Didn't Say It! Didn't Mean It!

If you are catching hell for what you said, deny saying it or say you did not mean it that way. Forget about the plain meaning of the words; words are open to interpretation, are they not? This sort of denial and obfuscation is particularly important when the gaff you committed reveals something unsavory about you and/or your party. Just ask Representative Kevin McCarthy, who is now trying to cough the Benghazi bone out of his throat.

As Greg Sargent reported in the Washington Post, Kevin McCarthy went on Fox News last night to clean up his comments about Benghazi and failed miserably.

“This committee was set up for one sole purpose, to find the truth on behalf of families for four dead Americans,” McCarthy told Bret Baier. “Now, I did not imply in any way that that work is political, of course it is not. Look at the way they have carried themselves out,” McCarthy said.

Of course he did not “imply” that the Benghazi hearings were politically motivated; there was nothing that subtle about his comment.  He clearly said the hearings were held to discredit Hillary Clinton! There is no other way to interpret it (See my previous post “Witch Hunts And Inquisitions”). While I do not think anyone who heard McCarthy's comment will believe his denial, I will understand if some generous soul commiserates with him for being confused by his own words. After all, a man who says “untrustable” obviously has trouble with the English language!

Some people will defend McCarthy's comments about the Benghazi hearings, others will deny them, but no one will forget them. The problem with the truth is that you cannot successfully hide it after it has been exposed.

Witch Hunts and Inquisitions

When a political party has no viable policies or proposals all it has left to sell is fear and loathing. And how do you stir up fear and loathing? You do it with witch hunts and inquisitions!

Can You Benghazi?

In his Sept 30, 2015 article, “Kevin McCarthy's Truthful Gaffe About Benghazi” E. J. Dionne Jr. wrote:

“Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), the likely successor to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), told Fox News’s Sean Hannity explicitly on Tuesday night that the Clinton investigation was part of a 'strategy to fight and win.'

He explained:'Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.'”

In Making this stunning admission Representative Kevin McCarty added to the infamy a Senator named Joe attached to the McCarthy surname. I say “stunning admission” only in that it was unbelievably foolish for a high ranking Republican to actually say this out loud and in public! It is rather fitting, however, for a guy named McCarthy to confirm what everyone who was paying the slightest attention already knew about the Benghazi inquisition. Grand inquisitor Issa ruined his credibility during Benghazi hearings, and grand inquisitor Gowdy (or is that gougey) is well on his way to doing the same thing.

Can You Say Planned Parenthood Hearings? 

Alright, lets take a deceptively edited film that was surreptitiously shot (or is that shat) by an unscrupulous anti-abortion group, add some outrageous accusations and lies to it, and start another grand inquisition based on the deceptions. Go ahead, Carly Failurina and her ilk will praise it; they will never question it - at least not in public. And make sure that the witnesses you call find it almost impossible to answer what are supposed to be questions about it because you are constantly interrupting them, usually with absurd accusations. Here are just a few examples of how the alleged planned parenthood hearings are being conducted by the Republican inquisitors.

As Kimberly Truong wrote in Mashable:

During the testimony of Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, Representative Chaffetz (R. Utah) “...presented a slide claiming that Planned Parenthood's money spent on breast exams has been reduced, while money spent on abortions increased.

Though he claimed that the slide came straight from Planned Parenthood's annual reports, Richards' lawyers told her otherwise, after she said she'd never seen the slide.

'My lawyers just informed me that the source of this information is Americans United for Life, an anti-abortion group. I would check your source,' she said.”

I might add here that the chart was as deceptive as one would expect given its source.

In the following exchange between Ms Richards and grand inquisitor Gowdy, Esq., Mr. Gowdy makes us all wonder what the hell he was taught in law school!

"'I appreciate the way you like to frame the issue — that you're the reasonable one and those of us who have a contrary position are not reasonable,' Gowdy said. 'That's exactly the last answer you gave.'

When Richards argued that he was twisting her words, Gowdy interjected: 'It's not always what you say, just sometimes what you mean,' seeming to wink his right eye at her."

If someone had said that to a witness Mr. Gowdy was representing and he did not start hurling objection such as “badgering the witness, misrepresenting the evidence, and assuming facts not in evidence,” he would be guilty of legal incompetence or malpractice. How the hell did he know what she meant? Is he the Amazing Kreskin?

*Update: Discussion and Correction of Chaffetz Chart.