EDITORIAL OPINION – In recent years, the American justice system has come under scrutiny, revealing a disturbing pattern of bias and unequal treatment. This trend is particularly evident in the disparate handling of cases involving prominent political figures, underscoring a two-tier justice system that betrays the foundational principle of equality under the law.
At the heart of this issue is the case against former President Donald Trump, who has been charged with various allegations. Critics argue that the charges against Trump are politically motivated, aiming to undermine his legacy and thwart his influence. This stands in stark contrast to the leniency shown towards Democratic figures in similar or more severe circumstances.
Former President Barack Obama’s administration was accused of wiretapping and monitoring American citizens without due process. This included the controversial use of the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect data on millions of Americans, an action that raised significant privacy and civil liberties concerns. Despite the gravity of these accusations, there was no accountability or thorough investigation into these practices, reflecting a glaring double standard.
Adding to the discourse on the two-tier justice system, the treatment of Bill Clinton’s scandals compared to the rigorous scrutiny faced by Republicans further exemplifies the disparity. Clinton’s numerous allegations of sexual misconduct and accusations of sexual assault were largely downplayed by the media and the justice system. This leniency starkly contrasts with the political attacks against conservative figures during their confirmation processes.
The confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh were marred by accusations that many conservatives view as politically motivated attempts to derail their appointments. Thomas faced allegations of sexual harassment, which he famously described as a “high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves.” Kavanaugh’s confirmation was almost derailed by accusations of sexual assault dating back to his high school years, with claims that witnesses were paid to smear his name. Both instances were seen as character assassination attempts rather than legitimate inquiries into their fitness for office.
Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court faced intense scrutiny, with critics labeling her a “Stepford wife” and a “religious zealot.” These attacks were perceived as attempts to undermine her credibility and professionalism based on her personal beliefs rather than her qualifications.
The case against Donald Trump, with charges amounting to 91 felonies (44 federal charges and 47 state charges), stands as one of the most aggressive prosecutions in U.S. history, potentially resulting in a 700-year sentence. This aggressive pursuit is seen as a culmination of years of political animosity, starting with his campaign. Allegations of illegal wiretaps, confidential FBI informants within his campaign, and the infamous “dirty dossier” financed by the Clinton campaign illustrate a concerted effort to undermine his presidency. The impeachment proceedings against Trump, particularly the charges of quid pro quo based on a reconstructed phone call, further highlight the perceived bias in how justice is administered.
Comparatively, Joe Biden’s actions, such as threatening Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin over the Burisma investigation and his handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, including the surrender of Bagram Air Base which preceded the death of 13 U.S. service members, have not received the same level of scrutiny or accountability.
Another stark example is the handling of the Benghazi attack under Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s watch. The tragedy resulted in the loss of four American lives, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Critics argue that Clinton’s mismanagement and failure to adequately protect American personnel were egregious, yet she faced no significant repercussions. Furthermore, Clinton’s use of a private email server for official communications, potentially jeopardizing classified information, was met with a controversial FBI decision not to prosecute, further illustrating the uneven application of justice.
Hillary Clinton and the video nobody seems to remember. pic.twitter.com/EAvSciJ1sU
— The Don’t Unfriend Me Show (@TheDUMShow) February 10, 2024
The case of Joe Biden retaining classified documents also underscores this bias. Despite the serious nature of mishandling sensitive information, the response from the justice system appears markedly subdued compared to the fervor directed at Trump.
Moreover, the Obama administration’s authorization of drone strikes against American citizens overseas, notably Anwar al-Awlaki, without due process, raises profound legal and ethical questions. The decision to execute an American citizen, albeit one accused of terrorist affiliations, without a trial, is a chilling precedent that received minimal outcry compared to the outrage directed at Trump’s policies.
These instances collectively paint a picture of a justice system that is swayed by political affiliations, undermining the very essence of American democracy. The apparent immunity enjoyed by Democratic figures contrasts sharply with the aggressive pursuit of Republican ones, especially Donald Trump.
These examples underscore a troubling pattern within the American justice system and political discourse. The stark contrast in treatment between Republican and Democratic figures raises concerns about the impartiality of justice and the integrity of democratic institutions. It paints a picture of a system where political affiliation influences the severity of scrutiny and the likelihood of prosecution. This perceived injustice not only erodes trust in the legal system but also deepens the political divide, undermining the principles of fairness and equality that are supposed to underpin American principles.
The principle of equal justice under the law is a cornerstone of this Republic. It is imperative that all citizens, regardless of political affiliation, demand a return to this principle. Only then can trust in the justice system be restored, ensuring that it serves the interests of all Americans, not just those of a particular political persuasion. The current trajectory is unsustainable and un-American, betraying the ideals upon which the nation was founded.
It’s time for Lady Justice to shed the blindfold off and take a look around…
“The Don’t Unfriend Me Show” explores a broad range of political themes, from satire to serious topics, with Matt Speer, a Navy Intel veteran, husband, and father, leading the show. Matt shares his views to stimulate constructive discussions. The show aims to provide a balanced perspective on complex issues, welcoming participants of all political affiliations to share their unique viewpoints.
I think this is evident for all to see. Sadly there are those who still choose to remain Willfully Ignorant. It’s not just Lady Justice that needs to take the blindfold off. Many Party line voters, are more then willing to ignore harmful facts committed by the party they align themselves with. What aboutism is often used to deflect from harmful facts. This ignorance is displayed by both Democrat and Republican voters alike. My concerns are not with the politicians but, their supporters. I see the supporters as enablers for the politicians to continue to do exactly what they do. Talk the talk but not walk the walk.
This alone shows judt how stupid the American people become. The fact they aloud the corruption of the far left Communist democrat party to control everything and our laws saids it all. They openly lie and free the real criminals in our government like obama’s, Clinton’s and now bidens said everything you need to know about our justice system. Yet they attack trump at every corner and tho they cant make any lie stick on Teflon Don, still it show just how corrupt the democrats are willing to go in order to fix our elections for the power and money. Are you really willing to lose everything for the sake of a Communist take over in our government. Is this the end of the greatest country ever cause of the corrupt enemies from with in, while yall just stood there watching like fools wondering why ??? So much for your grandkids and their kids life of freedom because of your weakness to act in time. Shame on yall !!!
THE PROBLEM IS NOT TWO TEIRS BUT NO JUSTICE inherent in the Constitutional Republic’s CRIMINAL Justice System – juxtaposed with the Bible’s Criminal JUSTICE System jettisoned by the constitutional framers:
“…According to Habakkuk 1:7 not only did the Chaldeans’ authority originate with themselves, but so did their justice. And so does the justice of We the People: We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice….” What an audacious assertion. Only Yahweh is just, and only He can establish justice:
‘Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy [Yahweh’s] throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face.’ (Psalm 89:14)
“In a lecture entitled The Common Law, Constitutional Attorney Herb Titus claimed that the Preamble’s assertion that WE THE PEOPLE established justice did not authorize “the national government to define justice.”57 However, because the Constitution never declares Yahweh’s law the standard for determining justice, the definition of justice has always been left to the federal and state governments. Instead of confirming the justice inherent in Yahweh’s morality and already established in His perfect law, the framers’ declaration implies that justice had yet to be established. This (and other numerous confirmations throughout the Constitution) reveals they preferred their own justice to the justice of Yahweh.
“Anytime autonomous man attempts to establish justice outside Yahweh’s moral laws, the result is always injustice. In Isaiah 5:20, this transposition is depicted as calling good evil and evil good. The word “autonomous” comes from two Greek words: auto meaning self and nomos meaning law. The word, which literally means “self-law,” is just another way of describing humanism and, in this instance, constitutionalism….”
or more, see Chapter 3 “The Preamble: We the People vs. Yahweh” of free online book “Bible Law vs, the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at bible versus Constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 3.
Then Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation.”
Find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the sidebar and receive a free copy of the 85-page “Primer” of “BL vs. USC.”
Have heard this argument before. Sounds good until you argue about who will administer this Holy justice. Having good intentions the founding fathers tried to use guidelines that were derived from Christian beliefs into the U.S. constitution. The many references to GOD on our money, Pledge of Allegiance, swearing on the Bible etc are all attempts to keep the lord in our hearts. But power and greed corrupts even the best institutions. The answer is following the constitution and condemning those who don’t by a constitutional court that only hears constitution violations and doles out actual punishment to guilty parties. We have no such court. We sure as hell need one! So many take the Oath to uphold it, few do, none are confronted when they don’t. You can’t condemn the constitution for its failures without condemning the system that can’t and won’t allow enforcement of its compliance as a mandatory staple of our Republic!
I am not sure where you picked up “Holy Justice” from. I am simply calling for the current system to be recognized for what it truly is; a two-tiered system with no consequence for those in power. Full stop. Thanks for contributing.