Now, now, let's not go jumping to conclusions just because they happen to be based on facts and logic.

This headline and article are begging to be in c/NotTheOnion, yeah.

Screams:
My Christian nationalist flag has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my flag.

Don't celebrate too soon. Thanks to gerrymandering, voter suppression and an unpopular Dem president, they still have a chance to retain the house and maybe even retake the Senate no matter how batshit crazy they get.

I'm not saying it's likely, I'm just saying that the risk is never zero and celebrating too soon increases that risk 🤷

Exactly my thought. Entire point of the article is a flag outside his office. The article does not contain a picture of said flag, none of the links in the article that I have followed contain pictures of said flag.

It took some effort, but I found it.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F-kvkPJW4AADuT9?format=jpg&name=large

Probably because the flag looks like a toddler made it and it's not intimidating at all even though the implications behind it are very serious.

Seriously, this is journalistic malpractice. If it’s right outside the guys office then it should be easy enough to take a photo. I don’t need a flag to know this guy is bad news but I’m not gonna jump on the outrage wagon over an article with no photo.

Can't he?

Thank you.

Violating the oath of office is a seperate crime, carrying stiffer penalties than perjury.

The Dems would never have the guts to enforce it no matter what, though, and the SCOTUS has a Christofascist majority itself.

That tree looks like it would make a nice cozy fire.

This looks like it was done in Ms paint

Hah! Same thing I thought. Probably has a stash from years ago that he refuses to throw out.

Fine, but let's look at all of that section of Article VI:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Bound by oath to support the Constitution, but no religious test required to assume that duty. Ok cool. Your duty as a government official is to the Constitution, not to your religion, and your religion is immaterial -- and this is key -- provided you uphold the Constitution.

Now let's look at the "establishments clause" of the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

If you will not uphold the First Amendment's establishments clause, if you are scheming to establish a Christian theocracy, you are not supporting the Constitution. If you are not supporting the Constitution, Article VI in fact disqualifies you from public office.

For that matter, you don't even need the First Amendment to make the point. A theocracy would immediately run afoul of Article VI itself, as it would require officials to adhere to the state's church doctrine.

No, it's just implied.

Wtf is a neo Nazi flag?