U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene testified she couldn’t recall a lot of things at her hearing Friday in state court. She is fending off a challenge filed by voters who say she should be kicked off the May 24 ballot because she helped stir up the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol that disrupted certification of Joe Biden’s presidential victory. AP Photo/John Bazemore, Pool
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene took the stand Friday in an at-times raucous court hearing that incorporated a history lesson on the Whiskey rebellion and a stirring speech from a president fighting off an extraterrestrial invasion.
Greene was in the hot seat because a group of voters say she should not be allowed to run for re-election because they say she helped plan the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. It was the first questioning under oath of a sitting lawmaker about events leading up to the attack on the Capitol intended to interrupt certification of the 2020 presidential election.
They are seeking to invoke a provision of the 14th Amendment adopted in the wake of the Civil War barring insurrectionists from running for office.
Greene vociferously denied any foreknowledge of the riot but answered many of the questions put to her about her meetings and social media posts around that time with “I don’t know” or “I do not recall.”
Attorneys representing the voters sought to characterize the Jan. 6 riot as akin to pre-Civil War uprisings including Shays’ Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion of the late 1800s.
“These insurrections were of a different character,” said attorney Ron Fein. “They were not quite as organized as the Civil War. The foot soldiers of those insurrections didn’t march in armies, they didn’t conquer vast swaths of territory, and they certainly didn’t wear uniforms. That is the kind of insurrection that occurred on Jan. 6.”
Judge Charles Beaudrot listens to arguments in the courtroom, Friday, April 22, 2022, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Bazemore, Pool)
The attorneys invited Indiana University professor Gerard Magliocca to testify as an expert witness about how the framers of the 14th Amendment would have conceptualized the idea of insurrection, but Judge Charles Beaudrot expressed skepticism in the relevance of the testimony.
“This is what I would expect to be reading during briefs,” he said. “This is not what I expect to hear testimony on. This is historical data that can be reviewed and commented on, proffered and so forth. I’m indulging you because (of) the importance of this hearing.”
The attorneys sought to use Greene’s past interviews and social media posts as ammunition against her, including a speech in which she suggested House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could be executed for treason posted before Greene’s election.
Greene’s attorneys dismissed such statements as political hyperbole protected by the First Amendment and said they should not be considered as evidence in any case because they were made before she was sworn into office Jan. 3, 2021. The provision in the 14th Amendment Greene is being targeted with applies to people who have sworn an oath to defend the constitution before participating in an insurrection, which would mean prosecutors would have to show she participated in the insurrection between Jan. 3 and Jan. 6 of that year.
They pointed to a Jan. 5 interview in which Greene predicted a “1776 moment” the following day. Read more
