Hecklers as Critics

How the Media Are Destroying Democracy

We are actually in the midst of a full-blown Constitutional crisis, but not because of anything President Trump has said or done; rather, it is because those opposed to President Trump — elected Democrats, the administrative and deep state, and the media — have decided that Trump is a cancer on the body politics, and even if they have to kill that body to excise it, they will.

They are actually creating a Constitutional crisis out of whole cloth by hysterically acting like everything Trump says and does is a Constitutional crisis. They are killing the trust and goodwill necessary for the democratic process.

To me, this just shows how the Democrats and Media are unwittingly serving as Putin’s pawns. Witness Putin’s most recent game. He says they have a transcript of the meeting in the White House. Doubt it. I predicted this would lead to charges that Trump was so careless he allowed a recording device into the meeting, and within hours Andrea Mitchell was asking Sec. Tillerson if the Oval Office was bugged.

By offering a transcript, which likely doesn't exist, Putin will also create the perception that he and Trump are allied, and Putin is trying to protect him. Needless to say the Media will allow Putin to play them like a fiddle, accomplishing what he could never have imagined in his wildest dreams.

The Russian collusion narrative is like if my neighbor told the police I had a meth lab, and they asked why, and he said I just know he does because he’s a scummy scumbag, and so they raided my house, set up camp and said they were staying until they got to the bottom of it, and each day that went by and they found nothing my neighbor kept screaming “It’s there; it’s there; it has to be there. Keep looking,” and so they keep ripping my house apart.

It doesn't matter how many times (three separate links) they are proven wrong, they continue to make wild accusations, make them incessantly, make them over everything, and then demand they get investigated, that we “get to the bottom” of something has no top because it exist only in the realm of j’accuse! That’s why they have to keep the hysteria ratcheted up to a 10 on the Richter Scale, to keep everyone so alarmed no one takes a moment to notice the rumble is a train passing by.

They accuse Trump of leaking classified information to the Russians. When National Security Advisor McMaster says it didn’t happen they scream: “That’s his opinion!” The testimony of one of the few principals in the room is “opinion” but the hearsay of anonymous sources is fact?! Every day I am stunned, literally mentally dazed, by how on-air and on Twitter these elite-”educated” “professionals” sound like middle schoolers (and I raised 5 kids). It’s the same level of logic, same posturing and posing, same substitution of snark for argument, same playing to the crowd.

They breathlessly report about how Trump has either a trust problem or a credibility problem or both. These are by and large people who never granted Trump an ounce of trust or respect or ever allowed he had any credibility. It’s as if the hecklers and the critics were the same people. At night they go to the show and heckle the performers, and then they write up the story the next day, as critics, that the performance was so bad the audience couldn't stop heckling.

Yesterday it’s the alleged Comey “memo,” which is instantly accepted without a moment of critical thought or investigation. Only Greg Jarrett analyzes it enough to notice the flaws.

Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law.
So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it.

However, even he supposes Comey is behind it for revenge. I rather imagine that if there is a memo it contains lines like “I do not believe Trump was trying to obstruct justice by these comments but express regret that the reputation of a man he admires and respects is being tarnished.”

That is why the full memo, if it exist, wasn’t released, the context can never be provided. They can only read the description of the conversation without the analysis because Comey’s analysis of the conversation would hurt their argument.

I was never a big Trump fan. I see him the way Charles Martin does

Now, as I seem to keep needing to remind people, I’m not a Trump fan: his perpetual self-promotion annoys me, his habit of shifting positions in moments unsettles me, his skeevy business practices in the past make it hard for me to respect him, and his apparent willingness to say anything to get a deal done makes it hard for me to trust him.

But I knew Hillary would be the final nail in the coffin, and I genuinely believed, and still do, Trump was rising to the occasion and tapping into an authentic sub-current of yearning for renewal, for another “morning in America.” I now believe Trump came to late; the rot was too deep; the foundation too damaged.

They won’t stop. They will win. Trump will somehow be forced out, and they will believe they victoriously and righteously took out Hitler before he could implement the Final Solution, projecting onto him every trait they themselves manifest, killing Democracy with Darkness while believing they are the Light. They will actually do for Putin what he couldn't do himself and smugly believe they kept the bear out of the hen house.