Hate to say it but Shame on Trey Gowdy

Home  »  Blog  »  Hate to say it but Shame on Trey Gowdy
Print This Post Print This Post
Nov 28, 2014 No Comments ›› admin

By Ben Barrack

“The Department of Justice is responsible for safeguarding the fundamental foundation of this Republic, which is respect for the rule of law. The Department is symbolized… by nothing more than a blindfolded woman holding a set of scales and a sword. She doesn’t care about political agendas… just the equal application of the law so all citizens can have confidence in the decisions she makes.” – Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) in 2012

When it comes to the issue of impeaching President Barack Obama, political calculations run rampant but what of Lady Justice? According to Rep. Trey Gowdy, that’s not part of her calculus.

If there is one overriding argument for the impeachment of Obama it’s that the standard will be incredibly low for future presidents if he is not impeached. Instead, Gowdy has argued against the impeachment of Obama by making an assertion that Lady Justice would reject.

No one has been a bigger champion of Gowdy than yours truly. I watched him tear apart administration officials who came before him to explain Operation Fast and Furious. I watched him change the course of the IRS scandal when he successfully exploited a very a small window of opportunity after Lois Lerner invoked her fifth amendment right before enumerating the reasons for her innocence.

Before Lerner could leave, Gowdy rightly pointed out that she waived her fifth amendment right by maintaining her innocence. It was Gowdy’s quick thinking that ultimately led to Lerner being found in contempt of Congress. The next step would have been for House Speaker John Boehner to order the Sergeant-at-Arms to jail Lerner.

He did not and Gowdy did not call him on it in the name of Lady Justice, whom he professes to champion; his record also demonstrates this.

Earlier this year, information about Lerner’s handling of the 501(c)(3) application and approval letter of Malik Obama was sent to Gowdy weeks prior to Lerner testifying before Gowdy’s committee. He has done nothing with it.

So where is Gowdy on demanding that justice be served relative to Lerner being found in contempt? Ditto for Attorney General Eric Holder being found in contempt of Congress in 2012 for failing to honor a lawfully issue subpoena.

It was Rep. Gowdy who insisted that Lady Justice doesn’t play politics.

How about the issue of impeachment? When asked by Bill O’Reilly about the matter of impeaching Obama for issuing an Executive Order on amnesty, Gowdy rhetorically asked, “Have you met Joe Biden”? The implication was clear. If Barack Obama was removed from office, his replacement would be worse.

First of all, the premise is flawed. If – I understand it’s a big “if” – Obama were impeached and successfully removed from office in a Senate trial, Biden would be a neutered president, unwilling to lift a finger to do more damage. He could also serve as a block on a Hillary nomination in 2016.

Another argument Gowdy made against impeaching Obama was that the act itself is one of punishment, not remedy. In the case of Obama, it would be both. He would be punished for breaking the law and the remedy would be his subsequent inability to do it in the capacity as POTUS.

More important than that debate are Gowdy’s own words about Lady Justice, who doesn’t have any interest in political outcomes, only just ones.

When Gowdy argues against punishing the President for breaking the law because the Vice President would be a worse president, it smacks of an attempt to skirt Lady Justice.

Don’t look now but Lady Justice just put down her scales and performed a facepalm in response to Mr. Gowdy’s argument against impeachment.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: