Bill proposed that would ban President Trump from Arlington burial, name on federal monuments, buildings

Share:

The following editorial is written by a retired Chief of Police and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.

WASHINGTON, DC- One thing we have learned about Democrats…they really do not care what the Constitution says.

That became obvious during the recent impeachment hoax, where the Constitutional requirements of an impeachment were totally disregarded.

Even Chief Justice John Roberts recognized the impeachment for the sham it was and refused to go anywhere near it.

Yet there were the Democrats, having their “neutral arbiter” Sen. Patrick Leahy presiding over the “trial.” Leahy of course voted, as the “presiding ‘judge’” to impeach. Trump was of course acquitted to the surprise of nobody.

However another thing we have learned about Democrats is that former President Trump resides 24/7/365 in their heads. They are literally obsessed with him, some to the point of literal madness one might argue.

When you think Democrats can’t go any lower, there is yet another one ready to say, “Hold my beer.”

The latest edition of “Trump Lives in My Head 24/7” features Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA), who has introduced a bill, H.R. 484 entitled quite ironically the “No Glory for Hate Act.”

The bill has 13 co-sponsors of mostly irrelevant people you’ve never heard of, who have accomplished nothing in their congressional careers. The poorly titled bill is actually sponsored and endorsed by representatives who clearly glorify their hatred for Donald Trump.

Under the proposed bill, President Trump would be banned from being buried in Arlington National Cemetery, an honor given to former presidents when they pass.

Of course, Sanchez is careful not to mention Trump by name, instead playing cute with the bill’s language by prohibiting “twice impeached presidents” from being interred at Arlington.

That despite the fact that both impeachments were politically motivated witch hunts for which Trump was exonerated both times.

The bill would “prohibit the use of Federal funds for the commemoration of certain former Presidents, and for other purposes.”

Sanchez and the rest of her apparently illiterate co-sponsors may want to refer to Article 1, Section IX., Clause III of the United States Constitution, called “Bills of Attainder.”

Under this clause, it prohibits all legislative acts, “no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group [emphasis added] in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial…”

 Under the proposed bill, it would prohibit the use of federal funds to:

  • Create or display any symbol, monument, or statue commemorating any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives on or before the date of enactment of this Act…
  • Name, designate, or redesignate a Federal building or Federal land after, or in commemoration of, any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives on or before the date of enactment of this Act…

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

However, Sanchez takes it much further than that.

Under the bill, any state or town which chooses to so honor a “twice impeached former President,” no Federal funds or other Federal financial assistance may be provided to a State, political subdivision thereof, or entity if any such funds or financial assistance will be used for the benefit of any building, land, structure, installation, or any other property that bears the name, or is named or designated in commemoration of, any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives…”

See what they’re doing there? A couple of things stand out. First of all, this bill only applies to former presidents on or before the date the law is enacted. This is clearly targeting President Trump.

Secondly, they were also careful to only mention the House of Representatives, disregarding the trials in the Senate. This bill is akin to punishing someone who was “arrested” for an offense, but who was found not guilty in court.

It goes much further. The resolution also says:

Notwithstanding any provision of the Act entitled “An Act to provide retirement, clerical assistants, and free mailing privileges to former Presidents of the United States, and for other purposes,” approved August 25, 1958 (3 U.S.C. 102 note; commonly known as the “Former Presidents Act of 1958”), any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives on or before the date of enactment of this Act or has been convicted of a State or Federal crime relating to actions taken in an official capacity as President of the United States is not entitled to receive any benefit [emphasis added], other than Secret Service protection, under such Act.

Finally, in the ultimate display of psychopathic hatred, the legislation says:

In carrying out paragraphs (1) and (2), the Secretary of Defense shall not approve a determination of eligibility for interment or inurnment in Arlington National Cemetery made by the Secretary of the Army that permits the interment or inurnment in Arlington National Cemetery of any former President that has been twice impeached by the House of Representatives on or before the date of enactment of this Act…

Some may argue that a case involving former President Richard Nixon heard by the U.S. Supreme Court would perhaps allow this bill to pass constitutional muster.

In that case, the court held the Bill of Attainder didn’t apply to Nixon, in this case relative to a law passed which required Nixon to relinquish control of documents and recordings acquired during his presidency.

The court allowed the law to “fairly and rationally” focus on Nixon because he “constituted a legitimate class of one.”

In this particular case, the court found that turning Nixon’s materials over to the General Services Administration didn’t inflict punishment within the meaning of the Bills of Attainder clause. The key word being “punishment.” 

They issued a “three-pronged” analysis:

  1. the law imposed no punishment [emphasis added] traditionally judged to be prohibited by the clause;
  2. the law, viewed functionally in terms of the type and severity of the burdens imposed, could rationally be said to further nonpunitive legislative purposes [emphasis added]; and
  3. the law had no legislative record evincing a congressional intent to punish. [emphasis added]

The law proposed by Sanchez is CLEARLY designed to inflict punishment solely and specifically on President Trump, who is the only one subjected to two bogus, politically and hate motivated impeachments, therefore the ruling applied in the Nixon case would appear to be irrelevant.

Remember this.

While we are a year into this pandemic, while schools largely remain closed and we continue the demise of a generation of school children as teachers refuse to go back to work, while suicides including among children explode, and where tens of thousands of businesses remain shuttered, this is what Democrats are focused on.

Revenge…so petty and so pathetic.

Remember this in 2022.

 Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
 
Facebook Follow First
Share:
Related Posts