457 Comments

The Court's job is to follow the law, not freelance into what's best for anyone (or everyone). The language of the Amendment is clear. Trump is not eligible to be president and his name should not be on the ballot.

Expand full comment

As I posted some days ago on this subject - if the plain text of the Constitution isn't enough to prevent an insurrectionist from appearing on the ballot, who or what can, I ask you? "The voters"? No, as the will of the people was *almost* thwarted by this very insurrectionist, election results be damned. And now, SCOTUS is about to consider unleashing "Insurrection II" upon this country? tRump threatens "bedlam" if he's barred...bedlam = insurrection; and he's already testing the "I was robbed!" line yet again, if he loses in November; and we want to go through this again? Seriously?

Expand full comment

Lance, you are right. This insurrection was specifically about annulling the will of the voters. The Senate abdicated its responsibility saying the voters should decide, which is itself a misdirection. The voters don't decide guilt of insurrection. That's the job of the Senate. The voters decide whom they want for President. If the candidate they want is guilty of insurrection, it shouldn't matter. That candidate should be disqualified under the Constitution. Either the Constitution is the ultimate authority or it's just a wish list.

Expand full comment
Feb 5·edited Feb 5

I was about to say that all this buck passing by the people in public office is just chicken shit, but I wavered not out of fear of vulgarity but out of respect for chickens.

Expand full comment

Just what we need - MORE respect for chickens - much more than for some of these sort-of politicians!

Expand full comment

😀😀

Expand full comment

Amen chickens!

Expand full comment

Why is nobody discussing the "aid and abet" clause? It seems to me that 45's inappropriate failures to act fall squarely within an "aid and abet" definition and analysis.

Expand full comment

Grand posts Lance and Jim! Using irrefutable logic to come to the painfully obvious conclusion! Will SCOTUS buy it? Who knows?

Expand full comment

I fear they will not.

Expand full comment

I think if they decide Trump is disqualified it won’t be from a sudden change of heart by the 6 traitors who McConnell shoved down our collective throats. It’ll be because their billionaire buddies are sick of Trump’s insanity.

They’ll easily blame the senate for not finding Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection during his impeachment process and by denying Trump access to the ballot they’re simply correcting a mistake made by McConnell and his party. There by sidestepping anyone criticizing them being “responsible” for Trump‘s disqualification.

Heaping it directly onto Mitch McConnell and senate republicans. I can dream 💭.

Expand full comment

Here is the submission by the Colorado Attorney General in support of Secretary of State Gena Griswold. It is pretty darn clear that Trump should not be on the ballot.

file:///var/mobile/Library/SMS/Attachments/9d/13/534DA255-32B6-4B04-A101-C821A1B0D1A6/20240131133707445_23-719%20Griswold%20Repondent%20Brief%20on%20the%20Merits.pdf

Expand full comment

Jim, it is now a Chinese Menu, pick three

Expand full comment

My dad would have said, "Maybe they think the constitution is just a suggestion...."

Expand full comment

I always go back to Judge J. Michael Luttig’s testimony before the Special House Committee on January wherein he stated in closing, “They are going to do it again in 2024. How do I know? Because they are telling us.”

Expand full comment

They have told us all along. People are not listening!

Expand full comment

I need to do as much as we can to get them to “hear” and to “understand.” I recently compiled a two page “Resources to GOTV” and set it to around 100 friends and acquaintances. Most of the info included was taken from my reading on Today’s Edition by R. Hubbell and Chop Wood, Carry Water by Jessica Craven. People need to donate and engage now instead of waiting until October.

Expand full comment

Right. And Mueller punted to the Courts, and McConnell punted to the Courts, and the Courts will likely punt back to the voters, as these bodies who make and uphold the Constitution and the law do neither.

Expand full comment

I agree, so much "punting" and so little actual doing there jobs!!! This is a very big reason we are in the mess we are. Vote Blue!!

Expand full comment

And that statement is what really pisses off this reader; “these bodies who make and uphold the Constitution and the law did neither.” Makes a person want to scream into a bag.

Expand full comment

Hard to score if a team just punts. (It's Super Bowl week, what can I say?)

Expand full comment
Feb 5·edited Feb 5

Trump's threats have been controlling American politics for far too long. He's got the GOP under his thumb, including most of the members who are too afraid of him to speak out. His character assassination of President Biden is aided and abetted by the mainstream press. Now the SC has the power to apply the Constitution to shut Trump down. But they probably won't because Trump appointed the right wing majority of them to the Court.

Expand full comment

And some days the MAGA justices are originalists and some days they are textualists. All depends on the outcome they want. Don’t trust them as far as I can spit!

Expand full comment

Alito & Thomas have likely contorted themselves into pretzels to issue a ruling favorable to Inmate PO1135809.

Expand full comment

What I also fear is that, once you have crossed into the realm of "let the voters decide," where does it end? Not only would this diminish the rule of law, but it would potentially put every major issue to a popular vote, which is not how a republic is supposed to operate. Unfortunately, Sen. McConnell let this genie out of the bottle when delaying hearings for a SCOTUS nominee and its hard to see how the damage can be repaired. The irony in all of this is that the so-called originalists should be up in arms over this issue, but are strangely mute.,

Expand full comment

If the justices do their job and stick to the law instead of politics, it's going to be hard for them to avoid affirming the Colorado Supreme Court decision. The main briefs, and the dozens of amicus briefs, are strong for affirmance and lame for reversal.

So Trump will come off the ballot in Colorado, and because that precedent means that Trump could not serve even if elected elsewhere, every other state in the Union will want to strike him from their ballots in order to save voters from wasting their votes on Trump.

And overnight Trump's power will evaporate, leaving him standing in the dock as just another criminal defendant, more notorious but no more exempt from punishment than any other criminal.

Expand full comment

Well Douglas Wilson, your thoughts are my dream scenario for 2024. But as another reader wrote, we are sitting here powerless watching a lot of elected people passing the buck. Scary!

Expand full comment

I feel and think that we are indeed truly powerless.

Expand full comment

I agree with you Douglas and hope your prediction comes true.

Expand full comment

You are right, Douglas. I am asking my Higher Power to help us maintain the Rule of Law and save Democracy for those who have children and grandchildren. I grew up in a free America, the envy of almost every country I visited in the past sixty years. Now that I am almost 80, it frightens me to think that we will be ruled by one person.

Expand full comment

Wow....that would be the universe's karma that I keep praying for. That would be a shining light on a hill!!!!

Expand full comment

I dearly hope you are correct, but that is a very big ‘if.’

Expand full comment

Only in a logical, rational, sane world....

Expand full comment

Except the SC will reveal the sameness of its originalism and save Trump

Expand full comment

The same holds true for members of Congress who supported the insurrection, and claim that those found guilty and imprisoned for their participation are hostages.

Expand full comment

Couldn't agree more on this one. All of those folks -- including the Speaker of the House -- seem to be skating. Why? Why haven't they been charged with anything?

Expand full comment

When President Biden wins in 2024, he needs to appoint a pitbull in place of Merrick Garland. He is a very good man, but not aggressive enough to stop the traitors in our country.

Expand full comment

The list is long.

Expand full comment

Amen. The language of the amendment is clear. It means what it says. Its purpose is to protect the nation from known traitors.

Expand full comment

I totally agree. The 14th Amendment is tailor-made for Trump and any other public official who aided and abetted him in his attempt to overthrow our government. That list would include Congress people who knew in advance that this event was going to proceed. The legal language of this Amendment is crystal clear. He and others are NOT eligible to run for public office. Period. I don't care that it may be the opinion of the Court that we should just go ahead and put him on the ballot. That would be doing grave damage to the language of Section 3 of our Constitution's 14th Amendment. It would set a terrible precedent.

Expand full comment

Victoria: You're right. There are many in the Senate and House who should be removed from the ballot when they come up for re-election, based on their support of DT before and during the insurrection. The Supreme Court may find a loophole for DT to slip through in the language of the Constitution....but the language is crystal clear with regard to members of Congress.

Expand full comment

I have a feeling Jack Smith is working very much on this….

Expand full comment

Flo: I surely do hope so. And...surely some of those people are up for re-election this year. How come no one is talking about it, filing papers to keep them off ballots? DT is the "big fish", but how about all those minnows? Or...plankton?

Expand full comment

Agreed Dave. What’s the point of section 3 of the 14th Amendment if it is not applied when appropriate? I.e If not now, when?

Expand full comment
founding

I said the same thing about Trumputin's 2 impeachments -- if not now, when?

Expand full comment

Anyone with common sense can see he is ineligible.

Expand full comment

Dave, yet what law can stop the Gang of 6 from doing whatever it wants??? Trick question, there is no law stopping them. They ARE the law now

Expand full comment

I agree. The Supreme Court was not elected (nor appointed) to decide what is best for the country. They are there to interpret the law. The language of the 14th Amendment is clear and direct; so too is their task. And while I think this conclusion stands on its own, the plain language of the Amendment also offers a very democratic off-ramp for those so concerned about what's "best for the country:" If people don't like the result of the 14th Amendment's application, their elected representatives in Congress, by a 2/3 vote, can override it and put him on the ballot anyway. If someone is to make a judgement that having Trump face the voters is somehow best for the country, the drafters of the 14th Amendment assigned responsibility for achieving that result to Congress, not the Court. Perhaps I lack imagination, but again, I just don't see how this one is so complicated.

Expand full comment

I agree and wonder about the potential outcomes of an election where the psychopath is not roundly defeated at the poles?

Expand full comment

Look at what happens in the "elections" of countries run by dictators and. you will have your answer.

Expand full comment

If Trump will not be excluded per the 14th Amendment and the election moves forward, what will prevent another January 6th-type debacle when he loses the 2024 election? The minions and MAGA loons will create more havoc as he whines and moans about a “rigged election”. I’m afraid for our country.

Expand full comment

He's already whining and moaning and claiming election interference. He's the victim. He's by doing so he's already preparing his supporters to act should he run and lose. And, we will have a repeat of the aftermath of the last election but with more violence.

Expand full comment

This is my fear. Trumpism is a cancer that is metastasizing out of control.

Expand full comment

He’s also preparing them in case he does win. They will become his army to beat down any opposition to his rule.

Expand full comment

Trudy, the difference this time, is Joe Biden. If a bunch of MAGA clowns tried the same thing, my bet is the reception at Congress would be armed and brutal. As it should have been the first time!!! I say bring it on.

Expand full comment
founding

I believe our republic stands on the brink of a precipice.

If, God forbid, trump wins we're screwed. He has already told us he's going to be a dictator, removing any doubt that the rule of law will stand.

If Biden wins, God willing and the creek don't rise, trump will claim voter fraud again and set his mob against the rule of law.

If trump is disqualified per the 14th amendment, he will foment violence in the streets. And this time the mayhem won't be so unorganized.

We need to do whatever it takes to get people to vote blue.

We need to encourage everyone to vote. Write letters, talk to people, volunteer.

Truly our republic depends on it!

Expand full comment

If SCOTUS does not rule appropriately in this case, it WILL set a dangerous precedent. All states--even monarchies and dictatorships--are fragile, but democracies (or representative democracies) are especially fragile. We should have a good idea of which way they'll go after we hear oral args. on Thursday.

Expand full comment

Good afternoon Joyce: I don’t care what the polls say about TFG being so far ahead in the polls. Most Americans know the score. Voting for him would be for lowering taxes for the very rich. Let’s be real here. The Maga cult are half crazy. And their base is only about 30 percent. Disinformation is a major concern but common sense tells us Grifters USA want to throw America under the bus 🚌 because they’re crazy. They do not have common sense. Most of us know better and will re-elect Biden in November. It’s the crazies we need to worry about fueled by Putin’s secret militia and complex strategies TFG has been planning since he left office. And the idea that he would have immunity from prosecution even after leaving office is just plain ridiculous. Not sure how we stop him but we will. It’s going to be all hands on deck here. And I hope Biden can have all available troops at the ready should anything appear to threaten the election process in November. There is no way he’s going to win. If we understand that, we too can prepare to avert any missteps when havoc approaches to deter mayhem because that is what the orange man is hoping for. Your accounting today is very much appreciated and all that you continue to do. 🗳️🙏🇺🇸🗽🗳️

Expand full comment

Great post of encouragement!! I want to believe that we won’t be overrun by the crazies, but you’re right…..it’s all hands on deck to maintain our constitutional form of government. I heard JD Vance speak today and there is no doubt that authoritarian folk are pushing their agenda in any way they can. There is no attempt to hide their intentions. We need to take them at their word and VOTE BLUE.

Expand full comment

Joyce, here is my dilemma on the 14th Amendment issue. It reads so clearly! And it is in the Constitution not some Federalist Paper or long-ago lower court opinion. Would a SCOTUS ruling against Trump put this issue to rest? No. Neither would a defeat in November. And if this doesn't rise to the level of being disqualified, why have qualifications at all? My preferred outcome is take him off the ballot and be prepared for the inevitable fallout. My prediction, however, is that the Court will skirt the issue.

Expand full comment

I agree Mr. Roseen. A Trump defeat in November will just have him howling louder and longer. We've been this route before and the outcome wasn't pretty. But Trump will be out of office (not in D.C.) and likely defending himself in a bunch of courtrooms. I say remove Trump from the ballot.

Expand full comment

And ensure that this vile criminal slimeballr is behind bars BEFORE the election!

Expand full comment

Agree the SCOTUS is not going to let states take TFG off the ballot. That would require a level of courage in the application of justice they do not possess.

And after the blue tsunami in November that again leaves Trump an ordinary citizen, there will be a period of civil unrest by the uneducated that Trump declares he loves. He is so good at getting others to do his dirty work.

He and his team of plotters (plodders?) will try every sort of underhanded trick and make even more outrageous allegations. Election interference 2.0. Without a doubt, they'll drag out the tactics from the 2020 election, but fine-tuned a bit. False electors. Voting machine irregularities. Observers who mistake a ginger mint for a thumb drive.

I think Smith and Garland will let the election play out before they

Expand full comment

*before they make their cases.

Expand full comment

Agree. Robert Hubbell made this point when he wrote this in his newsletter last week:

"The courts are not coming to save us."

Expand full comment

And that is a very dangerous strategy!

Expand full comment

Cheryl, your statement is so true. There are NO current decision makers who could be candidates for Profiles of Courage. “That would require a level of courage in the application of justice they do not possess.”

Expand full comment

In the words of Cicely Tyson " To soar toward what's possible, you must leave behind what's comfortable"; for SCOTUS to be the arbitrator, they may need to accept the fallout which comes when upholding their oath of office to make decisions which uphold our national constitution as it has evolved.

Expand full comment

In my opinion Vance's interview was a disaster today. While there was some pushback he was mostly allowed to just spew the same old lies about 2020 election fraud and the cases against Trump being left wing and Biden election interference. They cannot provide proof of either and those lies need to be challenged forcefully and with facts during these interviews. They should not be allowed to get away with it.

Expand full comment

I don't think it was a disaster. If you watched, George pushed back on virtually every point of treason puked out by vance, and masterfully cut him off with glee at the end. It was a televised castration if ever I saw one. I was SO proud of George!!

Expand full comment

Heather Cox wrote an excellent article on the history of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution today. It would seem that any "originalist" interpretation of those amendments would prohibit Trump from running or holding any elected office in the country. There are also, in Congress, other conspirators who should be removed and ineligible to run for re-election.

Expand full comment

Totally agree that others in elected office should also be knocked off the ballot if the 14th amendment (Sec. 3) prevails.

Expand full comment

At this point, it's virtually the entire Republican party!

Expand full comment

And you must purge all of them from the public service.

Expand full comment

Also see Timothy Snyder’s post today. He is adamant that Trump has disqualified himself:

Expand full comment

I can’t help wonder whether there would be any fuss at all about Fani hiring a lover( or having an affair with an employee) if she weren’t black I’m disgusted

Expand full comment

I was thinking the same thing. Not only is she not white, but she's a FEMALE after all. Means she's had two points against her since Day One, as far as he's concerned.

Expand full comment

And a woman. A man seems to be able to take lovers and have children at will without consequences. Will it never end?

Expand full comment

The article points out that she did NOT hire a lover. That is a very important distinction. The rest of the story? Better suited to the Nation Enquirer than to civil discourse.

Expand full comment

Many couples, married or not, work together.. I think that if she were white it would not be an important distinction, but would be nobody's business but their own.

Expand full comment

True.

Expand full comment

I’m frustrated that a candidate (DJT or anyone) can run for President with so few requirements for candidacy. Can it be that age and citizenship are the only hiring criteria? And their financial disclosures should also be made upon filing. Even if tRump is a felon he isn’t disqualified? For the highest office in the country and the free world? Why are there not standards to be met upon applying, as with any other job in this country? With even a whiff of scandal a candidate should be denied, yet we all saw him on live tv not only obstructing the peaceful transfer of power by denying Biden’s transition team access to needed offices and information, but by inciting a rebellion on our sacred Capitol to prevent the official congressional ceremony to certify the votes for the instatement of the duly elected President Biden. He is clearly ineligible to run for office but also guilty of treason and should long ago have been required to step aside. God help us if a tyrant can just strong arm and bully his way into the office of the President of the United States of America!

Expand full comment

Bully is what he is trying to do! He’s counting on his bull to push him though the rules, again.

Expand full comment

I know it's not a legal argument, but if Trmp didn't want to allow the voters to choose the president in 2020, why should they get to possibly choose him in 2024?

Expand full comment

Because he knows he has to allow an election to get himself elected so he can then use the military to turn himself into dictator, and he has said he will do that on the first day of office. So he is only using the process as a steppingstone to dictatorship. He acted like a dictator while he was in office from 2017 through 2020. That’s when he first gave Iran nuclear secrets over the objections of members of Congress from both parties.

Expand full comment

Valere

Agree that the presidency is just a stepping stone. I think his motives are simpler than they look. Reclaiming the Presidency is just a tool to achieve these four things:

*avoiding prosecution ("pardon myself" I'm not going to jail);

*retaliation (for perceived wrongs. "Don't get mad - get even.");

*arrogance (narcissistic power over other people because he's smarter than everyone else);

*money ("everything I do for you has a price tag." Nuclear secrets weren't a freebie!)

Almost everyone goes through a stage in life where these things are important. It usually resolves around the 8th grade. A case of arrested development.

Expand full comment

Agreed - and you have nailed it. Could the arrested development have occurred at age 3 in a temper tantrum?

Expand full comment

Valere

Agree. Age 3 is more appropriate for those kind of tantrums!

Expand full comment

What a week coming up. I am looking forward to listening to the audio feed on the 14 Amendment in Colorado. Let’s hope there outcome will be siding with the law. I believe Jack Smith will keep on pecking on Judge Cannon and Trump. Trump won’t back down but I think Judge Cannon will soon realize she is over her head.

I see Willis as a strong woman, although her misstep was very unfortunate, I think if allowed to try the case she will blow it out of the water.

So many Republican Senators, like J.D. Vance, are speaking craziness out loud. It makes you wonder?

Thanks for laying out this coming week. Speaking for myself, I’d be in the weeds without your knowledge and explanations.

Expand full comment

Monica, years ago I clerked for a federal district judge, and in my experience, they are impervious to “pecking.”

Expand full comment

Just trying to be hopeful with a nod to the chickens.

Expand full comment

Monica, we cannot call this business with Fani a ‘misstep.’ If the affair began after the indictment was filed, which is what she claims, she was already in a criminal case involving one of the most important issues that has ever occurred in the United States. The president of the United States and his coconspirators tried to steal the election of the citizens of Georgia: some of whom elected her. One of the biggest fights that ever occurred in the United States of America was over how to count our votes for president. That’s how we ended up with the electoral college. it came about because of a compromise. It may not be perfect, but there hasn’t been anything else that replaces it. That fight, that was one by the way by those of our founders who defended the rights of American citizens to have a vote and a say so in the election of their president. They opposed those who wanted Congress to select the president. That fight went on for a long time and resulted finally in a compromise that we know as the electoral college . Our right to vote and have our votes count is precious. This is exactly what Trump wanted to take away from us. He wanted to take away from every citizen of the United States, which Jack Smith is fighting for every day of his life. And he wanted to take it away from Georgia because we have an audio tape that says so. But Fani Willis is telling the people of Georgia, and by extension, the people of the United States, that the case itself isn’t very precious to her. Trotting off with hot lips is more important. She put her personal desires ahead of her responsibility to the people of Georgia, and by extension to the people of the United States of America. There’s no other way to think about it. A ‘misstep’ is inviting the wrong person to a party or disclosing a friend’s confidence.’ This was a lack of judgment that she carried on for a period of time, and would most likely still be carrying on if the affair had not been disclosed. Then she was not forthright about admitting it. That makes one wonder if she was trying to figure out a way to cover it up and pretend it didn’t happen. Then when she knew someone had the goods on her, she decided to throw herself at the mercy of public opinion. That doesn’t work in this kind of high stakes scenario. There is no room for carelessness or risk or lack of judgment in a case of this magnitude. So whether she’s ‘able’ to try the case or not doesn’t matter. She may be capable of doing law, but her priorities are out of order, and we have no guarantee that she will ever give any degree of priority to this case. We wonder if she simply wants to be in the limelight? And that’s what Joyce is pointing to when she says she should back off with “humility.“ We are concerned about her priorities. A litigation like this isn’t simply a day job: it’s a night and day job until the job is finished. She doesn’t get this and we don’t think she will ever get it. Yes she can have a day off from time to time. But hot lips seems to be her priority and he might not be going away. People will have zero confidence in her ability to make good decisions. (He doesn’t make good decisions either). Being a litigator requires doing strategic planning at a very high level. It requires someone who is living, breathing and dying the case until it’s over. So if she couldn’t choose between dedicating herself to a very important case, and traveling with hot lips, she doesn’t have the ability to work this case. That’s my opinion. And I could care less if she has 10 affairs. That is not the issue . Being able to set aside your personal desires and wishes to finish out the case is my issue.

But Fani wasn’t doing strategic planning or buttoning up every single part of every single one of her RICO case involving multiple individuals, including the president of the United States of America. She was traveling with hot lips and celebrating getting three attorneys to plead guilty. That’s called ‘picking off the low hanging fruit.’ The case is hardly over at that point. Her reelection as a district attorney could come before the case is even tried. She doesn’t have any crystal ball. Does she have so much ego that she thinks she will be reelected? She was elected, not appointed. That’s a huge difference and she’s acting like a common politician.

She is also someone who is acting like this is her first trip to town in public life. One lives differently when you’re in this kind of extreme public exposure. For example, one doesn’t go out to dinner and have a single drink and drive oneself home (you plan ahead with a driver). She didn’t have enough sense to understand her responsibility doesn’t end on Friday night when she leaves the courtroom. My criticism isn’t that she had an affair. My criticisms surrounding the affair is that she was so stupid about it. If she’s stupid about that, she’s stupid about court. Not to be unkind, but it’s the stupid thing that is showing with Fani more than the morality. The complete lack of a moral compass with her boyfriend is another bothersome detail. He booted his wife of many years, left her with no income, while her father died. I will be disappointed if Fani stays on the case, and I have absolutely zero confidence that she can make any kind of strategic decision to bring it to a conclusion. And that’s the exact fodder she’s given Trump. They need to put her next in line deputy on the case and hire whoever they need as a consultant.

Expand full comment

Valerie, you have assigned a lot of motive and generalizations to Ms. Willis. Perhaps it is reasonable to suggest she displayed a lack of good judgement based on the significance of this case. I might agree with that. However she has NOT forsaken her duties as prosecutor just because she has a relationship. It is not uncommon for couples to work together. And these two are on the same side of the courtroom. Perhaps she just desired privacy? However, we are all very aware that people in the limelight rarely are given privacy or even have the expectation of it in our culture. And most of all Trump is the biggest bully on the block and never misses an opportunity to badmouth a person!

Expand full comment

Thank you Christine for pointing to this. I’m just so disappointed in what I viewed as her jeopardizing the case. Indeed, what may have been a powerful, working relationship will be capitalized on by Trump for sure. Again, I was just feeling deeply disappointed at the thought of her being required to resign.

Expand full comment

And thank you for receiving my comments in the spirit in which they were intended. I share in your anxiety on this issue.

Expand full comment

Of course Christine!

We have suffered collective PFSX since Jan 6. Some of us recognize it from prior diagnosis, and some folks are undiagnosed. But we are all suffering. The more invested we are in protecting our Republic, I think the more anxious some of us are.

I feel strongly that Joe Biden will be reelected. And the bicameral Congress will be blue, both Senate and House. And there will be a lot of work still to come, and a lot we will do together. This is such a lovely Substack - and I’m reminded of how Garrison Keillor used to talk about l

Lake Wobegon, where ‘all the children are above average.’ So as well, is Joyce’s Substack, where all of the readers are above average.’ 💙 and where all the women are strong ha ha 💪🏻 I guess the men are good looking too…

Expand full comment

I’m an engineer not a lawyer but I saw what everyone else in the country saw on January 6th. Pretty clear what we witnessed was an insurrection that would not have occurred without the direction we all witnessed from DJT. Also would be a very hard sell for anyone to convince me that DJT should be anywhere near the White House. Without DJT none of this would have happened and it is quite obvious he’s running for president because he’s found a willing group of marks that send him money to pay for his legal issues and if he’s elected will be able to destroy the legal system that is going after him for his criminal existence.

Expand full comment

Hear hear, Joe!

He will not be elected. I feel strongly that we will defeat him and reelect Joe Biden and we must elect both house and Senate Blue. 💙

Expand full comment
founding

With you in Michigan 1000% We will prevail!

Expand full comment

Totally

Expand full comment

Lot's to unpack here. First, I think JD Vance just got the not to be Trump's VP. Secondly, in my view, the issue with Ms. Willis is not unexpected as Trump and his sycophants are/will be looking at any way they can to deflect the reality he - and many others - attempted to overthrow the results of Georgia's state election results in 2020. Of course, as in all other examples of Trump's claim of a "rigged election" NONE of the republicans voted into office in 2020 - as far as I know - have complained about their own elections. Finally, and I have to say this as a 76 year old white man, I believe the FACT Fani Willis is Black pretty much says it all as to why her personal relationship seems to be such a problem. As far as I'm concerned, what she does in her private life is her business. But, of course, when it comes to Trump and republicans, interfering in people's private lives - especially women - has become second nature.

Expand full comment

Well Mr. Vance, that comment just proves that you are not fit to be Vice President of the United States

Expand full comment

Or to be a citizen of the United States of America!

Expand full comment

What an upcoming week. I’m heading to Costco tomorrow with the pickup. The Honda Passport won’t hold enough popcorn.

Expand full comment

Mark T, Love this. My neighbor used to buy those giant bags of Costco popcorn:)

Expand full comment

Lol

Expand full comment

The only ones who do not seem to be afraid of Trump is E Jean Carroll, her attorneys and Judge Kaplan. Others would do well to follow their lead. “He is nothing.”

Expand full comment

This really goes to the fundamental question of who decides that a candidate is ineligible under the 14th Amendment and on what is the decision based? Does it come under the heading of states interpreting the Constitution or is this a federal decision? I.m not comfortable punting this decision to a court of lifetime appointees who have not bothered to disguise or act upon personal biases. And I doubt that SCOTUS would favor a patchwork approach by the states.

Expand full comment

SCOTUS has the last word on the meaning of the constitution. The obvious big questions here would be "what's an insurrection?", "what conduct amounts to 'engaging in' an insurrection?" and "is s. 14(3) self-executing, or must there be some as yet unwritten mechanism to determine whether s. 14(3) applies to a particular individual?"

On the other hand, SCOTUS is not at liberty to contradict findings of fact made in state courts. Oh, except when it does, as occurs all too often in criminal cases, hot button culture wars and attacks on the administrative state.

Expand full comment

I am with you Joyce, somewhere I wish that Trump stays on teh ballot and gets rejected by a wide margin. the Very democratic way, which doesn't prevent out awesome SC Jack Smith to continue relentlessly to have him get through a jury''s judgment, bless his heart., and his team's heart working relentlessly.

A to JD Vance, there is no word to qualify this person.

Expand full comment

I remember reading an op-ed that bored millionaires and billionaires winning public office with no understanding of government wasn’t helping governance.

Expand full comment