Waving the Constitution at Those Who Ignore It

/49 Comments/in , /by

I waved my pocket copy of the Constitution at Nancy Pelosi on July 19,2008. Khizr Khan waved his at Donald Trump on July 28,2016.

I waved my pocket copy of the Constitution at Nancy Pelosi on July 19,2008. Khizr Khan waved his at Donald Trump on July 28,2016.

In real time Thursday night, I caught only the final few seconds of Khizer Khan’s powerful speech at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. Through the rest of Thursday and Friday, more and more of the details of the speech flitted through my Twitter stream and then my heart was warmed when I saw photos of Khan pulling out his pocket copy of the Constitution and waving it at Donald Trump. Almost exactly eight years ago, I had done the same thing, waving my pocket copy at Nancy Pelosi, who then was Speaker of the House and appearing at Netroots Nation in Austin.

Khan was confronting Trump about his campaign in which he had noted that “Trump consistently smears the character of Muslims. He disrespects other minorities, women, judges, even his own party leadership. He vows to build walls and ban us from this country.” (Quotes come from this copy of Khan’s transcript.) Khan then continued, presumably in reference to banning Muslims from the US: “Donald Trump, you are asking Americans to trust you with our future. Let me ask you: Have you even read the U.S. Constitution? I will gladly lend you my copy.”

In my case, as I noted here and then in a follow-up a couple of months later here, I was urging Pelosi to act on the clear evidence that the George W. Bush administration had committed war crimes including torture. Sadly, as we now approach the end of two terms with Barrack Obama as President, no significant Bush Administration official has faced any consequences for the torture and other war crimes carried out in our name. Further, despite clear-cut evidence of many crimes by banksters in the massive foreclosure fraud crisis that dispossessed a significant proportion of the US middle class, no significant prosecutions have been undertaken by the Department Formerly Known as Justice.

Khan is so right to wave the Constitution in Trump’s face. Note that a central feature at recent Trump rallies has been endless chanting of “Lock her up”, calling for prosecution of Hillary Clinton for crimes associated with her use of a private email server (and presumably also for Benghazi!!1!) while serving as Secretary of State.

And that is where I see potential huge danger for our dear Constitution. We already have seen failure to prosecute crimes of tremendous impact to the world and to ordinary citizens here at home. Should Trump win, how could a “Justice Department” that already has shown a willingness to ignore the law in response to the desires of two presidents in a row refuse Trump’s insistence that Clinton be incarcerated through massive overcharging of any technical violation (if it even occurred, which is a huge stretch on its own) on the email front and totally fabricated charges on Benghazi.

Thank you, Khizr Khan for reminding our country that we are founded on what should be a sacred document that lays out how we should establish justice. And thank you for the sacrifice of your son Humayun, who was lost while taking part in an ill-advised war in which many of the war crimes discussed above were carried out.

Here is the full video of Khan’s speech. Standing next to him is his wife, Ghazala Khan.

image_print
49 replies
  1. wayoutwest says:

    The Donald may want to ban Muslims for some time but HRC has already shown that she enjoys and will continue to enjoy killing Muslims individually and by the thousands along with her ‘it was worth it’ sidekick Madeleine. Do you actually expect people to believe that Clintonites or their Red Queen have any more reverence for the constitution than any other power hungry cult.

    • Jim White says:

      .
      I certainly agree that Clinton resides in full neocon territory when it comes to security issues. I also think she’ll be even worse, if that’s possible, than Obama regarding Wall Street.
      .
      I don’t, however, think she would move the DOJ down Trump’s slippery slope to jailing opponents.
      .
      As for Trump, on multiple occasions he has proudly proclaimed that he intends to openly restart waterboarding and “worse”.
      .
      So I see him shredding the Constitution into much smaller bits than Clinton.

      • wayoutwest says:

        ‘Slippery Slope’ very scary Jim. Your twisted logic just doesn’t work, conflating what Obama and Pelosi did and what Trump might do, when Trump and his supporters are proposing holding crooked politicians such as HRC to the rule of law something you seemed to support when used against republicans but now not against someone who was complicit in the same crimes during the Iraq war is confused at best. You seem to be adopting Obama’s ‘Look forward not back’ posture in this case.

        I know these are tough times for Clintonites and they can’t seem to get any real traction but this type of projection along with the Russians are coming is bound to drive people away, it’s too obvious and desperate and Trump has already publicly punked the true believers and let people watch while they run around like their hair is on fire, screaming Putin.

        I think most everyone knows that this ‘Lock Her UP’ meme is a rhetorical tool and even some Sanders’ supporters were seen wearing ‘Hillary For Prison” shirts at the convention. I also know that Trump and many other people know that HRC along with her Bush & Co friends are untouchable legally and will be protected just as Obama did and will be.

        • Jim White says:

          .
          Fuck off.
          .
          Trump wouldn’t know the rule of law if it bit him in the ass. I’ve been monitoring Obama administration war crimes since long before you began fouling the air here. I don’t give a shit who gets prosecuted for those. But that’s NOT what Trump wants to prosecute her for and you know that. Or would if you had half a brain instead of RNC talking points.
          .
          Done with you.

    • John Casper says:

      You wrote, “Do you actually expect people to believe that Clintonites or their Red Queen have any more reverence for the constitution than any other power hungry cult.”
      .
      40. Why didn’t you capitalize, “Constitution?”
      .
      40.1 Was it intentional, to show disrespect?
      .
      “Your twisted logic doesn’t work.”
      .
      40.2 Why do you hate the Bill of Rights?
      .
      You wrote, “…but HRC has already shown that she enjoys and will continue to enjoy killing Muslims individually and by the thousands….”
      .
      40.3 What actions have you taken to save Muslim lives?
      .
      40.3.1 Have you taken in any refugees?
      .
      40.3.2 How do you know Sec. Clinton enjoys, “killing?”

        • John Casper says:

          1. Who is, “we?”
          .
          2. Where’s the, “outburst?”
          .
          Provide a link and a time stamp.
          .
          3. To whose death is she referring?
          .
          4. How do you get from that to, “she enjoys killing?”
          .
          5. Are you a pacifist?
          .
          “The number of people rushing to defend this appalling,” Donald Trump, “on this blog is getting ridiculous.”
          .
          6. Are you planning to take your comments somewhere else?

        • bevin says:

          What is important is to tell the truth. And the truth is that Clinton has a track record: in Ukraine, for example, her protege, former Cheney aide, Victoria Nuland has sponsored, defended, funded and assisted into power neo-Nazi militias.
          Trump might sound like a fascist but Clinton has acted like one. And is threatening, even now, further war in Syria. Ar some stage Clintonites have to take responsibility for the evils that she promises and has been responsible for in the past. It is not reassuring to learn that Trump is in some ways worse and may turn out to be much worse but facts are facts and the facts about Hillary’s past policies-in Libya, Honduras, Haiti and Syria- are very clear. She is a facilitator of fascistic coups. She assisted Michel Martelly into power by removing his leading opponent from the run-off election ballot. She gave support to and justified the coup in Honduras which has given rise to years of death squad action reminiscent of El Salvador under Reagan. She paved the way for the brutal killing of Ghadaffi and her Department wages a propaganda campaign, justifying war, of rare vulgarity and deeply racist mendacity.
          And the record goes on. In Syria hundreds of thousands have died, millions been driven to flight abroad, by wahhabi militias which Clinton is proposing to protect from the Syrian government Air Force. The US armed these militias from Libya.
          This is only to scratch the surface of her record in foreign and military policy. All that needs to be added is that the neo-con Establishment, from Max Boot to Robert Kagan is backing her. As are the banks and Wall St.
          They all have every right to do so but for those of us who have seen, in recent years, the fruits of the legislation that both parties have sponsored four more years of war mongering and provoking major nuclear powers is frightening.
          One more word: you add nothing to your arguments by abuse and the affectation of an arrogant attitude, they merely serve to lower the tone of discussion and postpone the discovery of common ground.

        • John Casper says:

          “What is important is to tell the truth.”
          .
          7. Doesn’t Monsanto wants Ukraine’s wheat fields?
          .
          7.1 Don’t the Western oligarchs want their natural gas?
          .
          7.2 Don’t the Russian oligarchs want them too?
          .
          7.3 What will Trump do differently?
          .
          7.4 Isn’t energy the issue in Syria?
          .
          7.5 Why do you always leave that out?
          .
          According to you, she just decided to destroy a country.
          .
          8. Why do you and wayoutwest never mention collective bargaining?
          .
          8.1 Why do you never mention that the U.S.-backed death squads in Central and South America target unions?
          .
          9. Will Trump support unions?
          .
          “One more word: you add nothing to your arguments by abuse and the affectation of an arrogant attitude, they merely serve to lower the tone of discussion and postpone the discovery of common ground.”

        • Jim McKay says:

          Never read St Clair before, read your post and followed the link.

          Reads like a rant to me, nothing I’d be informed by & certainly nothing I would call a “report”.

          And no, I’m not a HRC supporter (voting Green/Stein).

          Honestly, seems more & more like the 99% is very adept at cleverly articulating whats is “wrong” with (fill in name), but providing little in way of visionary ideas. This concerns me more then our available options for prez.

          Just look at the self-righteous food fights in this comment section. :(

        • John Casper says:

          In case you missed it, here’s wow making false claims about you:

          “wayoutwest on July 29, 2016 at 4:21 pm In reply to John Casper
          JC, you don’t seem to be bright enough to recognize when your technocratic fantasies are being dismantled by someone on the far left who agrees with writers such as those at Deep Green Resistance.
          Jimbo was the one who cut and ran at the other thread because all he could do was parrot technocrat BS rhetoric to feebly try to back up his agenda.
          If you could come up with a rational argument, not a linkfest or cut and paste reprint of my comments I would gladly dismantle it and hand it back to you to count my words and Grammer errors.”

          As long as the polls show HRC strongly in control of Wisconsin, I’m voting for Stein too.

        • Jim McKay says:

          Thx. Honestly, I just don’t waste time on these petty arguments as you quoted WOW. Waste of time, go nowhere. He is hardwired.

          Climate change, warming and green energy entirely intertwined… cannot be separated. More misinformation that reliable “out there”. Freshwater shortages entire planet experiencing in recent years a 2nd’ary affect of warming, still hardly discussed at all. Somehow managing our 401k’s is more important: have a nice bank account means “successful”. All that “green” stuff, just somebody else’s problem or an exercise of fools to them.

          Our problems run deep. :(

          Something big that I do not foresee must happen if we’re going to have success implementing Green Energy. A number of countries are way ahead of us, and China is very close to leapfrogging all of them soon. This is doable allright, U.S. just has little will to do it. Ironically (or sadly), our big push for domestic oil recent years, largely leading to Saudi’s dropping oil price below our production costs… is/was shortsighted “effort” on our part that has both brought day of reckoning closer and at same time delayed our preparation for it.

          Glad you’re voting or Jill. I no longer am influenced by “lesser of 2 evils” prez choice. AFAIC, Trump & Hillary are more or less going to take us down different paths to the same place: more stagnation, less able society with more diminsihed resources of all kinds for the life & death challenges that face us. Stein’s been around for a while and is a very competant speaker… knows her stuff on energy. It’s really time she was invited into the debates, most of the “adults” I know have never heard of her.

        • John Casper says:

          Correct on the fresh water. The oligarchs are trying to control it.
          .
          Germany’s doing very well. Green is the new chic. Renewable supply chains will be a crucial competitive advantage. Think your overall concern is warranted.

  2. Ol' Hippy says:

    These days the US Constitution and top level government officials are, now anyway, two separate categories. One has to do with civics we learned in propaganda/school classes. The other is how the government actually is and their disregard of the founding documents. They now seem to be, at best, mere suggestions or ‘dreams’. I’m starting to believe it can’t be fixed and will eventually collapse into the other failed empires down the memory holes of history. It’s just a matter of will the climate get there first or will it end in a war or third, financial collapse? The jury is still out on these final outcomes.

    • blueba says:

      The constitution was suspended after 9/11. The police have been fully militerized complete with chains of command all the way to the Pentagon – Marshal Law is in force the police state is here today right now. Cleverly entrenched power hasn’t made an announcement about it so it doesn’t exist in our conversations.

      The US has committed two of the highest and most abhorrent crimes making unnecessary war and torture with complete impunity, the sitting president harbors those responsible for these crimes and may be committing them himself. Given the right of the Empire of the Exceptionals to violate the human race in these ways with impunity, what laws do you think they might uphold?

  3. harpie says:

    Hey Jim…hope you’re well.
    Thanks for your thoughts on this. That speech by Mr. Khan was one of the most difficult/beautiful/gut wrenching 15 minutes of this long campaign season so far.

    Just want to point out that there’s a point in your essay where Hillary has the wrong last name. :-)

    • Jim White says:

      .
      Hi harpie, it’s great to see you around.
      .
      Oops, error is fixed. Hillary is no longer a Trump.
      .
      I’m doing remarkably well to be only ten days out from heart surgery to repair my aortic aneurysm. Now that my radical aorta has been replaced with a more moderate one, things are looking good as we go forward.

      • harpie says:

        Wow, {{{{Jim}}}, I had no idea…haven’t been keeping up with things recently. I’m really GLAD to hear things went well, and will keep you in my thoughts, wishing you the very best for your recovery. :-)

  4. Rayne says:

    bevin (7:54) — This:

    One more word: you add nothing to your arguments by abuse and the affectation of an arrogant attitude, they merely serve to lower the tone of discussion and postpone the discovery of common ground.

    Policing as well as baiting the contributors at this site is not constructive and when repeated, annoying — it gets the pushback it deserves.

    Readers can add something well reasoned to the conversation. If they don’t like the content or the tone, they know how to click on the Back icon.

  5. Rugger9 says:

    The stuff today is just as interesting. The RWNJs of various stripes are going after the Khans for pointing out the obvious hypocrisy of a party that harbors chickenhawks. They are getting blow-back as they should.
    *
    The Donald for his part whined that he too makes sacrifices (citing the support for vets he’s done [but the money didn’t turn up until the press started asking about where it was] as if that’s EXACTLY THE SAME as putting one’s life in harm’s way, and that’s the ONLY sacrifice Donald mentioned), before moving on to saying that the NFL complained to him (only him) about the debate schedule [the NFL sent no such letter]. I figure that the Donald is too afraid to debate HRC. Not only because of the imbalance of facts, knowledge and policy positions, but also because unlike Shrub who would retreat into his Alfred E. Neumann mode knowing that he was expected to be dim but still likeable, Trump would blow up like he did in the GOP debates and look like the mental case that he is.
    *
    SO, you heard it here first: Donald Trump is so afraid of getting wiped on the floor by HRC (think Biden v. Ryan) that he will do everything he can to avoid debating her in person.
    *
    Rayne, WOW and bevin are teabagging trolls, all we can do as John has done is point out the attempts to misinform the board. We know they are full of beans. Perhaps “bevin” is the online handle of the KY governor Matt Bevin who was busted this week for trying to break the law by wiping out the University of Louisville board and president to replace them with his cronies.

  6. Rugger9 says:

    The “NFL letter” is the first part of the Trump debate dodge. We could start a contest to suggest other dodges Trump might try to avoid being beaten by a girl.

    • P J Evans says:

      He’d complain about fire marshals not letting everyone in, and never mention that his campaign handed out a lot more tickets than there were seats.

        • P J Evans says:

          I read about that. There were fire marshals – undoubtedly dead, because they were notorious in SF fandom in the late 70s – who would have done that and been much nastier. (People waiting in line for an hour or more, who took advantage of benches to take weight off feet and knees, were told they had to stand up or else. I heard that one even cut short a vacation to annoy one convention.)

        • Jim White says:

          .
          Wow. That guy is truly crazy.
          .
          Way back when, before kids were in the picture, my wife did agree to me doing a bungee jump. She even took a picture. I did at least have the sense to do it from a bridge, where the height was well known, as opposed to something like a hot air balloon where guessing is involved. We return to the scene of that crime next spring, but I really doubt I will want to jump again.

  7. Denis says:

    Tweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!! [Ref’s whistle] TIME OUT! We gotta’
    sort these penalties out.
    .
    WOW @ 1.49pm – 5 yards, illegal motion –
    Constitution takes upper case when used as proper noun. Anal John
    Casper at 4:03 pm gets an extra time out for pointing that out.
    .
    Anal John @ 4:03pm – 5 yards, (numerical) off-sides –
    Numbering system is screwed. Where did “40″ came from? Are you
    keeping a running count of all the times you whine at someone? Now,
    that would be OCD-freaky. Anyway, assuming “40″ is correct for the first
    point you whine about, according to Rule 666 you should have used “41″
    and “42″ for the next two points. Thus, “40.2″ should have been “41″, &c.
    .
    WOW at 3:10pm and bevin @ 7:54pm – 5 yards, delay of game, lack of
    white-space – Those comments are harder to read than the NYT personal
    ads in a Brooklyn downpour.
    .
    Rayne @ 8:14pm – 15 yards and PC police whistle confiscated, head-butting
    That is, butting in where she doesn’t belong and berating a user for berating
    users. Obviously did not berate fellow blogger for his potty-mouth attack on
    WOW – see below. [BTW, after months of bitching about nobody being busted
    for Flint water cluster fuck, your silence since following week’s multiple busts
    is conspicuous. Because the girls were busted?]
    .
    Anal John @ 8:26pm – 5 yards, illegal motion
    At point 7, “Doesn’t Monsanto wants” is a noun/verb number botch.
    .
    Jim White @3:25pm – 30 yards and ejection from game, offensive foul . . .
    or make that offensively foul. WOW made a very civil and reasonable comment
    that was in no way deserving of “Fuck off” and the rest of that noisome tirade.
    Is Jim White samie-same as bmaz? Sounds to me like they were raised by
    the same potty-mouthed mother. BTW, didn’t your doctors tell you to keep
    your BP down, you’ll pop those stitches, dude.
    .
    Tweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet! Start the clock. , OSU ball, 1st and goal on the Michigan 5.

    • wayoutwest says:

      Thanks for the fair and balanced Ref work but I should probably get a ten yard penalty for illegal baiting of Anal John, just look at the hooks in his mouth.

      I’m not sure about the white space problem, I don’t think I typed it that way, see if this space shows up.

        • bmaz says:

          Listen you two bellowing twits, it is NOT proper or acceptable for you to refer to John Casper as “Anal John”. Clean up your act here or get the hell out. Jim White is not the only one that has had it with your petulant bullshit.

        • Rugger9 says:

          My money says they’re sockpuppets (bevin, WOW and Denis, the new alter ego). Just like their hero Donald Trump.

        • wayoutwest says:

          Hall-monitor bnaz calls us names to emphasize what’s NOT proper about us calling people names, priceless. In Clinton World he may get the job of writing the Red Queen’s Book of Etiquette.

          99 days remaining in this no holds barred battle for the blogosphere and the Clintonite A-Team is flaming out and auguring in so soon after taking some flack. I’m watching a number of blogs and the cult’s B-Team isn’t doing any better while the young Power Ranger Clintonites are embarrassing themselves and everyone else.

          Its probably time for them to call up the reserves and reactivate their favorite loudmouth General TBogg and his Flying Monkeys.

        • John Casper says:

          You wrote, “Hall-monitor bnaz,…”
          .
          41. Who is bnaz?
          .
          You wrote, “calls us names to emphasize what’s NOT proper about us calling people names, priceless.”
          .
          You called me a “fool,” here https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/07/20/chris-christie-and-karl-roves-us-attorney-project/
          .
          41.1 Is that, “proper,” or, “priceless,” or both?
          .
          You wrote, “In Clinton World….”
          .
          41.2 Are you admitting that Sec. Clinton will win in November?
          .
          You wrote, “…he may get the job of writing the Red Queen’s Book of Etiquette.”
          .
          I asked you yesterday, “39.6 Who is the, ‘Red Queen?’”
          .
          You wrote, “99 days remaining in this no holds barred battle for the blogosphere….”
          .
          41.2 What happens in 99 days to the blogosphere?
          .
          You wrote, “…and the Clintonite A-Team…”
          .
          41.3 Who is, “the Clintonite A-Team?”
          .
          41.3.1 Is there a Clintonite Double-A, Triple-A, and Major Leagues?
          .
          You wrote, “… is flaming out and auguring in so soon after taking some flack.”
          .
          Thanks for the text book example of mixing metaphors.
          .
          You wrote, “I’m watching a number of blogs…”
          .
          41.4 How many?
          .
          41.4.1 Will you provide links?
          .
          41.4.2 Are you commenting at any of these?
          .
          41.4.3 If so, under what handle?
          .
          You wrote, “…and the cult’s B-Team…”
          .
          41.5 Who is the, “cult?”
          .
          41.5.1 Who is the “cult’s B-Team?”
          .
          41.5.2 Who is the cult’s A-Team?
          .
          41.5.3 Does the cult have any other teams?
          .
          You wrote, “…isn’t doing any better while the young Power Ranger Clintonites are embarrassing themselves and everyone else.”
          .
          41.6 Who are the, “young Power Ranger Clintonites?”
          .
          41.6.1 Are there adult, “Power Ranger Clintonites?”
          .
          41.6.2 Could you quote examples–and provide links to them–where the, “young Power Ranger Clintonites are embarrassing themselves?”
          .
          41.6.3 Could you quote examples–and provide links to them–where the young Power Ranger Clintonites are embarrassing, “everyone else?”
          .
          You wrote, “Its probably time for them to call up the reserves and reactivate their favorite loudmouth General TBogg and his Flying Monkeys.”
          .
          It’s, “probably time,” for you to learn the difference between it’s and its.
          .
          41.7 Who is General TBogg?
          .
          41.7.1 Do you have a link to him and to his, “Flying Monkeys?”

  8. Rayne says:

    Denis (11:16) — I think you need to check the bylines at this site and note there were three warnings in this thread from three contributing editors.

    I’ll repeat for your benefit: Policing as well as baiting the contributors at this site is not constructive and when repeated, annoying — it gets the pushback it deserves.

    Readers can add something well reasoned to the conversation. If they don’t like the content or the tone, they know how to click on the Back icon.

  9. Evangelista says:

    bmaz,

    Your notation of reference to John Casper as “anal” being incorrect is correct.
    .
    Correct reference for John Casper is “Troll”.
    .
    John Casper is a ‘soft’ Troll, not an under-bridge Troll, a from-the-swamp Troll, or even an “anal” Troll. He is more ass than anything else, and so a “morass” Troll, mired in his own morass, which his writing, and your (site-supers collectively) defending makes yours (the site’s).

    Troll John is a paying contributor to your site, as he enjoys to crow, and so is a payment-contributing Troll. This makes him important to yourself and your fellow site-supers. Apparently a Site-Pet.

    The Site is your and your fellow site-supers to collectively direct, and to steer debate, or from debate, as you choose.

    It is Readers’ option to read, or avoid, or void.

    • John Casper says:

      You want to be rewarded for freeloading?
      .
      You have to be paid by the word.
      .
      You don’t have time or can’t afford to donate?

    • bmaz says:

      John Casper has been here about ten years longer than you; he is not a troll, you are. And not a particularly valuable one at that.
      You say readers can “avoid”. Good. Then, as a reader, please feel free to “avoid” from now on. And your ramble on meandering and loquacious tripe to Jim White at 8:20 pm is seriously ridiculous and insulting. Again, feel free to “avoid”, you are adding nothing here but obnoxious gibberish.

      • Evangelista says:

        bmaz,

        I am not now and never have been a member of any blog congregation. Not for any length of time or duration.

        I do not join anything, including comment-board discussions. I post comments, usually, where and when I do to provide information, where it appears it might be useful, or helpful, to someone, or anyone.

        Where I perceive it more likely, to be pointless to, or don’t see any fun, I don’t bother. I go do other things.

        Favorite in my commenting for fun is to gas self-inflated airbags. So you may still get a buffet now and again from me, to upset your equilibrium and rock your flatuous lawyer-balloon, even if I click through only to skim the Marcy headlines.

        Which I will do since Marcy’s Wheel rolls some useful reading. I can ignore the barky-snappy tire-biters packing around it, thinking themselves her Wheel’s protectors, but whose nastiness and noise are detracting and mostly just unpleasant and in the way.

        To avoid unintentionally inflating any ego, please note that I do not include John Casper’s nippity-yipping in the bell of the tire-biter pack. John Casper is a kind of panting-after Peekapoo who is inconsequential, a squeaky-balloon who can be ignored, except to laugh at. Yourself and Rayne are more problem dogs to Marcy, if she is serious about maintaining the credibility of her blog as a forum for inetlligent exchange.

  10. Evangelista says:

    Jim White,

    Read the Preamble to the United States Constitution.
    The United States Constitution is law for the government of the United States, and so for the “public servants” who assume that status by assuming positions in the United States’ government.
    .
    Donald Trump has not served in the United States’ government and is not serving in the United States’ government. For this, he cannot be legitimately assigned to have violated, or ignored, the United States Constitution.

    Waving a copy of the United States Constitution at Donald Trump is only a reminding to him that he will be subject to the law of that Constitution if/when he is successful in his application for the President of the United States position defined in that Constitution.

    Meanwhile, Donald Trump is one of The People, and so is protected by the prohibitions delineated in the United States Constitition, among which is his free-speech right to call anyone any name he may choose that does not slander or libel, and to hold any views of any of his fellow People that he may choose. He may not act on any such views in ways that genuinely, physically and actually hurt, harm, or damage a fellow People. But a sore larynx from whining, and wet pants from pissing oneself, or feeling unhappy, upset, outraged, or Vapouré for hearing air-vibrations one’s ears translate to “offensive sound” or “hate-speech” are not legally actionable under Constitutional restriction and restraint in the United States.

    It is those who seek to subvert the protections provided The People, all of them, in th United States by manufacturing faux “rules of law” that illegally “allow” curtailments of The People’s Constitutionally protected rights who ignore the Constitution.

    “Trump consistently smear[ing] the character[s] of Muslims…disrespect[ing] other minorities, women, judges [etc.]” is protectd by the United States Constitution, as is Khan’s defining Trump’s commentings as “smear”, and Marcy’s referring to Trump as an “Orange Baboon”.

    You would do better to advocate the United States Constitition be less reverenced with syrupy devotion and elevated a “sacred document”, and more enforced upon those who seek employments in the United States government.

    With a little more realism, and less spiritualism in your perspective when you listened to Khan’s blast of political rhetoric you might have taken note that the son lost to war that Khan made much of died in U.S. service for U. S. warmaking in contradiction to the United States Constitution, and in 2004, twelve years past, while far more recent examples of Muslim youth (women and infants, too), civiliians, not military personnel, being murdered by unConstititional U.S. warmaking, in far greater quantities than one, were, and are, amply available. And, in fact, examples of Muslim civilians, women and children being murdered, gangster-style, by drone-torpedoes, by a U.S. Executive exercising powers not granted him under the United States Constitition, and illegal under all civilized concepts of law, that are only slightly less recent than the latest unConstitutional U.S. war-activity killings available.
    Why didn’t Mr. Khan bring these more recent, more egregious and more numerous acts of violence against Muslims not members of an invader force of volunteer military personnel forward, instead of making a hubbuboohoo for his military-invader expeditionary-force member son’s death twelve years behind us?

Comments are closed.