Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Quote of the Day: The Benefit of the Law

 

Roper: So now you’d give the Devil benefit of law!

More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

Roper: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!

More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you — where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country’s planted thick with laws from coast to coast — man’s laws, not God’s — and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — d’you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake.

– “A Man For All Seasons”, Robert Bolt (Act I)

You can append any outrageous charge with “if” and the sentence that results would be true. If I ate babies, I would be a cannibal. If I did, I would be. But I do not. So I am not.

Currently, we have a set of accusations made against the President by anonymous witnesses offered behind closed doors. Those judging the evidence are not impartial. They exclude all except those who agree with them. The conclusions and public pronouncements made by the investigating committee are frequently contradicted by both facts and the statements of those testifying after they leave. If Trump had done the things he is accused of he should be removed. But an accusation alone is not enough to condemn a man. There must be proof. And the proof must be credible, and it must be presented openly and subject to investigation.

We have established norms of evidence in this country. They are not being followed in the investigation of the President. We have established procedures for investigating accusations of misconduct. No cross-examination of witnesses is allowed. The Intelligence Committee is investigating the accusations, not the committee that should be investigating the accusations (Judiciary). The main inquisitor committee chair with the responsibility of impartiality is behaving in an egregiously biased manner.

I understand why the press is playing this as gospel. It sells papers and views and they have no obligation to respect the facts or tell the truth. What I do not understand is how any rational person – especially those educated in the law – can take this process seriously, at least as far as a legal proceeding. What should be taken seriously should be the assault on the bedrock principle of this country: due process of law. Anyone, especially lawyers, should be ashamed of themselves if they put the result of a trial ahead of the process.

Published in Law
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 36 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  1. KentForrester Coolidge

    I’m amazed you found such a perfect quote for the occasion, Seawriter. I’d sign up for Quote of the Day every week if I could find quotes as germane as the one you found.

    Great job.

    Surely all of this unfairness will finally explode in the faces of the rabid Democrats. Let’s hope so.

    • #1
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:06 AM PST
    • 11 likes
  2. EODmom Coolidge

    KentForrester (View Comment):

    I’m amazed you found such a perfect quote for the occasion, Seawriter. I’d sign up for Quote of the Day every week if I could find quotes as germane as the one you found.

    Great job.

    Surely all of this unfairness will finally explode in the faces of the rabid Democrats. Let’s hope so.

    It may/probably will take some active help to enable the explosion. I think it’s really important to explicitly reject bald faced statements of unreality. I’m working on my fewer than 10 words distillation of @seawriter’s comments to deploy in hostile territory. The QoTD is surely a great start. 

    • #2
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:23 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  3. Seawriter Member
    Seawriter Post author

    EODmom (View Comment):
    It may/probably will take some active help to enable the explosion. I think it’s really important to explicitly reject bald faced statements of unreality. I’m working on my fewer than 10 words distillation of @seawriter’s comments to deploy in hostile territory. The QoTD is surely a great start. 

    Now you know how I write when I am spluttering mad – verbosely.

    • #3
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:06 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  4. Mendel Member

    I’ll be the devil’s advocate here, as it were:

    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure. Indeed, the Constitution does not state anywhere that our typically due process applies to the impeachment process (logically, since impeachment does not rob the accused of life, liberty, or property). And of course the “judges” are not impartial – as elected partisans, they are the very definition of partiality.

    It seems to me that if we want to be the defenders of the Constitution, we also need to be very aware of its intentional self-limitations. Trying to apply a standard set for legal proceedings to political proceedings is almost as sloppy as leftists who claim that equal protection under the law means that transgender boys get to change in the girls’ locker rooms.

    Having said that, it seems more than reasonable to me that Congress extend the principles of due process to the accused as a courtesy. Should they fail to do so, I sincerely hope that a different form of political proceeding (i.e. the next elections) sends a critical mass of them packing.

    • #4
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:08 AM PST
    • 9 likes
  5. Seawriter Member
    Seawriter Post author

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    I’m amazed you found such a perfect quote for the occasion, Seawriter. I’d sign up for Quote of the Day every week if I could find quotes as germane as the one you found.

    I have a file called quotes on my computer. Whenever I see a quote that strikes me, I put it in that file. As I use the quotes, I change the text to red (to indicate it has been used) and put it at the top of the file. When my day rolls around I go through the unused quotes until I find one that is appropriate for the current week. Based on the location, the quote I used today had been sitting in my file for at least a year.

    • #5
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:12 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  6. KentForrester Coolidge

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    I’m amazed you found such a perfect quote for the occasion, Seawriter. I’d sign up for Quote of the Day every week if I could find quotes as germane as the one you found.

    I have a file called quotes on my computer. Whenever I see a quote that strikes me, I put it in that file. As I use the quotes, I change the text to red (to indicate it has been used) and put it at the top of the file. When my day rolls around I go through the unused quotes until I find one that is appropriate for the current week. Based on the location, the quote I used today had been sitting in my file for at least

    When you start to enter your quotes into a spreadsheet, it’s probably time to back off.

    • #6
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:29 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  7. Vectorman Thatcher

    Mendel (View Comment):

    I’ll be the devil’s advocate here, as it were:

    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure. Indeed, the Constitution does not state anywhere that our typically due process applies to the impeachment process (logically, since impeachment does not rob the accused of life, liberty, or property).

    I understand your “devil’s advocate” preface.

    However, in all previous impeachment proceedings, there has been at least some form of openness and “bipartisan” involvement. This isn’t even close, with our nation not (yet) under war or insurrection, unless that is purpose of these proceedings.


    The Quote of the Day series is the easiest way to start a fun conversation on Ricochet. There are many open days on the November Signup Sheet. We even include tips for finding great quotes, so choose your favorite quote and sign up today!

    • #7
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:39 AM PST
    • 5 likes
  8. Vectorman Thatcher

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    When you start to enter your quotes into a spreadsheet, it’s probably time to back off

    It’s what Engineers do…

    • #8
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:47 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  9. Mendel Member

    Vectorman (View Comment):

    Mendel (View Comment):

    I’ll be the devil’s advocate here, as it were:

    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure. Indeed, the Constitution does not state anywhere that our typically due process applies to the impeachment process (logically, since impeachment does not rob the accused of life, liberty, or property).

    I understand your “devil’s advocate” preface.

    However, in all previous impeachment proceedings, there has been at least some form of openness and “bipartisan” involvement.

    I agree, but it’s stull crucial to remember that said openness is based on tradition, not law. If we want to claim that the Constitution means what it says and not what somebody wants it to say, that’s an important distinction. 

     

    • #9
    • October 19, 2019, at 9:59 AM PST
    • 6 likes
  10. Seawriter Member
    Seawriter Post author

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    Seawriter, I annoy my wife with my neatness. Do you annoy yours with your organization? When you start to enter your quotes into a spreadsheet, it’s probably time to back off.

    The only thing that is organized is my writing. Everything else is chaos. Right now I have a pile of books next to my chair which are references for my current book project. My limit for order is making my bed, keeping the bathroom clean, and laundering my clothes every week. 

    • #10
    • October 19, 2019, at 10:03 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  11. Mark Camp Member

    I have no comment on the Constitutional process questions, but only because I think it’s moot. The President has not been accused of wrongdoing. 

    True, someone has claimed that he had pressured a foreign power to help the US to prosecute a crime, in keeping with that country’s treaty obligation to do so.

    That isn’t a crime. It’s an admirable case of a US President actually honoring his oath of office, to see that the laws are faithfully executed. He should get a medal.

    The people under investigation are political opponents. So what? Would a DA have to call off his investigation of Al Capone if the Capone ran for DA?

    If there were an accusation that Trump’s pursuit of justice was in fact tainted by the obvious political motive, then yes, that would be an accusation of a crime. But no one has claimed to have evidence that he did that.

    You could argue that he must have been politically motivated (in an unlawful sense), because the Justice Dept.’s case against the Biden family was too weak to get convictions. I am not a lawyer, so I don’t know. There is no question that they peddled influence to the tune of millions of dollars in Ukraine: the family has not even bothered to make a claim that Hunter Biden provided any services to Burisma.

    But peddling influence by itself isn’t a crime.

    There is no question either that Joe Biden meddled heavily in Ukraine politics, nor that his meddling was very helpful to Burisma. Joe basically quashed an active investigation into Burisma corruption. Burisma no doubt gleefully regards this as having gotten exactly what they paid the Bidens for.

    But to get convictions, you have to show that there was no other explanation for Joe’s meddling, and he claims that there was. (He said the prosecutor himself was corrupt.)

    The Bidens’ defense of what appears on its face to be simple graft stinks to the heavens. But again, I am not a lawyer.

    • #11
    • October 19, 2019, at 10:36 AM PST
    • 3 likes
  12. Stina Inactive

    My husband says the privacy is necessary so they can figure out what to credibly accuse Trump of that they have not done.

    Russian Collusion, #MeToo, Bribery and blackmail. All have landed on them more than him.

    Seems they might need some privacy.

    • #12
    • October 19, 2019, at 10:43 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  13. Aaron Miller Member

    Aside from custom and honor, are Congressional rules being violated? There are no defined consequences for violation of such rules. But opportunist defiance might compicate future politics.

    • #13
    • October 19, 2019, at 12:08 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  14. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge

    I am torn between wishing the leaders of the DNC who are behind the continued persecution of the President would go away.

    I am so tired and angry at the DNC leaders for these witch hunts that involve not only Mr Trump himself any individuals who associate with him or serve as appointees.

    That is what I wish on one hand.

    On the other, I find myself almost hoping they succeed in ousting him from the WH via impeachment. Their level of Crazy is now so far beyond the pale, that I fear if they do not succeed in impeachment they will resort to assassination.

    • #14
    • October 19, 2019, at 12:53 PM PST
    • Like
  15. Saint Augustine Member

    Mendel (View Comment):
    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure.

    It’s a provision which is normally political, and where standards and procedures are not under the management of courts and lawyers.

    But impeachment is a legal thing. It’s the only provision in the supreme law–the Constitution–for enforcing the law when it is violated by the executor of the law.

    • #15
    • October 19, 2019, at 3:51 PM PST
    • 6 likes
  16. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Mendel (View Comment):

    I’ll be the devil’s advocate here, as it were:

    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure. Indeed, the Constitution does not state anywhere that our typically due process applies to the impeachment process (logically, since impeachment does not rob the accused of life, liberty, or property). And of course the “judges” are not impartial – as elected partisans, they are the very definition of partiality.

    It seems to me that if we want to be the defenders of the Constitution, we also need to be very aware of its intentional self-limitations. Trying to apply a standard set for legal proceedings to political proceedings is almost as sloppy as leftists who claim that equal protection under the law means that transgender boys get to change in the girls’ locker rooms.

    Having said that, it seems more than reasonable to me that Congress extend the principles of due process to the accused as a courtesy. Should they fail to do so, I sincerely hope that a different form of political proceeding (i.e. the next elections) sends a critical mass of them packing.

    Their is no benefit of the law in anything. There is no justice either. There are only powerful people executing their power as they wish. The rest is rhetoric to justify actions and appease the masses. Trump is guilty and will be impeached. That was decided the day he won. Now they are just looking for enough excuse to lynch him and get away with it.

    • #16
    • October 19, 2019, at 4:25 PM PST
    • 1 like
  17. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Mendel (View Comment):

    Vectorman (View Comment):

    Mendel (View Comment):

    I’ll be the devil’s advocate here, as it were:

    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure. Indeed, the Constitution does not state anywhere that our typically due process applies to the impeachment process (logically, since impeachment does not rob the accused of life, liberty, or property).

    I understand your “devil’s advocate” preface.

    However, in all previous impeachment proceedings, there has been at least some form of openness and “bipartisan” involvement.

    I agree, but it’s stull crucial to remember that said openness is based on tradition, not law. If we want to claim that the Constitution means what it says and not what somebody wants it to say, that’s an important distinction.

     

    Everything means what the elite interpreted it to mean. 

    • #17
    • October 19, 2019, at 4:27 PM PST
    • 1 like
  18. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    CarolJoy, Above Top Secret (View Comment):

    I am torn between wishing the leaders of the DNC who are behind the continued persecution of the President would go away.

    I am so tired and angry at the DNC leaders for these witch hunts that involve not only Mr Trump himself any individuals who associate with him or serve as appointees.

    That is what I wish on one hand.

    On the other, I find myself almost hoping they succeed in ousting him from the WH via impeachment. Their level of Crazy is now so far beyond the pale, that I fear if they do not succeed in impeachment they will resort to assassination.

    Yes, I think that is coming. I am surprised it has no already happened. I thought it would be by one of their crazies. Now I am thinking a CIA or FBI job. It would be in their wheel house. Do we know how corrupt the other intelligence / law enforcement agencies are? 

    • #18
    • October 19, 2019, at 4:32 PM PST
    • 1 like
  19. Kay of MT Member

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):
    Yes, I think that is coming. I am surprised it has no already happened. I thought it would be by one of their crazies. Now I am thinking a CIA or FBI job. It would be in their wheel house. Do we know how corrupt the other intelligence / law enforcement agencies are? 

    President Trump has his own private security forces, not only for himself, but all of his family and his properties. One of his biggest private expenses. It would be extremely difficult for anyone to get close enough to kill him.

    • #19
    • October 19, 2019, at 7:51 PM PST
    • Like
  20. Mark Camp Member

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Mendel (View Comment):
    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure.

    It’s a provision which is normally political, and where standards and procedures are not under the management of courts and lawyers.

    But impeachment is a legal thing. It’s the only provision in the supreme law–the Constitution–for enforcing the law when it is violated by the executor of the law.

    Thanks. You are a saint for reminding people of this.

    • #20
    • October 19, 2019, at 7:51 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  21. Saint Augustine Member

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Mendel (View Comment):
    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure.

    It’s a provision which is normally political, and where standards and procedures are not under the management of courts and lawyers.

    But impeachment is a legal thing. It’s the only provision in the supreme law–the Constitution–for enforcing the law when it is violated by the executor of the law.

    Thanks. You are a saint for reminding people of this.

    No, I’m a saint because of that stuff in Ephesians 1.

    • #21
    • October 19, 2019, at 7:58 PM PST
    • 4 likes
  22. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Kay of MT (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):
    Yes, I think that is coming. I am surprised it has no already happened. I thought it would be by one of their crazies. Now I am thinking a CIA or FBI job. It would be in their wheel house. Do we know how corrupt the other intelligence / law enforcement agencies are?

    President Trump has his own private security forces, not only for himself, but all of his family and his properties. One of his biggest private expenses. It would be extremely difficult for anyone to get close enough to kill him.

    His private force is not allowed to be armed. True their witness might make it harder for a Democrat / government sanctioned assassin but I suspect it could happen. At this point it is obvious the Federal government is a Democrat organization that is hostile to Trump so killing him is likely.

    • #22
    • October 19, 2019, at 7:59 PM PST
    • 1 like
  23. Steve C. Member

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    My limit for order is making my bed, keeping the bathroom clean, and laundering my clothes every week. 

    Then you do yourself proud. Be not ashamed.

    • #23
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:02 PM PST
    • 2 likes
  24. cirby Member

    I’m just waiting for the first serious “leak” of the impeachment hearings.

    It won’t have to be accurate, it won’t have to even be pertinent – but the first one that sheds even a tiny bit of light on the Democrats and their proceedings will set them all at each other’s throats.

    They know that their only hope of succeeding is to keep things completely secret, and that’s obviously not going to happen.

    • #24
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:02 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  25. Steve C. Member

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    My limit for order is making my bed, keeping the bathroom clean, and laundering my clothes every week. 

    And once you fell all the norms, what do you have?

    It would not surprise me to see the next three Presidents impeached before the anger burns itself out. 

    • #25
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:06 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  26. aardo vozz Member

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    Their is no benefit of the law in anything. There is no justice either. There are only powerful people executing their power as they wish. The rest is rhetoric to justify actions and appease the masses. Trump is guilty and will be impeached. That was decided the day he won. Now they are just looking for enough excuse to lynch him and get away with it.

    You’re being far too idealistic.

    <sarcasm off >

    <cynicism always on >

    • #26
    • October 19, 2019, at 8:12 PM PST
    • 1 like
  27. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Saint Augustine (View Comment):

    Mendel (View Comment):
    There is no benefit of the law in impeachment, because impeachment is inherently a political procedure.

    It’s a provision which is normally political, and where standards and procedures are not under the management of courts and lawyers.

    But impeachment is a legal thing. It’s the only provision in the supreme law–the Constitution–for enforcing the law when it is violated by the executor of the law.

    Thanks. You are a saint for reminding people of this.

    No, I’m a saint because of that stuff in Ephesians 1.

    Is Ephesians 1 where we agree to ricochet’s CoC when we first sign up here?

    • #27
    • October 19, 2019, at 10:23 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  28. CarolJoy, Above Top Secret Coolidge

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    I’m amazed you found such a perfect quote for the occasion, Seawriter. I’d sign up for Quote of the Day every week if I could find quotes as germane as the one you found.

    I have a file called quotes on my computer. Whenever I see a quote that strikes me, I put it in that file. As I use the quotes, I change the text to red (to indicate it has been used) and put it at the top of the file. When my day rolls around I go through the unused quotes until I find one that is appropriate for the current week. Based on the location, the quote I used today had been sitting in my file for at least a year.

    For me that quote of the day went sweeping out of the stadium, leaving us outfielders throwing our gloves up in the air to grab it.

    Possibly the one quote of the day that thrilled me beyond compare.

    • #28
    • October 19, 2019, at 10:29 PM PST
    • 3 likes
  29. Stad Thatcher

    Seawriter: . . . and they have no obligation to respect the facts or tell the truth.

    Actually, I think they do if they’re to fulfill their intended function under the First Amendment. However, the modern MSM is abusing its freedom plain and simple to forward their warped view of what this country is (a nation founded on bigotry and hatred of everyone who’s not a heterosexual, white male Christian), and what it should become (a socialist Utopia) . . .

    • #29
    • October 20, 2019, at 5:40 AM PST
    • 4 likes
  30. Seawriter Member
    Seawriter Post author

    Stad (View Comment):
    I think they do if they’re to fulfill their intended function under the First Amendment.

    Fulling their intended function under the First Amendment is a moral obligation. It is not a legal obligation, however.

    Since those running the media lack both scruples and morals expecting the media to fulfill a moral obligation is to expect a shark to become vegan.

    • #30
    • October 20, 2019, at 5:55 AM PST
    • 2 likes
  1. 1
  2. 2