“Incomprehensible” is how the Washington Times editorial page describes the reported decision of Nancy Pelosi to oust Rep. Jane Harman as the top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and replace her with Rep. Alcee Hastings. Not only is Harman able and bright, but she has a record of seriousness with respect to intelligence issues dating back to the late 1970s when she served as special counsel in the Department of Defense. By contrast, Hastings, in the words of the Times, is “arguably the least impressive member of the House.” He was impeached as a federal judge by the Democrat-controlled House after a special investigative committee concluded that he had lied and fabricated evidence to win an acquittal on bribery charges. One impeachment count approved by the House alleged that Hastings leaked information about a wiretap he was supervising, forcing a halt to an extensive federal undercover operations. It is to this corrupt blabber-mouth that the Dems would assign their top spot on the most senstive congressional committee.
But why is this imcomprehensible? It’s been quite a while since the Democrats considered seriousness on national security issues a virtue worth rewarding. Just ask Senator Lieberman.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.