way Americans vote in the middle of an election for partisan advantage; an ostensibly free press that credulously and willfully published fake news to damage the President… page 10

            As for listening to left wing media, you know better than to think I read their agitprop. I purposely refuse to visit any of their websites to deprive them of web traffic and hence revenue. However, this isnt about Trump. My antennas have been up for decades about Marxists. I see the Dems of today as Marxists, and this from a lifelong registered Democrat up until Dec 2020. The Democrats since Jan 2017 are guilty, in my eyes, of treason against a US President and all Americans.

            1. “As for listening to left wing media, you know better than to think I read their agitprop.”

              Absolutely Estovir, but I didn’t mean to say you read their ‘agitcrap’. We are both exposed to left-wing propaganda through what we read and hear, even if it seemingly comes from the right. Who are some of those people in the Lincoln Project that are Never Trumpers? Many come from the left or have been on both sides. National Review had a good number of Never Trumpers. Some later apologized. Others didn’t and became supporters of the left. They are not conservatives or classical liberals.

              I have no gripe with those that dislike Trump because of good reasons. I understand your feelings towards Trump, which caused me reservations, but I look at results. The left is animalistic and destructive. They know how to destroy, but they cannot build. History has proven that in every case.

              I was afraid Trump was more of a leftist when he first ran. Though I remember him talking about being President decades ago, I never thought he was serious about it or wanted the Presidency until there was such a void that he decided to run. That probably surprised him, for as we know, Trump acts through his gut, and his gut has proven correct in most places.

              Trump is an outsider, and many right-wing media support insiders in Congress and the states who did not want an outsider because he didn’t have any insider connections. They were afraid he would ruin the game both Democrats and Republicans play. In NYC, Trump had constant fights with some leading political figures. He showed them up, even one who was tolerable to me. (You can look up the skating rink example.) The politicians needed Trump and more like him, who helped save NYC from bankruptcy.

              He has an image problem where his enemies expand on the negatives forgetting about the positives. We think of him as a bit unruly and filling up an entire room by himself, but when I have seen him enter a room just to say hello, he has done so with the utmost respect for all and barely enters past the corner (I do not know him personally.) Most of what we see on TV is the promoter. That is what promoters do.

              He likes pretty women and has excellent taste. I think most men like pretty women, but perhaps he likes them too much for you or me. That is none of my business. It wasn’t my business when JFK had his affairs except when he escaped the WH and his secret service protection.

              Mollie is, like many others, friendly and sincerely interested in the American way of life.

              As for 2024, if all things are similar to today and Trump is healthy and desires the run, I will support him. We need politicians to break up the club filled with political elitists. Few have the backbone of Trump, so they are hard to find. Additionally, by him running, I expect the leftist efforts to focus so much on Trump that more Democrats will lose because he sucked the air out of the room.

        2. The “blog rule” that you violated is otherwise known as copyright law. Your long quote exceeded fair use.

    2. Cawthorn Invited Conservatives To Threaten Their Congressmen

      Steve Scalise and Rand Paul could not be reached for comment.

      1. In Virginia we watched with horror as Democrats like Maxine Waters called on Americans to assault, harass and physically threaten Trump officials, including the savage treatment Sarah H. Sanders received at the “Red Hen Restaurant” in Lexington, VA. Maxine Waters was de facto inciting people to assault Trump officials. Surprisingly Charles Schumer rebuked Waters

    3. Whose side are you on? Your comment seems like a confession that Cawthorn did nothing wrong.

  8. Jonathan: The RNC says Jan. 6 was “ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse”. Kevin McCarthy literally ran away from a reporter who asked” “Was it a riot or insurrection?” Mitch McConnell was less reticent: “It was a violent insurrection with the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election…”. Seems Republicans can’t even agree. I side with McConnell. The DOJ apparently agrees with McConnell because they have charged Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the OathKeepers, with “seditious conspiracy”. But as the resident Republican legal expert cover-up guy you continue to insist Jan. 6 was just a “riot”. Like Fox and other Republicans you bizarrely blame everything on the Capitol police and Nancy Pelosi for allegedly failing to anticipate the first attempt to overturn the government since 1812. Tucker Carlson has gone further by falsely claiming the FBI fomented the insurrection. Others have falsely suggested Antifa was involved. The attempts by Republicans and you to rewrite history, what we all saw on TV, won’t work.

    What apparently frightens you is that enterprising lawyers want to disqualify GOP Rep. Madison Cawthorn (North Carolina) from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. There is plenty of evidence against Cawthorn and other right-wing Republicans who supported Trump’s attempted putsch. Cawthorn promoted Trump’s “Save America” rally. He said “it’s time to fight”. Cawthorn said those arrested and charged were “political hostages” and he would like to “bust” them out of jail. He went further: “If our election systems continue to be rigged and continue to be stolen, then it’s going to lead to one place, and it’s bloodshed”. Cawthorn follows a long list of those who have engaged in rebellion and sedition from North Carolina. In 1961 when the southern slave states left the Union, ten Southern senators were expelled from the Senate–including North Carolina Senator Thomas Bragg. Maybe Cawthorn should be expelled from the House because he supported the insurrection.

    You say the “Democrats are playing a dangerous game with the long-dormant provision in Section 3…”. No, the real “dangerous game” was when Trump and his supporters tried to stage a coup d’etat to overturn the results of a legitimate election to keep Trump in power. Cawthorn was part of the plot. Section 3 may be “long-dormant” but is needed now to prevent any repeat of Jan. 6.

    1. Democrat politicians, from Biden on down the line, are a bunch of lying dog-faced pony soldiers.

    2. Dennis McIntyre, in the past I have recommended that you provide a link to support your statements about what this or that person has said or done but you never will present substantiation for your claims. Surely you are not so lazy as to not share your evidence of your claims in order to allow for our enlightenment. Maybe I’m wrong but it seems that a pattern has developed. Please help us understand.

    3. There is plenty of evidence against Cawthorn and other right-wing Republicans who supported Trump’s attempted putsch.

      Plenty of evidence against Cawthorn, you say. But your position is belied by your failure to cite any such evidence makes.

      And Trump didn’t plan a putsch. Trump wanted to do something Trump believed to be legal. That’s not a putsch; it’s not an insurrection; it’s petitioning the government for a redress of grievances. The government said no, and Trump accepted it– just like he did every time a court ruled against him.

      And the claim of a coup is laughable. No coup is possible without the cooperation of the military and/or media.

      And you assert that Cawthorn was part of “the plot” even though tyou aren’t aware of any “plot”. You are a partisan liar.

    4. “The RNC says Jan. 6 . . .”

      Trump approved the deployment of some 20,000 National Guard troops at the Capitol. Pelosi refused to authorize their deployment. If those troops had been at the Capitol, there would not have been a Jan. 6.

      Why did Pelosi refuse to deploy the National Guard? Why won’t she answer any questions about her refusal? Why won’t she make public the communications relevant to that deployment? Is she attempting to hide her utter incompetence? Or something more sinister?

      3. Any investigation should initially create a layered form of inquiry where the top layer is always in focus. Dems have focussed on the bottom layers, those with no involvement, all for political reasons. They will never reach the top, Pelosi because they already know the truth. What happened was avoidable but desired and contributed to by the uppermost layer.

  10. More of Turley’s paid drivel from the files of Fox. First of all, the reason Jan 6th wasn’t a protest that got out of control is because there was nothing to protest–Biden simply got more votes than Trump, proven and re-proven by recounts, re-recounts and dozens of lawsuits dismissed for lack of anything resembling evidence. Losing an election is not something that can be protested, but that’s not why the Trump insurrectionists gathered at the Capitol. They were there at Trump’s insistence to prevent Biden’s certified votes from being formally presented to Congress, because their stupid hero didn’t, and still doesn’t understand that the V.P.’s role in reading the certified vote totals from each state is purely ceremonial. The VP has NO power to reject certified vote totals from each state. Trump still thought he could circumvent this by having slates of HIS electors dummy up certified forms claiming that he won the popular vote in 5 swing states. Those fake “electors” created forged documents using state seals and sent them in anyway, hoping that this would stop the real votes from being accepted or at least create confusion, and that somehow Pence this would give Pence a reason to reject the true certified totals, or declare that the winner couldn’t be determined and/or that Congress or Republican-led legislatures could change the outcome in these 5 states despite the popular vote. In Michigan, the fake electors tried to force their way into the State House because Michigan law requires the Electoral College to meet on a specific date and at a specific time at the State House to sign the official forms, but the fake “electors” were turned away by a security guard who informed them that the REAL electors were inside, and that they couldn’t enter. The fake form said that the fake electors met “at” the State House, not “in” the State House as required by law. Bear in mind there wasn’t and still isn’t any proof of widespread voter fraud. This is all to appease the massive ego of a narcissist who cheated to get into office and who tried to cheat to stay in office. These are facts,and should scare the hell out of anyone who is an American patriot, along with the fact that the Republican Party still goes along with it even to the point of censuring members of their party who are involved in investigating this matter.

    Trump set the stage for this insurrection even before Election Day because all polls predicted he would lose, which he did. He went on “Stop the Steal” campaigns to convince his fans that they were cheated out of their choice for President by a “rigged election”, with absolutely no proof. He exhorted them to gather at the Capitol, and to “fight like hell” or they wouldn’t have a country any more. Contrary to the picture Turley is attempting paint, so far, the small fish are the only ones who have gone to trial or have pleaded. The Jan 6th Commission is investigating evidence of an apparent coordination of effort by various groups like the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and others with members of Trump’s campaign, so the full extent of the planning and coordination with Trump and his campaign with these groups is just being uncovered. So, Turley is wrong in claiming that the only crimes were relatively minor things like trespassing. Cases against the bigger fish are yet to come. But, that’s the Fox narrative: Jan 6th was just some “yahoos” who got out of control, ignoring the fact that they bludeoned police officers, broke windowns, smashed doors, 5 people died, they urinated and defecated inside our Capitol building, entered Congressional offices, stole a laptop, rifled through papers, and erected a gallows shouting “hang Mike Pence” because Pence wouldn’t violate his oath to the Constitution. Again, what does this conduct have to do with “protesting” the fact that their hero lost the election?

    1. Trump has been right about almost everything. He’s right about this, too. Democrats know what they did to steal the election. So do we.

      1. Please produce for me, I beg you, the proof that Trump is “right” about his “landslide victory” being “stolen” away. Please. If you can’t produce actual evidence, then admit that you believe all the polls were wrong, that 50 Secretaries of State were wrong, that dozens of lawsuits dismissed for lack of evidence were wrong, that multiple recounts proving Biden’s victory was wrong solely because you believe Trump over all of this evidence. WHAT DID DEMOCRATS DO TO “STEAL THE ELECTION”. Put up or shut up.

        2. Natacha………..been meaning to ask: Did Rocky and Bullwinkle renew your contract?

        3. Well. There are 700,000 ballots in Arizona that have no chain of custody. And, all the absentee ballots collected on drop boxes were illegal. 16 months out, but the truth is shining through.

          1. All of these conspiracy theories have been disproven. Tell me: were the 700,000 voters registered? Was there any proof that there were duplicates? Who says the absentee ballots “were illegal”? Cite me some verifiable proof. Even the Cyber Ninjas couldn’t provide proof that there was anything amiss in Arizona. Trump desperately wanted Arizona because John McCain deep-sixed his effort to overturn Obamacare.

    2. But hey, what’s to complain about? Now that Covid is OVER, Biden is sending us free masks (Made in China, of course), and free Covid home tests (made in China, of course) and now, Biden is giving away free crack pipes, too?

      How does it get any better than this, eh?

      1. The Biden government crackdown on our free speech is coming next…

        Biden government issued its latest bulletin equating political free speech with ‘domestic terrorism’ and those freely speaking such things will be labeled as “ideologically-motivated violent extremists”…. they are not referring to Antifa, or BLM, of course. No, they are talking about conservatives and smelly Trump supporters.

        This is war being declared on our free speech and first amendment rights.

        It has never been a more frightening time to be an American conservative — living in fear of our own government.

        1. Justin Castreaux in Canada called those who choose to not take the mRNA shots – for any reason — anti-vaxxers, who are often “racists, extremists, misogynists”…..

          The memo has gone out. Anti-vaxxers are “extremists”…..

          Trump voters are “extremists”….racists, white supremacists…..

          You get the picture….

  11. I am disappointed in Mitch McConnell’s statement to media. I think it would have been more prudent-as the quintessential face of the Republican Party, for him to simply state a regret that Jan. 6 had gotten out of control, -or even to state his displeasure with Jan. 6 protesters, or something similar. But I’m not certain what end was achieved by his calling it an “insurrection” -other than to lend credence to the perception that the Republican party is divided on this. He had previously not said this…He must have known that his words would be pounced upon by the media (they were). .bad timing and we know we will hear his words repeated over and over come election time…

    1. “He had previously not said this”

      Actually, McConnell called it a “failed insurrection” on January 6, 2021. It is not new for him to characterize it this way.

      1. In the heat of the moment on the very day, Jan 6 2021, McConnell emotionally referred to it as a failed insurrection. As facts and reflection proceeded, -just 6 or 7 days later-, he addressed Congress by referring to it as “an attack,” and as “the event” of Jan. 6. To my knowledge, he has never since called it an “insurrection.”–which is why his current statement is all over media. Please correct me if I am wrong.

        1. If you want to know whether your new conjecture is right or wrong, you can investigate it yourself.

          1. I did. You’ve used this cop-out with several other commenters. My position stands unless you disprove it. Thanks.

            1. I agree that your conjecture stands as a conjecture until it’s either proven (at which point it becomes fact) or disproven (at which point it’s known to be false). But I have no burden to disprove your conjecture, and it’s not a cop-out to tell you that.

    2. “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard today.”

      – Real President Donald J. Trump
      __________________________

      “We need to go IN-TO the capitol.”

      – Ray Epps, FBI/CIA/NSA Covert False Flag Operator,

  12. AMERICA PERPETUATING A LIE

    Since we’re regressing to the 1868 ratification of the 14th Amendment (improperly ratified under the duress of brutal post-Lincoln-“Reign-of-Terror” military occupation), we must similarly return to the extant immigration law of the same year, the Naturalization Act of 1802, which required citizens to be “…free white person(s)…,” which, in turn, required compassionate repatriation, aka deportation, of freed slaves.

    When we revisit that era, we are compelled to discover that every last act of Lincoln was unconstitutional, and remains unconstitutional and illegitimate to this day, from denying secession through suspending habeas corpus and confiscating private property, to violating immigration law and failing to deport illegal aliens.

    It took only 13 years to correct the aberration of Prohibition.
    _______________________________________________

    “[We gave you] a republic, if you can keep it.”

    – Ben Franklin
    ___________

    You couldn’t.

  13. Regardless of this case, it should disturb all of us that Trump and his allies swore a supreme loyalty oath – Oath of Office – to follow and defend the U.S. Constitution to the best of his ability.

    There were dozens of court rulings – by almost 50 GOP appointed judges – that removed all doubt that Biden won the election. Trump knew this fact and continued to push the Big Lie.

    From an Oath of Office perspective, Trump knew the constitutional due process was legitimate before January 6 and did not to the best of his ability honor his Oath of Office (his employment contract).

    Conservatives seem to like constitutional due process on things like the 2nd Amendment but it’s a complete package, you can’t just cherry-pick the parts you like. If the 2nd Amendment has any legal weight in law, so does the 14th Amendment and so does the Oath of Office. The premise of a constitutional right is that it’s a “legal restraint” on the other two political branches and that is enforced by the Judicial Branch courts.

    Do gun owners and property owners really want to weaken this constitutional system defending a guy who violated his own Oath of Office? That is real precedent being made here that will affect future cases. Do we want presidents and other officials only following the U.S. Constitution when convenient? Trump agreed to this employment contract and continued the Big Lie knowing it wasn’t true.

  14. “One way or another, the Cawthorn suit is going to make some pretty important law about Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment — including to whom its disqualification provisions apply and by which actors it should be (and can be) enforced.”

    Maybe.

    I sense the Democrats are starting to realize a victory in some of the these matters before the court, might be pyrrhic, and better left as hypotheticals, rather than precedent.

    With this Hawthorn case, a court ruling allowing the state election board to disqualify a candidate for something that has not been tried in court, would allow Republicans to use the exact same reasoning. Democrats have voted to reject certified results. insurrection, thus lies in the eyes of the beholder. Texas has a congress critter that has refused to accept certified slate of electors.

    The NYT has already written an op-ed voicing the truth that the Jan 6 commission has run far afield constitutional powers. If subpoenas are going to be enforced against citizens and past and present office holders, those powers become the powers of Republicans in control of congress. In that light, VP Pence was asked if he would refuse a subpoena, from the Jan 6 committee? He did not say yes. Rather, he felt the House might be over reaching and would only decide if he in fact got subpoenaed.

    1. I honestly don’t know what more proof self-proclaimed liberals could need at this point in the insanity soup that their party is taking cues from Adolf Hitler or Mao. Are they really *that* privileged? Are they really that, ‘Nothing happened to me, because i am an *important* person.’, obtuse in the face of all of this? Sure seems that way, and they don’t seem to realize they are a minority. Their ‘party of the people’ hasn’t been anything resembling that for a solid 30-40 years. I won’t give the Republicans of that time period a full pass either, but come on. How blind are people???

      1. Democrats are possessed by their tribal identity politics and only ideologically driven — like a religion for them.

        It’s why Democrats would vote to give Mayor Bill DiBlasio a second term to ruin the greatest city in the world EVEN MORE than he already had –rather than vote in a Republican to try something different to fix the problems that are destroying a once great city.

  16. I don’t have anything left for the modern, American Democratic party. If nothing else, they are cowards, and I do not want to live in a country run by cowards. Enough is enough. Anyone with two eyes to see can see what is going on here, and it is shameful. I have never, not once in my life prior to the past few years, been so ashamed of people that have the temerity to call themselves liberals or progressives. This is grade school parody with all too real real-life consequences. A joke. A pathetic one. I will never vote Dem again, and if that means voting for Cookie Monster, I will do it to keep these leftist thugs out of power.

    1. PS – I would love it if Trump DIDN’T run. He is too toxic. If he wants to serve in a lesser capacity, fine. I too, find him to be far too egotistical and abrasive. But this – THIS – cannot continue. And there will be a really, really big mess if the Dems do not relent. And yes, this is entirely, 1000% on the dems. ALL of it is on the utter and complete insanity that constitutes the modern Democratic party. Again: those of you that still, in your comfortable incubators, think you are voting for JFK or that any of the issues of the 60s even matter anymore – WAKE THE ***K UP.

      1. Pay attention to the recent comments of Mitch McConnell. It sure seems like old Mitch was in on it….along with Pelosi and gang…

        1. It is long past time for McConnell to go home and stay there and meddle not in politics.

          Old Cowboy Wisdom…..”When you ride for the Brand….you ride for the Brand!”.

          You don’t halfway ride for the Brand.

      2. True, but typical of the NY metro area. The same can be said of the squad that does not have Trumps redeeming habits of staying out of wars and advancing a healthy US economy.

    2. Yes, and our choice come midterm elections in November is to vote for either 1) more tyranny (Democrat)….or 2) freedoms and civil liberties (Republican).

      *Also keeping eyes wide open to the fact that the Uni-party is real. The establishment/administrative/deep state is real.

      As ‘we the people’ continue fighting amongst ourselves, becoming more polarized, more divided and more distracted from what is really going on in Washington DC’s Uni-Party corruption.

      A house divided against itself cannot stand.

      People divided by parties and fighting each other cannot stand against the tyrannical central government that is CAUSING the division in the first place.

      Look at the Freedom Convoys of Truckers for example. They represent the fight for freedom for ALL people, parties, persuasions AGAINST government tyranny and control…not one party over another….which is why they must be smeared, dismissed, destroyed at all cost).

      A VOTE this next election that moves the country toward FREEDOM is without question a vote for Republicans.

      If you want MORE TYRANNY, vote Democrat.

      The choice for our country could not be more clear.

  17. The last provision of the 14th Amendment grants congress the power to act to enforce its provisions – it does not grant any power to the states to do so. And Congress can do so only by “appropriate” legislation, which would be by a criminal statute. The courts will determine what is appropriate, that is how our judicial review system works. Independent state action will never qualify as “appropriate.”

    2. Trump is a pathological liar. It is not criminal to speak the truth.

      If Trump actually wanted to speak the truth, he’d testify under oath.

      1. Your basis for your statement is?

        Are you a Clinical Psychologist having examined Trump or are you just offering an individual opinion?

        Trump is exactly right on this…..the Left is making every effort to punish anyone that speaks out against the Leftist Agenda…..exactly as you did in your post.

        You offer a completely baseless accusation and I suppose in your own warped thinking belive it to be true.

        Offer the evidence….corrobrate your statement.

        1. It’s my opinion based on the thousands of demonstrably false claims that Trump has made. Here’s one discussion that links to evidence of the thousands:
          https://www.thestar.com/news/world/analysis/2019/06/05/donald-trump-has-now-said-more-than-5000-false-claims-as-president.html

          You may disagree, but my opinion certainly isn’t “baseless.” It’s quite well-founded.

          Again: If Trump actually wanted to speak the truth, he’d testify under oath. He’d also encourage Pence and many other people to testify under oath. Trump doesn’t want the truth. He wants to keep promoting his Big Lie that the election was stolen.

          1. As usual deflection to a link that he won’t stand behind or he would defend the 5000 claims in the article.

            He proves that very few, if any, of those claims are true because he can’t put them forward for debate. He has no defense. He is a liar so he hides his claims knowing that his lies will be proven false.

            This is how Anonymous the Stupid acts. 1)Lie or deflect. 2)Link. 3)Lie or deflect. No honesty exists where he is concerned.

              1. At least this time the ignoramus got the acronym spelled correctly.

                1)Lie or deflect. 2)Link. 3)Lie or deflect. No honesty exists where you are concerned.

            1. Ironically, you make a statement about “the first example of a lie, according to The Star,” when the Star itself does not refer to them as lies, only as false statements, and it explains why it has made that choice.

  19. Key word in your phrase is “largely:” “Those charged for their role in the attack that day are largely facing trespass and other less serious charges.” We now have sedition charges. On a scale of 1 to 10, the January 6 insurrection was one.. Your argument, therefore, comes down to the threshold of casualties required to support insurrection under the law.

    1. No, it doesn’t come down to that. Cawthorn has to have been shown to participate in any insurrection that might have occurred. All he did was engage in 100% legal speech.

    2. Be careful what you wish for. The US Code is clear. Consequently, as Mollie Hemingway proves, the Democrats deserve the full brunt of US Code for the charge of treason.

      §2381. Treason

      Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

      https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=%2Fprelim%40title18%2Fpart1%2Fchapter115&edition=prelim

  20. What is surprisingly left out here (correct me if I am wrong) is that, even if NC election board deems it has the authority (which I see as a stretch), the last sentence of Section 3 allows Congress, by a two-thirds vote in both houses, to “remove the disability.” Democrats want to move fast on this, realizing the potential weakness of the asserted NC election board authority. So a member of U.S. Congress, Democrat Steve Cohen, has now proposed a Congressional bill to allow AG Merrick Garland to argue before a three-judge panel that Cawthorn and others engaged in insurrection. Such a finding would allow Congress to then move on a disqualifier bar, and it is unlikely (IMHO) that both houses could reach a 2/3 vote to remove the disqualification

    1. Correction: Cohen’s proposed bill was introduced last year, I think. So this week’s NC effort might be in response to a failure of Congress to pass Cohen’s bill?

      1. Lin – Was that before or after his KFC chicken meal at the Judiciary meeting? That stunt went over like a #art in a divers helmet.

        1. Sure did! But I apologize for my post, I keep forgetting it is 2022, and Steve Cohen proposed that in February 2021. ooops

    2. Merrick already has the authority to ask a grand jury if there is evidence that Cawthorn either planned, prepared, organized, aided, or abetted the attack on the Capitol.

      No new laws are needed.

      1. Michael Ejercito: (I think you meant to say that Merrick has the authority to convene a grand jury…It is up to Merrick/DOJ to produce the evidence, which a grand jury then reviews to determine if such evidence is sufficient to charge…)

Comments are closed.