The Kansas City Chiefs’ Kadarius Toney lines up offside.
Column By John Young
Was he offside?
Of course, he was.
The visual couldn’t have been more conclusive in the heated NFL contest: the blue line of scrimmage on the TV, the red-and-white shoe of Kansas City Chief Kadarius Toney on top of it. Five yards. Replay down.
Ah, but the penalty negated a decisive touchdown! On a certifiably cool flea-flicker! A throw across the field by tight end Travis Kelce, for goodness’ sake!
Chiefs partisans went crazy.
The chief complainant in the heat of the moment was QB Patrick Mahomes: Why call that now?! It’s such a rare infraction! (Mahomes would apologize on Day 2 after he saw the replay.)
We won’t get any of that from Donald Trump and his partisans.
Instead, a storm of exclamation points as they ignore Trump’s clear violation of our rule book: the U.S. Constitution — and scream hysterically about the prescribed remedy: Player ejected.
Trump incited an insurrection, not just with words that triggered bloodshed but with backroom plans to negate the will of American voters.
“A concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish a peaceful transfer of power,” is how the Colorado Supreme Court defined what the court majority and the preceding trial judge found: an insurrection.
We saw what we saw. For what we didn’t see, Special Counsel Jack Smith is providing many added details.
Sure, blame the refs for calling what we all know to be a horrendous affront to us, to every American with eyes to see.
“Leftist, blue-state judges.”
Do you know that the plaintiffs in this case are two Republicans and two independents?
The legal experts first to advance this matter – law professors Willam Baude (University of Chicago) and Michael Stokes (University of St. Thomas) — are members of the right-wing Federalist Society.
Meanwhile, the foremost advocate of Trump’s disqualification by the 14th Amendment is Judge Michael Luttig, a superstar of jurisprudence on the right.
MAGA marionette Rep. Elise Stefanik called the Colorado court’s ruling “un-American.”
Judge Luttig calls the ruling “unassailable.”
Team Trump calls it “election interference,” which is its response to every attempt to hold him accountable for breaking the law.
No greater attempt at election interference has ever existed than when “Hang Mike Pence” rang out at the Capitol and Trump sent his love to frothing insurgents.
Trump has been artful in his effort to make this a partisan matter, as with every effort to hold him accountable.
Useful phrasing comes from Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch who, back when he was a Colorado appellate judge, wrote that a state acts on a “legitimate interest” in excluding from the ballot “candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office.” Base it on age. Base it on citizenship. Base it on encouraging and abetting a revolt against democracy.
The Colorado Supreme Court says Trump meets the latter definition.
Trump’s attorneys can call every legal entanglement he faces a Democratic plot. It’s not.
It’s the work of a justice system built to give the defendant every benefit of the doubt while enforcing the law.
Regarding the separate felony charges against Trump, a rarely mentioned truth is that – whatever their politics — prosecutors did not indict Donald Trump. Grand juries did.
“Election interference”? Funny joke, This is a man who literally bullied the Georgia Secretary of State in his bid to “find” votes that weren’t there.
Now tapes emerge of Trump personally asking election officials in Michigan to break the law.
Donald Trump is the victim of a witch hunt.
And the refs were against the Chiefs that night. They always are.
Longtime newspaperman John Young lives in Colorado. Email him at jyoungcolumn@gmail.com.
The opinions expressed in this editorial are those of the author.
