"Constitution Day" is now a day of reflection
The gap between its words and the Government's deeds induces cognitive dissonance
Today, September 17, is Constitution Day. It was 236 years ago, on September 17, 1787, that the US Constitution was signed. Alas, the current administration has shown a deep disregard for both the letter of the law and the spirit of the Constitution.
The gap between the intent of the Founding Fathers and the actions of the Democrats during the Biden Presidency forms a chasm that rivals the Grand Canyon. It's impossible to even describe all of the violations of the law that the people of America have suffered without writing a doctoral thesis. It would be like Evel Knievel proposing to jump the length of the Grand Canyon on his motorcycle, rather than the width of the Grand Canyon.
I have decided instead to pick just four of the most egregious violations to demonstrate why our legal and constitutional rights must be vigorously exercised and defended, because if we do not use them, then we will quickly lose them.
First, Special Counsel Jack Smith wants the courts to issue a gag order against both Donald Trump and, incredibly, his lawyers:
The Government seeks a ... restriction that is targeted at extrajudicial statements ... The Government’s proposed order specifies that such statements would include (a) statements regarding the identity, testimony, or credibility of prospective witnesses; and (b) statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory, or intimidating.
That's an astonishingly broad restriction on the right of free speech of both the leading candidate to win the nomination of the opposition party for the Presidency and his lawyers. The Government (as they refer to themselves, with a capital G) want to literally make it a criminal offense, namely contempt of court, for the former President and his lawyers to disparage their behavior, no matter how badly they behave. That's a spectacular violation of the First Amendment. As many government officials are residents of the District of Columbia and are therefore "potential jurors", this gag order also would in effect make much of the government immune from any criticism at all from the probable Republican nominee during an election year. The Democrats could use any "disparaging" criticism of almost any government agency as an excuse to imprison Trump, as at least some of the officials of those agencies are in the pool of "potential jurors".
The President and Vice President are both residents in the District of Columbia and are therefore in the jury pool, which implies that any criticism of their administration by Trump would violate the gag order, which would force him to campaign against them without ever mentioning them by name. This would be an insanely tight restriction on his right to free speech. If Trump even did something as harmless as adding a reference to this very post on Constitution Day to social media, he would in theory be violating the terms of the proposed gag order. How can anyone "petition the Government for a redress of grievances" when any criticism of the Government might violate a gag order?
When in the history of the United States of America have the lawyers for the defense effectively been banned from talking to the press and making any "statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory, or intimidating"? That's so broad that a defense lawyer who calls Jack Smith an idiot could potentially be thrown in prison. Only Jack Smith thinks that this is a good idea, or is even vaguely constitutional. This is a truly unique interpretation of the right to free speech, one which has not previously existed in the preceding 236 years of American jurisprudence.
It’s bad enough to prosecute somebody with questionable charges. Threatening to imprison his lawyers adds an entirely new dimension of prosecutorial overreach to the long list of legal abuses during the Biden administration.
Second, there are many alleged participants in the riot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, who are still in prison waiting for their trial. That was two years and nine months ago. The "right to a speedy and public trial" has been denied to them, and in many cases the typical prison term for their criminal charges is less than the time they have already served before the trial is even convened. The phrase "the process is the punishment" has never applied more truly than to these political prisoners. They are held in appalling conditions and have thus received "cruel and unusual punishments" even before their trials have occurred. Animal rights activists would protest confining livestock for months at a time in the tiny cells where the accused participants are suffering before they even get their day in court.
Third, Biden has failed to fulfill his oath to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and … Commission all the Officers of the United States."
Attorney General Garland appointed David Weiss, the US Attorney for Delaware, and the person who allowed the statute of limitations to run out for some of Hunter Biden's apparent tax code violations, to the office of Special Counsel.
This directly violated the rule for appointing a Special Counsel:
§ 600.3 Qualifications of the Special Counsel.
(a) An individual named as Special Counsel shall be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decision making, and with appropriate experience to ensure both that the investigation will be conducted ably, expeditiously and thoroughly, and that investigative and prosecutorial decisions will be supported by an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies. The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government.
Just about any phrase in that job description disqualifies Weiss from that job, but they appointed him anyway because the Bidens are desperate to escape actual justice. It's particularly amusing that the job requires "an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies" and in the very next sentence requires that "The Special Counsel shall be selected from outside the United States Government". If Weiss did indeed understand the law, then he should have refused to take the job, as he very clearly was part of the United States Government when he served as the United States Attorney for the state of Delaware.
Finally, the Governor of New Mexico tried to simply suspend the Second Amendment by banning the carrying of firearms in Albuquerque for 30 days. This is so egregious that even other Democrats, and the local sheriffs, have refused to support it. It's so beyond the pale of reason that it borders on the Kafkaesque. I'll match her absurdity with another much more entertaining absurdity by observing that unlike Bugs Bunny, she did take a left turn at Albuquerque, but she ended up even more lost than that rascally rabbit.