Sixth Amendment?

I’ve taken a little look at the sixth amendment.  As near as I can tell, the right to face your accuser only applies for defendants in criminal court.  That means that the worst killer or rapist has the right to face his accuser.  This includes victims as well as any witness.

There are three reasons for this.  First, it is a verification that the witness exists.  Without the sixth amendment, the prosecution can just make up the witness and claim he is real.

Second, the accused is able to question the witness.  Believe it or not, some witnesses do lie.  When the witness is put on the witness chair under oath, it gives the accused the ability to challenge the witness’s testimony.  Strange as it seems, some witnesses don’t tell the truth.  Sometimes they intentionally lie, even under oath.

Third, it gives the accused a chance to uncover motives.  For instance, if the witness stands to gain a few million dollars by giving false witness, it might be a good thing for the jurors to consider during deliberations.

Unfortunately, President Trump does not have this right.  He is not being tried in a criminal court.  He is being railroaded by a bunch of dummycrats that hate him.  Instead of a jury, if impeached, he will be judged by senators.  There is no doubt in my mind that he will not be found guilty.

However, the false charges brought by the false witnesses are also being displayed (very selectively) before the public.  Even if there is no impeachment, the falsities remain and the president never gets a chance to challenge any of it.

Hence, he is not even being treated as well as a serial killer.

May I remind you, we don’t even know if these whistleblowers exist?  Assuming he does, we don’t know his motives.  Finally, there is no opportunity for the president’s lawyers to challenge the accuracy of what they say.

Is this really the way to run an impeachment?  I am sure that if our forefathers considered such a thing, they likely would have written the sixth amendment a little differently.

Then again, they likely never considered the likes of the dummycrats.

Deceit and Lies About Deceit

Some time ago, Rep. Shiff lied by saying he had positive proof of collusion between President Trump and the Russians.  Now we know better.  If he had the proof, as much as he hates Pres. Trump, he would have produced it.  Instead, he says nothing more about it and hopes we will forget about it.

Then, a short while ago, he attempts to make us believe a supposed conversation President Trump had with the president of Ukraine.  It might be laughable but for two things.  First, there are millions of people that believed his deceit and continue to believe him to this day.  After all, he never made an apology and there are those that continue to quote the lier rather the real wors of the president.  Intentionally, he and his conspirators permit the deceit to live on.

Second, The Speaker of the House endorsed the lie.  Staightfaced, she said it was the truth.  (It wasn’t even a believable lie.)

Finally, Rep. Shiff lied about having talked to the so-called wistleblower.  This prompted four Panochios from even the liberal media.

Were there any corrections issued by Shiff or Pelosi?  Were there any apologies from either of them or any of those in the media who were in cahoots with them.

Then what did Shiff, the lier say when he was confronted?  He tells another lie, of course.  What else would you expect?

It is why I call them dummycrats.  It would seem they don’t know how to tell the truth, not even when they are confronted.

The Mess Inside

One of the lines in “My Fair Lady” that I found humorous was when Professor Higgins makes the remark about women:  “Straitening up their heir is all they ever do.  Why don’t they straighten up the mess that is inside.”

Normally I don’t make personal remarks like this, but, sorry.  I just can’t resist.  It would seem to particularly apply to Rep. Ilhan Omar.  More than that, in her case, the mess that is outside is pretty bad too.  It is no wonder she wants to keep it under wraps.