Or, "The Psychology Of A Cover-Up":
Democrats would be wrong to take the advice of California-28 Congressman Adam Schiff and boycott a Benghazi select committee, says Representative Peter King.
Schiff told "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace that if Democrats vote to create the committee or participate as members it would lend it credibility.
Not exactly. At this stage of the game Democrats wouldn't lend a mugging credibility, largely because the mugging victim would look over at the Democrat and exclaim, "If it isn't you mugging me, then who the hell is?"
What Schiff means is "the appearance of bipartisanship". If there are both Republicans and Democrats on the House Select Committee on Benghazi (HSCB), LIVs and NIVs are more likely to believe that something legitimate and serious is going on, whereas if Donks boycott it and it's made of all Republicans, it'll look more like the "partisan witchhunt" they want Americans to believe it is.
This tells me a few of things: (1) Democrats know that the Rhodes email is a "big f-ing deal"; (2) they believe this HSCB is going to, accordingly, draw some serious public attention; and (3) they have calculated that the tack they've taken in all the House investigatory hearings on all Regime scandals the last year and a half - sit there cutting raspberries, throwing spitballs, lobbing catcalls, making fart noises, running interference for Regime witnesses, and demonizing committee Republicans - will be too visible and thus, politically damaging to them. By not showing up at all, they hope to convey that same arrogant contempt in absentia and maintain the "What difference does it make?!?" party line. While the reality is that House Dems have no other alternative. Well, aside from honesty and humility, but those reality aren't options for them.
Schiff and other Democrats say Republicans are playing politics and that the attack that left four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, dead has already been investigated.
i.e. The Regime's cover-up was the "investigation". "Trust us," said the blood & feathers-covered fox with a grin, "I investigated the coop after the hen massacre thoroughly". We discussed the "playing politics" canard yesterday.
But King, a New York Republican, told Fox News Channel later on Sunday that a boycott would make Democrats appear to be covering up something and that they did not take the investigation seriously.
They are and they don't. But their narcissism convinces them that their efforts will be effortlessly successful because Da Peepul are beyond stupid. And judging by the last two presidential elections, you can't really blame them for continuing to harbor that contemptuous viewpoint.
"And mostly it's going to show that they are afraid to confront the issues when the public is watching," King said. "They would prefer to have it done in the Situation Room of the White House maybe, but not in the light of public debate."
No, Pete, it's more like with more of the public watching, they see an opportunity to reinforce the public's heretofore-apathy. Lindsay Grahamnesty depressingly illustrated the RINO timidity that would emasculate the HSCB before it began; a Democrat boycott of the HSCB would frame Chairman Trey Gowdy and the 'Pubbies who treated this like the serious investigation it needs to be as the "racist lynching" Adam Schiff and his fellow-travelers want us all to believe it is.
At least, they hope it would. At the very least, it would create yet another shiny, massive-media-fueled distraction from the four Americans that were allowed to perish by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the sake of al Qaeda and O's re-election. Which is why it is imperative that Trey Gowdy chair the HSCB; he may be the only Republican capable of cutting through the other side's multiphasic propaganda deflector shields to the truth the whole country needs to see.
After which the 52% will probably shrug and go right on bowing down to O's Golden Putter. But maybe not; and that is what Adam Schiff and the rest of the Collective is afraid of.
No comments:
Post a Comment