The 2019 impeachment inquiry has been dominating the US news lately. It’s been very dramatic, with closed sessions, bombshell public hearings, recanting of depositions, and hours of riveting testimony. As interesting as the insight to the impeachment process is to me, perhaps more fascinating was the way each side used their choice of words to paint a negative picture of the other.
Rep. Schiff: “Chief Prosecutor”
Rep. Adam Schiff (Democrat), the Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, presided over the impeachment inquiry. Since the Democrats initiated the process, he can be thought of as the Chief Prosecutor.
Rep. Schiff sought to depict the President as a man who believes himself above the law and the Republicans in Congress as people who continue to defend the President despite evidence of his wrongdoing. In his opening and closing statements on the last day of testimony he spoke of how the Democrats “launched [their] investigation of this corrupt scheme“; how a “dedicated public servant” was “ruthlessly smeared“; how President Trump has to “destroy those that get in his way“; how Ukraine was asked to do “dirty work“; that it was “absurd” that the Republicans “don’t accept the documentary evidence.”
His opening and closing statements appealed to people to accept the facts as related by those who testified and to come to the logical conclusion that there is no choice but to impeach the President.
Rep. Nunes: “Defense Attorney”
Rep. Devin Nunes (Republican), the Ranking Member of the Committee, is the chief Republican voice. Like Rep. Schiff, he delivered opening and closing statements that made careful use of language to uphold his side of the hearings and to defend the President. As the chief Republican in the hearings, he can be thought of as the Defense Attorney.
A Defense Attorney’s job is to rip holes in the arguments made by the prosecution. So the more Rep. Nunes can call into doubt the truth of what the Democrats are saying and doing, the better he can defend President Trump.
Rep. Nunes used a lot more colorful language that appealed more to emotions than logic when it came to denouncing the impeachment process and defending the President. In his opening and closing statements, he referred to the impeachment hearings as, among other things, “these bizarre hearings” with its “carousel of accusations,” a “show trial,” a “spectacle,” an “impeachment crusade,” and a “farce“; about how the “grossly unfair process” “trample[s] on legitimate minority concerns.” He said that President Trump “was subjected to a coordinated smear operation.”
Other Republicans chime in
Overall, the Republican strategy seemed to be one of calling into question the need for an impeachment inquiry in the first place. I heard Republican Representatives refer to the process as a “kangaroo court,” which brings to mind a very unjust legal system and “Impeachapalooza,” which implies that the process is merely a spectacle.
The takeaway
When you’re trying to sway opinion one way or another, word choice is crucial. It’s not enough to speak well, you must also choose words that have a deeper meaning or that refer to other events in the Zeitgeist that will be instantly recognized by those who hear them. Words that make people feel something can be more powerful than those that make them think.
PS
If you want to download your very own transcripts of the impeachment inquiry, go to the House of Representatives’ website.