Let's talk about the shitshow that was Thursday's Congressional hearing. I would not be surprised if historians refer to this hearing as the moment where Hillary Clinton secured herself the presidency, and I say this as a Sanders supporter.
The Internet has been wonderful on this:
source
source
source
Also am I the only one who got a bit of an anti-semitic vibe from the GOP's obsession with Sidney Blumenthal? I guess he's the new Saul Alinsky.
All of that said, I don't think the Republicans are going to regret this hearing even if it does get Clinton elected; this Balloon Juice commenter sums it up pretty well:
Quote:
In contrast to Mr. Cole’s comment, I actually doubt the Republicans will regret hosting a kangaroo court of this nature, simply because that implies that they fear electoral consequences or losing the ability to govern as a result of this little farce. I’m not saying there won’t be electoral consequences, mind, but given that the GOP’s sole purpose is now to simply prevent the U.S. federal government from functioning, as long as they maintain enough seats in either the House or the Senate to obstruct all attempts to accomplish anything they don’t like, that will be enough for them. Meanwhile, their colleagues who have complete control of the majority of state legislatures in America will be free to rampage about the landscape imposing their inimitable brand of crazy on everything they see. It’s in the state legislatures that the can really run amok without any kind of inhibition.
I think the problem is that reasonable people are viewing these hearings through the lens of “what electoral advantage does this give the Republicans?” or “how is this proving any wrongdoing on the part of, well, anyone at all?” or “why do they insist on embarking on such massive wastes of everyone’s time and money?” But as has been displayed many times, Republicans are not reasonable and don’t care about such trifles. They are looking merely to rile their base and preemptively de-legitimize Ms. Clinton as a candidate for president and, if she is elected, as president. And in those aims, they’re probably succeeding, simply because any testimony she offers is entirely irrelevant. For Republicans, accusations frequently ARE evidence in and of themselves — after all, if someone’s done nothing wrong, no one will accuse them of anything, right? A demented viewpoint, but a lot of them tend to hold to it, especially where a Clinton is concerned.
It’s much the same as when the Planned Parenthood hearings were held — the testimony DOESN’T MATTER to them. At all. They have already convicted their targets. If their little fishing expeditions actually turn up something genuinely damning, wonderful. But that’s not the point of any of it. The point is to have the target of the week in front of a bunch of stern-looking Good White Christian Male Republican Lawmakers denying repeatedly that they did the Bad Thing of which they’re accused. Because when you’re dealing with a howling mob of an electoral base who are already convinced that the crime has been committed, evidence is no longer relevant. Making your targets deny in public they’ve done anything wrong is the point. Because that, for the people at whom this performance is really aimed at, is evidence of wrongdoing. Denials are proof now for Republicans. To paraphrase a line from Catch-22, for them, the case against their enemies is open-and-shut. The only thing missing is something to charge them with.
|
This is red meat to their base. It doesn't matter if they come up with anything in the hearings or indeed if there is any
there there. The base doesn't care. The Republicans aren't going to lose the House until at least 2020 so there are effectively no consequences for this kind of grandstanding. Well, apart from Hillary becoming president, but apparently they're too obstinate to notice or care about that.
BENGHAZI!!!!!!111
Threaded Mode
