Posted on Dec 22, 2023
Jeff Clark: Trump not guilty of insurrection because 'he left office on time'
1.71K
49
23
6
6
0
Former United States Assistant Attorney General Jeff Clark argued that Donald Trump could not be guilty of an insurrection because his efforts to stay in office ultimately failed.
During a Thursday interview with right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, Clark disagreed with a Colorado Supreme Court decision that bars Trump from the state's primary ballot based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Clark said the 14th Amendment did not apply to Trump because the president and vice president were not explicitly named in the text.
"MSNBC, CNN, they try to portray it as some kind of technicality," he scoffed. "And the trial judge was willing to obey it, but not four out of the seven justices of the Colorado Supreme Court."
During a Thursday interview with right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, Clark disagreed with a Colorado Supreme Court decision that bars Trump from the state's primary ballot based on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Clark said the 14th Amendment did not apply to Trump because the president and vice president were not explicitly named in the text.
"MSNBC, CNN, they try to portray it as some kind of technicality," he scoffed. "And the trial judge was willing to obey it, but not four out of the seven justices of the Colorado Supreme Court."
Jeff Clark: Trump not guilty of insurrection because 'he left office on time'
Posted from rawstory.com
Donald Trump
Constitution
Crime
Election 2020
Posted 4 mo ago
Responses: 11
3
3
0
3
3
0
3
3
0
The Trial of Vice President Aaron Burr
Nathan Dorn discusses the trial of Vice President Aaron Burr. A three-volume set of the proceedings of the trial is part of the Law Library of Congress' rare...
V1 : https://youtu.be/vIUbGV595bk?si=vuYxpWlj4JkeepZi
1.) A former vice president was tried for treason for an insurrection plot
Aaron Burr was the highest-ranking official charged with treason, which some have invoked amid Trump probes
On Aug. 3, 1807, in Richmond, Va., Chief Justice John Marshall opened the trial of former vice president Aaron Burr. The charge: treason against the United States. Burr was accused of plotting an armed insurrection against the government
SOURCE : https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/09/26/aaron-burr-treason-insurrection-trump/
2.) Aaron Burr’s trial and the Constitution’s treason clause
September 1, 2022 by Scott Bomboy
It was on this day in 1807 that former Vice President Aaron Burr was acquitted of treason charges.
The trial was truly a “Trial of the Century” in its time and one of the first tests of the Constitution’s Treason Clause.
The clause reads as follows in Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.”
The Treason Clause was carefully worded to limit the charge to the most serious of crimes. Part of this was because of the application of treason charges, in a broader sense, in Great Britain.
The clause, as it was developed by James Wilson at the 1787 convention in Philadelphia, borrowed part of its wording from the English Statute of Treason, and it limited the ability of Congress to define treason. It also put a high burden of proof in place by requiring “the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act.”
Since the Constitution went into effect in 1789, treason charges have been brought fewer than 30 times. And Burr's landmark treason trial was one of the earliest, featuring some of the same people who were at the Constitutional Convention.
Working on Burr’s treason defense team in 1807 were Edmund Randolph and Luther Martin (as the lead attorney), both former constitutional delegates. President Thomas Jefferson directed the prosecution from the White House, with George Hay, and future attorney general William Wirt assisting Jefferson.
How Burr came to be arrested in Alabama in 1807 was a long story in itself, but the brief version is that Burr was rejected by his own party, the Democratic-Republicans, for opposing Jefferson in the 1800 presidential election runoff in the House, and then shunned by the Federalists and others for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel.
SOURCE : https://constitutioncenter.org/amp/blog/the-great-trial-that-tested-the-constitutions-treason-clause
3.) ArtIII.S3.C1.3 Trial of Aaron Burr
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
After authoring the Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Bollman,1 in which the Court ordered the discharge of two of Aaron Burr’s associates, Chief Justice John Marshall presided over the treason trial of Burr. His ruling2 denying a motion to introduce certain collateral evidence bearing on Burr’s activities is significant both for rendering the latter’s acquittal inevitable and for the qualifications and exceptions made to the Bollman decision.
In brief, Chief Justice Marshall’s ruling held that Burr, who had not been present at the assemblage on Blennerhassett’s Island, could be convicted of advising or procuring a levying of war only upon the testimony of two witnesses to his having procured the assemblage.
Because the operation had been covert, such testimony was naturally unobtainable. The net effect of Marshall’s pronouncements was to make it extremely difficult to convict one of levying war against the United States short of the conduct of or personal participation in actual hostilities
SOURCE : https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-3/ALDE_00013526/
1.) A former vice president was tried for treason for an insurrection plot
Aaron Burr was the highest-ranking official charged with treason, which some have invoked amid Trump probes
On Aug. 3, 1807, in Richmond, Va., Chief Justice John Marshall opened the trial of former vice president Aaron Burr. The charge: treason against the United States. Burr was accused of plotting an armed insurrection against the government
SOURCE : https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2022/09/26/aaron-burr-treason-insurrection-trump/
2.) Aaron Burr’s trial and the Constitution’s treason clause
September 1, 2022 by Scott Bomboy
It was on this day in 1807 that former Vice President Aaron Burr was acquitted of treason charges.
The trial was truly a “Trial of the Century” in its time and one of the first tests of the Constitution’s Treason Clause.
The clause reads as follows in Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution:
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.”
The Treason Clause was carefully worded to limit the charge to the most serious of crimes. Part of this was because of the application of treason charges, in a broader sense, in Great Britain.
The clause, as it was developed by James Wilson at the 1787 convention in Philadelphia, borrowed part of its wording from the English Statute of Treason, and it limited the ability of Congress to define treason. It also put a high burden of proof in place by requiring “the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act.”
Since the Constitution went into effect in 1789, treason charges have been brought fewer than 30 times. And Burr's landmark treason trial was one of the earliest, featuring some of the same people who were at the Constitutional Convention.
Working on Burr’s treason defense team in 1807 were Edmund Randolph and Luther Martin (as the lead attorney), both former constitutional delegates. President Thomas Jefferson directed the prosecution from the White House, with George Hay, and future attorney general William Wirt assisting Jefferson.
How Burr came to be arrested in Alabama in 1807 was a long story in itself, but the brief version is that Burr was rejected by his own party, the Democratic-Republicans, for opposing Jefferson in the 1800 presidential election runoff in the House, and then shunned by the Federalists and others for killing Alexander Hamilton in a duel.
SOURCE : https://constitutioncenter.org/amp/blog/the-great-trial-that-tested-the-constitutions-treason-clause
3.) ArtIII.S3.C1.3 Trial of Aaron Burr
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
After authoring the Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Bollman,1 in which the Court ordered the discharge of two of Aaron Burr’s associates, Chief Justice John Marshall presided over the treason trial of Burr. His ruling2 denying a motion to introduce certain collateral evidence bearing on Burr’s activities is significant both for rendering the latter’s acquittal inevitable and for the qualifications and exceptions made to the Bollman decision.
In brief, Chief Justice Marshall’s ruling held that Burr, who had not been present at the assemblage on Blennerhassett’s Island, could be convicted of advising or procuring a levying of war only upon the testimony of two witnesses to his having procured the assemblage.
Because the operation had been covert, such testimony was naturally unobtainable. The net effect of Marshall’s pronouncements was to make it extremely difficult to convict one of levying war against the United States short of the conduct of or personal participation in actual hostilities
SOURCE : https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-3/ALDE_00013526/
(3)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
CPL LaForest Gray - Earning the Respect of a Grandson of William Dawes, You have Done Deftly! A Scottish American "Goon" Some Call a "Patriot".
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google