LETTERS: We Can Do Better to Protect Democracy

John Roberts when questioned by Senator Leahy (Dem. Of VT) in 2005 at Roberts’ Supreme Court confirmation hearing was asked, “is the president above the LAW?” Roberts said, “No one is above the law under our system and that includes the president. The president is fully bound by the law, the constitution, and statutes.” (Sept. 2005). 

Roberts in 2005 would have been consistent with the thinking of the founders of our country. The first grievance against King George III of Britain and his British Governors in America was the King’s failure to accept laws passed by the 13 colonies. A long list of grievances were listed in our Declaration of Independence ending with sentence: “A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.” A Tyrant in the modern English usage of the word, is an absolute ruler who is unrestrained by law. It seems in 2005 Roberts was aware of the history as we read in his answer to Senator Leahy. But on July 1, 2024 the Roberts’ decision on immunity was aligning himself closer to a position of a Tyrant.

The US Constitution was silent on the question of presidential immunity. As historians have written, the Constitution was silent on presidential immunity because it was the abuse of a Tyrant being above the law that the colonist were willing to revolt against, die for in battle, while forming a new government. The Founding Generation was committed to the concept that in America, no one was above the law. As Thomas Paine stated, “in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” Historian’s Brief quoting Thomas Paine Common Sense.

Ultimately, as the Constitutional Convention adjourned, a woman [Mrs. Eliza Powell] asks one of the key attendees Dr. Benjamin Franklin: “Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy? A republic [replied the Doctor] if you can keep it.” Turns out that, as today’s national challenges indicate, that struggle continues.

For the sake of brevity I will detail just one aspect of Roberts ruling of July 1 that clearly shows his thinking has evolved to a tyrant’s way of ruling. I believe his new thinking should cause great alarm in all of us. Trump’s lawyers in the Jan. 6, 2021 conspiracy case argued Trump was immune from any criminal prosecution. They argued, since the Constitution was silent on the question of presidential immunity, the authors of the Constitution had certainly held that the president was immune from criminal prosecution. This so called silence on the subject of immunity is an anathema to what the authors of the US Constitution stood for and what is foundational for our Republic. If you recall that in late December of 2020,Trump sought to lend his false claims of election fraud credibility by asking his staff in the Department of Department (DOJ) to endorse his scheme. The scheme stated there was evidence of election fraud, and the fake electors scheme was the solution to the Biden “election steal”.

It started by asking the DOJ officials to send a formal letter totargeted swing states. At the time President Trump asked that a formal letter be generated under Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen’s signature expressing Justice Department concerns. Acting Attorney General Rosen replaced Attorney General Bill Barr following his resignation from the Trump administration on December 23, 2020. On Dec. 22, 2020, Trump met with Co-Conspirator 4 (Jeffrey Clark a DOJ Environmental Attorney and Trump “yes man”) Trump told DOJ officials that “People tell me [Clark] is great. I should put him in” and “Just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” The “rest of my plan” has come to be known as the “fake electors plan”.

The fake electors plan included using forged state elector’s documents that indicated that Trump and not Biden won in 7 swing states.

All 16 persons who signed the document below are currently facing felony forgery crimes in the state of Michigan.

The legitimate electors document from Michigan that was accepted by VP Pence on the day of January 8th is provided.

Trump asked the Department of Justice officials to lie to the citizens of key swing states that:

  1. There were significant concerns about the integrity of the election.
  2. Trump and his co-conspirators’ legal advisors asked the Dept Of Justice to promote and advance the alternate electors ballots scheme. Yes the same “rest of my plan” that utilized forged documents generated form pro Trump republicans in key swing states like Michigan as illustrated above. 
  3. Trump and his coconspirators legal advisors asked the Dept Of Justice to promote that swing state legislatures convene a special state session to choose the forged documents as opposed to the legitimate documents. 

The Acting Attorney General Rosen repeatedly responded to Trump that there was no evidence of election irregularity, and that the DOJ would not execute the 3 point plan requested by Trump. When Trump threatened to replace the Acting Attorney General with a TRUMP “yes man” the Acting Attorney General said if that happens there will be mass resignations within the department.

Trump and his cohort of co-conspirators do indeed, under our notion of equal justice, have the right to have their day in court to have these accusations proven or dis-proven before a jury of US citizens. Just like any of us! But the Roberts’ Court and its ruling have, in the opinion of many, broken the sacred bond formed lo those many years ago that we are a Republic whose supreme power rests with the people and their elected representatives and not with an imperial monarch who believes the power rests with him.

So what is Roberts view of the TRUMP request and forgery scheme.

From the Majority Opinion of Page 21 and the first sentence we read what he thinks: “The indictment’s allegations that the requested investigations were “sham[s]” or proposed for an improper purpose do not divest the President of exclusive authority over the investigative and prosecutorial functions of the Justice Department and its officials. App. 186–187, Indictment¶10(c).

Lying to the citizens of 7 key swing states by the Department of Justice and promoting a fraudulent elector’s scheme based on forgeries is just an “improper purpose”.

Oh my goodness!! The Founders would have been shocked at such an egregious breech of the fundamentals of our Republic. Justice Roberts intent with this ruling constitutes a reassertion that a Monarchy is what the Founders were after with the Presidency. Nothing could and should be further from the truth.

As citizens of Watauga County, we must not allow for someone with such autocratic and monarchical tendencies to return to the White House to act like King George or worse. Since the Roberts ruling Trump has re-truthed these statements:

“ELIZABETH LYNNE CHENEY IS GUILTY OF TREASON,” one post created by another user that Trump amplified on his social media website Truth Social on July 7 reads. “RETRUTH IF YOU WANT TELEVISED MILITARY TRIBUNALS, and the jailing of top elected officials, including President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.”

Yes some in Watauga County may agree with military tribunals leading to a firing squad but I pray not the majority of Watauga  County potential voters. There are many of you who were registered to vote in 2022 but for many reasons failed to vote (see the table below that shows just under 48 % of registered voters participated in the 2022 election). We can and must do better this fall.

We have a stark choice this Fall. If Trump wins in November, the Roberts’ court has given him the green light to, as the former President once intimated, “assassinate someone walking down Fifth Avenue” as long as the order is given to someone under his Article II executive authority. He will have “absolute” immunity as conferred upon him and to any future President by the Roberts’ ruling. And there is the real possibility that 2 or more like minded judges will be appointed to the Supreme Court this next term of office. Is this what our Republic needs? I think not.

We can do better to protect democracy, fight authoritarianism, and reaffirm that no one is above the law including the President as Roberts professed in 2005.  We must think think about the urgent caution that Benjamin Franklin gave us: “It’s a Republic if we can keep it”. Please register and VOTE in NOVEMBER!

Charles Stafford

Fleetwood, NC