The long, slow death of the rule of law in America

OC Register ^ | Aug. 27, 2015 | TROY SENIK

[MarvinStinson]

The most disturbing aspect of the scandal around Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server during her tenure as secretary of state is not the former first lady’s penchant for secrecy.

What’s truly unsettling is that it has been widely taken as read among both the media and the general public that Mrs. Clinton will likely avoid serious legal consequences for her behavior because the Justice Department is ultimately answerable to President Obama – and Democrats will not use the instruments of government to destroy one of their own. Whether that eventually proves true, the sentiment itself reveals a troubling trend in American politics.

It’s unnerving that the segments of society charged with keeping those officials in check – namely, the media and the voters – now regard such lack of principle as so unremarkable that it barely merits mention. We have transformed into a country in which it’s difficult to imagine precisely what kind of official malfeasance would be met with more than a shrug of the shoulders.

The Justice Department, for example, already took a pass on prosecuting Lois Lerner, the IRS official at the center of the scandal in which conservative groups were singled out for special scrutiny by the federal government on the basis of their political beliefs. If there’s anything that ought to be a matter of consensus in American politics, it’s that holding the reins of power doesn’t give you carte blanche to turn the power of the state against your partisan rivals. Yet Ms. Lerner, having done that very thing, doesn’t seem to be much worse for the wear.

This hands-off trend isn’t limited by any means to the DOJ. Consider the current debate over the nuclear deal with Iran.

[caww]

Hillary’s health problems are down to MS some are saying...working with her staff to keep the medical drama under wraps...others say Hillary has suffered three secret strokes, and she’s flat-out lying about her failing health.......behind the scenes it is said she appears exhausted, dazed and confused at times.......Hillary has a history of blackouts, falls, memory loss, blinding headaches, vision problems and collapses dating back at least a decade.

2005 she fainted during a luncheon speech in Buffalo, N.Y.

2009 she broke her right elbow in a mysterious fall in a U.S. State Department garage.

2011 Hillary collapsed while boarding a flight in Yemen, but insisted she’d simply slipped.

2012 suffered a head injury from a fall in Dec. .collapsed at home, striking her head. She sustained a concussion and was hospitalized for three nights.

she had a blood clot in a vein found between the brain and the skull behind her right ear. She was given blood thinners to dissolve the clot. But Karl charged her team was covering up what really happened, and insisted Hillary “had some kind of traumatic brain injury.”...Hillary was later seen wearing glasses with a prism designed to correct double vision, which is a recognizable symptom of MS.

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/real-life/how-chronic-disease-could-end-hillary-clintons-white-house-run

[MUDDOG]

She looks it.

[Smokin' Joe]

One can only hope we don't get a French Revolution.

With the depth and breadth of corruption it will take something on the order of a guillotine roadshow and a decade to clean it up.

On the other hand, if people bought stout rope, picked out an appropriate branch/lamp post/traffic signal or such, and learned to tie forbidden knots, the cleanup could be quicker.

Enough sarcasm, but only because I despise mob rule. It will take a return to the Rule of Law, not an abandonment of it.

[Jane Long]

Yikes!

[Smokin' Joe]

If they don't have to obey the law, then why the hell do we?!

We acknowledge that it is a dangerous place to go, that no one has regard for the law. If for no other reason, we obey laws because we feel they are just, and the right thing to do. Of course, that requires some sort of moral compass.

We have, however, reached the point where there are so many laws, and so many of those run contrary to what was once considered "common sense" or even the simple guidance of the Decalogue, that it is almost impossible to avoid being in violation of some nonsensical ordinance, some ridiculous law, or some illogical regulation. This breeds contempt at best for the law and, eventually, those who enforce it.

[Smokin' Joe]

In case you hadn't noticed, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM NOW.

Now? They've been part of the problem for a quarter century or more, their position politically bolstered only by the fact they were not quite the other party.

Thank Almighty God people are finally waking up to the fact.

[usconservative]

We have, however, reached the point where there are so many laws, and so many of those run contrary to what was once considered "common sense" or even the simple guidance of the Decalogue, that it is almost impossible to avoid being in violation of some nonsensical ordinance, some ridiculous law, or some illogical regulation.

That's by design my friend. That's deliberate. It all comes down to this: When they want to find you guilty of something ..... anything really ..... in order to get you to shut up and do what they say, they'll have the "law" on their side.

Ayn Rand wrote quite extensively about this. Atlas Shrugged. Hank Reardon is one of the main characters in the novel who when push came to shove against the Government, he knew how to push back.

That book just changed my life when I read it. I'm due for a re-read (my 4th) soon.

[usconservative]

The equal protection clause has been thus rendered null and void in practice.

Damn' straight.

[Carry_Okie]

It may sound goofy, but in my recollection, the single thing that induced more widespread disrespect for the rule of law in United States history was the Federal 55mph speed limit in response to the OPEC oil embargo. This single event made widespread daily disobedience a fact of life.

[onedoug]

She looks like she really needs a bath. I’d hate to be downwind of her.

[XHogPilot]

Walter Williams wrote a great article on “Rule of Law”, perhaps 10 years ago. It was very well written, describing what it meant, and didn’t mean, and why it was pivotally important to a successful society. I’d love to find the article again....

[DB]

I have to agree.

[XHogPilot]

Professor Walter E. Williams has written extensively on Rule of Law. Here’s an excert from a 2009 article: “The rule of law means laws are certain and known in advance. Laws envision no particular outcome except that of allowing people to peaceably pursue their own objectives. Finally, and most important, laws are equally applied to everyone, including government officials.”
http://fee.org/freeman/rule-of-law-versus-legislative-orders/

[MarvinStinson]

Interesting.

[MarvinStinson]

“Finally, and most important, laws are equally applied to everyone, including government officials.”

[DungeonMaster]

Without the bible there is no law.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“How would that be determined?”

Constitutional Convention? Presidential decree? My thought would be to privatize it.

[MarvinStinson]

It is already privatized.

That’s the problem.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks MarvinStinson.

[stephenjohnbanker]

If you put enough frivolous laws on the books, everyone beccomes a criminal sooner or later.