“The Whole Enchilada”: Pundits Wrongly Claim the Mar-a-Lago Raid Could Disqualify Trump from Future Office

Source: Jonathan Turley.

Turley makes an important observation: The Constitutional requirements for being elected President are such that even a convicted criminal may be legally elected to the office. Counterintuitive as the observation may be, I think it is both profound and essential to our concept of liberty.

10 thoughts on ““The Whole Enchilada”: Pundits Wrongly Claim the Mar-a-Lago Raid Could Disqualify Trump from Future Office

  1. The funny part of this hyper left wing assault and bully tactics on Trump is that it is making him more and more appealing for a 2024 run by a very large and growing voter population. The Democrats are unknowingly helping the man achieve the office of the presidency again. Now THAT would be a case of karma is a bitch.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Every observer I have seen who mentions the law’s disqualification provision also mentions the clear Constitutional question that would likely “trump” the desire to punish a guilty criminal running for President. So sure, conviction on crimes associated with Presidential records would not be enough to keep Trump from the Presidency.

    I would remind you, though, of this language in the Constitution. . .

    “Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

    Should Trump secure the GOP nomination in 2024 there would immediately be suits filed to disqualify him based on his involvement in violent and seditious conspiracy to subvert the Constitution.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. RE: “Should Trump secure the GOP nomination in 2024 there would immediately be suits filed to disqualify him based on his involvement in violent and seditious conspiracy to subvert the Constitution.”

      I doubt it. Since Trump has never been convicted of such involvement, it is a non-existent disability.

      Like

      1. Don’t be ridiculous. You are imagining a scenario in which the courts must first find Trump guilty of seditious conspiracy, then find that his guilt disqualifies him from office and then a vote in Congress might remove the disability.

        Like

        1. It is NOT ridiculous to believe that Trump’s documented and illegal attempts to overthrow the Constitutional transfer of power is disqualifying and that our courts would find that to be so. The Constitution says nothing about being convicted of a statutory crime. Did he engage in rebellion against the Constitution? Did he give “aid or comfort” to violent armed insurrectionists? Read his statements and tweets.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. RE: “It is NOT ridiculous to believe that Trump’s documented and illegal attempts to overthrow the Constitutional transfer of power is disqualifying and that our courts would find that to be so.”

          Until Trump is indicted for seditious conspiracy, the fantasy will remain ridiculous.

          Like

          1. If Trump is indicted, I will evaluate the case against him before I leap to any conclusions. Do you support the ideal that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty?

            Like

          2. You and Don have jumped to so many conclusions, how can I trust what you say?

            Unless you are on the jury, or watching the proceedings, you can’t say a word. Kind of like taking the word of pundits you listen to concerning the 1/6 committee hearings.

            When CONVICTRRED, will you claim the jury was corrupt. Or the prosecutor? Or the defense was inept? What excuse will you deicide on now, before anything else comes to light?

            Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s