- Friend of Boehner had special responsibility and a pulpit to make things happen
- But poor Trey, it wasn’t ‘Deuce’s’ fault he talked a great game but accomplished very little.
“And perhaps that explains why Gowdy, along with some of the 38 other retiring Republicans, don’t want to stay in Congress. It says a lot more about the institution. Without control of the White House, a party can raise a little hell before giving in to the president. With control of the White House, they just do what he wants. “
Anybody know what this guy’s talking about? Does he? Read this Philip Wegmann article at Washington Examiner: Graphic not in original.
A weak and inept Congress crushed Trey Gowdy
Congress has crushed the spirit of Rep. Trey Gowdy.
In a recent interview with Vice News, the South Carolina Republican admits that he’s not just counting down the days until his time in politics is over. Gowdy is literally counting the number of flights left, the number of trips to-and-from D.C., before he can retire for good (it’s 19). Why?
“To the extent men judge themselves based on what they do for a living,” Gowdy tells the camera, “I don’t have a lot to show for the last seven years.”
That’s interesting coming from Gowdy. While other members were naming post offices, he was at the center of every major investigation. YouTube is full of viral clips showing the former prosecutor shredding everyone from former IRS Administrator John Koskinen to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Measured against the average congressional career, Gowdy has achieved more than most.
But Gowdy isn’t satisfied anymore. Outspoken and aggressive during the Obama administration, he has been relatively silent and reserved during the Trump administration, disappointing those who had hoped he’d defend the administration from the Russia investigation. It seems Gowdy just doesn’t to have the appetite for it anymore.
And perhaps that explains why Gowdy, along with some of the 38 other retiring Republicans, don’t want to stay in Congress. It says a lot more about the institution. Without control of the White House, a party can raise a little hell before giving in to the president. With control of the White House, they just do what he wants.
Either way, Congress has willingly surrendered its authority and made itself ineffective. The once-feared as an legislature is mostly a rubber stamp where members cede power to administrative agencies to avoid the responsibility of governing and oversight and the tough choices that make reelection difficult. In short, Congress doesn’t really do anything anymore.
Look back at the oversight Gowdy did on his committees. Sure he went viral and became a conservative hero. But aside from scoring political points, what good did it do? His two most prominent witnesses, Koskinen and Clinton, faced no serious consequences.
Gowdy is right. He doesn’t have much to show for the last seven years. But it’s not all his fault. It’s Congress’.
Earlier this week, in a piece titled “Better call Saul“, we linked to a story we had posted more than 3 years ago. It, too, related to Mr. Gowdy and was entitled “Jury still out on Gowdy”
Some excerpts , we believe, are especially pertinent today as we near the end of deliberations and hopefully get a verdict on the now outgoing congressman.
Our own verdict is that Trey Gowdy was someone from whom we expected a lot and, in the end, got little.
These excerpts, we think go a long way in explaining what seem to be Gowdy’s ‘inexplicably marginal” performance over his time in Congress and the advice he gives President Trump as he heads for the door:
“Are the separation of powers, the rule of law, the power of an opposition party in congressional majority… the US Constitution itself, so fragile, and ultimately so meaningless as a protection for a free society? Or is it that no one will apply them?”
Gowdy has been talking a good game and we all had great expectations, but so far I’ve not seen much to be optimistic about. I’m in Andrew McCarthy’s camp who says he is greatly concerned and disappointed: (McCarthy’s comments in red)
“Taking on Clinton, Gowdy repeats, “is not my job. That’s the job of the RNC, and the Republican candidate for president. … If they hired me for that job they hired the wrong guy. Why would you hire a not-even-two-term guy, all of whose training tells him to go where facts take him, who doesn’t even go to NRCC [National Republican Congressional Committee] dinners, who’s lousy at fundraisers, who hates to travel? Because that’s who you’re getting.”
“The job he was appointed to do last year by House Speaker John Boehner was to chair a special investigatory committee on Benghazi after the Republican right roared its disapproval of previous failed inquiries. What does he know right now, I ask him, based on numerous witness appearances and 850 pages already submitted by the State Department?
“Not all that much. He says he’s “seen no evidence” that Clinton ordered a stand-down of security forces in Benghazi, contributing to the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans on Sept. 11, 2012 , or any of the other more damning things the right typically alleges.
And if anyone expects him to chase the presumptive frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination to the gates of political hell to get tens of thousands of her personal emails, well, don’t bank on it. Right now, Gowdy wants an independent arbitrator to decide whether those 30,000 or so emails contain anything significant material to his probe, and he says he’d even accept a respected Democratic professional like Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz for that task.
And here are a couple more of Gowdy’s remarks contained in that same article as revealed by McCarthy:
But when I point out that another committee he serves on recently accepted a high-level witness’s mere “certification” or a personal oath that his submitted emails were complete, Gowdy says a similar compromise might be possible with Clinton.
Yes, this defender of truth said that with reference to Hillary Clinton, who never lied about nothing.
In our article three years ago we referenced a Politico report / interview
When Gowdy attended a White House meeting at which his fellow GOP congressman bitterly complained about mischaracterization of their views, Obama retorted: “How do you think I feel when the right is constantly questioning my faith and my birth?” Recalls Gowdy, “I was really struck by that. That was a real authentic moment.”
Did that “weak” Congress force Mr. Gowdy to say those things? Recall the Wegmann opinion piece we started this posting with: “But Gowdy isn’t satisfied anymore. Outspoken and aggressive during the Obama administration, he has been relatively silent and reserved during the Trump administration, disappointing those who had hoped he’d defend the administration from the Russia investigation. It seems Gowdy just doesn’t to have the appetite for it anymore.”
“Outspoken”, perhaps…but “aggressive”…?? DLH
R Mall adds:
Indeed where was the incisive prosecutor mind on the matter Gowdy referred to as an “authentic moment”. We guess you just believe someone if they have tears in their eyes or express umbrage? As we remarked at the time:
Gowdy accepts a logical fallacy, a switcharoo. The GOP congressmen were complaining that Obama’s own operation were mischaracterizing THEM . Essentially that he, Obama, and people that report to him, are the perps. Obama’s complaint — that people who do not report to those congressman, who might even think those congressman are weak hitters, accuse or remark (not without evidence ) things about Obama that if false, he could clear up expeditiously. Obama’s authenticity on a lot is in question, including more broadly defined, did he ever claim to be a foreign student? Where do his sympathies lie? And much more that is easily subject to plain evidence as rebuttal if ever released by him.
I wonder if Gowdy’s start on parting reflections are an effort to appeal for forgiveness by a few Democrats “adding nuance” that he is absolutely devoted to the truth and nothing but the truth (even if he is not very good following through on it). I wonder if this is a bit about taking the edge off of a few in the Democrat party he might need for a lifetime appointment?
