Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump disqualified from holding office? Clinton-linked lawyer points to US Code after FBI raid
Washington Examiner ^ | 8 Aug 22 | Daniel Chaitin

Posted on 08/09/2022 12:17:21 PM PDT by seanmerc

With news of the FBI raiding Mar-a-Lago, buzz quickly bubbled up Monday evening about whether former President Donald Trump could be disqualified from holding office again.

The FBI search of the Florida resort was related to Trump's handling of presidential records, including classified documents, after leaving office, sources told CNN. The search warrant was connected to the National Archives, a senior government official told NBC News.

Such reporting had Marc Elias, the top lawyer for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign who has drawn scrutiny for his role in pushing Trump-Russia collusion claims, pointing to U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071. "The media is missing the really, really big reason why the raid today is a potential blockbuster in American politics," Elias said in a tweet.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: clintonistas; clintonstink; clintoons; dims; djt45; dumbocrats; elias; fakenews; hillaryclinton; hypocrites; liberalmeatheads; lyingliars; marcelias; mrsbillclinton; presidenttrump; rats; rulesforthee; russiarussiarussia; stasiraid; thehildebeast; trump; washingtonexaminer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last
Two words: Sandy Berger. This smells like a Clinton operation, which means it doesn't smell good at all. This raid was completely outrageous, on so many levels. Goons indiscriminately took whatever they wanted. The elites are trying to tell us that they're in control and that we'll vote for whoever they tell us to vote for. This raid must not be allowed to stand.
1 posted on 08/09/2022 12:17:21 PM PDT by seanmerc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Mission Accomplished. /s


2 posted on 08/09/2022 12:18:48 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Fake News and the the new executives at the Washington Examiner are antitrumpers.


3 posted on 08/09/2022 12:19:23 PM PDT by conservative98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Does this b’stard have any sense?


4 posted on 08/09/2022 12:19:36 PM PDT by BigEdLB (Let’s go Brandon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Worse than Watergate on so many levels. Contrived search, with contrived charges to follow.


5 posted on 08/09/2022 12:20:27 PM PDT by ToxicMasculinity (At this point, what difference does it make.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

That law is unconstitutional.

The Constitution precisely lays out the qualifications to be President.

That law goes directly against that.


6 posted on 08/09/2022 12:20:41 PM PDT by Az Joe (Biden & ChiComs are the enemy, not Putin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Marc Elias is a known Professional Liar!


7 posted on 08/09/2022 12:21:10 PM PDT by dpetty121263
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

The President is not an office “under the United States”.


8 posted on 08/09/2022 12:21:52 PM PDT by Jim Noble (I’ve stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

The Constitution spells out the qualifications for the POTUS, congress cannot amend the Constitution by statute, the statute is unconstitutional and has never been used.


9 posted on 08/09/2022 12:26:27 PM PDT by Robe (A nation can survive its fools and even n the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservative98

I’m notice that it’s already becoming old news. Get it out of the front pages the sooner the quicker the better because this is going to backfire ROYALLY on the effin rats!


10 posted on 08/09/2022 12:27:30 PM PDT by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cranked

On April 12, 1861, forces from the Confederate States of America attacked the United States military garrison at Fort Sumter, South Carolina. Less than two days later, the fort surrendered. No one was killed. The battle, however, started the Civil War, the bloodiest conflict in American history.
-—National Geographic.org


11 posted on 08/09/2022 12:28:04 PM PDT by frank ballenger (You have summoned up a thundercloud. You're gonna hear from me. Anthem by Leonard Cohen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: ping jockey

Elias also was part of the lawsuit settlement that Ga’s SOS Raffensperger signed in March 2020 (behind the backs of our legislature), that changed our election process and verification and helped enable the steal.


13 posted on 08/09/2022 12:30:10 PM PDT by LilFarmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: frank ballenger

Indeed. The straw that broke the camels back moment is fast approaching.


14 posted on 08/09/2022 12:31:24 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

Elias is a general-purpose Dem/globalist operator.


15 posted on 08/09/2022 12:31:31 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

He sure did come up with that argument fast. Almost like he was ready with the argument before the search was even conducted.


16 posted on 08/09/2022 12:32:32 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc
“The media is missing the really, really big reason why the raid today is a potential blockbuster in American politics," Elias said in a tweet.

The media haven’t missed anything, Marc. They just know you’re a sh!tbag, and they would rather wait until a more credible and respected lawyer like Michael Avenatti weighs in on the subject.

17 posted on 08/09/2022 12:32:40 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("It's midnight in Manhattan. This is no time to get cute; it's a mad dog's promenade.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc
The answer is no.

That law cannot bar someone from running for and holding the office of the President of the United States. It can keep someone from being nominated to lesser offices.

Federal law is not superior to the Constitution. The qualifications for the presidency are clearly laid out in Article II of the Constitution, and federal law cannot amend that.

Article VI Clause 2 says:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The supremacy clause makes it clear that a law created by Congress is inferior to the Constitution itself and cannot add extra conditions on the qualifications for President or other Constitutional offices.

What this law refers to is this:

Article II Section 2 Clause 2:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The Constitution refers to (but does not define) "inferior offices" and offices "whose Appointments... shall be established by Law." Those are the offices that come under the law referenced in the OP.

The only bar to holding the office of President is impeachment and removal, the 14th amendment prohibition via a finding of insurrection, or the 25th amendment finding of incapacitation.

This will go nowhere.

-PJ

18 posted on 08/09/2022 12:32:53 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too ( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

His opinion and 10 bucks will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.


19 posted on 08/09/2022 12:33:45 PM PDT by bray (The Vax is fake and deadly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seanmerc

If all else fails they will assassinate Trump.


20 posted on 08/09/2022 12:35:10 PM PDT by Salman (It's not a slippery slope if it was part of the program all along. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson