Effort to Block GOP Reps From Running Because of Jan. 6 Goes Down to Withering Defeat

[mystery-ak]

Effort to Block GOP Reps From Running Because of Jan. 6 Goes Down to Withering Defeat
By Nick Arama | Apr 22, 2022 10:30 PM ET

Democrats are up a creek without a paddle as we head toward the midterms. They know that they are quite likely to get slaughtered badly. But it’s well deserved because of the horrible policies they’ve put forth, and the terrible job that Joe Biden has done.

So, they don’t have too many options. They’re trying the redistricting game in the hopes that they can steal some seats that way. They’re going to try to play the Jan. 6 committee for all its worth, in the hopes that they find things to hurt Republicans with, like the tape of Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

They’re also trying the gambit of trying to block out some Republicans by accusing them of being “insurrectionists” and filing cases to keep them off the ballot. The irony of that is that they’re claiming that the Republicans were behind efforts to overcome the election. Yet, it’s Democrats who are pre-emptively trying to keep Republicans off the ballot so the voters can’t vote for them. Talk about losing the plot.

The plaintiffs in the case, the group Free Speech for the People (more irony), are trying to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits elected officials from engaging in an insurrection or rebellion to knock Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) and state Rep. Mark Finchem (who’s running for Secretary of State) off the ballot in Arizona.

more
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/04/22/effort-to-block-gop-reps-from-running-because-of-jan-6-goes-down-to-withering-defeat-n554723

[Fishrrman]

"The plaintiffs in the case, the group Free Speech for the People (more irony), are trying to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits elected officials from engaging in an insurrection or rebellion"

I could be wrong, but...
... seems to me that part of Section 3 specifically includes a provision that it will be terminated by a 2/3 vote of the House and Senate. In other words, it empowered Congress to "cancel it" by a vote.

... Which the Congress subsequently did in 1875.
So... that portion of the Fourteenth Amendment is moot and no longer in effect.

[libertybele]

We'll see what the DEMS come up with next. 

[Hoodat]

"The plaintiffs in the case, the group Free Speech for the People (more irony), are trying to use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits elected officials from engaging in an insurrection or rebellion"

I could be wrong, but...
... seems to me that part of Section 3 specifically includes a provision that it will be terminated by a 2/3 vote of the House and Senate. In other words, it empowered Congress to "cancel it" by a vote.

... Which the Congress subsequently did in 1875.
So... that portion of the Fourteenth Amendment is moot and no longer in effect.

Assuming that it is still in effect, it means that those accused are not able to hold office now.  It says nothing about them running for office.  Thus, if the accused are not disqualified from holding office now, then they are not disqualified from running for re-election.

The abject stupidity of the Democrats on this one is quite revealing.

[LMAO]

It looks to me like the Democrats are trying to criminalize different viewpoints on the accuracy of the 2020 presidential election

It is not a criminal act to believe the 2020 election was stolen

[Smokin Joe]

We'll see what the DEMS come up with next. 

If nothing else, totalitarians are a creative lot. Their shysters prosper.