Imagine you have in your life someone who doesn’t like you for whatever reason. That person has bad-mouthed you in your mutual circles and beyond for a number of years.

Now imagine that this person decides to go after you legally. He charges you with something pretty significant. You could lose everything, including your job. You immediately share information publicly that demonstrates the charge is clearly false. He doesn’t care. He continues to push. Then, because he also has legal power due to his job, he decides to start calling witnesses against you. You, however, will not be calling witnesses.

And, by the way, he will be presiding over the trial so he will be both your accuser and judge.

These witnesses are called without you being present. There is no way for you to record what is said. You are not allowed to have legal representation in the room. When someone else in the room asks a witness a follow-up question that your enemy doesn’t like because it could help you or hurt him, your enemy tells the witness not to answer the question. And since your enemy is also acting as judge, the witness doesn’t answer.

While all this is going on in secret, your enemy begins leaking little bits of information. You still have no access to the room and you still have no lawyer present.

These are the star chamber proceedings that Adam Schiff is running against President Trump on behalf of the Democrat Party.

What is a star chamber? The Free Dictionary offers a historical overview of the star chamber including this:

Theimportance of theStarChamberincreasedduringthereigns of James I (1603–25)andCharles I (1625–49).UnderArchbishopWilliamLaud,thecourtbecame a tool of royaloppression,seekingoutandpunishingreligiousandpoliticaldissidents. In the1630sLaudusedtheStarChamber to persecute a group of Puritanleaders,most of whomcamefromthegentry,subjectingthem to thepilloryandCorporal Punishment. ThoughtheStarChambercouldnotmeteoutCapital Punishment, it inflictedeverythingshort of deathuponthosefoundguilty.Duringthistimethecourtmet in secret,extractingevidence by torturingwitnessesandhandingoutpunishmentsthatincludedmutilation,lifeimprisonment,andenormousfines. It turnedequity’straditionallybroaddiscretioninto a completedisregardforthelaw.TheStarChambersometimesacted on mererumors in order to suppressopposition to theking.

TheStarChamber’sArbitraryuse of powerandthecruelpunishments it inflictedproduced a wave of reactionagainst it fromPuritans,advocates of common-lawcourts,andothersopposed to thereign of Charles I. In 1641theLongParliamentabolishedthecourtandmadereparations to some of itsvictims.

Thetermstarchamberhascome to meananylawlessandoppressivetribunal,especiallyonethatmeets in secret.Theconstitutionalconcept of Due Process of Law is in part a reaction to thearbitraryuse of judicialpowerdisplayed by theStarChamber.

If this process that is happening between the Democrats and President Trump were happening to you, your spouse, your child, or your parent, would you say that person is getting due process under the law? I would think not.

This is what we are supposed to think is a fair legal proceeding regarding the Democrat’s attempt to remove President Trump from office. It’s a total and complete joke that started before he even was sworn in.

Even more than a joke, it’s distressing if you believe in equal justice under the law. This sets a terrible precedence for future presidents and the rest of the country.

If the President of the United States of America cannot get equal justice under the law of our land, why in the world should you and I think we would?

Here’s a couple of videos. I know listening to Hannity and Ingraham interview people is often difficult because they don’t know when to stop talking, but the information from their guests is helpful.

I’m going to continue to update this post today (October 31) as more good videos come out during the so-called vote so scroll down for newest ones.

I love Senator Kennedy. He’s so frank and funny.