16 Comments
User's avatar
Ben Woestenburg's avatar

The funny part about saying Trump wasn't convicted of "insurrection", well, neither was Jefferson Davis.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

I think that speaks as a reason why a conviction is not necessary for disqualification. Many (maybe most) Confederates weren't tried, but they were disqualified from holding office.

Expand full comment
Eli Redman's avatar

He needs to be removed. Period.

Expand full comment
Zachary Ellison's avatar

Insurrectionists off the ballot.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

I 100% agree.

Expand full comment
Zachary Ellison's avatar

Congress was unequivocal in its findings. Trump clearly incited an insurrection! We are going to beat back this scourge!

Expand full comment
Michael Docis's avatar

While I don't disagree with your points, I do believe that accuracy is important. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments - while collectively referred to as the Reconstruction Amendments - were not all passed on the same day in 1865 (not 1965). Only the 13th was ratified in 1865. The 14th wasn't even proposed until a year later in 1866, and then ratified in 1868.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

Hey Michael! You're right. I went back, and it looks like I misread my source. Thanks for that.

I've added a correction.

Expand full comment
Tina Stolberg's avatar

Slight misunderstanding as to “party politics.” The GOP are just as threatened by a Trump win. Both parties need the status quo maintained. Any outside party win is a threat.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

Ah I see your point. Yea, I think that's fair.

Expand full comment
Tina Stolberg's avatar

Yes! Totally but that’s not what this is. Singling out Trump to me without equal adherence to the law is party politics at its finest.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

I think we'll have to disagree here, then. But I should note, the CO case was brought by Republicans, so I don't think it can be simplified as party politics. Just my thought.

Expand full comment
Tina Stolberg's avatar

Do you really want the government to decide who gets on the ballot? Have you not witnessed enough state sponsored censorship and control over the past few years (or decades) to understand the ramifications of government arbitration of the truth? And what have you to say of the two-party stronghold on ballot placement or primary eligibility? Do you really think either party would give up it's electoral advantages without a fight?

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

It's not so much what I "want," but what I believe to be legal. I didn't want Trump on the ballot in 2016 or 2020 because I despise his politics, but I never stated I wanted him removed because that wouldn't be fair.

In 2024 however, he very clearly (in my mind) breached the law and should be held accountable.

Expand full comment
Tina Stolberg's avatar

The list of politicians (and other government officials) who need to be held accountable for breaking the law is so long, only a handful currently in government would be eligible to hold any office let alone president. Not defending him, but curious that this accountability begins and ends with Trump and Biden's crimes get a pass? If we're going to do this, let's do it fair and square and offer the American voters a clean slate.

Expand full comment
Joe Wrote's avatar

I don't think Biden's crimes should get a pass. I think he should be impeached and tried for many of the immoral and criminal things he's done.

But I don't think we should give one powerful politician (Trump) a pass just because other powerful individuals get a pass. In fact, I think if we want to hold the powerful to account, we need to start wherever we can.

Expand full comment