moda0306 wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 24, 2019 12:42 pm
How is the impeachment inquiry "completely unconstitutional?"
I could write volumes on this, but with only four or five more hours of sunshine and a long list of winterization projects, I'll provide just a quick overview: The impeachment inquiry began with and was pursued for nearly two years by virtue of a FISA warrant, issued by a secret court, and based from beginning to end on fabricated evidence created out of whole cloth by the political opposition. That fact alone should strike terror in the hearts of every citizen that values his or her own Sixth Amendment liberties.
And let's not forget about the boatload of Fourth Amendment violations that were visited upon Trump as the result of unlawful surveillance by both foreign and domestic intelligence assets, as well as White House insiders, at the behest of the political opposition both before and after the election. These clearly unlawful Fourth Amendment violations did not stop with Trump, but were also visited upon his family and business associates, leading to a number of egregiously unconstitutional prosecutions ("fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine) entirely unrelated to the impeachment effort. Even the sanctity of the attorney-client privilege--a bedrock procedural right emanating from the Constitutional guarantee to freedom from self-incrimination--was thrown by the wayside as we watched an attorney's office be ransacked for evidence relating to what would turn out to be an entirely fabricated charge.
But that was just the beginning. . . When the fraud was discovered, the political opposition in Congress (each individual member of which was sworn to uphold the Constitution) persisted with the discredited narrative in an obvious attempt to give it a life of its own. This amounted to flat-out fraud upon the American public. When that narrative could no longer be repeated with a straight face, the opposition created a new one--AGAIN based upon fabricated evidence that was promptly revealed for what it was. And within a few weeks, yet a THIRD bogus charge surfaced, this time from an unnamed "whistleblower" who, big surprise, was from within the political opposition itself. More Sixth Amendment issues regarding the right to confront one's accuser.
What to do? Unable to come up with any cognizable evidence to support their preordained, yet still unarticulated, charge of impeachable conduct, the political opposition then resorted to secret hearings!
It's been years, now, that we've been waiting for the proponents of impeachment to come forward with evidence--or even a charge that sticks. The adage, "Give me the man, and I'll find you a crime" couldn't be more fitting. They're intent upon finding something--anything--in Trump's past, present, or future that might lead to something they can grab a hold of. Meanwhile, the political opposition continues to insist that the burden of proof is upon Trump to prove his innocence--a turning on its head of one of the most fundamental principles of justice and a clear infringement of the Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process.
At some point, it becomes clear (and I think we're long past that point) that from the beginning this has been nothing more than an attempt to unseat a duly-elected president. And at that point, we're talking not only "unconstitutional," but flatly seditious.