Lacking Consistency

The second impeachment hearing of now former-President Trump is about a week old by now.

I was immediately struck by a saying I heard many years ago from an attorney. It is so obvious most people don’t see it.

“If you can’t pound the law, pound the table.”

The message is clear, and being played out... with a difference. In Donald Trump’s five years in the political arena, counting the campaign leading to his election, he has been labeled or otherwise implied guilty on more issues than anyone in recent history. I say that cautiously because there is almost always someone who has a mile-long rap sheet, but didn’t get the attention of another person, a President for example.

The questions start with why him, why now? Why is there a history of Trump working with minorities, but once he entered office he was labeled a racist? Why do people believe what another elected official says, but won’t trust what is documented about Trump?

Yes, I’m wading into the dangerous lagoon of party politics. Yes, I’m an observer. No, I’m not an experienced attorney. However, with that said, we, the American people, are allowing a dangerous precedence.

By observation, we are ok with a standard for one person and not for another. We are ok with electing people to rule over us, not represent us. We are ok with screaming at each other over issues that we should be sitting down at a table and discussing.

Sadly, we’re ok with where we are instead of plotting a way out of this mire. If we’re not ok, too many are not letting their voices be heard.

To be clear, I’m not saying Donald Trump is innocent, the perfect President, or for that matter the perfect man. Candidly, there are no perfect men or women. We all have flaws. Some are obvious, and some are nicely hidden. Several years ago in a different community, I was encouraged that I may not be the perfect person for the job, but I was the right one for the time.

It was a gentle compliment offered by the staff, not the management.

Trump is accused of a speech that incited the riot also called an insurrection. The question is if the words in his speech rise to the level of incitement in the legal definition.

The next question would be if encouraging supporters to “fight harder” is incitement what are phrases like “confront and harass all Trump supporters.” And don’t forget the famous image of comedienne Kathy Griffin holding what looked like the decapitated head of President Trump, later dismissed as free speech and harmless comedy. Have our values really fallen to the point of laughing at the image of a seated president decapitated?

We’re at the point we need to examine the details, the immediacy of resulting action and the lack of consistency. Those who have favor with enough of the population also appear to have a stay-out-of-jail card while those who shocked the system with their success are seen as enemies of the state.

Any newspaper, radio station, television crew or supporter of the Constitution should stand with free speech, even when it is uncomfortable. We should recognize the limits are few and specific, and deliberately of a standard of provability.

Had there been a call for immediate and specific action, there would be no doubt. It would be recorded, transcribed and the Impeachment hearing would already be over. Had he called for storming the grounds as implied, as clearly as implied, supporters in Congress would be on the fringe, not Party aligned or on the fence.

The point is not the Party. Party by itself has been used and misused countless times in the last few decades. The point is show the public the undeniable facts. The point is also to apply the law, equally, across the field.

Since this was written, former President Trump has been acquitted.