“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 Disqualification Clause has also been used by Democrats like Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) who demanded the disqualification of the 120 House Republicans. Democratic lawyer Marc Elias also pushed this absurd claim.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has fueled these efforts and declared that “it is essential that we preserve the narrative of January 6th.” Part of that narrative is that this was not a riot but an “insurrection,” an actual “rebellion” against our country. Pelosi’s concern over the viability of that narrative is well-based as shown by a CBS News poll. The majority of the public does not believe that this was an “insurrection” despite the mantra-like repetition of members of Congress and the media. The public saw that terrible day unfold a year ago and saw it for what it was: a protest that became a riot.
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 have largely faced trespass and other less serious charges — rather than insurrection or treason. Only a dozen or so individuals have faced seditious conspiracy charges, which is a broad crime that covers intentionally interfering with an official proceeding.
Trump has not been charged over his role on January 6th. Nevertheless, Reich views the necessity of a charge, let alone a conviction, as a triviality.
“Can any of us who saw (or have learned through the painstaking work of the January 6 committee) what Trump tried to do to overturn the results of the 2020 election have any doubt he will once again try to do whatever necessary to regain power, even if illegal and unconstitutional?”
Reich believes that this is all that is required to bar the leading candidate running on the Republican side. Imagine the implications of what he is suggesting. He would bar candidates based solely on how he viewed their conduct in prior years as fostering insurrection.
“Filing deadlines for 2024 presidential candidates will come in the next six months, in most states. Secretaries of state – who in most cases are in charge of deciding who gets on the ballot – must refuse to place Donald Trump’s name on the 2024 ballot, based on the clear meaning of section three of the 14th amendment to the US constitution.”
While consistent with someone who warned that free speech is tyranny, this is not the defense but the denial of democracy. Under Reich’s approach, Republicans could bar Hillary Clinton or others from the ballot for what they viewed as treasonous acts. No criminal charge or conviction is needed. It is just based on “what we saw” in prior years.
Justice Louis Brandeis once warned that “The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” From his call to limit free speech to his effort to bar opposing candidates from ballots, Robert Reich is rapidly becoming one of those dangerous men of zeal.
Abraham Lincoln would have disapproved of any law that barred Alexander Hamilton Stephens from serving in Congress. They were friends and Lincoln greatly respected his mind. (Lincoln said: “A little, slim, pale-faced consumptive man just concluded the very best speech of an hour’s length I ever heard.”) Stephens was a moderate Unionist who opposed succession but followed his state, Georgia, when it decided to leave the union. http://www.nellaware.com/blog/alexander-stephens.html
Finally, there is a relationship between the two commentaries offered by JT today: the violence of AntiFa and the attempt of Democrats to disqualify Republicans from the ballot. They can be captured in the overworked word “fascism.”.
“Justice Louis Brandeis once warned that “The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” From his call to limit free speech to his effort to bar opposing candidates from ballots, Robert Reich is rapidly becoming one of those dangerous men of zeal.”
*************************
I thought we all quit listening to this munchkin years ago. That said, he is an annoying little man with hardly an ounce of self-respect. That he once held high government postion ought to tell you all you need to know about the Dims. As for being “dangerous,” well he never threatens me with his inanity.
This is just a giant grift by a tiny man. Reich has carved out his niche, gets published and makes his dirty money, it is how the game is played.
I am old enough to remember the brouhaha created by the book he wrote after he quit the Clinton Administration. He trashed the Democrat Party, some of his colleagues in the administration, as well as some people outside of government that he dealt with as Labor Secretary.
The book contained, indisputable, provable lies that caused a stir. The publisher removed the lies from subsequent paperback editions.
So of course, he gets a “professorship” at Berkeley and a regular column at The Guardian.
Remember it isn’t “Democracy ™” if the “correct” result is not obtained.
Brexit – not democracy
Orban – not democracy
Trump – not democracy
AfD, Vox – not democracy
S@@ew “Our Democracy ™”.
Democracy – the god that failed.
antonio
The funniest one is how they portrayed SCOTUS reversing Roe as this enormous threat to democracy. That was when Democrats were unsure if it was a winning issue or not. But now with a few elections in which abortion has been affirmed in red and swing states, Democrats are planning to run on it nationally. You know, “democratically.”
They are complete and utter hypocritical frauds. About everything.
The evidence is that the abortion issue has MOSTLY had no effect at all.
Those people who vote based on abortion were votig the same way before.
The one exception is single white women. and that exception is large enough to matter politically.
I personally beleive SCOTUS erred. There is an important recognizeable constitutional right involved – that of control of your own body.
But the court has been schitzophrenic on that for the past two centuries.
Bell v. Buck is still good law – and was cited in Cases challenging Covid policy.
The court should have scrapped Row – which was abysmal. Casey which is actually what was in place was more realistic – but fixated on viability as a legal principle – which it is NOT.
The correct decision is that a woman has a constitutional right to remove – even a 9month “baby” from her body – even if that results in its death.
But the right is to Remove – not to kill. That the state is free to regulate the process of removal to protect the life of the fetus, so long as it does not substantially increase the risk to the woman.
But none on the court are prepared to recognize the actual right of people to control their own body. As obvious and fundimental a right as that is. It is a ninth amendment right and left and Right the court has its head in the sand regarding the ninth amendment.
When Roe v. Wade was decided, I was subject to the draft. Did (or do) men have a “right” to “control their own body”?
Oliver Wendell Holmes is often quoted as saying one’s freedom to swing one’s fist stops at the point of another person’s nose. So shouldn’t a woman have the right to control her own body unless and until it contains another person’s body? It could also be argued that she already abdicated her right to control her own body by having consensual sex, of which pregnancy is a potential consequence.
“When Roe v. Wade was decided, I was subject to the draft.”
As was I.
” Did (or do) men have a “right” to “control their own body”?”
Yes.
“Oliver Wendell Holmes is often quoted as saying one’s freedom to swing one’s fist stops at the point of another person’s nose.”
All rights stop when they infringe on the actual rights of others.
“So shouldn’t a woman have the right to control her own body”
Yes
“unless and until it contains another person’s body?”
Nope. she still has control of her own Body. Nut she ONLY has the right to Evict the other person from her body.
“It could also be argued that she already abdicated her right to control her own body by having consensual sex, of which pregnancy is a potential consequence.”
It is perfectly correct to assert that the one follows from the other.
It is WRONG to argue that means rights were abdicated.
Humans are frequently subject to the natural consequences of our actions – There is no human right which Trumps nature.
Rights are with respect to other humans not nature.
At the same time the advance of the human race frequently means that we can overcome the limits nature imposes on us.
Again that is NOT about rights.
Reich is known as the “Poison Dwarf” for a reason….he is toxic to any discussion remotely involving commonsense…..he would fit right in with the Loons in Minnesota….no insult to the State Bird of the same name up there.
Look at the latest craziness from that fine bastion of Democrat foolishness.
Logging Hate Think incidents by Police…..not Hate Crimes….just complaints about someone’s Butt Hurt upon being exposed to a differing viewpoint.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/arguing-covid-came-china-land-minnesota-government-bias-registry-new-bill
Mocking the physical appearance of others is always a good way to make a point.
Yeah we know. Orange Man bad?? The left is good at mocking appearances, but don’t you dare hit them back, right??
Just like the right, the left frequently mocks the physical appearance of its opponents. Black conservatives are subjected to what may be the most vicious and evil mockery the left has to offer. One interesting phenomenon in 2023 America is when Christians briefly interrupt their mockery to attend church services, something that occurs particularly on the right, since there are so many non-believers on the left. Not a good look.
What is it with the “we know”? Could it be that some conservatives don’t want or need other conservatives speaking for them?
Agree. Never mock little Robert, or he may jump up and bite you on the ankle.
Of course, anyone who disagrees with the official line coming out of Washington is a traitor; in the same way that Jefferson was a traitor to King George III. Three cheers for the traitors to illegitimate, lying authoritarian usurpers of our rights….even if they are suffering from dementia.
I was going to comment that all great dictators are short, but that would be snide. Instead I refer readers to an article in the Washington Free Beacon, which discusses the efforts of Reich to stop development of low-income housing in his posh SF neighborhood. The article is entitled: “Left-Wing UC Berkeley Professor Doesn’t Want Poor People Moving Into His Posh Neighborhood” and can be found here:https://freebeacon.com/satire/robert-reich-nimby/: Of course, he supports low-income housing in your neighborhood.
“Terminate the constitution” DJT.
Is the Constitution absolute or something?
The National Socialist Democrat WOKE Party working over time to take us Civil War.
Even if Reich were a “man of zeal,” the Brandeis quote is inapt since Reich is certainly not “well-meaning,” although he definitely is “without understanding.”
What is truly incredulous is that Reich and his anti 1st Amendment positions have received virtually no coverage in the legacy media, despite his prominence. Lucky for him he’s not a Republican.
If Reich is looking into anti-democratic actions in America, perhaps he should focus on the politically motivated, highly selective investigations and arrests of conservatives by the FBI and the DOJ, conducted with the assistance of federal intelligence agencies. Perhaps he should focus on widespread censorship by the federal government of social media communication that the Biden White House disagrees with. And, perhaps he should focus on recent changes in election procedures across the country that have been made by entities other than state legislatures.
I used to respect Reich.
Now, he seems to have gone down the TDS ship.
I’m sorry, but how could you ever have respected Robert Reich? He has always been a political hack with no principles whatsoever.
Pudnhead,
That was back when he was on America Media’s Market Place, before TDS took over his mind.
That was also before NPR went all woke and could easily dismiss their bias and still get the news.
UF, Woke is a word only recently used, but that doesn’t mean corporations didn’t meet the definition before. PBS certainly did and so did Robert Reich. I think the dividing line between Reich the Nobel Prize Laureate and author of his book on economics was after writing the book. If I am correct much of his rhetoric is contrary to what he wrote in his book.
You might be confusing Robert Reich with Paul Krugman.
Creekan, you are absolutely right. Thank you. Both of them have the same affect on me. I was thinking of the taller one.
Robert Reich’s Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) has consumed his brain and Trump is living there rent free. You can’t fix the kind of stupid that Robert Reich represents.
Consuming Robert Reich’s brain was a trivial task.
Ah yes…. the always self-righteous Robert Reich. A real defender of free speech that Robert. The American Civil War was an ACTUAL rebellion Robert. The January 6th protest wouldn’t have even been a slow day during Mardi Gras, although the U.S. Capitol Police Use of Force policy did manage to “justify” the killing an unarmed woman with a backpack so it wasn’t a total loss for Democrats since she was a Trump supporter. Thank you, Jonathan, for an excellent article.
The Left is not interested in saving democracy. To the leftist elites, destruction is, and has always been, a means to an end.
Reich has always been a nut.
He’s not a zealot — he’s a toy of the Democrat party, and this is just part of the disinformation campaign to keep Trump from running. They will deal with Kennedy by refusing any primary debates and freezing him out of the media, and they’ll deal with Trump through absurd law suits and outright lies. It’s about time the Republicans realized that the Democrats are out for blood, that the good old days of being civil to the guys across the aisle are long dead, and that there is no tactic too low or too dangerous Democrats won’t stoop to to win the next election. Oh, and that means Kamala will be the “first” female president eventually, even though the party still can’t define “woman.”
Find the right judge (like they found “the right people” to entrap Mike Flynn); get a nationwide injunction; problem solved, easy as pie.
USSR Redshirts,
Germany Brownshirts,
Italy Blackshirts,
China Redshirts,
US Democrats Rainbowshirts
SAME FASCISM!
hmmm…but the Bidens TOOK money from foreigner China, Ukraine, etc Seems the Traitors are the ENTIRE Democrat Party