[jpp113]

"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.

Where are the charges that the Colorado electors for Trump engaged in insurrection against the US Constitution? Lefttards say Trump did, Trump did, however, in this case, this clause can only be used against presidential electors, not the actual candidate. This means that the electors must have engaged in insurrection, not the actual candidate.

[cymbeline]

“This means that the electors must have engaged in insurrection, not the actual candidate.”

That was my first thought and the reason I parsed the passage. Isn’t the “or elector of President and Vice-President” only one of a list of persons who might have engaged in insurrection?

That’s a nasty passage — the sort of thing that gives lawyers a bad name. Maybe I’ve misinterpreted it.