Month: August 2023

Donald Trump is still eligible to run for President

by Dave

Voila- I put the conclusion as the title of this posting. It isn’t what I want happen. It is a topic that received a flurry of attention among constitutional law professors in the last month.

It is ironic that convicted felons in my state of Florida can not vote, but they can run for president. It’s never happened before, but this is becoming a possibility. The idea of a convicted felon running our country probably never came up during the creation of our Constitution. It was just too preposterous.

Bottom line: Voters have to decide who our next president, not the courts. Trump may be ahead in the polls, but a lot can change from now to November 2024. I hope enough people see the light, and do not send a twice impeached and four times indicted candidate to the White House.

Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution provides the basis to disqualify a candidate for government office if they have engaged in insurrection or rebellion. It became part of the Constitution after the civil war. There were excellent opinions written by law professors and posted on the internet both supporting his eligibility and also supporting disqualification.

From a critical examination of the wording of Section 3, as provided by Professors Baude and Paulsen (link given at the end of this posting), Donald Trump should be disqualified from both the primaries and the general election. Their legal arguments are in a manner that conservatives usually prefer to interpret the law, referred to as originalism and textism. They argue that Section 3 is self executing, and any government official involved in the election can invalidate Trump’s candidacy. They are joined by Professor Laurence Tribe and former judge J. Michael Luttig. See video clip below.

Link: August 19, Laurence Tribe and J. Michael Luttig make the case for Trump’s Disqualification

I agree with the counter arguments by Professors Noah Feldman and Michael McConnell, that Donald Trump is eligible to run for president even if he encourage protesters on January 6 to be highly aggressive. I note Trump did not take any action as the Capitol was being ransacked. It is deplorable but not proof he engaged in insurrection.

Professor Noah Feldman cites two problems with Professors Baude and Paulsen article. First, is there never has been a real Supreme Court case to let the government officials know the proper interpretation of the key phrase to “engage in insurrection.” Secondly, the only precedent is the Griffin case, decided in a circuit court, which ruled that the legislature must first make Section 3 operable before actions can be taken. Professor Feldman emphasizes the importance of case law.

Link: Alas, Trump Is Still Eligible to Run for Office

Professor McConnell writes: “We must not forget that we are talking about empowering partisan politicians such as state Secretaries of State to disqualify their political opponents from the ballot, depriving voters of the ability to elect candidates of their choice. If abused, this is profoundly anti-democratic.”

Prof McConnell Opinion

I agree. Trump’s supporters will claim this as an egregious abuse of power. Disqualification would disenfranchise millions of voters and the action of a one person, the Secretary of State, could determine an election for the country, if it was close enough.

Further, disqualification in any state would be a disaster. It would simply feed into the ultra-right wing narrative that the Biden administration is afraid of Donald Trump, and is finding ways to derail his candidacy.

Much of Trump’s ardent supporters have swallowed whole wild conspiracy theories, that the Department of Justice, FBI, attorney generals from Manhattan and New York State are all after Trump. Now it would include the Secretaries of State. The attacks get very personal against judges, even one he appointed (Judge Aileen Cannon).

And if Biden were to be re-elected, the legitimacy of the election would forever be questioned because a secretary of state would not allow his name on the ballot in a particular state.

Disqualify Trump, No. Vote him out, Yes.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Additional link:

Link: Forbes, Can Trump Be Disqualified From The Presidency? Why Even Conservative Legal Experts Are In Favor Of It

Section 3, 14th Amendment states:

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.

section-3-1Download

Trump’s Cases: Just the facts

by Dave

On the right side of my site, I have created a separate page on the four criminal indictments of Donald Trump. It is very short. I have included the best links I could find tracking these cases. If I stick with just the court rulings, it makes things a lot shorter. Sort of like reporting the final score of a football game, and not the action on the field.

The one getting the most attention is the Georgia election interference case with 19 defendants. It is referred to as the Georgia inquiry case, Fulton County case or the Fani Willis case. All defendants have pleaded not guilty, had their mug shots taken, and posted bond.

The 19 defendants are not speaking with one voice. Fani Willis wanted a start date in March 2024, while Trump wants more time. The judge has not yet decided. But, one defendant, Kenneth Chesebro, asked for a start date of October 23, 2023 and the judge apparently accepted this date. Sidney Powell filed a similar motion. The New York Times reported that they learned from John Eastman’s lawyers, that he also may opt for an early start date.

Not in Fulton County, please! Five defendants (Meadows, Clark, Shafer, Still and Latham) want “removal” to federal court. New York Times reports that Trump will also likely request removal to federal court. The case will still be held in Georgia, but it will be moved outside of Fulton County, which is heavily Democratic. If it is in federal court, Meadows and Clark will likely argue that they should not be tried at all, because they have immunity, as they were federal government employees performing their duties to the president.

So, the Georgia case is getting messy. A hearing has been set for August 28, to discuss these issues. The Judge’s focus will be on ensuring a fair trial, with sufficient time for defendants to prepare their defense and have an unbiased jury.

And Judge Chutkan in Washington, has set a hearing for August 28 to discuss the start date for the January 6 case. Jack Smith wants January 2, 2024 while Trump’s lawyers want April 2026. Big difference.

Four cases, Hush Money, Jan 6, Georgia and the Documents case are all going forward. Wheel of justice turn slowly.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Feedback

by Dave

If you have stumbled on to my website and read some of my postings, I want to say thank you for your interest. I do not post often, and I try to research as well as possible my topics.

Your comments are always of interest. You can also click on “like” if you feel I have done a good job of explaining the topic at hand. The last posting was a comparison between two ex-presidents, Bolsonaro and Trump, and I did not have much good to say about either of them.

I could use some feedback to know how best to continue.

Thank you for your support.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Part II: The legacy of Jair Bolsonaro and Donald Trump

by Dave

This post will be more meaningful if Part 1 is read first.

Ex-President Jair Bolsonaro greatly admired Donald Trump, and his form of right wing populist politics. It was a very passionate love of country and religion, an emotional attachment that voters could easily embrace. Bolsonaro attacked the socialist views of Lula da Silva, comparing him to Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, who wrecked the economy of Venezuela and Cuba, respectively.

He continued his attack on the Federal Election court and the election in which he lost. While still in power, Bolsonaro met with foreign ambassadors in July 2022, in which he spread false information about Brazil’s electoral system. Thus he was laying the foundation to challenge the entire election process. The meeting was livestreamed by official television channels and on YouTube.

A lawsuit was filed by Brazil’s Demcratic Labor Party. On June 30, 2023, the federal election court barred Jair Bolsonaro from running for president until 2030. Bolsonaro plans to appeal the judgement. Per the CNN link:

Judge Alexandre de Moraes, who presided over the court, cast his vote last. “Let us reaffirm our faith in our democracy and the rule of law,” he said after voting in favor of the guilty verdict. Moraes added that with the vote Brazilian authorities would show they do not tolerate “criminal extremism attacking the powers of the state, fake news, disinformation to try to deceive voters.”

There are many other cases pending against Bolsonaro. Most recently has been the Saudi rolex watch scandal. The accusation is that Bolsonaro gave the watch to an aide to sell and then deposit the money back into his account. It is not a lot of money ($70,000) but the Superior Court has now permitted inspection of Jair Bolsonaro and Lt. Col. Mauro Cid bank accounts in the US on August 18, 2023.

This is a rapidly developing story, as on August 18, 2023, seven high-ranking military police officers were arrested in connection with the Jan. 8 attacks. I suspect more will follow, including possible connections between the violence on January 8, 2022 and ex-president Jair Bolsonaro. Also, there is considerable speculation in the media, that Bolsonaro and his son, Flavio were enriching themselves through government graft. It will be the court that have to decide whether guilt based on facts, not speculation in the media.

Link: ABC News: Brazil’s Bolsonaro accused by ex-aide’s lawyer of ordering sale of jewelry given as official gifts

What if Bolsonaro’s comments were not livestreamed and broadcast, and also captured on You Tube? Perhaps the Superior Court would have acted differently.

There is no equivalent in the US to the 7 member panel overseeing the election and corruption in Brazil. Some may consider it gives too much authority, as only a simple majority can deny a candidate from running for office. Our First Amendment rights are very broad, while a president is in office. However as Donald Trump has discovered, defamation lawsuits against an ex-president can be won as in the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit.

___

Trump at present has four criminal cases against him. The Federal January 6 case and Georgia case involve his direct involvement to interfere with the results of a fair election, before the election and afterwards, leading up to the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. The classified documents case relate to actions after he left office on January 20, 2021. Trump will be formally arrested in the Georgia election interference case on August 24, 2023.

A commonality of the US and Brazilian system is, no matter how high or low a person’s social status, there is equal justice and accountability for all. We have no privilege class. The prisons of our country and Brazil, were not created to house the poor or illiterate, but those found guilty of crimes by a jury in court of law where the rights of the defendant are enforced. A second principle is that the electorate decides who will govern the country in free and fair elections. Every four years, in the US and Brazil, only the electorate who can be their president.

Both Bolsonaro and Trump have legal rights and can petition a higher court to appeal their sentences. This is another example of

I feel no matter, what occurs, their legacy will be that they truly believed that truth did not matter. Everything depended on the dissemination of false information via social media and cable stations to maintain their base.

Trump in particular has portrayed his legal problems on a corrupt legal system, but this is another lie. He is the cause of the four criminal indictments.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Ex-Presidents Trump and Bolsonaro: Part 1

by Dave

“You shall reap what you have sown” old proverb, meaning you will suffer the consequences of your actions.

When Donald Trump in Nov 2020 and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro in October 2022 lost their bids for re-election, they refused to accept their loss. Both of them concocted lies which attacked the integrity of election. It was all very planned out and in both cases, within a few months, violence broke out in the capitals of their country. US Capitol attack occurred on January 6, 2021 and the federal buildings in Brasilia were attacked on January 8, 2022, encouraged by unfounded claims from the ex-Presidents.

But both Trump and Bolsonaro maintained a lie that the elections were rigged, and they were the legitimate winners of the election. Both perpetuated these lies by fabricating “evidence” of fraud. It is exactly what many of their supporters wanted to hear. Many people in the US and Brazil are in prison for the violence. Five people are dead as a result of the violent attack on the capital, and many police officers were injured as a result of the violence.

Trump schemed with other White House officials to have Mike Pence dismiss the results of the election in states where he lost by a narrow margin and prepared a slates of false electors. This is, in part, why he is facing charges of conspiracy in Georgia. We have the freedom of assembly and speech in the US, but when the communications are at the foundation of plans to break the law, then this becomes part of the crime.

At the local, state and federal level of government, violations of election laws can be investigated. Volunteers also act as observers and can report any violation. The courts heard more than 50 challenges from Trump’s team of lawyers. None of them were successful in changing the results of the election. On December 23, 2020, the US Attorney General, William Barr, announced that no fraud had been found that would change the results of the election. Similar conclusions were reached by the Director of Cyber Security, Chris Krebs, who was then fired by Trump.

In Brazil, just days prior to the election, Bolsonaro reduced fuel prices to gain favor with Brazilian truckers. On election day, truckers formed blockades to prevent voters from going to the polls in the Northeast region of Brazil, where the worker’s party with Lula Da Silva as the presidential candidate, was favored to win. The police set up checkpoints, causing more difficulties for voters. The federal justices which oversee the election process, voted to end the blockade and police checkpoints on election day. As a result, voters were delayed but not denied the opportunity to vote.

Link: AP Press Brazilian truckers protest Bolsonaro loss, block hundreds of roads

In Brazil, political parties have recourse in the judicial system (federal election court, headed by Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes) to hear their complaints of an unfair election and take appropriate actions. So Bolsonaro’s party presented to the court their arguments that the machines which tallied the votes were flawed and should be disregarded. The discrepancy was very minor, and did not affect the actual tally. The court quickly rejected the allegations of Bolsonaro’s party.

CNN Link: Brazilian court rejects election challenge from outgoing President Jair Bolsonaro

So, both Trump and Bolsonaro challenged the election results through the courts, but failed to show any convincing evidence of fraud. Trump should have conceded to Biden after the formal voting of electors on December 14, 2020. Bolsonaro should have conceded to Lula da Silva after the federal election court rejected the baseless claim of fraud on November 23, 2022.

Instead of recognizing the importance of election integrity and national unity, they continued their attack on the election which they clearly lost. The legal system has caught up with both leaders.

This will be discussed in Part 2 of this posting.

Stay tuned,

Dave

Patriot Legal Fund

by Dave

Attention Patriotic Americans: Donald Trump needs you to pay for his legal fees. The Patriot Legal Fund is a charity solely devoted to paying Trump and others legal fees.

He has an incredible track record of losing trial cases, so this requires extra cash to fund the appeals. So, if your initial reaction is, you’ve got to be kidding, that’s exactly right.

His legal problems are something he brought on himself. And Trump has been skirting the law for decades. It took a long time for the law to catch up with him.

Recently, he tried to move the Stormy Daniels hush money case to federal court. So, trying to connect hush money payments to his official duties of president failed.

Trump will have his day (or really months) in court, to defend the accusations against him. He has already siphoned off millions of dollars from the Save America superpac to hire the best lawyers in the country to defend him.

No one should break the law, and pressure government officials to find roughly 11,000 votes to change the election results in Georgia. No one should take then and hide classified documents. Obstruction of justice is a real crime.

So, do not send money to this fund. Let him pay for his own legal defense.

Stay tuned,

Dave