April 14, 2018

Without Due Process; the Impeachment of Eric Greitens

Timothy Birdnow

The Missouri legislature is beginning the process of impeaching embattled Governor Eric Greitens, according to NPR. A panel is going to make recommendations on impeachment shortly.

This is being driven by a report issued by the House Special Investigative Committee on Oversight which was full of allegations by the woman in question. Greitens has yet to have his day in court.

According to the NPR article:
"The document contains testimony from "Witness 1," a woman who alleged that Greitens subjected her to sexual and physical abuse.

She testified that during their first encounter in 2015, "for whatever reason, I trusted him" but that she didn't want to "do anything physical with him." Nevertheless she said that is what ensued.

Ultimately, she testified, he took a partially nude photo of her without her consent and threatened to make it public if she revealed their affair because he wanted to protect himself while he was running for office."

End excerpt.

In typical liberal fashion, the NPR article fails to state material information that is critical to the story. For instance, the woman complained that Greitens spanked and hit her. Well, yes, but that is what you do when you are indulging a "50 Shades of Gray" fantasy; sadomasochistic sex entails hitting, spanking, and abusing. It is a perversion, sure, and revolting, but when it is concensual it is not a crime, or justification for legal action.

The NPR story fails to mention that the woman admitted the photograph might have been a dream. The story also fails to mention that Greitens and the woman continued to have sexual relations well past this episode; in point of fact, they had a full blown affair. Hardly sexual assault.

Her ex-husband confronted her and said (while illegally taping her secretly) that she had been raped and she agreed. Well, gee, a woman trying to sve her marriage says agrees to her husband's charitable excusing of a lengthy affair as rape. What a surprise.

I give you Mo. Ann. Stat. § 542.400. which states:

"It is unlawful to record an "oral communication,” which is defined as "any communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.”

Since this woman's conversation with her husnand was assumed private, he clearly violated this legal precept. So, it's not o.k. for a man to take a nude photo of his lover (which he then tells her he deleted) but it IS o.k. for a husband who is seeking a divorce to record his ex-wife without her knowlege? Seems to me the ex broke the same law that Greitens is being accused of violating. And the prosecution wants to use this as evidence against the Governor.

I am personally disgusted by Greitens but I do not think he is being treated either fairly or legally. And it angers me the state GOP has so easily thrown him under the bus; even Josh Hawley, the Republican candidate for Claire McCaskill's seat, has demanded Greitens resign. You do not, ever, cave on such a partisan attack. When you do you embolden the enemy to use such dirty tricks again. I don't understand why the GOP is so completely clueless to waging politics. Have they never read Sun Tzu? (no, of course) Macchiavelli? This sort of thing is done a certain way, and publicly caving is a recipe for total disaster.

Especially with the timing of this, which was brought out entirely for political purposes. The Prosecutor is a radical Black Lives Matter supporter who has been heavily financed by George Soros and has engaged in considerable prosecutorial misconduct, including failing to disclose, hiring a private investigator rather than using the states own resources, and a host of other things. She sought a November 1 trial date to maximize the political damage. In short, this is a witch hunt. Granted, Greitens terrible behavior made it easy, but it is a railroading nonetheless. And the cowardly lions of the GOP are going right along with it.

Look at this as a matter of war; would the allies in WWII have surrendered territory because there were German sympathizers there? No, they would have fought all the harder. You don't give ground to an enemy because he might hit you, unless it is a feint. When we took the beaches at Normandy we didn't retreat when gunfire rained down on our troops. Politics is no different.

I don't know what it is but putting an R behind someone's name seems to shrivel their courage. I'd like to commission a neurological study to explain the phenomenon some day.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 782 words, total size 5 kb.

What colour is a green orange?

17kb generated in CPU 0.02, elapsed 0.2725 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.2575 seconds, 92 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.