Posted on 08/15/2018 4:57:32 PM PDT by ameribbean expat
“There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at their daily briefing. “Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.”
Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.
"Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,” Earnest said.
The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)
That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
If Brennan worked for Trump the left would be calling him a Nazi. He looks straight out of Hitler's Third Reich.
If he’d wanted to sear on the Quran there was nothing to stop him- he’d not be the fist federal official to take an oath on it.
Brennan’s an atheist as most communists are.
He claims he’s a muslim.
Brennan is an ass.
All showmanship.
He looks like Martin Bormann's dumber brother.
No. it doesn’t mean this: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial.
THOSE are inalienable rights from our Creator.
So, the plan sounds like when Hitlery became president that Brennan would not have a problem with her getting rid of the Bill of Rights cuz he didn’t swear an oath to uphold them.
Instead of a Bible...
There was a good argument for not having a bill of rights: putting a bill of rights in the Constitution implies that but for the bill of rights, the government would have the power to negate or deny those rights. However, given the trajectory of history, and the tendency of government to enhance its powers over time, it seems like the bill of rights was the better choice.
Brennan certainly acted like Americans have no rights.
A draft, now matter who wrote it is not the legitimate Constitution. A muslim would ask for a draft document.
Ping for later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.