↓
 
Home » What has the GOP said about the Trump Georgia indictment? And what could the GOP do?

What has the GOP said about the Trump Georgia indictment? And what could the GOP do?

The New Neo Posted on by

First, we have commenter “Gregory Harper” declaring this:

This is not about standing with Trump, this is about standing for the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Unfortunately, there are too many Republicans who are so blinded by their dislike of Trump that they are willing to not only abandon any conservative principles that they once claimed to hold, but to abandon the very principles on which this country was founded.

Agreed.

Then commenter “Mike K” quoted Gregory Harper’s comment, and responded with this:

Yes. I have seen almost no response by the majority of Republicans in Congress.

I often see comments like Mike K’s, stating a perception that the GOP hasn’t said this or that or the other thing, and excoriating them for it. I, too, think every single Republican – and even most Democrats – should be speaking out forcefully against what’s happening, and although it no longer surprises me it continues to deeply disappoint and even anger me.

But my response to comments such as Mike K’s is usually this sort of thing: have you checked what the majority of Republicans in Congress have said? After all, there are 222 GOP House members and 49 GOP senators.

Obviously, my question is somewhat rhetorical, because it would take an awfully long time and a lot of work to check every Twitter feed, every GOP member of Congress’ web page, and videos on YouTube that might be relevant, and ascertain for oneself whether it’s the case that the majority of the GOP members of Congress had not responded at all.

In addition, it may be that some of them haven’t responded yet and plan to do so soon. But more importantly, not every single GOP member who does speak up is going to be spotlighted or prominently quoted. In fact, why would the MSM focus on their critiques of the indictment, especially if those critiques might be persuasive? Spoils the narrative. So there’s really no way to know how many people have spoken up, unless a person is willing to put in an enormous amount of time and effort.

But what I often do is to check some prominent GOP politicians who come to mind. For me, the first was Ted Cruz. Here’s what I found:

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas said Monday the timing of the latest indictment of former President Donald Trump by a Georgia grand jury is “nakedly political” and that it is another attempt of election interference.

“Of course, it is,” Cruz told Fox News when asked if the indictment is an effort to interfere with the 2024 election. “The timing is nakedly political. Every time more bad news comes out about Hunter Biden or Joe Biden, you can set a stopwatch within hours some clown goes in and indicts Donald Trump again.” …

… “It’s the same thing as Alvin Bragg, the wild George Soros partisan in New York. It’s the same thing as [Attorney General] Merrick Garland and [special counsel] Jack Smith. … What they want to do, they want a trial to attack Donald Trump; they’d like a trial in September or October of next year right before the election. The other people, I’m not going to speculate, the other nine. We’ll find out [this was before the names had been announced].

“Frankly, there were nine people who were unlucky enough to be standing somewhere in or around Donald Trump. Their target is political. This is not the rule of law. This is not enforcing the law fairly.”

Next up, Kevin McCarthy:

Marco Rubio:

Then I thought of Lindsey Graham – a sort of RINO who sometimes is sort of a Trump defender, and a search led me to this article entitled: “Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz lead Republican reaction to Trump’s fourth indictment: ‘I’m pissed,’ Sen Ted Cruz says in response to the indictment.” It’s interesting that it’s in a British paper. Some excerpts:

Mr Cruz (R – Texas), who led efforts to try and challenge the 2020 presidential election results, appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News programme decrying the indictment, before the release of any details.

“I’m pissed at these over and over and over again, if they’re indictments, it’ll be the fourth indictment of Donald Trump” Mr Cruz, who lost the Republican nomination for president to Mr Trump in 2016, said. “This is disgraceful. Our country’s over 200 years old. We’ve never once indicted a former president, or a candidate or a leading candidate for president and this is Joe Biden and this is the Democrats weaponizing the justice system because they’re afraid of the voters.”

Similarly, Sen Lindsey Graham (R – South Carolina) told Fox News how Mr Trump spent more on legal fees than he did on campaigning for president. Mr Graham had attempted to avoid testifying before Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s team as she probed into Mr Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Georgia but ultimately testified in November of last year.

“The American people can decide whether they want him to be president or not,” he said. “This should be decided at the ballot box and not in a bunch of liberal jurisdictions trying to put the man in jail. They’re weaponising the law in this country. They’re trying to take Donald Trump down.”

Then the article quoted criticism of the indictment by Marjorie Taylor Greene, Kevin McCarthy, and Marsha Blackburn, as well as these members of Congress:

House Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik called Ms Willis a “Far Left radical” district attorney who was weaponising her office.

“This blatant interference by the Far Left will not work,” she said. “President Trump will defeat these bogus charges and win back the White House in 2024.”

The X account for the Republican majority on the House Judiciary Committee, which Rep Jim Jordan (R-OH) leads, sent out a series of posts criticising the indictment.

I was surprised that even Chris Christie chimed in; I wasn’t expecting anything from him except “Goodie, goodie!” This actually is only marginally better than that:

Mr Christie explained that he believed there was no need for it after the federal indictment against Mr Trump that was handed down by Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Washington, DC grand jury investigation and argued Ms Willis was possibly driven by ego following her two-year probe at the state level.

Here are a few more:

“Another week, another sham indictment,” Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., said. “This time it’s a radical prosecutor in Fulton County who wants nothing more than to stop President Trump from participating in the 2024 Presidential Election.” …

“Today’s indictment is just the latest political attack in the Democrats’ WITCH HUNT against President Trump,” [Jim] Jordan posted on X. “He did nothing wrong!”

As I expected, nothing from McConnell or Mitt Romney.

Then I got tired and stopped. But the point is that plenty of GOP members have spoken out, but the news doesn’t filter down to most of us very easily and we have to go searching for it. So it’s a bad idea to make any assumptions without doing some fact-checking of your own.

It’s also the case that all these angry words don’t mean much. What about action? This post is about Congress, and I’m not at all sure they can do much about a non-federal actor such as Willis. As we’ve discussed before, they could impeach Garland, but their margin in the House is paper thin and I’m not sure the impeachment effort would succeed. Up to this point, it hasn’t gotten very far. And of course, Garland would never be convicted in the Senate, so removal isn’t in the picture.

Leaving Congress aside for a moment, here’s a suggestion for what Republicans could try: Lawfare. In a previous discussion of that possibility, I was unable to think of a specific charge or venue where it was likely to work, but that article I just linked had some practical and specific suggestions. Some of them might work, and they involve very real violations rather than trumped-up (forgive the pun) charges.

Reciprocal lawfare of this type is probably necessary because the Democrats must be made to fear some sort of tit-for-tat consequences. But it must be done intelligently and in venues where it is likely to succeed.

[NOTE: “Mike K’s” remark was limited to GOP members of Congress, but along the way I happened across this article on the pool of GOP presidential candidates. Here’s an excerpt:

Ramaswamy went beyond attacking the Georgia prosecutors bringing the charges, suggesting he’d be willing to assist in the former president’s legal defense.

“As someone who’s running for President against Trump, I’d volunteer to write the amicus brief to the court myself: prosecutors should not be deciding U.S. presidential elections, and if they’re so overzealous that they commit constitutional violations, then the cases should be thrown out & they should be held accountable,” Ramaswamy wrote on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter.

On Tuesday, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis denounced the indictment during a call with New England media outlets, promising to “end the weaponization of federal agencies like the DOJ and FBI.”

“I think it’s an example of this criminalization of politics,” DeSantis said. “I don’t think this is something that’s good for the country.”

More here on the further statements of DeSantis and others.]

Comments

What has the GOP said about the Trump Georgia indictment? And what could the GOP <i>do</i>? — 28 Comments

  1. If Republicans retaliate in kind, on the same sort of “three felonies a day” rules that no one can be sure they are in compliance with, then at least one of these things should follow:

    a) Dems back off on their abuse of law
    b) Dems and Republicans agree on some new laws that make it harder to abuse the law in this way, or reduce the “three felonies a day” issues
    c) Dems and Republicans are at least on an even playing field as far as lawfare is concerned

    After all, it’s not as though Dem politicians are so pure that they can’t possibly have violated something. They just are used to never been held accountable.

  2. I like some of those ideas in the Federalist article. And they involve actual criminal conduct, not criminalized political behavior.

  3. But the point is that plenty of GOP members have spoken out, but the news doesn’t filter down to most of us very easily and we have to go searching for it.

    Oh, the ‘news’ doesn’t filter down? One guess at the cause of that. Our ‘news’ media, who once were thought to gather current events of interest and publish them for public viewing, spend a lot of time these days telling us ‘what you need to know about xyz’ (the Seattle Times far in the lead these days).

    Since they’re set themselves up as arbiters of that caliber – and since they’ve long since decided that non-progressives obviously have no Need to Know anything counter to their latest tsunamis of hate against Trump in particular and non-progressives in general, since such knowledge might damage Democrat chances come next election – well OF COURSE such bits are carefully obliterated.

    They can only wish that the Federal censorship, which was (is) applied to social media to prevent the spread of ‘misinformation’, should have a Commissar in the editorial departments of each ‘news’ program. Just in case an uncensored bit or two leaks out despite them.

  4. I read the Charlie Kirk article and while I agree that the Democrats are a target rich environment for lawfare and I would like to see some Republican AG do something, there are also dangers to this approach (as you mention). The problem Republicans have in battling radicals like Bragg and Willis in a tit-for-tat legal battle, is that Republicans would like to maintain the Constitutional order on which this country was founded and many Democrats are perfectly happy to blow the whole thing up. If the Republicans veer into the insane unconstitutional territory of the Georgia indictments, then they are pretty much admitting that our current system is inadequate to deliver justice.

    There is also the danger that using lawfare against groups like BLM or Antifa would result in a violent response from the left. The Democrat establishment, with an assist from the media, would excuse the violence as a necessary part of the struggle for justice. Any violent response from the right would be severely punished.

    I think the fundamental problem we now face is that while both sides used to agree on a general framework to handle disputes, this is no longer the case. The left has decided that the old rules no longer apply. In the ruthless battle for power, the left is a couple of steps ahead. I wish I knew what the answer was to stop this madness.

  5. I agree that some GOP Congress critters have spoken up but late. How many beside Gaetz and MTG have tried to visit the J6 political prisoners ? The Trump indictments are outrageous but so are the J6 kangaroo courts. The worst of the judges in the J6 cases is scheduled to conduct Trump’s trial. Cruz has been very good on this matter but not many have spoken up. The Mar a Lago raid was just as outrageous.

  6. After all, it’s not as though Dem politicians are so pure that they can’t possibly have violated something. They just are used to never been held accountable.

    A rather late discovery. Ever notice that the Dems have some time ago completed their Long March Through the Institutions, and are happily dominant in the political lives of most large American cities and in the institutions which influence public opinion? Hollywood? Universities? Any school staffed by members of the Teachers Unions (by far the greatest dollar donors to the ‘progressive’ monoparty)? Government employees unions?

    Let’s have a proposal on how to hold Dem politicians accountable in the face of those massive monopolies.

  7. If the Republicans veer into the insane unconstitutional territory of the Georgia indictments, then they are pretty much admitting that our current system is inadequate to deliver justice.

    Well put, Mr. Harper, quite well.

    And yet? Who among us does not see that “our current system is inadequate to deliver justice” is a simple fact on the ground of our lives as lived? Who has not seen this since the time in which — to pick one instance alone as example — FBI Director Comey stood before the nation and declared no Federal Prosecutor would bring charges against Sec. of State Clinton for clear blackletter violations of law?

    Kinda late in the events to save an already dead regime, it seems to me.

  8. There is a recurring theme among some, and I suspect it is Trump supporters, that mainstream GOP never stand up. As you pointed out Neo, that is a false narrative.

    One of the arguments for Trump has always been that he is a fighter. Yep, throughout his life he has deployed armies of lawyers to fight his battles, often to squash over matched opponents. He, of course, did this solely for personal gain. I suppose you could say that he fought as President. It seemed that his primary weapon was ad hominem attacks. He actually won some skirmishes; but not battles.

    Who is a fighter? DeSantis for one. He has proven it in Florida where he has taken on one adversary of the people after another. And won. And I mean powerful and deep pockets adversaries, such as Disney and the Teacher’s Unions.

    DeSantis did his time in Fallujah with the Marines and the Seals. While he never fired a shot so far as I know, he was in the company of, and in support of, warriors and learned first hand how warriors conduct themselves. It appears that he transferred any lessons that he brought back from that experience into the political arena.

    Young Trump, of course, was excused from military service; but as he once bragged, he did attend a military prep school and that is just as challenging as serving on active duty. That was news to me; and I enjoyed a sardonic snicker when I heard it. But, apparently, braggadocio impresses some people..

  9. @Insufficiently Sensitive:Let’s have a proposal on how to hold Dem politicians accountable in the face of those massive monopolies.

    Asked and answered numerous times. There are jurisdictions where Republicans dominate, and those jurisdictions need to indict and prosecute Dems just like Dem-dominated Travis County does in Texas to Republicans such as Rick Perry and Tom Delay.

  10. @Oldflyer:As you pointed out Neo, that is a false narrative.

    Neo gave us numerous examples of Republicans talking. And she asked, what are they doing?

    “It’s also the case that all these angry words don’t mean much. What about action?”

    The Ever Trumpers and the rest of the Republican base all know perfectly well that the GOPe will try to tell them what they want to hear. That’s simply not good enough to effect change. There are plenty of people, Dems and Republicans, who seem to think that talking is some kind of action, but it isn’t.

  12. “It’s also the case that all these angry words don’t mean much. What about action?”

    While the level of these indictments has reached a new extremely high point, the highly dangerous nature and intent of some of this has been around for a while.

    Early morning raids were done in Wisconsin many years ago, with computers and files confiscated, purely because people were supporters and donors to Scott Walker. One has to question the seriousness of the GOP in general, when the handwriting has been clearly on the wall for some time.

  14. Banned Lizard:

    And yet it is a war with a general whom I believe is doomed to lose. That does not mean it’s clear what substitute general might win, however.

  15. BJ:

    That supposed quote of Churchill’s has never sounded correct to me. He ordinarily had a much more elegant and graceful way of expressing himself. It turns out that what he said was this:

    Winston Churchill’s official biographer, Sir Martin Gilbert, speaking of this quote, noted that Churchill actually said, ‘Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war.’ Four years later, during a visit to Australia, Harold Macmillan said the words usually—and wrongly—attributed to Churchill: “Jaw, jaw is better than war, war.” Credit: Harold Macmillan.

  16. Lawfare ideas – The Clinton campaign purportedly used the Steele dossier to try to flip Trump electors in 2016. That is supposedly why there were so many faithless electors in 2016, although it didn’t at all turn out as Hillary’s campaign intended.

    Regardless, if Trump’s activity is a RICO violation, why isn’t Hillary’s? Is there a Republican AG in a state having a RICO law with a statute of limitations that hasn’t run?

  18. Neo

    In these circumstances I don’t think there is a Republican other than Trump that has a shot. But to use a Churchill quote:

    If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed;
    if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may
    come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

    The left controls so much of what makes opinion, and, in general people are unwilling to exert themselves to find the facts I say fight on.

  20. Texas should indict Biden and as many administration officials as possible the next time someone is hurt or killed with respect to illegal immigration. Whether an illegal is the one hurt or the one hurting.

    Manslaughter would be nice.

    A preposterous charge? Unserious?

    All the better.

    Democrats have completely destroyed trust, good faith, honesty or any other positive aspect of American society. I don’t want to travel to or through any blue city. Because justice is not available if someone attacks me or my family.

    Obama’s transformation has happened. All that remains are the explosions and the fires.

  21. I am stunned that people are so confident that they KNOW how the next 15 months will play out.

    “Experts are no better at predicting the future than a dart-throwing chimp.” — Tetlock

    Right now, those confidently predicting the future have completely fumbled their humble. The moment someone cites a poll, I know they have stopped using their brains. Even in relatively sedate, ordinary election cycles, no one knows. Who predicted Biden? And NOW?! With both leading candidates in the midst of the most bizarre and destructive lawfare, corrupt proceedings, who can even predict the situation by Nov 2023?!

    Polls are crap. And polls right now about Nov 2024 aren’t even good enough to qualify as crap. People need to stop flinging polls at each other like chimps at the zoo flinging crap at each other. The chimps come off as more thoughtful and mature.

    Humans citing polls for what will happen far into the future are less accurate than a crap-flinging chimp.

  23. The is a strong whiff of irony in complaints that R politicians are all talk but no action coming from people commenting on a blog.

    All of the R politicians named are at least engaged in the arena. They are doing something, whether or not it is effective. The question is, “what can the rest of us do besides complain and be prophets of doom.

    The answer is simple but not glamorous. Engage in small ways. Contribute money, time and effort to candidates who can actually win even if they are not philosophically perfect. Volunteer as an election official. You don’t need to catch D crooks at your neighborhood polling place you just need to show your neighbors that at least in one small place our elections are still fair. Ask questions of you Progressive friends and family. Don’t lecture them. They won’t listen. Genuinely try to understand where they are coming from and in the process they may discover that they don’t actually know. Do something to actually take car of the poor, sick and addicted of our society and show your neighbors that charity begins with each of us not in Washington or the State capitol.

    We got where we are one step at a time. The only way back is one small step at a time. We may not survive the journey, but what choice do we have. Sitting down by the side of the road, proclaiming it all hopeless and criticizing those who trudge past you is a vote for who got us here.

    As bad as things look today, this is a picnic compared to Valley Forge. To quote Winston Churchill, “Never, never, never, never give up.”

  24. right like the 7 million, mcconnell handed lisa murkowskis one of the worse rubber stamps, the way he basically endorsed this gormless golem fetterman by proxy

  25. stan – You’re falling into willful blindness. We have polls (Trump’s favorable is at 38.5% in RCP). We have the results of the past three national elections. We have the results of both national elections in which Trump was on the ticket and maxed out at about 47% of the vote.

    It is like an NFL team that’s only won one game on an opponent’s penalty and is down by four touchdowns at halftime and the coach says, “Hey, on any given Sunday no one can know what will happen.”

  26. Impeachment would be something they could do. Mayorkas should have been impeached last year, Garland now, and Biden should be impeached after that. Would it help? There wouldn’t be enough votes in the Senate to impeach. The 50%+ of voters who chose Biden wouldn’t be convinced. Negative capablity and cognitive dissonance were mentioned here recently. A loyal Democrat could see all the evidence of Biden family corruption and Joe’s connection to it, and still claim that he is a decent, honest man of integrity. But, still, doesn’t he deserved to be impeached? And wouldn’t it take some of the wind out of the Democrats’ sails?

  28. the most corrupt thugs who are visiting on washington and atlanta, what sherman, and general ross and admiral cockburn in 1814, could not are putting the opposition candidate in prison for thought crime,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

↑