trumps unconstitutional rhetoric

Trumps unconstitutional rhetoric is more than a little worrisome.  His appearance at the Republican National Convention was met with a crowd chanting “four more years.” 

Clearly enjoying the energy of the crowd, Trump unabashedly stated, “now if you really want to drive them crazy, you say twelve more years.  The crowd was happy to oblige.

This comes at an interesting time in our political landscape.  Far before we even had Candidate Trump, polls showed an overwhelming support for term limits across the Hill.  Spanning beyond the office of the Presidency, which constitutionally can only be held for two terms, the average American has been showing an overwhelming distaste for career politicians.  With the reported 75% in 2013, this is clearly a bipartisan view held across the nation.  Or at least it was.

Now it appears that we have people on the Republican side of the fence more than willing to chant “twelve more years” in direct violation of constitutional restrictions.

On the Democrat side of the fence, the career politician rhetoric is stomped out by the nomination of Joe Biden as their presidential candidate.  Joe Biden has was first elected to the Senate in 1972 where he sat until elected Vice President under Barack Obama. 

However, “twelve more years” is not the start of Trumps unconstitutional rhetoric.  In fact, as a general practice President Trump has a habit of saying what is on his mind then walking it back later. 

During one of his campaign rallies in 2016, he began criticizing protesters who were being removed.  

“The reason it takes so long,” he said, “is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, right?  And they’re being politically correct the way they take them out, so it takes a little bit longer.  And honestly, protesters they realize it, they realize that there are no consequences to protesting anymore.  There used to be consequences, there are none anymore.”

It is important to note that this is in response to peaceful protests, not the violence we are currently experiencing that was addressed previously.  In fact, he had no condemnation for protesters who assert that Bill Clinton was a rapist or who confront Joe Biden about his sons dealing in the Ukraine

To be clear, there is no condemnation needed on either side.  This is your first amendment right. 

However, it brings me to my next point:  the use of military forces to police the streets of America is by far the most alarming.  Madison spoke on the dangers of a standing army being used to oppress the citizenry.  While acknowledging the necessity to have a force to be called on strong enough to defend an invading threat, he said it should be “watched with a jealous eye.”

Trump has had plenty of rhetoric in regards to sending in the military to quell violence from recent riots, and has ultimately had states call upon the national guard.  However, this is a slippery slope that I already see as very concerning and deserving of condemnation.  Politically speaking however, one cannot ignore the fact that democrat-lead cities have given stand down orders to their police departments, essentially calling the bluff on Trumps use of martial law style threats. 

So while all of these examples should concern any voter, it should also wildly concern the Trump 2020 campaign staff.  Trump receives a lot of support from independents who recognize him as someone who is not a political insider.  However, most of these same people are of constitutional mindsets and have a number one priority of preserving freedom and liberty.  An understanding for walking back alarming comments ultimately will only go so far. 

By Josh Earwood

Josh has been an activist, citizen journalist, and commentator since 2013. He spent two years as a broadcast journalist, and has written for various groups in various capacities over the years. He has always been vocal, encouraging others to understand what is going on in the world around them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *