Email #90, Subject: “McCarthyism!”?

I want to thank you for not agreeing to President Trump’s call for a congressional investigation into his unsupported claim that President Obama wiretapped his offices before the election.

You have also recently refused to conduct an investigation into the Trump campaign’s possible contact with Russia, insisting that the House Judiciary Committee “can and will investigate any credible allegation of misconduct by the administration.” Since the Russian allegations—which already have forced the resignation of National Security Advisor Mike Flynn and forced Attorney General Sessions to recuse himself—do not rise to your definition of “credible,” the complete absence of evidence regarding Obama’s alleged wiretap must fall even further below that bar.

It would be helpful, however, if you would clarify for the White House and the American people in general your criteria for holding investigations. Press Secretary Spicer seems confused on the matter.

According to Mr. Spicer: “Reports concerning potentially politically motivated investigations immediately ahead of the 2016 election are very troubling.” Are you aware of any such reports? Mr. Spicer also reiterated the President’s demand that “the congressional intelligence committees exercise their oversight authority to determine whether executive branch investigative powers were abused.” Rather than providing any evidence, he announced instead that “neither the White House nor the President will comment further until such oversight is conducted.”

At minimum then, it appears that the White House is strangely unfamiliar with your concept of “credible allegation of misconduct.” It is also ironic that the President evoked “McCarthyism!” when first tweeting his unsupported allegation, since that term refers to Senator Joseph McCarthy’s practice of making unsupported “Red Scare” allegations in the 1950s. McCarthy was formally condemned by the Senate, and Edward Murrow famously said of him:

“No one familiar with the history of this country can deny that congressional committees are useful. It is necessary to investigate before legislating, but the line between investigating and persecuting is a very fine one, and the junior Senator from Wisconsin has stepped over it repeatedly. His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind.”

The President has stepped over the same line and has similarly confused the American mind. As chair of the House Judiciary Committee, isn’t it your responsibility to condemn the President’s use of unsupported allegations too?

Author: Chris Gavaler

Chris Gavaler is an associate professor at W&L University, comics editor of Shenandoah, and series editor of Bloomsbury Critical Guides in Comics Studies. He has published two novels: School for Tricksters (SMU 2011) and Pretend I’m Not Here (HarperCollins 2002); and six books of scholarship: On the Origin of Superheroes (Iowa 2015), Superhero Comics (Bloomsbury 2017), Superhero Thought Experiments (with Nathaniel Goldberg, Iowa 2019), Revising Fiction, Fact, and Faith (with Nathaniel Goldberg, Routledge 2020), Creating Comics (with Leigh Ann Beavers, Bloomsbury 2021), and The Comics Form (Bloomsbury forthcoming). His visual work appears in Ilanot Review, North American Review, Aquifer, and other journals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: