Monday, February 17, 2020

The Constitutional Equation of Acquittal 
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio 

President Donald J. Trump is now almost two weeks out from rightfully being acquitted of both charges the House Democrats leveled against him...abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. And while Democrats are not happy about this we Republicans, Conservatives, and a growing number of Independents are. And it's not just because President Trump was acquitted, but because the Constitution has proven to work as well today as it did back when our Founders and Framers put pen to paper and started writing one of history's greatest documents...a document that started with but three simple words...“We the People.” 

We the People”...probably the most three important words ever ascribed to a nation for with the words “We the People” in our nation's citizens collectively united as one people...we citizens became tasked with giving what became our government their powers, not the other way around, as well as assuring that said government would meet “We the People's” needs before their own. Also, with those three words came the monumental responsibility of making sure our nation stayed the constitutional republic our Founders and Framers intended her to be for this uniquely American document along with Magna Carta...the British document signed at Runnymede in 1215 which established a fundamental guarantee of rights and privileges....have stood the test of time as being the greatest of all contributions to what's known as “the science of government,” in the science of politics which dictates that government is necessary for the existence of civilized society.  

And while the Constitution and the Magna Carta differ in many ways, the shared goal of both was to create a government that would, above all else, meet the needs of the people not the needs of the government per se. And it's in the very phraseology of needs where the Democrats took it upon themselves to not only put their needs and wants over that of “We the People,” but where they unilaterally took it upon themselves to supercede both the words and intent of the Constitution by not just trying to remove a duly elected sitting president from office, but by trying to negate “We the People's” actual vote for said president. 

And by House Democrats using the words “abuse of” and “obstruction of” in their impeachment charges what they did was take the actual charges constitutionally allowed for impeaching a president and manipulate them to meet not the needs of “We the People,' but to try and fit the needs of their partisan driven political agenda alone. In other words, the “abuse of” came not from President Trump but from the Democrats themselves. And this manipulation of words applies to their “obstruction of ” charge as well.  

How so? Lets start with the fact that neither charge is in the Constitution. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution clearly states that the, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” but nowhere does it state “abuse of” or “obstruction of” anything as being impeachable offenses. And why not...because our Founders and Framers were wise enough to know that both “abuse of” and “obstruction of” something to one person or one party might not be “abuse of” or “obstruction of” to another person or party.  

In other words, both phrases are but subjective in nature being but one's person's or one's party's personal opinion or thoughts alone. Translation: “abuse of” or “obstruction of” simply does not meet the Constitution's legal definition of impeachable offenses. Treason and bribery are clear cut charges, and while “other high crimes and misdemeanors” are open to a modicum of conjecture of sorts, the charges of “abuse of” and “obstruction of” still cannot legally fit into impeachable parameters. 

And again why not? While many Democrats want to believe that impeachment charges can be brought against a sitting president via whatever interpretation of the Constitution the majority of the House wishes to make, that simply is not true as it would have the president serving at “the pleasure of Congress” instead of his being the titular head of our government as well as its commander-in-chief.

For Democrats, especially for Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Jerry Nadler, word semantics now comes into play for while the Constitution states that the president has to have committed certain indictable crimes...treason and bribery for order to be impeached and thus removed from office, Article III § 2 (3) of the Constitution clearly states that "the trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury" ...which regarding impeachment is decided by the Senate. And these words are important because the Democrats treated President Trump's impeachment as a criminal offense...a “high crime” if you will...yet no specific indictable or constitutionally impeachable crime was actually named in their Articles of Impeachment.  

Remember, while President Trump was accused in the House of having sought help from Ukraine's government to get re-elected by his having held back millions of dollars of military aid earmarked for Ukraine...which if proven true would have met the constitutionally indictable charge of bribery and given some credence to the Democrats call for impeachment...bribery was never proven because it never happened. So, the Democrats just made up the charge of “abuse of power” hoping it would fit, nevermind that said charge is never mention in the Constitution as an indictable offense.  

And yet the Democrats pushed forward anyway and turned to the word “misdemeanor” in the hopes that it could at least pick up where the “high crime” of bribery failed. But the word misdemeanor”...a criminal offense less serious than a felony but more serious than a mere infraction...was also not defined in the Constitution meaning it too had to morph into the constitutionally undefined catchall phrase of “abuse of power.”  

And the Democrats did so again with their second charge of “obstruction of Congress,” which also is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. Claiming President Trump “obstructed Congress” by his refusing to provide asked for documents to congressional investigators and by his having instructed top advisers and government officials to defy subpoenas and refuse to testify. But what the Democrats still don't get is that you cannot make up a catchall phrase just because you want a president you don't like removed from office, especially when using words that are not in the Constitution. Besides, the only “obstructing of Congress” that was done was the House's denying President Trump “due process” as well as denying him his right to face his this case whistleblower Eric Ciaramella.  

But the bottom line here is that when something does not meet the constitutional definition for impeachment and/or removal from office, the Republican controlled Senate did the right thing in voting to acquit President Trump of both the “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” charges. Remember, while Republican Senators did abide by the Constitution as for Mitt Romney of course...the Democrats in both the Senate and the House did not as they consider the Constitution to be an outdated, no longer relevant document.  

So, while President Donald J. Trump was rightfully acquitted of both charges and remains in office...and will for another four years come the November election very much to the Democrats chagrin...there does remain a guilty party in this impeachment mess. And the guilty party is both the leaders in the Democrat controlled House and their fellow Democrat congresspeople who voted to impeach based solely upon partisan politics, a need for revenge, and most importantly upon unproven accusations and knowingly what are unconstitutional charges.  

In fact, House Democrats themselves are guilty of the very charge they accused President Trump in “abuse of power.” How so? According to Constitutional law expert Randy Barnett, "The legislature can abuse power. That is one of the reasons we have judicial review — to ensure that the legislature has not exceeded its proper powers — as it did, for example, when it passed the Affordable Care Act pursuant to its Commerce Clause power." 

Basically, a judicial review was actually what the Senate trial was...a balance of power check of the House Democrats if you will...the very folks whom Barnett said had "clearly misbehaved" and "abused their impeachment power." How their ramming through of knowingly false allegations of wrongdoing against President Trump while at the same time denying the president not only his right to due process but by actually blocking both his and his defense team from presenting their facts as well as corroborating witnesses. So what the House Democrats and specifically Adam Schiff did was prevent President Trump from legally defending himself. 

And why did the Democrats have to prevent President Trump from defending himself...because they knew all the way back to the day when impeachment was but a glimmer in Adanm Schiff's eyes that there was no constitutional grounds whatsoever for impeachment. The Democrats in the House even knew that we Republicans and Conservatives knew what they were attempting was in actuality a political coup masquerading in the guise of impeachment...basically using impeachment as their excuse to do over what they failed to do with the Mueller investigation. 

And the Democrats had to know that with their case being weak from the beginning coupled with their having almost no legal merits by which to push said case forward, that their only chance of removing Trump from office was to have the House prosecution present a case not based upon the law as set down in the Constitution but upon false accusations, lies, innuendos, and what if addition to the only witnesses allowed to testify being but obviously bought-and-paid for partisan shills who testified via second and third hand hearsay information alone. 

So while many on our side of the political aisle will still talk about the Democrats predetermined outcome hiding within the anything but impartial House hearing coupled with how Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, and Chuck Schumer are all still crying in their rightfully shared politically stained hankie....I say it's time to let all that go and that instead what we on the right should talk about is how with the Senate following the rules of law as set down in the Constitution not only acquitted President Trump but proved once again to “We the People” that the Constitution itself is anything but the outdated, irrelevant document that the Democrats want us to believe it is.  

Once again, November 3, 2020 cannot come soon enough.

Copyright @ 2020 Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / All Rights Reserved.  

For more political commentary please visit my RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS partner Craig Andresen's blog The National Patriot to read his latest article, Biden Being Biden.


Tomorrow, Tuesday, February  18th, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'The Constitutional Equation of Acquittal'; 'Biden Being Biden'; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at: on Tune-In at:

No comments:

Post a Comment