You might be able to hit a handful with this. But the precedent from e.g the "Crittenden Compromise" is that even flagrantly unconstitutional legislative votes deeply hostile to the union and supportive of rebel causes doesn't count. Gotta actually *be* a rebel.
Copperheads were not constitutionally barred from office by the 14th amendment. Maybe you think they should have been, but they were not, and nobody at the time believed that the 14th banned them from running for office.
The only people that the 14th amendment hit were people who actually served in the government or armed forces of the Confederacy, or directly gave material, war-related aid to them. That's gonna be a high bar to apply in this case.
Some of the rioters themselves were people covered by the the 14th amendment: there was that West Virginia legislature, and also a few police officers in the mix (including one KY state trooper). You could bar that handful from future office or state employment.
But you're not gonna be able to bar people for objecting to the electoral college process. Many Democrats objected in 2000, 2004, and 2016. Here's Ohio Democrats objecting after the 2004 election, so not one that has a major "steal" narrative:…
Nor are you gonna be able to to get somebody for incitation for phrases like "march on Washington" or "come to Washington" or even "march to the Capitol." It's trivially easy to find thousands of instances of pols on both side calling for their supporters to march!
To get a Congressman or Senator, you'd almost certainly have to show *active* collaboration in planning or in the events themselves. To the best of my knowledge, there's no evidence of that yet. *Sympathy* for the insurrectionists is not what 14A is covering.
You can find that sympathy unpatriotic or immoral. I agree.

But it is not what the 14th amendment is talking about, and using the 14th amendment in such a way would be a heinous abuse of it opening the door for a terrible cycle of recriminations.
Getting *Trump* on the 14th amendment is probably easier than getting Senators/Congressmen, since Trump is in the executive and may have actually had decisionmaking powers that are documented somewhere.
If you can show that Trump knowingly prevented suitable security provision for Congress and thwarted a response to the mob he provoked, especially if you had eyewitnesses from inside the WH to that effect, maybe you get him on that.
As I said. Gonna be hard to invoke the 14th amendment based on electoral college objections.
I'm all for aggressively going after the perpetrators and any officials who aided them. But yes going full-on Reichstag Fire is probably unwise for the Democrats.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Lyman Stone 石來民

Lyman Stone 石來民 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @lymanstoneky

13 Jan
Saw @mattyglesias tweet about a poll of QAnon support (linked). I think it's a *bit* mistaken tho: the table he shared was QAnon support *among those who had heard of it*. But TONS more liberals have heard of QAnon than conservatives!
Here's the net favorability of QAnon (double-weighting the "very" folks) accounting for differences in who's even heard of QAnon. Image
Key to understand is Democrats and liberals are EXTREMELY anti QAnon not only because they are very unfavorable to it but because large shares of Rep/Con folks ***have never heard of QAnon***.
Read 22 tweets
13 Jan
I think it's fair to criticize US support of the Saudis in this war.

I also think it's unreasonable to argue that we should be providing even humanitarian aid in a region where we know both sides will steal it and use it to enhance their exploitation of the local people.
During the US Civil War, the Confederates starved because the Union starved them.

Food aid to the Confederacy would not have gone to slaves, folks. It would have gone to slave-owners.
It's possible to say both "we should not support the inhumane Saudi war effort" and also "if the Houthis want Iranian support, let Iran feed them."
Read 13 tweets
13 Jan
reading the self-important and vaguely-cultish textbooks by bayesians makes me want to go out and kill a sufficiently large number of bayesians that i can estimate the mean pitch of their screams
"when we have multiple models, we should choose one using Bayesian statistics"


you should do both and publish an appendix showing robustness tests, you cultist
"but my bayesian model takes 4 weeks to process i can't run 1,397 robustness tests"


Read 33 tweets
12 Jan
Because we're *not* vaccinating healthcare workers for this reason.

Many healthcare workers getting vaccinated are not even tangentially related to the ICU, or even providers *at all*, and what's actually happening is the fetishization of COVID precautions.
Choices are *justified* through ritualistic gestures at putatively epidemiologically significant concepts.

But the choice to put many non-health-related workers ahead of high risk people is the giveaway.
Likewise, that we have "prioritization" schemes, but allocated vaccines based on *total* population, suggests that those schemes are meaning-making rituals designed to build narratives of just desserts, not health-related efforts.
Read 8 tweets
12 Jan
So I want to talk about vaccines and the scale of stupid involved in what's happening.
We've heard what % of the population is vaccinated. What % of vaccines are distribute. We've heard about prioritization.

But does anybody have any numbers on prioritization? I couldn't find any. So I made some.
How many people live in each state who are either healthcare workers or elders living in group quarters? With a little adjustment for population change, we can estimate this, and see if states were over- or under-allocated vaccines.
Read 39 tweets
12 Jan
I'm one of those approximately 14 Americans who thinks we should give PR statehood and have a new VRA but not DC statehood or universal mail-in balloting.
Good question! Let me list a few things.

Election day is a a kind of super-Federal Holiday, and no employer other than public safety organizations can schedule more than 4 hours of work.
Commit money to waive passport application fees, expand the agency producing them, and automatically issue them for each social security number or any time somebody interacts with the Federal government.
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!