Monday, December 12, 2022

In Defense of the Constitution
By: Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots / Right Side Patriots Radio

Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution states that before a newly elected president enters the “execution of his office” he shall take this Oath or Affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

On December 03, 2022 at 7:44am former President Donald J. Trump posted these words on his media platform 'Truth Social' and I quote, “So with the revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great “Founders” did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!”

And so a still ongoing war of words began, words both in defense of President Trump's statement as well as words condemning said statement. And while I freely admit to belonging to the later group...especially when two days later Trump posted that he never said what he said thus making many of us out to be liars...know that I not only supported President Trump in both 2016 and 2020, but that I would do so again if he were to garner the Republican nomination. Also, know that I thought President Trump did a magnificent job on the national front, the economic front, and on the foreign policy front even while at times he was brash and rude, actions which I chalked up to his not being a politician per se, but a true American patriot bar none.

And in regards to today's politicians and political parties we know that partisan politics remains the overwhelming order of the day where loyalty is concerned, when in fact it shouldn't be. Our political loyalties should never lie with one man or one woman alone nor with straight party line ideologies per se, for above all else our loyalties should first and foremost lie with the Constitution...the very document that is the law of our great “republic.” And without laws...without us honoring and following said laws as put down in the Constitution...we become a nation riddled with overly manipulated, counterproductive, blind following victims of whichever party is in charge of the “political mob” on any given day.

Simply, our Constitution was designed to place our country above such pettiness while guaranteeing us individual rights and freedoms, and along with the Magna Carta (also known as the “Great Charter”) is the greatest of all legal documents ever written. And while the Magna Carta declared the “sovereign” in the be subject to the rule of law, it clearly laid out the liberties that were to be held by “free men,” which in turn laid the foundation for the collective of individual rights and freedoms in what became known as “Anglo-American jurisprudence.”

And where the Magna Carta left off, especially in regards to individual rights and freedoms, our Constitution and Bill of Rights picked up including, but not limited to, our freedom from unlawful searches and seizures, the right to a speedy trial, the right to a jury trial, along with the “Writ of Habeas Corpus.” And it's “habeas corpus” alone which affords those detained protection against the loss of life, liberty, or property without “due process of law,” which is the basis regarding the concept of “higher law” in law that cannot be altered by executive mandate (meaning “executive order”) nor by legislative acts. In fact, this very concept was taken to heart by our Founders and Framers so much so that it is embedded in Article VI, Clause 2...the Supremacy in the “Supreme Law of the Land,” and is enforced by the Supreme Court. Taking priority over any and all conflicting state laws, this means that state courts and state constitutions are themselves subordinate to the “supreme law” of our Constitution.

In other words, legally, the Constitution is above all else and should not be defamed, dishonored, nor be made a mockery of by those in the body politics. The Constitution should be followed as written, thus rendering individual interpretations” but wishful thinking of the disgruntled. And while throughout America's history some have tried to bend the Constitution's words in such a way as to meet their or their party's political agenda, know that has rarely been successful. In fact, at times, it has served to divide the very party it was trying to unite. Such is the case with President Trump who just a few weeks ago announced his third run for the White House, which would have been a good thing if only he had not followed up said announcement with what is unbecoming, unnecessary, and utterly divisive rhetoric.

But before I discuss President Trump's words and his possible but hopefully not true motives, know two other past presidents come to mind regarding issuance with the Constitution.

First, of course, is Barack HUSSEIN Obama the one who sticks in my craw the most. Remember back to September 6, 2001 when in a panel discussion on “Slavery and the Constitution” that aired on Chicago’s WBEZ-FM radio, how then candidate Obama described the Constitution as having “deep flaws” and that our country’s Founding Fathers had “an enormous blind spot” when writing it. Adding that the Constitution “reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day,” what Obama did was turn the Constitution into but a thesis on race relations during colonial times, ignoring the fact that the U.S. Constitution is based upon “human nature and natural law,” things that do not change over time. And while ignorance at times can be bliss, Obama's words spoken that day helped to set the stage for what became his future race based endeavors, including his turning the fight for “equality” into but reparations based “equity” witnessed by his flawed policies and laws passed courtesy of Democrat party line votes.

Now remember when on September 24, 2014, then President Obama spoke before the UN General Assembly and stated that, “On issue after issue, we cannot rely on a rule-book written for a different century,” in reference to our Constitution regarding his initiating war in Syria where he took it upon himself to bomb ISIS without constitutional approval of Congress. Ignoring the fact that the power to declare war is clearly described in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, we saw Obama executing war as commander and chief...which is his right...but without the funding limitations for war that the House alone can impose, thus showing a total lack of respect for the Constitution, the very document he swore by oath to “preserve, protect and defend.”

And before Obama, Constitution questioning Republican President Theodore Roosevelt comes to mind when, in an attempted third run for the White House, he criticized the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court that struck down what were so-called “populist” attempts to regulate businesses, including a law establishing maximum work hours for bakers that he considered unconstitutional. And by his saying, in 1912, that the High Court had made the “Constitution a means of thwarting instead of securing the absolute right of the people to rule themselves,” Roosevelt also took issue with the “peculiar function of the American judge and the function of declaring whether or not the people have the right to make laws for themselves.” Roosevelt staunchly believed that the ultimate power belonged solely with the people and not with the Constitution per se, in fact, he even proposed the “popular recall” of judges and their decisions, saying that doing so is “the highest and wisest kind of conservatism.”

Simply, it was not then nor is it now “conservatism” in any way, shape or form, for what Roosevelt proposed bordered on “mob rule.”

By the way, Theodore Roosevelt...who also used nasty and insulting nicknames to describe his opponents...lost his third attempt at becoming president after he basically ignored the fact that America is indeed a nation of laws. Maybe President Trump should seriously consider what happened to Roosevelt instead of even alluding to the  Constitution being “terminated.”

Now remember when earlier I spoke about motives in regards to those who question the Constitution being the law of our land...motives in two of the cases being quite easy to define. For Obama his hatred of America and his call for her “fundamental transformation” translated into his want for socialism to become America's new norm...socialism where the government controls every aspect of one's life...socialism where everyone except the now ruling class exists equally at the bottom rung of the socioeconomic ladder. Most ignored the obvious regarding Obama and America elected him twice, thus setting the stage for the nightmare that would become Joe Biden. And as for Theodore Roosevelt, he was, by his own dubbing, a “progressive,” but not in the same vein as today's uber progressive left for Roosevelt tried to do what he believed to be in the best interest of our country, and in most cases he succeeded.

However. President Trump's words regarding ...the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution...” crosses the infamous red line for neither Obama nor Roosevelt used the term “termination” in regards to the Constitution. And while some claim that is not what Trump meant and that I and others are interpreting his words wrong, I believe I am interpreting them just right for the word “termination” by definition simply means the process of having brought something to an this case the law that is the Constitution. And while his motive in doing so is to invalidate what clearly was a fraud ridden election, Trump forgets that nowhere does the Constitution speak of or even allude to election fraud.

Simply, the laws and processes in relation to our national elections see state and local laws governing the administration of presidential elections with the Constitution focusing solely on ensuring election stability, meaning there are no...I repeat no...Constitutional procedures for how to address or handle questions of election legitimacy let alone fraud. However, our Founders and Framers did give the Electoral College broad discretion to resolve disputes as it saw fit with the the Constitution stating that an election is deemed “legitimate” when the Electoral College says it is. There is no process for a “do-over” in regards to a presidential election even one we all know was riddled with fraud.

President Trump should know this, thus he should not have brought the Constitution up in his written discourse. He and we know that VP Mike Pence should have stopped the certifying from going forward but didn't, thus Pence is as much, if not more so, to blame for Joe Biden being president than those who sanctioned, committed, and certified what knowingly were fraudulent tabulation results. Trump should address his anger at Mike Pence not at the very document he took an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend” nor should social media's now deemed “Only Trumpers” be taking pot shots at we who both defend the Constitution and want another Republican to head the 2024 presidential ticket. And they do so no matter our saying that we will support and vote for Trump should he get the nomination.

Simply, the “Only Trumpers” are now as much a danger to our republic as are the “Never Trumpers” for both groups...whether knowingly or unknowingly...are helping Trump divide the Republican party so that no Republican will win the presidency in 2024. With words, insults, and accusations lobbed, these folks are trying to “cancel” out fellow Republicans and conservatives in defense of a man who cannot win in 2024 unless he lets 2020 go for a platform based on vengeance is not what America needs or wants...“Making America Great Again” is. Case closed.

Copyright © 2022 / 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, The Tyranny of the Twitterati.
Tomorrow, Tuesday, December 13th, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'In Defense of the Constitution'; 'The Tyranny of the Twitterati'; and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in to RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on Click 'LISTEN LIVE' starting at 6:50 pm EST with show beginning at 7pm EST.