Have you ever been lied to? What happens to the relationship when someone lies to you?

If you’re like me, after you’ve been lied to, you’re reluctant to trust that individual. You’re never sure from that time on whether that person is telling the truth. Boundaries and guardrails have been destroyed. Once gone, it’s difficult to rebuild trust.

Did you know that President Dwight D. Eisenhower was the first president ever to be caught lying in public? During the Cold War, the U.S. wanted information on the U.S.S.R.’s military facilities, especially missile sites and military bases. It was before the age of satellite photography. The U.S. government had developed a high-altitude spy plane, the U-2, that the Soviets didn’t initially have the technology to shoot down. But by 1960 they had developed that technology. On May 1, 1960 they shot down the spy plane. Its pilot was Francis Gary Powers.

When the U.S. military found out that the plane had been downed, Eisenhower lied and denied any involvement in such flights. Eisenhower thought Powers must have been killed. But Powers survived and publicly admitted he was working for the U.S. government, embarrassing the President in the process.

Since that time, several presidents and other government officials have been caught lying. Fact checking has become the way news organizations keep track of those lies.

We are now living in a time when we expect our government officials to be lying. It has made some of us less gullible. The common question people now ask each other is: “How do you know that______ is lying?” The answer is “when his/her lips are moving.” Some people have trained themselves to believe that only Democrats or only Republicans lie, depending on whom they choose to believe.

Last week I attended a town hall meeting on the Green River College campus where Eighth District U.S. Representative Kim Schrier (D) spoke to a crowd of about 120 voters, most of whom live in her Congressional district. Her district is one of the few in the nation that are split 50/50 into Democrats and Republicans. Schrier knew it would be a mixed audience with strongly differing views.

She began her town hall by telling the attendees that her job was to represent all her constituents, no matter the party. The crowd was attentive and respectful. There were no shouting angry voters as have been seen in recent Republican town halls across the nation. House Speaker Michael Johnson told Republicans not to hold any public forums since Democrats were trying to make Republicans look bad. Did he have any proof this was the case? No. I suspect he was lying to save face.

There were pre-submitted questions that Enumclaw Mayor Molinaro read and she answered. In one instance, Representative Schrier was asked a question she didn’t know the answer to, and she said so. That usually is a good indication a speaker is telling the truth. No one has a corner on all information. When she was asked whether Senator Schumer had caved by voting for the budget reconciliation bill to keep the government open, her response was: “Next question,” eliciting laughter. She then said she was a member of the House of Representatives, not the Senate. It wasn’t her issue.

Schrier was asked why Congressional Republicans were silent about the constitutionally questionable actions of the current president. Her answer surprised me. She talks to her Republican colleagues frequently and in confidence. Republicans have been silent because they want to get reelected. They don’t speak up because they are afraid of having public criticism focused on them and their families, putting their lives at risk of death threats.

Several times during the question/answer question session, the crowd clapped or cheered to show their approval of Schrier’s honesty and candidness. It was obvious they trusted her and her answers. Honesty builds bonds; lying creates suspicion and distrust.

All the questions that were asked were answered within the hour that was allotted. The question that I had submitted when reserving my seat online was not brought up, though. I had asked which presidential action to a judicial stay did she think would be ignored, creating a constitutional crisis in violation of the established checks and balances?

Afterwords, I considered why my question was not read. Two possible reasons came to mind: 1) Schrier decided not to speculate on what might happen. Time would answer that question. 2) Either she and/or her aides wanted to send a positive unifying tone to the town hall meeting. It was too hot a question. Sometimes, not answering a question is an answer.

Did I feel that Representative Schrier was telling the truth? Yes. The trust boundaries were still in place at the end of the town hall. Relationships were maintained.