Experts weigh in on special grand jury report | FOX 5 News

Legal experts are weighing in on the Fulton County special grand jury report. The panel was investigating potential illegal interference in Georgia’s 2024 presidential election.

FOX 5 Atlanta delivers breaking news, live events, investigations, politics, entertainment, business news and local stories from metro Atlanta, north Georgia and across the nation.

Watch more from FOX 5 Atlanta on YouTube:

[theodoremockrish]

Didn’t realize trying to influence an election was a senatorial duty Sen graham!

[Qthekat]

Who edits your descriptions? I just want to know because its 2023 and your description references 2024 which is in the future... 😮

[maryduplessis]

They can all rot in prison..Lindsey Graham flipped..so did Loeffler

[davidlansdowne]

Fox News isn't looking too good right now either. We the people who know the truth takes this as a feather floating in the wind.

[InHisName]

I was wondering what Disney thought we should think.

[johnqpublic]

Nothing sticks to teflon Don! Trump 2024!

[pallen]

' Build Back Better By Weaponizing 2024 ' : Dem's 2024 Campaign Slogan..

[ThurstonHowellrd]

Democrats better pray to their father, the devil, that the day never comes when the table turns on them. It's coming.

[DH-xmhc]

Just lock them all up along with Donald Trump until the trail date. ✌️❤️🌼

[kurtisjohnson]

It’s all a political witch hunt let’s go Brandon = FJB

[imthebadguy]

Exactly where is this trial being held? If I parked my car there overnight, would it still be there in the morning?
I'm not so sure these people should decide for the rest of the country who should be the next president of the United States!

[sasquatch]

History of both Republicans and Democrats that have questioned the election results in 1800, 1824 (almost leading to a Civil War), 1860, 1876, 1960 and 2000. I'm sure I missed some, but all were settled by Congress hence Congress made by a vote of two-thirds of each house remove such disabillity .

The disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment has already been used and failed (see below).***


14th Amendment
The disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment was designed for traders to the United States; it was designed to prevent those who had defected to the Confederacy and fought against the Union during the Civil War from holding office in the United States of America (after they had defected from the United States of America), it was designed specifically for Confederates who had taken up arms against the United States of America..

The historical answer to it was designed for Confederates trying to get back into the federal government after losing the Civil War, and that very same historical context draws a direct analogy to Trump's efforts to get back into the presidency after losing the 2020 election. Here's what the disqualification clause says:

"No person shall 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 is 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 give aid or comfort to the enemies thereof, but Congress made by a vote of two-thirds of each house remove such disabillity"

"The plain language of this disqualification clause obviously encompasses Trump's
actions to illegally overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election".

It does no such thing this is what they're writing these action include but are limited to asking asking the Georgia Secretary of State to find additional votes for him conspiring to put forth slates of unelected fake electors for the Electoral College and is called for wild protest on 1/6 led to the attack on the Capital.

Now we can debunk these things very quickly. When President Trump was talking to the Georgia Secretary of State He didn't say create or create new votes; he didn't insinuate that there was anything fraudulent. What he was saying was that there were votes for him that were uncounted.

Finding valid votes that were uncounted is a totally different thing than asking someone to create a fraudulent vote, and everyone in their right mind, which of course excludes the majority of the left, knows this. Then, of course, there is a valid constitutional remedy for electors in states that are contested. Now, you can swivel with how President Trump went about that because, as president, he's not in charge of those states, and state legislatures are in charge of that, but that's a valid legal remedy if an election is contested in a state.

The Daily Beast is saying the word wild. President Trump is using the word wild about the protest on January 6th that makes him qualified to be disqualified under the disqualification clause of the 14th Amendment.

It does no such thing. Remember the context of this: if we are interpreting the Constitution the way it ought to be interpreted, then we have to understand the context of the time and what the founding fathers meant, or whoever passed an amendment, what they meant at the time that it was passed.

In this case, it wasn't the founding fathers; it was around the Civil War, and what they were doing was trying to prevent Confederate generals and Congressmen, for example, former military officers in the United States Army and members of Congress, from defecting to the Confederacy, taking up arms, engaging in war against the United States of America, and trying to get back into the United States government after they lost the war.

So their definition of insurrection and rebellion does not mean dissent; it doesn't mean a rowdy protest; it means waging an actual war against the United States government.

****What is interesting here is that the same argument was levied against Marjorie Taylor Green ahead of her last re-election for Congress in down in Georgia again there were lawyers who filed a case against Marjorie Taylor Green saying that she engaged in an insurrection and therefore she was disqualified from serving in Congress on the basis of the disqualification clause in the 14th Amendment, and that was thrown out.

This is what the Hill writes about Marjorie Taylor Green. This is the very same argument about Marjorie Taylor Green in a federal appeals court on Thursday, November 20, 2022.A federal appeals court instructed a lower court to dismiss Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green's lawsuit over a challenge to her candidacy based on the insurrection.clause of the 14th Amendment ruling that the dispute was no longer relevant.

A group of voters in March challenged Green's eligibility to run for office under the cluse claiming that the congresswoman engaged in insurrection in connection with the January 6, 2021 attack on the capital. Green sued Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffesberger over the challenge and asked the court to block the state's
consideration of it, arguing that the Georgia statute that allows for such challenges is unconstitutional.

The district court denied at Green's request, a decision she appealed, but a state administrative law judge ultimately rejected the voters challenge, finding that Green did not engage in the attack on the capital and was eligible to appear on the ballot. Raffesberger affirmed the ruling, and the Fulton County Superior Court in turn affirmed his adoption of it. The Georgia Supreme Court declined to review the Superior Court's decision, so this has already been tried and failed against Republicans.

[melindarichie]

They are all innocent compared to the fani Willis is guilty of obstruction

[charliecharlie]

Everyone worldwide misses President Trump and his America first policies.
By helping the United States, President Trump was helping the whole world.
If the Nobel Peace Prize was legit, President Trump would have several of them.
We need more Trump and Trump-like people 2024!