The Rest Of The Fourteenth

Lately we've heard a lot about the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, but most of it has dealt only with one of its clauses (14.3). I think it's time to look at the other four clauses (14.1, 14.2, 14.4, and 14.5) to see how they may apply to the issue of Donald Trump's candidacy for a second term as US President.

[You can find the full text of the amendment here, along with some pertinent references - https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-14/]

Section 1 Rights

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

As a natural born US citizen, Mr. Trump is eligible to be US President. At issue is whether he is disqualified to hold that office under clause 14.3 of the subject amendment. I believe the failure to establish such disqualification via due process of law violates both clause 14.3 itself and clause 14.1, making such putative disqualification invalid.

Section 2 Apportionment of Representation

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

I believe that States which deny their residents the right to vote for Mr. Trump are in violation of this clause, and their representation in Congress should be appropriately reduced. Take note the right to vote referenced in this clause is not affected by the events of January 6, 2021, since the vast majority of voters had nothing to do with that alleged rebellion or any other crime.

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.

Note this clause refers only to disqualification to HOLD office, not to RUN for office. And since clause 14.1 does not allow States to abridge privileges (such as running for or holding office), I believe only Congress has the ability to disqualify a candidate via this clause or to certify their electors and their subsequent election.

Section 4 Public Debt

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

I do not believe this clause applies to the current discussion.

Section 5 Enforcement

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I believe this clause gives the US Congress and ONLY Congress the power to enforce this article, making the recent (and possible future) actions of State Attorneys General and other actors invalid.

At this point, it's worthwhile to mention several other States may be contemplating similar denial and abridgement of the rights and privileges of Mr. Trump and millions of other US citizens. You can find such a claim here:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/co-me-just-start-trump-ballot-blocking-these-20-states-have-suits-progress

I believe we the electorate should demand an investigation whether or not such lawsuits are the result of collusion among several parties to illegally deny or abridge our electoral rights and privileges, who such parties might be, and whether or not prosecuting them under the RICO Statues (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68) is warranted.

Or are such prosecutions now confined to abortion protesters and their organizations?

Update - 1/4/2024

I believe the above interpretation validates the allegedly "debunked" theory that legislatures (and ONLY the legislatures) of the States are constitutionally empowered to prescribe The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections and of appointing a Number of Electors (as specified in Article 1, Section 4, para. 1 and Article 2, Section 1, para. 2 of our Constitution). There is a compelling logic for assigning such authority TO THE PEOPLE and their elected legislatures and NOT allowing other parties to meddle in such matters.

Update - 2/9/2024

Note well that Representative Gaetz made most of the same arguments I did in my original 12/31/2023 blog post:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rep-matt-gaetz-introduces-resolution-saying-trump-didnt-engage-insurrection

Nice to know that at least one person in Congress has actually READ the US Constitution. It would be even nicer if the rest of them and the so-called legal experts would do the same.

By the way, Gaetz's bill either will result in a signed resolution or it won't. Time to start debating the ultimate impact of both outcomes. I doubt it could get through the Senate.

Is Ohio Really A State ???

I am an Ohio native, born and raised here, and I currently reside in Ohio. Like almost all of my neighbors, I believed that Ohio was admitted to the United States as the 17th State in 1803.

But I was wrong.

As this essay reveals, due to a Congressional screw up Ohio wasn't actually admitted (retroactively) to the Union until 1953:

https://www.athensnews.com/opinion/columns/the_view_from_mudsock_heights/the-improbable-story-of-how-in-living-memory-ohio-became-a-state/article_a87a3a7c-9ebd-11e6-bf18-076977e14ba3.html

But is that actually the case?

The US Constitution gives Congress the authority to admit new states to the Union:

Article 4, Section 3

1. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; ...

But it does NOT give Congress the authority to pass RETROACTIVE legislation:

Article 1, Section 9

3. No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Here we have the makings of a REAL constitutional crisis. Consider the following questions (and there may be more):

• Does the "retroactive" aspect of the 1953 legislation negate the entire act? If it does, Ohio is not a US State.
• If any of those eight Presidents were not truly eligible to hold the office, what is the status of laws and executive actions they authorized? (Same applies to votes of the possibly ineligible Representatives and Senators and rulings of Justices.)
• Were any OTHER "States" also improperly "admitted" to the Union?
• What if Ohio and any other applicable "State" now decides it does not WANT to join the Union? Can they be compelled to do so?
• Considering the current mess our three branches of government have put us in lately and (I hate to say it) the quality of the people now running them, how do you think they would deal with such a mess?

And should you think all this is no big deal, please ask yourself why so many people want to use a provision of our Constitution to disqualify President Trump from running again but choose to ignore other provisions they consider to be invalid, inconsequential, or inconvenient.

Smoke On The Water

In a former life, I used to travel up and down the highway which runs along the north shore of Lac Leman in Switzerland, from Lausanne to Montreux and beyond. Along the way I'd pass the site where the fire occurred which is immortalized in the rock song "Smoke on the Water" by Deep Purple:

https://youtu.be/zUwEIt9ez7M

For some reason, the US now plans to send a naval "coalition of the willing" to protect the Red Sea from what we consider to be pirates, mainly from Yemen. This mission also will involve smoke on the water, this time in the Middle East.

There are several reasons why this may be no easy task, and you can read about them here:

https://www.unz.com/article/the-u-s-navy-is-unprepared-for-a-prolonged-war-with-yemen/

You might want to ask WHY we would undertake such a thing WITHOUT a declaration of war or even a clear understanding of why this mission is necessary. I suspect it has a lot to do with the possibility of another "Gulf of Tonkin" resolution, this time in support of the pending war with Iran.

For many of us, this is mainly academic now, but wait until the Houthis sink one or more of our large ships (e.g., an aircraft carrier). Then the shit really will hit the fan, and the ol' national debt will zoom upward into the stratosphere.

Can we afford more wars? According to those who never went to war themselves, the answer is yes. But those of us who HAVE been deployed will tell you the answer is NO ... especially when the whole thing is avoidable and could be stopped in a New York minute if our "leaders" had enough backbone and intelligence.

MiniNukes For Ukraine ???

Here is an interesting, lucrative proposal:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rolls-royce-may-build-mini-nuke-plants-ukraine

And here is a cartoon which may help to sell it:

I like Mr. Fish, but he's way off base here. We're not going to turn into Venus any time soon.

As long as there is an independent nation-state known as Russia, Ukraine won't be entering NATO (and probably not the EU). So giving them nuke plants, which possess and/or produce things you need to make nuclear bombs (e.g., plutonium) may not happen either.

But the Rolls-Royce idea is certainly a good way to stick the EU with the development costs for a technology which no doubt eventually will be used somewhere else.

Just remember, every nuke plant is a source of forever mixed waste and a disaster waiting to happen. There are only two possible solutions to the problem(s) this project allegedly will solve:

1. use less energy, and
2. cull the human population ... A LOT.

Since both already are being rapidly implemented, the REAL reason behind the SMR concept probably is to provide power for the huge plantations and mega-factories the ultra-rich (e.g., Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg) are building for themselves.

Cartoons For Today - 12/18/2023

 From the net:

This particular stink will be hard to wash off.

The Obama Movie

I accidentally started to watch the Obama movie the other day ... you know, this one:

https://joehoft.com/breaking-obama-come-out-with-first-movie-about-end-of-times-director-says-obama-scared-the-f-out-of-me/

As soon as I saw his name I turned it off. Eight plus years of his crap has been more than enough for me; I don't need any more.

I have long compared him to the ad-Dajjal, and others also have related him to the Antichrist:

https://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2012/11/is-obama-antichrist-pastor-in-texas.html

Whatever the case, I do not believe he has my best interests in mind ... but you can decide for yourself.

And if you happen to watch his movie, tell me what you think. I'd like to know. It always a good idea to keep an eye on your enemy.

Debt Trapping

Here is an interesting anti-China screed:

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/debt-trap-diplomacy-which-developed-countries-are-most-indebted-china

If you've read John Perkins' book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, you know the West has been doing this for decades. The biggest difference is that the Chinese don't bomb your country and kill your leaders if they refuse to take the bait.

The Death Of Medicine

Medical schools are shifting from "medical expertise" to woke BS:

https://jonathanturley.org/2023/12/12/canadian-medical-schools-encouraged-to-shift-from-medical-expertise-to-anti-racism-and-social-justice-training/

Considering their pitiful performance during the plandemic, they might as well. It doesn't take much expertise to follow a cookbook written by someone like Fauci, especially if you're shielded from liability.

And thanks to that moron Obama ad-Dajjal, no one's going to the doctor anyway:

https://x.com/zerohedge/status/1734716040863473779?s=20

Sheesh !!!

The Dictator Strikes Again

"Joe Biden" and his minions continue to circumvent our Constitution, our Congress, and the will of the People:

https://www.azerbaycan24.com/en/us-skips-congressional-review-to-approve-emergency-sale-of-tank-shells-to-israel/

The only emergency here is the urgent need to stop Israel's genocidal massacre of Palestinians. The rest of the world can see that, why can't OUR "leaders"?

MSM Interference

Please watch this video "interview":

https://x.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1732771663329079393?s=20

I think it is fair to say the person "interviewing" this candidate did more to INTERFERE with his message than to allow him access to free speech. Don't you agree?

The episode revealed in this video shows how they're now taking it to another level, by directly censoring (bleeping out) everything the candidate has to say:

https://x.com/adamscrabble/status/1732974839810416666?s=20

I don't agree with everything Vivek has to say, but I don't need MSM censorship to assist me in deciding who deserves my vote. Do you?

Our Depraved Culture

Speaker of the House Johnson says the US is depraved and will be judged by G-d:

https://www.azerbaycan24.com/en/gays-in-schools-a-sign-of-looming-doomsday-us-house-speaker/

I couldn't agree more.

On the other hand, Jesus didn't even mention homosexuality so it's difficult to know how He felt about it.

He did; however, forgive the sinners He encountered, urging them to repent and sin no more; so I assume His stance toward gays and lesbians would be something along those lines.

Things That Make You Go Hmmm ...

From the web:

(1) However, Republicans remained unconvinced, blocking the spending package in the Senate, with the final vote being 49 in favor and 51 against. The measure was opposed by all GOP lawmakers, as well as independent Senator Bernie Sanders, who normally votes with Democrats, but this time expressed concerns about Israel’s military strategy in the conflict with Hamas. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer also voted “no” in order to have a chance to reintroduce the package later.

Alternatively, Schumer could have voted "yes" and VP Harris could have broken the tie, passing the bill. I think he's a better actor than his cousin Amy, and I doubt he gives a damn about you and me.

(2) 

Apparently they like the lies and want to protect the liars. A nation that hates itself this much cannot survive.

(3) 

Mr. Fish may offend some, but I think he's the greatest political cartoonist alive today.

BiBi BS

Here is an informative interview with Scott Horton of Antiwar.com explaining how the PM of Israel has used Hamas to ensure the Palestinians will NEVER have their own country:

https://x.com/Antiwarcom/status/1731818401016971461?s=20

I have listened to Scott for over a decade, and he knows his stuff.

Things Dictators Do

According to this report, "Joe Biden" and his henchmen have committed us to ditching coal as an energy source:

https://www.azerbaycan24.com/en/us-commits-to-ditching-coal/

How can THEY commit US to such a thing? Where in our Constitution does it give them such authority? Isn't such unilateral action the kind of thing a DICTATOR would do?

In contrast, President Trump was constitutionally authorized to be Commander-in-Chief AND to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed". But now they want to put him in jail for exercising those powers by questioning the results of the 2020 election. In reality, he had the authority to declare a state of emergency, to suspend what appears to have been a fraudulent election, and to arrest all the coup plotters.

But he didn't. And now those who appear to have conducted the coup are in charge.

Ain't that a fine kettle of fish?

[By the way, there is more evidence of electoral fraud than there was of Iraqi or Iranian WMDs, but you don't care about that, do you?]

And it also appears that King Charles of Great Britain is making similar proclamations:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/king-charles-delivers-highly-politicised-speech-support-collectivist-net-zero-project

I don't think even HE has such legal powers.

If carried out, such schemes will have (at least) two major impacts:

1. they will destroy nation-states, and
2. they will kill a substantial fraction of humanity.

If you're like me, I doubt you authorized any of THAT, either.

Whom Are YOU Gonna Believe ???

I stumbled upon an essay about David Koresh today ... you know, the guy who led many of the Branch Davidians to their deaths in Waco, TX at the hands of the US government.

The essay said he was a polygamist who married several young girls, and that he thought doing so was OK because it reminded him of things in the Bible.

Source - https://libertarianinstitute.org/blog/techno-agorist-35-waco-pt-1-of-3-the-sinful-messiah/

Then I recalled the recent words of Bibi Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel ... you know, the guy who told modern day Israelis to kill the Palestinians because he read something like that in the Bible:

“You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. 1 Samuel 15:3 'Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass'," Netanyahu said.

Source - https://www.livemint.com/news/world/pm-netanyahu-invokes-amalek-theory-to-justify-gaza-killings-what-is-this-hebrew-bible-nation-11698555324918.html

Has G-d ever told you to kill anyone? He never told ME that.

Do you think G-d actually speaks to PM Netanyahu? I don't.

But even if He does, should WE help Israel kill anyone? I don't think we should. In THIS country, if someone says G-d told them to kill their neighbors, we put them in jail or a mental health facility, right? AND we take away their weapons. We don't give them billions of dollars worth of highly lethal weapons on top of what they already have.

On the other hand, if we should all agree that G-d WANTS us to help Israel kill people, we ought to ask WHY He needs our help and why He's not speaking DIRECTLY to each and every one of us.

I don't know about you, but I believe such a request (or command if you prefer) ought to come DIRECTLY from the REAL "Big Guy", not from someone claiming to speak for Him.

Wouldn't you agree?