The partisan political propaganda is stunning to behold, even for the New York Times.  This observation refers to the July 22 New York Times story on the Pelosi ban on two Republican congressmen from her Jan. 6 select committee, which now will consist of eight Pelosi puppets. 

The Times story opened with this paragraph:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi moved on Wednesday to bar two of former President Donald J. Trump's most vociferous Republican defenders in Congress from joining a select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, saying their conduct suggested they could not be trusted to participate.

Let's pause a sec for an instant translation.  The "conduct" at issue alluded to apparent concern that the banned representatives would not go along with the biased findings of Pelosi's eight committee puppets, but would insist on issuing a minority (that is to say, dissenting) report, and in Pelosi-world, dissent is not acceptable. 

Now look at the following paragraph in the Times story:

In an unusual move, Ms. Pelosi announced that she was rejecting Representatives Jim Banks of Indiana and Jim Jordan of Ohio, both of whom amplified Mr. Trump's false claims of election fraud, joined their party's efforts to challenge President Biden's victory on Jan. 6 and have opposed efforts to investigate the assault on the Capitol by Trump supporters.

The language of the foregoing paragraph suggests that any Republican who opposes the re-election of Biden — or the election of some other Democrat — in 2024 will face the wrath of Pelosi.  This paragraph also indicates the proposition that a Republican who raises questions about "election fraud" is, as night follows day, a liar.

The article continues, after noting that Pelosi permitted on the committee the three other Republicans selected by House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy:

But Ms. Pelosi said she could not allow the pair to take part, based on their actions around the riot and comments they had made undercutting the investigation.  Mr. Banks, who has equated the deadly attack to unrest during the racial justice protests last summer, said the Jan. 6 inquiry was created 'to malign conservatives and to justify the left's authoritarian agenda.'  Mr. Jordan, one of the biggest cheerleaders of Mr. Trump's attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the 2020 election, pressed Mr. Trump's false claims of election fraud on the House floor as protestors breached the Capitol, and has called the select committee 'impeachment Round 3.'

This third paragraph in the Times story, by Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos, certainly supports the sense that this Pelosi-concocted committee is to be filled by Pelosi puppets — but see how Times-style bias is inserted as well.  What transpired across the country in the summer of 2020 were not deadly riots, much less cases of insurrection; they were merely outbreaks of "unrest."  Those videos of arson and looting — why, they simply revealed "racial justice" in action.  The two words in this paragraph by two propagandists for the Times — "deadly attack" — are the falsest intimation of all, as one person was shot and killed by a Capitol cop at the Capitol, January 6, 2021: the unarmed Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt.  Also, how dare Mr. Jordan call the forthcoming effort, by the Pelosi Select Committee, Impeachment 3.0?

The Broadwater-Fandos narrative, taking note of the unfolding "partisan brawl" over the Jan. 6. Select Committee and the "poisonous relations" between the two parties, then reported, "Many Democrats no longer wish to work with or hear from Republicans who helped spread Mr. Trump's lie of a stolen election, especially those who led the effort and have sought to downplay the severity and significance of the assault that it inspired."

Translation: The only good Republican is one who will Cheney before Pelosi and her puppets.  

And speaking of the member of Congress who has inspirited the new verb "to Cheney," Ms. Cheney was reported, in the Times story, to have agreed with the Pelosi ban on Rep. Banks and Rep. Jordan.

Time for another pause.  How long would a Democrat be tolerated as remaining a Democrat if she were to agree that a Republican speaker was right to ban Schiff and Raskin from a select committee?  Two milliseconds after the utterance?

What will it take for House Republicans to realize that Cheney is a Pelosi puppet, along with all 220 House Democrats?

Returning to the role of Times-ites Broadwater and Fandos as megaphones for Pelosi, they write:

Ms. Pelosi had quietly debated her options with Democratic member of the [select] panel, who had expressed reservations about allowing firebrands like Mr. Jordan and Mr. Banks, so closely associated with Mr. Trump's efforts to undermine the election, to serve alongside them.

One final translation.  The lying select member from California whose name is identical with that of a television series district attorney, who spent the entire Trump presidency working the Sunday TV shows to undermine the 45th president, peddling the lie that Mr. Trump was an agent of Russia and, later, during Mueller days, added the baseless assertion that Mr. Trump obstructed justice — this representative prefers not to serve alongside true Republicans?

Where in the Constitution does it say lying leftists have the power to overrule the voters who elect conservative patriots to Congress?

Pelosi now has the select committee she apparently wished for from the start: eight partisan political puppets.  In this, Pelosi seems to be heedless of the adage: be careful what you wish for; you just may get it.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.