Earlier this month, Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, sent letters to the heads of various oil companies seeking information about an alleged effort by former president Donald Trump to solicit a campaign contribution in exchange for pro-oil policies should he win reelection. That alleged quid pro quo was first reported by The Washington Post and centered on a meeting with industry leaders hosted at Mar-a-Lago. According to our report, Trump replied to a question about regulations by saying that his policy platform on energy production was worth the executives cobbling together $1 billion in contributions.
“Trump’s response stunned several of the executives in the room,” The Post’s Josh Dawsey and Maxine Joselow wrote.
On Thursday, House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) offered a response to Raskin’s letter.
ADVERTISING
“I support the right and ability of the Committee minority to conduct oversight,” Comer magnanimously wrote. Just not this particular oversight.
Follow Election 2024
“Despite efforts by you and some left-leaning pundits to conjure a nonexistent scandal,” Comer wrote, “there is nothing inappropriate or surprising about oil and gas executives aligning themselves with the candidate who favors increased production and U.S. independence from reliance on foreign energy sources.”
This is a fair point; of course the oil industry will support the guy that has repeatedly indicated that he’ll bend over backward to increase their profits. This is a different question, though, than the legality of asking for nine figures in contributions.
At the end of the letter, though, Comer offered a truly mind-boggling criticism.
“Your letters carry the odor, not of good-faith oversight, but of the weaponization of government office and of hypocrisy in chilling participation in the election,” Comer wrote. “This is far from the first time that election-year politics have entered into Committee Democrats’ oversight efforts.”
Chairman Comer is very lucky that irony is not a fatal condition.
You will recall that Comer has been engaged for more than a year in an effort to malign President Biden by way of members of his family. Time after time after time, Comer was at the center of allegations that were quickly proved overheated or overstated. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), then the speaker of the House, authorized a full impeachment inquiry in September, an effort that Comer would help lead. He has led it nowhere.
At the same time, he has repeatedly suggested that the value of his probe and his criticisms would be to hobble Biden’s chances at reelection.
Last month, for example, Comer participated in a radio interview in which he touted the fruits of his investigation.
“So the American people know the truth,” he said then, “and I think that’ll be a valuable tool of accountability for people in November when they vote, but also legal accountability.”
That seems to carry the odor of weaponizing government office in service of election-year politics. So do various fundraising emails that have been sent out under his name.
Earlier this month, for example, Comer sent out a fundraising email touting his having “uncovered evidence proving a massive web of lies told by Joe Biden about his family’s business dealings with our enemies around the globe.” (He did not.)
“I have some good news,” the message continued, “the American people are waking up to his lies and seeing him for the compromised Commander in Chief that he is. Now, with less than 200 days until the election, we must do everything we can to debunk his lies and make sure every voter knows the truth about the Biden Crime Family.”
Two weeks later, Comer tried to fundraise off the administration decision to assert executive privilege over audio recordings of interviews with Biden conducted by special counsel Robert K. Hur. The recordings were sought as part of the sprawling impeachment inquiry
Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision not to make the recordings available “could be the final blow to Biden with swing voters across the country,” the email from Comer asserted.
There is precedent for House Republicans using investigations to influence presidential politics. Back in 2015, McCarthy came under fire for crowing to Fox News’s Sean Hannity that, while the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton once looked impossible to beat, “we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”
Over the course of his probe, Comer has repeatedly elevated false or unsubstantiated claims about Joe Biden despite those claims having been shown to be false or unsubstantiated. His ongoing insistence that he has the goods on Biden and/or that he is about to lower the boom — a finale that has been imminent for months now — is either a function of his being unfamiliar with his claims being debunked or it is a function of his being uninterested that they have been.
His probe, since the beginning, has carried the odor, not of good-faith oversight, but of the weaponization of government office for political purposes. Perhaps this is why he so readily accuses Raskin of the same.
“Trump’s response stunned several of the executives in the room,” The Post’s Josh Dawsey and Maxine Joselow wrote.
On Thursday, House Oversight Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) offered a response to Raskin’s letter.
ADVERTISING
“I support the right and ability of the Committee minority to conduct oversight,” Comer magnanimously wrote. Just not this particular oversight.
Follow Election 2024
“Despite efforts by you and some left-leaning pundits to conjure a nonexistent scandal,” Comer wrote, “there is nothing inappropriate or surprising about oil and gas executives aligning themselves with the candidate who favors increased production and U.S. independence from reliance on foreign energy sources.”
This is a fair point; of course the oil industry will support the guy that has repeatedly indicated that he’ll bend over backward to increase their profits. This is a different question, though, than the legality of asking for nine figures in contributions.
At the end of the letter, though, Comer offered a truly mind-boggling criticism.
“Your letters carry the odor, not of good-faith oversight, but of the weaponization of government office and of hypocrisy in chilling participation in the election,” Comer wrote. “This is far from the first time that election-year politics have entered into Committee Democrats’ oversight efforts.”
Chairman Comer is very lucky that irony is not a fatal condition.
You will recall that Comer has been engaged for more than a year in an effort to malign President Biden by way of members of his family. Time after time after time, Comer was at the center of allegations that were quickly proved overheated or overstated. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), then the speaker of the House, authorized a full impeachment inquiry in September, an effort that Comer would help lead. He has led it nowhere.
At the same time, he has repeatedly suggested that the value of his probe and his criticisms would be to hobble Biden’s chances at reelection.
Last month, for example, Comer participated in a radio interview in which he touted the fruits of his investigation.
“So the American people know the truth,” he said then, “and I think that’ll be a valuable tool of accountability for people in November when they vote, but also legal accountability.”
That seems to carry the odor of weaponizing government office in service of election-year politics. So do various fundraising emails that have been sent out under his name.
Earlier this month, for example, Comer sent out a fundraising email touting his having “uncovered evidence proving a massive web of lies told by Joe Biden about his family’s business dealings with our enemies around the globe.” (He did not.)
“I have some good news,” the message continued, “the American people are waking up to his lies and seeing him for the compromised Commander in Chief that he is. Now, with less than 200 days until the election, we must do everything we can to debunk his lies and make sure every voter knows the truth about the Biden Crime Family.”
Two weeks later, Comer tried to fundraise off the administration decision to assert executive privilege over audio recordings of interviews with Biden conducted by special counsel Robert K. Hur. The recordings were sought as part of the sprawling impeachment inquiry
Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision not to make the recordings available “could be the final blow to Biden with swing voters across the country,” the email from Comer asserted.
There is precedent for House Republicans using investigations to influence presidential politics. Back in 2015, McCarthy came under fire for crowing to Fox News’s Sean Hannity that, while the Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton once looked impossible to beat, “we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.”
Over the course of his probe, Comer has repeatedly elevated false or unsubstantiated claims about Joe Biden despite those claims having been shown to be false or unsubstantiated. His ongoing insistence that he has the goods on Biden and/or that he is about to lower the boom — a finale that has been imminent for months now — is either a function of his being unfamiliar with his claims being debunked or it is a function of his being uninterested that they have been.
His probe, since the beginning, has carried the odor, not of good-faith oversight, but of the weaponization of government office for political purposes. Perhaps this is why he so readily accuses Raskin of the same.
Last edited:
