Democrats’ ‘Sergeant Schultz strategy’ on Chavez and Swalwell
Bettmann/Contributor/Getty Images
Chávez has been dead since 1993; the first accusations against him go back decades earlier. Swalwell first began serving in Congress in 2013; accusations of questionable conduct began almost immediately. In both cases, there were many episodes and many years.
Yet during this time, we are supposed to believe that no word about these two men got out within Democrat circles. The word was certainly out about both. There were reports about Chavez’s sexual improprieties that go back to the time when he was still alive. Swalwell’s seriously questionable decisions go way back, too.
Neither the inner ring of Democratic Party nor the House of Representatives is heavily populated. People know each other. They talk to each other. Yet we are supposed to believe that none of them talked about these episodes.
Instead, Democrats were elevating both. Chávez has schools and streets named after him; there are public holidays; there is a national monument to him in California, which Senate Democrats just blocked from being abolished. Swalwell was not diverted from moving up the California Democrat ladder. Until days ago, he was the front-runner for the state’s gubernatorial nomination.
While both stories have sickening similarities, the most overlooked one is the Democrats’ ignoring them for years.
Both scandals were covered up until someone uncovered them and made all the details public. Then Democrats were forced to run for cover themselves. Now they are rushing to run from them and make us forget that they, in all likelihood, knew significant details about both.
This is nothing new in their behavior. We are supposed to believe that the same thing happened with President Biden’s incapacity. With Hunter Biden’s behavior.
The pattern of admitting only when a thing is undeniable, and despite that it was obvious earlier, is all too clear. It is not simply the product of being above the rules. It is also the product of an establishment news media that Democrats know regularly avoid covering their scandals for as long as humanly possible. And when they are forced to cover them, Democrats know they will not ask the broader question: How did you not know? And when the rumors began to swirl — as they did in both cases — how did you not bother to see if they were true?
For both Chavez and Swalwell, Democrats had to ignore evidence before their eyes. They had to ignore the evidence brought to them. They had to either explicitly or tacitly construct an excuse. And they nonetheless let both men move forward despite what they knew or would have known had they simply looked. Now they want us to believe that, in the words of Sergeant Schultz, “I know noooooothing.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.