Who Do the Dems Replace Biden With?
Sen. Hawley Obliterates a Biden Nominee About Her Defense of Religious Discrimination
'Their Lies Start With Their Name': Bank of America Slammed for Using Woke...
New Biden Regulations on Gas Furnaces Set to Hammer American Households
Maryland Dem: Muslims Not Supporting LGBT Textbooks Makes Them White Supremacists
Montana Republican's Message for Democrats Complaining About Wildfire Smoke
How Pence's Campaign Believes He Can Win Voters on His Actions During J6
Brian Stelter Has an...Interesting Take on CNN's Trump-Era Reporting
The Left's Reaction to the Wildfires Is Just What You'd Expect
Worse and Worse: California's Downward Spiral Continues
Democrat Governor Proposes a 28th Amendment to Enshrine Gun Control in the U.S....
Should Smart Phones Be Banned in Schools?
President Biden Vetoes Measure to Overturn Student Loan Debt 'Forgiveness' Plan
Comer Cancels Move to Hold Director Wray in Contempt After FBI Comes to...
Moral Authority — the Secret Weapon to Restore America

Where's The Popcorn? AOC And Her Liberal Posse Pounce On NYT Over Hope Hicks

AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler on Tuesday subpoenaed former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks and White House Chief-of-Staff Annie Donaldson to testify before his Committee. 

The New York Times wrote a piece about Hicks and whether or not she'd comply with the congressional subpoena before her.

Naturally, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) did what she always did: spin the story.

Apparently The Times piece wasn't substantial for AOC. She said the newspaper framed the story as a "Lifetime drama called 'Hope's Choice'" because she's weighing her options.

She seems to think the picture that The Times chose treats her "less equally" because it's a "glamour shot." And it's a theme liberals ran with. 

AOC agreed with former CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien's analysis of the situation, saying Hicks was being put on a pedestal. 

The talking points seemed to be the same across the board: liberals are assuming Hicks won't comply with the subpoena because other current and former members of the Trump administration – including Attorney General William Barr and former White House Counsel Don McGahn – didn't.

There's this whole notion that she can assert privilege. 

And be on the right side of history.

Then there are those who think she repeatedly covered for the big orange guy in the White House.

Seriously? When will Democrats give it up?

If Hicks decides not to testify, they'll be up in arms. If she testifies and they she doesn't provide them any intel that they're hoping – or convinced – she has, then she'll be someone who's lying for Trump. It's a lose-lose situation, in all honesty. 

It's time to move on but Nadler and his crew are just getting started.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video