The House Judiciary Definitely Not An Impeachment, So Don’t Quite Know What We’re Here For Hearing

What a fucking circus that was! it left me absolutely livid, I lost sleep last night thinking about it and woke up this morning still stewing on it. The committee provided such a smorgasbord of contemptuous attitudes for the American people to pick from, and reserved something a little extra special for all people of the Muslim faith, not bad for a few hours of a non-event.

Proceedings were actually interrupted at one point by a Republican asking how much longer it was likely to go on for, after all, some of them had to travel...travel!

I really don’t know what they were doing there in the first place and feel myself in agreement with this administration’s most ardent supporters on the issue. They’re right! it was a tin-pot show (non)trial, which in a way, I suppose is fairly appropriate, for such a tin-pot show (non)administration. If that was a judiciary committee, and the inference is that somewhere in all of it, there was justice, then I’m a fucking ballpoint pen.

On top of it being totally bereft of even the slightest pretence of justice, those gentlemen can be proud of themselves, as they unquestionably control the single most partisan committee I’ve ever witnessed. In fact, I seriously doubt whether in the political history of this, once great, country, there's ever been a more partisan, dysfunctional bunch of self-serving political fuckwits gathered under a single committee banner before. The partisan tone here was even worse than the last great bureaucratic non-event; Senator Clinton’s failed stand at the DNC Rules & Bylaws committee. All that was missing here were the unseemly displays of wailing and booing that the Democrats had allowed.

I guess the problem stems from the chair. Temperate and likeable, John Conyers would make the perfect grandpa, but I’m not sure these are the right character traits for a man in such a pivotal position at such a pivotal moment in history. The knowledge that Congressman Conyers stands on one of the last lines of defense for our constitutional freedoms, is unsettling. I can see why he’s so popular with the ill-informed republican pitbulls that share his committee; he allowed himself, and more importantly the committee witnesses, to be bullied by them.

There was no control, no direction, it seemed like a free for all. Not unlike the way this administration has run roughshod over the constitution and those it purports to serve. I’m not sure what I found most upsetting, like I said, there was such a choice, but certainly the way in which some pretty shocking accusations were ignored seemed pretty suspect.

There was an overwhelming amount of hearsay and conjecture, the conjecture predominantly generated by the administration’s supporters on the committee. It was palpably their aim to focus on the more exagerated claims in an effort to deflect attention from the more substantiative evidence. They needed this committee to look even more partisan than it already was, and the more references they could make to Clinton, the more the whole affair conjured up memories of efforts to impeach along political lines, and bad chairmanship allowed it to work.

However, among all the nonsensical mudslinging by this administration’s supporters, there were accusations made and supporting evidence submitted, that if true, would prove beyond doubt that the administration and our president had committed crimes against the American people.

Two claims that would be easy to check and warranted further investigation were: that a CIA report handed to the president 6 days before he addressed Congress stated that Saddam Hussein did ‘NOT’ pose an imminent threat to the US, had been tampered with before being shown to Congress. Furthermore, in the president's address to Congress he claimed that he had good information that Saddam Hussein 'DID' pose an imminent threat to US security. A major difference and a clear abuse if true.

Then there was the ‘Downing Street Memo’ written by David Manning an aide of Tony Blair. It was disparaging about Bush and his intentions, claiming that he believed Bush was ‘looking’ for war, and among other things, had contemplated painting two US drones in UN colors and flying them over Baghdad, to tease Saddam into shooting them down, and trigger hostilities.

Surely, these accusations wouldn't be difficult to check out? Either there was evidence that GW Bush had broken the law or there wasn’t. But, where was the guidance, where was the chairmanship? Whether you feel they may be true or complete lies, surely they required further discussion and possible investigation. If I were a republican I would want to clear the president’s good name.

On the whole the congressmen/women of the committee and the witnesses were a fucking joke. The only person in the room with any gravitas was former Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney and Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi. His tone like a blast from a decent past. I was just waiting for a bit of fist slamming on the desk, he was alive and bright, with the kind of character and moral fiber that would scare the crap out of these sniveling self-serving politicians. Here's a taste of him in action...



Though I didn't dig Bugliosi's book plug, I forgave it as relevant, which couldn't be said of Elizabeth Holtzman’s efforts, promoting a book that hadn't even been written about the current administration. It just further demeaned the entire process. Then we get to the two stooges; Presser and Rabkin, brought in on behalf of the administration, they spent most of their time discussing ethereal bullshit. They pondered irrelevances like how many presidents would've qualified for impeachment, under what they claimed, were similar circumstances. But, as we say in England, the biscuit was taken by, a pig in a suit, who went by the name of Louie Gohmert TX01. What a prize plonker!

He kicked off feigning outrage at the accusations that had been made against our esteemed leader, but of course, didn’t reference them. Then promptly sticking to script, went off on Clinton, telling us that Bush shouldn’t be blamed for believing Clinton’s lies?!?!? Yup! but what the fuck that has got to do with anything?

I couldn't believe that a sitting member of the US congress could spit out such unadulterated bilge in a congressional ‘hearing’ where was the chairman? Does no one correct this kinda thing?

I was so offended by this twot, that I looked him up. I mean the bloke was so stupid I figured he had to be some old school chum of fanny Bush’s, or something. But no, I nearly choked on my fucking brioche when I read that, he used to be a district court judge! Poor, poor district.

The other bit of info I found quite shocking is that he’s only the second republican in 150 years to hold TX01, and only won the seat in 2005. How can someone in his shoes be so vehemently defending the most unpopular administration in history of mankind? I really hope he doesn’t know something we don’t, maybe he’s had a wink for the Supreme Court, he’d fit in nicely. But, hold on, I haven’t got to the best bit yet...

After his Clinton bashing, he went on to tell us that, no one would’ve guessed that the Muslims, yup the Muslims, would’ve attacked us, because Clinton’s only military actions had been to defend them against Christians.

This bloke couldn’t be for real, it was like he was reading straight from the Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda for beginners handbook. Muslims attacked us, he didn’t mention the word terrorist once! We’d been attacked by Muslims, and no one would’ve guessed, because we’d been so good to them, protecting them from our own Christian brothers.

Fucking outrageous! but what did he mean? where, did he mean? I wondered for a bit...then realized, you’ve got to be fucking kidding me...he meant Kosovo!

I think it was this that kept me up last night, this was what had troubled me most.

How can his fellow Republicans sit around and accept that kind of racially motivated hatred? How does it make our fellow citizens, American Muslims feel, when they hear this stuff? Words like those can so easily incite racial violence, children get beaten up in the street because of ridiculous ignorance like that. But, here was an ex US district court judge and current Congressman saying it. My only relief was that because the US main stream media are so fucking biased they weren't even covering it, fortunately I'd been watching on CSpan. So, perhaps everyone would be safe because the kind of people that attack 10 year old Muslim girls in the street don’t watch Cspan.

The real offence here is not so much his words, though they're truly disgusting, and made all the more revolting because they’re spoken by someone who does know better. But, the fact that US politicians hold the American people in such low regard. They believe their electorate to be so stupid, they don’t have to bother with the truth, they're never challenged for it. This Gohmert TX01 bloke wouldn't speak like this if he knew he couldn’t get away with it. He does it, because he can, it's easy, a little public unrest, a little tension is good for politicians. It's only bad for the people that have to live with the consequence of that prejudice, of their throwaway statements and feigned, or real ignorance.

The single most relevant statement made yesterday was Republican Congressman Steven King’s quoting of Tacitus. In a period when Rome was transforming from that once great Republic to a dictatorship - ‘The worst crimes were dared by a few, willed by more and tolerated by all’

Friday was a fucking travesty and the people of America need to stop tolerating that crap, but it won’t get better until you demand better.

I apologise for the poor quality of this piece, but that hearing made me so angry, I needed to get it off my chest.