You may have been flipping through the channels last night and stumbled upon the ugly spectacle of the Congressional committee investigating the events of January 6, 2021. Certainly, this wasn’t your preferred programming. Perhaps Kimberley A. Strassel, veteran columnist for the Wall Street Journal, explained it best, writing:
This week’s Washington corollary to the tree-in-the-forest thought experiment: If the Jan. 6 committee holds professionally polished hearings, amid wall-to-wall prime-time coverage, will anybody pay attention? If the answer is no, the committee will largely have itself to blame.
The prospect of public apathy is already deeply vexing the establishment. “Democrats have the steep challenge of convincing a disillusioned American electorate to tune into” the hearings, Politico worries. The Washington Post frets that even weeks of this miniseries may not “change hearts or minds.” The vexed are already laying blame. It’s the fault of Republicans who will “downplay” the findings, Americans who are too focused on gasoline prices, and Fox News for deciding not to air Thursday’s hearing live (although Fox Business and every other station said they would).
What’s actually missing in this special sauce of prime TV hours, slick videos and positive press is the one ingredient truly vital for public interest: credibility. If huge swathes of America ignore the committee’s work, it will be because the committee itself—through its construction and through its actions—made it easy.
Can Americans trust the findings of a panel whose members began with a preconceived narrative and blackballed any dissenting voices? Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s unprecedented decision to veto Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s picks last July in favor of her own handpicked Republican members blew the committee’s credibility before it even started work. Americans will find it easy to reject “evidence” that is too fragile to bear the scrutiny of fellow House members.
And consider Mrs. Pelosi’s Democratic picks. California’s Adam Schiff is the House face of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax and secret Ukraine impeachment proceedings. Maryland’s Jamie Raskin knows a little something about objecting to the counting of electoral votes. On Jan. 6, 2017, he objected to Donald Trump’s Florida victory. Mrs. Pelosi had more than 200 Democratic members to choose from, yet her picks allow Americans to dismiss the committee instantly.
The committee might have redeemed itself even with this makeup had it conducted its work in a sober, professional manner. Instead, within months, it had become the worst type of Washington leak machine—dribbling documents, texts, emails and inside tidbits about who was up for a grilling next and what was coming out of depositions. At least one of the text messages it released was altered (by—who else?—Mr. Schiff) to exclude context and falsely malign former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.
This practice reached a low in March, when the committee leaked personal text messages of Ginni Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas. The messages had no real bearing on the events of Jan. 6 but were perfectly timed to coincide with a left-wing campaign to smear Justice Thomas and pressure him to recuse himself from key cases. How much confidence should Americans be expected to have in a body that has abused its investigative powers for political gain?
On Tucker Carlson Tonight, host Tucker Carlson also called out the hypocrisy of the January 6 Committee. Watch below:
Action Line: No credibility and hypocritical. Congress can do better. Stick with me.
E.J. Smith - Your Survival Guy
Latest posts by E.J. Smith - Your Survival Guy (see all)
- Your Key to Retirement Wealth - December 4, 2023
- HARDSHIP WITHDRAWAL: Do You Have Emergency Funds? - December 4, 2023
- EVERGRANDE: The World’s Most Indebted Property Developer - December 4, 2023
- Risk and Reward: An Efficient Frontier - December 4, 2023
- Stop America’s Zombie Apocalypse before It Starts - December 1, 2023