by Mark Schwendau
Newsmax and the Washington Post are doing some real journalism in reporting the sinister cases of litigation to be brought against former President Donald Trump related to his supposed insurrection of January 6, 2020.
His case and the other four “trumped up” phony cases and charges seemed without reason until now.
Two left-leaning nonprofit groups now claim a section of the Constitution enacted after the Civil War will block him from appearing on primary ballots because of his role in the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Former President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign team is getting ready to fight state-level legal battles across the country this year to ensure he remains the Republican candidate for President of the United States in November of 2024.
In a statement to The Washington Post, Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung said, “What these undemocratic organizations are doing are blatant election interference and tampering. They are not even trying to hide it anymore, and it is sad they want to deprive the American people of choosing Donald Trump — the overwhelming front-runner by far — as their President. History will not judge them kindly.”
The two left-leaning nonprofit groups Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Free Speech for People plan to challenge Trump on the ballot next year under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
Historically this section was ratified in 1868 to punish Confederate officers and officials after the Civil War and said any “officer of the United States” is disqualified from future public office if they have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against” the United States after taking an oath to support the Constitution.
“It is a strategy designed to enforce the Constitution to bar Trump from serving as president,” said CREW chief counsel Donald Sherman about the efforts being made by his organization. “We have had two major insurrections in this country. One was the Civil War, which gave rise to Section 3. And one was Jan. 6.”
The very few minutes of the January 6 Capitol security footage aired by Tucker Carlson on Fox News showed this was a protest and not an insurrection. The law holds an insurrection is defined by the presence of weapons. No Trump-supporting protesters came to the demonstration armed that day. Tucker Carlson ruined the scheme, and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) lost his mind shortly after that on the Senate Floor.
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
Trump’s legal team may argue the following points. President Trump did not engage in any “insurrection,” state officials can’t bar candidates from ballots. Section 3 can only apply to a candidate before an election, and Section 3 can’t be enforced without an act of Congress, according to attorneys familiar with the case.
Some experts argue Section 3 challenges can’t be filed until President Trump applies for ballot access this year. Their legal logic holds judges or election officials will be engaging in election interference if they deny Republican voters the ability to choose Donald J. Trump on a primary ballot.
Lawyers from both sides agree a judge’s ruling from any state will likely be appealed to a federal court and then fast-tracked to the Supreme Court.
The effort to remove President Trump might backfire on Democrats by drawing Republicans to close ranks around the former president’s campaign. The Post as well as many other news sources report his poll numbers and fundraising efforts have climbed dramatically after he was indicted in Manhattan two weeks ago. His campaign donations were reported to top 5 million dollars last weekend.
One un-named Trump campaign adviser called the effort a “prime example of election interference,” enjoying the fact these people are “writing Donald Trump’s message themselves.”
“The question is really what judge is going to grant any one of these states the ability to interfere with the American electoral process,” this adviser said. “We are very aware of the task before us.”
President Trump’s legal team is expecting challenges in blue states such as California, New York, Connecticut, Oregon, Maryland, Massachusetts, Washington, and Michigan, according to this adviser.
Interestingly, CREW and Free Speech for the People are not required by law to disclose their donors, but both have histories of working along with Democrat priorities and are assumed to be run by “dark money.”
Free Speech for People launched an unsuccessful Section 3 challenge last year against Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., and former Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C. Cawthorn’s case ended up being dismissed after he lost in the primary election.
CREW is actively engaging in activities to remove Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas from the court: “CREW files civil and criminal complaint against Clarence Thomas.”
Copyright © 2023 by Mark S. Schwendau
~~~
Mark S. Schwendau is a retired technology professor who has always had a sideline in news-editorial writing where his byline has been, “Bringing little known news to people who simply want to know the truth.” He classifies himself as a Christian conservative who God cast to be a realist. His website is www.IDrawIWrite.Tech.
wpDiscuz
