The President recently called the investigation into Russian interference into the 2016 election and the Trump campaigns collusion with it a witch hunt. This is not the first time the President used the term nor is he the only one to make the comparison. What exactly is a witch hunt and how does the current investigation stack up against past activities that have been called witch hunts. 

 

The most famous case in America is the Salem witch trials in Salem Massachusetts between February 1692 and May 1693. While not the first, last or largest it is the most famous to Americans. A quick recap some young girls in Salem who were exhibiting strange behavior accused local people of being witch’s and possessing them a series of trials took place and many of the accused were convicted, you know the rest.

 

The witch trials have been used in modern times as a cautionary tale to advise against false accusations and the refusal to adhere to due process. The American historian George Lincoln Burr cited the trials as “the Salem witchcraft was the rock on which the theocracy shattered.”^[          

 

 The most famous witch hunt is modern times were the McCarty hearings looking, for communist in the government. This, as the Salem trials, spread far and wide looking for any person that could fit into the paranoia of the times. The Salem trials and the McCarty hearing finally floundered by becoming so aggressive that it became clear that there was no basis for the accusations.

 

Now to the current rush to judgment. As I have said in previous posts, the Russian accusations started out as an attempt to deflect the growing appearance of incompetence by Hillary Clinton and, more so, from her apparent criminal actions as Secretary of State regarding mishandling of classified information. From the first charge of the Russians hacking the DNC and releasing incriminating emails through Wikileaks. Following this it was a Russian conspiracy to swing the election to Trump, and finally that the Trump campaign was conspiring with the Russians to influence the election.

 

Now why are we calling the current congressional and FBI investigation a witch hunt? As I said the only thing that is known is the DNC was hacked, likely by the Russians. The rest is pure speculation and innuendo. Much of what is being investigated could be called guilt by association. Paul Manafort who was at one time a Trump campaign manager had also help the former president of Ukraine, an ally of Russia. Paul Manafort is a paid political consultant, this is what he does. This is no established connection between him and any Trump campaign activity that could lead to Russia. The big best known now is former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Flynn met with the Russian ambassador in December, after the election. The accusation is that Flynn spoke about lifting sanctions after the inauguration. He was fired for lying to the Vice-President about that conversation, no connection to Russian hacking or influence. Now in today’s Washington Post is an article about the Presidents son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his connections to Russia. This last is the most recent example of yellow journalism. Which is defined as relying on sensational or exaggerated headlines to sell newspapers. What was the headline:

 

        Jared Kushner now a focus in Russia investigation

 

And what was in the story:

 

        “Investigators are focusing on a series of meetings held by Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-                   law and an influential White House adviser, as part of their probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and related matters, according to people familiar with the investigation.”

 

 

 

So far so good, a news story, until we get 5 paragraphs in:

 

“The Post has not been told that Kushner is a target — or the central focus — of the investigation, and he has not been accused of any wrongdoing. “Target” is a word that generally refers to someone who is the main suspect of investigators’ attention, though prosecutors can and do bring charges against people who are not marked with that distinction.”

 

OK, is this a story or a witch hunt. Front page in print and leading in the online edition and 5 paragraphs in it reverses the headline.

 

Again, I ask, PLEASE THINK about what you read and hear. I am not sure if I want to call this story part of a witch hunt or just continuation of bad/biased reporting. In fact, it is both so read the whole story and use common sense. To the news media, please just report the news and only once you have confirmed the facts.

 

 

I recently read a story put out by the Associated Press (AP) whose headline screamed “Trump, DHS considered National Guard troops for immigration raids; White House disputes report.” At least they said the White House disputed the report. This and another article went on to report that up to 100,000 National Guard troops would be used to help enforce immigration laws and assist in the deportation of illegal aliens. What it said was:

D, Expansion of the 287(g) Program to Include State Guard Units in the Border Region

(Two paragraphs latter it says)

     “Pursuant to Title 32 of the United States Code, State National Guard components are employees of their respective states and are under the command to their Governors when not in federal service. Based on their training and experience, these men and women are particularly well-suited to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law and augment border security operations by Department components.”

In other words within 14 paragraphs A through N with a lot of verbiage in between this two sentence paragraph is the only one that mentions the National Guard. If you wish to read the entire memo you can find it at http://apne.ws/2l1Dj0k

From these two sentences the AP deduced that up to 100, 000 Guardsmen would be used in immigration round-ups. Ignoring the rest of the draft memo the only part reported was on the National Guard.

No one knows who instigated the memo or at what level but it is reasonable to be assured it did not get too far.

In his last press conference the President castigated the news media, this is one of the reasons why.

I ask all journalist to PLEASE THINK about the stories they are reporting on and to check the facts. This story had no purpose other then to instigate fear in the immigrant community and once again try and bring down the executive branch of our government.

For many years now there has been a war raging between all sides of the political spectrum, that has made the reporting of facts and real news less and less relevant. As said, there is nothing new in this other than the degree and speed in which the reports are reaching the public. The right blames much of what is happening today on Saul Alinsky’s 1971 book “Rules for Radicals.” Much of what we see happening today can be cast as a direct link to some of what is in the book however the manipulation of public opinion goes father back. I will not go into the political campaigns of the past, suffice it to say Thomas Jefferson and John Adams may not always spoken the truth about each other.

The concept of diverting attention away from facts using a direct attack on something else is long standing. However, it does appear to have become more of an art form with some. The most talk about recently is the Kelly Anne Conway flub of alternative facts. But to be fair let’s just say the audience on the mall for President Obama’s inauguration was larger than for Trumps. Over all viewing including worldwide television audience was larger for Trump. The larger fact is no one really cares except the comics, including TV pundits, who will not let it go.

Most recently the driving force of innuendo as fact has become Russia and the narrative that Russia manipulated the election, and both side have jumped on that bandwagon. What are the facts that we know: the DNC was hacked and the most likely culprit was Russia, ok. Unflattering emails were released from the hack, correct. Russia was behind the release of the emails, likely. Russia released the emails to manipulate the election in favor of Trump, Maybe, but unlikely. On this last I say maybe because it would be difficult to make that determination without a deep cover operative and I doubt the Intelligence Community would expose that operative for political gain. I say unlikely because should the Russian have tried to pick a candidate it would probably have been Clinton. Russia knew they could beat her and that she was predictable. More likely the purpose of the Russian actions was to destabilize the political system and wreak havoc on America, if so, mission accomplished.

Since Trump took office the Russian bogyman has been trotted out on every occasion possible. The use of this bogyman has diverted our attention from actual news stories and analysis. LTG Michael Flynn was forced to resign as director of the National Security Council. The news would have us believe it was because he spoke to the Russian ambassador about sanction relief after Trump took office. In fact, he was forced to resign because he lied to the Vice-President and lost the trust of the President. Because a Russian was involved this then took a turn toward the Trump is under the influence of Russia and past claims about Trump operatives in cahoots with Russian intelligence before the election. The New York Times had a recent article about all the interactions between Trump people and Russian intelligence. The problem with the story is that there were almost no facts and mostly innuendo. Today however innuendo becomes fact for a lot of people.

A story that started as truth and ten took a left turn was the recent pictures of President Trump and Japans PM Abe receiving news about the North Koran missile launch into the Sea of Japan. Instead of the story being about the launch and the dangerous implications it became about the possibility that classified information was being discussed in a public place. This has overshadowed the production and deployment of medium range cruise missile in violation of a treaty and the movement of a Russian spy ship up the east coast of the US. While both are reported, they have become secondary and are quickly forgotten in favor of more sensational new/innuendo.

I could go on but would rather concentrate on what we can do to return the news organizations back to news. The most obvious is to call them out when they stray from facts. I am not sure what the House of Representatives are doing about the Russian provocations but the Republicans have called for an investigation on the unlikely intelligence breach with PM Abe. The News must keep opinions to the editorial pages and the front page should be for known facts.

Let’s ask the news media to Please Think about facts.