You don’t have to look very far to see how Democrats continue to push ideas that upend some of our most cherished Constitutional norms. Our founding fathers were geniuses in setting up protections against tyranny from the government and from the majority. However, because the Democrats cherish power above all else, many of these protections are being publicly challenged.
We saw a very public display of their desire to upend the idea that you are innocent until proven guilty in the Fall of 2018. Well, at least this is the standard if you are their political enemy. Their relentless pursuit of Justice Brett Kavanaugh on flimsy, decades-old allegations was stunning to watch. “Believe All Women” they cried. As if having a uterus makes you unquestionable.
Their rationale is righting the wrongs of history. However, that is not how our justice system works. Nor should it. An individual can only be held accountable for their own behavior in their own time when their guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Anything else is a ridiculous proposition that is the polar opposite of justice in any sense. And certainly in a society where the government’s first obligation is to protect the rights of the individual.
Yet here they go again with their impeachment farce:
If the President thinks the call was 'perfect' and there is nothing to hide he would turn over the thousands of pages of documents requested by Congress, allow witnesses to testify, and provide exculpatory information that refutes the overwhelming evidence of his abuse of power.
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) December 2, 2019
It is more subtle here than during the Kavanaugh assault on due process. However, the general idea is that it up to the President to exonerate himself rather than up to the impeachment process to demonstrate that a high crime or misdemeanor took place. From the Schiff Show, there is very little to move forward on, yet they will. There was a parade of unelected bureaucrats who seem to object to the President’s foreign policy ideas.
Some, like Fiona Hill, only came to their current position during the Trump administration. She actually wrote an eloquent defense of Barack Obama’s refusal to provide Ukraine with defensive weapons. This alone should discount her passionate objections to President Trump’s policy. In any case, the job of diplomats and foreign policy experts is to advise and implement the decision of the Chief Executive. Or quit. Which I am happy to say Dr. Hill did.
The Presidency is also bigger than President Trump. It is an institution with certain Constitutional protections. There are established limits in the information the Chief Executive is required to share with the Legislative Branch under the doctrine of Executive Privilege. They are not privy to his private deliberations with key staff under many conditions. There is no reason to put the separation of powers in jeopardy for the Democrat’s current circus.
Despite the position of House Democrats, Congress does not oversee the foreign policy decisions of the President. They may oversee some Executive agencies under the law. But neither they nor the bureaucracy have veto power on how the President deals with a foreign power. That is for voters to decide at the ballot box.
Additionally, there is Attorney-Client Privilege, specifically in the President’s communications with his personal counsel. This is afforded to all individuals and as Representative John Ratcliff famously said, while the President is not above the law, he is also not below the law.
Further, once you understand a few items the whole thing becomes even more of a farce. The President’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s activities in Ukraine significantly predated Biden’s announcement of his candidacy. His inquiries were related to the Mueller probe and the defense of his client against those allegations. The New York Times wrote about the appearance of corruption regarding Hunter Biden’s appointment to the Burisma board in 2015. This hardly started with a call on July 25, 2019 despite the Democrat’s myopia.
And flipping due process on its head is not the only way the Democrats would like to upend the protections against tyranny. In this case it is the tyranny of the majority. Here is flailing Presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren:
My goal is to get elected—but I plan to be the last American president to be elected by the Electoral College. I want my second term to be elected by direct vote. pic.twitter.com/a2Lj2a9F0F
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) December 2, 2019
She says she has a plan for everything. I guess she has a plan for ensuring the horrible policies breaking California and New York are implemented nationally. People are fleeing these deep blue nanny states and I guess Senator Warren wants to make sure they have nowhere to go.
The popular election of Senators was the first truly significant blow to the effective functioning of the republic.
The popular election of the President would be last election in what we affectionately call the United States of America. There are large swaths of the country that don’t want to be California or New York. It is also patently obvious this is the radical Left’s solution to winning elections in perpetuity. Comply you plebs. They are sure they know better.
Historian Tara Ross gives a compelling argument to combat the popular vote argument. She cautions about the consumers overruling the producers in the electoral process and actual advocates for an electoral college process in large states like California, New York and Texas that have deep blue concentrations of voters.
Warren is at least correct in one sense. She is very old fashioned. Like ancient Greek and Rome old fashioned. Plato warned of the propensity of late stage democracies to eat away at institutions until a demagogue appears.
Democrats like to tell you that is Trump. I’d like them to point out one demagogue that rolled back government regulations significantly, reduced taxes and did not attempt to enrich themselves by their position. Mean tweets don’t cut it. Trump doesn’t even take a salary and his family business revenues have declined since his election.
If you don’t see the demagogues in the party that wants to upend due process, limit your speech, take over the life and death decisions of your healthcare and raid your labor after you make a mere $29,000 a year, I am not going to convince you. But I will continue to sound the alarm. We already have a judiciary that effectively legislates. Now we have a Legislative branch who thinks they can oversee the Executive. And growing call to subject the entire republic to a form of pure democracy.
The convergence of power Madison warned of is beginning to evidence itself. And it is being driven by the Left.