Discussion: WH Calls Dean's Testimony A 'Complete And Colossal Embarrassment' For Dems

[tiowally]

If there is one thing the Hapsburg Hillbilly knows it’s “sleazy attorneys.”

[callmeeric]

Don’t worry, Sarah, in 40 years you, too, could be testifying before Congress as a convicted felon.

I can’t really picture her writing a book though… Well maybe a picture book.

[steviedee111]

Part of it would be to have experts weigh in on the witness testimony and explain to people what obstruction of justice is, why underlying crimes are not and should not be required to find a person guilty of such crime, and how the evidence presented by Mueller meets all of the elements for a conviction.

All good and well, if not for the fact an actual plurality of the electorate is possibly OK with the President being a criminal.

[tomanthony]

I’ll have you know, that I am certainly MUCH more embarrassed by that BIG FAT HAIRY CONFESSED LIAR, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who doesn’t do what we pay her to do, daughter of the very FAT and very crooked Mike Huckabee.
There is so much truth in the wise old saying, “The Apple Doesn’t Fall Far from the Tree”!

[khyber900]

I think it’s more that a plurality or majority are being coaxed by leadership to think that it might be ok to let a crook get away with massive crimes, breaches of national security and outright disloyalty because…reasons.

[old_curmudgeon]

Who f-ing cares what they say?

[pshah]

They’re probably picking on Dean, a relatively easy target, to avoid discussing Vance’s and McQuade’s devastating testimony. There’s no real response to the case they laid out for Impeachment.

[tomanthony]

By that time, she will have amassed a fortune after her years with the WWE.

[old_curmudgeon]

If we had an impeachment panel–a unified investigation–then maybe Democrats could have at least a more-or-less unified set of themes to make clear the enormity of Trump & Co.'s crimes.

[steviedee111]

If we had an impeachment panel–a unified investigation–then maybe Democrats could have at least a more-or-less unified set of themes to make clear the enormity of Trump & Co.'s crimes.

That would help, if not for the fact Democrats are essentially a herd of cats.

[sedonaz]

When most politicians use the word ‘frankly,’ it’s a tell that they’re about to lie. It’s similar to when certified liar Sarah Huckster uses any word.

[khyber900]

The challenge is for Dem leadership. The committee members know what needs to be done but they have to operate in a political context in which the Speaker is against impeachment or at best for a long delay and gauge of public opinion before moving down that road.

That’s why Nadler got from Pelosi permission to ramp things up on the subpoena compliance front and to get other witnesses in front of the committee. He has to keep things moving this summer.

[rick]

I don’t know that they’re trying very hard. They’re certainly being ineffective. The strategy of reducing everything to sound-bites isn’t going to sway anybody’s opinion. OTOH, a clear, detail-based argument like what Rep. Amash has presented on Twitter could do so.

Also, they need to be more aggressive with accusing Trump of being a liar.

Finally, they need to stop expecting quick results. It takes time and a lot of work to move public opinion.

[randyabraham]

If they do take note of them, they’ll just dismiss those two as “MSNBC lawyers.”

[paul_lukasiak]

yes but…

yesterday was the first taste of what impeachment hearings would be like if held by the Judiciary Committee. There needs to be a select committee on impeachment that can write its own rules, to prevent this kind of crap. (it could be a subcommittee of Judiciary, if necessary, but it has to be able to have the majority Counsel conduct most of the questioning, and prevent witness harrassment during testimony.)

[nemo]

Why the hell Dems have a difficult time convincing the public Mueller’s work has merit is a mystery.

Not that much of a mystery. Communications 101 is not being applied.

1. There must 2-3 master narratives about the GOP/Trump, each hinging on a soundbite that is repeated at all levels of the discourse. For example, on the economy: “Republicans always crash the economy. They’re crashing it again.” On healthcare, “If you don’t want health care, vote Republican. If you think healthcare is important, vote Democrat.”
   On Trump-Russia, something like “the Republicans and the Russians are allied against the American people.”

2. Every time something new happens, you plug it into the master narrative. New jobs data? Boom. Republicans always crash the economy. New Mueller revelation or GOP act of obstruction? Boom. Republicans and Russians are allied against the American people.

3. The fact that there is no such communications model is down to the Democratic leadership and its (1) sheer ineptitude; (2) strategic confusion; and (3) fear of the GOP. Remember, last time Pelosi was Speaker, she led us into a cataclysmic midterm defeat. When the GOP had just crashed the economy and tried to stop the ACA.

[becca656]

So it sounds like Dean hit a lot of nails on the head about this administration - that’s the only thing that the WH would care to comment about, to denigrate the facts.

[paul_lukasiak]

hat would help, if not for the fact Democrats are essentially a herd of cats.

even a herd of cats responds to the can opener operating at dinner time… so too with Democrats. If they want TV time as an “official” spokesperson or DCCC/DNC/DSCC money, they should have to be able to stick to the day’s talking points.

And of course, the Dems will need to hire someone to develop its narratives, because whoever is responsible for the Dem message right now is grossly incompetent.

[george_c]

Complete And Colossal Embarrassment

Actually, a term that neatly describes the White House.

[paul_lukasiak]

The “master narrative” of the Dem leadership is that Pelosi “saved the ACA”

(just don’t ask how you take a 79 vote Democratic majority, and put the ACA in a position where it has to be saved)