"It's a giant land mine of a story that could go either way. Mueller could leak the pee tape tomorrow, or we could be sitting here two years from now talking about a money laundering indictment that has nothing to do with Russia, or, who knows, the president might even turn out to be innocent (in this matter), at which point we'd have to start asking some questions about what this was all about.
We just don't know, and I know a lot of reporters from the start found the whole matter confusing, unsure of what it means. A few are even beginning to say so publicly. That we've resorted to denouncing people for saying so, or for offering alternative opinions, just shows how out of control this whole thing has gotten."
Matt Taibbi, RussiaGate Skeptics Take a Beating
The Democrats, in a pale imitation of the Republican juggernaut, gave themselves up to Big Money starting back in the 1990's. And because of this, they cannot take the expected stands on issues of economic policy to counter the GOP. Instead they endlessly resort to ad hominem attacks and fear-mongering, to strike the 'lesser of two evils' chord, and avoid saying anything that might alienate their corporate money masters.
Yes, there *might* be more to this RussiaGate story, given all the claims lacking real evidence, just like there *might* have been real names on the list of Commies in the State Department and the Army that Senator McCarthy liked to wave around.
And when that evidence hits the table, and something more than innuendo and claims by authorities who have perjured themselves shamelessly in recent memory, I think skepticism is not only called for but entirely appropriate for the press, an obligation of the fourth establishment. Especially given their own complicity in the Big Lies in the past that have taken us into endless wars.
The Democrats seem to have settled into the quisling like behavior of trying to serve both the people and Big Money. Until they get back to their own roots and drop the highly cynical lesser-of-two-evils strategy they will never be able to achieve a return to the successful platform that was the basis of their glory days before the Clinton-Obama phenomenon of catering to the wealthy and professional class.
I understand how a viral dislike of Trump can be tempting to toss one's principles aside, and go along to get along. After all, the liberal media did the same thing with the Iraq war, and the bailouts of the banks who were held virtually without serious penalty for serial felonies. But tossing aside your principles when it favors your cause is not moral, but expedient, and hypocritical.
As the liberal dislike of Trump urges them to embrace any anti-Trump messaging, no matter how reckless or specious or veiled in secrecy it may be, keep in the mind how easily that same campaign is turned to stifling any dissent or contrary policy opinions, including Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein.
It is an old, old game, the scapegoat and the boogeyman, and this particular crew that rules the Democratic Party plays it extremely well. In doing so, they make themselves no different from the Republicans, and that is the greatest irony of those who would be standing for reform, in name only.
There seems to be a grass roots movement within the Democratic Party towards more progressive financial issues, more supportive of the broader working public. And it is being relentlessly and almost ruthlessly resisted by the party bosses and their establishment, casting aside all their principles, that makes them ineffective at best, and simply ridiculous and useless at worst.
And woe be to anyone who stands up and points this out to them.
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
