“Many of these lawmakers on the other side of the aisle who had their hair on fire about what appears to have been an inadvertent action taken by Congressman Bowman, to which he is now being held accountable for, within the criminal justice system, regularly defend violent individuals who overran the Capitol on Jan. 6, as part of an effort to halt a peaceful transfer of power. And these violent individuals brutally beat and seriously injured 140 police officers, on the day of the insurrection. And many of them, who are having a panic attack, publicly, about Jamaal Bowman have actually defended or refused to comment on the violent mob on January 6.”

—House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), the man every Democrat in the House voted for to be Speaker, “explaining” why Rep. Bowman shouldn’t be censured by the House for breaking the law, indeed two laws, as well as violating the House ethics code. 

To be blunt, this statement by Jeffries exhibits the approximate ethical comprehension of a Cocker Spaniel. It reveals him to be a shameless liar and an ethics corrupter:

1. Bowman’s act does not “appear” to have been inadvertent. The video makes it spectacularly clear that Bowman pulled the fire alarm deliberately, and knew what he was doing. Moreover, Bowman, by pleading guilty, formally admits that he committed the misdemeanor of setting off a false alarm, and that crime requires intent.

2. Someone send Jeffries a copy of the Ethics Alarms Rationalizations List, please. The opinions and statements made by Republicans regarding the January 6 riot do not and cannot change Bowman’s culpability or the seriousness of his offense.

3. Moreover, those rioters (it was not an insurrection: will Democrats ever stop flogging that Big Lie?) have been prosecuted and severely punished for committing the same felony that Bowman committed: attempting to obstruct the legislative process of the United States of America. Jeffries’ argument rebuts itself.

4. Jeffries’ “hair on fire” commentary shows that he doesn’t believe attempting to obstruct a vote, breaking two laws, lying about it repeatedly, then confessing that it was a lie to get minimal punishment, then continuing to lie about it, further demolishing public trust and respect for Congress, is anything members of the House should treat as objectionable and worthy of rebuke.

And this is the elected official House Democrats unanimously feel is the most qualified individual to hold the most powerful position in the U.S. Government after the President.

It is mind-boggling that Ethics Alarms has had to write nine posts related to Bowman’s unconscionable actions and statements, which in a rational, ethical setting should have constituted an open and shut case of egregious misconduct disqualifying him from serving in Congress.

Meanwhile, the mainstream news media treats the debacle with less urgency that it devoted to “covfefe.”