Of the many reasons offered for why the American people ought to be concerned about congressional Democrats’ handling of their informal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, the one offered by Fox News journalist Brit Hume may be the best.
In a tweet posted Thursday morning, a day after a group of House Republicans stormed a closed-door House Intelligence Committee impeachment hearing, Hume pondered how the public would feel about the since-bunked Russian collusion delusion conspiracy theory had former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony being kept hidden.
“If a witness’s opening statement were all we could see, think how differently we would feel about Bob Mueller’s testimony in July if all we saw was him reading his statement. The Q&A was revealing, indeed some might say devastating,” he tweeted.
If a witness’s opening statement were all we could see, think how differently we would feel about Bob Mueller’s testimony in July if all we saw was him reading his statement. The Q&A was revealing, indeed some might say devastating.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) October 24, 2019
Hume was correct. Mueller’s “wobbly,” “shaky” and just “underwhelming” performance, as described by the media, helped signal the end of the collusion delusion hoax.
“I have to say that far from breathing life into the report, he kind of sucked the life out of the report,” MSNBC contributor and former Obama administration official Jeremy Bash opined at the time.
“I thought he was boring. I thought in some cases he was sort of evasive, he didn’t want to explain or expand on his rationale. He seemed lost at times, he was kind of flipping through the report trying to find passages that members of Congress were reading to him.”
Others agreed with this assessment, including even anti-Trump zealot Michael Moore:
A frail old man, unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions…I said it in 2017 and Mueller confirmed it today — All you pundits and moderates and lame Dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller — just STFU from now on
— Michael Moore (@MMFlint) July 24, 2019
Chris Wallace nailed it; “This has been a disaster for the Democrats and a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller…He doesnt seem to know things that are in the report … I think it does raise questions about the degree to which he actually was in charge and control”
— Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) July 24, 2019
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) July 24, 2019
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) July 24, 2019
Now fast-forward to the present and just imagine what might happen if the Democrats’ witnesses for impeachment were forced to stand before the American people and reveal their so-called “truths.” Would they too crumble like dust?
In fact, that’s exactly what allegedly happened Tuesday when former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor testified before Congress.
According to Democrats, he unveiled the “smoking gun” claim that the president had indeed dangled a quid pro quo in front of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to pressure him into investigating U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden.
Thanks to the media, this narrative has gone viral. But according to Republicans, this is a fallacious narrative that’s far from the truth.
“Well, I was down there most of the day in this meeting with Ambassador Taylor,” House Intelligence Committee ranking member Rep. Devin Nunes revealed later Tuesday evening to Fox News host Sean Hannity.
“And once again, it was the same thing, something leaks out to The Washington Post, narratives are built. But the truth is, is that in two minutes, John Ratcliffe destroyed this witness. There is no quid pro quo.”
This narrative has of course been ignored by the media. And as a result, it will remain secret, as noted by Hume in an additional tweet:
If Amb. Taylor’s opening statement, which immediately leaked, is so explosive, shouldn’t everyone be able to see how well it held up under cross-examination? Republicans say it fell apart, but there’s no way to know because it’s all secret. https://t.co/UIbrSaIOrY
— Brit Hume (@brithume) October 24, 2019
But perhaps that’s the strategy?
Perhaps, as suggested by Sean Davis, the co-founder of The Federalist, the strategy is to avoid the same pitfalls that destroyed their Russian collusion narrative.
“The lesson Democrats learned from the Mueller debacle is that there’s zero upside to letting the public hear what key witnesses actually said when Democrats can instead just leak what they wanted their hand-picked witnesses to say,” he tweeted in response to Hume.
The lesson Democrats learned from the Mueller debacle is that there’s zero upside to letting the public hear what key witnesses actually said when Democrats can instead just leak what they wanted their hand-picked witnesses to say. https://t.co/jtN844Rzap
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) October 24, 2019
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- GOP state lawmaker’s Seinfeld-inspired telemarketer bill is gaining traction - February 4, 2023
- China claims balloon is ‘civilian airship’, whines America has ‘hyped it up to attack and smear’ - February 4, 2023
- Twitter slaps down Dem Rep’s comparison between China spy balloon, US border surveillance - February 4, 2023
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.