As Donald J. Trump throws around judgments as if they had his logo on them, I thought it would fun to explore how Trump feels about the fifth, sixth and eighth amendments. As all three amendments deal with the treatment of those accused of some sort of crime, this installment will focus on how the Republican presidential candidate shits on our legal system.

Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (American Civil Liberties Union).

“Pleading the fifth,” is often used in a facetious sense in our society, yet the true meaning is lost on some. In short, “pleading the fifth” means it is against the law to be tried for any serious crime unless otherwise indicted for said crime; it is also against the law to be forced to implicate yourself in a crime or answer for the same crime twice. You’ve seen that movie with Ashley Judd and Tommy Lee Jones, right? If not, go and watch Double Jeopardy.

Well, Trump doesn’t seem to have much regard for using the fifth amendment, at least when it comes to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“’So there are five of them [former Clinton staff members] taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right?’ [Trump] said at another rally in Iowa. ‘The mob takes the Fifth Amendment. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?’” (The Charlotte Observer)

That is an excellent question.

Maybe that should have been asked every time he invoked his fifth amendment right during his divorce proceedings with Ivana Trump in 1990. It would have gotten pretty repetitive after the first 20 times, much more so after the 100 reported times he “plead the fifth” when asked about his infidelity to Ivana, which is corroborated in the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement’s report (https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/NJGamingReport.pdf ).

We all know how much Trump loves to say what would happen to Clinton if he became the President of the United States: immediate incarceration.

Well, again, unconstitutional.

The sixth amendment guarantees proper representation and to be tried by an impartial jury comprised of the accused’s peers. It will also be a speedy and public trial.

“[I]f I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation,” Trump said at the second presidential debate, referring to Hillary Clinton’s much-publicized government e-mails on her personal server. “[W]e’re gonna get a special prosecutor and we’re gonna look into it.”

Not only would this violate her sixth amendment rights, this would tread very closely to violating her fifth amendment rights, as well. Plus, a special prosecutor? Really?

Moving on from how Trump would allegedly persecute and prosecute Clinton, if elected, I would now like to address Trump’s views on cruel and unusual punishment.

At a rally he held in Ohio during the summer of 2016, he brought up the subject of waterboarding, a torture method simulating drowning in order to extract information. Oh, and it also violates international law.

“So we can’t do waterboarding, but they can do chopping off heads, drowning people in sealed cages … you have to fight fire with fire,” Trump said (The Hill).

Trump also said in another interview in March, 2016, “[w]e have to play the game the way they’re playing the game. You’re not going to win if we’re soft and they’re, they have no rules,” (CNN).

Not only would he use forms of torture to gain information from suspected terrorists, which also doesn’t really work if you read any history books, but he would step it up a notch by targeting their families.

“They, they care about their lives. Don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families,” Trump said in a Fox News interview in December, 2015 (Politico).

Trump supporters would love for all of these things to happen that he’s promising to do, if elected president. However, what would stop him from waterboarding United States citizens? Or putting United States citizens in front of a firing squad without a trial?

This is basically me asking those Trump supporters who are still out there one thing: How is Donald J. Trump going to enforce the constitution of the United States the way our forefathers intended it to be enforced when he’s figuratively pissing on it at every opportunity?

ACLU https://www.aclu.org/united-states-bill-rights-first-10-amendments-constitution

The Charlotte Observer http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/election/article105179136.html

Newsweek < http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-2016-presidential-debate-read-full-transcript-508163>

The Hill < http://thehill.com/policy/defense/286209-trump-bucks-military-on-waterboarding>

Politico < http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/trump-kill-isil-families-216343>

CNN < http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/06/politics/donald-trump-torture/>