But the 14th amendment has been used. Those saying it is “uncharted” and “untested” are demonstrably wrong.
Saying that Trump hasn’t committed an insurrection because he hasn’t been tried for insurrection is poppycock. We all watched it. Hell, I predicted it, and many on this Board participated in the gathering of evidence prior to January 6th, 2021. Just because the laws of this land are so badly written that we don’t have a law against inciting a sack of the capitol doesn’t mean he didn’t incite a sack of the capitol.
I may have used it in this thread, but let’s discuss historical analogies: If Alexander the Great left a governor in charge of Samarkand, and, four years later, decided to replace said governor… and the governor incited a bunch of peasants to attack AtG’s counselor’s, do you think AtG would be warranted in doing nothing merely because he didn’t have an explicit law saying “don’t incite crowds to attack my counselors?” Tis to laugh.
There is no doubt that the Founding Fathers, one hundred years removed from Cromwell and the English Civil War, or the people (including the states!) who voted for the 14th amendment would declare Trump to be an insurrectionist and therefore ineligible to become President again. Many of these people would wonder why he isn’t swinging from the gallows already.
Claiming that the 14th amendment, part of the highest laws of this land, is somehow unenforceable precisely because one is worried that the opposition would misuse it, is subjecting oneself to terror tactics, the prima facie condition of a terror state.