Staying up late last night, I spent a good amount of time trying to wrap my brain around this Republican effort to use the Supreme Court to overturn the 2020 election.
The fact that over half of the Republican representatives in Congress and 18 GOP states attorneys general have filed “friends of the court” briefs in support of the Texas AG’s suit to overturn the 20 million votes of people in four battle ground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Georgia has made me livid.
I searched for analogies and comparisons and parallels in an attempt to grok it all, to understand what it really meant, despite the frivolous nature of the law suits, and especially what it meant to the rest of us.
The Reichstag fire came to mind. So did the firing on Fort Sumter.
After the burning of the German parliament building – the Reichstag – in 1933, Hitler blamed the “arson” on a Dutch communist – and used the fire as a pretext to claim that communists were plotting against the German government. Back then, the German Communist Party was one of the larger political parties in the country. Hitler was then able to have an emergency decree issued that suspended civil liberties, which allowed the government to institute mass arrests of communists, including all of their parliamentary delegates. With their rivals gone, the Nazi Party went from having a plurality to a majority, thus enabling Hitler to consolidate his power. We know what happened after that.
So, perhaps the burning of the Reichstag is like Trump burning down the election and blaming it on “rigged” ballots and fraudulent votes. And now with the suit, he’s jumping on the bandwagon and has become the director to undo the election and install him, the loser, as the winner. Holding on to power at all costs, is his goal, as was Hitler’s.
Or perhaps, the Fort Sumter analogy is better.
Months prior to the existence of the Confederate Army, the South Carolina militia fired on Federal troops at Fort Sumter at the entrance to Charleston Harbor. The Fort’s resistance, the siege, and subsequent surrender by the United States Army is usually seen as the start of the American Civil War.
Before the Fort surrendered, its resupply became one of the first crises of the administration of the newly inaugurated President Abraham Lincoln following his victory in the election of November 6, 1860.
The rebels were against the election of Lincoln; now, the Republicans are against the election of Joe Biden. Instead of firing on Fort Sumter, the Congressional rebs are firing on the US Constitution at the Supreme Court, not at the mouth of Charleston.
By attacking the validity of the 2020 election, these Republicans – again, over half of the GOP in the House and all 18 state’s AGs – they are assaulting the very principle that holds this nation together: free and fair elections. Without free and fair elections, we don’t have a democracy. And without democracy, America is not America.
It’s more than fealty towards Trump. These “grown ass men and women” – as MSNBC’s Brian Williams called them last night – have signed on to a suit that declares the election was wrong and it should be thrown out (by ditching the votes from WI, MI, PA and GA) – which would make Trump re-elected. Voiding the will of the people. Voiding 20 million votes. This is voiding the US Constitution.
Never mind that the suit has no chance of going anywhere. It doesn’t have facts, it doesn’t have the law – and it tries to clobber the concepts of federalism and states’ rights – which normally the GOP love. The suit is based on Texas telling the four states that it didn’t like whom they chose for president.
Despite its weaknesses as a legal document, the suit does other very dangerous things. It’s an opening salvo against the rest of us, the 80 million who voted for Biden. It’s telling us they don’t care who we voted for. They don’t care who won fair and square. That’s seditious. As the Pennsylvania Attorney General said in his state’s response to the suit, it’s a “seditious use of the judicial process…”
It’s power they’re after. And the suit gives more credence to those false claims of rigging and fake ballots. Which, apparently, 75% of Republican voters believe.
Blatantly not accepting the election results is a blatant attack on our democracy. On our founding documents.
What do you it when one part of the government tries to overturn a free and fair election won by another part of the government?
You call it treason.
And we will not forget who signed onto this treasonous attempt to overturn our democracy. They will be held accountable.
{ 54 comments… read them below or add one }
So well put, Frank. As a former history teacher I have racked my brain to find analogies to compare this to if I were still in the classroom… I came up more empty handed than you did, so I appreciate your information. Funny isn’t it that in those states where trump won there is no question about the mail-in ballots. No question about treason – every one of the AG and republicans that signed should be investigated, charged with treason and made to pay the penalty.
War is coming! You morons will not steal this election even if it means the destruction of this country! The only ones commiting treason is the people who carried out the cheating, the video evidence is quite clear that cheating was going on! We will uncover the traitors!
Ok, bring on the evidence. We’re still waiting. Lol.
There is no evidence of anything resembling widespread voter fraud or mishandled votes that could effect the election. Trump appointed Barr stated clearly that the Dept of Justice among others have made this abundantly clear. There is zero evidence or reason or so much as slight sign the voting machines were tampered with, defective, or in any way compromised. These are the facts. I’m not a political line follower, a Dem or Repub, and have wasted many hours scouring right wing news sites, far far right wing conspiracy sites prattling on about Qanon and Globalists and found nothing, absolutely not one ‘reason’ for any of these inane accusations made by some on the right, I investigate conspiracy theories as a pastime so I’m versed in the undertaking and found nothing but rhetoric and nothing resembling evidence. An understanding of nuance and an aptitude for critical thinking are barely even required to see these claims were randomly thrown out there, then we were told these things must be investigated at all costs, proof that these made up things didn’t happen must be shown, that is the strategy, it is pathetic and absurd. None of this should be entertained in the slightest. Those parties involved should be mocked, ridiculed, and made the butt of every joke, then committee’s must be formed to investigate and determine punishment and sanctions accordingly for these time wasting dolts, and there is ample evidence to warrant such actions unlike the made up, catchphrase nonsense that drives the blundering shills who invented this circus. Enough, no pandering need be done, no resources need be utilized, no credence given. Any and all further blabbering need only be met with laughter followed by disciplinary action. It is now these conservatives who “can’t handle the truth!”
Well said, Frank and Judy. Sad, mad, disappointed, furious, grieving — my emotions as Trump continues to fill his coffers with donations to his campaign while he and his minions are trashing our founding principles. I used to think of him as a masterful midway carnival barker, but I’m really scared that he is much, much more than that and will do anything to hold on to power despite what we, the people, have voted for.
“The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a long-shot bid by President Trump and the state of Texas to overturn the results in four states won by Democrat Joe Biden, blocking the president’s legal path to reverse his reelection loss.
The court’s unsigned order was short: “Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections. All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.” Washington Post
So now that the USSC has quashed Trump’s long shot bid, what is going to be the next crisis to drive people nuts?
I’ve really shrunk my world in 2020, restricting the flow of “news” to damn near nothing, but popping into The Rag weekly for your superior coverage of Ocean Beach quality of life issues. My mental health is much better when I avoid national politics, thank you.
And even with the covid thing, my neighbors are more friendly. We’re having frequent conversations out by the curb…probably more conversations than I’ve had in the 35 years I’ve lived in 92107. And believe it or not, none of the conversations have been political! When you’re face to face with your neighbors, nobody wants to be offensive, so we stick with weather talk, surf talk, garden talk and children talk. It’s quite refreshing.
There is tranquility that comes with being around nearly seven decades. We’ve seen the cows come and the cows go, and we also understand that the BS goes on forever. We grasp the concept of ying and yang, ebb and flow, and that pesky pendulum. We have faith that in the long run, the system will work.
Here’s to a more chill 2021!
According to New Jerseys Democratic Rep., Pelosi and the Dems can use the 14th amendment to refuse to seat all the Republicans that participated in the attempt to overthrow the election.
“Stated simply, the men and women who would act to tear the United States Government apart cannot serve as Members of the Congress,” Pascrell said in a statement posted on Twitter.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was written after the Civil War to bar from government any traitors who would seek to destroy the Union. But of course, everyone knows the Dems don’t have the fortitude to ever fight back and do something like that.
The attempt to override the election was done through the courts. And the courts worked.
I don’t think any laws were broken in that process, other than to whatever extent these baseless allegations incite violence. But so far it has been more peaceful than the lockdown protests or BLM protests.
To equate BLM protests with what these Republicans tried to do is way off base. What standard are you using? There was indeed violence done to the Constitution with this baseless, treasonous suit.
Injoy the fall of America.
What does “Injoy” mean?
Yep, Queen, I’m still all over this and waiting for Congressional response. To do nothing is totally unacceptable in my book… But, let’s respond to the underminers of democracy first, and the ineffectuals to functioning Govt second. I am almost as unhappy with Dem Congressional members as the GOP. But this is a national, Constitutional and function of the Union opportunity to correct that simply can’t be overlooked, sidestepped, or avoided. This is NOT something Biden is going to fix. This requires a major, symbolic if nothing else, intervention. And if it is allowed to flow downstream, it is a major nail in the coffin of the Union.
It’s not treason, nor was it when Trump was throwing that word around accusing everyone else of treason.
It is however a futile and reckless attempt to damage our democracy. It’s unAmerican and undemocratic, and downright shameful and embarrassing. But it’s not treason. Hopefully we can move on very soon and put this behind us and not repeat it.
Well, can’t agree here kh, it was and is treason, just like firing on Ft. Sumter was treason. Trying to throw out a lawful, fair election intentionally is by definition, treason. Don’t know what definition you’re using. There is no moral equivalency, which you suggest. “Treason: the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.” They’re trying to overthrow the duly-elected new government.
KK is right, Frank. Treason is defined explicitly in the Constitution and it is not concurrent with the Wikipedia general definition that you quote (what have I said over and over about using Wikipedia as a source? Even Wikipedia has a page demonstrating why you SHOULDN’T use it as a source).
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-iii/clauses/39
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Levying War
Early judicial interpretation of the meaning of treason in terms of levying war was conditioned by the partisan struggles of the early nineteenth century, which involved the treason trials of Aaron Burr and his associates. In Ex parte Bollman,1 which involved two of Burr’s confederates, Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for himself and three other Justices, confined the meaning of levying war to the actual waging of war. “However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason. To conspire to levy war, and actually to levy war, are distinct offences. The first must be brought into open action by the assemblage of men for a purpose treasonable in itself, or the fact of levying war cannot have been committed. So far has this principle been carried, that . . . it has been determined that the actual enlistment of men to serve against the government does not amount to levying war.” Chief Justice Marshall was careful, however, to state that the Court did not mean that no person could be guilty of this crime who had not appeared in arms against the country. “On the contrary, if war be actually levied, that is, if a body of men be actually assembled for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors. But there must be an actual assembling of men, for the treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war.”
Briefly, coup = treason; coup attempt = treason.
Nope. You of all people should know that you cannot make your own reality. Marshal had an opinion. The Constitution is precise and the list of people who have been convicted of treason and their circumstances bear this out.
SURRENDER, DOROTHY!
https://www.grunge.com/147135/every-american-ever-convicted-of-treason-and-what-happened-next/
You are not addressing my key point, mi amigo: coup or coup attempt = treason. Now, if you disagree the court case was a coup attempt, that’s another issue. Need I list all the posts, articles, and pieces that agree that we have been and are still watching a coup effort?
A coup attempt is not treason in the USA. It may very well be in Latvia or Turkey, but not here.
That is the key point that I am addressing: the definition of the term “treason” as it applies to US law.
That “coup attempt” that has everyone’s panties in a bunch was a distraction while Trump continues to fleece his flock of their remaining small change. If it was an actual attempt we have nothing to fear from these clowns. But it wasn’t, and we DO have something to fear from these clowns. Just not that.
Okay, Peter, we just have to disagree.
I was hoping you would come up with “sedition” on your own.
“18 U.S. Code §?2383.Rebellion or insurrection” is the law that covers punishing these douche bags.
Not treason. Trump misused this charge several times while trying to rile up his mob and the political analysts jumped on that story and spent a good deal of time fact-checking the treason charge.
I vigorously object to any repetition of this twisting of an important fact in this mess of an administration by respected outlets.
If they marched into the Supreme Court and started firing, or took over the military to overthrow the process by force, sure.
They didn’t. They quite literally used the institutions of government to challenge the election. That isn’t treason, it’s their legal constitutional right (in this case to lose and make fools of themselves.). Lets just hope it’s over with.
This is an opportunity to restore faith in our institutions,(and vaccines). Let’s not waste it by calling for each other’s heads.
Hey, nobody is calling for your specific head, kh, but the suit was an attack on all of us. Just because the Supremes saw its worthlessness, doesn’t mean it still didn’t cause damage; all those fully-armed thugs who appear threatening health officials and voting officials are encouraged to “levy war” against the US, and as Marshall said, “all those who perform any part (read GOP Congressional reps and states attys general), however minute, or however remote from the scene …, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered traitors.”
Most are well aware the punishment for treason is execution, so that label is quite literally calling for someone’s head.
Trumps accusations are absolutely damaging to our democracy. And dangerous as they could certainly motivate others into treasonous actions, such as the yahoos that were plotting to abduct Gov Whitmer. Those people are anarchists, and they come from all political stripes. Some even self identify as such.
It was not their “legal constitutional right”. No where in the Constitution does it state it’s okay for one state to challenge another state’s process of elections. They used the court in an unconstitutional attempt to stage a coup. I guess that’s where you and Peter disagree with me. I say – and many others have said – this was/ is a coup attempt. If that’s too narrow a definition of treason, then you need to broaden it. Coup = treason. Coup attempt = treason.
They brought a case to the courts without merit. The court shot it down. This happens all the time, although not often someone is foolish enough to do so at the Supreme Court level.
We should always be willing to entertain any tangible evidence of election fraud. It seems pretty clear to date there wasn’t any (at least not beyond a very small number of votes.). It’s a bold and serious claim, and yet was dismissed instantly by opposing media talking heads before the votes were even counted. They should stick to reporting the news rather than creating it.
As a retired lawyer, I’d have to say “this happens all the time” is just simply not true. It doesn’t happen all the time that feckless parties try to use the Supreme Court to overturn a free and fair election. No sirree, buddy. That’s why we’re in this dangerous moment. Michigan state electors have to travel with armed guards this upcoming Monday to file their votes out of fear that armed Trump supporters will intervene. I have to say, you’re down playing this way too much. Again, this is/ was a coup effort. You’re not addressing this.
BTW, those guys were not anarchists. They’re neo-nazis, fascists.
I’ve said my piece. Hey, where’s the sun?
please honey don’t put any faith in the vaccine, even with the vaccine they will keep us locked down for years, make us wear mask and end all small business in the US, it has already ended half the small business in the US. All politicians are evil if you think democrats love you, you are kidding yourself, Nancy Pelosi only like your money in her pocket. She learn a great lesson from her corrupt father. Do you think Newsome gives two shit about you, go look at the homeless, this is not compassion these people need help leaving them on the streets is cruel and unhuman, they are addicts and have mental problems and this govt does nothing. GET RID OF ALL OF THEM
What a crock of bs.
Judi – You’re so right. Sometimes we allow a comment from the “other side” to show the type of thinking that some people have.
That’s not thinking. My old boss had a great phrase for this, he called it verbal dysentery.
Geoff – had a laugh at that one – doubtless you’re right.
I hope after the dust is settled, we see a Mea Culpa from many of these Republican congressman that facilitated this. They unfortunately are stuck between a rock and a hard place in this new era of propaganda media, lynch-mob voter base, and social media platforms that magnify the most toxic among them. Cancel-culture is widespread on both ends of the spectrum.
Nice discussion between editor dude and kh, interesting. There is another possible connection to treason here, the part that read “in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
I’d say the Russians are more enemy than friend at the moment.
Trump’s relationship with Russia could fall into this interpretation making him treasonous.
The Republicans who have signed on to his cause would therefore also be treasonous.
And, kh, here is the punishment for treason:
“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
A little jail time would be great for the LOSER but the best part is the last clause. If I was faced with death or not being able to run for office again after the age of 74, I know what I’d pick.
“Enemies” as defined in the Constitution has been established by SCOTUS as a Country or non-aligned group that Congress has DECLARED war on.
That is why actions like these, which are INTERNAL, not external cannot by definition be treason.
They are seditious acts in peacetime.
Careful, Peter, we could drown in legal opinions. Here is one published in the Yale Law Journal in 1918:
“The term ‘enemies/ as used in the second clause, according to its settled meaning, at the time the Constitution was adopted? applies only to the subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us. It does not embrace rebels in insurrection against their own government . .,,.
Hence? treason by levying war is more generally committed in internal insurrections directed against the government by persons in the United States ; whereas giving aid and comfort is generally committed in connection with a war waged against the United States by a foreign power. When those who commit treason by levying war
become an. organized body politic, however, they may become ?’enemies” with.in the purview of the law, and giving aid and comfort to such enemies will constitute treason.
There will be no mea culpa, ever, from the Republicans. From my perch, you can call it treason, sedition, right to object or anything else- the semantics are argued endlessly, hourly, by all of us. My point is that this act of 17 Congressional employees endorsing and supporting the Texas lawsuit is the straw on the camel.
The Republican party has been obstructing the Govt for a long time now, certainly in the 8 years of the Obama administration, and in the four years that McConnell has been sitting on hundreds of legislative bills that have been sent to the Senate, the refusal to accept and review documents, testimony and evidence in the Trump impeachment inquiry, and the chronic gaslighting MO from all GOP members..
The point is that these Congressmen have a job to do: 1) to create, write, and enact legislation on behalf of their constituents 2) to represent their entire State, not just some subset of it 3) to uphold the Constitution and the democratic process.
What we see is that they are not doing their jobs,and have violated the oath they took to uphold the democratic process. So the move to bar them from sitting, or at the very least require them to retake the oath, albeit symbolic, is the way forward. It is perfectly obvious, whatever one wants to call their actions, that they are not upholding and defending the democratic process, either for their own constituents, or for the country at large. In so doing, they are not representing ANYONE, not doing the job they were elected to do. When you don’t perform your job and, worse, undermine your co-workers, you’re out. Call it what you want, Congress has failed miserably, and it is, after all, and regardless of SCOTUS, the foundation of the Union.
I agree with “retired botanist. It is very difficult for me to justify on any basis what Trump and his supporters have done after the election and for that matter before the election. They have shown in many ways that they do not believe in democracy. The rest of us should take very seriously that they do not believe in democracy.
Agreed, it is a failure of representation. And include the democratic congressman that have obstructed Trumps appointments high and low from the get go. And the Republicans before that against Obama. Some people are blind to it when it’s not targeting their favored candidate.
Really tired of the gamesmanship. It’s a pendulum swinging back and forth, further each time and at some point it’s all going to come crashing down.. I hope Biden is sincere about changing the tone, and doesn’t give in to the extremists.
I’m gonna need specifics for this one, kh:
“And include the democratic congressman that have obstructed Trumps appointments high and low from the get go.”
What quality appointment have the Democrats obstructed?
Seems to me they have been fighting an endless battle against unqualified appointees, none of whom had the interest of the country at heart; they were appointed for dismantling skills, not building skills.
Interesting opinion piece from the Washington Post from six days ago. Author is
Daniel W. Drezner: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/12/07/its-not-coup-its-not-even-bad-coup/
It is interesting but it’s also a weak argument in the face of so many others who claim the opposite. I guess I could include links to all the articles that differ with this one, but have other material to post this morning. Anyhow, thanks Chris for keeping this important conversation going.
Interesting piece, Chris. I think the writer made one mistake. He seems to be saying that because everyone is not with the LOSER on this, it isn’t a coup. But, I can’t find any definition that describes how many people have to be involved before it can be called a “coup.” Remember The Mouse That Roared?
All it takes to qualify is a nut like the LOSER and a few more liked minded idiots and, voila, a coup attempt!
I guess I always thought of a coup as a situation were there is a violent overthrow, or at least a violent attempt at one. As kh pointed out, Tump is doing all this through the courts. The fact he has supporters willing to commit violence doesn’t mean he as anything to do with organizing it (but who knows?). Coup or no coup I think we all agree he’s a POS.
Well, not wanting to seem too contrary, Chris, but I think the threat of violence that very many people have felt from his minions is pretty real. Alex Smith said yesterday “one way or another.” t-rump is using the courts but I am sure that is not all. Some day, it may come out just how much he had to do with fanning the violent atmosphere. I think he is using this as another tool in his feeble attempt to hold on to power.
I respect that Geoff. I don’t dispute the threat of violence from his minions is real. Plenty of people I know have been targets of it. Even I decided to peel off my Biden/Harris sticker of my vehicle. Trump doesn’t make any effort to discourage it, but I’m not so sure he’s actually organizing it. But like I said who knows? No shortage of his supporters are convinced convinced Biden is behind any violent actions by ANTIFA and and the small # of BLM activists who are committing violence. And I DO emphasize SMALL #s. Some are truly convinced Obama is behind it. The fact he already reached the pinnacle of his political career dons’t seem to register.
It’s sedition…
I think it’s accurate to describe his behavior as seditious. Especially when appealing directly to electors and governors to overturn the vote.
We should be careful when using hyperbole, it may sound fun at the time but it’s only going to alienate anyone that doesn’t already agree with you.
I’ve really enjoyed this discussion; it’s been one of the best within the comment sections ever! Thanks to all who’ve contributed: Peter, KH, Retired, Chris, Geoff, Queen. Oh, occasionally I’ll throw in a comment from those who totally disagree just to remind readers that what we disagree on is mere peanuts when you read something from someone who has drank the Kool-aid.
Did you mean to write “anyone that does agree with you” instead of “doesn’t agree with you?”
No, I meant it as written. I’m assuming the point of debating anything is to sway those who don’t already agree with you.
But some I suppose just enjoy the echo chamber, or hearing themselves speak. (Not you Geoff.)
Ah, got it, I thought maybe that was your point.