Marjorie Taylor Greene’s statement on the right to be re-elected

Voters in Greene said the Republicans helped ease the Capitol attack on January 6, 2021, and deprived him of the right to be re-elected.

ATLANTA – U.S. Reporter Marjorie Taylor Greene was hostile during a hearing on Friday’s re-election hearings, saying she liked and wrote various social media posts covering last year’s attack on the U.S. Capitol and did not recall accusing the opposition lawyer. use chopped videos and twist words.

Voters in Georgia’s congressional district said Green helped ease the January 6, 2021 uprising, and that it violated President Joe Biden’s victory and denied him the right to be re-elected under the 14th Amendment’s infrequent citation on “rebellion or rebellion.” he said.

However, Greene, who announced on television the day before the Capitol riots that it was “our 1776 moment”, said he never supported the violence.

Greene will run on the Republican Party’s ballot for the May 24 primaries in Georgia and was backed by former President Donald Trump. The administrative law judge overseeing the hearings must present his findings to Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who will then make the final decision on Green’s suitability.

Greene has repeatedly denied helping or participating in the uprising, and has filed a lawsuit alleging that the law he used to challenge voters’ compliance was unconstitutional.

However, Ron Fein, a lawyer for the protesting voters, said Greene had taken an oath and then violated the revolt. Although Greene was not on the steps of the Capitol, she played a key role in inciting Republicans before the attack, Fein said.

Unlike the Civil War and other uprisings involving military uniforms and tactics, he said, “The leaders of this uprising were among us, on Facebook, on Twitter, in the corners that would hurt the culture of social media.”

Voters’ lawyer Andrew Sally questioned Green about the posts on social media accounts. He repeatedly replied “I don’t remember” or “I don’t remember.”

Asked if he “liked” a post on his Facebook account in 2019 calling for the shooting of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the head, Greene said he did not remember it and that someone else could be held accountable.

Selli suggested that she endorse the use of violence to stop the vote from being confirmed, but Greene said she did not support the violence and encouraged peaceful protest.

Celli played a clip of Greene’s January 5, 2021 interview, which she said was “our 1776 moment.” When Selli was asked if she knew some Trump supporters were using the reference as a call for violence, Greene said it was not her intention and that she was talking about plans to protest the confirmation of the election.

“I was talking about the courage to protest,” he said.

Selli was upset when he did not answer her questions directly and accused her of speculating.

“Mrs. Greene, I’m just asking questions,” he said.

“I just answer,” he replied.

Administrative Law Judge Charles Bodro was sometimes annoyed by the repetition of questions and sometimes told Sally to continue. He also repeatedly urged Greene’s supporters to applaud or applaud during the trial.

Greene’s lawyer, James Bopp, said his client had “not been involved in the attack on the Capitol” and that rivals were making very serious allegations with significant consequences.

“By removing Green from the ballot, they want to deprive thousands of people living in Georgia’s 14th constituency of the right to vote,” he said.

During the riots, Greene was in a dark corridor at the Capitol and called on people to be safe and calm through social media.

“Rep. Greene was the victim of this attack, “said Bopp, adding that he believed his life could be in danger.

Bopp said Green was engaged in a protected political speech. He also argued that the administrative hearing process was intended to address key specialty issues, not to assess key constitutional and federal claims.

Dozens of Greene supporters, including U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, a Republican from Florida and a staunch ally of Green, attended the trial.

Green’s right to be re-elected was raised by five voters in his district, and the procedure for such a protest is set out in Georgian law.

The law states that any voter who has the right to vote for a candidate may object to the qualities of that candidate by submitting a written complaint. The Secretary of State must then request a hearing before an administrative law judge.

Beaudrot asked both sides to provide a briefing by midnight on Thursday, after which he said he would try to make a decision within a week.

After presenting the findings, Raffensperger will be tasked with deciding on the suitability of Greene, who is loyal to Trump, as the candidate approved by Trump faces a difficult underlying problem. Raffensperger angered Trump shortly after the 2020 election when he refused to take steps to offset Trump’s slight loss to the state.

The 14th Amendment states that “no one who has previously taken an oath as a member of Congress … who has sworn, rebelled, or rebelled against the United States Constitution may serve in Congress.” Ratified shortly after the Civil War, it was intended to ensure that delegates fighting for the Confederacy did not return to Congress.

In Atlanta on Monday, U.S. District Judge Amy Tottenberg rejected Green’s request to suspend the protest. Greene complains about this decision.

Georgia’s complaint was filed on behalf of voters by the Free Speech for People national election and campaign financial reform group.

The group made similar calls on behalf of voters in Arizona, where the judge decided to keep the three Republicans on the ballot, and against Madison Cawthorn, a Republican from the United States, who spoke at a pre-riot rally in North Carolina.

Last month, a federal judge blocked a lawsuit against Cawthorn and wrote that laws passed by Congress in 1872 and 1898 would not apply to current House members of the 14th Amendment.

Dr. Emory University Professor of Political Science. Andra Gillespie said on Friday that Green’s answers at the hearing – that other people she could not name – were also allowed to post on her social media accounts – and that she could not recall key events and statements before. and in the aftermath of the riots – it is likely to be part of the Chamber Committee’s ongoing investigation into the January 6 riots.

“Some of these social media messages claim that they don’t remember or are sure who actually sent them,” Dr. Gillespie said: “What Congressman Green is trying to do is make a convincing denial that he is not actually responsible.

Gillespie agrees with political and legal analysts who believe it will be difficult for Raffensperger to remove Green’s name from the Georgia ballot, but instead leaves it to his constituents and possibly the House Committee to decide his future in Congress.

Gillespie said, “Voters in the area should ask if they believe Congressman Green didn’t say what he said less than a year and a half ago.” Or what he thought less than a year and a half ago. If he does not, there is an opportunity to be reminded in a report published by the committee on January 6. It will prove the findings of investigators. “

The Associated Press contributed to the report.

Marjorie Taylor Greene’s statement on the right to be re-elected

Source link Marjorie Taylor Greene’s statement on the right to be re-elected

Back to top button