8:30 am Expect a more focused approach today by the Trump/Fox News Propaganda Machine. Fox News coverage yesterday was sparse, somber, and noncommittal. The inexplicably limited coverage by Fox news was a serious miscalculation, that surely had people switching channels. It’s like showing a basketball game while OJ is tooling down the road in his Bronco. Even if everyone wants to pretend they’re not interested in OJ, they’re gonna watch it.
Schmuckaroo Tucker Carlson, had a really interesting angle that the rest of Fox should adopt. He posited that the actual point of the Mueller Investigation, which is a real thing now (ho-hum), is Congressional malfeasance as proven by the inclusion of the lobbying firms Podesta Group and Mercury in Manafort’s indictment. Fox could kick the whole mess down the road for at least 6 months using this tactic and still cover it wall to wall. It fit’s into the whole “drain the swamp” narrative.
This is the absolute smart play. It fit’s a previous narrative and Trump can say, “I’ve always said this, this is proof of what I’ve been saying. Clearly, I’m vindicated!!!” The endgame for this position is awful, as other indictments are certainly forthcoming that will in no way be connected to, or reinforce this story line. But fuck it, who cares about that? Can always come up with something different.
5pm: Whitehouse and Fox are continuing to use the scattershot approach to the recent indictments, by using the “yeah, but what about…” argument and straight out muddying the waters. CNN reports some inside scoop on Fox news’ few actual journalists, being very upset with the state of affairs over on Fox.
I’ve worked in jobs where everything was so obviously going sideways and feeling like I couldn’t slap reality into my superiors, so I sympathize….start looking for a job that makes you happy.
It is now agreed that the Campaign official that okie dokied George Snuffleupagus’ trip to meet some Russian to get the dirt on Hillary was Sam Clovis. This Sam Clovis:
“Sam Clovis was always a pretty suspect pick by President Trump to become the chief science adviser at the Agriculture Department — mostly because he’s not actually a scientist. His chief qualification for the job seems to be that he was national co-chairman of Trump’s 2016 campaign. Democrats have also spotlighted his past comments skeptical of climate change and suggesting that laws protecting LGBT rights could lead to the legalization of pedophilia.”
John Kelly, who was ostensibly the voice of reason and stabilization in the Administration, is proving to be anything but. In his interview with the freshly minted Fox News shill, Laura Ingraham, he took up the previous Trump stance of protecting the legacy of Confederate rebel leader’s statues as a form of preserving history as well as revering their role in history as honorable, because they fought for their beliefs and in defense of their states.
I would argue this weak-minded, apologist stance would have us believe a statute for Osama bin Laden at ground zero would make as much sense as it fulfills the exact same requirements. It’s part of our history that we shouldn’t forget, He fought for his beliefs, and he attacked our nation with a desire to unmake it. That analogy is exactly the same.
Kelly also mentioned, that the civil war was a result of a failure to negotiate compromise and that there were, “…men and women of good faith on both sides.” Sounds like a familiar argument, doesn’t it? His implication is that to think otherwise is not to understand history in context. It’s not a philosophical matter that history is always re-examined or reinterpreted according to present-day context and thereby affirming what we have learned of our mistakes and triumphs and that this is necessarily reflected in how we view and disseminate history. The facts of the when and where and how much has not changed but our reflection on the issues of morality has…as it should. One could argue General Lee was an excellent strategist and leader of armed forces, they cannot effectively argue he was an honorable and just man of unquestionable moral principal if they chose to live in the here and now United States of America. If anyone is arguing that, they are arguing for slavery. The war was about slavery. General Lee fought to keep slavery. General Lee fought against the United States of America and thereby is a traitor and much worse.
Kelly has not studied history, nor have the naysayers that will have us believe that the Civil war was not fought because of slavery. It was fought because of slavery and there are no deals to be made in regards to reconciling that fact.
Anyone that would like to rewrite history on those wrong-headed beliefs needs to read the state’s declarations of succession. Here is the very top of Georgia’s declaration and all of the rest of them can be found here.
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.
This administration as a whole is so feeble-minded, that it is clear they think the mere presence of a counter-argument to the morally justifiable high ground is, in and of itself, verification as to the validity of the argument. The fact that a counter argument can be fabricated to represent nothing that actually exists, is proof enough that “two sides” weigh the same amount. “There were some fine people,” in Charlottesville, and there was, “Both sides.” Regardless of the fact there were no fine people, the spectre of the possibility automatically balances out the scale to what must be two sided and equally valid and therefore weighed as such.
Conversely, when this stance isn’t workable as in a situation like the NFL protests, there are not two sides. The inverse of an argument against police brutality or inequal justice should take the form of something like an apologetic stance for police brutality or some counter argument as to cause-effect for minorities and thier inequal justice. Neither of which arguments would be taken up to any positive results. Instead, the Trump/Fox news propaganda machine steals the cause from under the feet of the protestors. “That’s not what you’re protesting. It simply isn’t. You’re dishonoring the flag and our armed services. Case over, you lose.” There’s not even the pretense of a counter argument, as in Trump’s mind, there’s nothing to be discussed. This ugliness is re-stated daily by the person whom now must be called the Minister of Propaganda, Sarah Sanders.
At any rate, it is clear this administration can and will say or do anything they feel, because in the end, if nothing else, their stupidity serves as a distraction from their evil.