By now, any honest observer of political scene should be aware that the supposed collusion between Donald Trump and Russia – specifically Vladimir Putin – is a fantasy.

Absolutely no hard evidence of any kind has been offerred to substantiate this claim.  The closest anyone has come is showing that there was contact between Russian officials and Trump’s people – just as there was contact between Russian officials and Obama’s people…which puts it squarely in the “so what?” column.

Reality, however, has not prevented Democrats, and their complicit media, from continuing to promote this unevidenced, unproven fantasy.

But now, there is a growing fear among Democrat that the “take down Trump, we’ll either get the facts later, or maybe if we attack him enough we won’t need them at all” strategy is backfiring.  Boomeranging.  Hurting them instead of Trump.

Glenn Greenwald, an investigative reporter who has absolutely no problem attacking Republicans, has written a superb commentary about this.  Please, please use the link and read every word.  But, for the moment, here are a few key excerpts:

FROM MSNBC POLITICS shows to town hall meetings across the country, the overarching issue for the Democratic Party’s base since Trump’s victory has been Russia, often suffocating attention for other issues. This fixation has persisted even though it has no chance to sink the Trump presidency unless it is proven that high levels of the Trump campaign actively colluded with the Kremlin to manipulate the outcome of the U.S. election — a claim for which absolutely no evidence has thus far been presented.

The principal problem for Democrats is that so many media figures and online charlatans are personally benefiting from feeding the base increasingly unhinged, fact-free conspiracies — just as right-wing media polemicists did after both Bill Clinton and Obama were elected — that there are now millions of partisan soldiers absolutely convinced of a Trump/Russia conspiracy for which, at least as of now, there is no evidence. And they are all waiting for the day, which they regard as inevitable and imminent, when this theory will be proven and Trump will be removed.

Perhaps most revealing of all are the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee — charged with investigating these matters — who recently told BuzzFeed how petrified they are of what the Democratic base will do if they do not find evidence of collusion, as they now suspect will likely be the case. 

For so long, Democrats demonized and smeared anyone trying to inject basic reason, rationality, and skepticism into this Trump/Russia discourse by labeling them all Kremlin agents and Putin lovers.

But with serious doubts — and fears — now emerging about what the Democratic base has been led to believe by self-interested carnival barkers and partisan hacks, there is a sudden, concerted effort to rein in the excesses of this story. With so many people now doing this, it will be increasingly difficult to smear them all as traitors and Russian loyalists, but it may be far too little, too late, given the pitched hysteria that has been deliberately cultivated around these issues for months. Many Democrats have reached the classic stage of deranged conspiracists where evidence that disproves the theory is viewed as further proof of its existence, and those pointing to it are instantly deemed suspect.

If what you just read were Mr. Greenwald’s entire piece, it would be terrific:  accurate, insightful, honest.  But there is a lot more – and I again urge you to read every word.

Thank you, Mr. Greenwald, for so bluntly, honestly setting things straight.  Too bad that Trump hatred runs so deep among the people who would benefit by your words that it is doubtful very many will benefit from them.

Maybe when the Trump people start comparing the coverage of his claim that Trump’s people were wiretapped – including the invocation of that front page article which SAID so in the January 20th New York Times – to the non-evidence regarding Russia, a few more will wake up and realize how self destructive they are.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *