Who really stands watch over the House?
By Mark Alexander
Having returned last week from a few days of much-needed Thanksgiving respite, during which I made a point of avoiding any and all news, let me pick up where we left off.
The relentless Beltway news churn about the Democrat Party's ongoing efforts to undermine the Trump administration never took a rest. The "Schiff Show" charade to impeach Trump was handed off to Demo Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler for more testimony drama last week, on its way to a full House vote for Christmas.
On the way to Nadler, Republicans Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan, and Michael McCaul issued a 123-page report declaring: "The Democrats' impeachment inquiry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct; it is an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system. The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats' witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor."
The Republican report concludes: "The Democrats' impeachment inquiry paints a picture of unelected bureaucrats within the foreign policy and national security apparatus who fundamentally disagreed with President Trump's style, world view, and decisions. Their disagreements with President Trump's policies and their discomfort with President Trump's actions set in motion the anonymous, secondhand whistleblower complaint. Democrats seized on the whistleblower complaint to fulfill their years-old obsession with removing President Trump from office."
Yep, that pretty much sums it up.
Schiff then rushed out his committee's 300-page impeachment report, declaring that Trump "solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 U.S. presidential election" and "sought to undermine the integrity of the U.S. presidential election process."
As I have noted, if not for double standards, Democrat politicians wouldn't have any standards.
Regarding election interference, in 2016 it was the Clinton campaign and the Democrat National Committee that colluded with Russian operatives to fabricate the fake Trump/Putin dossier, which led to the Mueller investigation.
That baseless inquiry helped give Democrats control of the House in the 2018 midterm election, which is to say Democrats, in Schiff's words, "solicited the interference of a foreign government" and succeeded in their effort to "undermine the integrity" of that election.
The Demo report further notes the main focus of the hearings: "President Trump ordered the suspension of $391 million in vital military assistance" to Ukraine "without any legitimate foreign policy, national security, or anti-corruption justification."
But remember, it was Biden as vice president in 2015 and a group of Democrat senators in 2018 who threatened Ukraine in order to, in Biden's case, protect his son Hunter and, in the Demo senators' case, demand dirt on Trump to assist the failing Mueller investigation.
So now it's Nadler who will endeavor to spin the Demos' MAGA sabotage into something even bigger ahead of next year's election. According to the Democrat Daily, a.k.a. The Washington Post, "House Democrats are debating whether to expand articles of impeachment to include charges beyond abuse of power in the Ukraine controversy."
Who'd've thunk it? Oh, wait. We said this was exactly what the Democrats would do as soon as they announced their impeachment plans.
As our Managing Editor Nate Jackson wrote yesterday, "Democrats think combining the fizzled impeachment coup 1.0 (Trump/Russia) with its coup 2.0 sequel (Trump/Ukraine) is the combo to defeat Trump. Color us skeptical."
Now, with all that out of the way, this column is really about a group of individuals who have overwatch on the House impeachment farce. No, I'm not referring to the news recyclers who report every minute of this political theater as if it were a spectator blood sport in order to support their advertising revenue. I am referring to a group of remarkable individuals above the House chamber.
You may already know about the many subtle ways in which the foundation of American Liberty — the irrevocable fact that we are endowed by our Creator with "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" — is reflected symbolically around our nation's capital.
For example, the cap on the 555-foot Washington Monument is engraved, "Laus Deo," Latin for "Praise be to God." The great oak doors leading into the Supreme Court chamber are engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, representing the Ten Commandments, and the relief above the mahogany bench where the Supreme Court justices sit during session is likewise marble engraved with a stone tablet and the numerals I through X. In fact, monuments and engravings honoring the Judeo-Christian foundation of American law are found all across that town.
But what you may not know is that forming a ring around the House of Representatives chamber are 23 bas-reliefs of noted law-givers — those whose principles are the foundation for our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, as well as the Rule of Law they enshrine. There is one in particular that is most noteworthy.
You have likely seen our national motto, "In God We Trust," inscribed in large gold letters above and behind the speaker's rostrum in the House chamber. Above those words behind the rostrum is a quote from the venerable Daniel Webster that serves as the starting point for the 23 reliefs that look down upon the room: "Let us develop the resources of our land, call forth its powers, build up its institutions, promote all its great interests, and see whether we also, in our day and generation, may not perform something worthy to be remembered."
But it is the 28-inch reliefs above the gallery doors, surrounding and looking down upon the chamber, sculpted in white Vermont marble, that should give pause and warrant reflection upon all proceedings in that room and whether such proceedings might be "worthy to be remembered."
In order clockwise around the chamber from Webster's quote are the images of George Mason (Virginia Declaration of Rights), Robert Joseph Pothier, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Edward I, Alfonso X, Gregory IX, Louis IX, Justinian I, Tribonian, Lycurgus, Hammurabi (The Code of Hammurabi), Moses (The Ten Commandments), Solon, Aemilius Papinianus, Gaius, Maimonides, Suleiman the Magnificent, Innocent III, Simon de Montfort, Hugo Grotius, William Blackstone (Commentaries on the Laws of England), Napoleon and, of course, Thomas Jefferson (The Declaration of Independence).
Now, I would argue that there are some American Founders whose reliefs should also be included within that ring of honor — most notably that of George Washington. I would further argue that the man whose life and teaching is the centerpiece of the most important and most produced (more than five billion copies) book of all time, Jesus of Nazareth, should be there.
But here is what I find most interesting about those reliefs. Of the 23, all but one are facing left or right, all gazing toward the full front relief of the singularly important relief that is centered directly across from the dais occupied by the speaker of the House. The 11 profiles in the eastern half of the chamber face left and 11 in the western half face right.
They all look toward the frontal relief of Moses, the Old Testament's essential lawgiver.
When all the rancorous debate within the Judiciary Committee and the full House is concluded, and as Nancy Pelosi gavels the House to order for the inevitable impeachment referral vote to the Senate, she should remember those who are watching and, most notably, whom she is addressing directly across the room.
Mark Alexander is the executive editor of the Patriot Post.