Welcome to the Fun House
Well, that was certainly a fascinating day at the House of Representatives, when the House Government Oversight Committee had a hearing yesterday to discuss and vote on whether to recommend a "contempt of Congress" citation against Hunter Biden.
And keep in mind, just to reiterate, that this is about..."Hunter Biden." Not about an Insurrection to overthrow the government, not about a war overseas protecting democracy, or funding to keep the government open or some other major, national crisis. But..."Hunter Biden," a private citizen who had a drug problem and did some questionable, thoughtless, perhaps (or not) illegal things on a totally personal level, with zero governmental responsibilities, whose only connection to the U.S. Government is that his dad is President. Yes, yes, Republicans want to prove that there are devious undertakings going on between the two -- but after a year of intense investigation, and years of FBI investigations -- Republicans have found nothing. Zero. Nada. He's just a private citizen. Who they want to haul in front of their committee. Because, apparently, after being the least productive Congress since the Great Depression 90 years ago, this is the best that Republicans can muster. Investigating Hunter Biden. And even that was a total mess for them.
And overriding it all yesterday, I was seriously impressed with the impeccable stage management yesterday by Hunter Biden and his team. It began with them showing up expectantly at the House hearing, to sit in the front row as Republicans tried to cry that he’s ignoring a subpoena -- despite him saying he was willing to testify, but only openly in public, not behind closed doors where Republicans could lie about his testimony. A decision, by the way, made all the more impactful after Committee chair James Comer (R-KY) had earlier said on camera that witnesses could testify in private or at a public hearing, their choice.
But then, even more notable, was the Hunter Biden team's clearly-intentional timing to leave the moment Marjorie Taylor Greene started to speak. The impact of this got all the news cameras to follow them into the hallway and carry their statement, leaving an apoplectic Greene without being covered on TV. It was masterful.
But there was so much more.
Leaping out was Nancy Mace (R-SC), once thought to be a "reasonable" Republican (and my, has that ship sailed) who went on a rant about Hunter Biden that centered -- for some reason known only to her -- on the concept of "white privilege."
“You are the epitome of white privilege," she cried out, "coming into the Oversight Committee, spitting in our face, ignoring a congressional subpoena to be deposed. What are you afraid of? You have no balls.”
It was so cool to hear Ms. Mace finally move the Republican Party -- the party that has been banning the teaching of black history -- away from white privilege. And for her to do so with the flair of putting it in the context of male ego and genitalia.
White privilege, fair warning, Nancy Mace of South Carolina says you no longer have safe harbor in the GOP!!!
But it was the impressive Democratic congresswoman from Texas, Jasmine Crockett, who had another firebrand moment -- and she was only getting started -- by taking Nancy Grace to school over her attempt to be faux-outraged from her concept of "white privilege".
But Rep. Crockett was only getting warmed up. Because later, she had yet another Crockett Moment, which can sort of be described as an "Okay, I've listened to you lie and twist reality long enough, and I just can't take it any more, so it's my turn now" gambit. This time, her now-patented, explosive, no-holds-barred takedown was directed in general at Republicans on the committee -- and by extension, pretty much all of them -- as they tried to downplay the Insurrection. And Jasmine Crockett had heard enough and...well, was having none of it. Bluntly.
All that said, it must be noted that Jasmine Crockett is not the only fiery Democratic speaker capable of full-throated, justifiable indignation, most especially when in defense of democracy and the Constitution. And that would be the committee's ranking member, Jamie Raskin, who had been the Lead Manager for the House when Trump was impeached the second time. So, here is an outraged Jamie Raskin going off on Republican utter hypocrisy, laying out his points with brutal specifics, and not allowing any member on the other side to dare interrupt what he has to say.
By the way, as a follow-up of sorts to Jamie Raskin's scathing response on having the receipts (literally) of Trump's corruption, hours later Trump held a "Town Hall" event on Fox. He was asked by the moderators about the investigation report Rep. Raskin refers to that shows Trump's businesses received over $8 million from foreign governments while he was president, the most coming from China and Saudi Arabia. His tone-deaf response was “I was doing services for them … I don’t get $8 million for doing nothing!”
Services?? To a foreign government?? Usually people have to register as a foreign agent for that. But then, usually one isn't a president getting paid for providing services to a foreign government! (Sorry, I mean "foreign governments.") And no fury from Republicans. Imagine if President Biden or President Obama had said that?? Or...if ANY president is U.S. history had said that.
(Oh, and P.S. A president providing "services" to a foreign government, in particular China, for money is exactly what the House Oversight Committee insists they're looking into! They haven't found the slightest evidence that President Biden did anything, but... there is Trump himself saying he did!)
But back to the committee -- in the end, to no one's surprise, the Republican-led members voted to recommend the House of Representatives find Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with a subpoena. Left out was voting to condemn Jim Jordan (R-OH), former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino and other Republican officials who refused subpoenas.
It seems likely that the full House, with a GOP majority, will vote to recommend the DOJ press criminal charges against Hunter Biden. It also seem equally unlikely that the Justice Department will do so, given that a) he has said he is willing to testify in public at an open hearing, b) that Oversight Committee chair James Comer has said on camera that witness called may decide for themselves if they want to testify in private or at a public hearing, and that c) Hunter Biden actually showed up at the hearing yesterday and said he was willing to testify that very day, in public.
Left out of all this, too, is the even greater likelihood that if -- at this point -- Hunter Biden did testify, he would say, "I have long been saying since back in November that I would be happy to testify in public and wish the committee had not continually rejected that offer. As it happens in the interim, on Thursday, January 11, I was officially indicted by the Department of Justice, so for me to now testify at a Congressional hearing would obviously put me in serious legal jeopardy, which I'm sure everyone on this committee can understand. So on the advice of counsel, I must therefore -- while under legal litigation on the very same matter -- refuse to offer testimony against myself under my Constitutional 5th Amendment rights. As I said, I am absolutely certain that everyone on the committee fully understands why that is legally necessary...and regrets their delay in accepting my offer months ago."
On the positive side, this all now frees up the Republican committee members to help their party decide whether or not they want to throw out their current House Speaker once again for reaching an agreement with the President to keep the government open.
Comments