When facts are brazenly repudiated, civil discourse is impossible

Arguing via tweet and email with supporters of President Dumpster Fire who insist there is “no evidence” he did anything to merit the investigations and talk of impeachment he now faces is frustrating beyond belief.

I call it pouring water on concrete. You make a splash, but nothing sinks in.

That’s what it has felt like lately arguing via tweet and email with supporters of President Dumpster Fire who insist there is “no evidence” he did anything to merit the investigations and talk of impeachment he now faces.

It is, of course, an astounding claim.

Donald Trump stands accused not simply by a contemporaneous memo from then-FBI Director James Comey and a series of rather damning reports, but also by his own words. Such as when he told Russia’s foreign minister and U.S. ambassador that he had just fired Comey, who was investigating whether Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians last year when they meddled in the U.S. election.

“He was crazy, a real nut job,” said Trump. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”

And you wonder: How is that not obstruction of justice? If Bill Clinton lying about oral sex and Richard Nixon sacking a special prosecutor merited impeachment, how can anyone really believe there is “no evidence” Trump did wrong?

Anderson Cooper might feel my pain. You may have caught the CNN anchor last Friday watching in mounting disbelief as Trump surrogate Jeffrey Lord stumbled through one of his transparently disingenuous defenses of the president’s misbehavior. Finally, Cooper had had enough. “If he took a dump on his desk, you would defend it,” he said.

It was a coarse thing to say, yes. Cooper promptly apologized for it, as he should have. But one tends to empathize all the same. Because while the words might have been inappropriate, they were not incorrect.

Not that they will make a bit of difference. That’s the great frustration of political…

Read the full article from the Source…

Back to Top