Today's Paper Search In the news Latest Traffic #Gazette200 Listen Digital replica FAQ Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles + Games Archive
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

The Roman satirist Juvenal, in a famous passage, asked, "Who will watch the watchmen?"

That problem of policing the police has troubled Western thinkers from Plato to the American founders.

The framers of the Constitution set in place a brilliant series of legislative, executive and judicial checks and balances to thwart the abuse of power by the powerful. Their pessimistic take on human nature was that all power corrupts. Inevitably, elites will insist that they should not be subject to the very rules they enforce on others.

The sexual-abuse crises within the contemporary Catholic Church arose from the de facto exemptions from the law given to priests. Too many assumed that men of faith were exempt from prosecution because as holy men they would be the last to violate the trust of minors.

One of the ironic things about the Me Too movement was that some of the worst offenders were powerful progressive men such as Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, NBC host Matt Lauer and PBS interviewer Charlie Rose. They all apparently believed that their loud liberal credentials gave them immunity from being held accountable for their harassment.

Some of the feminist organizers of the recent Women's March, such as Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour, have been linked to racist and anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. They apparently assumed that as supposed victims, they could not be viewed as being sympathetic to victimizers.

Given President Trump's unconventional background, his wheeler-dealer past and the hatred he incurs from the left, few ever give him the benefit of the doubt. The paradoxical result is that his tenure in just two years has become the most investigated, the most audited and the most closely examined presidency in history.

Half the country apparently believes Trump cannot be trusted. The result is that everything he says and does is the object of pushback, opposition and audit.

In contrast, his most frequent accusers--the media--have set themselves up as the country's moral paragon. Journalists now see themselves as social justice warriors who are immune from the scrutiny to which they subject others.

The result of such moral exemption has led to journalism's nadir, with an unprecedented lack of public confidence in the media. "Fake news" now abounds, from CNN to BuzzFeed.

Recently, BuzzFeed (which first published the unsubstantiated Steele dossier) alleged that there was proof Trump had ordered his erstwhile lawyer, convicted felon Michael Cohen, to lie. One of the co-authors of the hit piece, Anthony Cormier, admits that he has not seen the evidence his sources cited. The other co-author, Jason Leopold, was once convicted of grand larceny and has admitted to substance abuse and lying. Leopold has been cited for past unethical journalistic practices and been disavowed by a number of his past employers.

No matter. Cormier and Leopold's reporting was published as an ethical takedown of the president of the United States based on supposed sources inside the special counsel's investigation. BuzzFeed has stood by the story.

After a few hours, the BuzzFeed yarn drew a rare rebuke from special counsel Robert Mueller's team, which disputed the veracity of the story.

The Department of Justice and the FBI are supposed to be our pre-eminent guardians of justice. But former director James Comey, former deputy director Andrew McCabe, former general counsel James Baker and several other top FBI officials have either resigned, retired or been fired--and some may soon be facing indictments themselves.

With Mueller, the question is not whether he should investigate possible Russian collusion in the 2016 election, but whether we need a special, special counsel to oversee the conduct of Mueller's team itself.

Peter Strzok, a former member of Mueller's team, violated a number of ethical protocols. He was romantically involved with another FBI official, Lisa Page, and the two exchanged a number of text messages critical of Trump.

One of Mueller's top prosecutors, Andrew Weissmann, was warned in August 2016 by Bruce Ohr, a former associate deputy attorney general, about the suspect, biased and unverified nature of the Steele dossier. But Weissmann apparently didn't mind that the dossier was used by his colleagues to deceive the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court into granting a warrant to spy on an American citizen.

Call it karma or attribute it to Nemesis, the Greek goddess of retribution, but when anyone assumes that they should be uniquely above all suspicion, they will eventually earn suspicion.

------------v------------

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.

Editorial on 01/24/2019

Print Headline: The Buzz of suspicion

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsor Content

You must be signed in to post comments

Comments

  • mrcharles
    January 24, 2019 at 1:08 p.m.

    Guess a world filled with coincidences. Guess connecting dots to those who have an opinion is important. Guess as things add up they dont add up.

    In contrast, his most frequent butt kissers --the media of the right with fox entertainment [ when not harassing female employees-- or is that a myth too?] [ fox and friends best comedy show on TV] --have set themselves up as the country's moral paragon [ see previous as to the irony of this] by saying Well, the deity tells us others do bad things and "Look their is a car chase".

    putins puppy and his merry band of chaos administration with the Tasmanian devil cartoon caricuture they say is a progeny from Ted nugents friend, the pious Huckster, will spin like a tilt-a-whirl on steroids [ see chris wallace interview- a smart ploy by fox in seeing that playing both sides of the ongoing fruits of russia and putin can be useful] ....

    hoover institution , like fair and balanced like sean hannity.

  • GeneralMac
    January 24, 2019 at 1:58 p.m.

    (4th paragraph)

    The reason the Catholic Church got in trouble wass people were very naive40 -50 years ago when most of this happened.

    People would never allow priests to have access to their YOUNG DAUGHTERS despite the fact they looked as priests as "holy"

    They saw no problem with their SONS having unsupervised contact with priests because...."the priest is male"

    The vast majority of the abuse was done by HOMOSEXUAL priests as years ago the priesthood was a SAFE place where HOMOSEXUALS could keep their "secret" and be in a "safe" occupation.

    MANY, MANY priests from 40-50 years ago were HOMOSEXUALS.
    MOST served honorably.
    SOME did not.

    Young men entering the seminary today are being screened much more carefully than years back.

    FINALLY, the church is learning that it is just as dangerous to allow young males to have close contact with HOMOSEXUAL priests as it is to allow young females to have close contact with STRAIGHT priests.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT