House Judiciary Committee irony

We've all heard that Democrats always accuse the Republicans of doing exactly what they are doing themselves.  That will likely become very obvious over the next few weeks as the DOJ investigation reports are released, and we discover exactly what some of the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee did.  I believe that the irony will come alive as names are put to deeds, and the media connects those deeds to statements made in accusation of Republicans.

In a way, it has already begun.  "Democrats Argue that Obama Should Have Been Impeached," by Tom Trinko, in AT on Thursday, beautifully puts to words some of what ran through my mind during the hearings.  It's gutsy, and colossally stupid of the Democrats, to make their accusations against President Trump and his foreign policy so close to what for President Obama was such a miserable failure. 

When we're forced to make those comparisons to Obama hot mic flashbacks, we are overcome with disbelief.  "Did they actually mean to say that, after what Obama did?"  It's mind-boggling to try to comprehend the House Judiciary Committee Democrats' outrage, especially when they appeal to the Constitution after they ignored it and Obama's very likely real high crimes and misdemeanors for the duration of his presidency.  Where was the outrage then, when it was really needed?  One would think some thought about historical context and rudimentary logic would have been part of their conspiracy planning for such serious allegations.

There was more irony with the legal scholars chosen by Chairman Nadler for their leftist viewpoints.  With fuzzy reasoning already a cloud over the entire impeachment bonanza, their vituperative commentary and whole-hearted parroting of the Democrats' line of thinking gave me pause.  Comedy works because it goes against the expected; it can't be predictable, or it isn't comedy.  That's what it was like, only it didn't make me laugh; it alarmed me. 

The highest of the high, the most educated and respected of their profession, the greatest of all practitioners of logic among all professions, and their comments were devoid of any logic whatsoever.  Each oozed bias and contempt from every pore, not just for the president, but for all Americans who might support him.  In the end, what they said was of no consequence and will be quickly forgotten (except the Barron Trump comment).  What mattered, what further gave away their game, was how they said it.

Finally, there was the Democrats' irony.  The House Judiciary Committee majority, the socialist wannabes, the excusers, advocates, enablers, and often the perpetrators of activities that take freedom and rights from the people rather than protect and preserve the freedoms of the people...pontificating about history, the Constitution, the rule of law, the intent and meanings of our Founders, and what is or is not a democracy.  It just didn't fit, didn't seem right; it felt as if I was being lectured on nuclear physics by a middle-school cheerleader.  There was no credibility or believability.  Have you thought to yourself, while listening to someone else, "He doesn't even believe a single word coming out of his own mouth"?

If I were a cartoonist, here's how I would summarize all the hearings thus far.  I'd draw a four-frame series.  In the first frame would be Trump, walking peacefully in a suit.  In the second, a mob of professors and congressmen hide, awaiting his approach, to ambush him.  In the third frame is the mêlée, the arms swinging, the piling on, and the dust cloud.  In the final frame, Trump continues his walk, without a wrinkle or a scratch, leaving a mound of beaten professors and congressmen in the background. 

The irony really is in the visible unfairness of these proceedings.  The Democrats were in charge, and it was a failure waiting to happen even before it began.  They never had a chance.  I wonder if that's exactly the way Trump planned it.

Donald N. Finley is a retired Air Force colonel. 

Photo credit: YouTube screen grab.

We've all heard that Democrats always accuse the Republicans of doing exactly what they are doing themselves.  That will likely become very obvious over the next few weeks as the DOJ investigation reports are released, and we discover exactly what some of the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee did.  I believe that the irony will come alive as names are put to deeds, and the media connects those deeds to statements made in accusation of Republicans.

In a way, it has already begun.  "Democrats Argue that Obama Should Have Been Impeached," by Tom Trinko, in AT on Thursday, beautifully puts to words some of what ran through my mind during the hearings.  It's gutsy, and colossally stupid of the Democrats, to make their accusations against President Trump and his foreign policy so close to what for President Obama was such a miserable failure. 

When we're forced to make those comparisons to Obama hot mic flashbacks, we are overcome with disbelief.  "Did they actually mean to say that, after what Obama did?"  It's mind-boggling to try to comprehend the House Judiciary Committee Democrats' outrage, especially when they appeal to the Constitution after they ignored it and Obama's very likely real high crimes and misdemeanors for the duration of his presidency.  Where was the outrage then, when it was really needed?  One would think some thought about historical context and rudimentary logic would have been part of their conspiracy planning for such serious allegations.

There was more irony with the legal scholars chosen by Chairman Nadler for their leftist viewpoints.  With fuzzy reasoning already a cloud over the entire impeachment bonanza, their vituperative commentary and whole-hearted parroting of the Democrats' line of thinking gave me pause.  Comedy works because it goes against the expected; it can't be predictable, or it isn't comedy.  That's what it was like, only it didn't make me laugh; it alarmed me. 

The highest of the high, the most educated and respected of their profession, the greatest of all practitioners of logic among all professions, and their comments were devoid of any logic whatsoever.  Each oozed bias and contempt from every pore, not just for the president, but for all Americans who might support him.  In the end, what they said was of no consequence and will be quickly forgotten (except the Barron Trump comment).  What mattered, what further gave away their game, was how they said it.

Finally, there was the Democrats' irony.  The House Judiciary Committee majority, the socialist wannabes, the excusers, advocates, enablers, and often the perpetrators of activities that take freedom and rights from the people rather than protect and preserve the freedoms of the people...pontificating about history, the Constitution, the rule of law, the intent and meanings of our Founders, and what is or is not a democracy.  It just didn't fit, didn't seem right; it felt as if I was being lectured on nuclear physics by a middle-school cheerleader.  There was no credibility or believability.  Have you thought to yourself, while listening to someone else, "He doesn't even believe a single word coming out of his own mouth"?

If I were a cartoonist, here's how I would summarize all the hearings thus far.  I'd draw a four-frame series.  In the first frame would be Trump, walking peacefully in a suit.  In the second, a mob of professors and congressmen hide, awaiting his approach, to ambush him.  In the third frame is the mêlée, the arms swinging, the piling on, and the dust cloud.  In the final frame, Trump continues his walk, without a wrinkle or a scratch, leaving a mound of beaten professors and congressmen in the background. 

The irony really is in the visible unfairness of these proceedings.  The Democrats were in charge, and it was a failure waiting to happen even before it began.  They never had a chance.  I wonder if that's exactly the way Trump planned it.

Donald N. Finley is a retired Air Force colonel. 

Photo credit: YouTube screen grab.