Politics
Column: Trump is dangerously unfit for office. But leave him on the ballot so voters can give him the boot
Even a despicable menace like Donald Trump deserves a fair shake. He shouldn’t be punished before being convicted.
In America, everyone’s innocent until proved guilty, right? At least that’s what was drummed into me growing up.
Many people — mainly Democrats and left-leaners — want to deny Trump access to presidential primary ballots under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Written right after the Civil War, Section 3 decrees that “no person shall … hold any office, civil or military, under the United States or under any state” who took an oath “to support the Constitution” and “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort to the enemies.”
That made perfect sense. If you fought to cripple the nation after pledging to protect it, once you’ve failed you shouldn’t be allowed to help lead the country.
Now there’s the movement to prevent former President Trump from running again for the Oval Office because he allegedly inspired — ”engaged in” — insurrection by armed thugs and wackos. After Trump’s pep talk, they stormed the nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and tried to prevent Congress’ certification of President Biden’s election victory over the sour loser who lied about massive voter fraud.
Give credit to Gov. Gavin Newsom and Secretary of State Shirley Weber, California’s top election official. These two liberal Democrats haven’t joined the chorus to deny Trump ballot access. They want nothing to do with it.
“There is no doubt that Donald Trump is a threat to our liberties and even to our democracy, but in California we defeat candidates we don’t like at the polls,” Newsom said in his only public comment on the matter. “Everything else is a political distraction.”
Weber put Trump on California’s March 5 Republican primary ballot despite pressure from Democratic Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis to boot him.
“I must place the sanctity of these elections above partisan politics,” Weber said in a statement.
“While we can agree that the attack on the Capitol and the former president’s conduct was abhorrent, there are complex legal issues surrounding this matter.“
She added that Trump’s conduct “tainted and continues to sow the public’s mistrust in government and the legitimacy of elections, so it is more critical than ever to safeguard elections in a way that transcends political divisions.”
California Secretary of State Shirley Weber.
(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)
In my view, the nation — and certainly democracy — would be a lot better off if Trump were never allowed anywhere near power again. He’s dangerously divisive, shamelessly immoral and a terrible role model for the nation’s youth. At 77, the Republican front-runner may even be slipping in the head, yakking about becoming dictator for a day, taking revenge on opponents and mimicking Hitler rhetoric.
OK, but Trump has not been convicted of insurrection. No prosecutor has even charged him with that, although he has been indicted on nearly 100 other criminal counts.
Where’s the due process that’s guaranteed by the Constitution? The right to a jury trial? To cross-examine prosecution witnesses? And what’s an “insurrection” anyway? We’d better have a solid definition before denying someone public office because he “engaged” in it.
But I’m just rambling on like the non-lawyer layman that I am, reflecting — I suspect — similar attitudes among numerous citizens.
I contacted some legal scholars and asked where I was off base. They obliged.
All of them told me that no conviction on an insurrection charge is apparently necessary to kick Trump off state ballots.
“There is nothing in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that requires a conviction,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law.
“I don’t read Section 3 as requiring that anyone be convicted,” said Jessica Levinson, who specializes in election law at Loyola Law School.
Denying someone ballot access “is not a criminal punishment,” UCLA election law professor Richard Hasen said. “It’s not going to jail. It’s not paying a fine. It’s not being denied a right.”
Running for office is not a “right,” I was told by the professors. It’s a “privilege.”
“That said,” Hasen added, “there’s a due process question.”
Colorado’s Supreme Court kicked Trump off the primary ballot, ruling that he engaged in insurrection. First there was a five-day administrative hearing that the court said sufficed for due process. Trump disagreed and is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court. But Maine’s secretary of state removed Trump from the ballot on her own.
Trump deserves some due process, Hasen said.
“There are two separate questions,” the professor said. “Was he participating in an insurrection? How do we know?”
Exactly.
Who gets to decide?
The U.S. Senate should have solved the Trump mess after the Capitol mob attack. The House impeached him for inciting an insurrection. But too many Republicans cowered on a Senate vote to convict. The vote fell 10 short of the two-thirds needed. A conviction would have barred Trump from ever holding office again.
Weber told me she concluded it was outside her authority to keep Trump off California’s ballot. And if she did, the secretary of state added, “it would feed those folks” who already believe elections are rigged against Trump. “It would just stoke the fire.”
Does she personally believe Trump’s an insurrectionist? “Oh, yeah,” she answered. “He’s telling people to fight and all of a sudden they’re climbing over walls at the Capitol, breaking in and going after the vice president? Is this insurrection? Oh my God! ….
“I hope and pray the Supreme Court takes up the issue and gives us a good definition of insurrection so people know exactly what it is, and whatever the outcome we’re not in a state of confusion.”
The court announced on Friday it will soon hear the case.
Yes, the best solution for democracy would be for the Supreme Court to deny Trump the right to serve again in public office. But that’s probably asking too much of this conservative outfit that includes three justices Trump appointed.
Short of that, we need to trust the democratic process to legitimately deny this guy another power grab. Let the voters find him guilty.
Politics
Dem fundraising giant in the hot seat as GOP lawmakers demand answers over dodged subpoena
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
House Republicans are demanding ActBlue, a top Democratic campaign fundraising apparatus, turn over international communications, probing whether the organization knowingly misled lawmakers and dodged subpoenas to hide weaknesses in its screening process to weed out illegal, overseas donations.
House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., collectively laid out their demands in a letter published on Tuesday.
“For more than a year, the Committees have conducted oversight regarding ActBlue’s ‘fundamentally unserious approach to fraud prevention,’” the letter reads.
“Recent reporting … strongly suggests that ActBlue deliberately obstructed the Committees’ investigation, including through misleading statements and noncompliance with our subpoenas.”
BREAKING THE FOURTH WALL: LEFT-WING GROUPS DEFIANT AS GOP SHEDS LIGHT ON GROUPS TIED TO CHINA
Rep. Jim Jordan leaves a House Republican Conference meeting at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 10, 2024. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc)
The letter is addressed to Regina Wallace-Jones, the CEO and president of ActBlue, and is the most recent entry in investigations that began in 2023 when Republicans originally raised concerns about foreign donations possibly influencing American elections.
It also follows New York Times reporting on a memo from Covington & Burling, a law firm, warning that gaps in its screening armor could present “a substantial risk for ActBlue.”
The memo, on its own, does not implicate wrongdoing or indicate that ActBlue accepted international donations. Even so, the reporting caught the eye of Republicans in Congress.
Steil, Jordan and Comer are collectively asking ActBlue to produce two internal documents to examine the internal understanding ActBlue may have had about its own weaknesses.
The first is a resignation letter from General Counsel Aaron Ting — a document Republicans contend centers on liabilities created by ActBlue’s donation security.
Republicans believe the second, a message from ActBlue’s former legal counsel Zain Ahmad, relates to an ignored whistleblower complaint about those practices.
HOUSE HEARING RAISES RED FLAGS OVER FORMER TECH MOGUL’S ‘CCP NETWORK’ ALLEGEDLY FUNDING OF FAR-LEFT GROUPS
House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY) speaks to the media on his Committee’s investigation into former President Joe Biden’s cognitive state, in the Rayburn House Office Building on July 24, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Republicans have already requested those documents before, but haven’t received them.
“There is considerable reason to believe that ActBlue may have deliberately withheld this responsive material to impede our investigation,” the letter states.
For its own part, ActBlue has claimed it makes every effort to ensure its fundraising complies with legal requirements.
In ActBlue’s own letter published in Nov. 2023, Wallace-Jones, the CEO, affirmed that the organization maintained the highest standards for scrutiny of its fundraising.
“Our approach is multilayered, with checks and confirmations occurring throughout the donation process to verify donors and donor information,” Wallace-Jones wrote.
“These measures, which include compliance measures, technological tools, and manual reviews, help to ensure the identity of donors, root out potential foreign contributions, and protect donors from financial fraud.”
OVERSIGHT DEMANDS DOJ ANSWERS ON FOREIGN FUNDING OF AGITATOR GROUPS AS IRAN, ANTI-ICE PROTESTS CONTINUE
Regina Wallace-Jones of Palo Alto soaks up the first evening of the DNC Convention at the United Center in Chicago, IL on Monday, August 19, 2024. (Photo by Yalonda M. James/San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Republican lawmakers have given ActBlue two weeks to produce the requested documentation, setting a deadline for April 28, 2026.
“Absent these steps, the Committees are prepared to use available mechanisms to enforce our subpoenas,” the letter reads.
Politics
Swalwell scandal sparks fears of deeper rot on Capitol Hill
WASHINGTON — Eric Swalwell’s downfall has raised the possibility of a broader reckoning on Capitol Hill as congressional staffers, reporters and opposition researchers race to verify long-standing rumors of a sordid underground culture among the city’s most powerful.
Former lawmakers across the political spectrum have warned for years of a hushed congressional bacchanal marked by inappropriate revelry and sexual misconduct. But a sense of growing momentum gripped Congress on Tuesday, as Democrats grappled with Swalwell’s resignation and Republicans called for other lawmakers to face scrutiny.
The 72-hour collapse of Swalwell’s political career has shifted attention not only to his closest associates in Congress, but also to a larger set of sitting lawmakers from both parties suspected of lurid sexual activity. Several members have claimed that Swalwell’s alleged behavior was an open secret amid a cacophony of rumors on social media of other potential offenders.
“I think that many people knew about this for a while,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Florida Republican, said in an interview with The Times.
Luna, who planned to lead the charge to expel Swalwell before he resigned, alleged that young staffers would talk among one another about Swalwell’s conduct. Lawmakers should have done more to approach him about the rumors, she said.
Multiple current and former female staffers who spoke with The Times described a broader culture of warning one another about lawmakers with reputations for inappropriate conduct.
But the warnings, passed privately among junior aides, have focused on “sleazy” activity and boundary-crossing behavior, said one former legislative aide, who asked to remain anonymous. Whispers about sleazy behavior generally do not meet the coverage threshold for traditional newsrooms, which are bound by strict ethical standards.
Another former aide said that quiet guidance shared among female staffers focused on behavior that is legal, but nevertheless viewed as unprofessional and unbecoming of members of Congress — a line that has prevented many from speaking out publicly.
Now, a race is on for leverage between two political parties facing comparable strategic risks — each with members facing growing questions over their alleged conduct — and for scoops among news outlets, seeking to break the story first.
The Monday resignations of Swalwell and Texas Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales, who faced his own sex scandal, was also forcing lawmakers to address the issue publicly. Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) — one of Swalwell’s closest friends in Congress — answered questions from reporters at length Tuesday, telling them he should have confronted Swalwell when he heard rumors about his behavior.
“You let your guard down. I let him into my circle. … I deeply regret it,” Gallego said.
He denied knowing about Swalwell’s alleged misconduct when asked about the behavior.
“Look, we socialized. We went out. But I never saw him engage in any of the predatory behavior, harassment, sexual assault,” Gallego said.
Notably quiet was President Trump, who has faced sexual assault accusations of his own and frequently parried with Swalwell throughout his presidency. Although Trump posted an article reporting Swalwell’s resignation on social media, he has not commented on the matter in his own words.
The unraveling scandal comes at a time when lawmakers have come together across party lines to push for transparency in the case of Jeffrey Epstein, the late sex offender and alleged sex trafficker whose network of powerful associates included Democrats and Republicans alike.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Meanwhile, details of the Swalwell scandal continued to unfold Tuesday, as a Beverly Hills woman accused him of drugging and raping her in 2018. The Times could not immediately reach his attorney; he previously denied allegations of rape and sexual misconduct made by multiple women in published accounts last week.
Sex scandals are not a new phenomenon on Capitol Hill, which has seen over a dozen members embroiled in controversy over the last decade, including Katie Hill of California, Cory Mills and Matt Gaetz of Florida, and Blake Farenthold of Texas, among others.
But several prominent former members — including former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy — have warned of a more widespread cultural problem.
“Every member in Congress knows not to let any young staffer get around Swalwell or Matt Gaetz. It’s not a secret there,” McCarthy said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”
Luna had pressed lawmakers to address alleged sexual misconduct on Capitol Hill. In February, she called on the “predatory freaks” in Congress to leave office as she complained about the process to get ethical complaints handled.
“It pisses me off because while some of us are actually working and busting our asses, these clowns are sexually harassing their own staff, doing illegal crap, insider trading etc,” Luna wrote at the time.
Luna said Monday that she was encouraged to see bipartisan support for expelling Swalwell and Gonzales.
A longtime staffer who spoke on condition of anonymity said Tuesday that allegations against Swalwell have sparked conversations about how to do more to help staffers report sexual misconduct, such as reforming procedural rules that would allow staffers to report any of their concerns directly to ethics panels, and about the need for ethics investigations to move more quickly.
“Congress has a short-term memory, that is the difficulty here,” the staffer said. “After these guys leave their seats, there needs to be a concerted and consistent effort for reforms to be established and be made permanent.”
Politics
Video: Vance Says Pope Should Stay Out of U.S. Affairs
new video loaded: Vance Says Pope Should Stay Out of U.S. Affairs
transcript
transcript
Vance Says Pope Should Stay Out of U.S. Affairs
Vice President JD Vance weighed in on the tension between President Trump and Pope Leo XIV as Catholics expressed dismay about Mr. Trump’s attacks.
-
“I certainly think that in some cases, it would be best for the Vatican to stick to matters of morality, to stick to matters of, you know, what’s going on in the Catholic Church and let the president of the United States stick to dictating American public policy.” “I don’t think that the message of the Gospel is meant to be abused in the way that some people are doing. And I will continue to speak out loudly against war, looking to promote peace.” “Pope Leo said things that are wrong. There’s nothing to apologize for. He’s wrong.” “I’m not a big fan of Pope Leo. He’s a very liberal person. I don’t think he’s doing a very good job.” “I did post it, and I thought it was me as a doctor, and it had to do with the Red Cross. There’s a Red Cross worker there, which we support.” “It’s terrible. It’s gross. It’s blasphemous.” “I stand with the pope. I mean, the pope speaks the Gospel. He speaks for peace.”
By Shawn Paik
April 14, 2026
-
Georgia1 week agoGeorgia House Special Runoff Election 2026 Live Results
-
Arkansas5 days agoArkansas TV meteorologist Melinda Mayo retires after nearly four decades on air
-
Ohio14 hours ago‘Little Rascals’ star Bug Hall arrested in Ohio
-
Pennsylvania1 week agoParents charged after toddler injured by wolf at Pennsylvania zoo
-
Milwaukee, WI1 week agoPotawatomi Casino Hotel evacuated after fire breaks out in rooftop HVAC system
-
World1 week agoZelenskyy warns US-Iran war could divert critical aid from Ukraine
-
Austin, TX1 week agoABC Kite Fest Returns to Austin for Annual Celebration – Austin Today
-
Culture1 week agoCan You Name These Novels Based on Their Characters?