Impeachment Trial Showed Shameless Double Standard

As House impeachment managers wrapped up their present over the weekend—an pointless train in histrionics for what they hope can be political achieve—the American folks witnessed the gorgeous double normal by which Democrats choose their enemies.

In his summation of the impeachment case, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) rightly excoriated Donald Trump‘s response to studying of the mob of his supporters laying siege upon the U.S. Capitol.

“Did [Trump] spring into action to stop the violence and save us?” Raskin requested rhetorically. “Did he even wonder about his own security, since an out-of-control, anti-government mob could come after him, too? Did he quickly try to get in touch with or denounce the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, the rally organizers, the Save America Rally organizers and everyone on the extreme right to tell them that this was not what he had in mind, it was a big mistake, ‘Call it off, call it off, call it off,’ as Representative [Mike] Gallagher begged him to do on national television? No. He delighted in it. He reveled in it. He exulted in it.”

This would have been a strong level if the Democrats’ personal actions did not undercut the message.

While arguing that the January sixth speech incited the mob, as an illustration, some Democrats advised the violence was deliberate beforehand. They used the president’s previous feedback to sign that efforts to court docket an rebel have been successfully underway previous to the January 6 speech. So did the speech incite the violence or not? Democrats did not even cost the president for poorly dealing with the mob post-riot.

They additionally argued that if Trump is not prevented from operating for workplace once more, nothing would cease him from partaking in the identical type of violence sooner or later. Well, if Trump meant to violently overthrow the federal government with a military of supporters, why would he go to the difficulty of partaking in a political marketing campaign? And if his plan was an rebel, as Raskin claims, why did Trump ever relent and name it off? Why did he even depart the White House in any respect? Not solely did he depart on his personal; he left early.

You can name out Trump’s speech as an inappropriate, harmful promotion of unsupported claims of huge voter fraud, and sharply criticize how the then-president dealt with the mob, with out supporting impeachment. These positions aren’t in battle.

You can strongly condemn the January sixth riot and hope all lawbreakers face steep punishment, whereas additionally questioning the motivations of a Democratic Party that hurried an impeachment realizing it did not have the votes to convict Trump within the Senate. Both positions are cheap to carry.

In this screenshot taken from a webcast, lead House impeachment supervisor Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) provides closing arguments on the fifth day of former President Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial on the U.S. Capitol on February 13, 2021 in Washington, DC. House impeachment managers had argued that Trump was “singularly responsible” for the January sixth assault on the U.S. Capitol and he ought to be convicted and barred from ever holding public workplace once more.

Democrats need you to suppose in any other case; that if you happen to do not help impeachment, you in some way additionally help an “insurrection” on the Capitol. It’s a juvenile, clear technique.

But maybe it belies an even bigger technique to hide the double normal by which Democrats choose their opponents. Once you evaluate their response to the Capitol riot to their inaction as left-wing radicals besieged cities throughout the nation for eight months, their hypocrisy turns into obvious.

Violent extremists roiled American cities for months within the aftermath of George Floyd‘s dying. Americans have been killed, police have been crushed, buildings have been burned down and companies have been destroyed. And we knew the culprits.

While typically fairly actually chanting “Antifa,” black-clad radicals waving anti-fascist motion flags tore neighborhoods aside. During Black Lives Matter marches, violence and looting broke out. Molotov cocktails have been thrown, officers nearly burned alive in a police building, with one metropolis experiencing properly over 100 consecutive days of riots. Rioters even established “autonomous zones” in some cities.

Did Democrats spring to motion at any level in the course of the eight months of violence? No. The rioting was both ignored, downplayed or excused. Some lawmakers even inspired the violence.

Did Democrats ever surprise about their very own safety, because the Antifa mob is anti-government, and will come after them? Democrats received a wake-up name on Inauguration Day when Antifa thugs rioted in Portland, vandalizing the Oregon Democratic Party headquarters whereas condemning President Joe Biden.

Did Democrats ever condemn Antifa or get in contact with BLM leaders to ask them to assist quell the violence? For probably the most half, Democrats will not utter the title “Antifa” until it is to assert the group does not exist. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) insisted it is a fable created by the Right. And some Democrats solely briefly and passively referred to as out BLM violence after inner polls advised Trump’s speaking factors have been gaining steam in swing states.

Instead of displaying consistency and calling out all political violence (as Republicans have), Democrats delighted in what the riots did to energise their base, convey momentum to the BLM motion and assist them take the White House and Senate. Now, they’ve the audacity to lecture others about inaction.

Jason Rantz is a frequent visitor on Fox News and is the host of the Jason Rantz Show on KTTH Seattle, heard weekday afternoons. You can subscribe to his podcast here and observe him on Twitter: @jasonrantz.

The views expressed on this article are the author’s personal.

Source Link –

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button