Sunday School Extra Credit: 11/3/19

In yesterday's Sunday School post, we spent time with Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Andrew Yang, consistent with my promise to pay attention to the Democratic presidential candidates when they're making the rounds.

In addition to the candidates, a few key Republicans were also making appearances in the classrooms - House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan; Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway on CNN's State of the Union with Dana Bash. Let's tackle them in order.

Brennan asked about strategy in light of the "damaging detail" that's expected to be shown in testimony likely to be released this week, and she asked who the Rs would like to see testify. There were lots of words, there was lots of interruption, but here's the gist of it. He wants to call Adam Schiff. Brennan seemed a bit incredulous, but McCarthy stuck to his guns.

Yes, I would. Because he is the only person who knows who this whistleblower is. He refers to himself as a Ken Starr, Ken Starr testified. How many times did he meet with the whistleblower? What did he talk to the whistleblower about? Because when the whistleblower even went to the inspector general he never mentioned that he went with Adam Schiff.

Remember what we're talking about today Margaret, the removal of the president of the United States. This should not be taken lightly. We should have all the facts. The public deserves the facts not something that's leaked. We're three weeks since the very first hearing inside there, the deposition. We still do not have the transcripts. You have members of Congress who just voted to justify what has already happened without ever reading one word of what's gone on.

Brennan did not remind him that we have members of Congress who just voted against what has already happened without ever reading one word of what's gone on, and that the vote that was passed allows all of them to see what's gone on. And, of course, that Republican members of Congress are in the room listening to or participating in the depositions and it defies credulity that the Rs don't know exactly what's been said in those traditionally secret depositions.

Brennan also pointed out that the whistleblower's attorneys have offered to have their client answer written questions, under penalty of perjury, directly to Republicans on the Intelligence Committee without going through the Democrats. McCarthy's response?

Well, Margaret, I have never received that offer and I'm the lead Republican in the House.

When Brennan told him the offer was submitted to Devin Nunes, the ranking Republican on the committee, McCarthy's answer was priceless.

Well, when was it submitted to him? because Devin had not told me about that prior to today.

Brennan said it was submitted Saturday night (not reiterating that was when McCarthy was in New York City attending a UFC event with the president). 

Well, Devin's in California, so let's see how they submitted. 

Right -- he was in California, the same state you represent -- and you were gallivanting around in NYC with the president, the subject of an impeachment that will come to you for a vote. Good to know.  

McCarthy pretended that the 'transcript' of the call is more information than the whistleblower has - which is almost certainly untrue, unless McCarthy has seen the actual transcript, which is on the secure server because it was so frightening? Potentially damaging? Embarrassing?

In the end, McCarthy stood firm on the demand, instigated and pressed by the president, that the whistleblower must come forward in person and show their ever loving whistleblowing face. 

I think democracy is too precious to think that somebody who's not on a phone call, that cannot stand before the American public, and answer the questions, that somehow we would change the course of that? And we're one year away from today. What are they so afraid of? What do they have to hide? Why wouldn't they release one item? 

Apparently, focusing on the whistleblower, instead of on the first-hand testimony provided by people who were on the call is all the strategy Brennan was able to get.

Scalise also toed the party line.

It’s all about reversing the results of the 2016 election. There are no high crimes or misdemeanors.

Stephanopoulos played a video clip of Deputy SecState John Sullivan indicating that "soliciting investigations into a political opponent, I don't think that would be in accord with our values" and asked if Scalise agreed with that statement. He said that wasn't what happened on the call, and there was some back and forth about that, whether it was Crowdstrike or Burisma or Biden. George asked again, "it's just a very simple question, do you think it's appropriate for the president to ask the Ukrainians or the Chinese, which he's also done in public, to investigate his domestic political opponents?"

Well, first of all on that call he was not talking about the 2020 election or political opponents, he was talking about corruption relating to the 2016 elections.

We know that is not correct, because the summary of the call clearly mentions the Bidens. It's right there, on page 4.

So, again, we're supposed to believe what the Republicans call a transcript, except when it doesn't support their position.  Got it.  

Scalise also said he wanted the whistleblower to testify, because

There are many reports out there that the whistleblower actually worked for Joe Biden. That concerns a lot of people. There are also a lot of reports that Adam Schiff and his staff coached the whistleblower prior to the whistleblower report being released.

Ignore, we're basically being told, that the Intelligence Community Inspector General indicated that whatever prior relationship there was did not discount what he reported, and that what was reported presented an urgent risk.

Scalise also repeated the lie that Nixon and Clinton depositions were public. His comments only reinforce how afraid the Republicans are here.

Dare I move on to Conway? Sure, what the heck. Dana Bash announced the state of our union to be "in fighting mode." And right off the bat, we have Conway calling the summary memo of the phone call "the transcript" and right off the bat, I know we're going to have fun with this.

In the interest of time, I'm just going to highlight some of Conway's comments. These are in order, and are in response to different questions Bash asked.

We don't need Ukraine's help to beat Joe Biden, anymore than we needed help to help beat Hillary Clinton.

 Who needs Ukraine's help to beat Joe Biden?

I feel comfortable saying that he never mentioned 2020, quid pro quo, holding up aid, Joe Biden, his political rival.

And but for President Trump, there would be no kind of aid going to Ukraine right now. Under President Obama, he was like the MyPillow guy for Ukraine. He was sending pillows and blankets.

There's no evidence that Donald Trump did anything wrong. 

Why are we about to have public hearings trying to impeach a president rather than voting on the USMCA, reducing drug prices, improving health care for the 28 million...

No no no but you are saying poor Hunter Biden and Joe Biden did nothing wrong. But what did Donald Trump do wrong? 

They have the aid. They're using the aid. 

And they get to the process a bit.

I think - I think if you're going to do, respectfully, what Adam Schiff does, is just come out and cherry-pick the 10 seconds or 10 minutes of 10 hours worth of testimony the - the - we have no access to the full testimony because everything's been done in the dark in secret.

We cannot unscramble the egg, put the toothpaste back in the tube now...

And, back to substance, with this specific question: "Was - was there a time when military aid was held up because the president wanted Ukraine to look into the Bidens?"

I don't know. But I know they've got their aid... Here's what's absolutely, unimpeachably true. Ukraine has that aid. They have more aid than they had under the previous administration.

They are using the aid. The Ukrainian president said he had no idea aid was being held up. He felt no such pressure.  

On and on and on it went, almost like an "I know you are, but what am I?"  Conway herself frequently cherry-picked parts of what has been released that is allegedly helpful to the president, such as the Sondland text that there was no quid pro quo, not mentioning testimony that Trump dictated that message to him and told him to send it.

And, she said

So we have to...make sure people get the full picture. And we've all been deprived. CNN, the White House, we've all been deprived and denied... 

Sh said that public hearings are "too late" and added

What I'm telling you is, Ukraine has the aid. And if we're going to impeach a president over ...different people's - quote - "interpretations" who the last time I checked weren't elected to be the president of the United States and the commander in chief...

Nobody ever thought we'd release the transcript. Ladies and gentlemen, you can all see it. Go read it. Everybody has access to it. What we don't have access to, Dana, is what happened over the last five or six (weeks) (in)...secret.

...Because nothing in this conversation so far resonates to the country, especially in the 17 swing states, that would lead to a high crime or misdemeanor.  

Why don't they admit what this is all about? Stop pretending this is about Ukrainian aid, this is about red hats, red ties and rednecks.

I'm going to stop there, even though there was more, much more.