Monthly Archives: December 2017

Can Abusive Government Use The Constitution Against You?

By: Jay Davidson

Sunday, December 17th, 8:25 am

First, and foremost, the Constitution was created to protect the citizens’ individual rights from his own government.  Should an employee of the federal government be afforded the protection of the Constitution, especially the 5th Amendment, when that person has abused his federal power, after he acted contrary to the very Constitution he now hides behind?


American Thinker

How an abusive government turns the Constitution against you

Question: Does the Bill of Rights protect citizens from government excess?  Nearly everyone will agree that it does.  The very reason we have a Bill of Rights is to protect you, the citizen, against abuses by government.

Next question: Can the government use the Bill of Rights as a shield in order to violate your constitutional rights?

Nearly everyone would say this is the opposite of what the Constitution is designed to do.  Yet, in practice, that is precisely what happens.  Here’s how.

Government officials confidently commit crimes against you, against your nation, and against your Constitution.  Their confidence, their arrogance, really, stems in large part from the fact that, if and when their crimes come to light, they can hide behind the Fifth Amendment.  Perverting your right to be protected from them, they shield themselves behind your rights while violating your rights.

Is this not the definition of tyranny?

This perversion protects government officials from having to testify about their crimes – which, through them, become the crimes of government.  Thus, not only do they avoid punishment, but their immunity encourages further lawlessness by others in the halls of power.

Let’s be clear.  If a government official is caught shoplifting, he should be afforded the full and complete protections of the Constitution.  Such a crime is not a crime of government, but that of a private citizen.

It is a completely different story, however, when the government official uses his office, his powers of government, to violate your rights, the very rights that government is sworn to protect.  In such a case, it cannot have been the intent of the Founders to protect the government against those whose rights the government abuses.

It should be crystal-clear that the government does not have the right to hide its crimes, nor to be shielded by a Constitution designed to protect citizens from governmental abuse.  It should be just as clear that every government official has an affirmative duty, an absolute duty, to uphold the Constitution.  This means that if a government official becomes aware of official crimes being committed against the American people, by government, then he must report it.  He must make it public, or at least as public as national security permits.

What seems less clear is whether the official has an affirmative duty to report governmental crimes that he himself commits.  But there is no unclarity.  The Constitution is not a suicide pact.  It does not protect the government by shielding it from any crimes committed by use of its authority.  Fifth Amendment protections do not protect the government, nor do they shield any office-holder acting under his governmental authority – because during the commission of that crime, he is the government.

The bottom line is that, when accused of an official crime, no government official has any rights under the Fifth Amendment to refuse to reveal all he knows about that crime.  If this amounts to self-incrimination, so be it; in such a case, the Constitution he abuses against his victims offers him no protection against self-incrimination.  None.  Instead, it protects his victims against him.  Any other conclusion is tyrannical.

Whether it be Lois Lerner, Peter Strzok, Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder – the list is disappointingly long – every one of them is required to reveal every item of knowledge he has, in order to protect you against them.

Every item.  Period.

This needs to be tested in the Supreme Court.  Indict one of them, require his truthful and complete testimony, and then let the appeals process begin.  If there is any hope for the future of our nation – if there is any hope of forestalling the accumulating forces of tyranny – the court will protect you, not the corrupt officials victimizing you.

Is America a Republic or a Democracy?

Jay Davidson
Thoughts regarding A New Trumpet for Democracy
Our form of government is strong, persistent and thriving.  But its not a Democracy…Nor do you want it.  All Democracies devolve into the tyranny of the many over the few.  Democracies are like two wolves and one sheep voting what’s for dinner.  What is the one overriding theme of all Democrat legislation?  It is to increase the size, scope and power of the federal government.
Where in all the Founding Documents do you find the word Democracy?  Nowhere.  In fact, the original documents went out of their way to prevent Democracy.  The Electoral College is the only remaining body solely placed to prevent Democracy.
America is, or was intended to be, a Republic of independent states whose governing bodies are constrained by the Constution, the Amendments and the Bill of Rights.  Or it used to be.  I find it highly disappointing when well-informed people, like this author, fail to discern the reality of democracy versus a Republic.

A New Trumpet for Democracy

Contrary to his isolationist reputation, the president echoes Reagan in affirming America’s founding values.

President Trump outlines his National Security Strategy, Dec. 18.

President Trump outlines his National Security Strategy, Dec. 18. Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

Ronald Reagan’s wisdom often went unappreciated in his day. In a 1982 address to the British Parliament, he presented a strategy to confront Soviet communism and other forms of dictatorship by championing American values. Commentators deemed it “naive” and “wishful thinking”—not to mention dangerous—to talk of advancing American principles and ideals. Why provoke hostility by trumpeting the superiority of democracy?

This Monday President Trump gave a speech outlining his National Security Strategy. Like Reagan 35 years ago, Mr. Trump celebrated the U.S. as a force for good in the world and cited America’s founding values as a powerful advantage against repressive regimes. The NSS document, which the White House released the same day, asserts the administration’s determination to protect American sovereignty by “defending the institutions, traditions and principles that allow us to live in freedom.” It identifies America’s fundamental source of strength: “we the people.”

Those expecting a more isolationist approach or a retreat from global engagement, especially with regard to championing American values such as democracy and individual rights, may be wondering whether Mr. Trump’s fundamental outlook has changed. What they need to understand—and the NSS makes clear—is that in today’s brutishly competitive world, in which rivals are actively seeking military, economic and political gains at U.S. expense, the American idea still reigns as the nation’s greatest competitive asset.

Prior administrations have used the NSS document primarily as an internal plan for coordinating policies among government agencies and departments. That Mr. Trump chose to present its key points directly to the public shows that he recognizes the global appeal of the American model of governance. Acknowledging that “we are not going to impose our values on others,” the document nevertheless affirms that the U.S. “will encourage reform, working with promising nations to promote effective governance, improve the rule of law, and develop institutions accountable and responsive to citizens.”

No one would accuse Mr. Trump of mushy sentimentalism when it comes to foreign policy. If he now embraces America’s founding principles as an advantage in the global arena, it is because he understands the potency of success as a countermeasure against ideologies hostile to freedom. He appreciates the value of a good brand—and America’s trademark represents the values that distinguish it from authoritarian regimes that treat their citizens as expendable.

The NSS document provides an operational blueprint for addressing specific threats to the U.S. and its citizens. It lays out four basic “pillars” aimed at protecting the homeland, promoting American prosperity, preserving peace through strength, and advancing American influence in the world. That last pillar defines the moral impact of America’s presence in the global arena—and how it redounds to the nation’s benefit by enhancing the prospects for peace and prosperity in the long run.

“The extraordinary trajectory of the United States from a group of colonies to a thriving, industrialized, sovereign republic—the world’s lone superpower—is a testimony to the strength of the idea on which our nation is founded, namely that each of our citizens is born free and equal under the law,” the document states. “America’s core principles, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, are secured by the Bill of Rights. . . . Liberty, free enterprise, equal justice under the law, and the dignity of every human life are central to who we are as a people.”

Reagan’s speech 35 years ago called on democratic nations to join in reaffirming the power of ideas to change the world for the better, reminding their citizens to think of themselves as “free people, worthy of freedom and determined not only to remain so but to help others gain their freedom as well.” Wars initiated by tyrants had devastated whole continents; the best way to fight totalitarianism and its terrible inhumanity was by actively promoting freedom and democratic ideals.

Two years later, on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, Reagan noted at Normandy that the men who fought there had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity: “You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man.”

Mr. Trump’s National Security Strategy aims to rebuild U.S. economic and military strength. The goal is to keep the peace, so that soldiers will not have to make the ultimate sacrifice to defend America’s vital national interests, its principles and its way of life. But as the world has learned, to great sorrow and loss of life, there are no guarantees. “We know that American success is not a foregone conclusion,” Mr. Trump said Monday. “It must be earned and it must be won.”

Or as Reagan put it in 1982: “No, democracy is not a fragile flower. Still it needs cultivating.”

Ms. Shelton is chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy. She served on the Trump transition team.

Appeared in the December 21, 2017, print edition.