The Equal Protection Clause
The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying anyone within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law. That means every person must be treated the same way in the application of the laws as someone else in similar conditions and circumstances.The Espionage Act or Obstruction of Justice
While Gohmert agrees that Democrats are trying to use the Espionage Act to make Trump ineligible to run for president, he added that another idea being floated by Democrats is to charge him with “obstruction of justice.”In July 2019, Gohmert blasted former special counsel Robert Mueller over his handling of the Russia investigation during a heated line of questioning before the House Judiciary Committee hearing, accusing him of “perpetuating injustice.”
“As I pointed out to him, that whole thing was a hoax,” Gohmert recalled. “The Steele Dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign with help from the DOJ and the FBI.”
‘The Documents Were Safe With Trump’
According to Gohmert, the concerns expressed by the DOJ and the FBI that Trump was going to destroy those documents “is ridiculous because he had been trying to get those documents released to the public.”“Like Schumer once said, the intel community has ’six ways from Sunday' to come after you,” Gohmert recalled, referencing the statement Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer made during a 2017 interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
Schumer also said, “[Trump’s] being really dumb to do this.“ When Maddow asked what Schumer thought the intelligence community would do in response to Trump’s actions, Schumer said, “I don’t know, but from what I am told that they are very upset by how he has treated them and talked about them.”
“I think the documents were safer with Trump because his incentive to keep them intact was stronger than that of the DOJ,” Gohmert added. “You could ask Ted Stevens about the DOJ and people like Muller, except he was killed in a plane crash after they prosecuted him a couple of weeks prior to his election in a totally fabricated case.”
Democrats Try ‘Insurrection’
Along with the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice, there is a third idea Democrats are toying with to get rid of Trump—insurrection.Just like Gohmert, Rick Hasen, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law also said he doesn’t see a conviction for violating 18 U.S. Code 2071 preventing Trump from running for office.
“Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly bars from the presidency, as well as any other ‘office, civil or military, under the United States’ anyone who ’having previously taken an oath … as an officer of the United States … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection … against the same,” Foley suggested.
“Given all that we now know about Trump’s role in fomenting the insurrection at the Capitol this past January 6,” Foley asserted, “there’s already a powerful case to be made that Trump ‘engaged in insurrection’ within the meaning of this constitutional clause, thereby making Trump ineligible to be inaugurated again as president on January 20, 2025. This ineligibility argument may grow even stronger after the House select committee completes its ongoing investigation.”
However, while being accused in the media and by members of the Jan. 6 committee of “insurrection,” Trump has not been formally charged. For that matter, nor has anyone who has been arrested for their participation in the protests of January 6, 2021, which has been repeatedly labeled by Democrats and the liberal media as an “insurrection.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Hasen and Foley for clarification of their allegations.
“I will not speak with the Epoch Times,” Hasen replied by email. “Sorry.”
About the Missing Video Footage
Gohmert also revealed for the first time to The Epoch Times that he finally received a response to his letter.While offering excuses like, they “can’t allow the public release of all 15,00 hours” of surveillance video because they would then have to change their security measures and the location of all of the cameras, Gohmert said Capitol Police were forced to concede that “Subsection (c)” indeed has the power to force them to allow any member of Congress to view those missing hours of video footage. Their stipulation, Gohmert noted, is that “any member of Congress who wants to view the videos may do so” as long as no pictures or recordings are taken.
Gohmert is now talking to the other members of Congress who signed the letter, “and even some who didn’t,” to come up with the most efficient and effective way to review the missing footage.
‘The Ultimate Authority’
As for the Democrats’ efforts to use the Espionage Act to preclude Trump from seeking another term as president, the immediate challenge to that charge will be the United States Constitution.According to what Gohmert refers to as “the ultimate authority,” the United States Constitution only provides for two qualifications to qualify for the office of President; that they are at least 37 years old and that they were born a United States citizen. There is nothing in the Constitution that precludes someone from seeking the office of president or being elected to that office and no law or statute enacted since has the power to overrule that “ultimate authority.”
In fact, someone convicted of crimes under the Espionage Act already ran for president—from prison.
‘Don’t Be Goaded Into Doing Anything Violent’
While Gohmert is still extremely concerned that the DOJ is trying to prevent Trump from having a full review of the documents to find out who was breaking the law while he was president, he also believes the raid used to confiscate the records is yet another effort to further agitate Trump’s already angered supporters and to “provoke conservatives into doing something violent.”Amid warnings that the protest might become “a trap,” Hardage canceled his plans.
A Venue Change
While Gohmert is not convinced that a conviction of any sort would dissuade Trump’s supporters from voting for him in 2024, he is fully confident that Trump—just as the Jan. 6 defendants and prisoners—would not get a fair trial in Washington.“I am proposing a venue change to allow someone who is being prosecuted to choose a venue in their own state instead of the District of Columbia. so they can actually be tried by their peers instead of people who just hate conservative Republicans.
“I am hoping that will be picked up and put into law next year. It would make it a more fair system because heaven knows this DOJ has twisted law into a direction most of us never would have expected in our lifetime.”
Gohmert is also convinced that, despite the efforts by Democrats to take Trump down since before he even announced his candidacy for president on the escalator at Trump Tower in 2015, Gohmert believes it’s just the beginning.
‘Coming After the DOJ’
If conservatives can avoid engaging in violence and if election integrity measures help prevent “massive unfair voting,” Gohmert predicts Republicans will take control of both the House and Senate in the November midterms. He also issued a warning to the DOJ.“I don’t know if the Senate will be as aggressive as needed,” Gohmert confessed, “but knowing the guys I serve with on the Judiciary Committee, they are not going to let this rest. They’re coming after the DOJ. They’re going to get to the bottom of who the crooks are in the DOJ and the FBI.”
If Republicans don’t take back control of the House and Senate, Gohmert said he does not see the injustice in the DOJ and corruption of the intelligence community ever being corrected.
“That’s third-world stuff,” Gohmert said. “That’s the kind of thing Chaves did in Venezuela and now Maduro is doing in Venezuela, and it’s the kind of thing Castro did in Cuba and Putin is doing in Russia.”
In closing, Gohmert offered some advice—and a promise—to frustrated Republicans.
“It’s so critical that we get this right,” he admonished. “Just don’t get provoked into violence, and we will straighten this out in January.
The Epoch Times reached out to the DOJ for comment.