• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    011 months ago

    I really want his to be the case but, to a laymen like me, the GOPs counterargument that he’s never been convicted of inciting insurrection is compelling. At least with the mental gymnastics SCOTUS and the GOP use. That’s why the special counsel’s and Georgia indictments are paramount, and why Trump’s team is fighting tooth and nail to delay them until after the election.

    • themeatbridge
      link
      fedilink
      2911 months ago

      The constitution doesn’t say “convicted.” In fact, it says anyone who has supported an insurrection, which wouldn’t be a crime at all.

      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.

      Trump did engage in insurrection, and gave aid and comfort in the form of verbal support and encouragement. That’s not really in dispute. People have been convicted, and he supported them at a minimum.

      Trump’s last tweet of the day:

      “These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”

    • Baron Von J
      link
      fedilink
      23
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      the GOPs counterargument that he’s never been convicted of inciting insurrection is compelling.

      The Constitution mentions engaging in insurrection, not inciting. The district judge in Colorado rule as a finding of fact that he did engage in insurrection, and the state Supreme Court has upheld that decision. So it has been ruled upon in a court of law, twice.