On Monday, a suit was filed in North Carolina before the state board of elections to challenge the candidacy of Rep. Madison Cawthorn on Constitutional grounds.
The suit, filed by 11 citizens and backed by the far-left groups Free Speech For People and the Bernie Sanders outfit Our Revolution, alleges that Cawthorn is ineligible because of Article Three of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that a candidate is ineligible “who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion.”
Cawthorn spoke at the same rally on Jan. 6, 2021, that Trump addressed — before the riot occurred. Was he really advocating for “insurrection”?
Speaking at the “Save America Rally” on the morning of the riot, days after he was sworn in to Congress, Cawthorn said the “crowd has some fight in it.”
“The Democrats, with all the fraud they have done in this election, the Republicans hiding and not fighting, they are trying to silence your voice,” he added. “Make no mistake about it, they do not want you to be heard.”
Cawthorn voted against certifying Joe Biden’s presidential victory, although later he signed a letter with other GOP members of Congress congratulating Biden. Cawthorn has said he had a constitutional duty to vote against him. He condemned the Capitol violence, but compared it to the summer 2020 protests over police brutality. Still, last summer Cawthorn warned North Carolinians of potential “bloodshed” over future elections he claims could “continue to be stolen,” and questioned whether Biden was “dutifully elected.”
Once again, Democrats are trying to elevate metaphor usage to the level of a threat. It’s loony. Madison Cawthorn spoke at a legal gathering of citizens. He did not urge the crowd to engage in any illegal activity. And while his analysis of the situation might have been flawed to some people, how can that possibly rise to the level of “insurrection”?
It’s interesting that a group called “Free Speech for the People” would be involved in an effort to silence any opposing viewpoints of what happened on Jan. 6.
He told The Associated Press the Cawthorn challenge will be the first of many his group intends to file against other members of Congress associated with the insurrection. Free Speech for People and the group Our Revolution announced last week that it would urge state election administrators to bar Trump and members of Congress from appearing on future ballots
The “leading national precedent” for such cases was created in 1869 by the North Carolina Supreme Court, which described the meaning of “engage” when it comes to a disqualifying act of insurrection or rebellion under the 14th Amendment, the filing states.
State law says Cawthorn has the burden to “show by a preponderance of the evidence” that he’s qualified to run.
Who besides liberals in the media and on the internet has referred to the riot of Jan. 6 as an “insurrection” or “rebellion”? These are legal terms with specific meaning and not political talking points to be bandied about by partisans.
The U.S. is not going to die from revolution. It will die of exaggeration and hyperbole.