Like the previous interminable impeachment hearings conducted by the House Intelligence Committee, yesterday’s session courtesy of the House Judiciary Committee provided members with a five-minute bully pulpit. Some of the Democrats used their allotted time to attempt to score points by directing leading questions at the four witnesses, while others chose to use their blocks for personal reflection.
Among the latter was Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), who, readers may recall, was one of the first members of Congress to introduce articles of impeachment against Donald Trump. Green also, in a moment of unintentional candor in May of this year, let slip the real reason why Trump needed to be impeached, telling MSNBC during an interview, “I’m concerned if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”
But yesterday, Green used his five minutes to expose what he viewed as a flaw in the procedure: Namely, none of the expert witnesses was “of color.” Here is a video of his rant, followed by a transcript of the key points.
Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?
https://youtu.be/o6zmaqOhN7E
I rise because I love my country, but I also rise today with heartfelt regrets. It hurts my heart, Mr. Speaker, to see the Judiciary Committee hearing experts on the topic of impeachment — one of the seminal issues of this Congress — hearing experts, Mr. Speaker, and not one person of color among the experts.
What subliminal message are we sending to the world when we have experts but not one person of color? Are we saying that there are no people of color who are experts on this topic of impeachment?
…
I refuse to be ignored and taken for granted. I came here to represent the people who are ignored and taken for granted. Not one person of color among the constitutional scholars. It seems that there’s a desire among some to have the output of people of color without input from the people of color.
It’s interesting that Green, who is a Democrat, didn’t own part of the responsibility for this perceived lapse. His party, after all, was in charge of the hearing. It was up to them to make sure that the spectacle reflected the Left’s obsession with diversity by filling arbitrary quotas when it came to the selection of their witnesses.
