any kind, a people who had overthrown a king are not going to turn around after securing their independence from corrupt tyranny and create an offense that, like the king, was above the law and could do no wrong. the framers created a chief executive to bring add strak to the administration of federal laws but be accountable to congress for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. the framers concern about the need to protect against a corrupt president was evident throughout the convention. here i must thank my prior two friends who have spoken and refer to a north carolynian, william davey. i ll refer to another north carolynian, james eyre dale who president washington later appointed to the supreme court assured his fellow delegates the president, quote, is of a very different nature from a monarch. he is to be personally
blow then? he finished by saying, yes, i d give the devil the benefit of the law for my own sake. so i will conclude with this, both sides of this controversy have demonized the other to justify any measure in their defense, much like roper. perhaps that s the saddest part of all of this. we have forgotten the common article of faith that binds each of us to each other in our constitution. however, before we cut down the trees so carefully planted by the framers, i hope you will consider what you will do when the wind blows again, perhaps for a democratic president. where will you stand then when all the laws being flat? thank you again for the honor of testifying today. i d be happy to answer any
will conclude with this, of a scene from a man for all seasons by sir thomas moore when his son-in-law, william roper put the law suggested that moore was putting the law ahead of morality. he said moore would give the devil the benefit of the law. when moore asks roper, would he instead cut a great road through the law to get after the devil, roper proudly declares yes, i d cut down every law of england to do that. moore responds, and when the last law is cut down and the devil turned around on you, where would you hide, roper, all the laws being flat. he said the country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, man s law, not god s. if you cut them down and you re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would
the johnson trial when they saved a president from acquittal that they despised. for generations they even celebrated his profiles of courage. senator edmond ross said it was like looking down to his open grave and then he jumped because he didn t have any alternative. it s easy to celebrate those people from the distance of time and circumstance and age of rage. it s appealing to listen to those saying forget the definitions of crimes, just do it. like this is some impulse by nike sneaker. you can certainly do that. you can declare the definitions of crimes alleged are immaterial and just an exercise of politics, not the law. however, those legal definitions and standards which i ve addressed in my testimony are the very thing that divide rage from reason. this all brings up to me, and i
fundamental principles that drove the founders of our constitution to break from england and to draft their own constitution. the principle that in this country no one is king. we have followed that principle since before the founding of the constitution and it s recognized around the world as a fixed, inspiring, american ideal. in his third message to congress in 1903 president theodore roosevelt delivered one of the finest articulations of this principle. he said, no one is above the law and no man is below, nor do we ask any man s permission when we require him to obey it. obedience to the law is demanded as a right, not asked for as a favor. three features of our constitution protect the funneledmental principle that no one, not even the president is above the law. first in the british system, the public had no choice over the monarch who ruled them.