Today is Sunday, September 3, 2023. Something that I wrote about very recently might actually bear fruit in this country’s up-to-now futile attempt to topple a madman by the name of Donald J. Dumpf from seizing control of the foundations of democracy in 2024 and declaring himself an autocrat for life and that is the nascent movement challenging Dumpf’s place on the ballot claiming that he aided and abetted an “insurrection” and is therefore disqualified from running for office under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since I mentioned this awhile back, the movement has gained momentum with the publication of law articles by Never Trump jurists William Baude of the University of Chicago and Michael Stokes Paulsen of the University of St. Thomas, and another by former Federal Appellate Judge J. Michael Luttig who penned an article in The Atlantic with former Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe. This new wrinkle in Dumpf’s improbable ascent to the White House in 2024 appears in an online article for 1945 by John Rossomando entitled ‘He can’t run’: Trump Is Now Facing the Totally Unthinkable.”

Talking about another “more politically perilous option” for getting rid of Dumpf altogether, Politico reporter Erica Arden wrote, “The other, more politically perilous option would be for one or more states to embrace the theory outright and simply refuse to list Trump on their ballots. That might force Trump to file his own lawsuits asking courts to order his candidacy restored in those states. So far, no state has moved to bar Trump from the ballot, though secretaries of state around the nation are discussing the issue among themselves.”

What this measure could lead to is thrusting the courts, and likely the Supreme Court, into an unsettled debate over the meaning of the insurrection clause, a long-winded 110-word provision that was ratified in 1868 and has rarely been interpreted – or even invoked – since then.

At the time, in the case of the Civil War, it was President Abraham Lincoln who declared that an insurrection was under way. Trump was president at the time of the Capitol riot; consequently, what authority declared that the riot was an insurrection? To the MAGA arm of the Republican Party, which seems to embrace the whole party these days, that “riot” was nothing more than a “tour” of the White House in the words of one Republican Congressman who spewed such nonsense at the time of the event.

The main weakness of these lawsuits comes down to whether or not the Capitol riot was “an insurrection” and if Dumpf aided and abetted the violent activities on January 6, 2021. To prove that Dumpf was guilty of insurrection, one would need to establish criminal intent.

One of those conservative voices who spoke about taking Dumpf off the ballot because of his involvement in an insurrection, J. Michael Luttig, has noted that special counsel Jack Smith did not charge Herr Dumpf with insurrection. The indictment against Trump over his involvement in the events of January 6 does not mention “incitement” even once.

The other judicial experts, Baude and Stokes, likewise concede that the definition of “insurrection” is not clean-cut.

So who knows if this movement to disqualify Dumpf from the ballot will ever gain much traction? Even though I believe there is a solid argument to get him off the ballot come next November. It might all boil down to doing the most basic and necessary thing: if his accursed name appears on the Republican ballot in November 2024, then it’s our solemn duty as Americans to cast our vote for President Joe Biden – if even his name is on the ballot. Anything can happen in a year, as we’ve been told.

Anyway, this entry tonight is going to be brief since Elliot and I watched a film earlier, Rabbit, Run, made in 1970 starring James Caan, Carrie Snodgrass, and Anjanette Comer. I’m sure most of you younger folks never heard of the two actresses mentioned here; I hope you have heard of James Caan who got his big break portraying Sonny Corleone in The Godfather two years later.

I came across this film on TCM’s schedule the other day and I decided to tape it. It’s based on the John Updike series of books on Harry Angstrom, aka Rabbit. I never knew any film was shot employing one of Updike’s more enduring fictional characters – until now. The character of “Rabbit” Angstrom would appear in three sequels and one novella, all of which I have read at one point or another.

The story follows Harry who was a former high school basketball star who is trapped in a loveless marriage to Janice (who is pregnant again) and decides to just leave his alcoholic wife and little son, Nelson, to drive to Virginia where he meets up with his former basketball coach, who introduces him to Ruth Leonard, a sometime prostitute, who he immediately moves in with. She is played by Anjanette Comer without any illusions as to who she is getting involved with.

The film is set in the working-class, weary-looking town of Brewer, Pennsylvania. This was not the usual milieu that Updike wrote about and that is why this series became very successful for him. In it, he laid bare the hopes, dreams, and frustrations of a working-class antihero in the form of Harry Angstrom, who is played to befuddled perfection by Caan in this first adaptation of his 1960 novel.

Stay safe and be well.