How not to handle the scandals

There has been much debate in conservative circles on how to respond to the White House scandals that seem to be accumulating by the day. Members of the Hard Right Entertainment Complex see the scandals as ratings gold. Driving those stories also drives up viewership, readership and radio listeners. So the rhetorical overreach--which has always been a great business model for extremists of all stripes--is especially potent in news cycles dominated by stories of a Justice Department at war with a free press, the IRS at war with conservative groups and a State Department at war with the truth.

While top conservative talkers will be rewarded with higher ratings and increased web traffic, Republican leaders on Capitol Hill will receive no such windfall if they swing for the fences by comparing Benghazi to Watergate or the Justice Department to Stalinist war trials. Often, the wiser political move is to soft-sell the story to the jury, set your opponent's trap and then be shocked (!) along with the jury after all the facts that are needed to win pile up against your opponent.

Republicans' overreach during Bill Clinton's impeachment trial in the 1990s is a perfect example of how not to handle a scandal. The GOP Congress handled that sordid episode in White House history so badly that they did the impossible by turning Bill Clinton into a sympathetic figure. Republicans got routed in the 1998 midterm elections and Clinton left office in 2001 with a 60% approval rating.

Twelve years later, let's hope GOP leaders on Capitol Hill and across America ignore the wolves outside their windows howling at the moon. They should keep their heads down, gather evidence and bring that information to the American people. I know that voters will listen, learn and then make reasonable choices at the voting booth. If Republicans think strategically over the next year, they can avoid the mistakes made by my GOP Congress a dozen years ago.