Kevin McCarthy suffers from ‘whataboutism’ in defending Trump and his indictments | Opinion
Kevin McCarthy was back with a case of “whataboutism” during his visit to Clovis on Thursday.
The Republican House speaker from Bakersfield, whose 20th District now includes Clovis, showed that political condition in a short meeting with local reporters. Just what is “whataboutism”?
It is a strategy being employed by McCarthy and other top Republicans in Congress to deflect attention away from the multiple indictments facing former President Donald Trump by raising the “what about” question in reference to President Biden and his son Hunter.
A few hours before McCarthy spoke to the reporters, Trump was arraigned for a third time in a federal court, this time for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results that made Joe Biden, not Trump, president.
A reporter asked McCarthy for his “thoughts on the indictment and the charges leveled against the former president.”
“I didn’t see what happened,” McCarthy replied. “I have been in meetings all day. But one thing I do know: It really begins to feel like it is a two-justice system.”
That kicked off his latest round of whatabout, namely, what about Hunter Biden.
Attempting to prove Biden is corrupt
McCarthy spent the next few minutes sharing details that have come out recently in congressional hearings led by GOP members in an attempt to show how President Biden’s son Hunter tried to use his father, then vice president, in his business affairs.
McCarthy noted that President Biden has said he did not talk to his son about business deals. “We have now found that the business partner says the vice president called in 20 times,” McCarthy said. That business partner is Devon Archer, who has been a witness at the hearings.
A transcript of Archer’s testimony to the House Oversight and Accountability Committee was released on Thursday, and as reported by The Washington Post, Archer said that there were about 20 times the son put his father on the phone to sell the family brand. Archer said, as reported by The Post: “I think you have to understand that there was no business conversation about a cap table or a fee or anything like that. It was, you know, just general niceties and, you know, conversation in general, you know, about the geography, about the weather, whatever it may be.”
It needs to be noted that Hunter Biden’s current legal issues deal with misdemeanor counts for unpaid taxes and for possessing a gun for 11 days in 2018 while he was a substance abuser.
Trump’s new indictment
Trump, on the other hand, is accused in the latest indictment of his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021 rioting at the U.S. Capitol.
Trump is accused of scheming to have fake electors in certain states to change election results; then trying to get then Vice President Mike Pence to recognize those fake electors so the election certification could be changed with Trump as the winner.
The indictment says that Trump lied frequently about the election outcome and made claims of widespread fraud, even when told by aides and lawyers that he had lost and that his fraud charges were false.
In short, Trump is accused of trying to overturn the will of voters to remain in power. Hunter Biden is accused of ethical lapses involving tax issues. He has admitted he was addicted to crack cocaine and faces a separate charge of buying a gun while he was using drugs.
There is a world of difference between the two. There can be no “whatabout.”
McCarthy also characterized the indictments against Trump as purely political prosecutions. But, in fact, McCarthy doesn’t know any more about the evidence gathered against Trump than what has been released so far in initial filings. It is not right for the speaker to prejudge a prosecution he does not know in full.
“Whataboutism” does not serve America well. McCarthy needs to let justice be done for both Trump and Hunter Biden. Otherwise, he is promoting a two-tier system of political justice.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREWhat are editorials, and who writes them?
Editorials represent the collective opinion of the The Fresno Bee Editorial Board. They do not reflect the individual opinions of board members, or the views of Bee reporters in the news section. Bee reporters do not participate in editorial board deliberations or weigh in on board decisions.
The board includes Opinion Editor Juan Esparza Loera, opinion writer Tad Weber, McClatchy California Opinion Editor Marcos Bretón and Hannah Holzer, McClatchy California Opinion op-ed editor.
We base our opinions on reporting by our colleagues in the news section, and our own reporting and interviews. Our members attend public meetings, call sources and follow-up on story ideas from readers just as news reporters do. Unlike reporters, who are objective, we share our judgments and state clearly what we think should happen based on our knowledge.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
Tell us what you think
You may or may not agree with our perspective. We believe disagreement is healthy and necessary for a functioning democracy. If you would like to share your own views on events important to the Fresno region, you may write a letter to the editor (220 words or less) or email an op-ed (600 words). Either can be sent to letters@fresnobee.com. Due to a high volume of submissions, we are not able to publish everything we receive.