the only reason that members of congress are allowed to hold hearings is to allow them to engage in fact finding before drafting legislation or impeaching a public official.
so what legislation is representative king contemplating right now? as far as i can tell, none.
somewhere along the line, maybe with the watergate hearings, politicians discovered that hearings were a great way to host a political circus. which is fine. the fact that a circus will follow should not preclude a legitimate hearing for some legitimate legislative purpose. but no one even bothers to pretend that the king hearings are anything more than peter king trying to make a point. even reading defenders of the hearings, i see a lot of people claiming the hearings "make sense" because violent muslim extremists exist. but none of them are addressing the fact this isn't about any legislation. if you keep your eye on the supposed point for legislative hearings, the king hearings make no sense at all.
so what legislation is representative king contemplating right now? as far as i can tell, none.
somewhere along the line, maybe with the watergate hearings, politicians discovered that hearings were a great way to host a political circus. which is fine. the fact that a circus will follow should not preclude a legitimate hearing for some legitimate legislative purpose. but no one even bothers to pretend that the king hearings are anything more than peter king trying to make a point. even reading defenders of the hearings, i see a lot of people claiming the hearings "make sense" because violent muslim extremists exist. but none of them are addressing the fact this isn't about any legislation. if you keep your eye on the supposed point for legislative hearings, the king hearings make no sense at all.
