
Law vs Politics
Beyond 1921

URBAN TRUMP[T]IONARY
1
Trumpology
We know people are confused.We'll translate:
​
ENDING 14th AMENDMENT
The 14th Amendment, in the same Section that grants Birthright Citizenship, states no one who has "engaged in" in an insurrection against the United States of America can be President.
​
Why this is time-sensitive, translation why this egg came first.
Democrats and Republicans took this section to court during the election in Colorado's bid to keep former President Trump off their ballot. The Trump courts ruled the Amendment's protections could not be used by the states, only the federal government could say the former President was not qualified to be President. Therefore, the current Congress could today take a vote and invoke this law.
2
Muskology
Describe your service here. What makes it great? Use short catchy text to tell people what you offer, and the benefits they will receive. A great description gets readers in the mood, and makes them more likely to go ahead and book.
3
Project 2025
Project 2025 began in 1776
Impeachment
Could it be that fiddling with the 14th Amendment is also to get rid of parts of Section 3?
​
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.

Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3:
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.
Reversing the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Anderson v. Griswold,1 the United States Supreme Court held, per curiam, in Trump v. Anderson, that states cannot determine a candidate’s eligibility for federal office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment.2 In Anderson v. Griswold, the Colorado Supreme Court had held former President Donald J. Trump to be disqualified from holding the office of President under Section Three3 of the Fourteenth Amendment on the grounds that he had engaged in insurrection.4 As a consequence, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the Colorado Secretary of State could not include President Trump’s name on Colorado’s 2024 presidential primary ballot.5
In reaching its decision in Trump v. Anderson, the U.S. Supreme Court observed that Congress enjoys power to enforce the Amendment through legislation pursuant to Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment,6 and reasoned that Section 5 grants Congress alone the authority to provide for the enforcement of Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates.7 The Court noted, however, that states retain concurrent authority to enforce Section 3 with respect to state offices.8
WILL THE REAL DEI PLEASE STAND UP
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is not interchangeable with CIVIL RIGHTS Amber Sims
1 FEB 2025 by R. Clardy
As soon as African men, women and children landed on the shores of North America in the late 1500s
BLACKS' FIGHT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS began. The fight crescendoed in the 1960s as one of the greatest American victories since the US Civil War ushered in a floodgate of inclusion for Women, for Native Americans, for Hispanics, for European American workers, for all Americans.
To fill jobs previously held by millions of White men for whom Civil Rights legislation now allowed to move much higher up the ladder along with a quota of Blacks and the millions of White women who were now allowed out of their homes, doors also opened for Immigrants from hundreds of countries that had previously been excluded.
Sixty years later everybody seems to have forgotten that for the first two centuries of our nation, before the Civil Rights Movement, before Affirmative Action, a small elite set all the
norms, made all the rules, wrote all the laws and were the only people allowed to swim in the vast seas of real opportunity all Americans, and much of the rest of the world, worked excruciatingly hard, long and often dangerous hours to produce and finance.
We don't remember the story this way because that elite also wrote or financed (with money we gave them) all the books and films and plays where wealthy or on the way to wealthy men, in the US narrated only as White men, were the heroes of every story, for all of world history.
A tiny class of people promoted as legitimate only every science and every art, that coincidentally only they were allowed to participate in, that told everyone else how perfectly right it was for them to be in charge...of everything.
As we watch this 21st century push to eliminate all of America's Civil Rights era advances, we have clearly forgotten or never understood how Affirmative Action and inclusion opened those same opportunities to all citizens. Opportunities that had for centuries only been available to wealthy and wealth adjacent, highly educated White men.
And they are continuing to write the narrative for your life even today. Ask their AI when women were fully allowed into Harvard, founded in the 1600s...Harvard, not Radcliffe. Even AI will give you a "nuanced" answer about efforts made (by women} in the early 1900s to create a school for women, muddying the truth, not straight up telling you Harvard fully opened to women in the 1970s. The same, even smaller now elite hope to use tech to continue setting all the boundaries of your life to their advantage forever. To continue telling you who you are.
These three videos discuss ways the new US administration is unraveling rights for all Americans by rolling back 1960s Civil Rights laws most Americans don't realize apply to all Americans.
Brian Becker and Eugene Puryear of Break Through News discuss the anti-DEI deals. Warning: Language
THE 14th AMENDMENT
Could it be that fiddling with the 14th Amendment is also to get rid of parts of Section 3?
​
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.
To be clear, the bar is low, that's not convicted of, it's participated in an insurrection.
RETURN of JIM CROW
North Tulsa born, I was taught that no people who have been oppressed for hundreds of years should ever dabble with oppressing other people...themselves included. And, no, I don't think anyone should be able to coerce me to believe differently. So, when I was maybe about 9 years old and first heard of the
Ku Klux Klan, I, of course at 9 years old, didn't understand and probably was not told about all their illegal activities...murder, threatening the communities of other Americans, I just thought, well, they are Americans, how can you coerce them not to believe what they have been taught. Of course I didn't realize what they had been taught. I was a teenager before anyone explained to me that discrimination, prejudice and apartheid were concepts in the world. As an adult, I realized you can't allow Americans to murder, harass and exclude other Americans from freedom to the pursuits of livelihood and happiness. You certainly can't make this legal.
​
I still understand if you do not want to participate, fraternize with others, clearly you can create your own private schools, private neighborhoods to not do so. You can refuse to politely serve customers, find hundreds of legal ways to deny employment, lower student grades, criminalize minor infractions...honestly, who should ever end up dead because they didn't make a turn signal.
These things are still totally legal and are done everyday.
​
What we do not do in our country, in a Democracy, is pass legislation or policies disbanding inclusion as the law of the land.
Discomfort and preference cannot be confused with exclusion. It's the bedrock of our Constitution.
Legally. In America, you are free to choose your own tribes.
You are not free to elevate your tribe to ruler over all others.
ERIKA BROWN and AMBER SIMS of BLACK LIBERATION MEDIA give a history lesson on the nature of anti-Black racism in America. It's highly strategic, cleverly marketed and its definitely not new. Warning: Language
OK GEN Z
How in all of Congress, The White House and all the State Houses in America, does only Jasmine Crockett (D/TX) seem to understand when you take money for food away from Americans you're making people you don't care about starve, sure...
but, how can you not understand what Farmers, who you do say you care about, have to sell to make a living? FOOD
It doesn't fall from trees.
We make all Billionaires
so, is it really their greed or ours?
You pay them to make the laws, all the social norms, the ads, and to buy the politicians who allow them to make the deals that allow them to keep and use waymore of your money, the American people's money, on themselves than on YOU, the American people.

