Attention Required! | Cloudflare

LTC Eric Udouj MSG Lonnie Averkamp LTC (Join to see) Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen Lt Col Charlie Brown 1LT Voyle Smith CPT Sara Galvin SSG Michael Noll MSG Izy Veguillacruz MSG (Join to see) CSM Charles Hayden SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM SGT Tiffanie G. SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT (Join to see) SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth CW5 Jack Cardwell SPC Douglas Bolton CPL Douglas Chrysler MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana YES...straight forward to me... who wants a wanna-be dictator for POTUS... he deserves justice that should lead to incarceration.

Speaking as someone who is not a pro Trump or Biden person here. This is the text of the Article, section 3:

"Section 3. 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."

Let's break it down...
What is Trump running for? - President
Is that included in the article? - No
Does a President "hold an office (civil or military)" and "has 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"? - No, the President is not defined as an "officer" of the United States. Those are appointed positions, not elected, as indicated in Article II, Section 2 of the same Constitution. If that isn't clear enough, ask why the position of "President" wasn't specifically identified in the 14th Amendment?

So that in itself negates the use of the 14th Amendment to restrict Trump from being on the CO ballot. But for argument's sake, let's say it can...

There are far too many posters out there who are clearly anti-Trump, that make the claim that the Amendment says nothing about whether there is a burden of proof, confirmed through a conviction in court. In their opinion (let's emphasize that word), Trump incited an insurrection (which has officially been classified as a riot... But again, argument's sake). I'm not sure how someone saying "come march to the Capitol Peacefully and Patriotically," with subsequent tweets to stop any violence can be categorized as inciting an insurrection. Using that logic, it seems to me we can deny a lot of currently elected officials and candidates from running for office based on their actions and our opinions. I want a clear and distinct trial and conviction, consistent with an actual insurrection/rebellion before I will agree to removing someone from office or denying any candidate from running. But for those who are still not convinced, I would advise them to switch out the name Trump with Clinton, Biden, Obama (pick one) and ask themselves honestly, would that change their opinion? I bet it would, but most will never admit that. As much as I would like to see Trump move on, this is not the right way to do it, it will invite more of it in the future, and it will hurt this country profoundly.