• SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol outlined 17 specific findings on Monday in the executive summary of its final report. Here are the findings, with additional context.

      1. Beginning election night and continuing through Jan. 6 and thereafter, Donald Trump purposely disseminated false allegations of fraud related to the 2020 presidential election in order to aid his effort to overturn the election and for purposes of soliciting contributions. These false claims provoked his supporters to violence on Jan. 6.

      Annotation: This reflects the committee’s finding that Mr. Trump’s repeated false claims that the election was rigged had both a political and financial motive. During its second hearing, the panel introduced evidence that Trump supporters donated nearly $100 million to Mr. Trump’s so-called Election Defense Fund but that the money flowed instead into a super PAC the president had created. It was not just “the big lie,” the committee said. It was also “the big rip-off.”

      1. Knowing that he and his supporters had lost dozens of election lawsuits, and despite his own senior advisers refuting his election fraud claims and urging him to concede his election loss, Donald Trump refused to accept the lawful result of the 2020 election. Rather than honor his constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” President Trump instead plotted to overturn the election outcome.

      Annotation: Mr. Trump and his allies filed more than 60 lawsuits challenging the results of the election and lost all but one of them. Many of the suits, the committee determined, were brought even after some of Mr. Trump’s closest aides — including his campaign manager, Bill Stepien, and his attorney general, William P. Barr — told him that there was no fraud that could have changed the outcome of the race.

      1. Despite knowing that such an action would be illegal, and that no state had or would submit an altered electoral slate, Donald Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count electoral votes during Congress’s joint session on Jan. 6.
      • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        10 months ago

        I am aware of the facts, but again, there was no conviction of insurrection or anything related. Do you understand how the conviction is the important part, not what people claim?

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Conviction is not the important part, at all.

          The 14th Amendment was intended to keep former Confederates out of government. The people who wrote it had no intention of putting former Confederates on trial.

          • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Right, but 14A has only ever been used to disqualify two categories of people - public officials of the Confederacy and people convicted of an appropriate crime (such as the Espionage Act or charges related to Jan 6).

            Trump is neither, so he’s going to challenge being disqualified by anything less on due process grounds. 14A is vague on that. Which ends with SCOTUS essentially deciding what due process should be, likely by looking at how it’s been used historically.

          • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I agree, that amendment was directly talking about confederates who had done a known and agreed on insurrection.

              • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Jan 6th wasnt and insurrection, and trump would need to be convicted of an insurrection not just declared guilty by someone.

        • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Can you do a text search and find the word “conviction” in the amendment?

          Here’s the text:

          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.

          And, again, this has all gone through Congress. Trump did it. Everyone knows it. Even the Trumpists know it.

          • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            And that was in reference to a particular known and agreed on insurrection that occurred. I think they were called the “reconstruction amendments”, and the reason was to get things back going after the civil war.

            • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Yup, and the reason for guaranteeing the right to vote regardless of race was also a result of a specific insurrection that occurred.

              I think it’s perfectly fair to say that if someone tried to overthrow the US government, they’re not qualified to be running the US government.