There were lots of opportunities to stop Donald Trump.\u00a0\u00a0He is the only President to be impeached twice by the US House of Representatives.\u00a0\u00a0Had the Senate convicted either time, they could have banned him from serving in public office.\u00a0\u00a0Even while he was still serving as the President, the Senate could have convicted him of corruption in office.\u00a0\u00a0They had him dead to rights, the \u201cperfect\u201d phone call to Ukraine\u2019s President Zelenskyy, where he asked Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden in return for US military aid.\u00a0\u00a0The House impeached Trump, and the Senate held a trial. But they failed to convict him, on a near straight party-line vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And in the second trial, after the insurrection and with Trump no longer in office, the Senate could have convicted him again.\u00a0\u00a0Even though he was out, they could have taken that step to bar him from future office, ending his MAGA \u201crevolution\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0But instead, they \u201cpassed the buck\u201d to the judicial system. As Mitch McConnell so eloquently put it, Trump could be brought before the Courts and held civilly or criminally responsible for his actions.\u00a0\u00a0Fifty-seven Senators voted to convict, ten short of the needed two-thirds.\u00a0\u00a0So while Trump was out of office, he was, and is, a threat to return.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And there was even conversation in the Democrat controlled House and Senate of passing a resolution, declaring that Donald Trump committed insurrection.\u00a0\u00a0They could have put the \u201csense of the Congress\u201d imprint on the man.\u00a0\u00a0But, they didn\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Biden Administration came into office committed to a return to \u201cpolitics as usual\u201d. Biden, reasonably, did not want to be the President who prosecuted his predecessor. That would be a \u201cBanana Republic\u201d thing to do, not the \u201cshining city on the hill\u201d example of American democracy. Merrick Garland was taken from the Federal Appellate Court bench to lead the Justice Department, as a sign of fairness and neutrality. The entire momentum was to put the Insurrection \u201cbehind\u201d us, and get back to the \u201cold days\u201d of political congeniality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was a laudable goal, but one impossible to achieve in our divisively partisan environment.\u00a0\u00a0It took the prodding of the Democratic controlled House of Representatives with the January 6th<\/sup>\u00a0Committee hearings, to get Garland to appoint a Special Prosecutor, Jack Smith.\u00a0\u00a0And in less than a year, Smith brought criminal charges against the former President.\u00a0\u00a0But instead of happening at the end of 2021, it\u2019s now the middle of 2023.\u00a0\u00a0We are four months from the Iowa Caucuses, and fourteen months from the 2024 general election.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Trump is running again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Add to that, Jack Smith did not use \u201cmagic words\u201d in any of his Federal charges against Trump (at least, so far).\u00a0\u00a0Nowhere in the indictments are the words \u201csedition\u201d, or \u201ctreason\u201d, or \u201cinsurrection\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Those charges carry a lifetime ban from public office.\u00a0\u00a0So even if Trump is convicted of ALL of the Federal charges now levied against him, they don\u2019t legally bar him from holding office.\u00a0\u00a0Here\u2019s a vision:\u00a0\u00a0the \u201cPresident\u201d behind bars, waiting to be sworn into office (in the prison lounge?) and then \u201cpardoning himself\u201d \u2013 if that\u2019s possible.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n So there were four possible chances of barring Donald J. Trump from a future Presidency. We didn\u2019t do it, either through the Congress or the Department of Justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So now here come the academics, college law professors and some members of Congress (including the b\u00eate noire of the MAGA movement, Adam Schiff) saying the 14th<\/sup> Amendment to the US Constitution can be used to \u201crid us of this turbulent Presidential Candidate\u201d. Conservative and Liberals all (including conservative retired Judge Luttig and most liberal Harvard Professor Tribe) are signing onto the proposition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n They are all using the \u201clanguage\u201d of the six Federalist Society members of the US Supreme Court. They claim that the \u201cplain meaning\u201d of the 14th<\/sup> Amendment can be used to ban Insurrectionists and those who gave \u201caid and comfort\u201d to them. And further, that the plain actions and words of Donald Trump makes him, if not an Insurrectionist himself, then someone who gave them aid and comfort. They want to disqualify him from appearing on 2024 ballots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And since the individual states, not the Federal government, run the election process of the United States; the \u201c14th<\/sup>\u00a0Amendment-ers\u201d are going from state to state to bar Trump from the ballot.\u00a0\u00a0But the State courts, where this will start, are likely to move the case into the Federal Court system. It clearly is a Federal case.\u00a0\u00a0And the Supreme Court would be required to rule on the issue in some way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n My best guess: despite the wishes and desires of conservatives and liberals alike, I cannot imagine the US Supreme Court, six conservatives or even the three liberals, agreeing to the premise that Trump is a \u201cdefined insurrectionist\u201d. On whose definition? No court has adjudicated him an insurrectionist. The Department of Justice dodged even using the term. The Congress had the opportunity to weigh-in on the issue at least three times and failed to do so. Why in the world would the Justices of the Supreme Court take it upon themselves to make the factual determination that Trump is an insurrectionist, and then apply the 14th<\/sup> Amendment to him?<\/p>\n\n\n\n They won\u2019t. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I think Donald Trump led an Insurrection. I think he led a plan to throw out the legitimate election results of 2020 and keep power. Larry Tribe of Harvard, Congressman Adam Schiff and even Judge Luttig think so too. But what we think, what we believe, even what we know; really doesn\u2019t mean much. This is the United States, and embedded in our foundation is the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty. We must prove that Trump was an insurrectionist, and there is only one place to PROVE it \u2013 in the Courts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n14th Amendment<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
We the People<\/h3>\n\n\n\n