MAINTAINING DECORUM: WILL WE PRESERVE OUR TRADITION OF THE PEACEFUL TRANSITION OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER?

Poetry reading by Horace, an early advocate of decorum. Painting by Fyodor Bronnikov
(from Decorum – Wikipedia)

Think about that title question. Will we preserve our tradition of the peaceful transition of power? Will we maintain the proper precepts of social decorum?

One of the most difficult things any nation ever must do is choose its leadership. Examine the history of the world. This is the subject of the most bloody and catastrophic wars. Thus, one of the marvels of the United States is that every four-eight years we peacefully choose a new president. The winners of the election celebrate. The losers of the election may sulk a bit, but everyone is relieved that the election is over. We don’t have to watch any more presidential campaign advertisements for another four years.

Is the process perfect? Two lifetimes ago, when Abraham Lincoln was elected, we fought a civil war.

We are not at war this year. We are also not at peace. Instead of the losers sulking over their loss, the winners are angry that anyone would dare to challenge their victory. In fact, this article, The Secret Bipartisan Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election | Time, effectively claims that a cabal formed to elect Joe Biden, and that cabal worked to suppress the speech of any who suggested that the election had been stolen. Their excuse? The research of Laura Quinn suggested a way to suppress dangerous lies — toxic content — that might otherwise spread unnoticed.

The most important takeaway from Quinn’s research, however, was that engaging with toxic content only made it worse. “When you get attacked, the instinct is to push back, call it out, say, ‘This isn’t true,’” Quinn says. “But the more engagement something gets, the more the platforms boost it. The algorithm reads that as, ‘Oh, this is popular; people want more of it.’”

The solution, she concluded, was to pressure platforms to enforce their rules, both by removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and by more aggressively policing it in the first place. “The platforms have policies against certain types of malign behavior, but they haven’t been enforcing them,” she says.

The Secret Bipartisan Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election | Time

In our republic, we traditionally consider suppressing what some refer to as “dangerous lies” as censorship. Instead of censoring our political opponents, we debate them. Yet Big Tech even censored President Donald Trump. Using the attack on the Capitol Building as an excuse, Big Tech completely banned Trump from their platforms, and Congress impeached him (see Text – H.Res.24 – 117th Congress (2021-2022): Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors. | Congress.gov | Library of Congress).

Deplatforming did not stop with Trump. For example, even though most of the rioters use Facebook for most of the planning for the January 6 attack on the Capitol (see Capitol invaders aided feds with Facebook posts, analysis finds – Washington Times), Big Tech used the attack on the Capitol as an excuse to shut down Parler Status Updates, a small competitor.

What is the primary charge in H.Res.24? Trump supposedly incited people to riot by lying about election fraud. Did Trump incite a riot? Big Tech doesn’t want us to know, but this website apparently still has a link to the speech, President Trump’s FULL Speech, January 6, 2021 – Washington, D.C. (welovetrump.com). Here is the text, Donald Trump Speech “Save America” Rally Transcript January 6 – Rev. Judge for yourself. Is asking for people to peacefully protest the same as inciting a riot?

As Growing evidence Capitol attack was pre-planned undercuts Trump impeachment premise | Just The News attests, the riot was planned long before Trump spoke.

Is anyone guilty of inciting a riot? How about the people mentioned in The Secret Bipartisan Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election | Time? Does anyone think suppressing our First Amendment rights is going to lead to peaceful protests? Are the people who have angrily opposed President Trump appropriate models of public decorum?

Was it inappropriate for Trump to stage a rally on January 6? That is debatable, but the quest for vengeance by his opponents is a despicable, unconstitutional vendetta. To ensure the peaceful transition of power, we have always left those who leave office peacefully in peace. Even though Trump assiduously pursued all legal venues to contest the results of the election, he, nonetheless, left office peacefully.

So, consider the response of Trump’s legal team to the impeachment, Trump: Senate Has No Grounds For Impeachment And Should Acquit (thefederalist.com). Then consider the reply of the House Managers, house_managers_replication_02.08.2021.pdf. Read The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription | National Archives. Where does the Constitution empower the Senate to put a private citizen on trial? Then ask yourself what this about, a show trial? A Kangaroo Court – Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes (legaldictionary.net)? Why?

Look at the executive orders Biden has signed.

Is it Joe Biden or Donald Trump who needs to be impeached? At least Joe Biden is the president.

Because there was so little concern for following the rules required for election integrity, lots of us think Trump had every right to complain about the election. Is the Senate going to put all of us on trial, or is it using Trump as an example? If our government will not respect the rights of a former president, whose rights are safe?

This entry was posted in 2020 Election and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to MAINTAINING DECORUM: WILL WE PRESERVE OUR TRADITION OF THE PEACEFUL TRANSITION OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER?

  1. John says:

    If we continue to accrue conspiracy theorists and radicals in our government, (Think of the rogue representatives in the House of Representatives –(The Trumpites) —and the QAnon quacks), we will see the steady erosion of our government and our way of life as well. We are closer to being a fascist state today than ever and fascist tendencies are rising all over the country.

  2. Tom,

    After reading your post I looked up a list of idioms to try to choose which idiom might best describe the Senate impeachment proceedings and selected this one.

    Going on a wild goose chase
    Meaning: Doing something that is pointless

    As for the rest off the concerns about Bidens actioins to date, , I chose this one.

    Speak of the devil
    Meaning: When the person you have just been talking about arrives

    Sad

    Regards and goodwill blogging

    https://www.bkacontent.com/40-popular-idioms-and-their-meanings/

    • Tom Salmon says:

      @Scatterwisdom

      That’s funny!

      • John says:

        You are entirely correct when you say that the Senate impeachment trial is a wild goose chase because a significant number of Americans have begun to embrace the idea of using violent means, in lieu of elections, to achieve their political aims … and this president is going to be acquitted, and he is going to be in the background urging his violence-prone supporters to continue their mission of destruction, and in 2024 (If some jurisdiction like New York doesn’t get him convicted on other “alleged” crimes — and I understand they are had at work to do exactly that) then we might see old Trump back in the Oval in 2024 and we can all learn to march in torchlight parades, and say an American equivalent to “Sieg Hiel!”

        • Tom Salmon says:

          @John

          You are doing what Democrats accuse President Donald Trump of doing, inciting anger with unfounded accusations.

          • John says:

            And you are judging me for my political inclinations. I hope you are well qualified both academically and with experience in the field to do that. Otherwise you are pissing in the wind.

          • Tom Salmon says:

            @John

            I am judging what you said. Since I speak excellent English, I am qualified.

          • John says:

            Qualified by ego or qualified because you can speak the language? Sopunds like an attempt to make First Amendment rights a qualifying factor — and I suppose it is in some manner or the other …but if that is the case then the whole thing boils down to individual biases or opinions .. which is also cool with me because that is the basis from which I operate also.

          • John says:

            Dear Tom … Let me hook you up with “Cry and Howl.” I believe you both may have a lot of things in common. Check him out at: https://cryandhowl.wordpress.com/?wref=bif

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s