Relax, this won’t be a religious piece. Rather, it’s about one’s reluctance to award credence to persons who’ve already proved unreliable.
We start from this story:
Nearly 100 House Republicans are urging Attorney General Merrick Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden’s foreign business deals, saying they had the hallmarks of an influence peddling scandal.
The letter led by Reps. Tom Rice (R-S.C.) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.), the chair of the House GOP Study Committee, comes as the U.S. attorney in Delaware enters his third year investigating Hunter Biden’s taxes, foreign lobbying and money movements.
In all, 95 House GOP members signed the letter.
“It is increasingly clear that Hunter Biden took advantage of his father’s position as Vice President to develop business relationships with clients in Ukraine, China, and Kazakhstan,” the lawmakers wrote. “Hunter Biden likely facilitated lobbying for foreign entities through third-party channels without registering for the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
“It appears that Hunter Biden used his position as son of then-Vice President Biden to gain wealth and influence in foreign countries, using questionably sourced money to pay tax liabilities, and lobbying on behalf of foreign entities without proceeding through the proper channels.”
So ninety-five Republican Congressmen signed the letter, eh? How many Republican Congressmen are there in toto? It says here that two hundred eleven Congressmen are members of the Grand Old Party. So one hundred sixteen GOP Congressmen have not signed it. Why not? Do they disagree with its allegations, or do they have some political reason for not joining the petition?
Later on in the article, we have this:
While support for a special counsel has been growing, some Republicans like Sen. Ron Johnson argue it isn’t necessary and would only further delay an already slow moving investigation.
“I won’t have any faith in him,” Johnson said of a special counsel.
The “isn’t necessary” part is a matter of political judgment with which I’m indisposed to argue. The “no faith” part is a different matter. It’s been unwise to put one’s faith in the ethics of politicians since before World War II. Politicians are even more aware of that than are We the Unwashed. Attorney-General Merrick Garland, whatever else he may be, is a politician – and a Democrat.
While we’re on the subject of faith in others, have Congressional Republicans proved themselves trustworthy and reliable? The record of the Republican-dominated Congresses during Donald Trump’s presidency was not inspiring. They often seemed determined to thwart him rather than support him. Because of Congressional balkiness, President Trump had to use executive orders far more often than was desirable. It’s a great part of the reason the Usurpers have had so little difficulty reversing the course he set. While “past performance is no guarantee of future returns,” were Trump to be returned to the Oval Office, would he be wise to place his faith in the Republican caucuses on Capitol Hill?
Trump’s no dummy. In his business dealings, he often relied on the trustworthiness of others – and he never allowed anyone to abuse him twice. The American electorate, on the other hand…
We have a serious political problem. Both major parties have proved themselves unworthy of trust. The evolution of political ethics has been steadily downward. To expect deceit and venality is far more sensible than to expect fidelity and honesty.
However, as matters stand, the major parties have a lock on federal offices, and on most state and local offices as well. We have nowhere to turn for an alternative that might prove more faithful.
It’s time to revive an old proposal:
On Every Ballot For Public Office.
NOTA, as it was once called, has several variations. My favorite not only refrains from seating anyone in an office where “None Of The Above” has garnered a plurality; it also suspends all powers associated with that office until the next general election. No one may exercise a power delegated to an office left empty by a NOTA result.
NOTA is not popular with politicians, of course. But isn’t that just another reason to talk it up, see if we can get it into the national conversation? Think about it.