(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . America is in a Constitutional Crisis until it settles the purported theft of the 2020 Election [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2024-12-11 Donald Trump is presumptively ineligible for any office, and several members of Congress are as well. #Insurrection January 6th, 2021, the United States of America lost tactical control of the Capitol building, a ministerial Constitutional ceremony was interrupted, and the Constitutional execution of the Vice President, saved a much larger Constitutional Crisis The Supreme Court recognized post-Civil War (1880) that. Ex Parte Yarborough In a republican government, like ours, where political power is reposed in representatives of the entire body of the people, chosen at short intervals by popular elections, the temptation to control these elections by violence and by corruption is a constant source of danger. Such has been the history of all republics, and, though ours has been comparatively free from both these evils in the past, no lover of his country can shut his eyes to the fear of future danger from both sources” January 6th, 2020 was the crux, a blatantly obvious coup attempt, The lame-duck President drove Congresspeople, Senators, and state officials to the most blatant, far-reaching, and violent attempt at major fraud against the United States in American history. National security risk, by whatever measure the lives of the Vice President, and the assembled Authority of the Houses of Congress, and Representatives of every State and Territory in arms range of rioters, during a ceremony of transfer of power In the end, this attempt involved a desperate, last-ditch effort to delay Constitutionally mandated processes with hundreds of followers rallied to “Stop the Steal” recruited behind the Official Seal of President,a Donald Trump deliberately incited a riot with the help of former New York City Mayor Rudy Guliani. He told the crowd that the election was stolen; that incoming President Biden was a false President. This continued a pattern: Trump’s 2016 Electoral College only victory, losing by 3 million in the popular vote, though Trump claimed at the time that was due to the illegal immigrant vote in California from 2017 at every chance he got. President Donald Trump accused incoming President Biden of engineering an election fraud of more than 7 million votes. He continued that assault on President Biden’s legitimacy maintaining he had never lost until today An Axios poll shows 40% of Americans say they have doubts that President Biden won in 2020, and more than 60% of Republicans. This incident has cast doubt on the legitimacy of President Biden, and thus the "soft power" of the Office. All of Congress and the Vice-President were closer to real bodily harm and death perhaps at any point in American history. It was a an assault, daily, across several major media networks, watched every day by millions of Americans and in Army barracks owned and operated by foreign interests, and changing hands via fo If he knew he lost and lied about it- this alone could be considered within the realm of treason itself- his Authority, behind the Presidential was used to destroy the Authority of the Incoming President of the United States with his crowd, the "soft Power" of the incoming President, but important ones; how can and should people comply work with, follow the decisions of an illegitimate President? Why should they listen to him about a vaccine roll out, about any of the issues of the day if he's nothing but a thief? The "election thief" label- beyond even the day to day Donald Trump must testify- and report back on the threat of election theft and controversy, and the Constitutional obstruction of January the 6th, his people’s part in it, as well as his actions and inactions on that day. In·sur·rec·tion [ˌinsəˈrekSHən] Noun a violent uprising against an authority or government: [Younis Bros. & Co. v. Cigna Worldwide Ins. Co., 899 F. Supp. 1385, 1392-1393 (E.D. Pa. 1995)] insurrection means “a violent uprising by a group Or a movement acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers. An insurrection occurs where a movement acts to overthrow the constituted government and to take possession of its inherent powers." On the day of the Article II ceremony of counting electoral votes, the official transfer of power away from President 45 to President 46 President Trump Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We're supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our Constitution. States want to revote. The states got defrauded. They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people. And I actually, I just spoke to Mike. I said: "Mike, that doesn't take courage. What takes courage is to do nothing. That takes courage." And then we're stuck with a president who lost the election by a lot and we have to live with that for four more years. We're just not going to let that happen. The sitting President, behind the Presidential Seal, in front of the White House, displaying the Executive Authority of the President, claims "voter fraud" against the Incoming President of the United States, Joe Biden, that the election was stolen, not from President Trump, but from the people themselves. Mr Trump ends his speech with the words: "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56004916 Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country. ……….We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. "Brandenburg v Ohio"- a very open, liberal free speech standard higher than petitioners, overturned Whitney, establishing a very high bar of imminence presumably to prevent abuse. The Court used a two-pronged test to evaluate speech acts: (1) speech can be prohibited if it is "directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action" and (2) it is "likely to incite or produce such action." President Trump's speech, did incite and produced a riot This is unquestionably a riot, as opposed to a peaceful demonstration. riot | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute A riot is a public disturbance where three or more people behave in a violent and uncontrolled manner. A riot usually has the following characteristics: made in furtherance of an express common purpose; through the use or threat of violence, disorder, or terror to the public; and resulting in a disturbance of the peace. Under criminal law, inciting a riot and rioting are crimes. The concerted acts may be unlawful in themselves, or they may be lawful acts that are done in a violent or turbulent manner. Among the different forms that riots may take include escalated labor disputes or political demonstrations Congress was unusually specific in its demands regarding riots- commanding speedy process and on any adverse action at the lower courts, to appeal. §2101. Riots (d) the Department shall proceed as speedily as possible with the prosecution of such person hereunder and with any appeal which may lie from any decision adverse to the Government resulting from such prosecution. Congress spoke definitively, aiding any sort of controversy over the specific Amendment, with the “whoever” with no exceptions. It sets a low bar for participation for such events to prosecute criminally, starting it , assisting with it, engaging with it or helping people who are going to do it gets disqualification and/or up 10 years §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. sets on foot to initiate or start (something) To act to cause something to begin; to set something in motion. The senator from New Hampshire set the legislation on foot. Mr Trump ends his speech with the words: "We fight. We fight like hell and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore. So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue." Republican Leader in the Senate "T he mob was fed lies ," McConnell said on the Senate floor Tuesday. "They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like. "There is no question — none — that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day." Speaker of the House (about Donald Trump) “ Let me be very clear to all of you, and I have been very clear to the president: he bears responsibilities for his words and actions,” McCarthy said on the January 11 call. “No ifs, ands or buts.” Kevin McCarthy also voted to stop the certification of the Election of Joe Biden on January 6th. Within a month, both GOP leaders voted to acquit President Trump from a second impeachment for the events of January 6th Multiple officials and two Cabinet secretaries, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, resigned over the riot. "There is no mistaking the impact your rhetoric had on the situation, and it is the inflection point for me," DeVos told the president in a resignation letter. Qualification standards for office Age - Would the court allow a 21 year old of undeniable charm and beauty to run and win a campaign for President? Not an American Citizen Would the court allow a foreign born person, probably a billionaire to run for United States President? Recent Presidents have suggest all Presidents must show proof of their qualifications, such as a birth certificate. Has the person done Insurrections/coup/treason? This criterion presumes a reasonable due process to things like riots and insurrections, like, someone will bring a case. January 6th alone imparts 3 possible 1.the liability of 46 and VP 46 if 45’s claim of criminal election theft is true 2. 45’s liability if untrue, an attack on the Authority of 46 3. 45’s liability for the riot at the Capitol even if true about 46 4. What if both parties committed elections Does the candidate number of states and the number of votes per state hit 270, according to the election* The example of the Electoral College demonstrates, in both its current form and ancient intent, (never truly engaged and actively disengaged)- the qualifications matter enough to change the outcome of the event - in any other country in the world, just a popular vote alone. 2016 2000 In these two elections is Who do the electors vote for the President? It has never happened- a significant shift by the electors, and is specifically disabled by the state and federal governments. But the idea was that for “a populist” who would destroy the Constitution, wiser heads would say naah. The determination of the Insurrection need only meet the “civil” qualification matching the criminal definition of insurrection. The lower courts have already convicted on seditious conspiracy. Therefore, to find that Donald Trump is presumptively ineligible for the office of the United States, the court need only to find that he in someway involved in the run up and organization of the activities on January the 6th All grants of Authority and Trust are “civil” matters and to serve at any post There are literally two more Quality control checks mandated to review the outcome of the election set up by the founding fathers and discouraged and disabled by design and action of Parties, state and The bar for the Presidency and for Article Branch matters, owing as to their importance of functioning, and for clarity of law- disruption of their actions or activities is many crimes, ad nauseum, these should, as Congress has written the laws overlap. It seems 14-3 functionally is an amendment to Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5. The Presidential requirements clause So if an insurrection occurred,that the person is associated with, let alone organized, or if any way the Compelling He gets to defend himself though, and must; it is the Duty of the President to report to the People on such risks and bring forth such evidence as brought him to declare the incoming President a criminal election thief, and conclude and what happened on January 6th and why it happened. As there has been no unrecused Executive Authority — Joe Biden is also the accused, and a witness to ht “Take care” Constitutional duty to enforce the Constitution, including the Presidential transition of Power Uphold integrity and perception of United States Processes, an Commander in Chief’s responsibility for security in the Federal District Article II 2017-2028 Absence of unrecused executive or attorney general authority/ Dismantles Article II and Article III, and special Counsels if you can get them, aren’t enough if the President is involved, to enforce Color of Law violations II. Investigate Foreign Influence on the American Government 28 USC 455 is a reasonable guideline for recusal of Article II Executive and Attorney General powers- as the AG is a prosecutor, and thus an Officer of the Court. Since only the Department of Justice has the mandate or manpower to investigate federal crimes or the ability to initiate suit on behalf of the United States, it would be highly unlikely for any case to proceed involving the US President or staff, nor a reputable investigation during his term of office, and given the circumstances apparently after either. The “Watergate”- the Nixon Presidential campaign burglary into DNC headquarters, and subsequent firing of the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General in an unindicted but clear attempt to obstruct justice by a sitting President. While AG Barr’s actions are questioned, his points about DOJ aren’t unworthy- there should be some question if this should be the first route any way, as the DOJ is the mightiest of the Presidents normal domestic swords for his Chief role- enforcing Justice. It is a difficult thing to expect those sworn to follow the Constitution to instead wish to investigate the President and hardly the sort of thing you want national security and the guarantee of a republican government hanging on. Perhaps a Congressional Agency would be engaged in lie with GAO in line with Congressional Oversight Powers would be a more appropriate body Prose cution, if anything, requires more certainty and aggressiveness than the bench, seemingly a logical extension of not being required to provide witness against self- one cannot be expected to initiate due legal process, nor oversee such process against one self-nor appoint prosecutors or Attorney Generals to manage one’s own investigation. This becomes more problematic with the “intracorporate conspiracy” doctrine, slides into corruption which is the natural human tendency of people in tribes without contracts or borders or rights, and the virtue of taking care of the people in our sphere more than the laws or our jobs. That tendency becomes more important not less with more power. How then is the color of law code- to be enforced? Mueller often made a point of being fully restrained by the "OLC Memo" referring to a 1973 Nixon-era DOJ decision regarding prosecutions of sitting Presidents. Given Nixon's well-documented tampering with the DOJ, it would probably merit revisiting, and my recall was the core reasoning was the President was "too busy". I do in fact, understand the merits of not calling the Executive to carpet every time a cantankerous citizen with too much time But Trump clearly spent a lot of time on it- so asking him specific questions would hurt how? If we take it a step further, for January 6th, 46 Administration is also recused, as 46 was the object of the accusations, and should reasonably be party to any proceedings, and possibly VP46 No unrecused Attorney General nor Executive can be said to have existed, to initiate a security process on matters of clear National Security Risk as defined earlier- by the clear possibility of a mob maiming or injuring members of Congress, the Management Board of the United States of America. The Department of Justice in its role as Nixon's campaign “Watergate” burglary, likely to find out if his previous campaign’s sabotage of Vietnam peace talks- and the subsequent Saturday Night Massacre, - the firing of an AG and a Deputy AG, to remove a Special Prosecutor provides the perfect precedent for Example #2 Echoing the events of the Watergate scandal, the Department of Justice was involved in an investigation of the Presidential candidate who became President, and that President pushed out Attorney General Sessions, publicly until he got one that 1. - and halted it- 2. covered up the investigation’s findings The Mueller investigation ended within a couple of months of AG Barrs arrival. AG Barr redacted the Mueller report, and released a memo to the public, only allowing the press- and the conservative media to digest the Attorney General’s own findings. Director Mueller objected publicly to the Attorney General's handling of the report. 2 weeks later before releasing the whole Mueller report, which when read Multiple members of the DC District Court, no one's partisans, Judge Berman-Jackson, and Walton strongly suggested that the Mueller report was improperly presented to the American people, in a manner that sounded like conspiracy to defraud the United States, and which would require very different Buzzfeed v DOJ “cause the Court to seriously question whether Attorney General Barr made a calculated attempt to influence public discourse about the Mueller Report in favor of President Trump despite certain findings in the redacted version of the Mueller Report to the contrary.” CREW vs DOJ “that not only was the Attorney General being disingenuous then, but the DOJ has been disingenuous to this Court with respect to the existence of a decision-making process that should be shielded by the deliberative process privilege. The agency’s redactions and incomplete explanations obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum, and the excised portions belie the notion that it fell to the Attorney General to make a prosecution decision or that any such decision was on the table at any time.” This was not issued, by the Department of Justice. official-looking copy, on display in MLK Library in DC in Oct 2024 bearing the US Seal, stating "as issued by the Department of Justice" with foreword that starts with the conclusion lifelong Republican -Deputy Attorney General, who appointed the Special Counsel should have recused. This your Honors is fraud, a for-profit imitation United States report with the Authority of the United States, given primarily over to a private attorney operating on behalf of, claiming the DAG who appointed Mueller was a partisan(lifelong republican) who repeats a pattern with Barr's pre release Mueller report memo conclusions,- putting forward what amounted to a defense brief preface to the Republican former FBI directors report, and presented to the public : As issued by the Department of Justice. Purchased by funds originating in Congress for the DC public library. to address the fears, uncertainty, and international controversy regarding United States elections. Article II 2021-Present >40% of the populace questions the legitimacy of the current President of the United states Article III Recent obstructions regarding Judicial Appointments, measured legally by the Petitioner questions of direct statutory requirements for recusal, in terms of being a potential witness Legislatures write Laws,but don’t enforce nuthin. Party behavior is unaccounted for by the Constitution, and is interfering with Constitutional discipline Republican Leader in the Senate "The mob was fed lies," McConnell said on the Senate floor Tuesday. "They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like. "There is no question — none — that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day." Speaker of the House (about Donald Trump) “Let me be very clear to all of you, and I have been very clear to the president: he bears responsibilities for his words and actions,” McCarthy said on the January 11 call. “No ifs, ands or buts.” Kevin McCarthy also voted to stop the certification of the Election of Joe Biden on January 6th. Within a month, both GOP leaders voted to acquit President Trump from a second impeachment for the events of January 6th The 2 party system of government, and the words “political party” do not appear in the Constitution. The GOP and DNC, headquartered 2 blocks away from one another, control 99.9% of all, state, local and Federal legislative and executive authority, and appoint, through there Judges and Justices. They were both attacked and hacked by the Russian government according to the Mueller report, making them de facto agencies of the United States government, and their records, and systems of vital national interest.This creates a significant barrier to the execution of color of law violations and arrests; the word Corporation means “of a body”, or “E Pluribus Unum” if you will; it means that every investigation is either by a political appointee of a party on their party or that of the opposite party. If the “intracorporate conspiracy doctrine” is defining- If the two parties act as corporations most likely do- to minimize risk to themselves they will vote to acquit, since they share common interests and affiliations, and need their numbers to defeat position the other party . This is problematic if the removal mechanisms require supermajority votes,the temptation to simply ignore “the opponent’s attack”to prepare. Impeachment and removal is essentially impossible. The history of impeachment suggests as much, and the two recent attempts double down on this. As does the tenure of a recent New York Congressman found to have lied about everything he said he did, because he was a vote, a chip against the “other” party. Legislators write laws, but they are terrible at enforcing especially laws they passed for Apportionment, and rarely expel members, even with great cause, and it seems to be something they are uniquely bad at, though of course the contention in this matter is that the other branches have also this same tendency to not prosecute themselves. In the entire history of this Country, the mechanisms of law have failed to expel more than a handful of members of Congress, judges, and no Presidents. While regular ejections of Officers is hardly the preferred benchmark of success for a Republic, the nature of man, power, money, and government suggests that a lack of scandals is often lack of enforcement. It is likely that Legislatures “Act as a body” as they are meant to, but self-operation sometimes is hard, and may simply be the same as the issue with Executives in charge of investigating themselves. Their mechanisms of operation must also comply with the law, even if they are not prone to doing well themselves. It should seem highly unlikely that this phenomenon stops at two of the three branches, and it abundantly clear that everybody needs review once and a while. The rules must be understood, and enforced, by the government and the citizens, and the Courts can rise above politics only by decisions of law made by text and facts, as well as duty to act, to resolve with finality - and whose power come from the orders, the law delivered from the bench from the Court, so empowered by the strength of facts to change whatever necessary, and reasonable, to address the conflicts between the de jure and de facto, and certainly government authority used against itself for personal gain, electoral gain, is the definition of corruption. If a President questions a function of law it is his responsibility to fix it. If the Government makes grave errors of fact and law it is the duty of the Court to fix it. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/story/2024/12/11/2291232/-America-is-in-a-Constitutional-Crisis-until-it-settles-the-purported-theft-of-the-2020-Election Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/