Biden: Supreme Court Packing
If Joe Biden has ever had a strong incentive to add more seats to the Supreme Court, the recent Supreme Court decision against Joe Biden’s loan forgiveness program is just that incentive. Let’s explore.
Legal Merit and Standing
The Supreme Court is, at this point, simply going through the motions. This once seemingly impartial entity is simply pretending to be a fair and just body, but is now an almost completely Republican owned and partisan entity targeting the Democrats (and Democracy) at every turn. It can do this because of the way the court is now packed across party lines, in a highly partisan way.
However, it’s easy for these Republican Justices to pretend to use legal jurisprudence in the guise of their fully partisan agenda. It’s sickening and disheartening that people who have been put in a significant position of supposedly unbiased power in the United States can become yet another pawn of biased politics; wielding their judicial power like a weapon and targeting it firmly against the opposing political party and ultimately using their power against the very American people they swore to protect. That’s not justice.
If anyone has weaponized anything, it’s Donald Trump. With his court packing of the Supreme Court, this is exactly where the United States firmly sits. The Republicans have now firmly weaponized the Supreme Court against the Democrats and, more importantly, against the American people. It’s a sickening turn of events. It also signifies, once again, the destruction of the American people, America’s Democracy and the further erosion of America’s constitution.
Democrat Party
I’m not a Democrat by any stretch. I am also not a Republican. I’m a non-partisan writer who sits somewhere in the middle. I also don’t identify with either of these current two political parties. I don’t like how either of these two entities operate; neither of which actually perform their services on behalf of the American people for which they were elected. Both parties certainly make bold claims about what they are doing is “for the American people”, but the reality is, they do not and they haven’t worked for the betterment of America in a very, very long time.
With the above said, I can sniff out partisan politic antics instantly. This recent Supreme Court ruling against Biden’s loan forgiveness has the guise of seeming legit and above board, but underneath that legal facade, this SCOTUS ruling is 100% driven by partisan politics and is about as far against American betterment as one can get.
The Democrats don’t deserve to be harangued by Republicans any more than Republicans deserve to be harangued by Democrats. However, Republicans have been much more actively on the offensive against the Democrats (and ultimately against America) than vice versa. The Democrats have mostly been attempting to stay out of the Republican’s childish fray. Yet, the Republicans constantly keep pushing the Democrat-bad buttons, with Fox News Network taking this Republican button pushing to entirely unnecessary extremes.
Being nasty and vile towards anyone else is not what politics is about. It’s not what America is about. Yet, here we have supposedly conservative Christians taking this “nasty game” as far as they possibly can. How can ANYONE proclaim to be a conservative Christian and hold these nasty, vile and disgusting behaviors dear? Disgusting.
Both parties have lost sight of the true agenda of elected (and appointed) representatives. Instead of spending inordinate amounts of time in-fighting with one another, that time could be better spent actually producing legitimate, workable fixes for America, America’s Economy and the American people. Instead, we have the SCOTUS, who incidentally should have even declined to accept this case entirely, is instead poking their mostly Republican heads into a case were they have no business… and worse, making biased political statements with their actions.
Biden’s Supreme Court Revision
It’s time for Joe Biden to wake up. He can’t afford to sit idly by while Republicans run roughshod all over America, the American people and America’s constitution. Instead, Biden has a way to bring balance back to the Supreme Court. I’m not saying that the Supreme Court will be in any way fixed by Biden packing this court. Oh, no no no. That will take much more effort and changes. However, giving equal balance back to both liberals and conservatives alike on this court will at least make this court’s rulings much more fair and take this now unfair balance of power back out of the hands of the now Republican packed Supreme Court.
Right now, the court has 9 justices. However, there are 13 Federal circuit courts that sit directly under the Supreme Court. At the time when 9 justices were implemented, there were 9 circuit courts. This meant there was 1 justice for every circuit court. Since the circuit courts have increased to 13, our justices are now out of alignment against the circuit courts. This means that to put the SCOTUS back into balance against our now 13 circuit courts, 4 more justices must be added to the Supreme Court.
If Joe Biden pushes to have 4 new justices added to this court, he may even choose to nominate these justices, making the balance of the court change to 6 Republicans and 7 Democrats. That could possibly bring some semblance of balance back to the court, but also possibly push it back over to the Democrats. That’s a small price to pay to get this court out of its current heavy Republican imbalance. One extra Democrat justice is way more balanced than the current 3 extra Republican justices.
But the Court Isn’t Partisan?
No court should be partisan or hold with any partisan politics. Yet, we know that every person in the United States has their own opinions and must be allowed to vote in elections. This means that, yes, even these Supreme Court Justices have their own political affiliations… if even just at the moment of entering the ballot booth. Unfortunately as humans, we are fallible and subject to subjective personal whims. Sometimes those whims are of our own making and sometimes those whims are of others making.
Unfortunately, because these justices are appointed by politically affiliated and motivated Presidents, this places a political burden on top of the person being appointed to that judicial role. Meaning, if a Democrat President appoints a Justice, this likely means that that appointed person is also of a Democrat leaning persuasion and vice versa with the Republicans and conservatism. It may further mean that the Justice may feel the need to repay that appointment over time. This further means that as this person rules in their position as Justice, their political persuasion is likely to become part of that thought process when producing judicial opinions; thought processes that might actually help out the person who appointed that Justice to the bench.
Joe Biden’s Debt Absolution
I would be remiss by not bringing up this point. Some have argued that Joe Biden, as President, didn’t (and doesn’t) have the authority to forgive student loans in that large of a quantity; that the amount of money being forgiven by the government should have needed Congressional approval.
I won’t get into the nitty-gritty of this argument here because that’s an argument that cannot be decided by an independent blog. Suffice it to say, however, that as President of the United States, the person elected to this position has tremendous power over the American people. Whether that extends to forgiving student loans or other types of debt relief, that will have to be up to the courts to decide.
Clearly, though, if Franklin D. Roosevelt was given the broad authority to implement his “New Deal” to reinvigorate the then flagging economy, then Joe Biden should have had similar authority to implement his “Student Loan Debt Relief” program for the same reason amidst COVID. Let’s move on.
Re-balancing The Court
It’s clear that without a rebalance of the Supreme Court that this so-called conservative court will continue to run roughshod all over the United States of America and America’s Constitution. If we’re trying to heal this partisan divide, then the only way to do this is through bringing balance back to this court.
Thus, the only way forward is then by increasing the number of seats by 4. This increase also makes more sense when looking at the now 13 Federal Circuit courts that exist just below the Supreme Court. As stated above, increasing the number of SCOTUS seats to 13 would be firmly in-line with the current number compared to the 9 justices we was had when there were only 9 circuit courts. One Justice should exist for every circuit court that exists. That also means expanding the SCOTUS each time a new circuit court opens.
Biden must seriously consider rebalancing the court so that four new Justices are added to offset the conservative imbalance now held on this court. The only way the American people can be properly served is if the balance of conservative justices and liberal justices is near equal. This way, opinions written (even if of a specific political persuasion) cannot imbalance justice in the favor of one side or the other.
Taking Bias Out of the Justices
This is actually impossible. There is no way to do this short of forcing Justices to give up their ability to vote after they take their oath as Justice; that and having nominations come from anonymous sources, not the President. When Justices can’t vote in elections they shouldn’t be swayed by political actors. Unfortunately, that’s never likely to fly with the Justices. Even then, they’ll have spouses and children who can vote and who can sway the thoughts and minds of these Justices at home.
Political influence is everywhere. Even were Justices to give up their right to vote simply to take their seat as Justice, that wouldn’t remove years of ingrained political persuasion before they ever took their seat. It also won’t remove outside influences from those nearest to these Justices. It also won’t remove undue influence by those in political power near to the SCOTUS, including the President, Vice President and Congress.
Further Court Balance
One idea that clearly needs to be implemented is term limits. If four additional seats are added to the bench, these new seats should come without lifetime appointment. In fact, all of the current seats’ lifetime appointments should end after the next person is appointed. Lifetime appointments for the Supreme Court need to end completely.
How long should Justices be allowed to serve? They should be allowed to serve no longer than 10 years or until they are aged 65. If a Justice is appointed to a seat and they are aged 58, they will only have until age 65 to serve. After that, forced retirement and a new appointment is required.
More than this, every four years each Justice (including the Chief Justice) must be brought before Congress for a reconfirmation hearing. This allows Congress to vacate a Justice seat should the need arise. If a specific Justice has made rulings in inappropriate ways and/or having taken inappropriate largesse, having reconfirmation hearings every four years would allow Congress to vacate that seat, giving better checks and balances over inappropriate situations.
Once a seat is vacated, it is on the President to find and appoint a new person. If a Justice is forcibly vacated from their seat, they are no longer allowed to hold a seat on the Supreme Court Justice again nor serve in any other Federal court. They may join lower non-federal courts as a judge, but may no longer hold other federal judicial roles. Once removed, it’s permanent removal from all federal judicial positions. This is effectively federal disbarment for judges.
Such reconfirmation hearings should further entice the current Chief Justice to both police and take internal action against inappropriate Justices instead of waiting for Congress to take action. If Congress is forced to vacate that seat, that person cannot serve nor be appointed to work in the Federal judicial system again.
Such actions above may seem punitive, but that’s clearly what’s needed. Right now, only the Supreme Court can police and punish itself and clearly that is not happening. Leaving it up to people to police themselves clearly means no policing at all. This means that, as has been shown, the SCOTUS is unwilling to take action against its own. This same goes for Congress as Congress is also unwilling to take action against their own (an article for another day).
Fair and Balanced Court
Bringing all of these changes to the SCOTUS means a much more fair and balanced court. If there are ramifications to wrongdoing, making the wrong choices or, indeed, taking actions of malicious intent, there should be severe consequences.
Today, there are no consequences. It means that enterprising hackers can hack this court and use its lack of governance against it. This is exactly what’s going on right now. Hackers have infiltrated this court and are using the lack of checks and balances, lifetime appointments in coupling with this court’s lack of internal governance against not only the court, but against the American people. This was not intended by the framers of the Constitution.
The Constitution intended and “trusted” for appointees to be of highly upstanding, moral and ethical fiber in taking on these roles. Unfortunately, it didn’t foresee people of ill intent and of questionable morality and ethics to be appointed to these roles. A person who is willing to sit in a grey area of intent can subvert and use the court’s “trust” against it, particularly when there are multiple Justices colluding in this nefarious role. Worse, the court’s highly lax internal punishment structures when combined with lifetime appointments makes it ripe for this kind of abuse. In other words, it only takes one person of criminal intent to become a Justice on that court and the United States can crumble from within.
Again, none of this was intended, nor foresaw by the framers of the Constitution. Yet, here we are and here we sit. Court reform is in order and the above is a good, solid way of getting this ball rolling. Unfortunately, the current lifetime appointees seem guaranteed in their roles. However, eventually they will retire, relinquishing their seat. Until then, adding four more seats all serving without lifetime appointments and with forced reconfirmation every four years ensures that at least the newest seat-holders should remain of upstanding moral and ethical fiber, else their seat can be vacated and reassigned to someone who is willing to uphold the highest ethics and values.
↩︎
Is Trump Guilty or Not?
I know there’s a lot of speculation, particularly since the January 6th Select Committee Hearings. Let’s explore what might make Trump guilty of something and what that something might be.
Electoral College Vote
To begin to understand how the January 6th riots became a reality, we must jump back in time to the Trump “Save America Rally” at the Ellipse the morning of the riots. However, before we discuss the content in this rally, let’s talk about what it takes to put together such a rally. More than this, why was January 6th chosen for this specific rally in the first place?
Election Lost
We all should now know and understand that Trump lost the 2020 election. We actually even knew it long before January 6th, but Donald Trump is a major sore loser. He simply cannot stand to lose. Thus, to avoid having to admit defeat, he chose to lie and claim the election was stolen. This lie is ultimately how the Save America Rally began.
Invitations to this rally began to circulate perhaps weeks before the actual event. In fact, I saw a tweet requesting attendance to the event on January 2nd, before the event from Donald Trump’s now suspended Twitter account. I even replied to a tweet in this stream.
More than this, this invitation was also sent to extremist groups known for violence, such as The Proud Boys, the Oathkeepers and others. Donald Trump was well aware of whom were being invited to the Rally. Of course, he didn’t know which groups might show because it wasn’t an RSVP thing, but he assumed at least some of these groups, if not all of them, would show… and show up, they did.
This is the precursor that must be understood to what later transpires at the “Save America Rally” the morning of January 6th at the Ellipse.
The Ellipse
The morning of the Ellipse began with a mostly RA RA session, but with some inciting rhetoric from both Trump and a bunch of Trump sycophants, including Rudy Giuliani. Trump, during his speech, included certain key phrases to work up the crowd and to specifically incite them to take action. Let’s read his closing words from that speech!
But I said, “Something’s wrong here.” Something’s really wrong. Can’t have happen. And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore. Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans for our movement, for our children and for our beloved country and I say this despite all that’s happened, the best is yet to come. So, we’re going to… we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give… the Democrats are hopeless, they’re never voting for anything, not even one vote… but we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So, let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I want to thank you all, God bless you and God Bless America.
Thank you all for being here, this is incredible, thank you all very much.
— Former President Donald Trump at the Ellipse on January 6th
Donald Trump was, after this speech concluded, advised by his team not to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue and he took that advice and did not march along side the crowd. Instead, they did so of their own accord, but at Donald Trump’s prompting.
Let’s take a few more words of this apart. For example, “the bold ones”. For this he is specifically referring to those like The Proud Boys and The Oathkeepers. He didn’t mention them by name, but he knew such “bold” groups were in attendance. He could see them in the crowd from the podium. For “the weak ones”, he’s trying to incite the people who don’t normally perform violent acts to step up and “take back our country”. For “take back our country”, that rhetoric is specific to the “Stop the Steal” lie discussed below.
Because Trump and his followers believe the election was stolen, he wanted everyone at that rally to “take back the country” from those who have been labeled as “thieves”… when, in fact, it was Trump who was the thief and who, at the time, was attempting to dismantle Democracy and the Constitution and illegally take a position from the duly elected candidate, Joe Biden and harm the rest of America by setting aflame the fabric of Democracy.
“Fight Like Hell”
A lot of people claim that these words are innocent. They aren’t. They’re actually fighting words. Let’s understand fighting words.
Violent actions began almost immediately (within a few minutes) after this speech concluded at the Capitol… as it was stated by Trump where “fight like hell” needed to occur. Once the people had walked down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol, all hell broke loose and the violence began. In this definition above, it says “incite an immediate breach of the peace”. How quickly “immediate” must be is a matter of debate, but I’d say it also matters based on its context… context that Trump supplied in his speech. “We’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue… we’re going to try and give them (the weak Republicans) the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
Trump told the crowd exactly what to do, where to do it and when to do it… and then followed through.
Once the rioting began, there were 187 minutes of continuous rioting that remained until Donald Trump broke his silence and requested the rioters to leave the Capitol grounds. However, by that time, the police may have been getting the crowds under control, no thanks to the President’s 187 minutes of inaction and silence.
It’s not just the “fight like hell” words, though. It’s all of the subtext in his and other people’s speech both before and after and the Save America Rally. It’s even in the name of the rally, “Save America” as though America needed saving. Saving from what exactly? The peaceful transition from one president to the next.
Stop the Steal
Again, we must step back in time to understand where this rally began and why. The “Save America Rally” wasn’t a one-off rally that appeared out of nowhere without context. No. It began as part of the “Stop the Steal” campaign that Trump initiated.
As we all know, Trump rejected (at the time in 2020) the idea that he had lost the election. In fact, he so rejected the notion that he lost the election, he fabricated all sorts of scenarios as to why it cannot be possible. From bad voting machines, to dead people voting, to faked ballots, to voting fraud, to election rigging on the part of the Democrats. He even attempted to rig the election himself in his favor by trying to replace the legitimate Electors with a set of his own choosing, Electors that would be faithful to Donald, not to Democracy.
Anything Donald could wrap his little greedy paws around, he’d use as a possible reason for Biden having won illegitimately. This included many, many failed lawsuits and paying for independent third party auditors to re-audit ballots in some key states. None of this worked… not the lawsuits, not the audits and definitely not his lies. The states that were accused of “rigging” or “cheating” have since audited and re-audited each and every vote cast many times to prove Biden legitimately won the election.
All of this was to no avail. Nothing has convinced Donald Trump that he has lost the 2020 election. As of this article’s date, Donald Trump is still attempting to perpetuate this lie.
No, the Save America Rally was intended for one singular purpose: to storm Capitol Hill and prevent the Electoral College from completing its job. That was the single, solitary purpose behind the Save America Rally. The rally was simply a precursor to rile up the crowd and give them a purpose. That’s exactly what Trump did in his speech.
The crowd, however, knew exactly the reason why they were there… to “Stop the Steal”. Of course, there was no steal involved. The election was free and fair and just. Nothing was stolen from anyone, least of all Donald Trump. Trump lost the election in the same way he had won it four years earlier. The voters cast their vote for Joe Biden in 2020 just as they had cast their vote for Donald Trump in 2016.
However, because the rally attendees knew exactly what “Save America” meant and knew exactly why the rally came to exist, it opened the door for exactly what happened on January 6th on the Capitol grounds.
Violence
Because it was known to at least some people in Trump’s administration, and likely to Trump himself, the types and groups of people who were invited to the rally, not just everyday citizens, but groups of extremists, it should have been known that violence was an inevitable outcome. Instead of attempting to quell that possibility during the Save America Rally, Trump did the opposite. He told them to “fight like hell” because “something is wrong”. The crowd knew exactly why they were there and it wasn’t to stand and listen to Donald Trump.
The day was January 6th, the day the Electoral College votes were to be counted. Having a rally specifically on that day with a march down to the Capitol was handwriting on the wall. There’s no way to “stop” the Electoral College by standing there peacefully outside. No. The crowd knew this. They didn’t need to be told, even though Trump more or less spelled it out with “Fight like Hell”.
The people handling this Electoral counting activity in the Capitol could only be stopped from within. That meant breaching the grounds and entering the building… which is exactly what the crowd proceeded to do and ultimately did. However, Pence and the rest of the House and Senate took shelter away from where the crowds were, thwarting advances by the crowds… only delaying the counting process.
The point to all of this is that Donald Trump’s prior rally lies combined with this Save America Rally speech lead directly to the violent outcomes of the crowd that commenced. If the Save America Rally hadn’t taken place, there would have been no riot. The riot was a direct result of the Save America Rally and, more specifically, because of Donald Trump’s words immediately prior to the crowd walking to the Capitol.
Motives
Clearly, Donald Trump had motive, opportunity and intent here. We know what that motive is. We understand the opportunity because of the Rally. We also understood the intent and outcome he desired. The motive was to stop the Electoral College and prevent them from continuing with their vote count so that he could continue his Presidency. How exactly that was to happen, Trump didn’t really care. Stopping the Electoral College vote would have been simply a stopgap measure. Meaning, even if the House and Senate hadn’t performed their vote count, President Biden would have still taken office. The vote was already official. The Senate and House portion is simply a formality. It is a formality which could likely be forgone without any problems in the system.
Exactly what Donald Trump thought he could accomplish by stopping that vote count with people breaching the Capitol is unknown.
Mike Pence
As Vice President, at the time, Mike Pence was requested by Donald Trump to reject some or all of the Electoral College vote counts. However, that’s not a power that the Vice President holds during the Electoral College vote count procedure. His role is procedural and as a facilitator of the process. The Vice President holds no power to veto, change or alter Electoral College votes in the way that Donald Trump had requested.
Why is this information important? It goes to motive on the part of Trump. Clearly, Trump was willing to try any and every avenue at this disposal to try to retake the office come January 20th, inauguration day. Trump wanted to be the one being inaugurated. Unfortunately, there was no way forward to that end short of dispensing with Democracy and the Constitution entirely… which is likely what Donald Trump wanted. Clearly, Donald Trump didn’t care whose toes he stepped on, whose coat got wet, or who fell in his puddles of water, so long as the outcome he wanted materialized.
When Pence told Trump he would be unable to do as requested by attempting to change the outcome of the Electoral College, Trump effectively tweeted that Pence had effectively turned on him. This, at the time that Pence and other representatives were holed up in fear of their lives against rioters… and at that time the tweet went out, the rioters began chanting “Hang Mike Pence”. Trump’s tweet alerted the rioters to the fact that Pence was not on board with keeping Trump in power.
Pence remained steadfast and continued with his oath and duties all while Trump did nothing to quell the rioting for 187 very long minutes.
187 minutes
Here’s a turning point. If you didn’t believe Trump had any hand in launching the riots, then you should after you understand that it took Trump 187 minutes to make a statement to stop the rioting, which he himself launched at the Ellipse. He wanted the Electoral College vote count to stop. He wanted to remain in power as President. This is all a given.
So, for that 187 minutes, he sat quietly (mostly), Tweeting only a few times. None of those communications were to tell the rioters to stop. No. Instead, they were, like the Pence tweet mentioned above, more or less attempting to egg the rioters on.
Even still, at the end of those grueling 187 minutes (at least for the cops there at the Capitol), Trump finally called a halt, but then rewarded the rioters with “Go home. We love you. You’re very special”.
You don’t reward people for bashing other people’s heads with barriers, fire extinguishers and flagpoles all while dousing them with pepper spray. That’s not what you say to people involved in violent activities. That statement was, in fact, so inappropriate as to be distasteful. It also goes to show, once again, motive, opportunity and intent. A person truly wanting the violence to stop doesn’t offer up rewarding words. Truly disgusting.
Motive, Opportunity and Intent
All three of these indicate a mindset of Trump at the time. Let’s support these with Trump’s actions:
- Trump knew he had lost the election, but created the big election lie
- Trump began the Stop the Steal rallies
- Trump sued states to attempt to prove voter fraud
- Trump invited people to the Capitol on the day of the Electoral College vote count specifically to interfere and stop the count
- Trump incited and fomented the riot at the Capitol from the people who attended the “Save America Rally”
- Trump more than likely knew violent extremist groups were present at the rally
- Trump incited the crowd with phrases like “Fight like hell” and “Save America”
- Trump did nothing for 187 minutes while these groups continued attacking the Capitol
- Trump rewarded the attendees at the end of those 187 minutes once he knew they couldn’t succeed
- Trump lost at this attempt
The motive, then, is to attempt to stay in power as President illegally beyond his Presidential term. The opportunity is to use his public power and words to wield citizens as weapons against the U.S. Government. The intent is to stop the peaceful transition of power.
What was the intent during his 187 minutes of mostly silence? The same as stated above. However, there’s no way to know what was going through Trump’s head. That’s the reason for the January 6th hearing testimony. To uncover conversations people had with Donald Trump during those 187 minutes. These conversations and other information may be very relevant to see a glimpse into the mind of Donald Trump, to see what he was thinking and possibly doing (or not doing).
Guilty or Innocent?
While 187 minutes with him doing nothing to stop the riot may not be considered a crime as part of his Presidential duties, as part of a wider and larger operation, including his election lie, the Stop the Steal concept, the Save America Rally insurrection incitement and the subsequent riot when combined, it may point to other illegal activities. It certainly leads to this conclusion.
That Trump is likely guilty of attempting to overthrow the election to remain in office. What he did is actually a form of Advocating to Overthrow the Government, which is highly illegal and carries a fine and up to 20 years in prison, along with a 5 year ban on holding any government position. Advocating to overthrow may be further considered a form of treason if other conditions are present (i.e, 187 minutes of silence).
At the time of the Capitol riot, the rioters should be considered an enemy of the United States. As a result, Trump doing nothing during those 187 minutes to stop the rioters could see him considered guilty of “adher[ing] to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort in the United States.” The very definition of Treason. If the rioters are labeled an enemy of the United States for the duration of the riot, then Trump should be considered “giving aid” during that 187 minutes of silence. He started the whole thing and then did nothing to stop it. That’s very much “giving aid”. His “rewarding” words stated when he asked the rioters to go home solidifies the fact that he was “giving aid”.
Anyone who attacks a Federal building should automatically be considered an enemy of the United States for the time they continue to attack. It doesn’t matter if the person is a natural born citizen or not. It’s the action of attacking which changes the status of the person to an enemy of the United States.
Some argue, well Trump would be overthrowing himself as he was still in power at the time. No, he was actually attempting to overthrow the future Biden administration, which was just days away from taking office. Trump’s tenure was ending and he knew that. Trump wasn’t overthrowing himself, he was attempting to overthrow Democracy (and Biden). He was attempting to light the Constitution on fire and burn it all to keep himself in power and keep Biden out of the office after Biden was so duly elected.
Clearly, it failed. Trump failed. It wasn’t for lack of trying and it wasn’t without damage and consequences to police who lost their lives, to the Capitol building that needed repairs and to at least one rioter who was killed… not to mention, the damage it has done to the reputation of the United States around the world.
This all means that because of Trump’s direct actions, not only is he likely guilty for Advocating to Overthrow the Government, not only may he be further guilty of Treason, he is likely also responsible for the deaths during the Capitol riot. After all, if he hadn’t held the “Save America Rally”, those extremists might never have showed up. It was due to his Tweet and his prompting that led people to the Ellipse and ultimately to the Capitol that day. Therefore, at the very least, Trump is partially responsible for the deaths of those at the Capitol on January 6th, 2021. Because of his 187 minutes of inaction, he likely intentionally let the rioters continue unabated which appears that he had “given them aid and comfort in the United States”, the very definition of Treason.
Trial and Consequences
All of this means, especially after all of the January 6th Select Committee’s investigation, that there should be more than sufficient evidence for the Department of Justice to hold a trial over Donald Trump’s actions prior to and leading up to the January 6th riot event.
Leave the trial up to a jury to decide whether or not Trump is guilty of any or all of these charges. Personally, I don’t see innocence here. There is nothing at all innocent about lying about election fraud, then inviting violent extremists to the Capitol, unleashing them onto an unsuspecting police force and then giving them 187 minutes to perform their damage, kill people, all in an attempt to halt the Electoral College vote process. That doesn’t at all say innocent to me. No, Trump definitely needs an indictment and a trial over all of this.
↩︎
Random Thoughts - Randocity! 
leave a comment