Episode Details

The questions beg to be asked. Are our political and academic classes that fatuous and dense? Or are they so jaded in their partisanship that they are willing to commit an actual insurrection against the American people because of their political power greed?

Such is the question that we are presented with in scrutinizing an opinion editorial in The Hill (and, by the way, if you are under the delusion that publication is fair and balanced or conservative, you’re smoking something Hunter Biden would share) by two established far-Left operatives, Evan Davis and David Schulte.

Davis, a former editor-in-chief of the Columbia Law Review and counsel to New York Governor Mario Cuomo (D), and Schulte, an investment banker and former editor-in-chief of the Yale Law Journal—and good friend and financial supporter of Barack Obama, are ignorantly parroting the nonsense promoted by US Rep. Jeremey Raskin (D-MD), that somehow, Donald Trump is ineligible to hold the presidency because of Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states:

“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...”

Davis and Schulte, like Raskin, insist that there has been some sort of adjudication that insurrection occurred on January 6, 2021, and that is was planned and executed by Donald Trump.

Davis and Schulte write:

“Disqualification is based on insurrection against the Constitution and not the government,” the authors write. “The evidence of Donald Trump’s engaging in such insurrection is overwhelming. The matter has been decided in three separate forums, two of which were fully contested with the active participation of Trump’s counsel.”

Davis and Schulte, like Raskin, cite the main charge of Trump’s second impeachment trial, “incitement of insurrection,” which all 222 Democrats voted in favor of, as proof. Trump was acquitted by the Senate on February 13, 2021.

Davis and Schulte went on to cite “the Colorado five-day judicial due process hearing, during which the court found “by clear and convincing evidence” that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section Three.

And lastly, the authors cited the farce that was the Nancy Pelosi House Select Committee that investigated January 6, arguing that evidence from witnesses leads to “the inescapable conclusion…that Trump engaged in insurrection against the Constitution.”

For men educated at Ivy League universities, these two are as constitutionally illiterate and devoid of critical thinking skills and common sense as they come, maybe but for Raskin.

Let’s take each piece of “evidence” in reverse order.

Underground USA is reader-supported…Please consider becoming a paid subscriber

The House Select Committee's investigation of the events of January 6th was contested in its legitimacy from the start because the minority party was denied the right to seat members from its caucus, thereby making the exercise one of political persecution and partisan politics.

Further, the committee selectively presented evidence to support a predetermined narrative. The committee cherry-pick