369
Jan. 6 “QAnon Shaman” is running for Congress
(www.salon.com)
The 14th Amendment disqualifies him.
It only applies if he took an oath to uphold the constitution prior to committing the treason.
I.E. government officials and ex military personnel who took place in the Jan 6 riots would be disqualified, but not every random yahoo that was there.
EDIT: Others have pointed out that he is ex-military, so it looks like the 14th amendment does apply to him after all.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
will run as a libertarian in Arizona
Neither of these surprises me.
Libertarians are just Republicans in disguise
Libertarians are even worse, they are like anarchist Republicans. Slamming two dumb political ideas into one really dumb political idea and acting like they are very smart about it.
Republicans have to deal with being constantly proven wrong on everything, but Libertarians enjoy that their fantasy ideology will never be tested in the real world. That makes them feel immune to obvious criticisms, and therefore “very smart.”
They did test it and it failed completely. A book was written about it. A libertarian walks into a bear. So you can point and laugh at libertarians any time you want
load more comments
(1 replies)
Jacob Chansley can eat a whole cauldron of gently boiled dicks.
He's vegan or something. Remember how butthurt he was in prison because the food wasn't up to his standards?
White people, man...
I hope that, once a year, at the most inopportune possible time of that year, he shits himself loudly and thoroughly. For all the years of his life.
Is this like, an ordeal you think he should go through, or are you saying that you know for a fact, that this man can slurp down a whole caludron of al-dente dicks?
Good deal. Let him siphon off the republican vote.
Gee, let me think about it. According to this article he may be uniquely suited to run as a Republican.
In an interview, defense lawyer Albert Watkins said that officials at the federal Bureau of Prisons, or BOP, have diagnosed his client Jacob Chansley with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety.
If you throw in a low IQ, he'll do well with Republican voters.
Felons can't run for office
I'm pretty sure they can and do.
In 2016, the libertarian convention had a guy strip to his underwear on stage. At the convention debate, one of the candidates was boo'd for saying you shouldn't be able to sell heroin to five year olds.
The QAnon Shaman isn't the craziest thing in the Libertarian Party. They are not serious people.
will run as a libertarian in Arizona.
Well at least we won't have to worry about him winning.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Is that even legal?
If you’re part of an insurrection, you shouldn’t be able to run for any public office anywhere.
If Germany would have had this same rule/law the whole world in this timeline would look completely different.
Hey look, you could theoretically identify as an anarchist, and have constructive ideas about how a government system could be improved
Unfortunately, yeah. Can’t vote but can be voted into office.
No he can’t. Jan 6 was an insurrection. He’s absolutely ineligible
Can you point out exactly what makes him ineligible? Even if everyone agreed that it was an insurrection, point out where it would bar him.
You bring up an interesting point, and I'll admit I am not a constitutional lawyer. But section 3 of the 14th amendment says that hey couldn't have sworn to uphold the Constitution prior to attempting insurrection. Thats how they are framing it for Trump too because he swore to uphold the Constitution when he came into office. I don't know if Chansley had done the same or if that would make a difference.
He was in the military. I definitely remember swearing an oath to uphold the constitution when I enlisted. Section 3 should bar him no problem.
Oh, I didn't know that about him. I'll be honest I have not followed his story very closely.
Can’t work from home when that home is a federal prison.
He was sentenced for 3 years. (Which is a joke, but that’s besides the point.)
And he’s ex military which means the 14th applies
No. He's ex-military, 14th amendment applies.
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...
He took an oath as a member of the military, he also took part in insurrection.
The crimes charged in the indictment involve active participation in an insurrection attempting to violently overthrow the United States Government. By Chansley’s own admissions to the FBI and news media, the insurrection is still in progress and he intends to continue participating.
You and I might agree that it applies, but how much do you want to bet that some Trump appointed judges decide that it doesn't apply and kill any effort to remove him from the ballot?
Ya’ll keep saying these things like I don’t already know, but regardless of what the 14th amendment says, or his military background, ultimately that determination will be made by a court decision, because if nothing else he will sue the state if they choose to take him off the ballot. I didn’t make the rules, or the legal system.
load more comments
(3 replies)
As much as I want to say no, to my knowledge he technically hadn't "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" so I think he'd be eligible under Amendment 14, Section 3, article 1... quoted here in full:
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:
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.
Though, he had previously been in the US Navy, and the Navy oath of enlistment begins ""I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic....," he was not even an officer in the Navy let alone in a legislative, executive or judicial branch position.
Pretty sure he would be eligible to run this time, whereas trump would not.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This guy is t elligible…. Trump might be able to weasel it, but this guy was an insurrectionist through and through.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Getting some "Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho"-vibes from this, lol
For all his flaws, Camacho at least tried to enlist the help of, and listen to, people he knew were smarter than him. And at the end of the day, he tried to help his people.
This guy just wants to play dress up and smear shit on the walls.
I feel bad for Jamiroquai that this asshole stole their mascot
He'd best have a good security detail. If anything goes awry, a bunch of Leftists are going to be peacefully asking him pointed questions that might make him uncomfortable.
If you're assuaged to believe that winning means everything, I can't speak for you. It assumes that you start and stay on the same side of any moral argument and you have to fight for it to the end regardless of if new evidence nullifies your opinion.
That's not how humans understand each-other. Humans garner nuance and discern things in new and meaningful ways over time and social interaction. We understand others - people that we can identify with in profound ways even if they don't necessarily share our point of view.
I would give him a moment of our time - maybe 30 seconds if he doesn't state one of the over-used vitriolic statements on the Bingo cards that I will be handing out now.
load more comments
(2 replies)
He should be required to wear that costume the entire time on the campaign trail.
He should be in jail.
No argument here. But if he’s out and running, no one should forget what a weirdass goofball he is.
You'd be more productive sticking a fork in an outlet, Jacob.
Republicans stopped using "cuck" as an insult because the person who epitomizes what they're all about wore horns.
What a crazy world we live in.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
369 points (94.9% liked)
politics
19159 readers
4521 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS