Op-ed:
The “Boxes Hoax” on Steroids
By Diane Sori and Craig Andresen /
Right Side Patriots / Right Side Patriots Radio
The Op-ed posted here is my and my radio partner's opinion alone, and does not necessarily
represent the views of blogspot.com
Author's Note: Right
Side Patriots stands strong in our support of President Trump in
regards to this indictment, but with the left focused on trying to
cover...or should we say cover-up all bases...we must play devil's
advocate at times to help expose the Democrats nefarious anything but
truths.
By now we all know that on the
afternoon of Thursday, June 8, 2023, the Biden DOJ (as in the still
Obama controlled DOJ)...upon completion of Special Counsel Jack
Smith’s six month investigation into last years August 8th FBI
raid on President Donald J. Trump's Mar-a-Lago home...formally
issued its“49-page indictment” against our former president. Now being
referred to as a “criminal defendant,” Trump was
immediately summoned to appear at the Federal Courthouse in Miami on
Tuesday, June 13th at 3pm, in this, a precedent setting case,
revolving around what on the surface appears to be but a case of
simple document mishandling.
And if the DOJ were
to apply the law equally for all...as in their not selectively
weaponizing federal law enforcement based upon one's political
affiliation or as payback for an election lost...think 2016
here...these exact same charges would be immediately levied against
Joe Biden...levied before he tries to pardon himself...more on that
in a bit.
Now, as per the property receipt(s) for the 20 or so boxes taken from Trump's
Mar-a-Lago home...serious charges were levied because of Trump's “supposed” refusal to return key documents...documents that might have been shown to
visitors...documents that did contain intelligence relating to both our and our
allies “defense and weapons capabilities.” In fact, there was one key set of documents very clearly marked as being “Various
classified/TS/SCI documents,” which refers to top secret and
time sensitive compartmented information.
And while any
records recovered at this level could possibly include “human
intelligence and information”...information that if disclosed
could not only jeopardize relations between our and other nations,
but jeopardize the safety of our troops, and place the lives of our
and/or other intelligence operatives in danger...know that such
information is at the time of classification given a date for
declassification of up 25
years or, in certain select cases, more depending upon the duration and sensitivity of said
information.
Unfortunately,
while this aspect of the case is basically a simple case of bad judgment or just forgetfulness on Trump's
part, that does not change what might be the most damning of all charges levied against him
for every president knows well that they must never, we repeat
never, discuss any classified documents with those not having
security clearance. But here we must state that we truly believe this
was not done by Trump on purpose nor with malicious intent, but was a
careless yet serious security breech on his part. But is such a breech...especially when it seems no harm to our country was done... worthy of such an indictment, we personally think not, but we must wait to see how it all plays out in court. However, the very nature of these charges has us wondering if Obama, upon his
leaving office, left certain “classified/TS/SCI
documents” unattended
to or talked about as well. But for Obama, we believe, any actions
taken by him would have been intentionally done on purpose.
The
charges levied against President Trump must become part of the public
discourse, because the indictment as laid out, at least on the
surface, is quite damning for the fact is that the DOJ went forward
with this investigation even while knowing the negative push back
they would receive to what most consider to be but yet another
continuation of the Trump “political witch hunt.”
In other words, the DOJ believes they now have indisputable evidence
as to Trump's guilt courtesy of the fact that witnesses...including
his former lawyer and friend Evan Corcoran...gave statements under
oath to federal investigators, and even quoted Trump's very words
encouraging them and others not to look for documents or allegedly to
conceal them. And they did so even while knowing, as fact, that they
could and most likely would be prosecuted if said statements were
proven to be false.
So with this being a case not tried before in U.S. history for no previous nor
sitting president has ever been brought up on federal charges...even
Richard Nixon resigned before such charges could be brought...this case of the government alleging that Trump willfully
kept “sensitive” information about U.S. and foreign defense
capabilities and that he shared classified information with people
who did not have security clearances, clearly sets the hallmark of being precedent in nature.
It seems, to us, that Trump's
well known ego caused him to simply be careless in regards to whom he
spoke to and what he shared with them. We believe Trump did what he
did not to betray the country that he so loves, but to bolster said
ego as a means by which to help circle the MAGA wagons around him to
assure him the Republican nomination...meaning what some now deem a
betrayal is actually just Trump being Trump...a patriot and our former great
president whose major flaws have always been not knowing
when to shut his mouth and give his tweeting finger a rest, always coupled with his need for ego boosting
bravado and attention.
We know Trump was careless in his
storing of documents taken, every president is...Biden even stored
classified documents in his car and in his garage...but a simple case
of bad judgment and carelessness does not a crime of the magnitude now being levied against him make. Remember, nothing taken from the Mar-a-Lago
raid in anyway compromised our national security; no documents were
taken out of Trump's home to be stored elsewhere; no one broke into
his home to steal any such documents; and surely no national
“secrets” were betrayed for if they had been Jack Smith and his
DOJ lynch mob would have brought charges of treason against President
Trump, and they did not.
And why didn't he...because Joe Biden
and crew can now use President Trump's woes as a means to
“divert
and deflect” attention away
from Biden's five million dollar bribe taking scandal, which gives
them plenty of time to find the perfect excuse for replacing the
ever so pathetic Biden/Harris ticket with Hillary and whomever, for it always
was and remains about Democrat vote garnering. After all Trump v.
Hillary round two would bring Democrat voters out en-masse, but if
Trump is found guilty and sentenced to prison even though legally he
can still run...Obama and his buddy Soros will have taken America
down without barely having to lift a finger.
And not only that
but Biden can then pardon himself, Hunter, and his fellow “crime
family members” before being forced to step down...or can he for a
sitting president pardoning himself is as much a precedent setting
case as is the case against President Trump.
To understand the possibilities regarding likely pardons,
one must first consider what the Constitution has to say on the matter. The pardon power of the
president is based on “Article II, Section 2, Clause 1” of the U.S.
Constitution, which provides: The President...“shall have Power to grant
Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases
of impeachment.” The Constitution sets two clear limits on presidential pardons.
First, that such pardons may only be granted for offenses against the
United States which excludes any offenses regarding state or civil cases, and
the second being that such pardons are disallowed “in cases of impeachment.”That leaves defining what exactly is meant by “in cases of
impeachment.” Does it mean that someone who has been impeached cannot receive a
presidential pardon, as some scholars contend, or does it mean that an
impeached president cannot provide a pardon as other scholars contend? The
Constitution does not elaborate and thus, it is most likely that the matter
would end up at the U.S. Supreme Court where a ruling would have to be
rendered.
So can a sitting president pardon himself? That is the key question
here and one that is truly unprecedented as no president has ever tried to employ the
tactic before. Most legal scholars do agree that a president’s pardon power does
not extend to forgiving crimes and misdemeanors that the House might charge in
a bill of impeachment, nor does it prevent a Senate trial based solely upon a House-passed
impeachment. It is also believed by numerous legal scholars that the impeachment
exception provided in the Constitution precludes presidential pardons for those
who have aided the president in activities that have given or threaten to give
rise to a presidential impeachment.
That legal argument is based on the notion that without it,
any president could conspire with others to commit crimes against the nation
that would benefit himself and those engaged in the conspiracy with impunity,
as the self-pardon would essentially and in reality set the president above
any laws of the land. That, of course, is an opinion held by many legal
scholars but not by all legal scholars, and thus it would most likely rise to
the level of being in need of a Supreme Court ruling.
Potentially, the closest we’ve ever come to a presidential
self-pardon was when President Nixon floated the idea to his legal counsel and
Mary Lawton, the acting assistant attorney general, wrote that the president
could not pardon himself because of “the fundamental rule that no one may be a
judge in his own case.” That, too, was an opinion and not a ruling, and while
it makes perfect sense it requires a ruling from the Supreme Court well before it
could be considered law.
Making the case against presidential self-pardons even more
interesting is the fact that these very questions were raised by liberals
during the Trump administration as they were concerned that Trump himself might
attempt a self-pardon, and liberals were set to argue against such a move based
in large part on the opinion of Mary Lawton for the reasons stated above. Now,
those same liberals that were dead-set against the possibility of a
presidential self-pardon where Trump was concerned would likely argue in favor
of the notion should Biden attempt the tactic.
So, it seems that a presidential self-pardon may well be
unconstitutional, however without a Supreme Court ruling it remains murky, but
what about a pardon from Joe Biden regarding Hunter Biden? Following the
opinions of many legal scholars, Joe Biden would not be able to pardon Hunter
Biden for any crimes in which Hunter Biden was involved in a conspiracy
resulting in, or connected to, crimes committed by Joe Biden, and that presents
a whole different legal conundrum. Joe could essentially pardon Hunter for
crimes involving violations of federal laws like falsifying records, such as in
the gun permit case, but would such a pardon be constitutionally available
regarding money laundering or pay to play schemes that involved monies paid to
Hunter and then transferred to Joe Biden, or with regard to tax evasion had
some of the monies received by Hunter...monies not reported to the IRS then been
distributed to Joe Biden?
Following the line of legal opinion that would have been
employed in the attempt to disallow such pardons by President Trump but now
embraced in the effort to relieve Biden of being tried for his and his son’s
alleged crimes, it would seem that pardons handed out by Joe Biden to his son
or to himself would be unconstitutional. It seems that way, but it is not
settled law…not without a Supreme Court ruling.
That is one line of legal theory regarding presidential
self-pardons. But regardless of how flat you make a pancake it does still have
two sides, and the other side of this particular legal pancake has been floated
by Brian Kalt, an expert on constitutional law, presidential history, and a
law professor at Michigan State University. Kalt’s legal theory holds that the
criminal process and the impeachment process are separate, and that a sitting
president retains all of his presidential powers including the pardon power
until he is convicted or his term ends. That line of legal theory means that a
president can still issue pardons -- whether related to his own impeachment or
not -- while he is impeached.
That line of thought holds that Biden could issue both
himself, Hunter, and potentially others presidential pardons even if the alleged
crimes result in Biden’s impeachment.
That of course begs the question…can a presidential pardon
be overturned?
It would seem that should Biden pardon himself, Hunter,
and/or others in matters related to any crimes involving himself, and then leave
office before the rendering of a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, those
pardons would stand and could not be reversed by either the courts or a future
President. And this would seem to indicate that the timing of any attempt at a
self-pardon by Joe Biden might well be the key, but what does that mean
exactly?
It means that were Joe Biden to attempt a self-pardon and
pardons for Hunter or anyone else in the mix of crimes related to Joe Biden,
such a scenario might well include the issuance of said pardons followed
rapidly by Joe Biden’s resignation from office, that is unless he can stall off issuing
such pardons until that time frame between losing the 2024 election in November
and leaving office the following January. In that case Joe Biden could wait
until his final days in office to issue said pardons while not leaving enough
time for a Supreme Court decision to be made, thus codifying those pardons with
no chance of having them nullified.
Regardless which path of legal theory is followed by ether
side of the equation all roads lead to the U.S. Supreme Court, but at what
point would the nation’s highest court wade into the depths of such murky and
uncharted waters? A ruling from the Supreme Court would best serve the country
sooner rather than later, and while not impossible it would be unlikely that
the Supreme Court would entertain the request without a “direct cause” to hear
it. In other words, it would be highly unusual for the Supreme Court to take the
matter up unless or until Joe Biden attempts to become the first in his
position to issue a self-pardon.
The Supreme Court could act in a preemptive manner, but will
they?
What’s at stake here is a constitutional matter, and in the potential
case regarding Joe and Hunter Biden, it is in regards to alleged bribery which
may well have compromised national security. The potential case would revolve around
Biden accepting an alleged $5 million dollar bribe from a foreign national that
is reportedly a Russian agent who allegedly has audio tapes of conversations
between himself, Hunter Biden (who also received a $5 million payout), and Joe
Biden when Joe was the Vice President...tapes that may well have been used as blackmail
against Joe Biden.
Should Joe Biden pardon himself, Hunter, and anyone else
involved in the alleged crimes and get away with it because of such pardons,
it would set precedent that any future President would be above the law. And
even if the Supreme Court were to rule against such self-pardons, in effect to
not allow future presidents that option, Joe Biden would have been allowed to
commit a very high crime indeed without fear of punishment for it.
Given the complex nature of both lines of legal theory
regarding presidential self-pardons, the murky waters surrounding inconclusive
constitutional direction and the dire nature of the alleged crimes committed by
Joe Biden, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS believes that action should be taken immediately
to stop the pending scenario that Joe Biden could get away scot-free, thus
potentially having committed such high crimes against our nation. Our suggestion
would be to have constitutional attorneys bring a case to a “friendly” federal
court to at the very lease seek an injunction preventing Joe Biden from using a
self-pardon to alleviate himself of any ramifications for committing such high
crimes in an effort to get the case on the U.S. Supreme Court docket at the
earliest possible moment.
Further, we contend that any ruling less than making a
presidential self-pardon unconstitutional would then allow any future president
to issue a blanket or specific self-pardon on his or her first day in office
setting that president above any law as a monarch rather than as a president. But
remember, just because it needs to be done post haste does not necessarily mean
that the Supreme Court will do it at all.
In
conclusion, the case against President Trump relies heavily on the
“Espionage Act” plus a conviction on espionage charges. And this will
require the DOJ to prove intent on Trump’s part as to do harm to
the United States or to aide foreign adversaries with regards to
keeping documents in his possession. Without said “Espionage Act” the
case boils down to the ”Presidential Records Act” where it becomes
difficult or nearly impossible to gain a conviction unless it can be
proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump knowingly and with
malice refused to turn documents over to the National Archives while
knowing that the documents were not his to keep as per the
”Presidential Records Act.”
As
for Joe Biden, the “Big Guy” who acquiesced to doing favors
for money while Vice President, the walls are now closing in. And in
a politically impartial judicial system he would be indicted on
charges of accepting bribes from a foreign national who is, in fact,
a Russian agent. There is a money trail, there is testimony from a
highly trusted source, there are alleged audio tapes that not only
purportedly involve the bribes to Joe and Hunter Biden, but also
negate years worth of statements made by Biden that he had no
knowledge of or involvement in Hunter's nefarious business dealings.
Make
no mistake, the outcome of these two cases will eventually determine
whether or not the American people can ever again have trust in our
judicial system.
Copyright
© 2023 / Diane Sori and Craig Andresen/ Right Side Patriots / All rights reserved.
***************************************************************************************************
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!
Tomorrow, Tuesday, June 20th, from 7-8:30pm EST, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS
Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss 'The "Boxes Hoax" On Steroids'; and important news of the day. Hope you can tune in to RIGHT
SIDE PATRIOTS
on
https://rspradio1.com. Click 'LISTEN
LIVE' starting
at 6:50 pm EST with show beginning at 7pm EST.
