"That might work on Steve Bannon's podcast, but that's not gonna work in the Rules Committee..." Rep. Jamie Raskin told Matt Gaetz, shutting him up before demanding to know why he voted against an independent investigation into Jan 6th.
October 20, 2021

Rep. Jamie Raskin has elevated expressing disgust to an art form, and we have Matt Gaetz to thank for it.

Raskin has always had a tiger-like killer instinct ready to pounce out from behind that polite, brainy, calm, genuinely neighborly demeanor. All Matt Gaetz has to do is exist to bring it out in most of us, but no one delivers in quite so entertaining a way as Mr. Raskin.

Arguing that all of Trump's lawsuits attempting to overturn 2020's election have failed for good reason, Raskin — a constitutional law professor — had the legal and intellectual advantage over the Florida alleged sex trafficker Gaetz.

"No court has said fraud existed, so there's no remedy, because there's no violation, Mr. Gaetz," said Rep. Raskin, his voice dripping with well-deserved condescension as he drew out and elongated the "Mr. Gaetz."

He repeated, perhaps because he knows he's dealing with a stunted intellect in Gaetz, "There's no violation. There's no fraud."

Gaetz whined, "How can they decide there's no fraud if they didn't take up the question and review the facts on jurisdiction or remedy?"

Raskin had had enough.

"Okay. You know what? That might work on Steve Bannon's podcast, but that's not gonna work in the Rules Committee in the United States House of Representatives," he informed Gaetz, who had clearly been hoping for a Fox or Newsmax moment.

The beloved Maryland rep continued, "I'm sorry, Mr. Gaetz, forgive me. I've got some serious questions to ask you," because clearly Gaetz wasn't capable of discussing Trump's sixty-plus failed court cases with any degree of seriousness.

"The chairman of the January 6th Committee, Chairman Thompson and John Katko, who was the emissary of Kevin McCarthy, negotiated an agreement for an independent outside commission with five Democrats, five Republicans, equal subpoena power, right down the middle. And yet, Donald Trump decided he didn't like it because he doesn't want anybody investigating January the 6th. So he turned against it, and then the Republican leadership flipped over and turned against it. I think you voted against that commission. Why did you vote against that commission?" he asked.

Gaetz began, "For many of the reasons that I've discussed today. That the focus on January 6th is unwarranted --"

"So you don't wanna know. You don't wanna know any more," interjected Raskin. He continued, "Okay, lemme ask you about that."

Gaetz pretended to have respect for the courts, answering, "We have a process in Article III, where the courts get to determine those issues. If the United States government brings charges, people can resolve those in the courts."

"You don't wanna know," Raskin rightly concluded.

"That's not okay with you guys, because you wanna politicize--" struggled Gaetz, trying again to get his right-wing media soundbite out, and failing.

Raskin quickly gained control, denying him the satisfaction.

"Mr. Gaetz. I know you too well for this. You don't wanna know the answer."

That's Jamie Raskin for you. Seemingly soft on the outside, sharp as razor blades if you mess with him. Gaetz never stood a chance. Because not only does Gaetz not want to know more information about the insurrection, he more likely doesn't want the rest of us to know the information, either.

Can you help us out?

For 17 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.

Discussion

New Commenting System

Our comments are now powered by Insticator. In order to comment you will need to create an Insticator account. The process is quick and simple. When registering you will also be presented with the option to tie all your old Disqus comments to your new Insticator account. Please note that the ability to comment with a C&L site account is no longer available.

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.