Rep. Elise Stefanik Plays Gotcha

Congressional hearings ideally are useful exercises that are used to collect information, allow Congress to engage with third parties (especially members of the executive branch and nominations), and express themselves. 

The last part is going to be part of the mix. The cynical will label all public hearings as a sort of "dog and pony show" that is a lot of hot air. It need not be. It is not merely that. Nonetheless, yes, there is some of that. Republicans seem to use them to do a lot of bloviating. 

One or more college presidents got in trouble for some remarks about addressing antisemitism. We had some "the devil has a point" responses. Nonetheless, as Popehat* notes here, let's not fall for that. A few complained (most watching one clip) that a witness needed to answer better. 

I thought this when I saw it on Twitter/X. The gotcha is that "promoting genocide" should be against the rules. A trick is that "genocide" is being used loosely. Also, context does matter. Hate speech is not default harassment. And, she sounds stiff because she realizes it is a trap. This gamesmanship is part of the game, of course.

I have not watched an extended clip. People should be careful. They should know what to expect. They should have a plan to address, as best they can, trolls like Rep. Elise Stefanik.  

We also should take things with a grain of salt. Do not fall for the "oh boy" when all you have is a short clip. Sometimes, maybe, it might be a sign that the witness is bad or had a bad segment. Even then, it is best to at least listen to more than a minute or two to get a decent sense of things. 

--- 

* Popehat has been in this blogging business for a long time. He is well respected. He often has some excellent things to say. Other times, he tosses in something that rubs me the wrong way. I am not a normal reader.  

ETA: "Penn’s President Resigns, After Her Responses About Antisemitism." Sigh.