Yes, it was pretty good when the January 6 House Select Committee presented their evidence yesterday for why former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows should be held in contempt, and then to bolster their case read several pleading text messages to him, including several from “Fox News” hosts and even sonny boy Don Jr. to please stop the insurrection.
A few thoughts about these. The first is you’d think that since Don Jr. had his father’s phone number and could have just called to say, “Er…dad…” That he didn’t and instead wrote to Mark Meadows is certainly a fascinating family dynamic. The other is that, although many people are pointing out how “Fox News” hosts Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Brian Kilmeade were reprehensibly hypocritical, indeed out-and-out lying, by telling their viewers that the riot should be blamed on “antifa” and Black Lives Matter while, at the same time, texting Mark Meadows that Trump’s own rioting supporters were undermining his legacy, that – as repugnant as it is – is only of secondary importance to me. After all, I think most people who aren’t “Fox News” viewers expect such deception to be the case. It’s certainly valuable, of course, that this blatant, dangerous hypocrisy is there in clear written texts for all to see, but I still would be shocked to discover that any “Fox News” hosts actually believed what they were saying on the air. More notable to me, though, is that these supposed “news” people were directly involving themselves in the news they were reporting on, to the point of telling the White House Chief of Staff what they thought he should do – while the story was going on. In fairness, yes, I suspect that many people assume that to be the case with “Fox News,” as well, that its hosts are often in policy-based discussions with Republican officials. But again, this was during the news story they were actively on the air doing reports about! To me, that’s taking it to a much higher level. (Or then, there's also what the inveterate Chris Dunn noted to me -- that, knowing they could actually get through, rather than the first thought of the "Fox News" hosts being "This will be bad for Trump," far-better would have been "People are going to get hurt" or at the very least, "This does great harm to the country.") In the end, this is a bit of high-level nitpicking: “Which is the most galling action by “Fox News” hosts? Here are five options, including ‘All the above.’” There probably isn’t really a wrong answer here. All the more notable since the standards you’re dealing with for “Fox News” are egregiously low. Far more to the point is that the evidence seems to be pouring out of witnesses and crashing down on Trump, his administration and closest acolytes in the circle around him. I don’t know where this will lead in the House investigation, and with the DOJ, and among Republican officials. I do know, though, that history shows that the more it rains a torrent of damning evidence, the more rats tend to leave the sinking ship to protect themselves. How many rats are willing to leave is another matter. As is what this will all mean to the general public. But I would suggest that the more evidence that pours out against something horrifying that most Americans saw live as it was happening, revealing an attempt to overthrow democracy, is generally not the campaign platform a political party prefers for itself going into a mid-term election. But hey, this is today's Republican Party. Who knows what in the world they actually stand for? Overthrowing democracy seems as an accurate a brand for them as any.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|