"When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean." -- Humpty Dumpty
"The question is, whether you can make words mean so many different things." -- Alice
"The question is, which is to be master." -- H.D.
Lawyers argue over what words mean. They go to court, where a moderator judges who has the better argument -- which has mastered the language.
That doesn't mean one is right and the other is wrong; only that one is better at arguing. All of this assumes that only lawyers are capable of understanding the meanings of words. In turn, this leads to the phrase, "I'm not a lawyer, but ..."
Editors also understand word meanings, as do linguists, readers and writers.
So if you like to argue, become a lawyer, and play the word game. Otherwise, become a journalist.
This brings us to the current discussion of the "insurrection" on January 6, 2021, as supporters of Donald Trump stormed the Capitol to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the presidential election two months earlier.
The Constitution's 14th Amendment prohibits anyone from holding any public office if that person engaged in insurrection or encouraged those who do, giving them "aid and comfort."
So did Donald Trump actually do that in his speech to supporters just before they invaded the Capitol? And several hours later, did he comfort them even as he urged them to leave the building?
All of that was seen live on national television, so Americans know what he said and did that day.
Now, the legal system is taking action against those who were active in the demonstrations, and punishing them according to law. Also, some of Trump's aides are facing contempt of Congress charges for not cooperating in the investigation of events that day.
Did they give "aid and comfort" to the insurrectionists? And did the former president also give similar support to them as part of his effort to stay in office?
All of this means that Donald Trump can no longer hold any office, civil or military, under the United States because he gave aid and comfort to those who participated in the insurrection.
And if it can be proven that he somehow engaged in that insurrection himself, that would be an even more severe violation of the Constitution. During his speech to the demonstrators, he said he would march with them to the Capitol. He did not, however, perhaps his advisors persuaded him that it was not only unsafe, but a violation of the Constitution -- participating in the insurrection.
Meanwhile, he continues to hint that he may again run for office. Whether he does, or whether he decides to abide by the Constitution and not seek office, are two key questions.
"The question is, whether you can make words mean so many different things." -- Alice
"The question is, which is to be master." -- H.D.
Lawyers argue over what words mean. They go to court, where a moderator judges who has the better argument -- which has mastered the language.
That doesn't mean one is right and the other is wrong; only that one is better at arguing. All of this assumes that only lawyers are capable of understanding the meanings of words. In turn, this leads to the phrase, "I'm not a lawyer, but ..."
Editors also understand word meanings, as do linguists, readers and writers.
So if you like to argue, become a lawyer, and play the word game. Otherwise, become a journalist.
This brings us to the current discussion of the "insurrection" on January 6, 2021, as supporters of Donald Trump stormed the Capitol to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the presidential election two months earlier.
The Constitution's 14th Amendment prohibits anyone from holding any public office if that person engaged in insurrection or encouraged those who do, giving them "aid and comfort."
So did Donald Trump actually do that in his speech to supporters just before they invaded the Capitol? And several hours later, did he comfort them even as he urged them to leave the building?
All of that was seen live on national television, so Americans know what he said and did that day.
Now, the legal system is taking action against those who were active in the demonstrations, and punishing them according to law. Also, some of Trump's aides are facing contempt of Congress charges for not cooperating in the investigation of events that day.
Did they give "aid and comfort" to the insurrectionists? And did the former president also give similar support to them as part of his effort to stay in office?
All of this means that Donald Trump can no longer hold any office, civil or military, under the United States because he gave aid and comfort to those who participated in the insurrection.
And if it can be proven that he somehow engaged in that insurrection himself, that would be an even more severe violation of the Constitution. During his speech to the demonstrators, he said he would march with them to the Capitol. He did not, however, perhaps his advisors persuaded him that it was not only unsafe, but a violation of the Constitution -- participating in the insurrection.
Meanwhile, he continues to hint that he may again run for office. Whether he does, or whether he decides to abide by the Constitution and not seek office, are two key questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment