When the rule of law unravels
Newt Gingrich, a former House speaker and candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, stoked outrage on Sunday by predicting members of the House committee investigating the Capitol attack will be imprisoned if Republicans retake the chamber this year.
So he’s saying the Republicans plan to kill what’s left of US democracy if they win.
One of two Republicans on the committee, Liz Cheney, said: “A former speaker of the House is threatening jail time for members of Congress who are investigating the violent attack on our Capitol and our constitution. This is what it looks like when the rule of law unravels.”
…
Calling the members of the 6 January committee “wolves [who] are going to find out that they’re now sheep”, he said that if Republicans take Congress in November, “this is all going to come crashing down … they’re the ones who in fact, I think, face a real risk of jail for the kinds of laws they’re breaking”.
Except that they’re not.
Some Newts never get better.
What a Maroon,
“Some Newts never get better.”
Taken over by Aliens, turned into pod people, become one with The Body …
But some justification for arguing that the “rule of law” has been unravelling for some time, in part because it’s often seen, with some justification, as one set for the rich and one set for the poor. Though that is hardly the only disparity that’s tearing at the fabric of US democracy.
There was an article in Canada’s Globe and Mail on Dec 30 by Stephen Marche – author of “The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future” – which discussed Washington’s apprehensions some 250 years ago on America’s “hyperpartisanship”:
“In his Farewell Address, George Washington was almost fantastically lucid about the situation the United States faces at this exact moment. ‘I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations,’ he warned. ‘This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.’ The Founding Father saw hyperpartisanship as the greatest danger to American democracy. Almost 250 years later, he’s been proven correct.”
My tribe, right or wrong; four legs good, two legs bad.
I must say, my respect for Liz Cheney has grown by leaps and bounds in the last year or two. We may disagree on serious policy issues, but she’s not an authoritarian, and it has taken real courage for her to stand up against these things (with demonstrable damage to her career).
James, one of the most difficult things about all this (apart from 40% of the western population coming out as insane fascists) has been that a handful of Conservatives have demonstrated just how strongly they hold onto core principles that are clearly common to those of us with a more liberal bent. Actually, that’s not the difficult part because I already knew that. The difficult part is that some of that handful are people who are not actually what I would consider good or nice people at all. They are people who’s political views in the round are actually really harmful (IMO). Turns out they still have principles that we can hold in common though. I struggle to see what I could hold in common with the likes of the core MAGA crowd though.