top of page


Four Marxist judges on the Colorado State Supreme Court have broadly interpreted Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as precluding anyone who has taken an oath to support that Constitution and then “engages in Insurrection or rebellion against the same,” from holding office again.  Even if that person has not been convicted of such action and Congress has not been consulted.  Although Jonathan Turley, GWU Law Professor, has stated that the Colorado decision to bar Trump from the ballot will be overturned because “it is wrong on the history and the language of the 14th Amendment,”[1] Socialist-Marxist Party machines in other states disagree.  Opinion, apparently, is all that is required to condemn a person of insurrection or rebellion.  Very convenient for the SMP takeover of America, but let’s see what that section of the 14th Amendment says.


            “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.”[2] (Ratified 9 July 1868)


            Now let’s take notice of a couple of points in this section that the Marxists have conveniently ignored.  The first is that nowhere in that paragraph does it say “convicted” of engaging in Insurrection or rebellion.  A loophole for Marxist lawyers and RINOs?  Not so fast. 

Second point, this amendment was ratified 9 July 1868, and was meant to preclude those who had been engaged with the Confederate States of America, in a civil or military capacity, from ever holding national or state office again.  There was no need to insert “convicted” because those guilty had, by taking an oath to the Confederacy, already convicted themselves of rebellion.


The last sentence of Section 3 is the point no one that I know of has mentioned.  Congress must be consulted before State and Federal officers accused of insurrection and rebellion can be convicted.  Indeed, it implies Congress can, and has in the past (see below), assess their cases on a sliding guilt scale.  Someone will be quick to say, “Getting two thirds of both Houses to exonerate Trump would never happen!”  Perhaps, but Congressional opinion must still be sought.  Remember though, the Marxists taking over America only use the Constitution to destroy it and America.


            According to the Legacy Media, Trump faces four federal charges over his efforts to subvert the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.[3] However, an appeals court said he was not guilty of insurrection or rebellion.  Indeed, Trump told protesters to do so peacefully.


            So, the Colorado Four have put Democrats (aka Socialist-Marxist Party) and the RINOs – the Benedict Arnold Wing of the Republican Party – between a rock and a hard place.  They recognize that the 14th Amendment threat is not only absurd, but also an extremely dangerous precedent.  Such a precedent would allow state supreme courts, not the people, to determine who could and could not run.  This is ballot cleansing, so that voters do not make the wrong choice.  And could very well come back to bite Marxists in the ass if they fail to take over America.


            For RINOs, such as those on the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board, Karl Rove, Chris Christie, and Nikki Haley, who would rather see a Socialist-Marxist Party president hiding as a Democrat than support Donald Trump, the situation demonstrates their malevolent, petty, and jealous natures.  After condemning the decision of the Colorado Four the WSJ Editorial Board declared, “Mr. Trump’s behavior after the 2020 election through Jan. 6 was disgraceful, and it is one of several reasons not to trust him with so much power again.”[4]


Perennial Trump hater, Karl Rove, who will never admit the 2020 election was fraudulent, asked what I presume is a rhetorical question: “You can consider Mr. Trump’s behavior on Jan. 6 abhorrent, his continuing claims of massive fraud and a stolen election delusional, and his attempt to muddy the waters with fake electors reprehensible, but is our democracy well served by emulating banana republics by keeping candidates off the ballot?”[5] By the way Karl, when you say “democracy” you sound just like a Democrat.  Wake up, meathead, it is a Representative Constitutional Republic!


These RINOs are the disgraceful, abhorrent, reprehensible ones.  The backstabbers.  And they have given us all the reasons we need not to entrust them with any power whatsoever.



                                                                        21 December 2023

[1]  Turley, “The Call of History:  It is time for the Court to Speak as One in Overturning the Colorado Decision,” 21 Dec 23,

[2]  The Constitution of the United States of America with the Declaration of Independence (New York:  Fall River Press, 2012), p. 69.

[4]  WSJ Editorial Bd., “The Folly of Colorado’s Trump Disqualification,” 20 Dec 23.

[5]  Karl Rove, “Trump vs. the Banana Republic of Colorado,” WSJ, 20 Dec 23.

4 views0 comments
bottom of page