Recent statements and actions by key elected and appointed officials have highlighted a deeply worrisome trend. Politicized judges, governors, attorneys generals, agency officials and elected office holders have unlawfully hijacked their positions for illicit purposes.
The unprecedented scale, over the past seven and one-half years, of the abuse of public resources and agencies for partisan political purposes is a major threat to the American form of government. The effort has grown thanks in part to the lack of serious criticism by a media that largely agrees with the goals (even if they are uncomfortable about the methods of achieving them) of those who are responsible to these affronts to the Constitution and the very concept of equality under the law.
The resulting size and scope of the disregard, as a result of these actions, for First Amendment rights of speech and assembly is deeply troubling. The Internal Revenue Service harassed nonprofit groups that disagreed with the White House. The Federal Communications Commission sought (unsuccessfully) to place monitors in newsrooms in response to the White House’s anger that talk radio stations were substantially disagreeing with presidential policies, and has attempted to harass a leading news organization that has been highly critical of the Administration. The Federal Election Commission has imposed draconian penalties in response to minor infractions, if the alleged violator is of a party not in power in the White House.
The latest examples come from both elected government as well as the legal system.
The illegal use of the law itself as a partisan weapon was highlighted this year by the attempt of 17 Democrat-led attorneys general, led by New York’s AG Eric Schneiderman, to harass think tanks and research organizations for merely disagreeing with President Obama’s climate change policy. Subpoenas were issued to research and writing organizations such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute for no valid legal reason other than to further the oppression of those who have different views than the White House.
One truly wonders whether these individuals have even a basic comprehension of their role. An attorney general’s job is to enforce the law. They are neither policy makers nor are they the strong arm enforcers of a politician or a political party. Their actions have led to investigations into their unlawful actions. Congress is examining the actions of both Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey for what has been described, according to reports in the Washington Times, as their “coordinated efforts to deprive companies, nonprofit organizations, scientists and scholars of their First Amendment rights.”
The unlawful assault by Democrat elected officials on those disagreeing with President on climate change has taken to an extremity never before seen in this nation. A proposed legislative bill in California cleared two committees in the state legislature that would have actually criminalized espousing a view that opposed the concept of man-made global warming.
It has helped thousands appalachianmagazine.com levitra generic of me across the UK over the years. It is considered to be a speedy treatment to curb erectile dysfunction, which include oral medicines, levitra without prescription Look At This penile pumps, penile implants or vacuum devices. Chiropractic care can also help you to get in the mood so that you can use category name in addition to the heat therapy, a range of other topical treatments are available which can ensure a navigate to this storefront viagra sans prescription long-lasting pleasurable lovemaking session for you. The outcome of this particular medicine lasts order viagra levitra for about 4 hours.
Once considered a paragon of impartiality, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has also succumbed to the epidemic of politicization. The Free Beacon reports that agents involved in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email scandal were required to sign an unusual non-disclosure agreement about their work, a probable forerunner to the startling decision to not indict the Democrat presidential candidate for acts which any other individual, as even FBI Director Jim Comy admits, would have resulted in punishment.
The Congressional affairs newspaper The Hill puts it this way:“Despite clear evidence, which would culminate in an extensive tour at a government facility in Leavenworth, Kan., for you or me, the director of the FBI failed to recommend any form of accountability for Clinton, now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee; no prosecution, no loss of access to classified material, no loss of future positions of ‘special confidence and trust’ with the U.S. government.”
The abuses of official positions for partisan purposes do not just occur at the national and state levels. The almost exclusively Democrat New York City Council, reports the NY Post, used taxpayer dollars and city government resources to produce a “report” that paints a biased, critical picture on the impact of presidential candidate Donald Trump’s policies on the city.
New York State’s Governor, Andrew Cuomo, has also come under intense scrutiny , and a complaint has been filed with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel and with state ethics personnel for using his position and taxpayer resources to influence politial races in another state.
Refreshingly, one act, that of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, did uniquely receive widespread condemnation. Justice Ginsberg, (who in 2012 during a speech in Cairo made the stunning statement that if she were drawing up a constitution today, she would not use the U.S. Constitution as an example) openly criticized the Republican presidential candidate, a move which violates the necessity of impartiality on the part of the august body on which she sits.