2023 was a slow year for radcen, post-wise. There was a lot going on, to be sure, and just as we could get thoughts together something new and even more bizarre would pop up. That being said, let’s hope 2024 will be a more productive year.
Today’s topic is whether or not Trump should be removed from the ballot due to his alleged participation of the insurrection of January 6, 2021. It’s a heavy question and we as a nation have never been faced with anything even remotely like it, given that Trump is both a former president and is current running for president.
The pertinent part of the 14th Amendment reads:
“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.”
The crux of this post is whether nor not a candidate, in this case Trump, needs to be indicted first. The far-right says ‘yes’. They say Trump has never been indicted, so who is to say if he’s an insurrectionist, or not? The far-left say ‘no’, all that is required is that someone at the state level… and ALL elections, even for president, are state elections, this is true… decides so. It boils down to this simplicity, though some will toss in various nuances.
We here at radcen.net side with the far-right on this one. I know that if I were running for office and my name were removed from a ballot by a state Secretary of State my attitude would be, “Who the hell are you to declare me an insurrectionist? I’ve never been convicted of insurrection!”
The far-left is saying, “Nowhere does it say a conviction is required.”, and no, it doesn’t. Are you on the far-left claiming we need a disclaimer in every law and Amendment stating whether a conviction is required for anything restrictive? Really? Seriously? That’s an absurd stance to take.
While the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” is nowhere to be found in the Constitution, it has long been upheld to be a founding pillar in our sense of justice… at least in principle, if not application, but we digress. This is why radcen believes a conviction needs to be obtained. One is not officially a murderer until they have been convicted of murder, even if they did actually do it, and I bet if there were a law restricting murderers no one on either side would even question a conviction being necessary. Same here. No, we don’t need disclaimers in every law, this is… should be… a given. Does radcen want that lying cheating thieving bastard off all the ballots? Damn straight he does! A second Trump term would be the worst thing to ever happen to our country. But radcen is not willing to abandon his principles to do so. Neither does radcen want to kick the can down the road.
Moving on to Side Note #1: Both sides are trotting out legal scholars who mare making points for their side, and proclaiming, “See? Even Constitutional scholar ‘X’ says we are correct!” *sigh* No, they’re not. They’re just expressing their opinion, and that we have scholars with roughly equal credentials spouting opposite arguments means exactly that, it’s just their own educated, albeit biased opinion, nothing more.
Side Note #2: The far-right is blathering on about, “Let the voters decide.” Oh, isn’t that just fucking precious? <eye roll> You’ve just confessed to not believing in the rule of law. Any shit against the wall to do an end-run for your repugnant America-hating candidate. Spare me your faux concern for fairness.
Side Note#3: We here at raden.net believe the final question will end up at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), and we believe SCOTUS needs to intervene (it has been done, there is precedent), and make a final and definitive decision sooner rather than later. Do NOT let the chaos languish until a few months before the general election.
Ok, people, peace out. 🙂