Re: The New Election Interference Strategy
Posted: Sun Sep 17, 2023 3:15 am
The first clue of the pretense of the New Yorker article is the extent to which the author parades the credentials of the so-called conservatives.
The American Constitutional Society, founded by liberals and counselled by among others Lawrence Tribe is politically left of Hillary Clinton. Tribe is a swamp specimen.
Section 3 disqualification clause has never been defined by Congress. Congress has never legislated a process of determination. Because there is no statute or case law the High Court has nothing to rule on. It will take Congress to set the parameters but only for future matters. Crafting law to essentially keep Trump off the ballot would be "ex post facto". Meaning "retroactive"....which would violate Article 1 Sec 10 clause 1.
On top of all of this the DOJ has not charged the former President with said "disqualification" crimes. None of the indictments of the 4 cases even touch upon "insurrection, rebellion or giving aid and comfort to the enemy" BTW, under the constitution "an enemy" must be defined (by Congress) a designation by law. The last time they defined an "enemy" was Germany/ Japan in the 40's. Not ironically, the last time we won a war.
And finally "putting down insurrection, enforcing the laws of the United States, and repel Invasions" are powers to be defined by Congress and enforced by the President. How ironic.
...So a sitting President violated an undefined clause of Amendment 14, and said clause is now invoked (assumably defined) to prevent his lawful pursuit of election ???
We are such a nation of lies.
The American Constitutional Society, founded by liberals and counselled by among others Lawrence Tribe is politically left of Hillary Clinton. Tribe is a swamp specimen.
Section 3 disqualification clause has never been defined by Congress. Congress has never legislated a process of determination. Because there is no statute or case law the High Court has nothing to rule on. It will take Congress to set the parameters but only for future matters. Crafting law to essentially keep Trump off the ballot would be "ex post facto". Meaning "retroactive"....which would violate Article 1 Sec 10 clause 1.
On top of all of this the DOJ has not charged the former President with said "disqualification" crimes. None of the indictments of the 4 cases even touch upon "insurrection, rebellion or giving aid and comfort to the enemy" BTW, under the constitution "an enemy" must be defined (by Congress) a designation by law. The last time they defined an "enemy" was Germany/ Japan in the 40's. Not ironically, the last time we won a war.
And finally "putting down insurrection, enforcing the laws of the United States, and repel Invasions" are powers to be defined by Congress and enforced by the President. How ironic.
...So a sitting President violated an undefined clause of Amendment 14, and said clause is now invoked (assumably defined) to prevent his lawful pursuit of election ???
We are such a nation of lies.