Below is my column in the New York Post on the expansion of the 14th Amendment theory to attempt to remove Republican candidates for Congress from the ballots. Dozens of Democratic members have already called for the disqualification of up to 126 Republican colleagues under the same sweeping theory. These efforts show how this theory could place this country on a slippery slope to political chaos if not clearly and finally rejected by the Supreme Court.
Here is the column:
As the decisions disqualifying former President Donald Trump from the 2024 election work their way through the courts, a new filing in Pennsylvania seeks the same “ballot cleansing” by barring Repubfenablican Rep. Scott Perry.
It’s only the latest effort targeting congressional candidates as Democrats seek to bar opponents as “insurrectionists” for questioning the election of President Biden.
We have become a nation of Madame Defarges — eagerly knitting names of those to be subject to arbitrary justice.
Former congressional candidate Gene Stilp, who’s previously made headlines by burning MAGA flags with swastikas outside courthouses, filed the challenge.
Using the 14th Amendment to disqualify candidates like Perry is consistent with Stilp’s signature flag-burning stunts.
But what’s chilling is how many support such efforts, including Democratic officeholders from Maine’s Secretary of State to dozens of members of Congress.
Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ) sought to bar 126 members of Congress under the same theory for challenging the election before Jan. 6, 2021.
Similar legislation from Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) to disqualify members got 63 co-sponsors, all Democrats, including New York Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamaal Bowman and Ritchie Torres and “Squad” members Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.
When Maine’s secretary of state disqualified Trump, three in the state’s congressional delegation — Sens. Angus King (I) and Susan Collins (R) and Rep. Jared Golden (D) — condemned the decision. But others supported the antidemocratic action.
The grounds were virtually identical to those of Stilp. He accuses Perry of supporting challenges to Biden’s election and opposing its certification.
Of course, he ignores Democratic members who sought to block certification of Republican presidents under the very same law with no factual or legal basis.
Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) praised the effort then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) organized to challenge the certification of President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election.
Jan. 6 committee head Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) voted to challenge it in the House.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) sought to block certification of the 2016 election result — particularly ironic since he’s a leading voice calling for Trump to be disqualified.
He insisted last week on CNN that the effort to prevent citizens from voting for Trump is the very embodiment of democracy: “If you think about it, of all of the forms of disqualification that we have, the one that disqualifies people for engaging in insurrection is the most democratic because it’s the one where people choose themselves to be disqualified.”
That is akin to treating every criminal charge as a consensual act of incarceration because the accused chose his path in life.
This is also being played out in state races.
The filing against Perry came the same day Pennsylvania Democratic state Sen. Art Haywood made public a complaint to the Senate Ethics Committee against his Republican colleague Doug Mastriano accusing him of playing a role in the plot to overturn the election.
Notably, in his effort to “hold insurrectionists accountable,” Haywood admitted he relied on the same evidence from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington that was used in the Colorado case.
“Insurrectionist” is the newest label to excuse any abuse.
During the McCarthy period, individuals were accused of being Communists or “fellow travelers.”
Now you have Stilp accusing Perry of being “supportive of insurrectionists.”
Democrats and pundits have claimed civil libertarians and journalists who have testified against the government’s growing censorship efforts are enablers of insurrectionists and even “Putin lovers.”
These Democratic members and activists vividly demonstrated the dangerous implications of this unfounded theory.
Figures like Stilp are wrong on the law but right about one thing: There are few real limits once you embrace this theory.
If the challenges work, there is no reason they can’t be used unilaterally against any candidate (and without any criminal charges, let alone convictions).
It is instantly both self-executing and self-satisfying. It would put the world’s most successful democracy on a slippery slope to political chaos.
That is why the Supreme Court needs to take up this issue and put this pernicious theory to bed once and for all.
Until the court rejects this antidemocratic ploy, activists eager to win elections through the courts will keep using it, and it will metastasize throughout our body politic.
With the support of elected officials across the country, they can then join Stilp in moving from burning flags to torching the Constitution in a fit of exhilarating rage.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Dear Prof Turley,
As far as I can tell the constitution only has three (3) requirements for presidential candidates.
The U.S. Constitution states that the president must:
Be a natural-born citizen of the United States
Be at least 35 years old
Have been a resident of the United States for 14 years
That’s it. Nothing about Republican/Democrat ‘tickets’, registering with an ‘Election commission’, establishing campaign committees or pre-approved state ‘ballots’. Obviously, if only Democrats&Republicans can win, it doesn’t matter how they count the votes.
*Write it in.
The person must also be elected by the Electoral College, and he can be disqualified by engaging in insurrection.
Next up from the Democrats will be a page out of Joe’s bestest buddy’s Ukrainian playbook; they’ll just declare the Republican Party illegal.
Democrats and Republicans. Two peoples separated by a common language.
On February 1, 2008, William Burns, the US Ambassador to Russia (and present CIA director) sent a memo home titled ‘Nyet means Nyet’ .. .
“Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests. Experts tell us that Russia is particularly worried that the strong divisions in Ukraine over NATO membership, with much of the ethnic-Russian community against membership, could lead to a major split, involving violence or at worst, civil war.”
. .. but it clearly fell on deaf ears.
You left out that joe briben needed to cover his Ukraine corruption and such a conflict offers distraction and his fake rally around the flag kinda bunk. There are no coincidences.
286 comments and counting; what a f*cking joke. The response to this post by JT is like the response from the President’s of Harvard, Penn and MIT about calls for genocide. The answer is YES, this violates the principles of democracy. There IS NO context that makes this acceptable…PERIOD!!!
Not everybody who comes to this site comes for the sober discussion.
And now we are seeing that the leftist progressives are the true insurrectionists. They despise the Constitution and aren’t afraid to show it.
Turley’s at it again–spinning facts to fit the alt-right narrative. “Newsweek” reports:
The suit cites Perry’s involvement in attempting to replace duly elected electors with a slate of electors that would vote against certifying the election results and his attempts on Jan. 6, 2021, to block certification of the election results in Congress.
Previously:Unsealed court ruling sheds light on Scott Perry’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election
It also cited Perry’s legal entanglements, including the seizure of his cell phone last summer and the litigation that has resulted. It also cited the content of some of his texts that were inadvertently released in a court document. Those texts, according to the suit, illustrated Perry’s involvement in efforts to overturn the results of the election.
Perry does not face charges in the federal or state criminal cases involving the efforts of Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the election.
The suit, Stilp pointed out, asserts that “it is not necessary for a person to be convicted of a crime for the disqualification language in the Fourteenth Amendment, Section Three, to apply.”
Stilp said, “It is not necessary for an insurrection to be violent and have people taking over buildings. Attempts at insurrection can be non-violent and quietly orchestrated as in the attempt to overturn the certification process using false certification certificates from false sets of electors.”
Turley is being dishonest when he claims that the reason for seeking Perry’s disqualification, as well as those Republicans who engaged in similar conduct as merely”questioning the election of President Biden.” Perry’s conduct went way further than that, including direct involvement with a slate of fake electors and efforts at blocking certification of Biden’s victory. There wasn’t then, and isn’t now, any evidence of widespread voter fraud, and there never was, and still isn’t any rational grounds to “question” Biden’s victory–other than the ego of a chronic, habitual liar. There never was, and still isn’t, any justification for what these Republicans did, which was to violate their oath to support and defend the Constitution.
But, Turley is paid to feed into the alt-right “injustice” trope when efforts are made to hold Republicans accountable.
According to the Trump cult there was no insurrection, but Trump allies, and Roger Stone and others wanted Trump to deploy the military and enact the Insurrection Act to stay in power.
“Roger Stone and others wanted Trump to deploy the military and enact the Insurrection Act to stay in power.”
annnnnddddd…..did he? NOPE.
But if destabilizing the Republic to stay in power by making a bunch of seniors running through a public building with doors held open by police into the russian revolution gets the dems some votes (because their policies don’t) then of course the dems will try it.
According to the Trump cult there was no insurrection,
I’m just following what the DoJ has decided . . . 100’s of times, they have decided, No evidence to trigger charges of insurrection.
The political opponents of those in power shall be removed from ballots for any reason, no matter how flimsy, to save democracy.
New Report: Election Deniers Are Same People Pushing Biden’s Impeachment
The report, marking three years since a mob of Trump supporters ransacked the US Capitol in a bid to overturn his election defeat, was produced by the Congressional Integrity Project.
“In fact, the key players involved in Trump’s scheme to overturn the election in 2020 are the very same Republicans leading the bogus impeachment effort against President Biden,” it says.
These include Mike Johnson, the House speaker; Jim Jordan, the chair of the House judiciary committee; and James Comer, the chair of the House oversight committee, all of whom continue to push Trump’s debunked conspiracy theories and wage a crusade to impeach Biden.
Edited From:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/05/donald-trump-january-6-supporters-behind-joe-biden-impeachment
………………………………
What a coincidence! All those Republicans who tried to deny Biden’s certification are the same folks trying to impeach Biden. Then yesterday we learned that Trump pulled down almost $8 million in foreign payments during his presidency.
Please learn english.
There are no “election deniers”
The 2020 election occured.
It was lawless and corrupt .
It involved massive illegal ballot harvesting.
The illegal destruction of election records
Violations of state constitutional requirements
violations of the legal and moral requirement for transparency.
Further the feederal government directly and indirectly engaged in and funding censorship influencing the outcome of the election.
You bird brains on the left rant and rave about Russian election influence – which did not occur, and even if it had – can not have an illegitimate impact. Absent hacking election systems Russia can do nothing beyond persuade.
Russia does not have the ability to use FORCE inside of the US – that is what it means for the US to be a sovereign nation – that it can use FORCE within its boarders, and other nations can not
Russia can not unconstitutionally use force to censor US media or social media.
But the US government can and did.
That is unconstitutional.
That is election fraud.
That is election rigging.
YOU are the election fraud denier
I’ll bet it is not a coincidence that the all wear shoes too!
ATS there is a long list of excellent reasons to impeach Biden.
That said the primary purpose of House inquiries is not to impeach Biden – though that may happen.
Just as the primary purpose of the assorted prosecutions of Trump is not to enforce the law.
The impeachment inquiry exists to assure that VOTERS have the oportunity to learn who Joe Biden is before this election.
To correct for the failure of the media to do their job in 2020, and to correct for the social media censorship the government undertook in 2020 and since.
You can rant and rave that the conduct that the House is uncovering is not impeachable – though after the dual stupid impeachments of Trump such a claim would be pure hypocrisy. Constitutional scholars like Turley LOST the arguments over what is and is not impeachable in 2020.
The house can impeach for whatever reason it wants. There is no check on a house impeachment decision.
You can rant that bribery has not been proven. Most of us think it has. Regardless, If Joe Biden’s complicity in his sons influence peddling has not been proven to your satisfaction – then further inquiry is necessary. This is not a criminal trial, the standard is not beyond a reasonable doubt – though most of us see the beyond a reasonable doubt standard as met.
But if you are a “doubting thomas” – Fine, I am sure that the house is subpeoning more bank and financial records, more emails, more witnesses, There is more than enough potential lines of inquiry to keep them busy for years.
Regardless, impeachment is fundimentally political. It is also very serious and should not be entered lightly – But democrats already blasted down that constraint and turn about is fair play.
House Republicans republicans are engaged in a legitimate political act – that of deterrmining the extent of the presidents corruption.
Absolutely they are seeking to influence the 2024 election – With the Truth. Regardless, impeachment is a legitimate political act.
Conversely the DOJ and NY and GA are prosecuting Trump on far more ludicrous charges for the political purpose of influencing the election.
The problem is that using law enforcement for political purposes is NOT legitimate.
And people understand that – which is why all the democratic lawfare is backfiring.
You are giving Trump a MASSIVE campaign boost, and a massive issue to run on.
You are proving yourseles the fascists.
You are proving yourselves lawless.
You claim that you won the 2020 election – then why are you so afraid of 2024 ?
In 2020 people KNEW who Trump was. But they did NOT know who Joe Biden was.
They were LIED to. And the Government actively censored the truth.
In 2024 – MOST people know who Joe Biden is now – and as they learn more – He is falling further behind.
in 2024 – People know who Donald Trump is. They KNOW his claims regarding the election, and they KNOW your claims regarding the election. The KNOW what Trump did after the election – you have gone out of your way to point out everything Trump did – often lying.
Regardless, there is no secret to what Trump actually did. To the extent that people do not KNOW they are influenced by FALSE narratives sold by the left. Regardless, there are no secrets here. There is nothing for these nonsense politcal prosecutions to expose.
Everyone is well aware what you are up to. Your goal is to get juries in places Biden won by 75%-95% to convict Trump of a crime – because you claim what Trump did is a crime. But everyone knows what Trump did and whether people like it or not, the overwhelming majority found not crime.
But KEEP IT UP – keep engaging in this weaponized political nonsense. And pray to god that voters do not see through it and punish YOU.
Because thus far – that has been the outcome.
John Say,
Well said.
we learned that Trump pulled down almost $8 million in foreign payments during his presidency
If that/s what you learned, then your comprehension sucks. because that is NOT THE FACTS
Both Trump and Ronald Reagan used to be Democrats. Trump was Pro-Choice until leading up to the 2016 election. When using ambiguous terms to demagogue Democrats, were these two guys included since they were also Democrats.
According to Dwight D. Eisenhower’s family members, the only reason he became a Republican was because the GOP supported NATO at that time. Today Democrats are closer to Reagan and Eisenhower on NATO. Was Eisenhower a leftist also?
Hillary Clinton was originally a Rockefeller Republican (the non-racist wing of the 1960’s political party). Hillary on many levels is closer to Reagan or Eisenhower than todays RINOs like Trump.
“Cleansing the ballots” is not a new tactic. From 1933 – –
“While the Nazis were focusing on putting Germans back to work in the midst of the Great Depression, they also unleashed attacks on their political opposition as soon as Hitler became chancellor. On the evening of February 27, 1933, alarms suddenly rang out in the Reichstag as fire destroyed the building’s main chamber. Within 20 minutes, Hitler was on the scene to declare: “This is a God-given signal! If this fire, as I believe, turns out to be the handiwork of Communists, then there is nothing that shall stop us now from crushing out this murderous pest with an iron fist.”
Marinus van der Lubbe was the man the Nazis captured that night. He confessed to setting the building ablaze but repeatedly insisted that he had acted alone. Adolf Hitler paid no attention to the confession. He saw a chance to get rid of what he considered the Nazis’ most immediate rival—the Communists—so he ordered the arrest of anyone with ties to the Communist Party. Within days, the Nazis had thrown 4,000 Communists and their leaders into hastily created prisons and concentration camps. By the end of March, 20,000 Communists had been arrested, and by the end of that summer more than 100,000 Communists, Social Democrats, union officials, and other “radicals” were imprisoned. Were any of them responsible for the fire? The question was irrelevant to the Nazis. They had been given an opportunity to get rid of their enemies, and they took it.
. . . .
The day after the fire, February 28, 1933, President Hindenburg, at Hitler’s urging, issued two emergency decrees designed to make such arrests legal, even those that had already taken place. Their titles—“For the Defense of Nation and State” and “To Combat Treason against the German Nation and Treasonable Activities”—reveal how Hitler used the fire to further his own goals. The two decrees suspended, until further notice, every part of the constitution that protected personal freedoms. The Nazis claimed that the decrees were necessary to protect the nation from the “Communist menace.”
. . . .
The day after the fire, February 28, 1933, President Hindenburg, at Hitler’s urging, issued two emergency decrees designed to make such arrests legal, even those that had already taken place. Their titles—“For the Defense of Nation and State” and “To Combat Treason against the German Nation and Treasonable Activities”—reveal how Hitler used the fire to further his own goals. The two decrees suspended, until further notice, every part of the constitution that protected personal freedoms. The Nazis claimed that the decrees were necessary to protect the nation from the “Communist menace.”
. . . .
Then, in June, Hitler outlawed the Social Democratic Party. The German Nationalist Party, which was part of Hitler’s coalition government, dissolved after its deputies were told to resign or become the next target. By the end of the month, German concentration camps held 27,000 people. By mid-July, the Nazi Party was the only political party allowed in the country. Other organizations were also brought into line. As historian William Sheridan Allen has put it, “Whenever two or three were gathered, the Führer would also be present.”
https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/outlawing-opposition
Substitute “treasonable activities” by “insurrection”. Substitute “Communists and Social Democrats” by “MAGA Republicans.” Substitute “Nation and State” by “Democracy” Substitute “Hitler” with [you fill in the blank].
CHAOS
_________
Ballot cleansing is prescribed in the Constitution as a function of State legislatures.
Turnout was 11.6% in 1789, when voter criteria were generally male, European, 21, and 50 lbs. Sterling or 50 acres.
Within the year, immigration was severely restricted to “…free white persons…,” further restricting the vote.
America was established as a severely restricted-vote republic under the philosophy of democracy.
Never was America intended by its Founders to be a one-man, one-vote democracy.
One-man, one-vote democracy IS the “chaos” out of which “order” will be obtained by the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” per Karl Marx.
The American Founders extirpated dictatorship, including that of Karl Marx, when they removed the British monarchical dictatorship.
Freedom and the America of the Founders were illicitly and unconstitutionally terminated by Lincoln and his successors who were progressing towards the communism that holds America in its grip today.
________________
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
________________
You couldn’t.
Jonathan: Why do you suddenly think it is important to defend Rep. Scott Perry? Perry is a focus because he was a major actor in DJT’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election results. The Jan. 6 House Committee report documents his role. Perry was instrumental in connecting DJT to Jeffrey Clark who wanted to be the acting AG so he could implement the plan to declare martial law and seize the voting machines. Clark is a co-defendant in the Fulton count RICO indictment because he played a central role in trying to change the vote count in Georgia. After the J. 6 attack on the Capitol was put down and the collapse of the fake scheme Perry helped organize, he went to the WH and asked for a preemptive pardon. “Guilty mind”. You betcha! Why would Perry ask for a pardon if he thought he did nothing wrong?
The House Jan. 6 Committee sought Perry’s testimony in connection with his participation and planning for the J. 6 insurrection. He refused to comply with a subpoena and was referred to the House Ethics Committee for investigation. That was stopped by the MAGA Republicans when they regained control of the House last January. Last year the FBI seized Perry’s cell phone. Last month a judge ordered Perry to turn over more than 1,000 texts and emails in connection with Gene Stilp’s lawsuit.
Now you claim Stilp’s attempt to keep Perry off the ballot in Pennsylvania is an attempt by the Dems with “no factual or legal basis”. The factual basis is pretty clear. DJT, Perry and others were attempting to violently overturn the 2020 election. That’s set out in the J.6 House report and the rulings by the Colorado district court and Supreme Court as well as the Secy. of State in Maine. The factual record is not in dispute except by DJT and his MAGA supporters.
Then you try to deflect. What about Jamie Raskin, you ask, who tried to challenge the results of the 2016 election. What you conveniently ignore is that Dem challenges were in the courts. Neither Raskin nor any of the Dems resorted to a violent insurrection to try to change the 2016 election results.
And you seem to think that if SCOTUS were to find Section 3 is “self-executing” it would put our “democracy on a slippery slope to political chaos” and “torching the Constitution in a fit of exhilarating rage”. Such hyperbole is hardly the way for a constitutional scholar to address the fundamental issue: whether the candidate who led the Jan. 6 insurrection is entitled to hold office again? If the supporters of DJT on the SC have their way that will be the “torching of the Constitution”!
If you’ve ever wondered what a loaded question is.
Exhibit A: “whether the candidate who led the Jan. 6 insurrection is entitled to hold office again?”
Where is America headed? That is the continued question of this era of demagoguery of the political left. Are we headed towards the cliff like Buzz catching his sleeve in the door handle and being unable to bail out before plunging to his death? Are not the leftists of America embracing disorder, lawlessness and countless other means to sow tyranny? These Machiavellian’s are cadgers wanting what they are not entitled; they are not singularly the authorities of meanings of words, morals or laws. Their tautological language is nothing other than a contradiction to the meanings written or interpreted throughout this great countries history.
This Barbarian tribe of foolish leftists must be removed from any further discourse of the future of the United States of America.
God help us ALL!
Interesting how conflating a protest to an insurrection may lead to a revolution.
I say bring it and let’s purge the democrats once and for all, exile them to wherever they are welcome and if they’re not welcomed anywhere, load-up barges and shove them out to sea.
I’ve about had it with these lecherous, anti-American, POS.
A US w/o democrats will be vastly superior to what we currently have or anything mankind has ever seen.
If you welcome civil war, you’re anti-American.
Removing a political party from the ballot is essentially a civil war, imo. Hiding behind lawfare and stacked courst can be overcome via force.
If you avoid fighting it, you will no longer be American in anything but name.
You’re deluded if you think “Removing a political party from the ballot is essentially a civil war.” Hundreds of thousands of people died in the Civil War. You advocate the deaths of hundreds of thousands or millions, all because you can’t cope with a potential court ruling. Anti-American.
What does The Civil War have to do with A civil war, except for the fact that the evil democrats must be taken down? Where did I advocate for the deaths of millions or 100s of 1,000s – there is not that much rot in congress, K street, and marthas vineyard.
100s of 1,000s of people have died since the democrats stole the 2020 election, and yep, coping with that is not easy.
Stand by and watch as your government check rolls in and more people die everyday because of the dem warmongers and fentanyl dealers and china sycophants and pretend you are an american. ROT.
No one welcomes civil war.
But by their tyrannical words and actions the Democrat party is certainly trying to force one with their anti-Constitutional actions. They have more in common with Iran than they do with America.
Neil,
I do not know.
On one hand, those sick and twisted groomers need to be dealt with before they can abuse another child.
On the other, it is kinda fun watching them dumb themselves down more and more.
We will have two societies, operating in parallel the two which shall never meet.
One will produce well rounded, educated, members of society who contribute to society as the middle class.
The other will not be able to read, write, do math, be confused about what sex is, be emotionally stunted forever remaining a angst fill teenager, lives with their parents or be a parasite on society, contributing nothing of value to society.
I get it, but it is tragic that so many people have been lied to and dumbed down to advance the neo-con as well as woke obamma agendas. We can do better for people that want it and I hate that the inner cities are nearly lost, their children born to suffer for the most part. the people responsible for that, democrats, should pay now and then rot in hell (if that’s a thing).
We are better than they are, always have been. We need them excised from all institutions so that we can get to the business of helping our children, not profiting from their ignorance, as the left does.
Neil,
That is a good point and well said.
Orwell says, “Told you so”, while Marx giggles himself silly; enough to wet his pants.
I guess We’ll find out if WE have a United States of Democracy or the United States of Orwellia after the Supreme Court makes a Ruling.
The later is always be there, just make it evident and quit the disguise. The ‘Real’ America makes the Music, while the Overlords play the Game.
“In Colorado 100% of the plaintiffs trying to disqualify Trump are Republicans”
That is a bald-faced lie.
That suit was hatched, filed, and funded by “Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington” — a Leftist attack-dog organization that has been hounding Trump since his first year in office.
Leftists are liars and liars do what liars do—-they lie.
CREW is not a plaintiff. So you’re the one who’s lying when you assert “’In Colorado 100% of the plaintiffs trying to disqualify Trump are Republicans’ That is a bald-faced lie.”
“CREW is not a plaintiff.”
Pedantry to make your position appear strong. Typical sophist move.
Not pedantic at all. The original claim was about the plaintiffs. You just dislike that you’re caught lying.
The Labor Department also revised 10 of the 11 previous jobs reports have been revised substantially lower by the Labor Department.
Nobody wants this fact introduced into the discussion.
“Nobody wants this fact introduced into the discussion.”
Apparently, we are back to that Anon’s comments being scrubbed, along with all of the replies under them.
In January 2022, Stewart Rhodes and Kelly Meggs were charged with insurrection (seditious conspiracy) under federal criminal code Title 18 US Code 2383.
Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years in prison and Meggs 12 years.
Rhodes conviction may spell trouble for Trump (and Trump’s accessories), since Rhodes apparently never invaded the Capitol himself but was one of the planners.
Seems like DOJ could indict Trump & friends using the Rhodes precedent, since Trump was the architect of the entire insurrection attempt.
The STATE is providing an Illusion of Democracy.
The REALITY is a Delusion of Democracy.
Life in America is anything but a Democracy.
It’s just an Illusion.
Two things are clear: the mid-terms were much closer than we were lead to believe (I have zero faith prominent offices that went to dems in seas of otherwise dem losses were not fiddled with); and the next logical step if they are successful is to come for voters that ‘support insurrection’. Our modern dem party is a regime, straight up, s*** is getting real, and the courts needed to shut this down yesterday. Regardless of outcome, 2024 is going to be a mess the likes of which we haven’t seen for many generations in the West, and yes, it is Soros/Obama etc. Heaven help us. 😐