Chelsea Handler: “Perhaps We Skip Trials” When There’s “Audio And Video” Evidence, Despite Constitutional Due Process

OPINION | This article contains political commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

Radical progressive leftist Chelsea Handler has some very weird views about hot political topics. Like when she thought she had to remind 50 Cent that he was black because he had the audacity to think for himself and support President Trump’s Platinum Plan. How dare he not agree with her and deign to think for himself like an independent and intelligent American. (Picture my sarcastic eye roll at her hypocritical impudence.)

Her latest bizarre and completely ridiculous statement comes as the George Floyd trial gets under way.

After expressing disgust that former police officer Derek Chauvin is even being permitted a trial to prove whether he is guilty or innocent of the murder charges he faces regarding the death of George Floyd, she then suggests,

“Perhaps we skip trials when there is audio and video footage of the murder.”

Perhaps we skip trials? She can’t be serious, can she? Is she just spewing ridiculous lunacy without thinking for even one second about the implications of something like that? Just do away with constitutional due process?

Because there’s no chance of video and audio manipulation or editing, right, Chelsea?

Because video and audio always tells the complete story, right, Chelsea?

Because due process has never saved an innocent person from unwarranted punishment, right, Chelsea?

Because people don’t deserve to make sure that all the facts are heard and considered in a case, right, Chelsea?

— Advertisement —

I’m honestly curious what she thinks about the death of Mohammad Anwar, which was likewise caught on tape.

Video and audio recordings very clearly show the two teen girls violently carjacking Anwar and directly causing his brutal death during the commission of a felony. It’s on video for everyone to see.

So does Handler also think that the two teen girls should go straight to prison for murder since everyone can see the video evidence?

Does Handler want to skip a trial for them?

Does Handler think they also don’t deserve due process?

Or does she only suggest that we skip the trial for people she thinks are bad and don’t deserve a trial? So then who gets to decide who’s bad and who doesn’t deserve a trial? Chelsea Handler? Elected officials? Seriously, who would get to decide something like that?

What radical progressive leftists don’t seem to realize is that our Constitution protects all people, whether you agree with them or not. Whether you think they are bad or not. First Amendment rights protect the speech with which you agree and the speech with which you disagree. Because once you restrict certain speech that you don’t like, you pave the way to restrict all speech, including the speech with which you agree, because eventually someone will disagree with your speech and they’ll choose to restrict you. And you made it possible for them to do it.

Likewise, constitutional due process protects all Americans facing charges, whether you like them or not. If you deny a person their constitutional due process because you don’t like them or don’t agree with them and think they don’t deserve due process, then you pave the way for stripping constitutional due process from all defendants. Because eventually, someone you support will be denied a trial thanks to you undermining constitutional due process.

This kind of language from Chelsea Handler is so dangerous because it sounds good to people who agree with her and who don’t think through the implications of such action. Would Chelsea think the same way if there was video of her committing a crime, or would she be grateful for the protections she enjoys from the U.S. Constitution that guarantees her due process?

As usual with radical progressive lunacy, I ask, “Where does it end?”