Over the weekend House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was on the Sunday shows again, or at least a Sunday show, or at least Fox News. The Sunday show format has gotten so tiring it largely passes without notice every week: The same Republican camera hogs go on the same programs to repeatedly bullshit an already put-upon public with the same rote answers, shrugging off whatever rote challenges to their narratives the fabulously paid hosts might on occasion rouse themselves—briefly—into offering, in what at this point amounts to a cooperative attempt by hosts and guests alike to turn all issues of existential import to the public into a sneering variety show themed around insulting non-Beltway audiences, over and over, for ever giving a damn. It is the place where news goes to die; it is each week's funeral for accountable government, lorded over by the same voices that did the killing.
The only time you will ever hear about a politician's performance on one of the Sunday shows is when one of the usual fatheads promotes a bit of bullshit so egregious that the lie itself turns into new news. It's usually Ron Johnson or Lindsey Graham, because even the bullshit is now fully formulaic. Performatively dimwitted Republican lawmaker is the bread and butter of the Sunday circuit. Sometimes it's Kevin McCarthy, a man who is the Ron Johnson of Lindsey Grahams cosplaying as the Marco Rubio of Mitch McConnells, so here we are.
On Fox News' version of the Sunday show—and this is redundant, because all Sunday shows follow the Fox News format of unchecked bullshit-peddling as "news," on all networks—House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was asked about Donald Trump's last-ditch effort to Do A Treason rather than relinquish power, an act of sedition backed by the majority of House Republicans as they peddled absolutely fraudulent notions of the American presidential election being "stolen" and therefore invalid. Only months after the insurrection that caused deaths inside McCarthy's place of work, he flatly refused to acknowledge his own bit of evidence that Trump was supportive of the rioters.
During the Jan. 6 violence, McCarthy had told other lawmakers, he called Trump to beg the then-president to call off the encroaching mob; Trump took the side of the mob, telling McCarthy, "I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are." It was just one of numerous Republican-confirmed exchanges that showed Trump's unwillingness to take action even after becoming aware that his vice president and top lawmakers were in physical danger—Trump was using the violence itself to pressure for an overturning of the election.
Now? McCarthy doesn't want to talk about it.
The leader of McCarthy's party attempted to overthrow the government via violent acts, and Kevin here doesn't want to dwell on it. On the contrary, McCarthy went on to instead demand that any special committee assigned to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection and attack on Congress should also investigate "antifa" and Black Lives Matter.
As Republican minority leader, McCarthy has considerable power over whether a congressional investigation of the Trump-promoted, Republican-abetted insurrection will take place or be scuttled. As Republican minority leader, McCarthy also is a key witness as to the facts that he himself is now trying to bury under rhetorical mudslide.
A new New York Times profile of the man released on the same day as his Fox News gaslighting paints a polite but unflattering picture of McCarthy's rationales. After the violence, McCarthy was "depressed." He was being asked to continue supporting the same fraudulent election lies that had now led to deaths, and was getting blamed for doing so, and Donald Trump was furious with him for not being willing to do even more. Mr. McCarthy was faced with the terrible, terrible "dilemma" of deciding whether to abandon Donald Trump after Trump's promoted hoaxes caused multiple American deaths and nearly led to the assassination of government figures seen as insufficiently loyal to Trump, or to continue supporting Donald Trump.
This is a dilemma only for an odious amoral fascist pustule of a man, of course. The only proper action for anyone who has stitched his own face into the American flag with as much gusto as Kevin McCarthy and others have is to not support hoaxes intended to lead to the toppling of elected government. The entire rest of the Times article consists of a long explanation that Kevin McCarthy, insurrectionist traitor, did not make that decision because Kevin McCarthy wants to become the next speaker of the House and has calculated that it cannot happen if McCarthy displeases Trump—so McCarthy continues the alliance.
Yes, there was violence in the Capitol. Yes, Kevin McCarthy himself was one of those who promoted the Trump-pleasing hoaxes that directly led to the violence and that nearly killed a vice president, and he directly witnessed Trump's unwillingness to call off the violence he stoked and was, by internal White House accounts, enjoying. But Kevin wants to be House Speaker, and that means Kevin must continue to offer loyalty to a national traitor, distance himself from what he knows, and block or water down probes into the hoax and its violence. You know, because of his dilemma of wanting to use Trump's power to enhance his own, regardless of violence, deaths, or damage to democracy itself.
We are less than four months out from a genuine attempt to topple elected government and reinstitute Trump as Dear Leader Because Reasons. Yes, the plot was absolutely stupid from beginning to end—but it existed. Yes, it remains likely that the Kevin McCarthys of the Republican Party supported the propaganda leading to the insurrection primarily so as to court the fascist Trump-supporting base and not with any real belief that Trump would succeed in actually overturning the election's outcome. And yes, it appears Trump himself, with the assistance of truly malevolent figures like Rudy Giuliani and an assortment of eager propagandists, genuinely did believe he stood a chance of remaining in power, so long as sufficient threat could be brought to bear against his enemies and allies alike.
And all of it is being whitewashed by the Sunday shows, shows that eagerly feature the same propagandists responsible for stoking the violence now in new campaigns to erase—simply erase—the actions they took and the consequences that followed.
McCarthy supported the promotion of false propaganda intended to delegitimize an election—propaganda that led directly to an attempted insurrection to overturn that election. He and the near-entirety of the Republican Party chose to continue supporting the man responsible for the violence so as to continue to accrue power for themselves. McCarthy is doing it even now: He is allying himself with the man whose seditionist acts he himself was forced to flee from, because doing otherwise stands the chance of alienating the fascist-minded Republican voters who still stand behind the violence.
None of the Sunday hosts, Chris Wallace included, find this notion objectively insane? No supposed journalistic flags are being raised by allowing those supportive of hoaxes and propaganda to yet again scrub out recent history to suppose that, well, perhaps an invisible antifa is the thing that most needs looking into?
McCarthy is a supporter of the insurrection. There are no games to be played over this; whether he did or did not intend violence when he originally peddled fraudulent notions about the election being "stolen" from its rightful Republican owners, he has made the conscious decision in the aftermath to ally himself with the man directly responsible even though he himself has direct knowledge of the scope of the plot—that is, that Trump himself backed the violence. The man is a seditionist, acting to block justice after an attack on democracy itself.
How that turns into a somewhat gauzy Times profile of a party leader just tryin' to make good despite the dilemma of having to balance a history-shaking crime against a desired new nameplate is ... confusing. How it translates into being given continued privileges on the Sunday shows to gaslight Americans outright in service to blocking probes of the sedition is mysterious. The journalistic meter here is one in which political corruption of the most nation-shaking sort is just another side to be debated, a new extension of the political spectrum in which intentionally crafting false hoaxes capable of goading extremist acts is a new partisan strategy, not the act of international crime it would be pegged as if it were another nation's lawmakers doing it.
McCarthy betrayed his country. Is betraying his country. He is doing so in service to personal and party ambitions and nothing else. None of it is hidden, but the morbidly sedentary press instinct is to validate it as political lifestyle choice rather than mark it as anti-democratic plot.
No, these are just the acts of a hopelessly unprincipled buffoon. He is just a cheap crook, and nothing more.
The only time you will ever hear about a politician's performance on one of the Sunday shows is when one of the usual fatheads promotes a bit of bullshit so egregious that the lie itself turns into new news. It's usually Ron Johnson or Lindsey Graham, because even the bullshit is now fully formulaic. Performatively dimwitted Republican lawmaker is the bread and butter of the Sunday circuit. Sometimes it's Kevin McCarthy, a man who is the Ron Johnson of Lindsey Grahams cosplaying as the Marco Rubio of Mitch McConnells, so here we are.
On Fox News' version of the Sunday show—and this is redundant, because all Sunday shows follow the Fox News format of unchecked bullshit-peddling as "news," on all networks—House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was asked about Donald Trump's last-ditch effort to Do A Treason rather than relinquish power, an act of sedition backed by the majority of House Republicans as they peddled absolutely fraudulent notions of the American presidential election being "stolen" and therefore invalid. Only months after the insurrection that caused deaths inside McCarthy's place of work, he flatly refused to acknowledge his own bit of evidence that Trump was supportive of the rioters.
During the Jan. 6 violence, McCarthy had told other lawmakers, he called Trump to beg the then-president to call off the encroaching mob; Trump took the side of the mob, telling McCarthy, "I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are." It was just one of numerous Republican-confirmed exchanges that showed Trump's unwillingness to take action even after becoming aware that his vice president and top lawmakers were in physical danger—Trump was using the violence itself to pressure for an overturning of the election.
Now? McCarthy doesn't want to talk about it.
The leader of McCarthy's party attempted to overthrow the government via violent acts, and Kevin here doesn't want to dwell on it. On the contrary, McCarthy went on to instead demand that any special committee assigned to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection and attack on Congress should also investigate "antifa" and Black Lives Matter.
As Republican minority leader, McCarthy has considerable power over whether a congressional investigation of the Trump-promoted, Republican-abetted insurrection will take place or be scuttled. As Republican minority leader, McCarthy also is a key witness as to the facts that he himself is now trying to bury under rhetorical mudslide.
A new New York Times profile of the man released on the same day as his Fox News gaslighting paints a polite but unflattering picture of McCarthy's rationales. After the violence, McCarthy was "depressed." He was being asked to continue supporting the same fraudulent election lies that had now led to deaths, and was getting blamed for doing so, and Donald Trump was furious with him for not being willing to do even more. Mr. McCarthy was faced with the terrible, terrible "dilemma" of deciding whether to abandon Donald Trump after Trump's promoted hoaxes caused multiple American deaths and nearly led to the assassination of government figures seen as insufficiently loyal to Trump, or to continue supporting Donald Trump.
This is a dilemma only for an odious amoral fascist pustule of a man, of course. The only proper action for anyone who has stitched his own face into the American flag with as much gusto as Kevin McCarthy and others have is to not support hoaxes intended to lead to the toppling of elected government. The entire rest of the Times article consists of a long explanation that Kevin McCarthy, insurrectionist traitor, did not make that decision because Kevin McCarthy wants to become the next speaker of the House and has calculated that it cannot happen if McCarthy displeases Trump—so McCarthy continues the alliance.
Yes, there was violence in the Capitol. Yes, Kevin McCarthy himself was one of those who promoted the Trump-pleasing hoaxes that directly led to the violence and that nearly killed a vice president, and he directly witnessed Trump's unwillingness to call off the violence he stoked and was, by internal White House accounts, enjoying. But Kevin wants to be House Speaker, and that means Kevin must continue to offer loyalty to a national traitor, distance himself from what he knows, and block or water down probes into the hoax and its violence. You know, because of his dilemma of wanting to use Trump's power to enhance his own, regardless of violence, deaths, or damage to democracy itself.
We are less than four months out from a genuine attempt to topple elected government and reinstitute Trump as Dear Leader Because Reasons. Yes, the plot was absolutely stupid from beginning to end—but it existed. Yes, it remains likely that the Kevin McCarthys of the Republican Party supported the propaganda leading to the insurrection primarily so as to court the fascist Trump-supporting base and not with any real belief that Trump would succeed in actually overturning the election's outcome. And yes, it appears Trump himself, with the assistance of truly malevolent figures like Rudy Giuliani and an assortment of eager propagandists, genuinely did believe he stood a chance of remaining in power, so long as sufficient threat could be brought to bear against his enemies and allies alike.
And all of it is being whitewashed by the Sunday shows, shows that eagerly feature the same propagandists responsible for stoking the violence now in new campaigns to erase—simply erase—the actions they took and the consequences that followed.
McCarthy supported the promotion of false propaganda intended to delegitimize an election—propaganda that led directly to an attempted insurrection to overturn that election. He and the near-entirety of the Republican Party chose to continue supporting the man responsible for the violence so as to continue to accrue power for themselves. McCarthy is doing it even now: He is allying himself with the man whose seditionist acts he himself was forced to flee from, because doing otherwise stands the chance of alienating the fascist-minded Republican voters who still stand behind the violence.
None of the Sunday hosts, Chris Wallace included, find this notion objectively insane? No supposed journalistic flags are being raised by allowing those supportive of hoaxes and propaganda to yet again scrub out recent history to suppose that, well, perhaps an invisible antifa is the thing that most needs looking into?
McCarthy is a supporter of the insurrection. There are no games to be played over this; whether he did or did not intend violence when he originally peddled fraudulent notions about the election being "stolen" from its rightful Republican owners, he has made the conscious decision in the aftermath to ally himself with the man directly responsible even though he himself has direct knowledge of the scope of the plot—that is, that Trump himself backed the violence. The man is a seditionist, acting to block justice after an attack on democracy itself.
How that turns into a somewhat gauzy Times profile of a party leader just tryin' to make good despite the dilemma of having to balance a history-shaking crime against a desired new nameplate is ... confusing. How it translates into being given continued privileges on the Sunday shows to gaslight Americans outright in service to blocking probes of the sedition is mysterious. The journalistic meter here is one in which political corruption of the most nation-shaking sort is just another side to be debated, a new extension of the political spectrum in which intentionally crafting false hoaxes capable of goading extremist acts is a new partisan strategy, not the act of international crime it would be pegged as if it were another nation's lawmakers doing it.
McCarthy betrayed his country. Is betraying his country. He is doing so in service to personal and party ambitions and nothing else. None of it is hidden, but the morbidly sedentary press instinct is to validate it as political lifestyle choice rather than mark it as anti-democratic plot.
No, these are just the acts of a hopelessly unprincipled buffoon. He is just a cheap crook, and nothing more.