Honesty, Integrity, and Judge Roy Moore

By Gary Welch, National Communications Director of the Constitution Party

The first principle of the Constitution Party states “We are committed to restoring honesty, integrity, and accountability to government”. Embodied in that statement are goals, commitments, and policies that will change how our government operates and the character of those that serve as government officials. It incorporates our commitment to having candidates and government officials that are honorable men and women who will be held accountable for their integrity, conduct, and actions.

On November 16th, the National Executive Committee of the Constitution Party voted to start a fundraising effort to assist Judge Roy Moore in his Senate campaign in Alabama.

Some may consider this a controversial decision because (a) it contradicts our standing policy of not endorsing or officially supporting any candidate from another party and (b) because the nature of the accusations against Roy Moore have convinced many (including some staunch conservatives) that supporting him would be violating that first principle of honesty, integrity, and accountability in government.

I feel that it is important that the Constitution Party explains its actions and uses this opportunity to explain how this applies to our unwavering dedication to restoring honesty, integrity, and accountability to government.

We start with the party’s position on the guilt or innocence of Roy Moore. Our official stance is the same of that of President Trump’s – we are not making any profession of the innocence or guilt of Roy Moore. We hold that there has not been enough time allowed to provide for the truth to be fully known. As such, it would be equally foolish to declare his innocence or guilt based solely on the facts that we currently have. By taking up the fundraising efforts for Roy Moore, we are not doing so because we are convinced on his innocence nor does it indicate our refutation of the claims that have been made. Instead, our decision to support him came from the following criteria:

  1. There has not been enough time to evaluate the evidence that has been presented. We have not heard both sides nor has Roy Moore been allowed sufficient time to defend against his accusers. The information that has been presented so far has been all one sided. The Washington Post had plenty of time to build its case in their article and to dig for evidence that supported their case. Judge Moore deserves sufficient time to provide evidence that supports his position or refutes the statements that have been made. The condemnations and actions by the media, government officials, and especially the Republican Party, have come too quickly without providing Roy Moore the opportunity to defend himself. We find the pronouncement of guilt was all too swift and done without giving him the time needed to mount a defense. The investigation and research into the accusations, the accusers, and the facts surrounding case will take time. We don’t know what new evidence or facts will come out from this, but we strongly feel that Judge Moore deserves sufficient time to provide a defense and he was not allowed this opportunity.
  2. Roy Moore has earned the right to be given the opportunity to defend himself. His actions and sacrifices has shown him to be an adherent to Christian principles and that deserves the decency of giving him the opportunity to prove his case. Character does matter, and past actions should be considered when determining innocence or guilt of a person accused of such a grievous crime. Again, we don’t feel that his past alone automatically makes him innocent, but it does warrant that we should carefully review the evidence and provide him with the opportunity to refute or disprove the allegations.
  3. We have some serious concerns about the motives and the actions of some of the participants in this scandal, mostly with the Washington Post and the GOP.
    1. First, the Washington Post’s assertion that they only knew about the scandal only recently is hard to believe. A scandal of this magnitude would have been available to any investigative journalist during the primaries. Where were the accusers during that time? Why were their concerns about Roy Moore not expressed and published back when Roy Moore was running in the primaries? The Washington Post says that they did not do any serious investigations on any candidate in Alabama until after the primaries. Really? The Alabama primary was one of the biggest political news event of the time. No one from the Washington Post was there to cover it? No one was asking the questions about Roy Moore that would shed any light on him as a suitable candidate? The timeline of when the Washington Post knew about the accusations would be critical in determining the motivation and the purpose of the article. Is it a “hit-piece” that is designed to derail the Republican nominee after the primaries to ensure a Democrat victory or is it just what the Washington Post declares it to be, something that came up out of nowhere as part of the coverage of the election? The past history of the Washington Post’s biased reporting should trigger some skepticism of the article, its purposes, and the agenda of the reporters that broke the story. At a minimum, there should be an investigation into how the Washington Post conducted its investigation. Who did they talk to? What did they decide to use or leave out of their story? When did they find out about this information? Their story requires us to accept that everything the Washington Post did was unbiased and coincidental to this race. We have a hard time accepting that.
    2. Second, the GOP’s reaction is very suspect. The history of the Republican Party in defending and staunchly declaring the innocence of their candidates (even when overwhelming evidence of their guilt existed) is legendary. Their moral outrage against Roy Moore sounds both hollow and contrived. We all know that the two major political parties do not act organically. Everything that they do is part of a coordinated effort that is orchestrated by their party leaders. So, the questions that we started asking all started with “Why?”. Why would they turn against Roy Moore just based on nothing more than accusations and hearsay? Why turn against their candidate during the middle of a campaign? Why are they sabotaging their own candidate and ensuring that a Democrat will win the election? Why the extraordinarily quick condemnation from party leaders and government officials (the accusations were barely out before the condemnations started)? Why use threats of unseating Judge Moore or expelling him from the Senate if elected? The answer of “because of moral outrage and to maintain the reputation of the GOP candidates” is laughable. Even very recent history has shown that they put party politics over morality and candidate reputation every day of the week.

Our questioning of the “why did the GOP do this?” led us to answers that this was an act of a corrupt party that was more concerned about maintaining the power base of the political elites even at the cost of an election. That a Democrat would win the election was worth the price for party leaders to maintain their control and power.

It is well known that Roy Moore was not the candidate that the Republican elitists wanted. His election was another blow to the party leaders that have taken the GOP to new lows and alienated their Republican base. Ordinary Republicans are starting to rebel against the direction that their party is taking and are fighting to elect true conservatives to office. Roy Moore was just another example of mainstream Republicans rejecting their party’s leadership choice and deciding to choose a candidate that represented their values, not the party elitists’.

The actions of the RNC (both in party leadership and government officials) clearly demonstrated to us that this was an act of political party that wanted to punish the Republicans of Alabama for daring to elect a candidate that would not “play ball” with the political elites. Roy Moore had made a name for himself in thumbing his nose at GOP leadership that failed to uphold the principles that they supposedly stood for. His election was just too much for them and they retaliated.

Which brings us to the main reason why we are now financially supporting Roy Moore. We feel that the GOP is attempting to invalidate the choice made by the people of Alabama. These latest actions are the acts of a desperate party that is trying to maintain their power over the people. Any acts of rebellion or non-compliance with the GOP leaderships’ agenda, must be dealt with severely and quickly. That they are violating their own principles, the fundamental principles of due process, and (most importantly) the will of the people of Alabama, compelled us to act and take extraordinary action.

Finally, we need to address our action regarding supporting a candidate from another party. That one was easy for us. Roy Moore does not have a party affiliation in our opinion. The RNC has clearly abandoned him. For now, he is now an “Independent” candidate that is acting on his own. Since the GOP has disowned him, he is free to associate himself with any party that he feels would help him in his efforts to change American politics and the proper role of government. As such, we feel that we are free to offer him our assistance as a party to continue his campaign and to provide him with the opportunity to defend himself and make his case to the people of Alabama and America.

Corrupt Politicians Come From A Corrupt Party. The Constitution Party calls on all Americans to examine the latest actions of the GOP and ask yourself if the GOP should be the party representing the cause of the conservative movement. Regardless of whether you personally feel Roy Moore is innocent or guilty, you must look at the recent actions of the GOP and consider their motives and agenda.

The Constitution Party stands for Honesty, Integrity, and Accountability in Government. Our party is based on these principles because they build the foundation for creating a free and prosperous society. We are not compromising on these principles by supporting Judge Roy Moore. Should evidence be shown to our satisfaction that the allegations against Roy Moore are true, then we will be the first to condemn and disavow him. This would apply to any candidate or leader within our party. At present, however, we feel that these are just allegations and accusations. They need to be thoroughly investigated and vetted. Those that support and believe in Roy Moore need time to carry out the process of mounting a defense so that we can base our opinion (and our votes) on truth and not innuendo.

We ask Americans from all over to help support us in this cause and to consider that maybe there is another choice in politics. When is enough is enough?

Please visit our website at www.constitutionparty.com to learn more about the Constitution Party or to support our efforts in raising funds for Judge Roy Moore’s campaign.  Click here to donate.

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE FROM NATIONAL CHAIRMAN FRANK FLUCKIGER

Frank Fluckiger, National Chairman
A lot has transpired since my last email to you describing a rare window of opportunity that is opening up for the Constitution Party.
 

For the first time in our history, the Constitution Party has succeeded in getting enough signatures to place a remarkable young candidate on the ballot for the office of governor in the state of New Jersey. His name is Matt Riccardi. He is a very dynamic young man and is garnering significant attention through his campaign. Matt has a very busy schedule and he has been able to introduce the party to a growing number of voters in that very liberal state. He will be sharing his experiences with us at the upcoming Constitution Party National Committee meeting in Pittsburgh, PA October 27th and 28th.

It has become obvious that the liberal GOP establishment intends to defeat all conservative Republicans running for any office, including Congress. This has become crystal clear in the recent GOP primaries in Alabama and Utah, just to name two states. In both cases the GOP establishment deliberately ran liberal candidates against very capable conservative candidates. Furthermore, in each state, two conservative candidates were placed on the ballot with the goal of dividing the conservative vote, thereby hoping to elect their liberal candidates with a plurality of the vote. The plan worked beautifully in Utah, but fortunately it failed in Alabama, much to the dismay of the establishment. The opposition spent 300% more funds than did the Roy Moore campaign and Moore still handily won the recent runoff primary. Because of these and other recent events, including the Republican Congress’ betrayal of voters in refusing to repeal Obamacare, a growing number of conservative Republicans have become increasingly disillusioned with the GOP and are looking for an alternative.

As a result of such ongoing actions, we have recently been contacted by a well-known conservative Republican, Vernon Robinson, who has served two terms in public office. He stated he can no longer remain in the Republican Party and is convinced that there is an overwhelming number of like minded Republicans who feel the same way. He further stated he feels “that the Constitution Party has never had a greater opportunity to tap into the GOP betrayal of the country.” Those are his exact words. He has since agreed to be the keynote speaker at the Constitution Party National Committee meeting in Pittsburgh.

One other well known Republican, Joe Miller, has also agreed to address that body. Mr. Miller defeated Senator Lisa Murkowski in the 2010 GOP Primary for the US Senate seat in Alaska. However the establishment then organized a write-in campaign for Murkoski in which she narrowly defeated Miller in the November General Election.

Yet another well known Republican, William “Bill” J. Olson, from Virginia, has requested to attend the meeting and will also address the group. It is his law firm that wrote the amicus brief in the Masterpiece Cakeshop bakery case that will be heard before the Supreme Court. All three gentlemen are traveling to the meeting at their own expense. To me, that is indicative of the level of interest they have in the Constitution Party.

However, there still remains one caveat that is critical for us to meet. We must show them that the Constitution Party, with its three pillars, has appeal to the general public. To that end, we set a goal to raise $10,000 before the National Committee Meeting in Pittsburgh. Thus far we are just under the $5,000.00 mark. That goal is still attainable but we need your help to achieve it.

The most viable way we have to show this support is to raise the balance of the $10,000.00 in the next two weeks. I am confident that this can be done and I am therefor appealing to each of you to give serious consideration to this funding request. Please step forward and donate today. It is critical that you donate what you can, whether $5.00, $10.00, $15.00, $20,00, $25.00, $50.00, $100.00, or $500.00. You can donate online, or mail your donation to, Constitution Party, P.O. Box 1782, Lancaster, PA 17608. Raising $10,000.00 prior to us meeting him in person will be the catalyst for opening up doors of opportunity that the party has never seen.

Time is of the essence, so please take action now and make it possible for this door of opportunity to become a reality for the party.

In the cause of Liberty,

Frank Fluckiger
National Chairman
Constitution Party

Message From the Chairman

Frank Fluckiger, National Chairman
Frank Fluckiger National Chairman

THEOCRACY and the CONSTITUTION PARTY

I have become increasingly concerned with the comments on Facebook and other Internet sources which seem to indicate that the majority of the national leadership of the Constitution Party, and particularly members of the National Executive Committee, are pursuing an agenda of promoting a theocratic government for our country. Though I cannot speak for each person individually, I can certainly speak for the large majority of the both the Executive and National Committee members.

The argument stems from the preamble of the national platform which states and I quote

“The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.”

Comment is also made of the platform statement “The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.”

Those who feel the party leadership is promoting a theocracy for our government would do well to give careful study to the writings and minutes kept by James Madison and other Founding Fathers who attended and participated in the Convention in Philadelphia that produced the Constitution. Thirty four percent of the quotes presented at the convention were from Biblical sources and yet that body of men did not even consider that their new government would be a Theocracy. So why then was the Bible so often quoted by these men in the Constitutional Convention?

They were among the wisest and most well-versed men in history to ever meet as one body and they fully understood that the principles taught in the Bible were the source of good and sound government. First and foremost, they understood that our rights came from our Creator and not from the laws of man. In addition to the 10 commandments, they were fully aware of the many other concepts of good government whose origin came from both Old Testament (Jewish history) and New Testament (Christian writings) Among those records were the concepts of Representative Government; the right of an accused to be heard by a jury of his peers; the understanding that men are innocent until proven guilty; the concept that the truth of a matter had to be witnessed by at least two and preferably more witnesses, Also established in those histories was the right to own and to protect one’s property; that the best government came from the bottom up and only those matters that could not be decided locally should be brought up to be considered at a higher level. The list could go on and on. These were based on the premise of self-government by a moral and virtuous people. These concepts are the basis of Common Law and the Laws of Nature. Again, the Founders clearly understood that the government they gave us could survive only among a virtuous and moral citizenry.

This necessitated that for the Constitution to be a successful form of government for a free and liberty loving people, we as a people must be a moral and virtuous people, a characteristic of a God-fearing people. The Founders fully understood the dangers of a state religion that controlled the governments in Europe, but they likewise understood the importance of religion in fostering and furthering the concepts of good government. One of the stipulations of the Northwest Ordinance of 1785 was that religion be taught in those territories. Now the teaching of religion in the public schools is forbidden. How far we have strayed from what the Founding Fathers envisioned for our nation!

Over and over again, the Founders recognized the hand of Providence in both freeing ourselves from British Rule and in the drafting and adopting of the Constitution. George Washington alone listed 76 times in which the hand of Providence intervened in behalf of the colonies. They readily understood that without such help, our nation would have never been possible. Why we as Americans cannot recognize that, and acknowledge the need for that same Providential assistance in restoring that government that the Founding Fathers bequeathed us is of grave concern to me.

The principles promoted by the party are good and praise worthy and in time they hopefully will be achieved. But for any of us to think those goals can be reached without each of us incorporating virtuous values in our individual lives is hoping for something that can never happen. Acknowledging the Hand of Providence in our party’s preamble is only fitting. The does not mean that the wording in the preamble cannot be changed. The party leadership is open to such a consideration, but to exclude reference to Providential assistance in the freeing of our nation from Britain and the establishment of the Constitution is a disservice to the Founding Fathers as well as the founders on the Constitution Party. That would be akin to turning our backs on history.

Promoting the sound concepts of good government given to us by the Founders is totally different than promoting a theocratic government. Whose interpretation of the scriptures is correct? That is something that the various theologians and religious leaders are free to discuss, but under no circumstances are they to be imposed on the citizens of our nation by the force of government. The Founders of our nation were totally opposed to that approach as are the majority of the national and executive committee members of the Constitution Party. These things are to be self-imposed and the Founders well understood it. The leadership of the Constitution Party is in full accord with this understanding.

NJ Gubernatorial Candidate Matt Riccardi – Constitution Party Talk Radio

Tune in to the long awaited return of Randy Stufflebeam’s Constitution Party Talk Radio as he interviews 2017 Constitution Party of New Jersey Gubernatorial Candidate Matt Riccardi for Episode 1!

Another place to learn more about Matt Riccardi is at his website, r4nj.org.

Join the cause on Facebook at his Page “Riccardi for Governor 2017” or Follow on Twitter @Riccardi4NJ

 

 

Listen to the Show HERE