Rep. John Conyers, as predicted here 10 days ago, will hold one of his patented “fake hearings” on the Downing Street Memo Thursday afternoon at 2:30 p.m. EST. Pay no attention to the fact that the witnesses list is lead by the same lead witness (John Bonifz) who presented at his Ohio vote-rigging “hearing,” or that Conyers will trot out Valerie Plame’s husband, Joseph Wilson, who can regale the “hearing” with tales of yellowcake and book sales. Luckily for Wilson no members of the Senate Intelligence Committee will be present to bitch-slap him again. Given the lack of reporting about his cratered credibility, Wilson probably sounded like a great witness to Conyers.
At Conyers Ohio vote-rigging “hearing” the witnesses even addressed him as “Mr. Chairman,” though one suspects he will have counseled his new stooges that tomorrow’s stunt is neither an official meeting of the House Judiciary Committee nor an official hearing, and that in any event he is merely the ranking minority member of the Committee that’s not actually meeting.
What a handful of C-SPAN3 viewers will be treated too is a bunch of Democrats, many of whom are members of the Judiciary Committee attempting to hold a hearing without the Chairman and majority members. Given the moonbat factor I suspect that every member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (note their website is hosted by the lone Socialist in Congress – Rep. Bernie Sanders) will find a way to get some face time.
Undoubtedly they’ll fail to mention this:
Prewar British Memo Says War Decision Wasn’t Made – [NYT]
The second Downing Street Memo, which is a briefing paper for the meeting the original memo captured minutes of, states not once but twice that “no political decisions” to invade Iraq had been made. Of course they’ll probably argue that the briefing is superseded by the memo (are you dizzy yet) so no attention should be paid to the briefing. They’ll ignore that the chief of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service’s (Sir Richard Dearlove, noted as C in the memo) quote from the original Downing Street Memo, “Military action was now seen as inevitable,” was characterizing his impressions of the opinions of US intelligence officials he had recently met with. They’ll also ignore the fact that, other than providing intelligence, those officials Dearlove met with were uninvolved in the “political decision” making process.
And Conyers, et. all, will wonder why their fake hearing receives scant attention…
Prior Downing Street Memo coverage.
Update: They most certainly won’t be talking about the Editorial Board of the Washington Post saying:
AFTER LAGGING for months, debate on Iraq in Washington is picking up again. That’s a needed and welcome development, but much of the discussion is being diverted to the wrong subject. War opponents have been trumpeting several British government memos from July 2002, which describe the Bush administration’s preparations for invasion, as revelatory of President Bush’s deceptions about Iraq. Bloggers have demanded to know why “the mainstream media” have not paid more attention to them. Though we can’t speak for The Post’s news department, the answer appears obvious: The memos add not a single fact to what was previously known about the administration’s prewar deliberations. Not only that: They add nothing to what was publicly known in July 2002.
Update 2: They surely won’t be discussing Fred Kaplian’s analysis of the Downing Street Memo (and all the other memos) at Slate. Exactly how many mainstream liberal media institutions (NYT, WaPo, Slate, etc) must debunk the DSM obsessed bloggers assertions? Go back to the quote from the Fox News article about this being a test for the liberal blogosphere if you’re wondering who should be worried. Today’s “fake hearing” leaves the DSM issue precisely where the Ohio vote-rigging story is, nowhere. Much of the media has bent to the will of the left and issued mea culpas for not reporting on the story initially, but by and large they’ve also noted upon examination of the DSM story that there’s hardly even a bit of smoke (let alone fire) to the story. Many liberal bloggers have made this their ship and seem intent on going down with it. If that’s their choice so be it – we’re just interested observers to the non-story story…