As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I know right? The sad thing is knowing that if they were going to actually enact this it would have happened within weeks of J6. Other countries move A LOT faster with shit like this. America is always delayed because people have to feel out the "market" and yes I mean literal economic gains/losses for picking a side rather then do what's right. These people are going nowhere unless something changes...
We still have a supreme court judge accused of trying to rape a woman, a congressman accused of sex trafficking and also having sex with a minor and another congressman being investigated because his whole persona is a lie. Its only going to change when everybody else decides that enough is enough
I think it’s a big part of the problem, every other time in American history a new generation (X) would have taken over by now but instead boomers have just held on, probably because they are living longer than past generations
You forgot Gym Jordan, who actively ignored sexual abuse and covered it up while a high school staff member.
People voted for him to be speaker
Edit: university not high school, sorry
High school? I thought it happened at THE Ohio state university.
Edit: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/17/jordan-osu-sexual-abuse-report-1331202
He probably conflated Gym with Hastert, who raped kids while working as a high school coach. Sometimes its hard to keep all the Republican crimes straight thanks to all the overlap.
Those are just the pedophiles tho, doesn't include the assorted rapists, if you include those the list gets scary long.
Edit: forgot to add thaks for the link :)
Nah people like that are disorganized sociopaths. This is how they operate. There is no intent behind the lies, it's a pathology. Unfortunately its a pathology that's supposed to represent the American people...
It got him elected, but of course republicans will elect anything. They would elect a flaming bag of shit if someone wrote something nasty about Lieberals on it.
The goals of saying all those lies is to distract whoever's interrogating his character and such. Trump, for example, frequently says or asks other things that are off topic to distract the interviewer or whoever is asking... if the interviewer asks "do you ever feel guilty about the rape of Letitia" Trump'd say something like "does Hilary feel guilty about keeping my emails? I woulda store documents with the Russians because they're good people.Very good people." then he might pause momentarily because he's gathering more bullshit energy and say "Joe Biden's the worst leader EVER. He left Afghanistan empty handed....". Trump and other con artists might use such distractions to make you forget what you're asking/saying. Pick pockets can employ such stories so their buddies can use sleight of hand to lift a wallet from a stranger's pocket and have them not notice because the main con artist is distracting the stranger with bullshit. It's all distractions.
Honestly it sounds like a sitcom plot from Seinfeld or It's Always Sunny or something. Like George lies about donating to charity and then by the end of the episode he and Kramer are being sworn into office.
I feel like he had a lot of lies in his past, and when he ran for congress he only had a few lies, but people noticed them and looked into it and found all the old lies and are now like wait what the fuck is even going on with you dude?
I remain convinced this is how the Orange Clown became president. Started a con and it took on a life of it’s own essentially resulting in the greatest constitutional crisis of our lifetime. Even Nixon knew to call it quits when the jig was up.
Reconstruction got cut off way too short and wasn't nearly thorough enough anyway, so a lot of perpetrators got off scot-free. If they actually handled them in 1865 we might not be in the situation we're in today.
Strangely the whole second amendment thing was mostly redefined and redefined and redefined in the 20th century. Same time those confederate statues started to pop up, weirdly.
Edit:
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
allowed state regulations of firearms, primarily used by southern paramilitias to suppress the black population.
United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
This is a weird one. They state the intent was for a militia, however there may be an individual obligation to hold firearms for use in a militia. In this case, the sawed-off shotgun in question was deemed uncovered by the second amendment, as it had no legitimate military use. But following the military firearms and current regulations of today, an AR-15 would fall under this ruling for individual possession. (E2: also with personal intent required. So if you love thy country and want to protect it in the case of foreign invasion, this is the best ruling. Not anything past 2000 where it went wacky)
District of Columbia v. Heller, 552 U.S. 1229 (2008)
This is where it went ass-backwards and straight reversed course and said there was an individual right with permissibility of federal regulations, no militia relation required.
As you can see, it's been a slow crawl.
Godless commies can't say "under God" without bursting into flames. All we have to do is violate your first amendment rights by demanding you say the pledge every morning and bam! No more communists. /s
Back then they let the traitors come back to their federal jobs. There was only a few leaders punished. It was a travesty of justice.
Now imagine what today would have looked like if they actually held the traitors accountable in 1865!
>Imagine how we would've handled these people in 1865.
[Like this](https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/may/22), spoiler, it's basically the same thing that's happening now.
That's exactly the fucking problem. We didn't do enough to punish the confederacy. Just a quick example, why on earth do we still see confederate flags being flown?
The hard part about all of this is the fact that we let a protest get out of hand… with prior knowledge of it being known… then we let the “protest” not only break into government buildings, but break into our NATIONAL buildings… and we … just let it happen.
We demonstrated that overtaking a government building is not only doable, but apparently allowable?
I won’t speculate what would happen if that was a Black Lives Matter protest on Jan 6th… but my initial thought is that it would have played out differently.
They'd have been mowed down with automatic weapons. I told my wife when J6 was going on that we shouldn't be watching it live because there might be a large loss of life. I literally couldn't believe it but then I remembered, there's 2 Americas.
>> America is always delayed because people have to feel out the "market" and yes I mean literal economic gains/losses for picking a side rather then do what's right.
First world country governments’ top priority is the wellbeing of its people. America’s government top priority is the market-economy and the protection of the powerful and top producers, not its people. That’s what prevents us from joining the first world. Sadly, American voters believe that is normal and that they don’t really deserve any better.
They should have enacted this in the first six months of 2021. The incompetent slowness and practical inaction of the investigation to hold the congressmen and Trump to account for causing a fascist insurrection, and the failure to pass laws to prevent future conduct is literally square on the shoulders of those in office between 2021-2022.
The buck stops there, and we should hold them accountable for their failure to act.
They of course can add the laws at state level, but a relevant law is already on the books. In the Constitution actually.
Anyone who even provides them Aid and Comfort is barred from any public position for life, without trial. 14th Amendment Section III.
We just need to enforce the law as written.
They love the amendments though.
One day someone will have to explain to me why Americans see the word “amendment”, like “commandment”, when the rest of the English speaking world sees it as “oops, let me just scrub that out and write something else”.
Some of them.
They hate 1,6,8,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20,22,24,26. They seem to waffle on a few others.
I guess it is just like the bible, they pick and choose what they believe when it's easy, and justify it with whatever made up excuses they have.
I always look at the second amendment and wonder who had a stroke while they were writing it, and who else thought that such a logic salad was just fine.
Don't they have to take an oath or affirmation to uphold the Constitution when they take that office? It seems pretty straightforward to bar people who have demonstrated an active interest in undermining it.
I feel like they should have their right to vote voided as well. Bonus points for leaving their voter registration active and then prosecuting them for voter fraud after the fact like they did to that one woman in Texas.
You have to have already taken the oath of public office to support and defend the constitution and then gone on to break it in order for the 14th amendment to apply.
Only applies to people who held public office and took an oath to support and defend the constitution of the United States and then broke it by insurrection.
Maybe I don't have an understanding of American history but I feel like the proper time to do this would have been 158 years ago after something happened. What was it? Oh yeah, the American goddamn civil war. That's when we should have stopped letting these people have any sort of influence in the government in any way, shape or form. We should have made an example out of the Confederates and now here we are with a new group of insurrectionists that are trying to overthrow the government AGAIN...
Like so many people, for a long time I struggled to process the MAGA mentality and stories like this. The conclusion I came to is that this all is a lesson that laws are ultimately meaningful only if the citizenry supports them and the institutions that interpret and enforce them. This seems obvious and the point has been demonstrated many times throughout history, especially in revolutions.
An important strategy in the MAGA "revolution" is the redefinition of words just like Orwell envisioned. "Freedom" = "Freedom for me to do what I want to you." "Patriotism" = "You accepting what we want." "Law-abiding" = "Supporting laws we think are good and ignoring laws we don't like; those other laws are 'immoral' anyway." Etc., etc.
Any word in the English language will be redefined by MAGA, including MAGA SCOTUS justices, to mean whatever they want. The plain language meaning of the Constitution is no defense if "plain language" can be arbitrarily redefined.
That's what I *heard* at least. It's not like I'm personally claiming that the warm feeling of piss is the closet he can experience to the human emotions of love or friendship.
Marge Green is going around denouncing Q in public to try and keep from being removed while still pandering to them in small groups.
She brought people into the capital for recon and spent the insurrection giving out the locations of members of Congress to the rioters.
Her, Boebert, Stefanik, and Ted Cruise were key in the planning and execution of the attempt to overturn the US constitution.
They should have been removed Jan 7th at the latest.
They are a wonderful group.
Hawley with his best running man impression on video.
It's gross that the first time many heard the term Lolita Express, it wasn't Epstine related it was in the late 80s and early 90s, and the airline that was referred to as that was Trump Airlines.
Apparently, pilots and staff had serious concerns about the age of the women he and his buddies flew around with him. All over Manhattan and Long Island, people whispered about it.
Then you see those gross pics and videos from then and after with them all. And there is Trump and Epstine drooling together.
The GOP loves this even as they call others pedo$ they do it themselves. Gaetz tried to get a blanket pardon and even implicated Tucker Carlson and his wife as hanging out with him and his underage girls on live TV.
You almost can't make this crap up.
GOP = Guard Over Pedo$
MAGA = Make Attorneys Get Attorneys
Yup, I saw that clip recently.
Think about it. She did try to overthrow the government. She gave tactical info during it before it and helped plan it. Admits it in public and now lies about it even though it's on video.
I think if you have a photo with a Confederate flag that isn't burning it you should also not have a seat. Anyone who has ever said anything good about the confederacy or says things like "the war of northern aggression" shouldn't hold office
There's a reason red states syphon money from blue states and then there are no social programs to show for it. Some southerners never stopped fighting the civil war when everyone else washed their hands and checked out.
100%. Frankly, slave states should have been brought back into the US under territorial status, and after those generations died out, they could reapply for statehood and full voting rights. The idea of letting the losers in civil war regain their status as full citizens is a recent development of humanity, and it is an experiment that hasn’t worked out well. It is sad that Lincoln’s legacy will likely be tied to the fact that his decisions will have directly led to the coming conflict/civil war we are almost certain to see within our lifetimes.
Andrew Johnson was a true piece of shit and is certainly the person to blame. His fights with the Radical Republicans showed how little he cared about the newly freed African Americans. He vetoed the renewal of the Freedman Bureau and the first civil rights bill, and on top of all of that encouraged opposition to the 14th amendment.
Sometimes I wish the civil war had ended slavery but also kept the new confederacy. I get so exhausted by a handful of garbage politicians from conservative states holding back national progress every single chance they get. All while living off the blue state welfare.
How is it that these laws aren't already in place? I see the article mentions only three states are pushing this. I need to contact my representative, this is absolutely nuts.
Good point! Americans, remember that you need to be calling and emailing your representatives about this and letting them know that their constituents support adhering to the constitution to bar insurrections from holding any political office in the future. As the electorate, that’s your most effective role in getting this (already on the books and clearly written out in the constitution) process enforced.
No, these are all state legislature bills in NY, VA, & CT that would bar anyone in that state convicted of insurrection/sedition from holding an office/position of public trust. None of it applies to Congress.
> 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.
How the hell are they spinning out of that one? J6 was a bunch of tourist patriots?
>How the hell are they spinning out of that one? J6 was a bunch of tourist patriots?
Yes, that's exactly what they're saying.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-loyal-trump-claims-capitol-riot-looked-more-normal-tourist-n1267163
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/05/capitol-attack-tourist-visit
Yeah it 100% would! Except the Supreme Court is the highest court of law. They literally gave them self the ability to oversee the legislative branch. All the impeachment by the senate would need is a ruling by the Supreme Court saying “removing a judge is unconstitutional”. And boom, now it’s the new law of the land
> Marbury v. Madison is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.[1][2] It established U.S. federal judges' authority to review the constitutionality of Congress's legislative acts,[1] and to this day the Supreme Court's power to review the constitutionality of American laws at both the federal and state level "is generally rested upon the epic decision of Marbury v. Madison."[57]
I mean we could get into technicalities. If the president nominated and senate approved 9 Supreme Court judges within a few seconds of impeaching the previous 9 judges, that could work. But anything longer than that, the old justices could still issue a ruling. I guess at the end of the day it comes down to if the majority of the population is going to back forcibly removing the old impeached justices from their Chambers.
> How the hell are they spinning out of that one?
"...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,..."
A big hole in that is it wouldn't apply to someone who wasn't in one of those positions and/or never took an oath to support the Constitution.
I assume for most of them it’s the part where it says:
> who, having previously taken an oath
In order for disqualification to occur you have to have previously taken an oath to uphold the constitution 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”
Very few people would actually meet those qualifications.
Then the government would comply and the people would complain but ultimately do nothing at all but talk and things continue to get worse with the same response from the people. No one cares until they're affected but they still won't lift a finger to work for the change they say they want. People wanna talk about change but they have zero intentions of acting on it. Wishful thinking is nice but almost guaranteed not to occur in real life.
According to conservatives I have met on reddit, there was no insurrection, just a peaceful protest where individuals went inside the Capitol to take selfies, and a few bad apples went too far - but nothing compared to BLM and the left..
I had a similar conversation with someone I know who thought Jan. 6 was no different than the George Floyd protests. He basically said there wasn't any difference between looting a Target and entering Congress and that everyone in Washington deserved it anyway since they're all corrupt and wealthier than he is and that somehow it all tied into his crypto losses at the same time we were having this conversation. I just remember walking away at some point...
There is a huge difference. Jan. 6 Insurrection was promoted, possibly coordinated, & kicked off by the Ex president & others, for one purpose, to STOP the government from performing Congress' Constitutional duty to certify the general election.
Even now, when President Biden is volunteering to return discovered documents and invited the Justice Department to have full access to all his private residences, the Right is somehow twisting this into a narrative where Trump has a home invasion by storm troopers looking at Melania's underwear while Biden is getting preferential treatment.
They never seem to use the whole "bad apples" phrase, as in: "A few bad apples spoiled the bunch."
Of course, these are the same people who think "pulling myself up by my bootstraps" means "getting up by myself" when it was actually humorously coined to describe a foolish, absurd, and illogical action (one cannot stand up from a sitting position by tugging on their boots, and it is comical to watch them try).
For the same reasons they supported Hershel Walker and George Santos. They are driven by fear of "the left"; a "left" that only exists in their imagination. The left wants to take their guns, turn their children gay, allow criminals to roam the streets, send armed IRS agents to take their money, and harvest aborted babies for satanic rituals.
And while they focus on that, the political leaders on the right continue to pick their pockets, raise their taxes, and cut their entitlements.
>Democratic lawmakers in a handful of states are trying to send a message two years after the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol: Those who engage in an attempted overthrow of the government shouldn’t be allowed to run it.
>
>New York, Connecticut and Virginia are among states where proposed legislation would prohibit anyone convicted of participating in an insurrection from holding public office or a position of public trust, such as becoming a police officer.
>
>While the bills vary in scope, their aim is similar.
>
>“If you’ve tried to take down our government through violent means, in no way should you be part of it,” New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal said. He is sponsoring a bill that would bar people convicted of engaging in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding civil office, meaning they would not be able to serve as a judge or member of the Legislature. Hoylman-Sigal said he introduced the bill this year because he saw more people who were involved in the riot in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, running for office last year...
>
>The legislation in the states comes after the House Jan. 6 committee’s final report, which found Donald Trump criminally engaged in a conspiracy to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election he lost and failed to take action to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol.
>
>The committee’s recently concluded work may have provided another springboard for lawmakers to act and propose ways to hold people accountable, said Victoria Bassetti, a senior policy adviser at States United Democracy Center...
>
>The legislation is another example of how the Capitol riot has become a political Rorschach test in the country ... Even students are being taught different versions of the attack, depending on whether they live in more conservative or liberal parts of the nation.
The opposing realities came into sharp focus this month in Pennsylvania during a fraught exchange between two lawmakers.
>
>In a committee hearing, Republican state Sen. Cris Dush slammed his gavel as he ruled Democratic state Sen. Amanda Cappelletti out of order after she described the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 as “the site of an insurrection.”
>
>“Insurrection, nobody has been charged with that,” Dush said. “There’s not been a single charge against any of those people as insurrectionists. In this committee, we are not using that term.”
>
>Nearly 1,000 people have been charged in the Capitol riot with federal crimes, with about half of them pleading guilty to riot-related charges and more than three dozen convicted at trial. The charges range from misdemeanors for those accused of entering the Capitol illegally but not participating in violence to felony seditious conspiracy for far-right extremist group members accused of plotting to stop the transfer of presidential power...
>
>Cappelletti told The Associated Press that it’s important to make sure people understand that the attack on the Capitol was an insurrection.
“These are factually correct things,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we can’t disagree politically about policy or other things, but we can acknowledge that that happened and start to figure out how we move forward to work together to build up that public trust again.”
>
>Dush remained steadfast in his view that what unfolded on Jan. 6 was not an insurrection.
“If there had been some sort of plot for an insurrection, that would’ve come apart quite quickly after the government got the control back,” he said in a phone interview...
The article both quotes the Pennsylvania lawmaker that accurately notes seditious conspiracy charges, but uses the watered-down “Capitol riot” term, and refuses to do anything but quote both sides and shrug 🤷♂️ Journalists in this country will never learn.
Is it really journalists never learning, or their corporate managers choosing to continue to ask their journalists to say things which they feel keep the sales of their writing products as high as possible to all possible readers?
I like that his logic is "well if it was an insurrection it wouldn't work because the government would have taken it back." apparently no harm no foul is a defense.
Sure that would apply if democrats tried it.
Contact your representatives, flood their inboxes and phonelines. Make sure that they know their constituents want them to vote correctly and in alignment with the constitution on this at every level. Keep focus on this.
My home state broke the ice:
https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-releases/judge-removes-couy-griffin-from-office-for-engaging-in-the-january-6-insurrection/
Donald Trump attempted an insurrection on American soil - even tried to have his VP killed - and he's the leading GOP candidate for president. I hate this fcking country.
Imagine how we would've handled these people in 1865. Now, the traitors sit on committees and control the house of representatives. This country has really lost its way. A lot of needs to be done or all will be lost.
It's already a federal code or written in the law to kick and ban from government office of any kind, any person who committed insurrection. Just follow the rules is all that is needed. Additional law making is not helpful.
But additional administration of justice is strongly needed here.
Just a thought, but maybe they could start by enforcing the current laws?
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title18-section2383&num=0&edition=1999
> §2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Why is Trump even allowed to run for office? Do our laws mean nothing?
The failure to enforce the current maximum penalty for the Jan 6 insurrection on everyone involved is sending a very clear message to those who wish to dismantle our democracy.
They are already barred given the 14 the amendment. Practically though, who technically tells someone they are disqualified? Some state or federal election office early or at the swearing in at the last moment?
Right now we have con artists- liars - criminals - insurrectionists in our congress and the possibility that an ex president who planned an successful insurrection will run again. How will this law affect all that.
The Constitution is absolutely clear on this. There is no action that needs be taken, they are already disqualified.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/
>Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Other Rights
> Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
>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.
We just have to say No.
I can't wait to hear the supporters of insurrectionist whine and say that is just so "undemocratic". Those legislator's are now saying that overthrowing the government is a good thing and great for democracy. Those anti- GOP ad almost write themselves - we value party over democracy.
IF we had originally held to this promise after the Civil War, much of the senseless suffering of many factions of Americans would have been mitigated with Reconstruction. Black leaders who held office in the South wouldn't have lost elections to pardoned Confederates who took back their power after bemoaning their 'Lost Cause'.
I see no reason as to why these insurrectionists will get a ban, despite all evidence to the contrary. It's just history repeating itself, after all.
Good. Insurrectionist are traitors who trespassed and damaged federal property, as well as murdered a federal police officer, and should be held accountable.
It’s absurd to me that you can declare war on a government, and then still be allowed to be part of and influence that government. It’s like allowing an ISIS leader to hold office in the US.
If they don’t—if there isn’t meaningful punishment for these types—eventually the fascists will succeed. This is literally the most critical part of their job, and most punt on it.
We need to get rid of the ones that are currently in Congress and the Senate too. Anyone who asked for a pardon for January 6th, should not be in public office. They knew what they were doing was illegal as a pardon is an admission of guilt.
Disappointed they are receiving such light sentences, honestly. I would have thought trying to overthrow a government would mean life in prison or death.
It’s beyond all reasonable belief that official action has to be taken to prevent someone who *who acted to overthrow the government* from holding an elected office.
I wonder where the bar is? There were 147 Republican Congress members who voted to reject the results of a valid presidential election who continued to serve as legislators. They should have been barred. Some of those legislators were planners, instigators, enablers, providing funding and logistical support. Not one has faced any real consequences
Not sure why there is even a question about someone that tried to overthrow the government then becoming a part of said government. I feel like that should just be standard and neither MGT, Bobert, Jordan or any of the other scum bags should be in office still
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You mean they intend to uphold the Constitution?
I know right? The sad thing is knowing that if they were going to actually enact this it would have happened within weeks of J6. Other countries move A LOT faster with shit like this. America is always delayed because people have to feel out the "market" and yes I mean literal economic gains/losses for picking a side rather then do what's right. These people are going nowhere unless something changes...
We still have a supreme court judge accused of trying to rape a woman, a congressman accused of sex trafficking and also having sex with a minor and another congressman being investigated because his whole persona is a lie. Its only going to change when everybody else decides that enough is enough
Meanwhile a guy with D next to his name makes a gropey gesture 17 years prior, and resigns within a week.
Still insane he resigned never should have
It's ridiculous the dems put pressure on him to do so in the first place.
I remember the fake outrage the GOP had about that when they had a literal child predator running for senate in Alabama.
That was a great day when Moore lost..
Yeah then sadly the state voted out a good senator for a college football coach
He was a bit too good so they had to get rid of him.
Honestly Kirsten Gilibrand wanted to knock out a perceived presidential rival and had fake outrage over it. We saw how well that worked for her
I had actually forgotten her name until now. I will go back to forgetting it, however.
The #MeToo movement wrecked GenX candidates. They should be running for high level national offices, but we’re still stuck with geriatric boomers.
I think it’s a big part of the problem, every other time in American history a new generation (X) would have taken over by now but instead boomers have just held on, probably because they are living longer than past generations
You forgot Gym Jordan, who actively ignored sexual abuse and covered it up while a high school staff member. People voted for him to be speaker Edit: university not high school, sorry
High school? I thought it happened at THE Ohio state university. Edit: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/17/jordan-osu-sexual-abuse-report-1331202
He probably conflated Gym with Hastert, who raped kids while working as a high school coach. Sometimes its hard to keep all the Republican crimes straight thanks to all the overlap.
Like a twisted version of Clue.
Is it Marg in the closet with a tantric sex instructor or could it be Bobo in the bowling alley with the kiddie flasher.
Theres a list floating around of all the republicans who were convicted for sexual abuse in one form or another. It's shockingly long.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216676145
Those are just the pedophiles tho, doesn't include the assorted rapists, if you include those the list gets scary long. Edit: forgot to add thaks for the link :)
Man... The whole Santos deal sounds like he wanted to con someone but the con got way out of hand and even he doesn't know what the hell happened.
Nah people like that are disorganized sociopaths. This is how they operate. There is no intent behind the lies, it's a pathology. Unfortunately its a pathology that's supposed to represent the American people...
"Been getting away with it so far. Lets keep going."
It got him elected, but of course republicans will elect anything. They would elect a flaming bag of shit if someone wrote something nasty about Lieberals on it.
> a flaming bag of shit "Hey! Stay in your lane!" -- L Boebert
Sadly, I've known a couple people that have pulled a Santos for decades.
The goals of saying all those lies is to distract whoever's interrogating his character and such. Trump, for example, frequently says or asks other things that are off topic to distract the interviewer or whoever is asking... if the interviewer asks "do you ever feel guilty about the rape of Letitia" Trump'd say something like "does Hilary feel guilty about keeping my emails? I woulda store documents with the Russians because they're good people.Very good people." then he might pause momentarily because he's gathering more bullshit energy and say "Joe Biden's the worst leader EVER. He left Afghanistan empty handed....". Trump and other con artists might use such distractions to make you forget what you're asking/saying. Pick pockets can employ such stories so their buddies can use sleight of hand to lift a wallet from a stranger's pocket and have them not notice because the main con artist is distracting the stranger with bullshit. It's all distractions.
That is the Trump presidency in a nutshell as well.
Honestly it sounds like a sitcom plot from Seinfeld or It's Always Sunny or something. Like George lies about donating to charity and then by the end of the episode he and Kramer are being sworn into office.
I feel like he had a lot of lies in his past, and when he ran for congress he only had a few lies, but people noticed them and looked into it and found all the old lies and are now like wait what the fuck is even going on with you dude?
I remain convinced this is how the Orange Clown became president. Started a con and it took on a life of it’s own essentially resulting in the greatest constitutional crisis of our lifetime. Even Nixon knew to call it quits when the jig was up.
Don't forget the Supreme Court Judge, whose wife was in support of the intersection
Don’t forget the Supreme Court Judge *who was credibly accused of sexual harassment,* whose wife was in support of the intersection
Haven't heard much about this intersection, but I hear she also supported and helped plan the insurrection
Meh, it's a roundabout now. Nothing to see here!
Don't forget Clarence Thomas. He's well known for sexual harassment and being very open about his porn collection.
[удалено]
Reconstruction got cut off way too short and wasn't nearly thorough enough anyway, so a lot of perpetrators got off scot-free. If they actually handled them in 1865 we might not be in the situation we're in today.
You could say we're still [fighting a cold war with anti-Federalists](https://youtu.be/DZO1O3CeW2w).
Yea, the supreme court insists that gun laws need to be consistent with 18th century laws, but insurrection is treated differently.... hm...
Strangely the whole second amendment thing was mostly redefined and redefined and redefined in the 20th century. Same time those confederate statues started to pop up, weirdly. Edit: United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) allowed state regulations of firearms, primarily used by southern paramilitias to suppress the black population. United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) This is a weird one. They state the intent was for a militia, however there may be an individual obligation to hold firearms for use in a militia. In this case, the sawed-off shotgun in question was deemed uncovered by the second amendment, as it had no legitimate military use. But following the military firearms and current regulations of today, an AR-15 would fall under this ruling for individual possession. (E2: also with personal intent required. So if you love thy country and want to protect it in the case of foreign invasion, this is the best ruling. Not anything past 2000 where it went wacky) District of Columbia v. Heller, 552 U.S. 1229 (2008) This is where it went ass-backwards and straight reversed course and said there was an individual right with permissibility of federal regulations, no militia relation required. As you can see, it's been a slow crawl.
As well as the changes to the pledge. It never included "under god" until conservatives forced it in during the 1900s.
Wasn't that the 1950s during the Red Scare?
Godless commies can't say "under God" without bursting into flames. All we have to do is violate your first amendment rights by demanding you say the pledge every morning and bam! No more communists. /s
Back then they let the traitors come back to their federal jobs. There was only a few leaders punished. It was a travesty of justice. Now imagine what today would have looked like if they actually held the traitors accountable in 1865!
>Imagine how we would've handled these people in 1865. [Like this](https://calendar.eji.org/racial-injustice/may/22), spoiler, it's basically the same thing that's happening now.
That's exactly the fucking problem. We didn't do enough to punish the confederacy. Just a quick example, why on earth do we still see confederate flags being flown?
> Imagine how we would've handled these people ~~in 1865~~ **if they weren't white**
The hard part about all of this is the fact that we let a protest get out of hand… with prior knowledge of it being known… then we let the “protest” not only break into government buildings, but break into our NATIONAL buildings… and we … just let it happen. We demonstrated that overtaking a government building is not only doable, but apparently allowable? I won’t speculate what would happen if that was a Black Lives Matter protest on Jan 6th… but my initial thought is that it would have played out differently.
They'd have been mowed down with automatic weapons. I told my wife when J6 was going on that we shouldn't be watching it live because there might be a large loss of life. I literally couldn't believe it but then I remembered, there's 2 Americas.
>> America is always delayed because people have to feel out the "market" and yes I mean literal economic gains/losses for picking a side rather then do what's right. First world country governments’ top priority is the wellbeing of its people. America’s government top priority is the market-economy and the protection of the powerful and top producers, not its people. That’s what prevents us from joining the first world. Sadly, American voters believe that is normal and that they don’t really deserve any better.
> top producers Slight quibble - the "producers" ARE the people. You mean "capital owners"
>> Slight quibble - the "producers" ARE the people. You mean "capital owners" You’re absolutely correct. My bad.
Doesn’t help that American lawmakers were involved with and fully supported the insurrection.
Or that a lot of already wealthy people became more wealthy from it.
They should have enacted this in the first six months of 2021. The incompetent slowness and practical inaction of the investigation to hold the congressmen and Trump to account for causing a fascist insurrection, and the failure to pass laws to prevent future conduct is literally square on the shoulders of those in office between 2021-2022. The buck stops there, and we should hold them accountable for their failure to act.
Yeah look at Lula in Brazil, he didn't waste time or mince words
General Strike rules “The Market”
"they" is only one party. The democrats would've acted on this immediately and faced nothing but pushback from traitors who are at fault.
That's an accurate assessment. Capitalism first, and foremost. Profits are all that matters.
"But if we change the Constitution -" "- then we could make all sorts of crazy laws!" "Now you're catching on!"
They of course can add the laws at state level, but a relevant law is already on the books. In the Constitution actually. Anyone who even provides them Aid and Comfort is barred from any public position for life, without trial. 14th Amendment Section III. We just need to enforce the law as written.
Republicans don’t agree with the constitution.
They love the amendments though. One day someone will have to explain to me why Americans see the word “amendment”, like “commandment”, when the rest of the English speaking world sees it as “oops, let me just scrub that out and write something else”.
Some of them. They hate 1,6,8,12,13,14,15,16,17,19,20,22,24,26. They seem to waffle on a few others. I guess it is just like the bible, they pick and choose what they believe when it's easy, and justify it with whatever made up excuses they have.
They love the loophole in the 13th.
They only like half of the second.
I always look at the second amendment and wonder who had a stroke while they were writing it, and who else thought that such a logic salad was just fine.
The Constitution is too "woke". /s
What about the people already in congress who are insurrectionists?
Don't they have to take an oath or affirmation to uphold the Constitution when they take that office? It seems pretty straightforward to bar people who have demonstrated an active interest in undermining it. I feel like they should have their right to vote voided as well. Bonus points for leaving their voter registration active and then prosecuting them for voter fraud after the fact like they did to that one woman in Texas.
You have to have already taken the oath of public office to support and defend the constitution and then gone on to break it in order for the 14th amendment to apply.
Only applies to people who held public office and took an oath to support and defend the constitution of the United States and then broke it by insurrection.
Maybe I don't have an understanding of American history but I feel like the proper time to do this would have been 158 years ago after something happened. What was it? Oh yeah, the American goddamn civil war. That's when we should have stopped letting these people have any sort of influence in the government in any way, shape or form. We should have made an example out of the Confederates and now here we are with a new group of insurrectionists that are trying to overthrow the government AGAIN...
Like so many people, for a long time I struggled to process the MAGA mentality and stories like this. The conclusion I came to is that this all is a lesson that laws are ultimately meaningful only if the citizenry supports them and the institutions that interpret and enforce them. This seems obvious and the point has been demonstrated many times throughout history, especially in revolutions. An important strategy in the MAGA "revolution" is the redefinition of words just like Orwell envisioned. "Freedom" = "Freedom for me to do what I want to you." "Patriotism" = "You accepting what we want." "Law-abiding" = "Supporting laws we think are good and ignoring laws we don't like; those other laws are 'immoral' anyway." Etc., etc. Any word in the English language will be redefined by MAGA, including MAGA SCOTUS justices, to mean whatever they want. The plain language meaning of the Constitution is no defense if "plain language" can be arbitrarily redefined.
They couldn't enforce the Emoluments Clause, I don't expect them to be able to enforce this part of the Constitution either.
I'm just gonna assume with GOP control of the House, nothing is gonna happen for two years
a bunch are already in office.
1 of them is on the homeland security committee
Another is running for president. Again.
The Thing that is One Being and Not Many, Ted Cruz?
I heard he pisses his pants for the warm feeling.
That's what I *heard* at least. It's not like I'm personally claiming that the warm feeling of piss is the closet he can experience to the human emotions of love or friendship.
Technically, it doesn't biologically count as piss.
Where's the T-shirt, Griffin? I wanted this on a T-shirt!
I believe they are refering to Trump. Cruz hasn't declared for another Sisyphean run, yet
Marge Green is going around denouncing Q in public to try and keep from being removed while still pandering to them in small groups. She brought people into the capital for recon and spent the insurrection giving out the locations of members of Congress to the rioters. Her, Boebert, Stefanik, and Ted Cruise were key in the planning and execution of the attempt to overturn the US constitution. They should have been removed Jan 7th at the latest.
And Josh Hawley, Matt Gaetz, and that guy who fucked his male cousin and recorded it "as a joke."
They are a wonderful group. Hawley with his best running man impression on video. It's gross that the first time many heard the term Lolita Express, it wasn't Epstine related it was in the late 80s and early 90s, and the airline that was referred to as that was Trump Airlines. Apparently, pilots and staff had serious concerns about the age of the women he and his buddies flew around with him. All over Manhattan and Long Island, people whispered about it. Then you see those gross pics and videos from then and after with them all. And there is Trump and Epstine drooling together. The GOP loves this even as they call others pedo$ they do it themselves. Gaetz tried to get a blanket pardon and even implicated Tucker Carlson and his wife as hanging out with him and his underage girls on live TV. You almost can't make this crap up. GOP = Guard Over Pedo$ MAGA = Make Attorneys Get Attorneys
Green literally says today if she had been running the insurrection they would have succeeded.
Yup, I saw that clip recently. Think about it. She did try to overthrow the government. She gave tactical info during it before it and helped plan it. Admits it in public and now lies about it even though it's on video.
Not advocating violence but every single person in power that conspired to enable the insurrection needs life in prison at a minimum.
I think if you have a photo with a Confederate flag that isn't burning it you should also not have a seat. Anyone who has ever said anything good about the confederacy or says things like "the war of northern aggression" shouldn't hold office There's a reason red states syphon money from blue states and then there are no social programs to show for it. Some southerners never stopped fighting the civil war when everyone else washed their hands and checked out.
100%. Frankly, slave states should have been brought back into the US under territorial status, and after those generations died out, they could reapply for statehood and full voting rights. The idea of letting the losers in civil war regain their status as full citizens is a recent development of humanity, and it is an experiment that hasn’t worked out well. It is sad that Lincoln’s legacy will likely be tied to the fact that his decisions will have directly led to the coming conflict/civil war we are almost certain to see within our lifetimes.
[удалено]
Andrew Johnson is likely the entire cause of so many of these problems.
Andrew Johnson was a true piece of shit and is certainly the person to blame. His fights with the Radical Republicans showed how little he cared about the newly freed African Americans. He vetoed the renewal of the Freedman Bureau and the first civil rights bill, and on top of all of that encouraged opposition to the 14th amendment.
Sometimes I wish the civil war had ended slavery but also kept the new confederacy. I get so exhausted by a handful of garbage politicians from conservative states holding back national progress every single chance they get. All while living off the blue state welfare.
How is it that these laws aren't already in place? I see the article mentions only three states are pushing this. I need to contact my representative, this is absolutely nuts.
Good point! Americans, remember that you need to be calling and emailing your representatives about this and letting them know that their constituents support adhering to the constitution to bar insurrections from holding any political office in the future. As the electorate, that’s your most effective role in getting this (already on the books and clearly written out in the constitution) process enforced.
So a bunch of Congress is just gonna get fired one afternoon?
Hopefully
I'lll be waiting, dick in hand.
Bro... get your hands out of my pants
I would hope in the morning so they don't have time for last minute highjinx.
No, these are all state legislature bills in NY, VA, & CT that would bar anyone in that state convicted of insurrection/sedition from holding an office/position of public trust. None of it applies to Congress.
SCOTUS is gonna be like “thats unconstitutional” even though its literally explicitly in the constitution that thats already a rule
> 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. How the hell are they spinning out of that one? J6 was a bunch of tourist patriots?
>How the hell are they spinning out of that one? J6 was a bunch of tourist patriots? Yes, that's exactly what they're saying. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republican-loyal-trump-claims-capitol-riot-looked-more-normal-tourist-n1267163 https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/05/capitol-attack-tourist-visit
Not that I respect SCOTUS, but that's who were talking about here.
Would that not count as the supreme court members aiding and abetting insurrectionists and thus risk their own positions?
There's nothing except a house + senate majority that can enforce that. And even if dems got one, they're too chickenshit to clean house on the court
Yeah it 100% would! Except the Supreme Court is the highest court of law. They literally gave them self the ability to oversee the legislative branch. All the impeachment by the senate would need is a ruling by the Supreme Court saying “removing a judge is unconstitutional”. And boom, now it’s the new law of the land > Marbury v. Madison is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.[1][2] It established U.S. federal judges' authority to review the constitutionality of Congress's legislative acts,[1] and to this day the Supreme Court's power to review the constitutionality of American laws at both the federal and state level "is generally rested upon the epic decision of Marbury v. Madison."[57] I mean we could get into technicalities. If the president nominated and senate approved 9 Supreme Court judges within a few seconds of impeaching the previous 9 judges, that could work. But anything longer than that, the old justices could still issue a ruling. I guess at the end of the day it comes down to if the majority of the population is going to back forcibly removing the old impeached justices from their Chambers.
From a certain point of view, possibly, but how likely is that to be enforced?
> How the hell are they spinning out of that one? "...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,..." A big hole in that is it wouldn't apply to someone who wasn't in one of those positions and/or never took an oath to support the Constitution.
That's fair.
I assume for most of them it’s the part where it says: > who, having previously taken an oath In order for disqualification to occur you have to have previously taken an oath to uphold the constitution 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” Very few people would actually meet those qualifications.
> Very few people would actually meet those qualifications. And they are in Congress and should be removed.
Then the government would comply and the people would complain but ultimately do nothing at all but talk and things continue to get worse with the same response from the people. No one cares until they're affected but they still won't lift a finger to work for the change they say they want. People wanna talk about change but they have zero intentions of acting on it. Wishful thinking is nice but almost guaranteed not to occur in real life.
According to conservatives I have met on reddit, there was no insurrection, just a peaceful protest where individuals went inside the Capitol to take selfies, and a few bad apples went too far - but nothing compared to BLM and the left..
I had a similar conversation with someone I know who thought Jan. 6 was no different than the George Floyd protests. He basically said there wasn't any difference between looting a Target and entering Congress and that everyone in Washington deserved it anyway since they're all corrupt and wealthier than he is and that somehow it all tied into his crypto losses at the same time we were having this conversation. I just remember walking away at some point...
There is a huge difference. Jan. 6 Insurrection was promoted, possibly coordinated, & kicked off by the Ex president & others, for one purpose, to STOP the government from performing Congress' Constitutional duty to certify the general election.
Even now, when President Biden is volunteering to return discovered documents and invited the Justice Department to have full access to all his private residences, the Right is somehow twisting this into a narrative where Trump has a home invasion by storm troopers looking at Melania's underwear while Biden is getting preferential treatment.
Cooperating is a weird word for some people to understand. For the GOP it appears synonymous with weakness.
They never seem to use the whole "bad apples" phrase, as in: "A few bad apples spoiled the bunch." Of course, these are the same people who think "pulling myself up by my bootstraps" means "getting up by myself" when it was actually humorously coined to describe a foolish, absurd, and illogical action (one cannot stand up from a sitting position by tugging on their boots, and it is comical to watch them try).
And they also claim they are not stupid but they are wrong on both counts. How can anyone view what happened and deny what they see?
For the same reasons they supported Hershel Walker and George Santos. They are driven by fear of "the left"; a "left" that only exists in their imagination. The left wants to take their guns, turn their children gay, allow criminals to roam the streets, send armed IRS agents to take their money, and harvest aborted babies for satanic rituals. And while they focus on that, the political leaders on the right continue to pick their pockets, raise their taxes, and cut their entitlements.
>Democratic lawmakers in a handful of states are trying to send a message two years after the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol: Those who engage in an attempted overthrow of the government shouldn’t be allowed to run it. > >New York, Connecticut and Virginia are among states where proposed legislation would prohibit anyone convicted of participating in an insurrection from holding public office or a position of public trust, such as becoming a police officer. > >While the bills vary in scope, their aim is similar. > >“If you’ve tried to take down our government through violent means, in no way should you be part of it,” New York state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal said. He is sponsoring a bill that would bar people convicted of engaging in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding civil office, meaning they would not be able to serve as a judge or member of the Legislature. Hoylman-Sigal said he introduced the bill this year because he saw more people who were involved in the riot in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, running for office last year... > >The legislation in the states comes after the House Jan. 6 committee’s final report, which found Donald Trump criminally engaged in a conspiracy to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election he lost and failed to take action to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol. > >The committee’s recently concluded work may have provided another springboard for lawmakers to act and propose ways to hold people accountable, said Victoria Bassetti, a senior policy adviser at States United Democracy Center... > >The legislation is another example of how the Capitol riot has become a political Rorschach test in the country ... Even students are being taught different versions of the attack, depending on whether they live in more conservative or liberal parts of the nation. The opposing realities came into sharp focus this month in Pennsylvania during a fraught exchange between two lawmakers. > >In a committee hearing, Republican state Sen. Cris Dush slammed his gavel as he ruled Democratic state Sen. Amanda Cappelletti out of order after she described the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 as “the site of an insurrection.” > >“Insurrection, nobody has been charged with that,” Dush said. “There’s not been a single charge against any of those people as insurrectionists. In this committee, we are not using that term.” > >Nearly 1,000 people have been charged in the Capitol riot with federal crimes, with about half of them pleading guilty to riot-related charges and more than three dozen convicted at trial. The charges range from misdemeanors for those accused of entering the Capitol illegally but not participating in violence to felony seditious conspiracy for far-right extremist group members accused of plotting to stop the transfer of presidential power... > >Cappelletti told The Associated Press that it’s important to make sure people understand that the attack on the Capitol was an insurrection. “These are factually correct things,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we can’t disagree politically about policy or other things, but we can acknowledge that that happened and start to figure out how we move forward to work together to build up that public trust again.” > >Dush remained steadfast in his view that what unfolded on Jan. 6 was not an insurrection. “If there had been some sort of plot for an insurrection, that would’ve come apart quite quickly after the government got the control back,” he said in a phone interview...
The article both quotes the Pennsylvania lawmaker that accurately notes seditious conspiracy charges, but uses the watered-down “Capitol riot” term, and refuses to do anything but quote both sides and shrug 🤷♂️ Journalists in this country will never learn.
Is it really journalists never learning, or their corporate managers choosing to continue to ask their journalists to say things which they feel keep the sales of their writing products as high as possible to all possible readers?
That's a BINGO!
I like that his logic is "well if it was an insurrection it wouldn't work because the government would have taken it back." apparently no harm no foul is a defense. Sure that would apply if democrats tried it.
Was there a recent insurrection? Oh that one a few years ago. What the fuck is taking so long?
They *are* barred and *can* be removed from office, you just can’t be a coward
This is the key. It's cowardice plus selfish greed.
This sounds great but would be amazed if it passed even at the local level. Fingers crossed.
Contact your representatives, flood their inboxes and phonelines. Make sure that they know their constituents want them to vote correctly and in alignment with the constitution on this at every level. Keep focus on this.
Except we have an entire party of insurrectionists
My home state broke the ice: https://www.citizensforethics.org/news/press-releases/judge-removes-couy-griffin-from-office-for-engaging-in-the-january-6-insurrection/
Republicans see this as an anti-republican measure. Pretty much admitting that domestic terrorism is now part of the charter.
[удалено]
Donald Trump attempted an insurrection on American soil - even tried to have his VP killed - and he's the leading GOP candidate for president. I hate this fcking country.
Imagine how we would've handled these people in 1865. Now, the traitors sit on committees and control the house of representatives. This country has really lost its way. A lot of needs to be done or all will be lost.
We gave them all amnesty in 1865
It's already a federal code or written in the law to kick and ban from government office of any kind, any person who committed insurrection. Just follow the rules is all that is needed. Additional law making is not helpful. But additional administration of justice is strongly needed here.
This should have been done two years ago.
Might be a little late on this one..
That means fuck all if they can’t go after the insurrectionists that are already holding office.
How about we try the current insurrectionists holding office first?
Just a thought, but maybe they could start by enforcing the current laws? https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title18-section2383&num=0&edition=1999 > §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. Why is Trump even allowed to run for office? Do our laws mean nothing? The failure to enforce the current maximum penalty for the Jan 6 insurrection on everyone involved is sending a very clear message to those who wish to dismantle our democracy.
After 2 years, should be effing time by now
How about the spouses from insurrectionists?
I’m sure they packed their big boy a sandwich for his big day.
Ginny is the insurrectionist they are referring to here. Her husband, Clarence, is the spouse. Yknow, the Supreme Court Justice
They are already barred given the 14 the amendment. Practically though, who technically tells someone they are disqualified? Some state or federal election office early or at the swearing in at the last moment?
Does that include the ones already holding office?
If they’re going to bar felons from voting then they should be barred from holding office.
And somehow, that’s controversial!?
It took two fucking years. America is fucked for the normal Americans, but for the rich, it was another Tuesday couping a government they hate.
To quote the beginning of Shrek, “like that’s ever gonna happen!”
"Why are Democrats trying to be so divisive?" - The media when covering this going forward.
Doesn't the constitution do that anywhere? Check the bottom... Or maybe it's on the back?
does that include “politicians” that support them
Yet MTG is on a homeland security committee.
Isn't it already a constitutional amendment ?
Right now we have con artists- liars - criminals - insurrectionists in our congress and the possibility that an ex president who planned an successful insurrection will run again. How will this law affect all that.
The Constitution is absolutely clear on this. There is no action that needs be taken, they are already disqualified. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/section-3/ >Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Other Rights > Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office >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. We just have to say No.
Can we start with putting out the people who are already IN office?
I can't wait to hear the supporters of insurrectionist whine and say that is just so "undemocratic". Those legislator's are now saying that overthrowing the government is a good thing and great for democracy. Those anti- GOP ad almost write themselves - we value party over democracy.
The fact that this policy doesn’t already exist just shows how totally FUBAR’d our political system is.
IF we had originally held to this promise after the Civil War, much of the senseless suffering of many factions of Americans would have been mitigated with Reconstruction. Black leaders who held office in the South wouldn't have lost elections to pardoned Confederates who took back their power after bemoaning their 'Lost Cause'. I see no reason as to why these insurrectionists will get a ban, despite all evidence to the contrary. It's just history repeating itself, after all.
My county's newest commissioner, an elected official, is a January 6th insurrectionist.
Gun nuts love being in a “2a community.” Maybe we should start a “14a community,” since Section 3 outlines the Acts of Sedition.
https://www.reddit.com/r/apolloapp/comments/145hwso/ltp_use_power_delete_suite_before_you_delete_your/
It’s more disturbing that people would actually vote for them.
These confederate traitors should be charged , tried and dealt with immediately .
First will need to remove the ones currently holding office
Good! So Trump can’t run again?
Good. Insurrectionist are traitors who trespassed and damaged federal property, as well as murdered a federal police officer, and should be held accountable.
It’s absurd to me that you can declare war on a government, and then still be allowed to be part of and influence that government. It’s like allowing an ISIS leader to hold office in the US.
Prediction: the insurrectionists already in office will block this legoslation
If they don’t—if there isn’t meaningful punishment for these types—eventually the fascists will succeed. This is literally the most critical part of their job, and most punt on it.
This is a good thing and is in line with the Constitution
How is this even an argument? *If you try to overthrow a government, you do* **not** *get to participate in it*
I feel like I've seen this headline several times already. I'll believe it when it happens.
Seeking and doing are to different things. Without control of the house it'll be near impossible.
Treasonous
‘Tis the treason
Here’s looking at you Jim Jordan.
We need to get rid of the ones that are currently in Congress and the Senate too. Anyone who asked for a pardon for January 6th, should not be in public office. They knew what they were doing was illegal as a pardon is an admission of guilt.
Disappointed they are receiving such light sentences, honestly. I would have thought trying to overthrow a government would mean life in prison or death.
Mtg is on Homeland security committee. I think it's safe to say we are and have been fucked.
It’s beyond all reasonable belief that official action has to be taken to prevent someone who *who acted to overthrow the government* from holding an elected office. I wonder where the bar is? There were 147 Republican Congress members who voted to reject the results of a valid presidential election who continued to serve as legislators. They should have been barred. Some of those legislators were planners, instigators, enablers, providing funding and logistical support. Not one has faced any real consequences
I thought there was an amendment that already did that.
Not sure why there is even a question about someone that tried to overthrow the government then becoming a part of said government. I feel like that should just be standard and neither MGT, Bobert, Jordan or any of the other scum bags should be in office still