Since you have an unusual capacity to keep somewhat suppressed - that justifiable rage which any human would experience re. This topic, somewhere along the exposition - you'd likely be able to sneak under the drone curtain which drapes over every speaking congresscritter.. when running a committee. (They really like to discuss such things as nuclear genocide 'calmly'- it makes the process seem almost wise, that way)

My thought is that, there's enough Quantity of atrocities to enumerate - just too many in fact, for most normal folks ever to assimilate: in a normal situation, listing merely the er *verified* instances, would have to seem to be oratorical exaggeration. Ergo somehow 'partisan'.

There's also the usual small percentage of Quality summaries, with just enough detail + a progressive story-line -- for the IQs of congresscritters possibly even to assimilate.

But past presentations suggest that the Quality screeds are submerged by the sheer mass of merely angry or vituperative (and often inept) material. SO.. someone demonstrably knowledgeable about a large number of individual atrocities; the resulting pattern of behaviour, one possessing also the details to bear cross-examination and smarmy rebuttal - that one might prevail over legions of less articulate speakers.

THAT is what I would hope to see 'happen' in the presence of Judge K-K. Of course this convergence would require chance, luck and.. her being in a suitable pissed-off mood:

A) Vaguely feeling that M$ IS a pustule on the ass of humanity.. but needing reassurance that there is solid data / evidence! to fully support such a simplistic characterization.

B) While aware that she could torpedo her own career if she pisses off enough members of the present Admin - *that day* feeling as if she *must* perform a service for the entire society and.. Damn the torpedoes!

{sigh}

So, you may not be the only competent candidate around but, I'd nominate you to speak for this particular small pond of massively talented.. yet humble experts ;-) Hope you can parlay the idea of "this being a relevant group" into somehow, being heard. AND.. were there room for two? Andy! Grygus has got to have the most acerbic summaries of anyone. Would pay for front row seats for the Andy & Ben / Ben & Andy Show, in a trice.

I'll contribute to the Greyhound fare, too :-\ufffd

(And if it gets that far, might I suggest a dress rehearsal?) It will be a play after all - needing all dramatic artifices available, to keep the listeners awake and.. hanging.. to hear the next part of The Story. Mark Twain == Your God for this unHoly Purpose, methinks.. (Would wish that you caught the bio of Twain on PBS, a few months ago. He may have been the most persuasive orator of modern times; Will Rogers stole merely the 'folksy' part of his perfectly-honed shtick.)


Mr. Smith goes to Washington

David vs. Goliath

Ashcroft vs. George Carlin (imagine That one)

Welch at the Army/McCarthy hearings

Twain (one hand tied behind) vs Wm. F. Buckley, the Junior.



Cheers,

Ashton



Go... ----> Iwethey !