The President: Above the Law or Below it?

The notion that no one, not even the most powerful of us, is above the law is the underpinning of any successful judicial system. In the same light we must remember, with even more intensity, that no one, not even the least of us, is below the law. While this is the foundation of justice, I challenge us to look further to complicate the equation: True justice requires that even the most powerful of us is not below the law. This may seem obvious; however, let it be noted that what is obvious is oftentimes most easily forgotten when passions are most inflamed.

And passions are most inflamed.

In any criminal investigations there is an inherent requirement that the party responsible for charging and prosecuting conduct themselves in such a way that reflects the tenants of fairness, transparency, and uprightness, lest they undermine the case and let the potentially guilty defendant walk free. To the onlooker, at times it appears that the witnesses testifying against the defendant are on trial rather than the accused. Why? It is because the prosecutor represents something bigger than the case before them—they represent due process and the principles that define it. If the prosecution does not have a case that they can prove without a reasonable doubt (in cases where that is the legal threshold for prosecution) it isn’t uncommon for them to withdraw the case all together.

Section 4 of Article Two of the Constitution states:

"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."

Although impeachment, a strictly political term with objectively ambiguous requirements, does not entail a criminal investigation, be not mistaken, the requirement for substantial evidence, due process, and transparency to the electorate still exists. Proceeding with disregard for said requirements is, in effect, the deconstructing or uncontrolled detonation, of the institution of American justice. If the courts are required to uphold the rule of law and foster due process, then I would argue that elected officials of government, who actively contribute to the creation of legislation and laws, are required to do the same.

The Democrats, led by Adam Schiff (D-Calif), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, have been meeting and questioning witnesses in closed-door sessions regarding the unofficial impeachment inquiry into the President. They, and their mainstream media activists, continue to suggest there is an active impeachment inquiry; however, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D) refused to hold a vote on the initiation of such inquiry which means that their alleged inquiry is nothing but political theatrics. Until Pelosi and Democrats are willing to put their vote on the record regarding the issue of impeachment, it can be assumed this is merely a political stunt. Further to this point, the fact that these sessions are closed-door to the public and elected Republican officials are refused an opportunity to even read transcripts from these sessions only proves that transparency is anathema to their cause. Republican Congressmen have articulated that the media, in most cases, know more about the contents of these sessions than them, members elected by collectively millions of Americans, through illegal leaks. In addition to that already stated, the President, the one accused of high crimes and misdemeanors, is not given an opportunity to have a lawyer sit in to hear the charges or evidence against him. By residing in no man’s land of a pseudo-impeachment hearing, the Democrats believe they are safe from committing fully to due process and transparency until they can covertly connect dots they believe will validate their narrative.

Even the President of the United States is not above the law, but he is certainly not below it. A foul mouth, crude humor, disregard for political correctness, blunt, hyperbolic speech, poor articulation and slightly orange-colored skin are all subjective critiques of the President; however, the idea that any of those stated reasons mean he does not deserve due process is simply tyrannical, corrupt, and pure evil. Mahatma Ghandi wisely stated that ‘truth never damages a just cause.’ When the President was accused of coordinating election fraud in 2016 with the Russian government, he released millions of pages of records and the entire probe was proved to be a left-wing conspiracy theory. When he was accused of quid pro quo during his congratulatory phone call with the newly elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, he immediately released the full transcript of the call for no other reason than transparency. The fact patterns would suggest that the accused has been far more transparent than the accusers.

3 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All