by Bob Barr | Aug 15, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily Caller Many Republican office holders have been frothing at the mouth as they air claims that an FBI-initiated search of Donald Trump’s Mar-A-Lago resort and residence was “unprecedented,” “intolerable,” “un-American,” and a step toward “communism.” This raises the question – when did the GOP adopt as part of its governing philosophy the principle that a former president’s residence, including one which doubles as a ritzy resort, cannot be the subject of a lawfully executed search warrant? Sitting U.S. presidents enjoy a significant degree of insulation from civil and criminal proceedings to which virtually all other citizens are subject, and this is appropriate. Were the holder of such high office subject to civil lawsuits and resulting discovery proceedings by every possible aggrieved party, or vulnerable to prosecutors seeking to make a name for themselves by indicting him, it would become utterly impossible for a president to carry out his constitutional duties. This is why the only way to remove a president is via impeachment and conviction by the Congress. It also stands as the reason for maintaining a very high bar for litigants to overcome in order to force a sitting president to respond to civil judicial proceedings. A former president, however, while perhaps allowed an elevated degree of deference in such matters, has never been considered absolutely immune. Claiming that the August 8th execution of the search warrant is an “un-American” step on the road to “communism” because it is “unprecedented” – that is, it happens to be the first time a search warrant has been executed on an ex-president’s residence – makes no sense, but has become a repetitive GOP talking...
by Bob Barr | Aug 10, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall George Washington University, located in the heart of our nation’s Capital, is widely considered a top-tier institution of higher learning. It also is among the most expensive schools in the country. Notwithstanding such pedigree, the university in recent months has shown the country that both its student body and its board of trustees rank among the dumbest in our nation. Just two months ago, for example, the GW Board of Trustees decided to “retire” the school’s long-time moniker, the “Colonials.” This decision resulted from a three-year long study which concluded that trashing the mascot was essential because the term “colonial” triggered visions of slavery and colonization, and was therefore anathema to the “unifying” purpose of a school moniker. Meanwhile, as the trustees now turn their attention to finding a more soothing and less “divisive” moniker (a process proposed to consume another year or more of their time), George Washington’s student body has been busy trashing no less a distinguished constitutional law lecturer than Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has taught a seminar at the university’s law school for more than a decade. While the vast majority of law schools in America would trip over themselves to have a Supreme Court justice lead a seminar on constitutional law – or would have done so before today’s “woke culture” turned academia on its head – GW students have just thumbed their collective nose at such a godsend. The reason for such a move by the students? Abortion — the new holy grail of leftwing politics. In late June, the High Court rendered a decision overturning the 1973 landmark abortion-rights case, Roe...
by Bob Barr | Aug 3, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall There was a time long ago in America’s civic institutions, where men and women who had accomplished great things for our country and for mankind, were studied by students of all ages — George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr., Albert Einstein, Marie Curie, Jonas Salk, and many other notables adorned classrooms and textbooks in schools across the country. Now, in an increasing number of public schools children are present with a far different role model. The age of the Drag Queen has arrived. This loony phenomenon, presented as lessons in “diversity” and “acceptance,” has even found its way into churches, and not just fringe religious sects, but mainstream denominations – Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic, and Episcopal — presented not only as lewd sideshows, but as official religious services. The United Methodist Church, for example, has accepted as a candidate for full pastoral ordination, a “Drag Queen Pastor” who proclaims himself a “dragavangelist” and laces his sermons with profanity and gibberish about “divine queerness.” It might be argued in defense of such activities that if adults wish to attend religious services extolling men dressed as women who prance down the aisle like court jesters, they are free to do so, as long as attendance is voluntary. Disturbingly, this lunacy goes beyond consensual adult activity, as with a Lutheran Church in Chicago recently hosting a “Drag Queen Prayer Time” for children during its Sunday service. As frequently happens with contemporary cultural phenomena, they tend to bleed across national boundaries, and churches in Canada reportedly are witnessing the same “Drag Queen Evangelism” infecting the U.S. Such expansive reach is made easy through social media, including...
by Bob Barr | Jul 27, 2022 | Townhall Article |
Townhall The medical profession for generations remained largely immune from the partisan politics that has affected virtually every other sector of our society, helping to protect the sacred bond of trust between doctor and patient from the rancor of petty, partisan political ideologies. Starting with gun control several years ago, and accelerating now with the Supreme Court’s recent decision overturning Roe v. Wade, that bond is fraying significantly with woke doctors latching onto such issues as a way to tout their ideological bona fides. In one clear example of this, dozens of graduating doctors from the University of Michigan walked out of their “white coat“ ceremony to protest a speaker who was to address them not on pro-life issues, but who was simply known as being pro-life. While most people have little if any concern about the politics of an auto mechanic or a cashier at the grocery store, this understandably is not the case when it comes to doctors who openly, and even hostilely, espouse radical opinions affecting the medical profession and treatment of patients. Consider, for instance, the trend of emergency medicine physicians jumping into the gun control debate to assert their “expert” policy perspective on gunshot wounds. While it is true that these doctors see first-hand the effects of such violence, many are eager to share their opinions on such matters as the “lethality” of and need for “assault weapons.” Such views have nothing to do with treatment of patients, and often are not based on any degree of real knowledge about how firearms function or the ballistic properties of differing types and calibers of ammunition. These gratuitous opinions...
by Bob Barr | Jul 26, 2022 | Daily Caller Article |
Daily Caller Last week the White House publicly issued a “Readout” describing a July 22 meeting between “senior advisors” to President Joe Biden and several state legislators from New York, Delaware, California and Illinois; all so-called “blue states” whose political leaders are firmly committed to restricting law-abiding citizens’ ability to exercise their rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The news release was the latest example of this administration’s pattern of deliberately mischaracterizing federal laws regarding the liability of firearms retailers and manufacturers for subsequent criminal use of products they sell or manufacture. In other words, a lie designed to further its gun-control agenda. The federal law at issue is the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” or “PLCAA,” legislation passed by the Congress and signed by President George W. Bush in 2005. PLCAA was deemed necessary by a majority of both houses of the Congress and the president of the United States, in the wake of a series of civil lawsuits against lawful manufacturers and retailers of firearms for the subsequent use of those products by individuals for criminal purposes. The law does not and was never intended to provide absolute protection for manufacturers or retailers of firearms. Rather, the PLCAA was designed simply to provide a legal framework according to which neither manufacturers nor retailers of lawful firearms would be treated differently from other lawful businesses, such as automobile manufacturers and dealers that never had been held liable for the subsequent use of their products (cars) by negligent or unlawful drivers. In fact, the clear language of the PLCAA provides that so long as the firearms businesses follow the many...
