If the average American voter cared about the Capitol riot committee, she
might wonder whether the committee's members or its targets are more
loathsome. All along, citizens have had to either laugh or cry at the
spectacle of federal election deniers leading an investigation of federal
election denial. But is the partisan congressional committee now interfering
in a state campaign?

As for the deniers conducting these proceedings, committee Chairman Bennie
Thompson (D., Miss.) was among the 31 Democrats who sought to prevent the
certification of the re-election of President George W. Bush in 2005.

Committee stalwart Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) has a long history of refusing
to accept Republican wins. He recommended dismantling the Electoral College
after the 2000 election and after the 2016 election he attempted to prevent
the certification of Donald Trump's victory and then boycotted the
inauguration.

And who could forget Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), who helped poison our
politics by spending years falsely claiming to have "more than circumstantial
evidence" of Trump campaign collusion with Russia?

After this season's final hearing was rescheduled to avoid competing for
television viewers with hurricane coverage, one might have thought the
partisan shenanigans were finally drawing to a close for this oddball
committee comprised exclusively of Democrats and Democrat-approved
Republicans. But now there's a question involving the surprisingly tight
gubernatorial race in New York.

A Journal editorial sets the scene in the Empire State, where GOP Rep. Lee
Zeldin is challenging Democratic incumbent Gov. Kathy Hochul:

New York is among the nation's most Democratic states, and President
Biden took 60% of the vote in 2020. The fact that Mr. Zeldin appears
competitive is a sign of frustration with Democratic policy excesses
and their demonstrable damage to the city and state.

A Quinnipiac survey this week showed Ms. Hochul up by only four points.
Notably, 28% of voters said crime is the top problem facing the state,
and 20% said inflation. These are good issues for Mr. Zeldin, who
promises to repeal cashless bail, fire rogue prosecutors, and cut taxes
to rev the economy.

But not everybody wants this election to be decided on the issues that most
concern voters. This week a New York Sun editorial states:

Congressman Lee Zeldin's jump in the polls in the New York Governor's
race looks to have spooked the Democrats -- including the solons of the
January 6 Committee. How else to explain the committee's apparent
attempt to intervene in a gubernatorial election by leaking Mr. Zeldin's
texts with President Trump's chief of staff? The leak comes as the race
has tightened to the degree that RealClear Politics reckons it to be a
toss-up.

Far from a bombshell, the leaked exchange draws no blood. Yet what is
the January 6 committee doing, issuing any leaks calculated to sway a
state election contest for governor?

Joshua Solomon of the Albany Times Union reports:

The Hochul campaign recently highlighted new leaked text messages,
which apparently were obtained during the Jan. 6 Commission's
investigation, that show Zeldin texting Mark Meadows, Trump's chief of
staff, in November 2020 about political messaging strategies regarding
"vetted voting irregularities." In comments to the Times Union, Zeldin's
campaign did not dismiss the texts but said his opponent is focused on
issues that are not pressing to the voters of New York.

One can't say for sure whether the committee leaked the information, but it's
an extremely good bet that neither Mr. Zeldin nor Mr. Meadows is the source.
The New York Sun opines:

This attempt to influence the outcome of a state election... falls
outside the scope of the panel's enabling resolution. After all, the
committee was asked "to investigate and report upon the facts,
circumstances, and causes" -- including "the influencing factors" --
leading up to the January 6 attack...

Nor is it the first time that the Democrats have strayed from the
committee's resolution. The Republican National Committee, after
getting a subpoena from the panel, challenged it in federal court
because the committee's members hadn't been appointed in accordance
with the terms of the resolution. Rather than risk defeat on that head
before the riders of the District of Columbia Circuit, the Democrats
dropped the subpoena.

The Republicans had also raised doubts whether the committee's subpoena
was constitutional because it wasn't "in furtherance of a legitimate
task of Congress" -- i.e., lawmaking. The Circuit riders seemed almost
reluctant to drop the case, noting that the January 6 panel had
"deprived us of the ability to review" what they saw as "important and
unsettled constitutional questions." This lack of resolution casts a
shadow over the panel's legal validity.

You can say that again.

--
Let's go Brandon!