Is Trump legally qualified to be a presidential candidate?

[Bootstrap]

But finally and above all, this article is actually probably the best defense of the January 6 rioters that could have been written. The rioters believed, “They don’t care what the voters actually voted for, they’ll never let Trump be re-elected.” And now this article says, “Yeah, that’s true.”

Let me respond to a fuller quote:

Law itself aside, do they really think it’s a good idea to just disqualify the guy who is probably the most personally popular politician in the US today? That’s literally exactly what actually happens in banana republics. If they were to go through with it there’s no way that Joe Biden could ever be a legitimate president. Are they even under any actual illusion that they’re not just making an end run around democracy to get rid of a popular guy they’re afraid they can’t beat?

But finally and above all, this article is actually probably the best defense of the January 6 rioters that could have been written. The rioters believed, “They don’t care what the voters actually voted for, they’ll never let Trump be re-elected.” And now this article says, “Yeah, that’s true.”

Do you think Trump cares at all for "what the voters actually voted for"? He lost the election, the recounts, the election boards, and court case after court case. Every legitimate authority agrees that the voters actually voted against Trump. Both the popular vote and the electoral vote. That's what the voters actually voted for.

"Law itself aside", I don't see any practical way to enforce the law. The courts would have to rule on this, or Congress would have to rule on this, and I don't see that happening. Trump will be allowed to run again.

But Trump himself is "literally exactly what actually happens in banana republics" - a charismatic populist leader campaigns against democracy itself, against elections and the courts and the Congress, insisting that he should have the power to overturn everything. Including elections. He assembles a mob to commit acts of violence and threatens people, and insists on personal loyalty.

And it's a bit like a cult. You can't change people's minds - "law itself aside". And in fact, Donald Trump himself becomes the central issue, "I can do whatever I want" becomes an acceptable motto - for Trump, certainly not for Biden. And it's a total outrage to hold Donald Trump legally accountable for anything - of course, the Bidens should just be thrown into prison, all of them, no need to wait for evidence. If Donald Trump is indicted for breaking the law, the tells people "I am being indicted for you, and if they can indict me, they can indict you". Nonsense, of course, if you didn't commit the same crime. And he promises "I am your vindication", saying he will use the DOJ to get his political enemies (while protecting his political friends).

This is "literally exactly what happens in banana republics". And the rule of law is the only reasonable answer to that. Personality cults need to be answerable to the rule of law.

[Pelerin]

Taking these a bit out of order…

"Law itself aside", I don't see any practical way to enforce the law. The courts would have to rule on this, or Congress would have to rule on this, and I don't see that happening. Trump will be allowed to run again.

No, it probably isn’t much more than thought experiment realistically. Ideally thought experiments are good for seeing where your thoughts will actually lead you without having to find the hazards in reality. But sometimes thought experiments end up being tried in reality.

But Trump himself is "literally exactly what actually happens in banana republics" - a charismatic populist leader campaigns against democracy itself, against elections and the courts and the Congress, insisting that he should have the power to overturn everything. Including elections. He assembles a mob to commit acts of violence and threatens people, and insists on personal loyalty.

And it's a bit like a cult. You can't change people's minds - "law itself aside". And in fact, Donald Trump himself becomes the central issue, "I can do whatever I want" becomes an acceptable motto - for Trump, certainly not for Biden. And it's a total outrage to hold Donald Trump legally accountable for anything - of course, the Bidens should just be thrown into prison, all of them, no need to wait for evidence. If Donald Trump is indicted for breaking the law, the tells people "I am being indicted for you, and if they can indict me, they can indict you". Nonsense, of course, if you didn't commit the same crime. And he promises "I am your vindication", saying he will use the DOJ to get his political enemies (while protecting his political friends).

I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to do here. I say this line of thinking leads to bad things. You reply here that Trump also does bad things. So…Donald Trump is a unique threat so it’s justified? I don’t think that’s the point you’re trying to make, but that’s how I would read it going by just the text.

This is "literally exactly what happens in banana republics". And the rule of law is the only reasonable answer to that. Personality cults need to be answerable to the rule of law.

Right. And you’re not going to work your way out of a banana republic by adding more bananas.

As I said in my first post, Trump has rather notably not been charged with inciting a riot on January 6. I’ll also add that “insurrection” is actually a crime you can be charged with—and as far as I can tell none of the January 6 rioters have been charged with it. The law already has the tools that it could rule that Donald Trump committed insurrection—and it hasn’t.

So now we’ve discovered we can circumvent the normal legal process and have individual partisan officials declare Trump ineligible? Where’s the rule of law now? It’s not like in a banana republic you can just ignore the law there either. There’s always a legal veneer, usually something like discovering a legal technicality that coincidentally happens to make an inconveniently popular candidate ineligible.

So what about the rule of law? Back to your first paragraph:

Do you think Trump cares at all for "what the voters actually voted for"? He lost the election, the recounts, the election boards, and court case after court case. Every legitimate authority agrees that the voters actually voted against Trump. Both the popular vote and the electoral vote. That's what the voters actually voted for.

So then, how’s that going for him? Seems like the rule of law is already doing just fine for itself, thank you very much.

///////

An aside:

And it's a bit like a cult. You can't change people's minds - "law itself aside". And in fact, Donald Trump himself becomes the central issue…

That’s an interesting choice of words (also in your last sentence). In my first post there was a sentence I cut: “It’s often said that Donald Trump has a cult but there’s also an anti-Trump cult and they both share the same center of devotion.”

[Grace]

"Law itself aside", I don't see any practical way to enforce the law. The courts would have to rule on this, or Congress would have to rule on this, and I don't see that happening. Trump will be allowed to run again.

You don’t know that, as it is too early to tell.

But Trump himself is "literally exactly what actually happens in banana republics" - a charismatic populist leader campaigns against democracy itself, against elections and the courts and the Congress, insisting that he should have the power to overturn everything. Including elections. He assembles a mob to commit acts of violence and threatens people, and insists on personal loyalty.

Let’s stick to the truth. Trump didn't assemble a mob, he had a rally and told the people to protest peacefully. However some did not listen.

And it's a bit like a cult. You can't change people's minds - "law itself aside". And in fact, Donald Trump himself becomes the central issue, "I can do whatever I want" becomes an acceptable motto - for Trump, certainly not for Biden. And it's a total outrage to hold Donald Trump legally accountable for anything - of course, the Bidens should just be thrown into prison, all of them, no need to wait for evidence. If Donald Trump is indicted for breaking the law, the tells people "I am being indicted for you, and if they can indict me, they can indict you". Nonsense, of course, if you didn't commit the same crime. And he promises "I am your vindication", saying he will use the DOJ to get his political enemies (while protecting his political friends).

They say that whatever Trump is accused of , the current administration is doing. It sure seems that the Biden DOJ is weaponized to go after his political opponent.

It appears like the Biden's don't have a mere motto that they “can do whatever they want”. But actually practiced "doing whatever they want to" for decades. An example is the Hunter Biden lawyers threatened the special counsel investigating him, that if they charged Hunter with anything it would be “career suicide”. We will all guess who ordered the lawyers to threaten the special counsel. Hunter Biden’s lawyers and the DOJ attempted to allow Hunter to “do whatever he wants” by giving him a plea deal that would have granted him immunity from future charges.

And Biden "can do and say whatever he wants", and he gets a pass. Comments that contain lies and that hurt people to the core. Biden visited Maui on Monday, taking a short break from his lavish vacation at a $18 million Lake Tahoe mansion. Biden stood in an area that was surrounded by death and destruction. An area that rescuers are finding people and families, who were literally cooked alive. Many of those who were cooked and succumbed to the fires were children who were off from school that day.

And what did Biden do, he compared the horrific destruction and deaths from the wild fires to a small kitchen fire they had decades ago. And that he almost lost his ‘67' corvette and his cat. His comments were insensitive, cruel and beyond disgusting. But whenever he lies, he “gets away with it”. Just like his lies that his son Beau died in Iraq, when he actually died of Glioblastoma in 2015 at the Walter Reed military hospital in Bethesda, Maryland. Every time Biden tells that lie “he gets away with it”

https://www.the-independent.com/news/wo ... 44269.html

Now compare the coverage Bush got during Hurricane Katrina and the coverage Trump got when he threw a paper towel. Or when Ted Cruz took his wife and daughters to Cancun during an ice storm.

And the statement that people want the Biden’s thrown into prison, without evidence is not factual. What people want, is equal justice for all. And were it not that the Republicans won the House, all the Biden corruption would have never came to light. And that is not equal justice. That would have been, the Biden’s “doing what they wanted” without accountability.

[Bootstrap]

Taking these a bit out of order…

"Law itself aside", I don't see any practical way to enforce the law. The courts would have to rule on this, or Congress would have to rule on this, and I don't see that happening. Trump will be allowed to run again.

No, it probably isn’t much more than thought experiment realistically. Ideally thought experiments are good for seeing where your thoughts will actually lead you without having to find the hazards in reality. But sometimes thought experiments end up being tried in reality.

I think we largely agree. And maybe we were talking past each other.

But Trump himself is "literally exactly what actually happens in banana republics" - a charismatic populist leader campaigns against democracy itself, against elections and the courts and the Congress, insisting that he should have the power to overturn everything. Including elections. He assembles a mob to commit acts of violence and threatens people, and insists on personal loyalty.

And it's a bit like a cult. You can't change people's minds - "law itself aside". And in fact, Donald Trump himself becomes the central issue, "I can do whatever I want" becomes an acceptable motto - for Trump, certainly not for Biden. And it's a total outrage to hold Donald Trump legally accountable for anything - of course, the Bidens should just be thrown into prison, all of them, no need to wait for evidence. If Donald Trump is indicted for breaking the law, the tells people "I am being indicted for you, and if they can indict me, they can indict you". Nonsense, of course, if you didn't commit the same crime. And he promises "I am your vindication", saying he will use the DOJ to get his political enemies (while protecting his political friends).

I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to do here. I say this line of thinking leads to bad things. You reply here that Trump also does bad things. So…Donald Trump is a unique threat so it’s justified? I don’t think that’s the point you’re trying to make, but that’s how I would read it going by just the text.

No, I think I was misreading you, and now you are trying to avoid misreading my misreading of you.

I'm thinking of discussion among three people I generally appreciate - David French, Jack Goldsmith, and Michael Luttig. Jack Goldsmith is worried that it may not even be OK to hold Trump legally responsible where he has clearly violated the law because of how people might take it. The other two see that danger, but also believe that upholding the rule of law is important even if some people won't be able to see that.

This is "literally exactly what happens in banana republics". And the rule of law is the only reasonable answer to that. Personality cults need to be answerable to the rule of law.

Right. And you’re not going to work your way out of a banana republic by adding more bananas.

Cute! I like that.

As I said in my first post, Trump has rather notably not been charged with inciting a riot on January 6. I’ll also add that “insurrection” is actually a crime you can be charged with—and as far as I can tell none of the January 6 rioters have been charged with it. The law already has the tools that it could rule that Donald Trump committed insurrection—and it hasn’t.

Both the House and the Senate said that Trump committed an insurrection. I think that matters. The Senate did decide not to remove him from office.

But again, I think declaring him ineligible is mostly a thought experiment.

[Ken]

But again, I think declaring him ineligible is mostly a thought experiment.

Not necessarily.

The swing states of Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all have elected Democratic or Democratically-appointed secretaries of state who control ballot access in those states.

It will quickly move beyond a thought experiment if there are challenges to his ballot access in any of those states based on the 14th Amendment. Say a lawsuit by voters challenging Trump's eligibility to be on the general election ballot.

[Josh]

But again, I think declaring him ineligible is mostly a thought experiment.

Not necessarily.

The swing states of Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all have elected Democratic or Democratically-appointed secretaries of state who control ballot access in those states.

It will quickly move beyond a thought experiment if there are challenges to his ballot access in any of those states based on the 14th Amendment. Say a lawsuit by voters challenging Trump's eligibility to be on the general election ballot.

There would be no greater gift to Trumpism than doing this.

[Robert]

But again, I think declaring him ineligible is mostly a thought experiment.

Not necessarily.

The swing states of Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all have elected Democratic or Democratically-appointed secretaries of state who control ballot access in those states.

It will quickly move beyond a thought experiment if there are challenges to his ballot access in any of those states based on the 14th Amendment. Say a lawsuit by voters challenging Trump's eligibility to be on the general election ballot.

So this is needed because he has the votes to get elected?

[Ken]

But again, I think declaring him ineligible is mostly a thought experiment.

Not necessarily.

The swing states of Wisconsin, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all have elected Democratic or Democratically-appointed secretaries of state who control ballot access in those states.

It will quickly move beyond a thought experiment if there are challenges to his ballot access in any of those states based on the 14th Amendment. Say a lawsuit by voters challenging Trump's eligibility to be on the general election ballot.

So this is needed because he has the votes to get elected?

No, I'm just pointing out that ballot access and determining who is president is actually delegated to the states under the constitution. So if any entity is going to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment it could easily be state secretaries of state.

Do I think any of it is going to happen? No.

But it is certainly within the realm of possibility that voters could sue in state court to have him removed from the ballot in X-state based on the 14th Amendment and a state court could certainly rule in that direction too. Then I suspect the Supreme Court would likely intervene.

The point is, the whole thing could easily be more than just a thought experiment.

[Robert]

So if any entity is going to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment it could easily be state secretaries of state.

Then the red states could do the same for Biden. All they would need is for some AG to draw up charges on the foreign money he has received.

[Ken]

So if any entity is going to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment it could easily be state secretaries of state.

Then the red states could do the same for Biden. All they would need is for some AG to draw up charges on the foreign money he has received.

First, unlike with Trump there would be no grounds. Biden didn’t lead an insurrection. And second, it wouldn’t make any difference. Trump will win the red states anyway. Only thing that really makes a difference are the swing states and Democratic Secretaries of State hold 4 of the 5 swing states. Only one they don’t is Georgia.

Mind you I’m not predicting any of this will happen. Just responding to suggest how it could be more than just a thought exercise.