Due Process and Matt Gaetz: A Response to Glenn Greenwald
Greenwald's response to the allegations against Rep. Gaetz reveals an inability to consider circumstantial evidence.
The last week and a half have been tense for Rep. Gaetz, who has been under investigation for alleged sex trafficking. Such tension has garnered many reactions, with some Republicans hesitating to defend the congressman from Florida. Still, some would hesitate to count Gaetz out even as the investigation reveals more about Gaetz’s relationship with the alleged sex trafficker, Joel Greenberg, and a 17-year-old girl. Glenn Greenwald, who is known for his work with Edward Snowden as well as his work launching the Intercept, is one such person.
Though not defending the alleged activities, Greenwald recently published an article on Substack, arguing that how the public has reacted to the Gaetz scandal not only violates Rep. Gaetz’s due process rights but also lends itself to the hysterical tendencies of the media. Moreover, Greenwald seems to see the recent scandal as part of a larger effort by online activists who seek to patrol the sex lives of private individuals.
Greenwald was so passionate about the issue that he dedicated a video to the same topic, making many of the same arguments that he made in his article.
From the beginning of his article, Greenwald makes a bold claim, that the media believe that Matt Gaetz is a predator who forces girls into prostitution despite their age. Such a framing device is useful for Greenwald, as it allows him to establish the media as the wellspring of Matt Gaetz hysteria.
That Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) is a pedophile, a sex trafficker, and an abuser of women who forces them to prostitute themselves and use drugs with him is a widespread assumption in many media and political circles. That is true despite the rather significant fact that not only has he never been charged with (let alone convicted of) such crimes, but also no evidence has been publicly presented that any of it is true. He has also vehemently denied all of it.”-Greenwald’s introductory premise.
This position is the most extreme version of the coverage that Gaetz has endured, making it all too easy for Greenwald to attack. It allows him to appear more rational than that of his counterparts and allows him to ignore circumstantial evidence against Gaetz. This framing, though not clearly intentional, is remarkably convenient to Greenwald’s argument.
But more than that, Greenwald argues that the allegations against Gaetz, while not inherently true or false, are consumed by an online frenzy that has previously sought to smear him. Citing several tweets, some random and some prominent, Greenwald points out that some commentators have actively engaged in speculative judgments against the Florida congressman without any reason to do so. The implication, therefore, is that the current allegations are subject to those same forces.
Serving as Greenwald’s prime example of rhetorical irresponsibility is Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wy) who, in an interview with Face The Nation, described the “charges” against Gaetz as “sickening.” However, Greenwald claims that such a statement is not only false but that by saying that the charges against Gaetz are concerning to her, Cheney has inadvertently made a false statement and that she is spreading lies that Gaetz has been charged with a crime.
His main source of evidence for this claim is a brief Daily Beast article that describes her statements during the interview. What does not mention in his article or his video is that Cheney explicitly recognized that there was an investigation, not a conclusive charge and that the term “charges” was colloquial for the allegations against Gaetz. Indeed, Cheney actively avoided answering questions regarding Gaetz throughout the interview, refusing to comment on the ongoing investigation. If Cheney was trying to argue that Gaetz was facing charges, then she’s doing a terrible job of it.
The assertions that the public—representatives, journalists, and Twitter commentators—have irresponsibly spread rumors about Gaetz ignore the significance of the evidence against Gaetz and the frequency of new revelations in this anti-Gaetz saga. Though Greenwald notes that states have inconsistent ages of consent the fact of the matter remains that it is federally illegal to proposition anyone under the age of 18 for sex along interstate lines. Meaning that it is illegal for Gaetz to have someone under 18 years engage in a “commercial sex act” even if other states have lower ages of consent.
Though Greenwald has attempted to play down, the severity of the alleged wrong-doing by Gaetz by comparing it to the scandals surrounding progressive candidate Alex Morse, the truth is that there is no point of similarity between Morse’s case and the allegations against Gaetz. Gaetz’s position is clearly different because Greenwald notes in passing, Gaetz’s Venmo payments to Joel Greenberg, an alleged sex trafficker, are public knowledge. Said payments involved Gaetz sending $900 to Greenberg, who, in turn, paid three women with a total of exactly $900. One of these women turned 18 only a few months prior. If there was no evidence of wrong-doing on Gaetz’s part, this would’ve died out a long time ago, but they aren’t going away, and Greenwald can’t change that.
It is one thing to use Gaetz’s case as a source for intellectual inquiry, but to suggest that everyone else is being hysterical about Gaetz is a gross misrepresentation. There is a distinction to be had about respecting due process and choosing a side—something that Greenwald has already done.