as donald trump makes a third bid for the white house and is the the first votes are to be cast in iowa in just under two weeks. trump s lawyers say the 234-year unbroken tradition of not prosecuting the presidents for official acts, despite calls to do so from across the political spectrum, provides powerl evidence. no president prior toth donald trump tried to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. had his attorneys point to the likelihood of mushrooming prosecutions. and future cycles. the ex-the president snlt prolsing retribution. his al lies aren t the ones plotting to end the independence of the justice department. the most audacious argument, one yesterday. on this program donald trump cannot be tri a criminal court for role in the january 6th insurrectn because heas acquitted by the senate during his second impeachment the new york times reports both legal perts have disdegreed with that position. not least because the federal charges he s facing are not analogous
presidential actions on january 6th, and is disqualifiedro holding office under section iii of theh amendment. importantly eedd was the ticking countdown clock, giving any party, not just donald trump, until january 4th to appeal to the supreme court and saying if anyone asks the supreme court to review this case, then donald trump s name stays on the ballot until the supreme court weighs in. well, no surprise, the disgraced, twice impeached, four times indicted ex-president made a lot of noise after the ruling came out whining and bloviating and promising to, quote, swiftly file an appeal to the supreme court. but then a funny thing happened. while trump and his lawye were working on that swift appeal look who beat him to t proverbial punch, the colorado republican party, who filed their owneal urging the justices to take up the case and d while mr. trump is expected toil his own petition in the coming days, the move by the colorado republican party has a, quote, practical i
lot of consternation around this question. and, yet, the ball is moving down the field. yes. i mean, the i would have talked to marc s point about originalism, if you look at the 14th amendment, section 3 from an originalist perspective, you say, sure, they re talking about confederate generals, they re talking about confederate soldiers who took up arms against the republic. but if you look at the 14th amendment as a whole, the 14th amendment, which was the post civil war amendment, is incredibly important and it is famously for incorporating the bill of rights into the federal constitution. basically the first time the court said the bill of rights applies to the states. so i think the court has to look at this in the macro context that this is an important amendment and it is something that they can t just do some technical qualification, that it is not donald trump is not eligible because he s not an officer in the way that other