"When You Say Trump Should Be Allowed to Run for Office, You Sound Like a Fucking Idiot"

[Nevilledog]

https://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2024/01/when-you-say-trump-should-be-allowed-to.html

Jesus fuck, stop being such pedantic idiots about whether or not Donald Trump should be prohibited from holding public office. The fucking 14th Amendment is absolutely fucking clear that he shouldn't be allowed near an election. And yet we keep having these pearl-clutching debates about what it means, how it's the end of democracy, and other assorted shit. No, it's the way the country avoids our stupid electoral system and our stupid voters putting a madman into office...again.

Look at these insane arguments.

1. "We should let the people decide." You sound like an absolutely pathetic little bitch if you say this and more than a little brain-damaged. The fucking people fucking decided in 2020 and the reason we're even having this discussion is because Donald Trump and a whole bunch of other elected officials decided that they were going to overturn that result because of shit they made up, shit that no court anywhere with every kind of judge agreed was real, and shit that no one has every been able to prove other than to keep asserting the shit is actual shit when it's just shit shit. If Trump is on the ballot again in 2024 and the people decide again that he should be shoved into the history books as another "holy fuck, that really happened" chapter, do you honestly think that this time he'll go quietly? He never goes quietly. Between the bellowing and the flatulence and the heavy breathing, he will always make a racket. It's madness to insist that any election with Trump involved will end up as a regular election unless he outright wins (even when he does, he's a total cockknob about it), and he shouldn't even have a chance to do that. I don't wanna keep going through this shit again and again like some moronic time loop we can't escape from. It's not supporting democracy to allow the person who says he's going to pretty much murder democracy run for the office that will let him do it. Fucking madness.

2. "He needs to be convicted of insurrection first." Read the third section of the 14th. You see anything in there about a conviction being necessary? That's also part of Trump's argument that he shouldn't be tried for anything because the Senate already absolved him of all crimes (actually only one and that one isn't even part of the indictments against him). Being prevented from holding office isn't even really a punishment. Barring his conviction on any of the roughly 8000 other crimes he's committed, Trump is free to speak his normal bullshit. He can wander the mildew-scented halls of Mar-a-Lago, waiting for the omelet bar to open up again. He can pretend he's a businessman and launder more cash for Russian oligarchs. Fuck, he can do anything he likes. But he violated his oath of office pretty fucking clearly, so fuck off on running for president. It's like if you write a bad check at a business and they put your fuckin' photo up and say, "Don't sell cigarettes to this asshole." You can go to any other store you like, just not the one you fucked with. Oh, and everyone forgets the final part of Section 3: "But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability." Yeah, Congress can, if it wants, say, "Oh, it's cool that you wanted to dick over the entirety of democracy. All is forgiven." Wait. On the other hand, keep that part quiet. I could see Democrats actually going along with that for the sake of going high when they go low or some other lie that conveniently lets you off the hook of actually doing something.

3. "The 14th Amendment doesn't include the presidency." Oh, fuck off. The Constitution doesn't specifically bar dead people from running for office. Look at it. Someone should try running the corpse of JFK or something. Except everyone fucking knows that dead people can't run. In the debate over the 14th Amendment in 1866, one senator asked why it didn't say the president or vice president. Senator Lot Morrill from Maine responded, "Let me call the Senator's attention to the words 'or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States.'" In other words, are you fucking blind? Stupid? Both? Of course it includes the presidency. And if you are also saying that it was only meant for the Confederacy, well, they also debated whether or not to put a sunset date on it and decided against it. C'mon, motherfucking textualist judges, you know what to do.

*snip*

[Walleye]

1. I think the word rebellion is also in there, there's no crime called rebellion, how could he be convicted of it?

[FBaggins]

27. Sorry - The word rebellion is also in 18 USC §2383.

The crime is actually "Rebellion or insurrection"

[triron]

32. So what!?

[mountain grammy]

2. I love Rude

C'mon, motherfucking textualist judges, you know what to do

[FreeForm73]

5. The Rude one speaks the truth n/t

[gratuitous]

8. "You know what to do"

Yep. Justice Alito will decide how he wants to rule, then reverse-engineer some cock-and-bull nonsense, stovepiping in the demented writings of some 13th Century madman/hermit, and declare Landslide McStinky emperor for life.

[JoseBalow]

13. As sure as the sun rises in the east

you're 100% right

[brush]

3. NOW THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. WAH-O-O-O-O-O.

[triron]

33. Yessiree.

[Blue Owl]

4. I'd as soon vote for a steaming sack of shit than Diarrhea Donald tRump

[JoseBalow]

12. Me too. At least a sack of shit

has substance

[ShazzieB]

15. And a sack of shit is up front about what it is and doesn't pretend to be a bouquet of roses.

That's a lot more than you can say for Slobby!

[Turbineguy]

6. This is America

We really cannot have a currupt, stupid, incompetent fuck-up like trump in the White House.

[samplegirl]

24. Says it all

How do we stop them??

[ismnotwasm]

7. K&R

[area51]

9. I love The Rude One

[creeksneakers2]

10. On the claim that a conviction is required.

The 14th Amendment was meant to keep Confederates from gaining office but there was few, if any convictions of Confederates for insurrection. They were promised upon surrender that if they behaved they would be left alone.

"During his presidency, Lincoln issued 64 pardons for war-related offences: 22 for conspiracy, 17 for treason, 12 for rebellion, nine for holding an office under the Confederacy, and four for serving with the rebels.”

"President Andrew Johnson, taking office after Lincoln’s assassination, granted a wide amnesty to most rebel soldiers, officers, and officials as long as they took an oath of allegiance. There were more than a dozen exceptions among them, including Davis and Lee. Federal investigators tried everything they could to pin war crimes and other hanging offenses on the two leaders, to no avail, but the specter of treason still hung over both men."

Neither Confederate General Robert E. Lee nor Confederate president Jefferson Davis were convicted. In 1868 all Conferates were pardoned.

So the framers of the 14th Amendment could not possibly have expected convictions to be required for the amendment to come into play, because there WERE NO CONVICTIONS.

https://www.civilwarprofiles.com/grant-protects-lee-from-treason-trial/

https://www.wearethemighty.com/mighty-history/why-robert-e-lee-wasnt-hanged-as-a-traitor-after-the-civil-war/

https://sites.duke.edu/lawfire/2020/07/11/were-confederate-soldiers-tried-for-treason/

[Ohioboy]

36. Yes, you are right. It was about failing the oath to protect the Constitution, not about conviction

Plus, there is a way Congress can take away the restriction. If it was about convictions I doubt it would be that easy for Congress to pardon.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

43. Ok. So its a choice between doing the right thing

(That hasn't worked to persuade these people) and kicking can down the road.

The right thing.

vs.

" You're wrong but we'll let you continue believing this flake, you'll lose at ballot box."

[creeksneakers2]

11. sorry, dupe

*

[orleans]

14. i love this! thanks for posting it! nt

[SouthernDem4ever]

16. Right on!

[sellitman]

17. This Rude Dude gets it.

Fucking, every time.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. Problem is ..that they don't believe he's horrible tho

He's brainwashed them. Opposing viewpoint is to just kick that can down the road.

He'll it's been what 7 years and nothing has worked to change their mind.

[triron]

34. "THEY" is not the constitution.

[AverageOldGuy]

19. "We should let the people decide."

The People decided. Twice.

2016 he lost the popular vote by 3,000,000.
2020 he lost the popular vote by 7,000,000.

[Emile]

20. K&R

[niyad]

21. Spot on, RP. As always.

[Hekate]

22. Amen, Rude One

[dalton99a]

23. Kick

[orleans]

25. k&r nt

[AlexSFCA]

26. most people never read the constitution

trump quite literally organized Stop the Steal riot with the goal to overthrow peaceful transition of power - insurrection. He had both criminal intent and organizing a rally in a very public way. Supreme Court is gonna struggle with this. Also, if not for capitol police officers (some dead), trump
may have succeeded in this insurrection with multiple congresspeople executed. His 2nd term would be very different with only singular goal to destroy democracy. This means instead of Bill Bahr he would be hiring people like Vivek who vowed to get rid of FBI on day 1. Eliminate FBI and replace military commander with trump loyalists, etc. All can be done under martial law needed to remove all undocumented people.

[70sEraVet]

28. "Let the people decide!"

Oh, can we do that with the 2nd Amendment, too??
That is my answer to those who want to ignore an uncomfortable Amendment.

[pandr32]

29. This should be on every news page near the top.

[Polybius]

30. What if a liberal or two (or three) on the Supreme Court decides that he should not be removed?

I don't think it'll be a 6-3 decision, personally I think it'll be 8-1 to reinstate him on the ballots.

[maxsolomon]

31. Section 5 is a problem:

Section 3
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. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 5
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

The previous Congress should have enforced Section 3 with a bill banning the motherfucker. It didn't, and this Congress won't.

[cayugafalls]

37. Since Section 3 precedes section 5. My reading is based on an election in progress.

Then section 5 could be acted on and the person who participated in the deed could be prevented from taking office.

I could be wrong.

Section 3 is clear, congress needs to act or States can simply ban dump and unless they remove the disability then it will effectively prevent the person from gaining enough votes.

My opine only...not a lawyer.

[maxsolomon]

38. I read it as being the method whereby the preceding clauses are enforced.

For instance, Section 4 where the public debt of the US can't be questioned? Well, we go through the ridiculous debt-ceiling dance all the damn time.

[cayugafalls]

39. Well, we could have an entire discussion on just section 4...

However, Section 5 would need to be analyzed, I have done a cursory reading and it seems section 5 is designed to prevent States from infringing on citizen rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

Since a state barred dump from being on the ballot for section 3 insurrection clause, Insurrection is not a federally protected right, so, dump is toast.

again, my opine after some cursory research...

[maxsolomon]

40. Section 5 is 1 sentence:

Section 5
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Are you thinking of Section 1 or 2?

[creeksneakers2]

45. That same boilerplate is at the end of lots of Amendments.

Its also in the 13th, 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24h, and 26th.

Here is what Findlaw.com says it means in the 14th:

"In the aftermath of the Civil War, Congress, in addition to proposing to the states the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, enacted seven statutes designed in a variety of ways to implement the provisions of these Amendments.1 Several of these laws were general civil rights statutes that broadly attacked racial and other discrimination on the part of private individuals and groups as well as by the states, but the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional or rendered ineffective practically all of these laws over the course of several years.2 In the end, Reconstruction was abandoned and with rare exceptions no cases were brought under the remaining statutes until fairly recently.3 Beginning with the Civil Rights Act of 1957, however, Congress generally acted pursuant to its powers under the Commerce Clause4 until Supreme Court decisions indicated an expansive concept of congressional power under the Civil War Amendments,5 which culminated in broad provisions against private interference with civil rights in the 1968 legislation.6"

Here is what Findlaw has to say about that statement in the 13th:

Because the Thirteenth Amendment is SELF-EXECUTING , its prohibitions on slavery and involuntary servitude became effective upon ratification without the need for further government action.1 Nonetheless, Section 2 of the Amendment grants Congress the power to enforce the Amendment’s prohibitions by enacting appropriate legislation.2 Congress may use its enforcement power to address specific circumstances and provide remedies for violations of the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibitions.3 Because the Thirteenth Amendment’s Prohibitions Clause extends to private conduct as well as government action, the Supreme Court has long held that Congress may enforce the Amendment through legislation that directly regulates private individuals’ activities.4

The statement that empowers Congress in no way means that Congress had to reaffirm the law for it to take effect. That is just another frivolous argument from the Trumpsters.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

[Ohioboy]

35. Thanks for your post

I'm bookmarking it because I'm putting together information to use in arguing with the idiots. I know trying to convince idiots is a losing battle, but my conscience won't let me not speak out for the Constitution and our country. If we ever lose this country to a grifter like Trump, I at least want to be able to hold my head high and know I was against him.

[Elessar Zappa]

41. Well said, Mr. Rude!

[bucolic_frolic]

42. People who believe in rule by force and insurrection want the people to decide.

Believe that one at your peril.

[DemocraticPatriot]

44. Several ex-confederates were barred from serving in congress by this amendment,

but they had never been convicted of insurrection, treason, or anything else, because no rebels were ever charged with those crimes...


(mainly because of the terms given to Gen. Lee by Gen. Grant at Appomattox, which, in accordance with the wishes of President Lincoln, precluded any prosecutions of ex-Confederate soldiers.... All that was demanded was that they stop fighting, lay down their arms and go home)

((Even ex-Confederate President Jefferson Davis was never charged with a crime, although he was held in prison for two years, then released and allowed to go home.))

Thus, with those ex-Confederate government officials turned away from serving in Congress after the civil war, NO CONVICTION of insurrection is necessary to execute the terms of that amendment, by precedent.

Those cases were admittedly more "cut and dried" than that of ex-President Trump---
I think the biggest legal argument in his case, is whether he did indeed commit insurrection, or not....

(It would be less in question if he had indeed marched to the Capitol with his supporters, as he told them he would do---
but like the coward he is, he instead went back to the White House to gloat over the riot while watching it on television...)