https://theweek.com/articles/954673/constitution-answer-seditious-members-congress
“The reasoning here is very simple. All members of Congress swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, which establishes a republican form of government. The whole point of a republic is that contests for power are conducted through a framework of rules and democratic elections, where all parties agree to respect the result whether they lose or win. Moreover, the premise of this lawsuit was completely preposterous — arguing in effect that states should not be allowed to set their own election rules if that means more Democrats can vote — and provides no evidence whatsoever for false allegations of tens of thousands of instances of voter fraud. Indeed, several of the representatives who support the lawsuit were themselves just elected by the very votes they now say are fraudulent. The proposed remedy — having Republican-dominated legislatures in only the four states that gave Biden his margin of victory select Trump electors — would be straight-up election theft.”
The Constitution, as goofy and jerry-rigged as it is, stipulates that insurrectionists who violate their oath are not allowed to serve in Congress. Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, written to exclude Confederate Civil War traitors, says that “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress … who … having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same[.]” How the Supreme Court ruled, or whether Republicans actually believe their lunatic claims, is irrelevant. It’s still insurrection even if it doesn’t work out.”
The why and the how. Makes an interesting argument for the 126 members of the House and those in the Senate (Graham, Perude, Loeffler, et. al) to go on permanent vacation.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
I found the article a bit extreme, as the center and rule of law is holding, but the overarching point is completely valid.
The oath of office should/must matter and the recent actions by the GOP clearly violate that oath. The ballot box may be the only reasonable remedy assuming they have the ability to wake up and start putting Country ahead of their own self interest.
One can dream…
LikeLiked by 1 person
It only requires a majority vote of the House of Representatives to not seat an individual member. It is therefore within the power of Nancy Pelosi to go down the list one by one and vote the bastards out and send them home. Of course, even if she wants to, President Biden will not want that done. He is serious about trying to heal the nation even if it means allowing such seditious shitheads to stay in Congress. IMHO.
We know what would happen if the roles were reversed but, as tempting and emotionally satisfying as it would be, we should not sink to their level.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yeah, “tempting”, but as in raising a small child, it is important that there be at least one adult in the room to quell a tantrum and facilitate the maturation process.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “What to do about seditious members of Congress”
There are NO seditious members of Congress. If you don’t believe me, try to find a law with which to charge them.
LikeLike
No need to find violations of the statutes even though some of these seditious Congressmen gave aid and comfort to gun-toting pinheads who threatened various state officials. Simply put, the House of Representatives has the power to refuse to accept the results of a tainted election of a member. Many of these seditious Republican Congressmen have formally accused IN COURT the elections which they won of being tainted.
You may not like the word “seditious” but it is a fair adjective for those who would throw away millions of votes by “urban” citizens in order to install the LOSER in the White House. The most fundamental bedrock of our Constitution is the idea that ours is a “government of the people, by the people and for the people” and these traitors have done their best to overturn that principle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Don’t need no stinkin’ law.”
Evidenced by the legal theaters of the absurd filed by Trump.
In the defense of the GOP, they did swear an oath.
To Trump.
So there is that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Don’t need no stinkin’ law.”
Let’s have anarchy, then.
LikeLike
Trump tried authoritarianism vice anarchy. But the result would be the same: The end of our Democratic Republic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But if the roles were reversed, you would be screaming for this to be used. Just because YOU say they are no seditious members of Congress, others might disagree.
No way, Mr. Roberts.
And I was not advocating for this. I found it a compelling argument that I thought we should discuss.
LikeLike
RE: “But if the roles were reversed, you would be screaming for this to be used.”
Only in your imagination.
Sedition is defined in our laws. I propose that before accusing someone of sedition, we be prepared to apply the legal definition. Anything less is irresponsible, in my view.
LikeLike
Based on your history, I find my statement to be valid; on the screen and a lot of other folks’ minds.
LikeLike
And I was NOT the first to throw the sedition flag.
LikeLike
Disagreeing with you on a legal matter is not sedition. Nor is taking advantage of legal processes.
Calling for violent resistance to the outcome of the election might be seditious, but questioning the outcome and taking legal action is not.
Advocating expelling duly elected members of Congress for exercising their speech and legal rights would be trying to steal the COngress as well as the Presidential election, and that might well fit the definition of sedition.
LikeLike
All elections have some challenges. They caught the felons in NC, and filed a challenge for another election.
But filing the same suits over and over from both the aggrieved parties and other institutions and now the red states, using the same “evidence”, but shuffling the deck each time, is trying to steal the election. Particularly since all the presented evidence was declared bogus, discredited or inconsequential.
The only places where the evidence is acceptable is in the minds of Trump fans. And in the conservative media where real truth is like acne on a teenager. Something annoying that needs to be covered up.
I am certain that even Trump doesn’t believe he won or the election was rigged.
It was just a game to him. And every citizen is the loser because of that.
LikeLiked by 3 people
RE: “Particularly since all the presented evidence was declared bogus, discredited or inconsequential.”
I would stress that losing (or winning) a lawsuit doesn’t invalidate the evidence it contains. It will always be true that there is substantial evidence of election fraud in 2020. At least, it is false to say the courts disproved the evidence; some, like SCOTUS, didn’t even try the merits.
LikeLike
Actually the “evidence” was the primary reason most of the suits were tossed. Why?Because the evidence was …”bogus,, discredited, (and) inconsequential”.
Your so-called substantial evidence of fraud has been debunked, tossed on the trash heap of history and, even the highest court in the land did not consider there was good enough reason to consider it. If there were actual compelling evidence, I believe that Thomas and the other justice who considered hearing the case said that it would NOT change the outcome.
LikeLike
RE: “Your so-called substantial evidence of fraud has been debunked, tossed on the trash heap of history…”
And yet it remains.
LikeLike
So does our old dishwasher that we disposed of at the city dump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It will always be true that there is substantial evidence of election fraud in 2020.”
Of course that is the lie being propagated by Trump and his minions so he can raise millions for his retirement. And the poor folks believe and send money.
There has been no evidence of substantial or even unsubstantial fraud that passes any kind of scrutiny, legal or otherwise.
Or to borrow from Paxton’s crooked data “expert”, a one in quadrillion chance that fraud or even just normal election errors would have altered the election.
Of course there is no doubt that Paxton and other crooks in the Congress that support Trump are looking for pardons and protection from primary elections.
And that is the real fraud. Just like Trump U, Trump’s Charity, Trump’s resorts for government employees, Trump’s selling of our national security for investments in Indonesia, Ivanka’s patents and copyrights in China, Trump’s slaughter via Turkey of trusted allies in the ISIS war to protect his hotels, children selling properties for access to Trump, the non-existent healthcare plan…and this is a partial list of frauds we have endured from the master of the game.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“. . . expelling duly elected members of Congress . . . ”
Uh, how can they be “duly elected” if they come from PA, WI, GA or MI. THEY have sworn in court that the elections in their state were not conducted legally. Your – and their – claiming that they are “duly elected” but claim that the Electors for Joe Biden were not – is just further evidence of the intellectual and legal garbage you people are peddling.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you make a valid point and across the board the GOP is actively accepting the outcomes that favored them.
THAT;S a pretty significant 1000 LB critter sitting in the corner….
LikeLiked by 2 people
And that critter’s name: Hypocrisy (in attempting to maintain power granted by the people that 45 LOST!).
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Uh, how can they be ‘duly elected’ if they come from PA, WI, GA or MI.”
They can’t. So what? Unless their opponents sue to reverse the vote, and win, they will be “duly elected.”
Given that GOP candidates attempted to do exactly that, the irony of your comment is wonderful.
LikeLike
“So what?”
Isn’t that what you always say when you have nothing to say.
This is not about court action. The courts have already affirmed that the election was fair and square in those states. This is about the HYPOCRISY of those who STILL claim the elections were not conducted legally but want to call these seditious Congressmen “duly elected.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Isn’t that what you always say when you have nothing to say.”
No. It is what I say when I want someone to substantiate their assertions.
RE: “This is about the HYPOCRISY of those who STILL claim the elections were not conducted legally but want to call these seditious Congressmen ‘duly elected.'”
Everyone is a hypocrite sometimes. So what?
LikeLike
No standing, no legal rights.
And what say you about those floating the idea of secession? I say let them. They can rely on Texas (and maybe Florida) to pay their bills. It won’t last long.
LikeLike
RE: “And what say you about those floating the idea of secession? I say let them.”
I say let them, too. I’m generally in favor of having constitutional republics in the world.
LikeLike
How surprising (not) to hear the children on the left throwing even more inane insults at those that are exercising their rights. There have been many contested elections and this one is not the worst. Stop the petty childish claims that someone is seditious because they don’t agree with you and are using the courts to be heard. Win or lose, we will still survive.
LikeLike
“Win or lose, we will still survive.”
That would be the best outcome and I think you are correct. It takes more than a con artist to destroy our nation. But a lot of damage has been done.
True, many elections at many levels have been contested. Then decided in court, perhaps even appealed.
Few, however, have been to court 40 times from state, to state appeals and supreme, then to federal appeals, then to SCOTUS. And no evidence of credible evidence to make any difference in the election was found anywhere. You have to figure that the early legal teams from the top firms in the country had the “evidence” and presented the best ones to dozens of judges. Same result everywhere. So we are back to fraud because Trump said so.
And, of course, the big difference is the continuing insistence that it was all a fraud. Still. After all states have certified their electors.
Trump is just collecting his few hundred million, Giuliani is maybe getting his $20,000/day. Thanks to his donors.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The man baby still in the Oval Office has been throwing tantrums about the election since before the election.
It is not an insult to indicate that the behavior of those in Congress signing on to a losing, unprovable lawsuit IS seditious in that it violates the oath they all took to support and defend the Constitution. They are attempting to SUBVERT the Constitution, not only the U.S., but the state constitutions of the battlrground states in question.
LikeLike
Two letters, B and S. You figure it out.
LikeLike
Big and stupid = Trump’s allegations and your opinion.
LikeLiked by 1 person