With the fix being in and the so-called trial of Donald Trump about to be choked off for the benefit of “The Chosen One”, here are two profiles in cowardice involving Reactionary Republicans that demonstrates their fear of simple and honest questions and the loathsomeness of their behavior.
Martha McSally is the junior senator from Arizona, appointed by the governor to replace the retiring junior senator, Jeff Flake. She was not put there by the voters of Arizona - she was beaten in the last election by the Democrat, Krysten Sinema. But she is there anyway and as a result sat on the senate trial of Donald Trump.
Martha McSally has a reputation as a female fighter pilot, the first to fly in combat, and a brave, forthright Republican women. During the Republican answer phase of the trial, after emerging from the deliberations, a CNN news reporter, Manu Raju, approached her and asked a simple question, “Should the Senate consider new evidence as part of the impeachment trial?”
This was a simple, straight forward question. And one that any Republican Senator sitting in that trial could have anticipated. And it was very pertinent question: the news media had announced that Lev Parnas, a major donor to Trump and friend of Giuliani, and, in conjunction with Giuliani, a fellow underground operator in Ukraine, had just made some rather shocking revelations about both men.
McSally should have been able to anticipate this question and have a ready answer. And there were all kinds of things she could have said. Of course, as a Reactionary Republican and part Mitch McConnell Senate fix to protect Donald Trump, she would not have said the obvious, “Yes, I think the Senate should consider new evidence.”
But any half wit Republican Senator, knowing that question would be coming, could still easily have handled it. She might have said, “No, it’s not fair to consider new evidence after the house investigation has finished.” Not perfect , but good enough for other Republicans. She could have handed the responsibility off to someone else by saying, “That decision must be made by the Senate Leader - go ask Mitch McConnell.” If she had been clever she might even had said, “The new evidence is of such a nature that we could now allow it without it all being thoroughly vetted and confirmed first, no matter how long it takes. Anything else would be unfair to the President.” She could even have dismissed it by saying, “Our constitutional scholar (Dershowitz) has said that even if there is new evidence about a quid pro quo it does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense, so there is no value to having it introduced.” And because she was walking into a hearing room she could even have punted and said, “I sorry, but I don’t have time to talk right now.”
But not Martha McSally, the election loser foisted on the people of Arizona. When confronted with a simple, straight forward, and honest question, she panicked, went into flight mode and simply said, “Manu, you’re a liberal hack. I’m not talking to you.” Raju simply replied, “You’re not going to comment about this?” (what a horrible and calculatedly cruel thing to ask). But, McSally came right back with the same original, wicked and leathally perfect retort, “You’re a liberal hack, buddy!” And like any good and courageous fighter pilot facing down an enemy of the the nation, she put her head down and ran away. Thankfully, the Senate meeting room was only steps away and she escape his scurrilous question.
So this is the great Republican female fighter pilot? This is the first woman to fly in combat after the restriction on women in fighter jets was lifted (during the Clinton administration)? This is the kind of woman that the Republican party thinks is worthy of being a senator even after the people in her state rejected her as one?
McSally is a coward. She was spooked by a legitimate and easily anticipated question. And the best she could do to cover her retreat in the face of this dastardly ambush was to say, “You’re a liberal hack!,
With this kind of courage I can only imagine how she would have reacted to being attacked by enemy fighter jets. I can just hear her now, panicked and screaming over her radio, “OH, OH, bad people flying towards me … you’re bad people, bad, bad people, fly away, fly back to base!” And who made this women a fighter pilot anyway? If I was a typical Reactionary Republican I would have to ask if she got into the cockpit because she was somebody’s affirmative action case.
Someone obviously should have told McSally that as senator she would sooner or later have to answer a tough or potentially embarrassing question. After all, they can’t all be boot licking, softball questions lobbed by Shinola-Nose Sean Hannity.
Of course, being a good Reactionary Republican, as well as a thorough coward, McSally immediately fled to the safe and comforting refuge of Fox Fake and Phony News by appearing on the Laura Ingraham show. There she was able to show the world, and the evil Raju Manu, just how tough and courageous she really is.
Ingraham, naturally, was pleased to have her on the show -she will never miss an opportunity to slam the mainstream media for ambushing good conservative politicians with simple, obvious and easy to answer questions.
Within the safe, oozey shelter of the Fox News studio McSally continued her assault on the evil Raju Manu (who, of course, was not there to defend himself nor invited for comment in real time). She laid into him by declaring that she had no regrets about her cowardly runaway escape line and that all the CNN reporters were biased, in cahoots with the Democrats, and hated President Trump. And then proudly boasting, “I tell it like it is!”
But the question was still so obvious that even Laura Ingraham had to ask it. She even cushioned the blow by saying, “You can call me a conservative hack (no kidding), but do you want witnesses, yes or no? Why aren’t you telling us?”
But McSally, as quick on the draw with a non-response response as she was with a Hellfire missile, could only offer up this, “I’m not going to tell everyone what my votes are going to be.”
To which, even Laura Ingraham had to reply with the obvious, “Pretty easy question, don’t you think, senator? citation
Republicans are cowards, and Martha McSissyPants is one of the worst. Shame, too, because you would like to think that a soldier would be tough enough to take some ground fire and not just fly away. Of course, most do show such courage. Lt. Col. Alexander Vidman comes to mind. He sat all by himself in that house inquiry and took hostile questions and disgusting personal attacks from all corners of the Republican establishment, and didn’t even try to run away or evade questions. Then again, he is not a Sally McSissyPants.
And speaking of cowardly ex-servicemen, how about Mike Pompeo. Pompeo, former United State military officer and currently the excuse we have for a Secretary of State, has managed to demonstrate both stupidity and cowardice. And all within a relatively short period of time.
Pompeo has accused NPR correspondent and reporter Mary Louise Kelly of lying to him about an interview that he did with her. Specifically, he accused her lying about the questions - he contends that there would be no questions about Ukraine, only Iran,. And, he accused her of lying about her reporting that he had her brought into his private living room where he berated her, repeatedly hurled the F-bomb at her, asked her if she thought the people of the United States cared about Ukraine and then, inexplicably, challenged her to find Ukraine on an unmarked map. citation
Here is why Pompeo is lying. He offered no proof that he would answer questions only about Iran. Kelly, on the other hand, reminded him that when they were negotiating the terms of the interview that not only would she ask questions about Iran but about Ukraine as well. And, she further reminded him, that she had put it in writing (in case he wanted to go back and look himself). And sure enough, when the email exchanges were examined it shows that Kelly would ask him about things related to Ukraine.
Concerning Kelly’s supposed second lie, Pompeo claims that the private room conversation was supposed to be off the record. And that she breached journalist standards (of which he is surely an expert) in how she reported it.
Of course, Pompeo offers no more evidence to support the claim that the meeting in the private room was off the record than he did about the terms of the interview proper. All we have are Pompeo’s claims.
But Pompeo is lying. And doing it rather stupidly. On both counts.
Think of it - if Pompeo had really negotiated to discuss only Iran (or non-Ukraine topics) then, during the interview as soon as Kelly asked him about Ambassador Yovanovich (did he owe her an apology?) he would have stopped and reminded her that she had already agreed that there would be no questions about Ukraine.
But he didn’t do that. He just ranted that he came to talk about Iran. But there was no mention of Kelly lying or trying to trap him by deceit. And, of course, if he really did feel that Kelly lied to him he would have done the obvious thing - stopped the interview and walked out. He didn’t, he just got angry and kept ranting on until it was time to retreat.
And as for his second lie about what he said to Kelly and how he acted in the private room, what an idiot!
If he really believed that Kelly had lied to him about the interview questions why in the hell did he ask her to come into his private room? Oh I know, he was sure that she was lying before but would be honest then!!
No, he invited her into the private room only so that he could scream and abuse her. Because that is the kind of coward that he is - one who gets embarrassed by a women (doing her job). Martha McSissyPants ran away, but Pompeo, being bigger and tougher than Kelly, just figured that he could take her one on one and beat her up in private.
No, Pompeo’s actions are what you would call internally inconsistent. His actions are too much at odds with his after-the-fact claims to be taken as anything but lies.
And here’s is one more way you can tell that Pompeo is obviously lying about what transpired with Kelly in the private room. In an obvious attempt to smear Kelly as being stupid, he was dumb enough to challenge her to find Ukraine on an unmarked map. And then he actually tried to make people believe that she mistakenly pointed to Bangladsh! citation
What an idiot! Kelly has a master’s degree in European studies, and probably could identify about every country in Western and Eastern Europe with or without lines on a map. Moreover, any half brain dead idiot who has ever looked at a globe knows that Ukraine is in Eastern Europe, real close to Russia (to which it used to belong) and on the Black Sea! And Bangladesh is all the way over - ON THE FREAKING FAR EASTERN SIDE OF INDIA. India! you fool - which is nowhere near Europe. And don’t tell me that an experienced reporter who has worked in China, Russia and Iran and has a master’s degree in European studies mistakes Bangladesh for Ukraine (she didn’t, of course).
Fear and loathing of Republicans: fear of reporters’ questions and the loathsomeness of their cowardice and lying. What a thing!