Clear and present danger rule – a standard for judging when freedom of speech can be abridged; “no one has a right to shout `fire’ in a crowded theater when there is no fire because such an action would pose a clear and present danger to public safety”

(Where were the police when the flag was burned in front of the New York Trump Tower or any place?  Doesn’t that create an immediate danger for any city?  Doesn’t every city have a burn ban in place?  Even in our small town there are posted notices at the post office and buldings on the status of the burn ban and people are fined if they start a fire.  GOODNESS – A FLAG BEING BURNED IN NEW YORK CITY AND NO ONE IS ARRESTED?  OF ALL PLACES, NEW YORK CITY?)

Monroe Doctrine – A principle of US policy, originated by President James Monroe in 1823, that any intervention by external powers in the politics of the Americas is a potentially hostile act against the US.

When there is a conflict between free expression and the demands of public safety, the courts usually rely on the “clear and present danger” rule.  This standard does not exist for the American people under the present government.  Now we have people coming in from all other nations with no vetting for the safety of the American people.  These people now have more rights than we the people – for we are being told that all American people are bigots and discriminate against those people from other nations.  They call us bigots but they still want to come to America -so what is wrong with this picture?

Words can be used as weapons – and the Democratic Communist Party is using these words against “we the people in this nation.”

My question is – is the Democratic Communist Party  using certain words and actions   to create a clear and present danger – such as burning a flag in the middle of New York and political correctness.

What constitutes a clear and present danger.  This question can be answered only on the basis of the facts in each particular case.

Where am I going with these questions?  The case that should be debated by Congress is Sharia law –  because it is a threat to the American Constitution and is a clear and present danger to “we the people of this nation.”

Our federal government has been avoiding this issue and why?  Congress has the right to look into this clear and present danger issue if Sharia law is a threat to America and the Constitution of the United States.

Since Donald Trump will become our President, he needs to ask Congress about this issue and confront this head-on for “we the people.”  This also goes back to the Monroe Doctrine which is not a law – rather it is a self-defense policy – a policy of “America for all Americans who oppose any-non-American encroachment on the independence of the United States of America from the western hemisphere and the Middle East” and our Constitution.

At this time, we are being invaded by foreign countries with the approval of Obama.

In God we trust and united we stand.

kommonsentsjane