There’s a new “urban myth” going around that Donald Trump is disqualified by his legal tribulations. “This 14th Amendment theory,” Jonathan Turley explains, “is something that good liberals will read to their children at night.” Their kids can sleep peacefully then, “but don’t look under the bed.”
Trump can serve from a cell
Democrats are dreaming if they think indicting – or even convicting – Donald Trump will prevent him from serving his rightful second term in office. With Joe Biden looking at prison for bribery and influence peddling, he should be able to take comfort from the fact that the 14th Amendment won’t stop him from running, either.
Democrats, especially those in the media, are as desperate to believe in the constitutional myth as they were to believe in fairies to save Tinkerbell when they were kids. “The desire of people to keep Elvis alive or prove that a Sasquatch could exist furtively in our backyards shows the resilience of fables.”
All around the beltway, liberals are passing along the word that “Donald Trump can be barred from office, even if he is not convicted in any of the four indictments he faces, under a long-dormant clause of the 14th Amendment.”
The Hill has posted my column on the claim that Trump is barred from office under the 14th Amendment. It is a theory that good liberals read to their children at night. With a kiss on the forehead, a child can then sleep peacefully through the night… https://t.co/x0fW0CEthX
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) August 19, 2023
It “bars those who previously took federal oaths from assuming office if they engaged in insurrection or rebellion.” As Professor Turley notes, “with that, and a kiss on the forehead, a progressive’s child can sleep peacefully through the night.”
The creature lurking under the bed is the reality that “Trump can indeed take office if he is elected. Even if he is convicted. Indeed, he can serve as president even in the unlikely scenario that he is sentenced to jail.” That would only make him more powerful than he is right now.
The traitorous rats in the GOP daring to oppose his rightful second term are about to get a rude awakening. It will be interesting to see who tunes in to watch the Trumpster interview with Tucker Carlson, airing on Elon Musk’s “X,” at the same time as the Republican farce of a debate.
Insurrection or rebellion
The FBI tried real hard. They apparently even had help from the psychological warfare folks at the Pentagon. The peaceful protest which morphed into an engineered barbarian riot and invasion of the Capitol was a whole lot more staged than the media is reporting, even though all the facts are out there. As much as they tried to frame Donald Trump for inciting an insurrection or rebellion, they simply couldn’t do it.
That’s because it wasn’t insurrection or rebellion no matter how you slice it. As Constitutional scholar Turley explains, “I have previously addressed the constitutional basis for this claim. It is, in my view, wildly out of sync with the purpose of the amendment, which followed an actual rebellion, the Civil War.”
“Polls have shown that most of the public view January 6 for what it was: a protest that became a riot. One year after the riot, CBS News mostly downplayed and ignored the result of its own poll showing that 76 percent viewed it for what it was, as a ‘protest gone too far.‘ The view that it was an actual ‘insurrection‘ was far less settled, with almost half rejecting the claim, a division breaking along partisan lines.”
As expected, the 14th Amendment psy-op is in full swing.
You have to believe it, MAGA, because two "conservative" professors say so!
Still voting Trump.
Have fun with the other Never Trumpers, professors. 👋 https://t.co/AkhcfheMc7
— Vince Manfeld (@AureliusStoic1) August 11, 2023
Even while Trump was delivering his speech, Turley and other pundits watching were noting “that we had never seen such a comparatively light level of security precautions, given the weeks of coverage anticipating the protest. We then watched as thinly deployed police barriers were overrun and a riot ensued. It was appalling, and most of us denounced it as it was unfolding.” It was also probably entirely organized and executed by federal agents and “informants.”
Even professor Turley admits that the president “waited to speak.” For “a couple hours.” Maybe so but “sulking in the Oval Office does not make Trump a seditionist. Indeed, despite formal articles of the second impeachment and years of experts insisting that Trump was guilty of incitement and insurrection, Special Counsel Jack Smith notably did not charge him with any such crime.”
The obvious reason why not is that “the evidence and constitutional standards would not have supported a charge of incitement or insurrection.“
