Brit Hume is usually fairly mild-mannered on Twitter. He will occasionally ‘snark’ at someone stupid but for the most part, his tweets are factual and mellow, and he does not argue with stupid people.
This from twitchy.com.
Until he DOES argue with stupid people and then … look out. Although he’s not really arguing, he’s just explaining to them in great detail why they’re wrong.
Case in point:
I’ve covered Washington for more than 50 years, including 11 years covering Congress specifically. I’ve never seen a committee all of whose members were chosen by one party, and where there is no cross-examination or any attempt to present both sides. https://t.co/7bjCm3O9Ez
— Brit Hume (@brithume) July 1, 2022
This is the evil, vengeful Nance Pelosi show and we all know it.
She deliberately chose two Republicans she knew would push her narrative so they and the media could push the notion that it’s a BIPARTISAN committee.
And Americans can see this crap sandwich is anything but … bipartisan.
Release the sycophant January 6 Committee defenders:
.@brithume could have covered Washington for 240 years and not seen a president challenge the lawful transfer of power in this way, nor seen members of Congress let institutional responsibilities be so eclipsed by devotion to/fear of a cult of personality. https://t.co/jhTzRhpR2T
— John F. Harris (@harrispolitico) July 1, 2022
So, it’s okay for two Republican-elected members of congress to behave so obsequiously toward the democrats in control?
This is not mentally healthy behavior.
Brit responded.
What a poor justification for discarding all Congressional precedent and norms in investigating Trump’s disgraceful post-election behavior. https://t.co/JEoP8esFnV
— Brit Hume (@brithume) July 1, 2022
In more ways than one, this committee is a classic witch hunt.
It has gone beyond matching what the democrat-communists have called ‘disgraceful post-election behavior.’
If you want to compare it to a trial, this is the prosecution’s opening argument. That’s it.
— Danny Deck (@DannyDeck68) July 1, 2022
Okay, so when does the defense get a shot?
After all these months, why hasn’t that time been allotted?
That was a rhetorical question. We very well know why.
So how and when will the defense get to make its opening statement? https://t.co/BDJJbxvqZA
— Brit Hume (@brithume) July 1, 2022
We can play this game of snark-response too.
Socialist automaton apologists are absent of measurable intelligence.
You may have forgotten that republicans had the opportunity to be represented but chose not to be serious about their representation!
If this needs to be compared to a legal proceeding to be accepted than it is t is like a grand jury where their is no adversarial representation!— Steve McPartlin (@thesaloonguy) July 1, 2022
Seriously.
Being “serious about their representation” is a lovely euphemism for being allowed to appoint only members acceptable to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. https://t.co/87ywOMETGe
— Brit Hume (@brithume) July 1, 2022
