June 19, 2022 --
CLICK HERE TO VIEW LINK
The June 11/12 weekend edition of The Wall Street Journal carried a lead editorial, "The Evidence of the Jan. 6 Committee," that does the paper no credit by taking seriously the Trump-hating propaganda spewed by the ex parte House Select Committee (which deserves that appellation for it selected use of "Jan 6." video) on its prime time use of the media, June 9, to attempt at brainwashing the American people to being receptive to the indictment of former president Trump by a Washington, D.C. grand jury, followed by his conviction by a D.C. jury. (A Trump conviction by a D.C. jury would, certainly, be the mirror image of the recent acquittal of political functionary Michael Sussman of lying to the FBI: as a Democrat jury in the capital would acquit an anti-Trump defendant, the evidence notwithstanding; a Democrat jury in the capital would likely quickly convict Mr. Trump of any offense charged by the politicized Justice Department. And let's have a poll on this in Middle America!)
Oddly, the Journal's lead editorial, the past weekend, began with this rational question and answer in the first paragraph:
"Do Democrats want to unfairly besmirch the entire GOP with the Jan 6. disgrace [invidious term], while distracting voters from 8.6% inflation and $5-a-gallon gasoline? Yes." (Actually, this observer saw gas at $5.29.9 and higher in lower Westchester County, N.Y., the evening of June 12 -- a sum totaling gas tank fill-ups in excess of $70.)
Unfortunately, the rest of this editorial took seriously the "evidence" received by the ex parte (that is to say one-sided) Jan. 6 House committee. (By the way, faux Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, by their compliant membership on this prosecutorial and persecutorial panel, join the rabid Democrats in "want[ing] to besmirch" their GOP colleagues.)
Can there be any doubt that Pelosi's selective [cq] committee goes contrary to the notion that congressional committees are legislative in word, thought, and deed -- not prosecutorial,and not to say zealously unbalanced? Yet in its rush to demonize Donald J. Trump to make sure he cannot ever run again for president, The Wall Street Journal takes no notice of the assault on due process this witch-hunting panel represents.
|It is likely reasonable to expect that once the aim is attained of ending Mr. Trump's political career (with a D.C. conviction) the Journal's editorial board will tut-tut that the "Jan. 6" committee must not become a regular feature of partisan politics on Capitol Hill lest government turn capricious and arbitrary.
To read the execrable June 11/12 Journal editorial one would have no idea that there are legal challenges to Pelosi's puppets in the federal courts, challenges from, among others, former Trump aide Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows. (And shouldn't The Wall Street Journal ask why the courts seem to be dragging their heels on this vital complaints?)
These challenges sagely cast doubt on the validity of the creation of this ex parte panel, and the subpoenas issuing therefrom demanding documents and personal testimony. That is top say, testimony before a persecutorial panel that has started out with the effective premise of a guilty verdict by a House committee authorized to take testimony for purpose of legislation, not for criminal conviction.
The Journal should have reminded readers -- and Republican members of Congress -- that the source of anti-democracy sentiment began its campaign against the Trump presidency with the lie of Russiagate, maintained the anti-Trump campaign throughout Mr. Trump's presidency, and, indeed, sought to impeach and remove Mr. Trump as president after his term expired. Yes, Donald J. Trump left office peacefully -- yet the anti-Trump cabal continues the lie that he sought to overturn the 2020 election.
The proper lesson of "Jan. 6" is that the lies hurled at both Mr. Trump and the Republican party, from the anti-democracy cult in our country, not only continue but increase in volume and vituperation. And, now, it may also be said of The Wall Street Journal: "et tu."