Third Party & Independents Archives

The Real Constitutional Crisis That Must Be Avoided

So. Imagine Hillary had won last November. A more than plausible scenario that might have happened if only voters had turned out in wherever. Let’s suppose she did win then. FBI Director Comey would have been fired and the media would have cheered.

Let's suppose additionally, that President Hillary signed a very similar executive order on restricting some targeted immigration from specific areas of the world. Seeing she had perhaps read an intel report that warned of increased risk of terrorist activities directed at America, perhaps even from inside America, using agents or lone wolf actors coming from those specific targeted areas.

Given the ACLU's Omar Jadwat's admission to Judge Niemeyer of the 4th Circuit that had another president signed Trump's executive order, it would have then been constitutional, one can safely say that had President Hillary signed such a travel order, it would have been accepted by the courts and the media. Perhaps with a few qualified concerns. But nothing more than that.

That means that the so-called constitutional crisis that media are already setting up as the headline for the next frew weeks, or months, is based solely on the fact that Trump is the President of America. Not Hillary. And that means we're back in NeverTrump land, where it's all about character, and how President Trump's character flaws mean he should never have been elected president. Character flaws based on a back-of-the-envelope psychological profile of how Donald J. Trump's mind works. Based, in turn, on his tweets, and campaign comments. Wonderful.

And while this is certainly partisan in the sense that Democrats are blood-mindedly united now in opposing Trump at every turn, all in order to placate a base that is all about radicalized identity politics, and not white working class males (as identity politics labels working families across America in all sorts of diverse conditions), it is also partisan in another way.

Consider: Jason Chaffetz, soon to be retiring, has now asked for an investigation of Comey's dismissal, in his capactiy as Chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. Senator John McCain - the victim of a notorious slur by then Candidate Trump - has requested that a special prosecutor be called to handle the Russia investigation that Comey's FBI has been carrying out. Senator Richard Burr, Chair of the Intelligence Committee, has stated he's "troubled" by the timing of Comey's dismissal. All Republicans.

With President Trump, it seems there are two faultlines that display two types of partisan divisions, in other words. The old-fashioned Republicans v Democrats, and also the Trump supporters v. Trump Detractors/Haters faultline. While the tectonic plates grind and rub against each other, it may be easy to confuse one faultline for another, but there are two of them, making a tense stand-off even more complex. While divisions within the ruling party are common fare in Washington, this does go deeper. The Russia investigation's future, Comey's replacement (a key factor for assessing the dismissal of the Director for many respected law professors) and even tax policy proposals by the administration, will all be stretched and bent by this new, troubling faultline.

The real constitutional crisis will be if this deteriorates into impeachment attempts with no clear and compelling evidence of collusion on the part of any Trump associates with Russia in relation to last year's campaign. That would truly be a disastrous precedent. Let's hope Washington can avoid that outcome, despite much of the town's open hostility to the president.

Posted by AllardK at May 15, 2017 7:42 PM
Comments
Comment #416247
had another president signed Trump’s executive order, it would have then been constitutional,

If Hillary Clinton had promised to ban Muslim immigration during the campaign, then her similarly worded order would have been likewise unconstitutional. This isn’t about Trump the person, this is about Trump’s concerted multi-front assault upon the Constitution.

The real constitutional crisis will be if this deteriorates into impeachment attempts with no clear and compelling evidence of collusion on the part of any Trump associates with Russia in relation to last year’s campaign. That would truly be a disastrous precedent. Let’s hope Washington can avoid that outcome, despite much of the town’s open hostility to the president.

Articles of Impeachment against Richard Nixon passed the Judiciary committee without any clear or compelling evidence of collusion on his part in either the planning or execution of the Watergate burglary. Even today, we don’t know if Nixon had any foreknowledge of that particular incident.

Posted by: Warren Porter at May 15, 2017 7:53 PM
Comment #416249

AllardK, it is amazing to watch the depths politicians will plumb to retain power and punish perceived enemies. Few elected national officials are worthy of support as most do not represent the views of the voters who put them in office.

I believe the Left senses that if they can take down Trump, they can take down the Constitution. What will be left of our nation is hideous to contemplate.

Imagine our nation being governed by an elite class that believes in noting but power. This will become a shit-hole nation not worthy of survival. Government by the people with justice for all will disappear.

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 15, 2017 8:01 PM
Comment #416255

Royal Flush-
Really?

I’d a stable economy, a secure nation with respected borders, people moving through the lawful process of immigration.

I’d also like you to stop pretending that the GOP isn’t leading as it’s supposedly being lead by voters, that it’s not indoctrinating them with certain views, then concentrating them, then turning around and gerrymandering the districts to amplify their voting power in Congress.

I’d like you to realize that most of us in this great country of ours have no self-interest invested in its destruction, that this is the cartoon bad-guy, bond-villain distortion of our intentions, and a rather immature way to deal with our disagreements.

As for being governed by an elite class? Give me a break. Who is it you’re offering all these tax cuts to? Who is it that you’re rigging the AHCA to deliver more money to? Who is it who actually benefits when regulations hold them less accountable? Who are you empowering when you let telecom companies monkey around with people’s internet streams to gouge more money out of them for their promised internet speed?

You should drop the rhetoric for ten seconds and take an actual look at what you support.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2017 8:31 PM
Comment #416256

Oh, and more on the subject, the trick with Trump is that he pretty much opened his big mouth and told everybody exactly what he planned to do, and why. You guys have done a good job of making original intent such a big consideration, so why would we ignore Trump’s intent, as he has expressed it?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2017 8:33 PM
Comment #416269

It’s a horrible Muslim ban then as it leaves off some of the most populous Muslim countries in the world…

Posted by: Rhinehold at May 15, 2017 10:03 PM
Comment #416282
You should drop the rhetoric for ten seconds and take an actual look at what you support.

I think you should as well, Stephen… You want secure borders and then support globalists. You think that just because the Conservatives are totalitarians that the Progressives aren’t either. They both are, because they all want the power to make decisions that individuals should be entrusted with making.

The partisanship I see today is astounding. I never thought it would get worse than the 90s, but boy was *I* wrong.

Posted by: Rhinehold at May 16, 2017 3:12 AM
Comment #416292

President Hillary could have signed the exact same executive order on restricting some targeted immigration from specific areas of the world, and the leftists would be kissing her a$$ and praising her, just as they did with Obama for 8 straight years.
And as with Obama, the appearance of success is more important than the country.

There would be no ridiculously dishonest assertions about her rhetoric trumping what the order actually says. There would be no activist judges putting party before country and trying to deny her from doing her job.

In fact, as long as she was still promoting identity politics and professing her love for abortion, wealth redistribution, gay marriage etc…, just as Obama did, she could have done the exact same things Trump has done to date and the left wouldn’t have batted an eye.

Posted by: kctim at May 16, 2017 8:48 AM
Comment #416311

You should drop the rhetoric for ten seconds and take an actual look at what you support.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 15, 2017 8:31 PM

It’s OK Stephen…I didn’t mean to frighten you. You will be fine in the new world of Liberal/socialism. You will still be poor, you will still be blaming others (only not the government) and you will still not miss your Constitutional Rights.

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 16, 2017 2:49 PM
Comment #416340

Rhinehold-
Oh, spare me the “globalism” vs. “America First” BS. America long ago gave up on being absolutely isolated. You want America to be exceptional, well, you can’t do that disconnected. My thing is, what does globalism mean? Must it be one thing, one paradigm of how to deal with the world? No.

No, there are many different ways to engage, some of them being more assertive, more helpful to the average person here than what the first draft strategists have gone for. The Business interests took offshoring and H-1B visas too far. We can take a different approach than that, and should.

I believe that there has to be a balance between the individual and the group. As somebody who is, by nature, much more individualistic than normal, I both understand the charms of being that way, and the hazards. We bristle at the depersonalization and the loss of individual ability to chose whatever they want to do, but at the same time, we’d also bristle at what others would ask of us in the name of their getting to do whatever they want to.

It’s finding the right balance of autonomy and harmony that is the challenge that our system was designed to try and handle. Too weak a government, and some groups of people run roughshod over others. Too strong, and the same result occurs, from different causes. The key is creating a more selective system of government.

Of course, it can be rather stressful to some who are sure that if they don’t get to completely determine the political, religious, or other social landscapes that everything will go to hell. Dealing with them is a special challenge of a system like ours.

kctim-
Could you do us all a favor and lay off of the “Hillary and the Dems would do this, and the left would love them for it?” It all seems to be a pity party for the right. No, I really doubt that Hillary would have set a Muslim ban in place.

Royal Flush-
I’m already pretty low in terms of income, so you’re telling me I’d be richer under the GOP… well, I’ve had my share of time under the them, and it seems more like I end up making less, paying more for everything. So, no thanks.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 17, 2017 12:28 AM
Comment #416346

Stephen, I will do that favor for you, just as soon as you all stop pretending that what Trump has so far done, is anything all that different than what previous Presidents have done. I will do that favor, just as soon as you stop being so hypocritical to defend your party, and start being consistent to support your country. I will do that favor, just as soon as you stop pushing innuendo, and start relying on fact.

Until then, I’m going to enjoy laughing at this sideshow and pointing them all out whenever I feel necessary.

Posted by: kctim at May 17, 2017 9:09 AM
Comment #416353

kctim-
Listen, mister, I get so much **** from you that just seems to be you justifying whatever awful thing your people are doing by saying somebody else did, too.

It never occurs to you that you’re wallowing in your own hypocrisy here? That you and the other Conservatives are the ones who have grown so delicate that the mere brush of criticism is painful?

I know my people aren’t perfect, but their imperfections are being dwarfed by that of a party that seems to tolerate gross abuses of power simply because it gets your critics off your back, lets you feel like you’re saving the country and the world. It’s time for the GOP and the Conservative movement to humble itself, to realize that stonewalling Democrats and others interested in investigating what’s going on is only serving to ripen the sense of conspiracy and wrongdoing, not move it out of the system.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 17, 2017 12:15 PM
Comment #416375

“I believe that there has to be a balance between the individual and the group.”

Or course you do Stephen, and you ascribe the same Constitutional rights to groups as individuals. Shame on you for not learning the difference.

Posted by: Royal Flush at May 17, 2017 3:28 PM
Comment #416514

It’s time for the GOP and the Conservative movement to humble itself, to realize that stonewalling Democrats and others interested in investigating what’s going on is only serving to ripen the sense of conspiracy and wrongdoing, not move it out of the system.

Who won the election?

Here’s where Stephen Daugherty is confused. This is where Stephen Daugherty’s anger comes from. He mistakenly believes, now, that elections DON’T have consequences. Even when his god loses he still thinks it’s supposed to be calling the shots. He still thinks the Democratics are superior and elections don’t matter when they don’t go his way.

Did he ever think the investigations aren’t going anywhere because, deep down, not too many people actually think it matters, that it’s Democratics making noise trying to stay relevant?


Posted by: Weary Willie at May 19, 2017 9:27 PM
Post a comment