General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs there really ---i mean, really---actually---in real life---anything more necessary before we---
GAWD DAMMIT!--- INSIST that Trump and Meadows and Perry and over a hundred other traitorous sonsabitches be BARRED from ever again holding ANY public office? Is that not what any sensible application of the 14th Amendment requires?
I leave aside for the moment whether or not----!!!!!----- they should be indicted, prosecuted and eating off trays for many years as punishment for their crimes against America. I ask only the very simple question: "Should these thugs ever be permitted to occupy any governmental office from dog catcher to POTUS?"
I say "Hell No!"
Can i get an "AMEN"?
ck4829
(35,673 posts)ForgedCrank
(2,084 posts)a system for that and I believe in it.
All those things will come to pass if it can be proven in a court of law. That is the bar we set.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)they won't.
ForgedCrank
(2,084 posts)have 100% confidence that the DOJ will do everything they are capable of with the evidence they have.
Only time will tell us if they have anything we aren't yet aware of. If they can prove he broke laws, they will prosecute him.
My demands are far simpler. Treat the ass the same way any one of us would be treated, and hold him accountable using the system as it is designed. I expect nothing less.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)indicted, etc.
"Should they not be barred from ever again serving in any public office?" Is the sole concern of the OP.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Nobody gets to decree that someone else is ineligible to run for office based on "we know he's guilty". The Constitution is the sole determinant as to who can and CANNOT be a candidate.
ForgedCrank
(2,084 posts)ruffle your feathers.
As far as I'm concerned, the demand is implied, always.
SouthernDem4ever
(6,618 posts)The problem is harder to handle when those enshrined with making and upholding our laws are the very same people that are breaking them. It gets even more difficult when stupid voters keep voting the lawbreakers into office.
Beastly Boy
(10,964 posts)I believe it was Hamilton who was most concerned with protecting us from tyranny of the mob. This is the main reason why we have a republic with independent judiciary and not direct democracy
Atticus
(15,124 posts)the consensus of opinion, there would be much less concern
There wasn't a "Nixon Court" or a "Ford, Carter, Bush, or Obama Court". But, we now quite obviously have the "Trump Court" that MAY be just craven and cowardly enough to be influenced by massive public pressure.
What's to lose by trying?
Beastly Boy
(10,964 posts)How do you define many anyway? How many are many and who are they?
Atticus
(15,124 posts)Beastly Boy
(10,964 posts)If you have nothing to add to the discussion, just come out and say so. Or say nothing at all. Dont get personal. It makes for bad optics, and it brings conversations to an inglorious end.
Good bye.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)Deuxcents
(19,134 posts)If were a country of laws, lets prove it.
nightwing1240
(1,996 posts)Preach it Atticus!
NewHendoLib
(60,402 posts)2naSalit
(91,672 posts)As soon as you get them all.
Response to Atticus (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
czarjak
(12,293 posts)intrepidity
(7,790 posts)Grasswire2
(13,681 posts)Merrick Garland??
Where do we take our rage and our fear and our sleepless hours of worry and sorrow and rage???
There is not yet a path by which we can communicate what we are feeling -- a path that seems it will bring some action.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Nothing else will block his ability to run for office. Even a conviction on other charges.
FWIW: The Jan 6 Committee's referrals did NOT recommend "insurrection" as a charge to investigate.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)a person who has sworn the oath of office from ever again so serving.
A conviction for "insurrection" would be nice, but it is not a requirement for the lifetime e bar to public service.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)SOMEBODY has to be convicted of Insurrection or Rebellion, and I'm not seeing DOJ or the J6 Committee going in that direction.
Atticus
(15,124 posts)rlegro
(339 posts)... does not preclude Congress from acting on its own, based on un-adjudicated evidence. It's a high bar, a two-thirds vote, just like impeachment, but it's possible. However, that option is presently quite improbable as long as today's breed of Republican congress sheeple maintain a strong plurality. Mitch McConnell clearly dislikes Trump and thinks he's hurt the party and done wrong by the country, but the Mitchster insists that he will back Trump if he wins the 2024 nomination for president. And he says he's not being inconsistent. No, he isn't he's just being craven and situational in his politics.
spooky3
(35,793 posts)The committee DID recommend insurrection as a charge to investigate.
https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/19/trump-criminal-charges-jan-6-panel-capitol-attack
Opening pgh, with more detail in the article:
The January 6 committee has referred Donald Trump to the justice department to face criminal charges, accusing the former president of fomenting an insurrection and conspiring against the government over his attempt to subvert the outcome of the 2020 election, and the bloody attack on the US Capitol.
republianmushroom
(17,050 posts)23 months and counting
bringthePaine
(1,806 posts)traitorous fuckers have no idea how lucky they are to
be breathing
Joinfortmill
(16,120 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,772 posts)flying_wahini
(7,914 posts)wendyb-NC
(3,724 posts)It's insane that they are still there, they are unfit because they were supporting a plan to over throw our democracy on January 6 2020.
Iris
(15,973 posts)AllaN01Bear
(22,785 posts)Initech
(101,455 posts)calimary
(83,812 posts)Justice matters.
(7,409 posts)Whats the difference between aiding and abetting?
The term aiding and the term abetting are similar legal concepts. But each has a slightly different meaning.
Aiding a crime means helping someone else commit a crime.
Abetting means to encourage or incite a criminal act. Although to abet does not necessarily mean that you help or facilitate its execution.
Both aiding and abetting are crimes and forms of accomplice liability. A conviction usually comes with the same penalties as the underlying offense.
While the crime is often referred to as aiding and abetting, either one suffices.
You can be liable if you aid a criminal activity, or if you abet in it.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/criminal-defense/difference-between-aiding-and-abetting/
The Constitutions Disqualification Clause Can Be Enforced Today
BY LIZ HEMPOWICZ & DAVID JANOVSKY & NORMAN EISEN | FILED UNDER REPORT | NOVEMBER 15, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Background on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment
Existing Enforcement Mechanisms
How the Select Committee Can Encourage Section 3 Enforcement
Red Herrings
Conclusion
Introduction
The attack on the United States Capitol complex to disrupt the certification of the 2020 presidential election on January 6, 2021, led to the first application of the disqualification clause contained in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment in more than a century. Section 3 prohibits public office holders who have taken an oath to support the U.S. Constitution and then engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or who give aid or comfort to enemies of the United States, from serving in public office.
The analysis in this report will build on the established collective understanding of Section 3 to guide contemporary application of the clause. The report will specifically prescribe how the disqualification clause can currently be enforced against individuals involved in the January 6 attack.
https://www.pogo.org/report/2022/11/the-constitutions-disqualification-clause-can-be-enforced-today#:~:text=Section%203%20of%20the%2014th%20Amendment%20was%20ratified%20shortly%20after,voted%20to%20allow%20such%20service.
lees1975
(5,550 posts)Indict. Prosecute to the fullest extent of the law.
However the 14th is enforced, do that.
It's long past time.
summer_in_TX
(3,089 posts)Just so you know:
The DOJ has a contact form at this link.
Correspondence to the Department, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
The Department may be contacted by phone at the following:
Department Comment Line: 202-353-1555
Artcatt
(344 posts)Makin potholders.
Hope22
(2,475 posts)permit them to continue to hold office? I highly doubt it! Our system has held together by expecting the majority to be honorable unfortunately one party threw honor and truth to the wind.
ShazzieB
(18,358 posts)I have a feeling most of us here don't think those thugs should "ever be permitted to occupy any governmental office from dog catcher to POTUS." If all you're asking is whether we agree on that, my answer is yes.
If you're looking for anything beyond a statement of "Yes, I agree," I'm at a loss. Regardless of what we want to see happen or what we think "should" happen, it's not like there's anything concrete we can do about it. Whatever is going to happen regardless if our personal opinions. Even those of us who believe the DOJ is eventually going to do something are aware that they are going to do whatever they're going to do when THEY are ready to do it, and not one second sooner.
I will therefore say "Amen" to your "Hell, no!" and then I will go back o waiting and watching and hoping, because I see no other course of action open to me.
Boomerproud
(8,324 posts)You stated it better than I could have done. The lack of justice weighs on me daily.
bsiebs
(748 posts)marieo1
(1,402 posts)AMEN>.....I agree with you totally!!
Meowmee
(5,185 posts)Violence during his nazi campaign rallies. And certainly now without doubt. But there are no real standards for who can run. One of the fatal flaws of the seriously problem filled and unfair system.
Lets see what happens, it is not looking good.
Stuart G
(38,726 posts)stopdiggin
(12,593 posts)to the 'Sensible 14th Amend' department ...
- click -
Silver Gaia
(4,716 posts)Permanut
(6,517 posts)1WorldHope
(846 posts)MiHale
(10,592 posts)People seem to be especially worried that if TFG gets indicted and convicted there will be untold acts of violence in protest from MAGATs.
Well
ok
How will we react if NOTHING is done? Nobody cares about that. Are we to roll over and get our collective bellies scratched, thinking, itll be alright just you wait and see?
Beastly Boy
(10,964 posts)... washing hands before leaving a public bathroom?
Seriously though, there are only three ways of accomplishing what you are asking for, and none require an amen. One is for Congress or a state legislative body to pass a law barring the violators from being nominated, the second is for one aggrieved party or another to challenge their nominations in court and the third is for a state or federal law enforcement body to prosecute those individuals.
The latter two require an invocation of the 14th Amendment. The former requires an act of legislation. With all due respect, we as citizens have only two effective ways of insisting on the matter. We can either elect representatives who will honor our wishes, or we dont interfere with due process of law. Anything else will require that we
disregard our responsibilities as citizens. And if that should be the case, we have to be careful what we wish for.
Paper Roses
(7,500 posts)Cherokee100
(308 posts)Amen, Praise Jesus, send me ur Social Security Check, so u can go to heaven.. (sarcasm, sorta)..
go directly to jail, do not pass 'GO', get your orange jumpsuits and start running