The left's 'insurrection' big lie

 Stephen Krusier:

...

Rick wrote something yesterday about New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait wandering away from the hive mind to question the Colorado court's ruling. First, Rick explains the crux of the matter:

But "insurrectionist" is a legal term. And once the Supreme Court finds that Trump may have welcomed efforts on his behalf to change the results of the 2020 election but had no part in planning or participating in the efforts, the Colorado Supreme Court's case will fall apart and all other challenges to Trump's ballot access will fail.

I've said since January 6, 2021, that anyone who calls what happened that day an insurrection is an unhinged liar. Trump couldn't have participated in an insurrection because there was no insurrection. 

Rick quotes Chait as saying that the "weak point in this argument" has to do with this insurrection angle.

For those unfamiliar with Chait, he's a leftist's leftist. The fact that he's writing a takedown of the Colorado ruling in the thoroughly liberal New York Magazine is a real red flag indicating just how awful it is. 

There was an even more delicious defection on Thursday. 

My friend and colleague John Sexton writes over at HotAir that The Washington Post editorial board has joined the naysayers: 

People (including our own Ed Morrissey) have been saying this since the decision appeared Tuesday but I’m still a bit surprised to see the Washington Post‘s editorial board making the same case. After laying out the basis of the Colorado decision under the 14th Amendment, the board points out “the law is not so clear.” The board argues that section 3 of the Amendment should probably apply to the president (which is what the Colorado Supreme Court found) but says that doesn’t really matter unless you’ve also concluded that President Trump did in fact commit insurrection in connection with Jan. 6. And on that point, the Colorado court is way out on a limb.

WaPo is home to some of the most vitriolic, unbalanced Trump screeds on Earth, and has been since 2016. I read its Opinion section every day and can assure you that the editorial board is not mentally balanced when it comes to anything having to do with him. 

This is, in the words of WaPo's least favorite American politician, "YUUUUGE." Stay tuned to see if The New York Times has a moment of clarity anytime soon.

While it is impossible to know how the Supreme Court will rule on anything, it will be stunning if it doesn't quickly throw the Colorado court's ruling on the trash heap of irresponsible jurisprudence. 

What happened in Colorado is, of course, the clearest sign of the Democrats' desperation yet. They're rolling into an election year with an incumbent president who is less popular than chronic diarrhea. Even if their plan to get Trump off the ballot works, Biden would probably lose to whichever Republican wins the nomination instead. He's not even Ramaswamy-proof at this point.

...

I have been saying for some time that what happened on January 6 was not in any way an insurrection.  I think the left has been trying to describe a minor demonstration as an insurrection as a reflection of their Trump hatred and a way to try to shut people up about what was done to get a boob like Biden elected.  The left's insurrection lie and the Colorado Democrat's opinion are another reflection of the Trump derangement syndrome.  The Dems have had an irrational hatred of Trump for a long time and it is not clear that they will ever get over it.  All you have to do is look at the record of Trump's economy vs, Biden's to know Trump did a much better job.  And then there are all the wars that have sprung up on Biden's watch after his irresponsible Afghan bug-out.

See also:

Tucker Slams Colorado Court Decision to Remove Trump From Primary Ballot as 'The Actual End of Democracy'

And:

 Colorado Supreme Court makes Trump victory inevitable and necessary

And:

 2020 Election Fraud and the Courts

And:

 Turley: January 6 Wasn’t Insurrection or Rebellion — 14th Amendment Doesn’t Apply

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more