28 Comments

By 1776, no king in the Anglo-sphere ruled by divine right. There was no daylight between the Whigs in Parliament and the Whigs in the colonies about monarchical rule. They were almost equally divided. The 27 articles of the Declaration, however, were hurled at George III, because opposition to tyranny needs a human face, who was under the thumb of Parliament. One charge accurately remonstrated because George gave his Royal Assent to oppressive legislation aimed at the colonies. But Jefferson well knew that George never refused his assent to anything. It went very badly for his predecessors in the 17th Century when Charles I lost his hat and James lost his realm.

That's why the Constitutional Convention choose a modified, robust form of executive—to protect against the tyranny of Congressional majorities. Geo. W enjoyed vaster power than George III, beginning with personal command of a standing army. Although no one expected by a presidency would be transferrable to heirs and assigns, the various proposals for term of office compromised on the four-year term with no limit on the number of times a President could be re-elected. Washington, had he wished, could have taken a third term, although he would not live to complete it.

The principal tyranny on the minds of the South was, of course, interference with their "peculiar institution." That's how we got the electoral college. Unfortunately, the Founders made no provision for the present day situation where a minority faction can impose their will on everyone else.

Expand full comment

I recall from History classes I had that George Washington's prestige and popularity after the Revolutionary War that it was proposed to crown him as the King of our infant nation. To his everlasting credit, he declined and remained a great but common person and citizen.

Expand full comment

As we unite to defend our democracy, let’s remember, our flag embodies freedom and equality, not animosity or exclusion — and a “patriot” is someone who fights for our country’s founding principles: equality, unalienable rights, the consent of the governed, the separation of church & state, and the goal to become a more perfect union.

Expand full comment

FDR, Japanese interment camps. Two atomic bombs dropped on civilians. Nixon. Reagan. Both Shrubs. Obama. All above the law. Every corrupt Wall Street banker, above the law. The immunity ruling is only status quo unmasked. The overturning of Roe and the Chevron Doctrine are what terrify me. If the Democrats are serious about saving this so called democracy, Biden would issue an executive order to expand SCOTUS, enshrine healthcare for women (abortion) and transgender people under the 4th amendment right to privacy. They would also codify the Chevron Doctrine and rewrite, to cover cable and streaming services, the Fairness Doctrine Reagan repealed years ago. If they don't do this, they have broken their oath to protect and defend our Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. You can't vote out fascism. It didn't work in 2020 and it won't work now. Garland fucked around, wasted 2 years. He never perused arresting the complicit Congress critters nor Ginnny Thomas. 147 traitors are still working in Congress, many are working for Putin others for Bibi. Trump is a Russian asset being allowed to run for president.The US isn't a serious country.

Expand full comment

You make me wonder if there's a book that details all the international (and constitutional law) violations Presidents have committed. If not it deserves to be written.

Expand full comment

*Pursued. Need an edit button. Stupid auto correct. Lol.

Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment

It seems that for 70 years the U.S. president, Congress, military and intelligence services have mostly been focused on colonizing the remaining regions hosting critical resources or commercial wares throughout South America, Africa and Asia. Colonization can't progress without an unimpeachable leader. Capitalism is built on colonization, overusing long term resources for short-term gain, and the bill is coming due from every side all at once. Biden has committed crimes relating to Israel that have been exhaustively documented, but everyone goes along. Like Heath Ledger's Joker said, "You know what I've noticed? Nobody panics when things go "according to plan."

Expand full comment

“Colonization can't progress without an unimpeachable leader.” Excellently said.

Expand full comment

This. "This July 4, remember that our nation was not founded as a perfect Union. It is called to become a more perfect Union."

Expand full comment

❤️✊🏽

Expand full comment

AOC is filing articles of impeachment against the Supreme Court’s justices.

Expand full comment

That's a step in the right direction for sure.

Expand full comment

What a great piece reminding us all of the truth. One thing a little off topic came to mind when reading this, and that is Miriam Carey. I say this because I still question how so many agents & police saw one woman as more of a threat than the mass of Jan6 rioters. Why weren’t the Jan6 rioters shot dead like Miriam?

Expand full comment

In a nutshell, Miriam's skin color got her shot and killed. Most of the January 6 insurrectionists were white. That's the difference.

Expand full comment

They had the complexion for protection. She did not. Hard and painful truth.

Expand full comment

Thanks for reading and sharing, Jane. And yes her case is absolutely bizarre. Her family is demanding it be reopened and I'm hopeful it is for the sake of justice.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 4
Comment removed
Expand full comment

People don't get sued for crimes. They get prosecuted by the government. There has to be a violation of a criminal statute. What official acts are you referring to that would constitute crimes?

Expand full comment

Are you arguing that the ability to unilaterally execute American citizens at the sole discretion of the President, to invade sovereign nations on a lie and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and to violate arms embargoes to overthrow governments is "good for the public at large?" Those are the real examples I'm talking about. Explain first why you defend these atrocities as "good for the public at large."

Expand full comment

I hope he clarifies his position. I am curious.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 5
Comment removed
Expand full comment

You can go now. You’re not a serious or honest person.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 5
Comment removed
Expand full comment

You’re being so dishonest. I cited specific examples. No hypotheticals. No “Lawyerly twists.” Specific examples. And you refuse to answer the question. Thanks for making that clear. Good day.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 5
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I appreciate how you admit you have zero qualifications to interpret American law yet somehow you have the arrogance to affirm its the right ruling. Absurd. You can go now.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 4
Comment removed
Expand full comment

You didn't answer the question.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jul 5
Comment removed
Expand full comment

You still didn’t answer the question. Seems clear you don’t have an answer but aren’t willing to admit you don’t have an answer.

Expand full comment