Hi Editor.
Listening this morning to a bit of discussion on whether Trump might be called to testify in the House investigation of 1/6. It was acknowledged as a theoretical possibility, but thought unlikely for two reasons.
First, it might set a “dangerous precedent”…where, for instance, a future Republican Congress might haul Joe Biden in to question him about Hunter’s laptop. Personally, I think it would set a good precedent—to be applied whenever a mobster has finished being president. Since the emotional maturity of the Republican party really is at the level of “Oh yeah? We’ll get him back!,” it’s not inconceivable that revenge brings Biden back into the witness chair. If that happens, since he’s not a mobster, I assume he’ll just answer all their questions, like Hillary did about the inflated issue of Benghazi.
The other reason, though, moots the first. If subpoenaed, will he show up? Or will he just begin some long court battle? To my mind, these are rhetorical questions. We know the answers. Trump is a master of getting out of things via delay. In this case, he could assert any crappy reason—finding traces of bamboo in the paper the subpoena was printed on!!!—and, when the challenge to that finally came up in court and he lost, appeal that ruling on some fanciful grounds and push it into the appeals court and &c.…and, sometime in 2023 or so, when SCOTUS says “no,” he can (realistically!) claim to be suffering from dementia and challenge the subpoena on hardship grounds. In any case, it will be easy for him to outlast the limited life of the House committee.
This leads me to wonder if other Republicans might emulate Great Leader…and, if subpoenaed, just refuse to honor them? If I were on that committee, I’d surely want to invite and/or subpoena McCarthy, Cruz, Flynn, Giuliani and all the Congressmen who gave tours to those later involved in the insurrection. What if they fail to comply? In normal times, when a subpoenaed witness fails to show, the House can go through its rigamarole and cite the no-show for contempt of Congress. This then goes to the DoJ…and so, to court…where lots of delays are possible.
These, however, are not normal times. We don’t have the luxury of allowing the Seditionists to stonewall the country. The rock has to be overturned and the vermin exposed.
Fortunately, this is possible! The House has the power to do this. They’ve always had the power to do this, but were too chickenshit to use that power as Trumper after Trumper refused to testify or surrender documents. I’m referring to the power of “inherent contempt.” The House doesn’t actually need the DoJ to do the prosecuting of a contempt charge. They have the power to do that entirely in house (so to speak). If they find the no-show guilty of contempt, they can order their own police force, the Sergeant at Arms, to arrest the miscreant. They can imprison him! And keep him in jail until he decides to cooperate or a new Congress is seated.
In the Trump years, going through the DoJ was impossible. Neither Sessions nor Barr was ever going to prosecute loyalty to the Annointed One. Using the power of inherent contempt was the only tool available to lance all these pustules growing on America. Now, with Garland as AG, contempt cases would be pursued, but would take too long—so, asserting the power of inherent contempt is still all we have to address the disease in time.
So, here’s my advice: If it should happen that, once the committee gets going and issues invitations to appear—at the first sign that Republicans are going to use Big Delay as their strategy, everyone should begin to bombard their Representative with letters, emails, tweets and etc. urging them to use inherent contempt. Spending some days in a non-luxury clink might convince these Trumpers of the benefits of testifying…and allow a real investigation to occur. It’s time to exchange our kid gloves for brass knuckles. If Trump’s big crimes are not exposed—on TV, where it matters—and his cult is not forced to turn from him in disgust, hard times are in store for us.
I started to push my Rep. on this the first time some Trumper stonewalled. I just wanted him to bring up inherent contempt in his discussions with other House members. As far as I know, this coward never did. If I was younger, I’d challenge him in the primary on this issue alone. Had he used his power for the good of the people, Trump’s first impeachment would have come sooner, included many more charges, and would have ended in conviction. As I see it, his failure to act was aiding and abetting Trump’s suppression of evidence. Don’t let your Rep. do this again!
Paul Fischler
Rochester, N.H.
PS: It’s great to see you back in print again. You’ve been missed!
Paul:
The remedy you propose will sound far-fetched to some. In fact, it’s as sound as a dollar used to be. There’s no reason why Congress should not do this.
Sadly, there is a reason they probably won’t: cowardice.
The Editor
–=≈=–