Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Donald Trump is NOT eligible to run for President. Period. [View all]nuxvomica
(12,532 posts)3. Webster's 1828 definition of "insurrection"
The following definition is from the 1828 Webster's dictionary. It was unchanged as late as 1841 so it was likely still in use at the time of writing the 14th Amendment. A notable difference from the modern definition is that it's pretty specific about "open and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of a law" which was precisely the immediate goal of the J6 insurrection.
INSURREC'TION, noun [Latin insurgo; in and surgo, to rise.]
1. A rising against civil or political authority; the open and active opposition of a number of persons to the execution of a law in a city or state. It is equivalent to sedition, except that sedition expresses a less extensive rising of citizens. It differs from rebellion, for the latter expresses a revolt, or an attempt to overthrow the government, to establish a different one or to place the country under another jurisdiction. It differs from mutiny, as it respects the civil or political government; whereas a mutiny is an open opposition to law in the army or navy. insurrection is however used with such latitude as to comprehend either sedition or rebellion.
https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Insurrection
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Agree. He disqualified himself by trying to rip off a free and fair election.
onecaliberal
Dec 2023
#2
I know SCOTUS is going to dismiss this, because they suck, but it is clear drumpf is disqualified
Takket
Dec 2023
#10
The framers addressed that as I understand it (?) "Officers" does not exclude POTUS or VP...
CousinIT
Dec 2023
#22
Here's the problem. There's no legal finding of participating in an insurrection.
WarGamer
Dec 2023
#21
No legal finding or conviction. But the entire nation saw it, heard him incite it.
CousinIT
Dec 2023
#24
So, if Trump's insurrection had succeeded, we would have needed his DOJ to prosecute him...
W_HAMILTON
Jan 2024
#56
We know he did it, but think one has to be adjudicated an insurrectionist, unless
Silent Type
Dec 2023
#31
When the Colorado judge orders a sentence hearing for insurrection, we have him.
Silent Type
Dec 2023
#43