No Right of Due Process For You - Trump
By de Andréa
Opinion Editorialist for
‘THE BOTTOM LINE’
Posted October 7, 2019
If you would like to write me direct
with a question or a comment on this or other articles, you can email me at writedeandrea@hotmail.com
A follow-up to a previous article titled “Democrat
Coup d'état Number Two”.
Assuming that you have read the previous
article showing that this impeachment attempt of President Donald Trump is
nothing but yet another unfounded partisan phishing expedition, moreover even
the accusation of the president asking for help of a foreign power in the
investigation of corruption is not only, not against the law, it is covered by
a treaty between the U.S. and the Ukraine since the 1990’s, but the president
is actually obligated by the Constitution to inforce the laws of the land.
Then, are the Communists in the House of
Representatives even proceeding
legally?
While there is no specific Federal Law
requiring the House to have a vote of the members of Congress in order to
proceed in an investigation of the impeachment of a president, it is however,
and has been, the process of the house (House rules) for a hundred years. So regardless of what the Communists say
about it, there is president.
So if this is, and has been the due process,
then President Trump is being denied his due process. That my friend is’ a
violation of his Constitutional rights. But then as usual Communists have no
regard for the U.S. Constitution or any law or rule.
The Constitutional Due Process Clause
The Fifth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution each
contain a due process clause. Due process deals with the administration of justice and thus
the due process clause acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life,
liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law. The Supreme Court of the United States interprets the clauses broadly, concluding that these clauses provide four protections: procedural due process (in civil and criminal proceedings), substantive due process, a prohibition against vague laws, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights.
The clause in the Fifth Amendment reads:
“No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
While the clause in the Fourteenth Amendment says: “...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process.”
This is nothing new my friend, Clause 39 of Magna
Carta provided:
“No
free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or
possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other
way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so,
except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.[4]
The
phrase "due process of law" first appeared in a statutory rendition
of Magna Carta in 1354 during the reign of Edward III of England, as follows:
No
man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands or
tenements nor taken (taken to mean arrested or deprived of liberty by the
state), nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought to answer by
due process of law.
New York was the only state that asked Congress to add "due process"
language to the U.S. Constitution. New York ratified the U.S. Constitution and
proposed the following amendment in 1788:
[N]o
Person ought to be taken imprisoned or disseized of his freehold, or be exiled
or deprived of his Privileges, Franchises, Life, Liberty or Property but by due
process of Law.
In
response to this proposal from New York, James Madison drafted a due process
clause for Congress. Madison cut out some language and inserted the word without, which had not been proposed
by New York. Congress then adopted the exact wording that Madison proposed
after Madison explained that the due process clause would not be sufficient to
protect various other rights:
Although
I know whenever the great rights, the trial by jury, freedom of the press, or
liberty of conscience, come in question in that body [Parliament], the invasion
of them is resisted by able advocates, yet their Magna Carta does not contain
any one provision for the security of those rights, respecting which the people
of America are most alarmed.”
As
a result of these facts, there has been an Amicus Curiae Brief, (which is to
say educate the court on fine points of law) has been filed against the House
for the lack of due process.
THE BOTTOM LINE: So why and what is to be gained in the
Communist controlled Congress to not have a vote by the whole house to move
forward on the investigation for impeachment of the president?
First a vote would make it official and
then the whole house would have authority to subpoena documents and witnesses
including the Republicans. And Nan certainly does not want that, that would be
“DUE PROCESS”. The truth would come out much too quickly and effect the
election in favor of the President. They know they haven’t a chance in hell to
impeach Trump. So the next best thing is to create and sustain a dark cloud of
confusion.
And then there is the little problem of
the whistleblowers credibility. “Second Hand Rose” so now they have dredged up
yet another whistleblower who says he heard ‘first-hand’ the Presidents
conversation. Well… so what! We already
know what he said don’t we? Trump said the same thing to Xi Jinping in China. I
do not know if we have a legal treaty with China to fight corruption as we do
with Ukraine but nevertheless corruption is corruption. Moreover, it’s the president’s
job to fight against corruption, whether it be in the media or the Congress or
in a foreign country that we are supplying arms to.
The Republicans have to abide by the
rule of law because they are Republican Representatives of a Constitutional
Republic. The Communists on the other hand, don’t have to follow the law
because…well because - they are Communists, and Communist Democrats make up
their own rules and laws as they go along.
As long as Nancy can quash the minority
in the house, she will- because that my friend is the way democracies work. The
majority must rule over the minority. Democracy the transition between a rule
of law Republic as the Framers designed, and the Communist tyranny of the DeepState.
I mean, after all, the majority rules
in a democracy regardless of the law. Maybe that is why the United States was
meant to be a Constitutional Republic ruled by law, and not a Communist Democracy
ruled by the majority, or as in this case, a small group of criminal elitists.
Think about it…
Thanks for listening my friend. Now
go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom.
-
de Andréa
Please
pass on this article to everyone on your email list. It may be the only chance for your family and
or friends to hear the truth.
The Fine
Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights
Reserved - Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted,
provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible
for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as
source materials.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment