THE JURISPRUDENTIA CLUB
Page
1
of
15
Judge John PickeringPERJURY AND PARTIAL JUSTICEUNDER LAWYERS AND POLITICIANSAN AMERICAN TRADITIONBYDAVID ARTHUR WALTERSSO HELP YOU GODSenate President Pro Tempore: “
Will you place your left hand on the Bible, and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of theimpeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help you God
?”Chief Justice: “I do. At this time I will administer the oath to all Senators in the Chamberin conformance with Article I, section 3, clause 6, of the Constitution and the Senate'simpeachment rules. Will all Senators now stand and raise your right hand.
Do yousolemnly swear that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, now pending, you will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help you God?
The clerk will call thenames and record the responses.”The legislative clerk called the roll, and the Senators present answered `I do' and signedthe Official Oath Book.
THE JURISPRUDENTIA CLUB
Page
2
of
15
What we have here, with “so help you God,” is properly called an oath and not anaffirmation, because a deity is invoked, in an imprecatory fashion, to bring down evil onthe head of whosoever breaks the promise, so may God help him or her.God helped so many perjurers over the ages that people lost their faith although theycontinued to profess it ritually to comfort society, but such is God’s mercy that liars andthe unfaithful will not be punished for the original sin of being individuals with willsoccasionally contrary to society until the Last Day, when the absolute truth will be told.In the interim, an affirmation given under penalty of perjury if broken would suffice toreduce false statements in this world if only perjury were easy to prove—judges polledopine that at least half of the sworn testimony given in court is false. None witnessedlighting striking a liar dead, though some perjurers were punished by the court.Nowhere in the Constitution can the word ‘God’ be found, for several reasons. Forexample: atheists would not have By Godders (bigots) pervert government with theirsuperstitions; the religious dared not curse the deity with a political constitution,preferring to keep heaven and earth separate; and we notice the primitive superstition,that simply pronouncing the name of the Supreme Being is a vanity punishable by death.Many were the ancients who adhered to the practical principle, expressed in one maximor the other, that no oath whatsoever should be taken whether or not one was religious;since man’s word is not very good on the whole, even despite good intentions, and sincecircumstances under which it was given change, why take the risk? As for professedinfidels, the Constitution provides ample room for atheism in allowing an affirmationrather than an oath, the error being that the word ‘swear’ is most often employed insteadof ‘declare.” In any case, the statement that the nation was founded on religious ratherthan political grounds is only half true at most.“Civilized” man is a liar; after meeting him, the Eskimos, for example, named him ‘Liar.’His representatives, his lawyers and politicians, have made a sophisticated profession of mendacity, lying even the more for their own sakes to secure and maintain their swayover him; everywhere is he hemmed in by their laws, dominated by their rulings, nomatter how perverse, professedly in the name of his own freedom, that they be consideredheroes instead of scoundrels. And he has only himself to blame for the original corruptionof his agents for their impurity is his as well, for he has the natural right to kill thelawyers, set the courthouses ablaze, and burn down the White House and Congress toboot.Lawyers who would be statesmen dominate the highest offices in the land, and they arewont to absolve or exculpate themselves for perjury whenever they can get away with it.Only once has Congress imposed a worldly penalty for the false oath or affirmation of high officers in this context: the Civil War Ironclad Test Oath of 1862 called upon allofficers except the President of the United States to swear or affirm that they had neverpreviously engaged in criminal or disloyal conduct; those who swore falsely could becharged with perjury. Now the United States Code only provides that no one may holdoffice who advocates overthrowing or striking against the government or knowingly is amember of an organization that does, the penalty being no more than a year
THE JURISPRUDENTIA CLUB
Page
3
of
15
imprisonment; that law does not explicitly refer to violating the oath of office, which maybe violated with impunity in a variety of ways besides blatantly seditious advocacy.The Constitution requires a ritual oath or affirmation to be made by the elected presidentbefore taking office: “Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take thefollowing Oath or Affirmation:—‘
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfullyexecute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States
.’ In 1789, the FirstCongress rendered the Presidential oath required by the Constitution into a simplefourteen-word assertion for all officers: "
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I willsupport the Constitution of the United States
."Again, an affirmation does not require swearing nor should it be called an oath. Anaffirmation, strictly speaking, would not include the imprecation, “so help me God,”which was later added, and its addition converts the preceding into an oath whether theperson privately considered his promise to be an affirmation or an oath. Neither should anaffirmation include the word ‘swear,’ but should allow for ‘declare’ instead.As for Congress, the Constitution provides a clause relevant to the silence the swearer ordeclarer may maintain on whether the she or he is swearing or affirming: “The Senatorsand Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several StateLegislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of theseveral States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but noreligious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust underthe United States.”The Constitution provides that, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try allImpeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation.”Well, they promised to do impartial justice according to the Constitutions and the laws.President Clinton apparently perjured himself, wherefore, according to the prevailinginterpretation of the Constitution in respect to impeachment, which holds that presidentsshould only be removed from office for criminal behavior, period, i.e. for Treason,Bribery or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors, according to Article II of theConstitution.As for the judges referenced in Article III, their tenure depends on Good Behavior, yetsophists have managed to confuse that express provision with the requirement of ArticleII in order to secure the independence of judicial officers. Their confusion ends with theirself-interest, since they do not argue, for example, that a Secretary of State cannot beremoved except by impeachment. Congress, dominated by the legal profession, hasprovided for withholding cases from judges and for reprimanding them for misbehavior;however, the judges responsible for handling complaints against judges, although theymay recommend voluntary retirement, are not empowered to remove Article III judgesfrom the bench even though they may be deciding cases contrary to law, or engaged incriminal behavior, or are stark raving mad or otherwise incompetent.
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Perjury and Partial Justice Under Lawyers and Politicians
An American Tradition
209
Reads
16
Readcasts
0
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
