{"id":740,"date":"2024-06-03T15:40:45","date_gmt":"2024-06-03T15:40:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2024\/06\/03\/the-destruction-of-jurisprudence\/"},"modified":"2024-06-03T15:40:45","modified_gmt":"2024-06-03T15:40:45","slug":"the-destruction-of-jurisprudence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2024\/06\/03\/the-destruction-of-jurisprudence\/","title":{"rendered":"The Destruction of Jurisprudence"},"content":{"rendered":"

Victor Davis Hanson<\/span><\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n

Now we are left with a final toxic gift from this [Boomer] generation: the destruction of jurisprudence, a system designed not to easily protect the popular and admired but those often pilloried in the public square, the unorthodox, eccentric, and unliked.<\/span><\/p>\n

Even Trump\u2019s antagonists know that had Donald Trump been a man of the left, or had he not run again for president, he would never have been charged, much less convicted, of felonies or been punished with nearly a half-billion dollars in legal fees and fines.<\/span><\/p>\n

We all accept that the charges brought against him by a vindictive and left-wing Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Fani Willis and Jack Smith\u2014all compromised by either past politicized prosecutorial failures or boasts of getting Trump\u2014have never before been brought against any prior political figure or indeed any average citizen. They were instead invented to target a single political enemy. So what hallowed law, what constitutional norm, what ancient custom, or what Bill or Rights has the fading left not destroyed in order to erase Donald Trump from the political scene?<\/span><\/p>\n

There is now no distinction between state and federal law. Once a prosecutor targets an enemy, he can flip back and forth between such statutes to find the necessary legal gimmick to destroy his target.<\/span><\/p>\n

Statutes of limitations are no more as errant prosecutors and political operatives in the legislature can change laws to dredge up supposed crimes of years past, to destroy their political enemies, by employing veritable bills of attainder.<\/span><\/p>\n

The very notion of an exculpatory hung jury depends on who is to be hung.<\/span><\/p>\n

Judges can overtly contribute to the political opponents of the accused before them. Their children can profit in the tens of millions by selling to politicos their relationship to the very judge who holds the fate of their political opponents in his hands.<\/span><\/p>\n

In sum, the First Amendment guaranteeing the right of the defendant to free speech is now not applicable. Asymmetrical gag orders are.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Fourth Amendment is now torn to shreds by those who boast of \u201csaving democracy.\u201d When the FBI, on orders from a hostile administration, storms into the home of the leading presidential candidate and ex-president\u2019s home, armed to the teeth, treats a civil dispute as a violent felony, and then doctors the evidence it finds, then constitutional insurance against \u201cunreasonable searches and seizures\u201d becomes a bitter joke for generations.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Fifth Amendment\u2019s protection that no person \u201cshall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law\u201d has been destroyed when an ex-president cannot summon expert legal witnesses to testify on his behalf and when he cannot bring in evidence that contradicts his accusers. There is no due process when one ex-president is indicted for the very crimes his exempted successor has committed.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Sixth Amendment\u2019s various assurances are now kaput. No one believes that Trump was tried \u201cby an impartial jury of the State\u201d\u2014not when prosecutors deliberately indicted him in a city where 85 percent of the population voted against him and are by design of a different political party.<\/span><\/p>\n

No longer will an American have the innate right \u201cto be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor\u201d when Donald Trump was never informed by prosecutor Alvin Bragg of the felony for which he was charged, with little advance idea of all the hostile prosecutorial witnesses to be called, and with no right to call in experts to refute the prosecution\u2019s bizarre notion of campaign finance violations.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Seventh Amendment is likewise now on the ash heap of history. The publicity-seeking judge Arthur Engoron, a political antagonist of Trump, warped the law in order to serve as judge, jury, and executioner of Trump\u2019s fate, without recourse to a jury of even his biased New York peers.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Eighth Amendment will offer assurance no longer to the American people that \u201cexcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Donald Trump was fined $83.3 million in the E. Jean Carroll case for an alleged assault of three decades past, brought by partisan manipulative waving of the statute of limitations, with the politicized accuser having no idea of the year the assault took place, with her accusations arising only decades later when Trump became a political candidate, with her own employers insisting she was fired for reasons having nothing to do with Donald Trump, and with her narrative eerily matching a TV show plot rather than any provable facts of the case.<\/span><\/p>\n

By what logic was Trump fined $175 million for supposedly inflated asset valuation to obtain a loan that was repaid with interest to banks that had no complaint? Since when does the state seek to inflict such \u201cunusual\u201d punishments for a crime that never before had existed and never will again henceforth?<\/span><\/p>\n

In sum, our departing weak-link generation leaves us this final Parthian shot\u2014 that when a toxic ideology so alienates the people who are rising up to prevent its continuance, then the desperate architects of such disasters can dismantle the rule of law to destroy its critics.<\/span><\/p>\n

And so, a single generation has broken apart the great chain of American civilizational continuance. But if this weak-leak generation thinks the evil that they wrought is their last word, they should remember the warning of a great historian:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIndeed men too often take upon themselves in the prosecution of their revenge to set the example of doing away with those general laws to which all alike can look for salvation in adversity, instead of allowing them to subsist against the day of danger when their aid may be required<\/em>.\u201d \u2013 Thucydides 3.84.3<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The above unexceptionable points adduced by Hanson will,  however, have no effect<\/em> on our political enemies who — I hate to have to say it — include not only leftists but also those we used to consider friends: never-trumping so-called 'conservatives'  such as the sorry bunch over at the Bulwark. (See, for example, this piece<\/a> by A. B. Stoddard.) A house divided cannot stand against external threats, and we have never been more divided.  There are dark days ahead. Time to (wo)man up, gear up, speak out, and put your money where your mouth is, but with detachment from the outcome, and steady awareness that it is all a passing scene and nothing to get too excited about. <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n

<\/main><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Victor Davis Hanson: Now we are left with a final toxic gift from this [Boomer] generation: the destruction of jurisprudence, a system designed not to easily protect the popular and admired but those often pilloried in the public square, the unorthodox, eccentric, and unliked. Even Trump\u2019s antagonists know that had Donald Trump been a man … Continue reading “The Destruction of Jurisprudence”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[99,230,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-740","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-law-philosophy-of","category-lawfare","category-political-ponerology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/740","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=740"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/740\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=740"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=740"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=740"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}