'The strongman principle': Attorney explains the dark meaning behind a Republican's fight with the 1/6 probe
Rep. Scott Perry (R-Penn.) is at the center of the latest developments in the House Select Committee's Ja. 6 investigation. In response to Rep. Bennie Thompson's (D-Miss.) letter seeking Perry's "voluntary cooperation," the lawmaker echoed former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows as he noted his refusal to cooperate with investigators.
On Tuesday, December 21, the Pennsylvania lawmaker took to Twitter with a series of tweets. "I stand with immense respect for our Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the Americans I represent who know that this entity is illegitimate, and not duly constituted under the rules of the US House of Representatives," he tweeted.
Perry continued, "I decline this entity’s request and will continue to fight the failures of the radical Left who desperately seek distraction from their abject failures of crushing inflation, a humiliating surrender in Afghanistan, and the horrendous crisis they created at our border."
(1/2) I stand with immense respect for our Constitution, the Rule of Law, and the Americans I represent who know that this entity is illegitimate, and not duly constituted under the rules of the US House of Representatives.— RepScottPerry (@RepScottPerry) 1640102653
Now, a new op-ed is examining how Perry may have laid the groundwork for a crash course and legal battle with Congress. NBC News contributor Teri Kanefield noted the significance of responses like Perry's.
"These responses constitute an attack on the legitimacy of the committee and the government itself and," Kanefield wrote, "like the string of losing election fraud cases, seem to be a right-wing propaganda move and not an actual legal strategy."
She continued: "On one level, Perry and the committee are clashing over something very basic: Did Trump or Joe Biden win in 2020? But more broadly it is a battle over the legitimacy of our government and from where that government draws its authority."
She also offered a detailed comparison of the "rule-of-law principle" in comparison to the rules Trump and his allies play by.
"The committee is operating under the rule-of-law principle, which assumes the legitimacy of our government and the existence of objective facts," she wrote. "Trump and his pals are operating under the strongman principle: They accept whatever Trump says as truth and ignore facts and court rulings that contradict the words of their leader."
Although it is reportedly clear that the committee has substantial evidence of the role Perry allegedly played in former President Donald Trump's plot to overturn the election, Kanefield closed with one compelling question that has yet to be answered. "Will a clear majority of Americans believe the evidence amassed by the committee and accept court verdicts? Or will a dangerous percentage of voters ignore it if a charismatic leader instructs them to do so?"
She concluded by writing, "In a democracy, after all, the fate of the nation rests with the voters."