'Cite one example': CNN host stumps congressman promoting election conspiracy lies
Louisiana Republican Clay Higgins is still in office and is still allowed to speak to people in the public. Higgins, known for losing his law enforcement job for using excessive force and then lying to investigators about it, continues the journey to unseat other GOP officials in the clown car of a garbage fire they have created. Higgins one claim to fame is that he dresses very sharply and flashily for an elected official. Other than that, he has equated the need to use force against the immigration “caravan” (remember that?) with World War II allies battles on the beaches of Normandy. He really did.
CNN’s Jim Sciutto had Mr. Higgins on Tuesday to discuss the non-existent case he and at least 139 other Republicans are pretending to have in order to overthrow our democratically elected 46th president, Joe Biden. It’s important to remember that Clay Higgins’ last walk in the glow of media publicity was having a social media post pulled down because of how racist and violent it was. Anyways, Higgins took to CNN to explain himself, and like everything Higgins does, he did so poorly. Sciutto asked Higgins why he was trying to stop the certification of the democratically elected Joe Biden, Higgins replied that there was a “preponderance of evidence” that “crimes” had been committed. Like all things Republican these days, a simple request to provide even the faintest shred of evidence very quickly turned this gun-toting manly man into a snowflake being persecuted by a combative press.
Sciutto asked for a single example of evidence of election fraud, and Higgins dragged out the tired charges that Republican Georgia elections official Gabriel Sterling debunked, point by point, on Monday. Sciutto did his best to point out that unless Higgins had something new, his claims had already been investigated by a Republican official and found to be worthless. “That’s not true. The Georgia election official rejected that very—he rejected it point by point yesterday. I’m asking what evidence you have to contradict the state Republican election official there as you’re claiming right now? What evidence do you have?”
Higgins replied “Good sir”—yes, he said that—“I say again, we have a preponderance of evidence that crimes may have been committed, election crimes.” To be clear, when asked for an example from his “preponderance” of evidence, Higgins is only able to provide more evidence that the only word he knows with more than three syllables is “preponderance.”
Sciutto bluntly asked Higgins to “cite one example,” to which Higgins went on a rant, claiming that he did cite the example of “problems verifying signatures,” a charge that Sciutto notes was both investigated and yielded only two questionable votes out of 15,000 (2, dos, two, dois, deux, due). Higgins then claimed that Sciutto is using “talking points”—a rhetorical trick that would get you kicked out of a junior high school debate club, but gets you lauded by the Grand Old Party of racists and fascists.
Higgins then pivoted, explaining that investigations take time. He then noted that D.C. officials cited new complaints against someone possibly connected with the Lockerbie, Scotland, plane bombing over 32 years ago. I guess Higgins thinks Donald Trump should stay in office for a few more years or decades, for the duration of a thorough investigation of evidence-free claims made by people who have also wrongly claimed that COVID-19 wasn’t a dangerous pandemic and that climate change isn’t real.
Higgins insisted that he knows about investigations while Sciutto doesn’t. That’s true: Higgins was investigated and found to have used excessive force as a Louisiana police officer, and then was investigated and found to have lied to investigators. So he does know a thing or two about investigations. In fact, he seems to be paying off a guy that lied for him.
Maybe that should actually be investigated.