As he was headed toward impeachment by the House, President Clinton committed another outrage that should have been submitted as yet another example of his crimes against the Constitution. But the mainstream media haven?t uttered a peep about it. Last December 10, Clinton issued a controversial executive order, number 13107, in which he claimed the power to implement treaties “concerned with the protection and promotion of human rights to which the United States is now or may become a party in the future…” Notice those words “may become.” It appears that he wants to implement unratified treaties.
If Senators are truly undecided about or opposed to the impeachment of Clinton, they should take a close look at this executive order. Basically, Clinton is telling the Senate, which must ratify treaties, to “drop dead.” This order demonstrates Clinton?s open disdain for the role of the Senate in our Constitutional system. The treaties that “may” be ratified are apparently the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which substitutes government bureaucrats for the role of parents, and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which would dictate government control of the economy for the purpose of guaranteeing “equal rights” for women.
In issuing his order, Clinton claimed “the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,” and he insisted that the U.S. had certain “obligations” under those treaties. He said that various federal agencies would implement their terms, such as by reviewing and monitoring compliance by the states. The executive order also mandated federal cooperation with U.N. representatives who travel throughout the U.S. to monitor our compliance with those treaties. In short, Clinton appears to be establishing an enforcement mechanism, in the form of a new federal bureaucracy, to implement treaties. This is a radical departure from the customary practice and constitutional responsibility of the Congress to pass legislation to implement U.N. treaties that have been ratified by the Senate.
Clinton?s action is unconstitutional and outrageous. Yet the major media have completely ignored what has transpired. They have apparently been too fixated on the issue of the president?s impeachment and possible conviction. However, stories about the controversial order have been carried on the Internet, on sites like WorldNetDaily dot com and Newsmax dot com. It will be up to the alternative media and ordinary people like you to get the Big Media to cover this controversy.
The executive order is part of a process whereby liberal and left-wing groups attempt to undermine our own legal and political system by insisting that we are violating international standards of human rights. One of their big objectives is to force the U.S. the stop the use of the death penalty. They claim the U.S. is violating various treaties by supposedly imposing the death penalty in a racially discriminatory manner.
Does Clinton favor abolition of the death penalty? Publicly, he is in support of it, and he has signed legislation to carry it out. Yet his executive order, if enforced totally, could make its use a violation of international law. This is a story worth covering.