OPINION | JOHN BRUMMETT: Whataboutism on parade

Former President Donald Trump claimed he had been cheated out of his rightful re-election victory in November. More than 60 courts, some run by judges he nominated, ruled against his arguments.

The Electoral College affirmed Joe Biden's victory. Procedure then called for the Congress to accept the results in a constitutional formality on Jan. 6.

Trump encouraged a mob of his supporters to come to Washington on that date, at which time he told his disciples to march to the U.S. Capitol and fight for their country because otherwise they'd lose it. He told the crowd he'd go with it, though he instead went back to his White House office to watch on television.

The mob followed Trump's instructions--or responded to his stirring. It routed police officers and broke out windows and broke down barriers to invade the Capitol during the election certification process and menace fleeing members of Congress.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy reportedly got on the phone during this madness with Trump. He is reported to have wound up cursing the president when Trump seemed indifferent to McCarthy's plea that he do what he could to call off the invasion. It was reported that Trump told McCarthy that those folks routing the U.S. Capitol apparently cared more about the stolen election than he did.

In summary: A preposterous president of the United States fomented an insurrection against the Constitution and American democracy.

So, now, in mid-May, the U.S. House is considering a resolution establishing a bipartisan congressional commission to delve into the incident and determine what happened. The Democratic chairman and ranking Republican on the Homeland Security committee have agreed on such a resolution.

But it happens that the aforementioned GOP leader McCarthy--fresh from punishing Liz Cheney for saying Trump should not have fomented insurrection--has announced he opposes such an investigation.

Why? It's because, he says, liberals also have protested--last summer in our cities, for example--and the resolution doesn't call for investigating that.

This is the "yeah, but, what about them" argument that didn't get far on the grade-school playground back in the day but seems to prevail as meritorious in the modern U.S. Congress.

And it's the same ol'-same ol' willful congressional failure to focus on a singular solution because of all the gumming up the works with peripheral issues.

Democrats gum up infrastructure with electric-car charging stations. Republicans gum up an insurrection with radical-left marauders in Portland.

Liz Cheney says McCarthy doesn't want such a commission for the real reason that he would be a star sworn witness. Presumably he'd have to tell the truth about whether he called Trump during the melee, and about what Trump said, and about what he said in response. And that might reflect unfavorably on Trump, with whom McCarthy has made his bed for the purpose of trying to win back the House in the midterms.

So, McCarthy said he can't go along with a bipartisan commission to investigate the events at the Capitol on Jan. 6 because of the proposal's failure to address "inter-related" issues.

By "inter-related" he means what actually are wholly unrelated street protests last summer against police killings of Black persons, which, in some locations, turned violent with property damage and physical harm.

One matter was a presidentially fomented assault on our democracy. The other was angry street protesting months before against police actions.

Violence attending the latter is a serious problem that ought to be addressed. But insurrection is, you know, worse.

You know what Congress might do? Investigate them separately. Pass authorizing legislation separately.

It's as if a prosecuting attorney went to a circuit judge to petition for a grand jury to investigate unsolved murders. It's as if the judge turned him down because there had been residential break-ins a few months before and no one was wanting to call a grand jury on that.

You might wonder whether a judge making a statement such as that he knew something about the murder ring that he'd rather not see come out. Maybe he'd been on the phone with a suspect.

Even if the resolution passes the House, a 60-vote majority will be required in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. Ten of the 50 Republican senators would have to take a stand against insurrection. Prospects are dim.

Sources say Democratic senators want to forge ahead even without the 60 votes for the talking point that Republicans would be imposing their first filibuster of the year to block an inquiry into insurrection.

Meantime, I read an editorial the other day arguing that spinoff political groups are not needed because our two parties serve us well. I did a double-take and checked to see if the editorial was from this century.

Strangely, it was from just the other day.


John Brummett, whose column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, is a member of the Arkansas Writers' Hall of Fame. Email him at [email protected]. Read his @johnbrummett Twitter feed.

Upcoming Events