WATCH: "I have no evidence but that's why there's an investigation in Congress..." @KellyannePolls on Trump's wiretap claims. pic.twitter.com/W4kGlrK0Um— Good Morning America (@GMA) March 13, 2017
Who needs evidence to start an investigation? I'd like some investigations and I have no evidence (actually for some, I'm sure I could come up with a reasonable amount of evidence). Here's my quick, off the top of my head list of congressional investigations I'd like to see:
- Why do so many Republican members of congress claim that climate change isn't human related?
- How much income tax has Donald Trump paid over the last 20 years and who has leverage over Trump because he owes them significant amounts of money or favors?
- Who do the Supreme Court justices talk to off the bench and how do those conversations affect their decisions?
- What is Sen. Dan Sullivan's (R-Koch) obligations to large oil interests and other funders?
- How do members of congress who knowingly vote against their constituents' best interests sleep at night? Is it true the pharmaceutical companies provide them with all the sleeping drugs they need? How does this affect their clarity and ability to make good decisions?
- How many officially pro-life legislators (federal, state, and local) have wives and/or girlfriends, mistresses who have had abortions? Who?
- How is it that members of congress do not object to Viagra being covered by health insurance, but they fight to keep birth control and abortions from being covered?
I'm afraid, I'm not too good at this. I've only asked questions, unlike Trump who made accusations.
Plus, these are all investigations which, I believe, if carried out honestly and effectively, would provide the US population with important information about how our representatives operate. And I'm sure a day of googling would give me lots of evidence that there is reason to investigate each of them.
The point here, is that investigations cost money. From what I can tell at that link about the costs of the Benghazi investigation, most of the money goes to pay for staff. What doesn't get factored are the opportunity costs of so many people spending their time on, say Benghazi or whether Obama wiretapped Trump Tower. What might they have spent their time on instead? Like coming to resolutions of issues so that the US is a stronger and safer and more democratic nation.
Try asking your local police department to do an investigation on something without providing them any evidence. Or your company to investigate something without evidence. It doesn't happen, because it costs money and takes people away from more pressing issues. And that seems to be the point of Trump's allegations, to divert attention from more pressing issues. But that's part of his standard operating procedure - Attack, Counterattack, Never Apologize. [I try not to be too repetitive, but I don't think I can refer to often to this Attack line of thinking. It truly appears to be how Trump thinks and everyone should understand it.]