Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Each of the various defenses and defenders which are offered for Robert Mueller’s probe, and his dishing an investigatory thread to U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York – thought to be related to Stormy Daniels and $130000.00 hush-money payment – are accompanied by noting that the raids had to be approved by a Federal judge (reminiscent of all the Federal agencies clearing Uranium One deal); reflexively presumed is the integrity of the judge. Of course that the judge is investigating a Republican abets that reflex, if the President were a Democrat the judge would likely be ubiquitously denounced as a hateful zealot opposed to the Democratic President – an exemplar of virtue – seeking to ameliorate the suffering the disenfranchised are delivered by the heartless Republicans and the evil social-political Right…

Included among those reflexively ascribing integrity to those investigating President Trump is South Carolina Congressman Trey Gowdy; when Gowdy was asked – by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday (15 April 2018) – about the warrants allowing Federal prosecutors to invade Michael Cohen’s home, offices, and hotel, Gowdy responded: “A neutrally detached Federal judge signed off on the warrant.” Congressman Gowdy – generally a straight-shooter (note: we are something of a Gowdy fan…) – responded to the questions put to him, and seems to limit himself to what he knows, thus the presumption of integrity he affords the judge granting the warrants. Gowdy would need evidence of the judge’s bias, to question the judge’s judgment.

Others – unlike Gowdy – ascribe integrity as an expedient to deflect critical examination of facts regarding this judge; similarly they impute integrity to Mueller, Rosenstein et al, such as they want investigators to probe every nook-and-cranny of POTUS Trump’s life hoping to find some undeniably damning criminal, or political, activity through which they vanquish POTUS Trump. These same people would defend Obama, Bill Clinton (or name damn near any Democrat) against any charge while savagely impugning the character of any judge – or investigator (to include Jesus Christ) appointed to look into Obama, Clinton or damn near any damn Demonicrat. Integrity – to people such as they – is not comprehensible.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to iPatriot updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Democrat Leaders Incite Violence Against Us – Just Praying Is No Longer Enough

The term “integrity” is defined by an online dictionary as “adherence to moral and ethical principles; sound moral character; honesty.” Note that such principles assume an objective moral order (which in turn presupposes a rational God); such an order as proposed only by Christendom and its derivatives; what moral virtue is still evidenced in our dying culture is a remnant therefrom…

Yves R. Simon (Thomist philosopher 1903-1961) claims – in passing – in one of his books that “integrity” originally meant: “to walk with God.” Of course the God with which one may be ordered in integrity would be limited to a rational God (i.e., a God whereby Mind and Will are always in agreement), which points to the God of Judeo-Christianity; contrast to Islam which subordinates Allah’s mind to Allah’s Will; Allah is not bound by Allah’s truth, thus the god of Islam is irrational! Although many may profess Christ, a Christian – understanding Christianity – knows integrity is a goal, and if integrity is “to walk with God,” then one seeking integrity seeks to be ordered in accordance with the truth – which is the Will of God (since will and mind are one…). The Exemplar of integrity (integrity personified, integrity incarnate) – Jesus Christ, who primarily sought His Father’s Will, redeeming the human-race was the consequence – proclaims: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me…” Luke: 9: 23

Saint Paul references the Truth-of-Being (i.e., ontological truth; this regards being-and-essence) written into Creation, viz: “The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness” Romans 1:18 Now Paul is particularly treating sodomy, as he inveighs against those that deny the truth of measured existence; measured particularly regarding the relation of formal-cause (i.e., essence, defined potentially) and final-causation (i.e., essence realized/actualized). Such a denial allows – perverted miens – to blithely murder millions of humans each year via abortion… Note that the Democratic Party’s Platform unabashedly celebrates abortion and sodomy as exemplifying their Party’s “moral virtues.” Consequently, to ascribe integrity to a supporter of Democrat Party Platform is patently oxymoronic… Democrats reject the conditions of integrity, thus they may generally be trusted to be unworthy of trust; this included the rank-and-file…

Rejecting the conditions of integrity is not the sole province of Democrats; most denizens of the culture-of-death (formerly Christendom) – where moral insobriety abounds – are by definition opposed to truths contrary to their interests as they understand those interests. Most in our culture – rather than subjecting their animating impetuses to a law of reason – are ordered sentimentally whereby “what is true” and “good” are subjectively reduced to reflect the individual…

Now to infer that an individual that embraces objective truth, morality and God is trustworthy and possessed of integrity is a mistake as well… All humans are weak; those which desire to be ordered to the truth seek to be morally ordered acknowledge the general problem of human weakness – in public and private affairs – may still betray their avowed principles. Such is the reason the Founding Fathers – who, to a man, trusted human nature to be untrustworthy – and in drafting the U.S. Constitution divided the Government and then added a number of additional checks upon Government power through the Bill of Rights to thwart human lawlessness. When we are told to trust a politically motivated appointment of an investigatory agency (e.g., FBI), a Special Counsel, or a non-partisan Congressional Committee or the Press, we should remind ourselves that the noble individuals that founded this Nation thought it a mistake to ascribe presumed integrity to any, and follow their lead.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and are not not necessarily either shared or endorsed by iPatriot.com.

TJDonegan7

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

CONTACT US

Need help, have a question, or a comment? Send us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.

Sending

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account

Send this to a friend