Two “respected” members of the Federalist Society spent over a year researching a scholarly paper concerning the evidentiary events surrounding Jan 6th 2021. Guess what, among other things, they’ve concluded Donald Trump aided and abetted a “insurrection or rebellion,” with the intention of unlawfully denying the rightful Election winner from ever taking office.
Furthermore, due to this attempt at “insurrection or rebellion” Donald Trump is plainly disqualified from running for any Office, according to the criteria of the 14th Amendment.
They arrived at their conclusion, LONG BEFORE Special Counsel Jack Smith did. Surprise, surprise.
Federalist Society professors William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas published a sweeping 126 page paper, which stated: “Donald Trump cannot be president — cannot run for president, cannot become president, cannot hold office — unless two-thirds of Congress decides to grant him amnesty for his conduct on Jan. 6."
In a particularly damning section of their piece, Baude and Paulsen state that Trump engaged in rebellion, and gave aid and comfort to others engaging in rebellion against the United States.
Read that section of the article here.
That article also has the Scribed version of that
just-published soon-to-be published research paper, which has many more Trump-incriminating details.
These authors are not democrats, progressives, or liberals. They did their fact-based research and arrived at their conclusions — from the perspective of “Constitutional Originalists.” This means at every turn, they interpreted the Jan-6 evidence and the relevant Constitutional Law, from the point of view of those who wrote the Constitution, and from their original intentions. You know, the same way that Alito and Thomas would do.
And still, they found no way to sugar coat, or excuse away, what Trump had done. Bottom-line: He’s guilty, and has no business being any where near the Oval Office. As cited above, they concluded:
Donald Trump both “engaged in” “insurrection or rebellion” and gave “aid or comfort” to others engaging in such conduct [...] He is no longer eligible to the office of Presidency, or any other state or federal office covered by the Constitution.
This may seem like “old news” or “so what news” — but MeidasTouch legal analyst Micheal Popok thinks otherwise. Among many other take-away points Popock concludes:
- This news, if it become widely known, will sway many conservatives.
- Their research WILL lead to many lawsuits against Trump, to disqualify him from running.
- The disqualification of Trump is not subject to a 2/3 vote of Congress, but rather simply the ruling of a Federal Judge, that the criteria of the 14th Amendment were met.
by Micheal Popok , The Meidas Touch Network — Aug 12, 2023
Sorry I don’t have a more complete summary of this clip, as before. But Popock does a thorough job of drilling into the main-points of this published scholarly conservative paper, including their political and legal implications. So watch the clip if you want more details.
But I will leave you with a screen shot from the clip, which was what I had in mind when I stated “among other things,” in the intro of this post:
As Popock put it, as Voters (especially the Voters of the 7 targeted states) were all victims of this unconstitutional fraud attempt. As such, we each have standing to bring suit for the Disqualification of Trump, and this includes Disqualification any of his Co-conspirators too.
Could a class-action suit, one day soon be in the works?
Make it so ACLU, make it so. The faster this gets to the SCOTUS — and they concur — the faster the healing of the Nation can begin.
Even these Federalist Society scholars agree.
PS. Joy Reid also reported on this same news yesterday, on MSNBC’s The ReidOut, where she interviews constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe about its ramifications including with the SCOTUS. (Hat-tip to blue oregon for the clip link.)