Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, listens during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, April 4, 2011 (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Democratic Rep. John Conyers is having a bit of a week.
News surfaced that the American taxpayer has forked over more than $17 million to settle claims against congresspeople like Conyers for their alleged lecherous and harassing ways. And Conyers reportedly has up to five accusers so far.
Conyers doesn't appear to be going down without a fight. His statement, issued by his attorney Arnold Reed, included an ominous comment:
If people were required to resign over allegations, a lot of people would be out of work in this country including many members of the House, Senate and even the president.
Well, we already knew about allegations against President Trump. They were a major focal point of the campaign, as a matter of fact. However, the comment about other members of the House and Senate is fascinating.
He implies that knowledge of sexual misconduct allegations against elected officials is simply floating around the halls of power. That these allegations aren't exactly secrets there -- yet they are being withheld from the American citizen.
Politics has reached bloodsport status in a lot of ways. There's evidence that members of each party simply do not have friendly associations with members of the opposing party like they used to.
Why does that matter? It's simple.
If Democrats know about allegations against Republican lawmakers -- and Conyers is a Democrat who implies he has knowledge of others' misconduct -- there's little reason to believe the allegations wouldn't have been released long before now. Consider the glee with which Democrats advanced the allegations against Trump.
This implies that Conyers has protected people who he knows for a fact have been accused of misconduct. For a party that has argued every victim should be believed, this is a serious charge.
Conyers is a powerful congressman, but is he so powerful that he and he alone would know the allegations against his fellow members? Unlikely. A far more likely scenario is that these allegations are common knowledge within the Democratic Party. If true, the Democrats have been protecting sexual predators within their party for quite some time.
Now, it's entirely possible that the GOP does this as well. Maybe everyone knows the predators on both sides of the aisle, and neither says anything due to mutually assured destruction. Regardless, that wouldn't absolve the Democrats of anything. Had they acted on the predators in their midst, they would have been free to call out the Republicans who might be guilty. If this scenario is correct, then they aren't just protecting predators in their own party, but in both.
As for Conyers, even if the allegations against him are bogus -- and it's unlikely that they are -- he should be forced to step down anyway, because of his comment.
After all, if that comment isn't an admission that he has been protecting predators, even if no one else has, then what is it?
No comments:
Post a Comment