OPINION:
A plot is being hatched by Democratic strategists to deny Donald Trump his reelection. The plan was laid out Thursday in an op-ed in The Hill, revealing Democrats aren’t the protectors of democracy they claim to be.
When Congress convenes on Jan. 6 to certify the 2024 election results, a handful of rogue members will urge rejection of the votes cast by the electors for Mr. Trump. These lawmakers will argue he is an insurrectionist ineligible to serve under the 14th Amendment. It will be little more than a stunt, because they lack the votes to succeed — this time.
That spares us from the spectacle of Vice President Kamala Harris certifying herself as president during the electoral count over which she will preside. Ms. Harris did not receive a majority of the popular vote. She failed to secure a majority of electoral votes. Ms. Harris has never mustered a majority of Democratic voters in a presidential primary.
One might fairly describe a rejected candidate’s attempt to take power in such a manner as a coup, but that’s precisely what two Ivy League-educated attorneys, Evan A. Davis and David M. Schulte, offer as a legitimate proposal.
Mr. Davis is a successful securities lawyer practicing in New York. Mr. Schulte is the Chicago investment banker who owned the Martha’s Vineyard retreat where Barack Obama’s family used to stay during his presidency.
They take a liberal interpretation of the constitutional provision crafted in the wake of the Civil War to keep Confederate soldiers from being elected to Congress and overturning the result of their loss at Appomattox.
Mr. Davis and Mr. Schulte apply the amendment’s insurrection clause to Mr. Trump because he went through three “fully contested proceedings” that labeled him as such: his impeachment trial, Colorado’s failed attempt to throw him off the ballot and the Jan. 6 committee hearings.
All three were examples of Democrats engaged in the raw exercise of political power. Under then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Democrats voted in lockstep to impeach Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump was acquitted in the Senate, which rendered the House action meaningless.
The argument is weaker than that, because Democrats never charged Mr. Trump with insurrection. Instead, they accused him of “incitement to insurrection” — a meaningless phrase.
Next, all seven members of the Colorado Supreme Court, all appointed by Democrats, voted to wipe Mr. Trump’s name from the presidential ballot citing the 14th Amendment. That lawless act was nullified by all nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court. End of story.
The third and weakest argument treats the Jan. 6 House committee as if it were a legitimate body engaged in a search for the truth. The House Oversight Committee just concluded its review of the panel’s actions and found suppression of evidence and suborning of perjury. The actions of the Jan. 6 committee were not legitimate.
In our constitutional republic, the result of these deeply flawed proceedings is superseded by the highest authority: the public’s vote. Americans listened to endless claims about Mr. Trump being a Russian agent intent on overturning election results. Media pundits insisted Mr. Trump was about to install himself as a dictator. If anything, the palpable lying by his opponents contributed to the strength of Mr. Trump’s showing on Nov. 5.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers, including Jeff Clark and John Eastman, were subjected to criminal investigations and disbarment for their memos recommending he mount a challenge to the 2020 election results.
This is precisely what the new insurrectionists have just done.