by Debra Heine
An alarming video surfaced Monday appearing to show Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) declaring that Congress will have to disqualify former President Donald Trump on January 6, 2025 if he wins the November election, and predicting a civil war with “rampaging Trump mobs” could erupt as a result.
Raskin made the disturbing comments during a discussion about voter rights with law professor Richard L. Hasen and civil rights lawyer Sherrilyn Iffil at the Politics and Prose bookstore in Washington D.C. on February 17, 2024. The congressman’s remarks were so extreme, some journalists are wondering if the video was manipulated.
The Supreme Court was expected to rule in Trump’s favor on an eligibility case within weeks. Democrats argued that Trump should be kicked of ballots because of a provision in the 14th Amendment related to people who engage in insurrection.
Raskin lamented that SCOTUS seemed poised to rule against the Democrats’ position on the issue.
“The greatest example going on right now before our very eyes is Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which they’re just disappearing with a magic wand, as if it doesn’t exist even though it could not be clearer what it’s stating,” Raskin said.
The Supremes went on to decide in a 9-0 ruling that “states have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency.” Trump had to be reinstated to the Colorado ballot following the unanimous decision.
SCOTUS wrote in the March 4 decision: “Because the Constitution makes Congress, rather than the States, responsible for enforcing Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates, we reverse.”
Raskin appeared suspiciously confident that Democrats would hold solid majorities in both Houses of Congress next year enabling them to pass legislation disqualifying Trump.
The Maryland Democrat told his comrades, “it’s going to be up to us on January 6, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he’s disqualified.”
Raskin predicted that civil disorder would ensue after Trump was denied the presidency.
“And then we need bodyguards for everybody, and civil war conditions, all because the nine justices—not all of them, but these justices who have not many cases to look at every year, not that much work to do, a huge staff, great protection — simply do not want to do their job and interpret what the great 14th Amendment means,” he said.
Raskin went on to attack the Supreme Court and argue that “the right to vote is under attack,” so Democrats “have to play defense and offense in 2024.”
What I would say is, you know, we’ve got to play defense and offense in 2024. The right to vote is under attack in very specific ways in lots of states, especially in some of the Deep South states, especially in Florida, which I just returned from. There’s just unbelievable stuff going on there — like, if you have to send a mail-in ballot or absentee ballot, you have to have a — you can only have it taken to the mailbox or the polls by a member of your nuclear family who lives with you. OK? So there’s just a million traps for the unwary that are being set across the country.
But at the same time, we do have to get on offense for the articulation of a constitutional right to vote that’s meaningful for everybody in the country. The million of people who are left out, and disenfranchised, and for everybody whose right to vote is rendered vulnerable by this Supreme Court. And you know, I like very much the point that both Sherlyn [Ifill] and Rick have been making about the Supreme Court. I mean, we’ve got to remember that for the vast majority of American history, the Supreme Court has not been a friend to the people.
It has been overwhelmingly in a reactionary or conservative mode, I mean, all the way up until the Civil War. What did the Supreme Court ever do for enslaved people in our country? Absolutely nothing, other than cement their status in the Dred Scott decision, saying that African-Americans had no rights that the white man was bound to respect. And then even after the Civil War, even after the Reconstruction amendments, in 1896 in Plessy v. Ferguson, constitutionalizing Jim Crow.
And then it’s not until the Warren Court for a couple of decades, with the white primary cases, and Brown v. Board, where you get a different kind of Supreme Court on the side of the freedoms and equality of the American people. But the court is not going to save us. And so that means the only thing that really works is people in motion amending the Constitution — but again, it’s necessary, but it’s not sufficient, because what can be put in the Constitution can slip away from you very quickly.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) reacted to Raskin’s intemperate words after the video went viral on social media.
“Raskin is 1) conceding the election… 2) fomenting civil war… 3) threatening to defy the will of voters conceded in #1… 4) assuming a congress willing to pass a measure …” Roy posted on X.
“Even if voters unquestionably elect Donald Trump as President, no matter the margin, and even if the election is universally accepted as free and fair, top Democrats are calling on Congress to block certification of the results, and prep for civil war,” wrote former Rep. Lee Zelden (R-NY).
“I believe this is called a criminal conspiracy to commit election interference,” commented former Trump advisor and America First Legal founder Stephen Miller.
Some journalists questioned whether Raskin’s extraordinary remarks were legitimate or a “deep fake.”
“I think the office of Jamie Raskin has to comment on the veracity of a video that is circulating, said independent journalist Matt Taibbi. “If it’s in any way altered he needs to make a strong statement to that effect.”
“It’s hard to believe that Jamie Raskin would advocate for some kind of Congressional insurrection against our democratic Republic, but here he is saying it on video. Any chance it’s a deep fake?” asked evolutionary biologist and Dark Horse Podcaster Bret Weinstein.
The congressman’s comments about disqualifying Trump begins at 58:39.
– – –
Debra Heine is a reporter at American Greatness.
Not only was Trump not convicted of insurrection, he was never even charged with inciting it. Not one of the bogus felony charges brought by Jack Smith was for insurrection.
Radkin is a Socialist and a total liberal hack.
He is carrying the bucket foe the Democrat narrative.
Raskin is the new Adam Schiff who tells bigger lies.
No Trump was never convicted of insurrection…because he never did it. He said march peacefully and patrioticly to the capitol. End of story. just more endless False accusations.
Raskin is an insurrectionist. He should be arrested and charged with high treason.