We’ll soon find out how partisan and corrupt the SCOTUS is when they have to make a decision. If Thomas doesn’t recuse himself then you know it’s rigged. BTW how many days do they work in a year as Thomas is complaining $170,000+ is not enough.
Idk, if I were the sort of voter worried more about the deficit than using my vote to stick a middle finger up at “the system*”, I’d like to see Trump go away.
*the system being billionaires who will fund Trump, if he does become the GOP nominee.
Just taking a moment to thank Clay for all the great cartoons. Often my favorites of the day and it can’t be easy to come up with new funny stuff EVERY day of the year. Thanks Clay and Happy New Year!
Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Other Rights: Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
“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.”
““Under Maine law, I have not only the authority but the obligation to act. I will follow the Constitution and the rule of law as directed by the courts.” – Shenna Bellows, Maine Sec. of State
“Based on the Constitution, Donald Trump should be removed from every ballot in the nation. He’s a traitor who attacked our nation.” – Clay Jones
Looks like an unelected Sec. of State with a BA in Economics and a political cartoonist with no degree that I’m aware of are suddenly experts on constitutional law. At least the former has access to legal counsel.
“Maine voters should decide who wins the election, not a secretary of state chosen by the Legislature.” – Maine Senator Susan Collins
The decision “should rest with the people as expressed in free and fair elections.” – Maine Senator Angus King
“There is no doubt that Donald Trump is a threat to our liberties and even to our democracy, but in California, we defeat candidates at the polls. Everything else is a political distraction.” – CA Governor Gavin Newsom
“It is more critical than ever to safeguard elections in a way that transcends political divisions.” – CA Sec. of State Shirley Weber
Let’s wait to see what the experts say about it, armchair quarterbacks.
On the ballot blocking question, I have to think a lot of people are waiting to see what our Less than Supreme court does. If one state is allowed to block… certainly more will follow.
Green Day slams Trump in ‘American Idiot’ performance on New Year’s Eve
The band performed their song “American Idiot” on Dick Clark’s New Year’s Eve Rockin’ Eve with Ryan Seacrest, but sneaked in a dig at Trump and his followers.
“I’m not part of the MAGA agenda,” sang Billie Joe Armstrong, instead of the song’s actual line, “I’m not part of a redneck agenda.”
The song was written as a statement about George W. Bush and his invasion of Iraq, but Green Day has frequently criticized Trump. Band members yelled ‘No Trump" during a performance at the American Music Awards in 2016, and last year they promoted new merch that incorporated the former president’s Fulton County mugshot.
I have a severe case of TDS. I hate the jerk in a way that is totally unreasonable considering that I don’t actually know him. However, I have reservations about kicking someone off a ballot when he hasn’t actually been found guilty of anything other than fraud and sexual assault. You could make a case that those two crimes alone make him unfit to be president, or a member of the human race for that matter, but that’s not what the constitution says. I don’t think he’s even been actually accused of insurrection. There is no doubt in my mind that he is guilty of insurrection and quite a few other things, but I think he needs to found guilty before punishing him for his guilt.
Traitor Trump is becoming more and more unhinged, while the members of his evil cult seem to keep to their usual levels of derangement. I suppose there is something to be said for consistency…..
I hear a lot of “it’s best to let the voters decide,” and as a strong believer in democracy I’m very sympathetic to that both on principle and pragmatism.
But let me provide a counter argument.
The voters already did decide in 2020, and rejected Trump. He refused to accept their ruling, and we’ve been in turmoil ever since. The system is built on trust, and he has violated that trust. Why should he be given a second chance? What is the basis for believing that if he lost again he would change his response?
If you had an employee who stole from the business, was fired, but is now asking to come back, would you let them in? Would you trust them?
It reminds me of the old saw: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Trump set to go to trial over claims he duped investors into backing failed video phone
Donald Trump is set to face yet another trial this month involving allegations that he duped investors into putting money into a failed video phone.The little-mentioned civil trial is scheduled to start on January 29, Newsweek reported Monday.
Jamie Raskin destroys excuses to keep Trump on the ballot: He democratically disqualified himself.
The January 6th insurrection, a dark day in American history, marked a pivotal moment where Trump’s actions aligned with the constitutional definition of an insurrectionist. As Raskin articulates, this designation is not merely a theoretical exercise but a practical impediment to Trump’s eligibility for future presidential runs. In its wisdom, the Constitution anticipates such scenarios, allowing for the disqualification of individuals who betray the foundational principles of democracy and the rule of law.
The comparison drawn by Raskin between the natural disqualifications and that of engaging in insurrection underscores the democratic nature of the latter. While one cannot choose one’s birthplace or the passage of time, one can certainly choose to uphold or subvert democratic norms and values. In this light, Trump’s actions on and leading up to January 6th represent a conscious decision to undermine the democratic process, thereby rendering him constitutionally ineligible for future presidential candidacy.
Raskin’s argument gains further weight considering the broader democratic implications. As the only national office representing all Americans, the presidency demands a holder who embodies the nation’s democratic ideals. Allowing someone who has actively worked against these principles to contend for or hold this office again would not only be a disservice to the Constitution but also to the democratic ethos of the nation.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s potential involvement in this matter underscores the urgency and complexity of ensuring the integrity of presidential qualifications. As Raskin notes, the Court’s decision could significantly impact the democratic fabric of the nation. It’s not merely a legal decision but a statement of the values and principles that define American democracy.
“IT’S A VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS!!!!” No. No it’s not, idiot. First off, the proposal has to reach the government. Then, it’s considered if it’s worth pursuing or not. Then it’s put to a vote after the investigation is over. Then majority rules on the result. It’s a not a violation of rights; it’s that it didn’t go your way (like a dictator would do). Keep in mind some states went “yay” and others went “nay.” Maybe your parents never told you this growing up, but you can’t always get what you want.
First the disgraced ex president needs to spend some time in the slammer for his crimes against the nation. While in there write a new book about his struggles. Then make a comeback and be appointed savior of the nation in perpetuity as absolute supreme ruler. Then all his dreams will be fulfilled.
Took a walk this afternoon. Went by a pile of scratch tickets, thrown by the side of the road. Some were links of 3 or 4 $10 tickets. These guys throw their $$ away. Even as reality says they’re losers. And yet, they persist.
Is this so different from trump supporters? Truth looking at them, square in the face, and yet, they persist.
Flashaaway 5 months ago
We’ll soon find out how partisan and corrupt the SCOTUS is when they have to make a decision. If Thomas doesn’t recuse himself then you know it’s rigged. BTW how many days do they work in a year as Thomas is complaining $170,000+ is not enough.
cmxx 5 months ago
Left sippy cup words: rock lobsteer
Right sippy cup words: tiny dingy [sic]
John Lustig (Last Kiss) creator 5 months ago
Couldn’t happen to a nastier guy.
Gnork 5 months ago
The Trumplicans who whine that leaving Trump off the ballot subverts democracy are missing the point. Without rule of law, there can be no democracy.
Uncle Joe Premium Member 5 months ago
Idk, if I were the sort of voter worried more about the deficit than using my vote to stick a middle finger up at “the system*”, I’d like to see Trump go away.
*the system being billionaires who will fund Trump, if he does become the GOP nominee.
superposition 5 months ago
There are no rational definitions of sedition/traitor in the MAGA lexicon … or perhaps they’re undefined.
knutdl 5 months ago
Where is Pizza rat?
cdward 5 months ago
The Russian flag lapel pin is a nice touch. 45 is far more loyal to Putin than the constitution.
stevesabe 5 months ago
trump is a biggler POS
MC3D 5 months ago
Just taking a moment to thank Clay for all the great cartoons. Often my favorites of the day and it can’t be easy to come up with new funny stuff EVERY day of the year. Thanks Clay and Happy New Year!
mourdac Premium Member 5 months ago
Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection and Other Rights: Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office
“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.”
Pretty cut and dried.
DC Swamp 5 months ago
““Under Maine law, I have not only the authority but the obligation to act. I will follow the Constitution and the rule of law as directed by the courts.” – Shenna Bellows, Maine Sec. of State
“Based on the Constitution, Donald Trump should be removed from every ballot in the nation. He’s a traitor who attacked our nation.” – Clay Jones
Looks like an unelected Sec. of State with a BA in Economics and a political cartoonist with no degree that I’m aware of are suddenly experts on constitutional law. At least the former has access to legal counsel.
“Maine voters should decide who wins the election, not a secretary of state chosen by the Legislature.” – Maine Senator Susan Collins
The decision “should rest with the people as expressed in free and fair elections.” – Maine Senator Angus King
“There is no doubt that Donald Trump is a threat to our liberties and even to our democracy, but in California, we defeat candidates at the polls. Everything else is a political distraction.” – CA Governor Gavin Newsom
“It is more critical than ever to safeguard elections in a way that transcends political divisions.” – CA Sec. of State Shirley Weber
Let’s wait to see what the experts say about it, armchair quarterbacks.
Tonto & Redd Panda 5 months ago
On the ballot blocking question, I have to think a lot of people are waiting to see what our Less than Supreme court does. If one state is allowed to block… certainly more will follow.
Radish the wordsmith 5 months ago
Green Day slams Trump in ‘American Idiot’ performance on New Year’s Eve
The band performed their song “American Idiot” on Dick Clark’s New Year’s Eve Rockin’ Eve with Ryan Seacrest, but sneaked in a dig at Trump and his followers.
“I’m not part of the MAGA agenda,” sang Billie Joe Armstrong, instead of the song’s actual line, “I’m not part of a redneck agenda.”
The song was written as a statement about George W. Bush and his invasion of Iraq, but Green Day has frequently criticized Trump. Band members yelled ‘No Trump" during a performance at the American Music Awards in 2016, and last year they promoted new merch that incorporated the former president’s Fulton County mugshot.
Diane Lee Premium Member 5 months ago
I have a severe case of TDS. I hate the jerk in a way that is totally unreasonable considering that I don’t actually know him. However, I have reservations about kicking someone off a ballot when he hasn’t actually been found guilty of anything other than fraud and sexual assault. You could make a case that those two crimes alone make him unfit to be president, or a member of the human race for that matter, but that’s not what the constitution says. I don’t think he’s even been actually accused of insurrection. There is no doubt in my mind that he is guilty of insurrection and quite a few other things, but I think he needs to found guilty before punishing him for his guilt.
Mike Baldwin creator 5 months ago
Goin’Maine Stream!
Godfreydaniel 5 months ago
Traitor Trump is becoming more and more unhinged, while the members of his evil cult seem to keep to their usual levels of derangement. I suppose there is something to be said for consistency…..
gnorth22 Premium Member 5 months ago
I hear a lot of “it’s best to let the voters decide,” and as a strong believer in democracy I’m very sympathetic to that both on principle and pragmatism.
But let me provide a counter argument.
The voters already did decide in 2020, and rejected Trump. He refused to accept their ruling, and we’ve been in turmoil ever since. The system is built on trust, and he has violated that trust. Why should he be given a second chance? What is the basis for believing that if he lost again he would change his response?
If you had an employee who stole from the business, was fired, but is now asking to come back, would you let them in? Would you trust them?
It reminds me of the old saw: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Radish the wordsmith 5 months ago
Trump set to go to trial over claims he duped investors into backing failed video phone
Donald Trump is set to face yet another trial this month involving allegations that he duped investors into putting money into a failed video phone.The little-mentioned civil trial is scheduled to start on January 29, Newsweek reported Monday.
IndyW 5 months ago
This all is becoming rather confusing. Who’s the real threat to democracy again???
Radish the wordsmith 5 months ago
Jamie Raskin destroys excuses to keep Trump on the ballot: He democratically disqualified himself.
The January 6th insurrection, a dark day in American history, marked a pivotal moment where Trump’s actions aligned with the constitutional definition of an insurrectionist. As Raskin articulates, this designation is not merely a theoretical exercise but a practical impediment to Trump’s eligibility for future presidential runs. In its wisdom, the Constitution anticipates such scenarios, allowing for the disqualification of individuals who betray the foundational principles of democracy and the rule of law.
The comparison drawn by Raskin between the natural disqualifications and that of engaging in insurrection underscores the democratic nature of the latter. While one cannot choose one’s birthplace or the passage of time, one can certainly choose to uphold or subvert democratic norms and values. In this light, Trump’s actions on and leading up to January 6th represent a conscious decision to undermine the democratic process, thereby rendering him constitutionally ineligible for future presidential candidacy.
Raskin’s argument gains further weight considering the broader democratic implications. As the only national office representing all Americans, the presidency demands a holder who embodies the nation’s democratic ideals. Allowing someone who has actively worked against these principles to contend for or hold this office again would not only be a disservice to the Constitution but also to the democratic ethos of the nation.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s potential involvement in this matter underscores the urgency and complexity of ensuring the integrity of presidential qualifications. As Raskin notes, the Court’s decision could significantly impact the democratic fabric of the nation. It’s not merely a legal decision but a statement of the values and principles that define American democracy.
Zebrastripes 5 months ago
L. M. A. O. !!!
Clay hits another outta da park!
Love it! ❤️❤️❤️
TwilightFaze 5 months ago
“IT’S A VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS!!!!” No. No it’s not, idiot. First off, the proposal has to reach the government. Then, it’s considered if it’s worth pursuing or not. Then it’s put to a vote after the investigation is over. Then majority rules on the result. It’s a not a violation of rights; it’s that it didn’t go your way (like a dictator would do). Keep in mind some states went “yay” and others went “nay.” Maybe your parents never told you this growing up, but you can’t always get what you want.
Free Radical 5 months ago
First the disgraced ex president needs to spend some time in the slammer for his crimes against the nation. While in there write a new book about his struggles. Then make a comeback and be appointed savior of the nation in perpetuity as absolute supreme ruler. Then all his dreams will be fulfilled.
pamela welch Premium Member 5 months ago
Happy New Year Clay, keep up the excellent work ♥
Tonto & Redd Panda 5 months ago
Took a walk this afternoon. Went by a pile of scratch tickets, thrown by the side of the road. Some were links of 3 or 4 $10 tickets. These guys throw their $$ away. Even as reality says they’re losers. And yet, they persist.
Is this so different from trump supporters? Truth looking at them, square in the face, and yet, they persist.
AtomicForce91 Premium Member 5 months ago
After being charged with imaginary crimes.