(The following is Connie Bryan’s unofficial transcript of part of the recent U.S. Senate hearing, questioning Inspector General Michael Horowitz about his report into whether there was bias in the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton private email investigation…While it may not be exactly ‘verbatim’, it reflects the overall ‘gist’ of the proceedings in Connie’s opinion…In traditional Saturday Night Live style, picture Connie Bryan in the role of Senator Amy Klobuchar, Will Ferrell as IG Inspector Horowitz, and Alec Baldwin as the senior Senate Hearing Moderator/Chairperson)
Moderator: The Chair recognizes the gentle lady from Minnesota, Senator Amy Klobuchar
Sen: Thank you Chairman…Insp Horowitz, let’s get right to the heart of the matter… Are you familiar with the television show Law & Order? (Side note for the reader…Yes, Senator Klobuchar DID actually make references and comparison to the TV show “Law and Order” during her time speaking during the hearings)
Insp: Uhhh (looking around surprised) YES?… Yes Senator, I’m familiar with the TV show.
Sen: Would it be accurate to say that the first half of Law and Order is always dedicated to the criminal investigation by the FBI, and the second half of the show is always devoted to the DA’s prosecution?
Insp: Ummm, I’ll have to take your word on that Senator…but don’t ask me when they schedule their commercial breaks (ha ha ha)
Sen: What are you trying to be, a stand up comic or an IG Inspector? That wasn’t very funny…I’d advise you to keep your day job Inspector…Now, would you ever have ANY reason to question the ethics or integrity of any of the FBI agents on the cast of Law & Order?
Insp: Senator, no… but you know they are actors right?
Sen: Let it be noted on the record that the inspector indicated he recognizes the honesty and integrity of ALL of the cast members portraying the FBI on Law & Order…
Now, Inspector, Let’s say FBI agent Dean Porter, while investigating a famous money laundering, mob connected, womanizing real estate mogul with, let’s say a history of defrauding students at his fraudulent college, and of failing to pay contractors who did work for him, forcing them to sue him so that he could get them to settle for hundreds of thousands less…
And let’s say of trying to use ‘imminent domain’ to force an elderly woman to sell her property to him just for the purposes of building a ‘limousine garage’ for his New Jersey casino, not to mention a history of not wanting to rent to minorities…most specifically blacks in his housing projects…And let’s say with an admitted history of bragging about sexually assaulting women just because of his star status…
If while agent Porter was investigating this individual, let’s say he were to TEXT another agent with a comment, expressing his opinion that this individual was CLEARLY a “LOATHSOME HUMAN BEING”… How would that in any way tarnish the moral integrity of his investigation of said real estate mogul?
Insp: Senator, I’m not sure I completely follow you?
Sen: Inspector, It’s obvious what I’m saying… Wouldn’t ANY viewer with an ounce of moral fiber, who was tuning in to the show…Wouldn’t they ALREADY ALSO have determined in their mind, that said real estate mogul was, at a MINIMUM, a “LOATHSOME HUMAN BEING”? And as a matter of additional fact, wouldn’t you agree that the ONLY REASON the millions of fans of Law and Order would be watching IN THE FIRST PLACE, is because they want to see that “loathsome human being” brought to justice??
Insp: Ummm, Senator, once again…You DO understand the character on the show you keep referring to, agent Dean Porter, is NOT an actual FBI agent? He’s an character played by actor Vincent Spano.
Sen: Inspector, what does that have to do with the price of Stormy Daniels in China? And I’m asking the questions here… Would you have any reason to believe that ANY such comment by Special Agent Spano, during his investigation of such an obviously loathsome suspect, that indicated his personal opinion that he believed the suspect was in fact ‘LOATHSOME’…would such an honest comment in any way indicate an unfair, ‘BIASED’ investigation, so that the D.A. would not be able to continue with a fair prosecution during the second half of the show?
Insp: Ummm, I’d prefer not to engage in these kind of Hollywood hypotheticals Senator.
Sen: You are clearly dodging my question, Inspector…You have already indicated on the record that you recognize the integrity of the cast of Law and Order, to the extent that they represent the FBI on America’s beloved crime series…Now I’m asking you ONE MORE TIME… If you were watching said episode of Law & Order, maybe with your significant other, let’s say after a glass or two of Bordeaux…and you’re cuddling together on the couch, maybe hoping for a little ‘action’ after the episode…
CHAIRMAN: Ah, excuse me, but I will need to ask the Senator from Minnesota to please avoid such unnecessary detailed descriptives of a personal nature here today, and to move on with her question please!
Sen: Yes of course, my apologies… My point is…What was my point? Oh yes, my point was Inspector, if you were watching the aforementioned Law and Order episode, wouldn’t you yourself have likely already expressed to your significant other, words to the effect that this fraudulent, mob connected, money laundering and womanizing real estate mogul was OBVIOUSLY a ‘loathesome human being’? YES or NO?? REMEMBER sir, you are under oath.
Insp: I just…OK, I just want to make SURE that I understand the question you are asking Senator…Reading between the lines, it APPEARS you are asking me if I, and most of the millions of fans of Law and Order, think that DONALD TRUMP is obviously a ‘loathesome human being’?… And that by simply recognizing that obvious truth OUT LOUD or in a TEXT, would an FBI investigator be in any way jeopardizing his or her investigation?
Sen: GOOD GRIEF, YES! Yes of COURSE that is what I am asking you Inspector!! Would you please answer the question in the interest of my time?
Insp: Senator, like I said before, I don’t want to engage in hypotheticals here today…But I WILL say, if you were to ask me, if I walked out of my house to go to work in the morning, and there were very dark and threatening clouds in the sky, wouldn’t I bring an umbrella because it was obvious it might rain?
Sen: Yes, YES Inspector, exactly!! And your response would be??
Insp: On second thought, while I’d like to answer your question Senator, my hands are tied because that again is a hypothetical, and I’ve been asked by those who charged me with producing this IG report , NOT to engage in any hypotheticals.
Sen: And I think we can assume that those who charged you with producing this report are likely NOT honorable American fans of Law and Order, would you agree with that assessment Inspector?
Insp: Senator, I can’t vouch for whether or not Atty General Jeff Sessions is a fan of the show Law and Order. However, I DO know he has frequently asked me on occasion if I recalled various episodes of “Swamp Pawn Stars” , “Honey Boo Boo” and “The Beverly Hillbillies”.
Sen: My time is almost up Inspector Horowitz, but I do have one more line of questioning…Did you see the Law and Order episode where –
CHAIRMAN: Excuse me Senator, but I really must question your obsession with constantly referring to this FICTIONAL television series in your questions here today.
Sen: EXCUSE ME, Mr. Chairman!… But Law and Order is NOT just a ‘fictional TV series’…it is the GOLD STANDARD by which most Americans today understand the operations of the Federal Bureau of Investigations…And I would caution you about undermining the show in any way during these proceedings today, at your own political peril!
Moderator: Senator, I’m not undermining the show, but I am asking you to please, in God’s name, wrap this up!
Sen: Thank you…Now, Inspector, as I was saying, did you SEE the episode of Law and Order where agent Dean Porter was investigating a Hollywood, high profile serial sexual predator?
Insp: Uhh, yes actually I did…I don’t watch the show a lot, but my wife is a BIG Law and Order fan, and we actually watched a re-run together of that very episode last week…Ironically it WAS after a couple glasses of wine…and I WAS hoping to get a little act-
CHAIRMAN: ONCE AGAIN, I can’t believe I have to do this, but it appears I need to caution EVERYONE here today on getting into too much PERSONAL detail in your questions and answers…Please proceed with that understanding Inspector.
Insp: Sorry Mr. Chairman… So the answer is yes Senator…I did happen to catch a re-run of that episode recently with my wife.
Sen: Thank you Inspector…Now, let’s say Agent Porter had texted another agent during a coffee break, while interrogating the serial sexual predator on the episode, and let’s say the message of his text was simply an observation that the serial predator IN HIS OPINION, was a ‘loathesome human being’…
Now, In YOUR opinion as IG Inspector, would that text from Agent Porter have in any way INVALIDATED the integrity of the FBI’s case on that episode? The fact that he, along with the MILLIONS of American Law and Order fans watching, had formed such an obvious opinion of Donald (Woops, I’m sorry – Freudian slip!)…I meant of said ‘sexual predator’?
Insp: Again Senator, that is another hypothetical… However I WILL say, you might as well be asking me an obvious question like, “If I was at a Manhattan dog park, and a cocker spaniel came up and raised his leg next to me, wouldn’t I probably assume he was about to pee on me, and would I just stand there and watch?”
Sen: Yes, YES EXACTLY!!…That would be just as OBVIOUS!!…And your answer Inspector??
Insp: Darn, that’s actually another hypothetical… And as I’ve said –
Sen: Ok, well let me rephrase the question in a way that is NOT a hypothetical…
While watching said Law and Order episode, having admitted you watched it with your WIFE… And remember you are UNDER OATH Inspector…While watching said episode, did your WIFE indicate to you at any time during that episode, that said serial predator was, in her opinion, a ‘loathesome human being’?
Insp: Actually Senator, she said something even more specific than that.
Sen: And will you at least share that with us today Inspector?
Insp: Um…Well to be honest, she said the sexual predator in the episode reminded her of Donald Trump…
Sen: Ok, now we’re getting somewhere…And did your wife say anything else?
Insp: Yes…She said Trump reminded her of the corrupt ‘MONEY CHANGERS’ that Jesus used a whip to drive out of the TEMPLE…
Sen: OK, Now we’re COOKING WITH GAS!!…Did she say anything else Inspector? Remember, this is not a hypothetical question I’m asking you.
Insp: (Heavy sigh) Then she told me, JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF could have been running the Hillary Clinton email investigation… and even as the Son of God, he could have texted the obvious truth that Trump needed to be stopped, and that he was a ‘loathesome human being’, and Sessions would have called not just for his firing, but for his CRUCIFIXION!
(Sound of shock and chaos in the chamber)
CHAIRMAN: ORDER IN THE CHAMBER!! I WILL HAVE ORDER IN THE CHAMBER!! YOU’RE TIME IS UP SENATOR!
Sen: I just have one final question for the Inspector General…Did you AGREE with your wife when she said that??
Insp: What do YOU think Senator?? Like I said, we’d had a couple glasses of wine, we were cuddling on the couch, and I was too close to getting at least a reach around!!
Moderator: ALRIGHT THAT’S IT!! ORDER!! THERE WILL BE NO TALK ABOUT “REACH AROUNDS” IN THE SENATE!!
(Connie Bryan is a writer and comedian in Sacramento, CA…Check out her blog, standup and all of her comedy material on her website at www.conniebryan.com)