Compilation Post by @JuanVSchoch on X/Twitter
Donald Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021, were not only against the government’s transfer of power but were explicitly directed against the Constitution itself:
Donald J. Trump’s Actions Against the Constitution on January 6, 2021:
The Constitution of the United States not merely, in several ways, outlines transition of power, but exists as foundational document that embodies the principles of democratic governance and the rule of law.
Donald J. Trump’s actions leading up to and during the January 6th Capitol attack were not only an assault on the peaceful transfer of power but a direct attack to several core constitutional tenets:
Direct Violation of Constitutional Oaths:
Oath of Office: Trump, having sworn an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,” instead actively worked to undermine it. His refusal to accept the election results, despite no evidence of widespread fraud, was a direct repudiation of his oath to uphold constitutional integrity, particularly the democratic process outlined in Article II and the 12th Amendment for electoral vote certification.
Subversion of Constitutional Processes:
Article I, Section 5: Trump’s encouragement of his supporters to disrupt the congressional session where electoral votes were to be counted directly contravened this section, which mandates that Congress shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members. By inciting a mob to interfere with this process, he attacked the legislative branch’s constitutional authority.
14th Amendment, Section 3 which aims to prevent those who have betrayed their oaths from ever holding power again: Beyond the implications for his eligibility to hold office, Trump’s actions align with the constitutional definition of engaging in “insurrection or rebellion.” His public incitement of violence to prevent the certification of the election results was an assault on the very fabric of constitutional order and governance,
Undermining Constitutional Checks and Balances:
Separation of Powers: Trump’s attempt to leverage his executive influence to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to unilaterally reject electoral votes was an attack on the separation of powers. The Constitution does not grant the Vice President such authority during electoral vote counting; this move was an effort to override the checks and balances designed to prevent any one branch from gaining unchecked power.
Erosion of Constitutional Rights:
First Amendment: By encouraging violence against members of Congress and disrupting their ability to fulfill their duties, Trump directly, by not acting to stop the highly damaging, disrupting and deadly rebellion, threatened the freedom of speech and assembly, as well as the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, all of which are essential for a functioning democracy.
Equal Protection Under the Law: The chaos and intimidation tactics used by Trump’s supporters was an attack on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, where all citizens’ rights, including the right to participate in a fair electoral process, are supposed to be equally protected.
Long-term Constitutional Damage:
Trump’s actions not only aimed at subverting a specific election outcome but also posed a broader threat to the constitutional order by normalizing the idea that electoral outcomes can be contested through violence or coercion rather than legal and democratic means. This undermines the Constitution’s promise of stability, order, and the rule of law.
Conclusion:
Donald J. Trump’s actions on January 6, 2021, were not merely about delaying or disrupting the transition of power; they were a calculated assault against the Constitution itself, not merely an attempt to subvert the election outcome. By attacking the Constitution, he violated the principles of governance, the separation of powers, and the sanctity of the oath to uphold it. Legal scholars and judicial decisions support that this conduct was an attack, rebellion against the constitutional framework.
Given this, under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits anyone who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution from holding office if they have engaged in insurrection or rebellion, Donald Trump is disqualified from holding any public office, including the presidency, unless Congress acts to remove this disqualification. This conclusion is based on:
The expansive definition in Section 3 which includes “any office, civil or military, under the United States.”
Historical intent of the amendment’s drafters to encompass all significant governmental roles, implicitly including the presidency.
Therefore, unless Congress intervenes with a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to lift this disability, Donald Trump remains constitutionally barred from assuming the presidency or any other public office based on the clear and deliberate attacks against the Constitution he undertook.
“Trump provoked and participated in an insurrection, and he gave aid and comfort to insurrectionists. For that reason, when he takes the oath of office on the 20th of next month he will be in violation of the Constitution of the United States.
The 14th amendment disqualifies specific office holders from holding specific offices.
Definitively; based on the constitutional text, historical context, and legal scholarship, the Office of the President is considered a public office under the 14th Amendment. This conclusion is supported by:
The broad language of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment which refers to “any office, civil or military, under the United States.”
Historical records indicating the drafters’ intent to include all significant governmental positions, implicitly covering the presidency.
References by legal scholars and some judicial opinions, like those citing the President in contexts that affirm public duty and office.
Thus, the presidency is unequivocally a public office under the 14th Amendment.
As to the following statement in regard to Donald J Trump fomenting insurrection and rebellion against the U.S. Government and Constitution as sitting U.S. president, both in official and unofficial capacities during and after the 2020 election, let us use General Semantics principles to examine the language, context, and implications of Trump’s actions while he was President. Note: General Semantics emphasizes precision in language, understanding the context, and avoiding absolutist thinking, which can help clarify the situation regarding the statement: “Unfortunately for you an insurrection is an act to overthrow a government and trump was fucking commander in chief of the govt so [you] can’t overthrow yourself dipshit!”
Precision in Language:
Insurrection Definition: An insurrection is indeed an act to overthrow a government or disrupt its functions. However, it doesn’t require the complete removal of the government but can involve significant disruption to its processes. The statement oversimplifies by suggesting that since Trump was the Commander in Chief, he couldn’t be involved in an insurrection or rebellion. This overlooks the complexity of his actions which aimed at disrupting the certification of the election, a key governmental process.
Overthrowing ‘Yourself’: The statement assumes that because Trump was the head of government, he couldn’t be part of an insurrection or rebellion against it. However, Trump’s actions were directed against the transition of power, not his current position but the future governance structure, which includes the democratic process of election certification. This distinction shows that Trump was not attempting to overthrow his own presidency but to prevent the lawful transition to his successor, thus disrupting governmental function.
Contextual Analysis:
Trump’s Statements and Actions:
Election Denial: Trump’s admission of loss being embarrassing (“I don’t want people to know we lost…”) frames his subsequent actions as driven by personal ego rather than legitimate concern over election integrity, aligning with efforts to undermine the democratic process.
Promotion of Events: Trump’s involvement in promoting events like the Million MAGA March on Nov 14, 2020, and his tweet on Dec 19, 2020, about come to Washington D.C. Jan 6 it’s going to be “wild,” along with his speech at the Georgia rally on Jan 4, 2021, show a pattern of encouraging gatherings aimed at contesting the election results, after the fact of knowing he lost.
Jan 6 Speech: His speech at the Ellipse included phrases like “fight like hell,” which, when placed in the context of the heated political atmosphere and his previous rhetoric, incited his supporters to act against the certification process, even though he previously said “peacefully and patriotically” in obvious attempt to legally cover all his bases.
Implications of Actions:
Pressure on Pence: Trump’s false claims about Pence’s power to reject electoral votes were part of a broader strategy to disrupt the certification process. This was not about overthrowing his own government but about preventing the certification of Biden’s win, a rock solid case of rebellion, considering the fact he knew full well he lost election.
Cassidy Hutchinson’s Testimony: Her account of Trump saying “hang” while watching the rebellion makes clear he was aware of and encouraging the violent rhetoric against Pence, which aligns with his lack of immediate action to stop his, what could be called outrageous, rebellion even after Ashley Babbitt was killed, further complicitly incriminating himself as to rebellion/insurrection, which again we already know was in attempt to stop certification of Joe Biden’s win so he could hold onto the reins of the power of the presidency as US President beyond Jan 20, rather than the ludicrous assertion as to attempting to overthrow himself.
Timing of the Tweet: Trump’s tweet criticizing Pence at 2:24 PM EST, after the breach had begun but before it escalated, exacerbated the situation by further goading and inflaming his supporters against Pence, contributing to the insurrectionist atmosphere of rebellion.
General Semantics Perspective: Avoiding Absolutist Thinking: The statement “can’t overthrow yourself” is an oversimplification. From a General Semantics viewpoint, we should consider the multi-faceted nature of Trump’s actions. He wasn’t trying to overthrow his current position but to undermine the democratic process of power transition, which is a foundational and fundamental part of governmental function as to peaceful transition of power.
Contextual Awareness: Trump’s actions must be viewed within the broader context of his refusal to concede, his encouragement of protests, and his failure to act decisively during the events of Jan 6. These actions collectively aimed at disrupting the democratic process, fit the definition of insurrection and rebellion even in light of the fact he was the sitting president.
In summary, while Trump was the Commander in Chief, his actions were aimed at disrupting the governmental process of election certification, which aligns with the concept of insurrection and rebellion against democratic transition of power and Constitution rather than an attempt to overthrow his own presidency. His behavior, from promoting gatherings to his rhetoric and lack of action during the events of Jan 6, supports this interpretation when analyzed through the lens of General Semantics, emphasizing the need for precision, context, and avoiding absolutist simplifications.